Saturday, July 21, 2018

MSM Disinformation Scam, Trump/Putin Meeting Fake Hysteria, Wells Fargo Troubles



By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com 
Putin dropped a bomb in the recent Trump/Putin meeting in Helsinki, Finland. Putin charged that an investment fund manager named Bill Browder (a British citizen) took $1.5 billion out of Russia and that he (and others) made the money illegally. On top of that, Putin charged that some U.S. Intelligence Officers helped guide “$400 million as a contribution to the campaign (2016) of Hillary Clinton.” Putin suggested Russian authorities want a deal to talk to Browder. Trump has turned down Putin, but shouldn’t the U.S. ask some questions? Don’t expect the disinformation scam that is the mainstream media (MSM) to ask the hard questions because FOX and MSNBC would only get Browder’s reaction to Trump turning down the Putin request. NOBODY would ask about the $400 million that Putin says was sent via U.S. Intel Officers to the Clinton Campaign. Not asking that question of Browder, when you have him on camera for an interview, is too stupid to be stupid.
The Deep State and their MSM partners are going hysterical because of the meeting with Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. They are calling Trump a traitor, but they know it’s a fake and phony charge. The real reason for the hysteria is they know that the Deep State is in deep trouble, and they are trying anything they can to discredit him and cast doubt. Trump is not afraid and has announced another meeting with Putin. The Deep State wanted war between the U.S. and Russia, and it looks like peace is breaking out instead. The Deep State, MSM, Democrats and RINO’s are panicked that Russia and America are working together against the New World Order and the Deep State.
Warren Buffett’s bank, Wells Fargo, is in trouble again for ripping off its customers. Why do they keep doing this sort of thing? Could it be the bank needs money anyway it can get it?
Join Greg Hunter as he gives his analysis on the week’s top stories in the Weekly News Wrap-Up.
(This report talks about how the MSM is ignoring a $400 million Putin bomb he dropped on Clinton, the Deep State’s panicked reaction to the Trump/Putin meeting in Finland and more warning signs of trouble for Wells Fargo.)
After the Wrap-Up:
Correction????
The plot thickens.  Now, I find that the Russia News Agency TASS has made a correction in the $400 million number Putin used in the Helsinki press conference.  Now TASS has corrected the number to $400 thousand.  It is still illegal for U.S. intel Officers to “guide” money to Clinton campaign and DNC from a foreign national (Browder).  Why aren’t the MSM press talking about this?????

Friday, July 20, 2018

China Has Been Preparing For A Trade War For Over A Decade

By Brandon Smith and originally published at alt-market.com
The crash of 2008 brought with it a host of strange economic paradigms rarely if ever seen in history; paradigms which have turned normal fiscal analysis on its head. While some core fundamentals remain the same no matter what occurs, the reporting of this data has been deliberately skewed to hide the truth. But what is the truth? Well, at bottom, the truth is that most economies around the world are far weaker than the picture governments and central banks have painted. This is especially true for the United States.
That said, one country has been pursuing an opposite strategy for many years now — meaning, it has been hiding its economic preparedness more than its weaknesses. I am of course speaking of China.
When we mention China in the world of alternative analysis, several issues always arise: China’s expanding debt burden, government spending on seemingly useless infrastructure programs like “ghost cities,” China’s central bank and its corporate subset misreporting financial figures regularly, etc. All of these things fuel the notion that when a global fiscal disaster inevitably takes place, it will emanate first from China. They also give the American public the false impression that a trade war against China will be easily won and that China will immediately falter under the weight of its own veiled instabilities.
However, if one actually studies China’s behavior and activities the past decade, they would see a method to the apparent madness. In fact, some of China’s actions seem to suggest that the nation has been preparing for years for the exact geopolitical conditions we see today. It’s as if someone warned them ahead of time...
In terms of prepping for a trade war with the U.S., China has implemented several important steps. For example, for at least the past 10 years the country has been shifting away from a pure export economy and reducing its reliance on sales of goods to the U.S. In 2018, Chinese consumer purchases of goods are expected to surpass that of American consumers. For the past five years, domestic consumption in China accounted for between 55% to 65% of economic growth, and private consumption was the primary driver of the Chinese economy — NOT exports.
The argument that China is somehow dependent on U.S. markets and consumers in order to keep its economy alive is simply a lie. China is now just as enticing a retail market as the U.S., and its domestic market can pick up some of the slack in the event that U.S. markets are suddenly closed to Chinese exports.
The problem of swiftly growing Chinese debt is presented often as the key argument against the nation surviving a global economic reset or trade war, with its “shadow banking” system threatening to unleash a long hidden credit crisis and stock market plunge. But this is not the complete story.
The exact amount of fiat printing that China’s central bank undertook after the 2008 crash is not known. Some estimates calculate China’s debt to now sit at around 250% of its gross domestic product. By normal standards this would suggest a credit crisis is imminent. But was China’s sudden interest in debt expansion a reactionary matter, or was it part of a bigger plan?
Just after 2008, a common argument against China’s resilience was the notion that China was dependent on holding U.S. dollar reserves in order to keep its own currency weak. Meaning, Chinese companies had to sell goods to the U.S. in exchange for dollars, which they then exchanged to the central bank for Yuan. China’s central bank then held those trillions of dollars in reserve as a means to keep the dollar artificially stronger on the global market, and the Yuan weaker, thus supporting and perpetuating the old export model.
Obviously this argument is no longer applicable, or outright absurd.
China’s own debt expansion and Treasury bond issuance actually started way back in 2005 under the “Panda Bond” program. At the time it was treated like a novelty or a joke by the mainstream economic community. Today, it is a powerhouse as Yuan denominated assets are spreading around the world.
China no longer needs to hold dollars or dollar denominated assets in order to keep its currency weaker for export markets. It can simply inflate and monetize its own debt, just like the U.S. does. But why would China bother to do this at all? Why jump into the same debt game that has caused so much trouble for western nations?
Perhaps because they know something we don’t. During the initial phase of the derivatives crisis, the possibility of China joining the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Rights basket leaped to the forefront. With the Yuan as an SDR basket member, its potential to become a financial center for global trade rather than just an export and import hub would be assured. But the IMF set certain requirements before China could join.  One of these requirements was far greater currency liquidity and a more “freely usable” Yuan market. In other words, for China to join the SDR basket they would first need to go into considerable debt.
This is exactly what they did; not to prop up their banking system (though this made for a valid excuse) or to necessarily prop up their stock markets. Rather, China wanted a seat at the table of the “new world order,” and they bought that seat through massive debt expansion. China was officially included in the SDR basket in 2016.
China has been a very vocal proponent of the SDR basket system, and it becomes clear why if you understand what the globalists intend for the future of the world’s monetary framework. This plan was first outlined in the globalist controlled Economist magazine in 1988 in an article calling for the beginnings of a global currency in 2018. The article states that the U.S. economy and the role of the dollar as world reserve would have to be diminished, and that the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket could be used as a bridge to set up a single currency for all the world’s economies.
This currency would of course be administered and controlled by the banking elites at the IMF.
Since 2009, China’s central bank has called for the SDR to become a “super-sovereign reserve currency,” in other words, a global currency system. In 2017, the vice governor of China’s central bank stated that central banks should increase their use of the SDR as a unit of account and that greater SDR liquidity should be encouraged. In 2015, China’s central bank suggested that the SDR system should “go digital,” creating a digital version of the reserve so that it could spread quickly.
It should come as no surprise that the IMF is in full agreement with this plan and has even suggested in recent articles on its website that cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology are the future evolution of the monetary system.
Notorious globalist George Soros revealed a few darker details of what the IMF calls the “global economic reset” in an interview in 2009; these details included a diminished American economy, a diminished dollar and for China to become a new economic engine for the world.
Finally, China has clearly been prepping for a considerable crisis in the dollar or in the world’s economic stability as shown in its sudden and aggressive stockpiling of gold reserves the past decade. Only recently surpassed by Russia in purchases, China is one of the most aggressive national buyers of gold. An expanding gold stockpile would be an effective hedge against a collapsing dollar market. If the dollar loses its world reserve status, nations like China and Russia are placed well to mitigate the damages. Considering the fact that the IMF officially holds around 3,000 tons of gold, the globalists are also well placed for a dollar crash.
It would appear that China has been included at many levels in the plan for the global reset. All of the previously mentioned actions suggest foreknowledge of a dramatic shift in the dollar model. The trade war itself provides perfect cover for the economic reset, as I have been warning in my latest articles. China would play an important role in the reset, as they have the ability to dump U.S. Treasuries and the dollar as world reserve, causing a chain reaction through global markets as their trading partners follow along in a domino chain.
They will likely do this quietly (as Russia recently did), in order to pawn off their T-bond holdings before news of a Treasury dump hits the mainstream. The primary beneficiaries of this act will be the globalists, while China has placed itself to survive (not necessarily to thrive) during the chaos. The same cannot necessarily be said for the U.S., which suffers from the Achilles Heel of total dependency on the dollar’s primacy.

Thursday, July 19, 2018

Mass Hysteria


By Mike Mish Shedlock and originally published at themaven.net
The mass hysteria following Trump's meeting with Putin is likely to last for days. Most are outraged. Few see the light.
My article Congratulations to President Trump for an Excellent Summit with Putin spawned numerous some I could not tell if they were sarcastic or not.
For example, reader Brian stated " There is zero doubt now that Putin stole the election from Hillary. So much so that she MUST be given the nomination again in 2020. All potential challengers must step aside. To refuse her the 2020 nomination would be evidence of traitorous activities with Putin."'
I congratulated Brian for brilliant sarcasm but he piled on. It now seems he was serious.
Mainstream media, the Left an the Right were in general condemnation. 
Numerous cries of treason emerged from the Left and the Right (see the above link)
It Happened - No Trial Necessary
A friend I highly respect commented "There is simply no question that they did it. You can legitimately claim that it’s not important or that there has been no tie to Trump shown. On the Russians’ side, they can say, screw off, we were pursuing our interests. But you can’t take the view it did not happen. It happened."
There is a question who did it. Indictments are just that, not proof. 
The US fabricated evidence to start the Vietnam war and the US fabricated WMD talk on the second war in Iraq. US intelligence had no idea the Berlin Wall was about to fall. The US meddled in Russia supporting a drunk named Yeltsin because we erroneously thought we could control him.
They Are All Liars
It's a mystery why anyone would believe these proven liars. That does not mean I believe Putin either. They are all capable liars. 
Let's step back from the absurd points of view to reality.
US Meddling
The US tries to influence elections in other countries and has a history of assisting the forcible overthrow of governments we don’t like. 
  • Vietnam
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Libya
  • Drone policy
All of the above are massive disasters of US meddling. They are all actions of war, non-declared, and illegal.
I cannot and do not condone such actions even if they were legal.
911 and ISIS resulted from US meddling. The migration crisis in the EU is a direct consequence of US meddling. The Iranian revolution was a direct consequence of US meddling.
Now we are pissing and moaning that Russia spent a few million dollars on Tweets to steal the election. Please be serious.
Let's Assume
Let's assume for one second the DNC hack was Russia-based.
Is there a reason to not be thankful for evidence that Hillary conspired to deny Bernie Sanders the nomination?
Pity Hillary?
We are supposed to pity Hillary?
The outrage from the Right is amazing.
It's pretty obvious Senator John McCain wanted her to win. Neither faced a war or military intervention they disapproved of.
Common Sense
Let's move on to a common sense position from Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept. 
Greenwald vs. Joe Cirincione 
​GLENN GREENWALD: In 2007, during the Democratic presidential debate, Barack Obama was asked whether he would meet with the leaders of North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria and Iran without preconditions. He said he would. Hillary Clinton said she wouldn’t, because it would be used as a propaganda tool for repressive dictators. And liberals celebrated Obama. It was one of his greatest moments and one of the things that I think helped him to win the Democratic nomination, based on the theory that it’s always better to meet with leaders, even if they’re repressive, than to isolate them or to ignore them. In 1987, when President Reagan decided that he wanted to meet with Soviet leaders, the far right took out ads against him that sounded very much just like what we just heard from Joe, accusing him of being a useful idiot to Soviet and Kremlin propaganda, of legitimizing Russian aggression and domestic repression at home.
GLENN GREENWALD: It is true that Putin is an authoritarian and is domestically repressive. That’s true of many of the closest allies of the United States, as well, who are even far more repressive, including ones that fund most of the think tanks in D.C., such as the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia. And I think the most important issue is the one that we just heard, which is that 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons are in the hands of two countries—the United States and Russia—and having them speak and get along is much better than having them isolate one another and increase the risk of not just intentional conflict, but misperception and miscommunication, as well.
JOE CIRINCIONE: Right. Let’s be clear. Glenn, there’s nothing wrong with meeting. I agree with you. Leaders should meet, and we should be negotiating with our foes, with those people we disagree with. We’re better off when we do that. And the kind of attacks you saw on Barack Obama were absolutely uncalled for, and you’re right to condemn those.
JOE CIRINCIONE: What I’m worried about is this president meeting with this leader of Russia and what they’re going to do. That’s what’s so wrong about this summit coming now, when you have Donald Trump, who just attacked the NATO alliance, who calls our European allies foes, who turns a blind eye to what his director of national intelligence called the warning lights that are blinking red. About what? About Russian interference in our elections. So you just had a leader of Russia, Putin, a skilled tactician, a skilled strategist, interfere in a U.S. election. To what? To help elect Donald Trump.
GLENN GREENWALD: I think this kind of rhetoric is so unbelievably unhinged, the idea that the phishing links sent to John Podesta and the Democratic National Committee are the greatest threat to American democracy in decades. People are now talking about it as though it’s on par with 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, that the lights are blinking red, in terms of the threat level. This is lunacy, this kind of talk. I spent years reading through the most top-secret documents of the NSA, and I can tell you that not only do they send phishing links to Russian agencies of every type continuously on a daily basis, but do far more aggressive interference in the cybersecurity of every single country than Russia is accused of having done during the 2016 election. To characterize this as some kind of grave existential threat to American democracy is exactly the kind of rhetoric that we heard throughout the Bush-Cheney administration about what al-Qaeda was like.
JOE CIRINCIONE: Why does Donald Trump feel that he has to meet alone with Putin? What is going on there? I mean, that—when Ronald Reagan met with Gorbachev at Reykjavik, at least he had George Shultz with him. The two of them, you know, were meeting with Gorbachev and his foreign minister at the time. This is—it’s deeply disturbing. It makes you feel that Trump is hiding something, that he is either trying to make a deal with Putin, reporting something to Putin. I tell you, I know U.S. intelligence officials—I’m probably going right into Glenn’s wheelhouse here. But U.S. intelligence officials are concerned about what Donald Trump might be revealing to the Russian leader, the way he revealed classified information to the Russian foreign minister when he met privately with him in the Oval Office at the beginning of his term. No, I don’t like it one bit.
GLENN GREENWALD: I continue to be incredibly frustrated by the claim that we hear over and over, and that we just heard from Joe, that Donald Trump does everything that Vladimir Putin wants, and that if he were a paid agent of the Russian government, there’d be—he would be doing nothing different. I just went through the entire list of actions that Donald Trump has taken and statements that he has made that are legitimately adverse to the interest of the Russian government, that Barack Obama specifically refused to do, despite bipartisan demands that he do them, exactly because he didn’t want to provoke more tensions between the United States and Russia. Sending lethal arms to Ukraine, bordering Russia, is a really serious adverse action against the interest of the Russian government. Bombing the Assad regime is, as well. Denouncing one of the most critical projects that the Russian government has, which is the pipeline to sell huge amounts of gas and oil to Germany, is, as well. So is expelling Russian diplomats and imposing serious sanctions on oligarchs that are close to the Putin regime. You can go down the list, over and over and over, in the 18 months that he’s been in office, and see all the things that Donald Trump has done that is adverse, in serious ways, to the interests of Vladimir Putin, including ones that President Obama refused to do. So, this film, this movie fairytale, that I know is really exciting—it’s like international intrigue and blackmail, like the Russians have something over Trump; it’s like a Manchurian candidate; it’s from like the 1970s thrillers that we all watched—is inane—you know, with all due respect to Joe. I mean, it’s—but it’s in the climate, because it’s so contrary to what it is that we’re seeing. Now, this idea of meeting alone with Vladimir Putin, the only way that you would find that concerning is if you believed all that.
JOE CIRINCIONE: So, Trump knew that this indictment was coming down, before he went to Europe, and still he never says a word about it. What he does is continue his attacks on our alliances, i.e. he continues his attacks on our free press, he continues his attacks on FBI agents who were just doing their job, and supports this 10-hour show hearing that the House of Representatives had. It’s really unbelievable that Trump is doing these things and never says one word about it. He still has not said a word about those indictments.
GLENN GREENWALD: That’s because the reality is—and I don’t know if Donald Trump knows this or doesn’t know this, has stumbled into the truth or what—but the reality is that what the Russians did in 2016 is absolutely not aberrational or unusual in any way. The United—I’m sorry to say this, but it’s absolutely true. The United States and Russia have been interfering in one another’s domestic politics for since at least the end of World War II, to say nothing of what they do in far more extreme ways to the internal politics of other countries. Noam Chomsky was on this very program several months ago, and he talked about how the entire world is laughing at this indignation from the United States—”How dare you interfere in our democracy!”—when the United States not only has continuously in the past done, but continues to do far more extreme interference in the internal politics of all kinds of countries, including Russia
GLENN GREENWALDThe United States funds oppositional groups inside Russia. The United States sent advisers and all kinds of operatives to try and elect Boris Yeltsin in the mid-1990s, because they perceived, accurately, that he was a drunk who would serve the interests of the United States more than other candidates who might have won. The United States interferes in Russian politics, and they interfere in their cyber systems, and they invade their email systems, and they invade all kinds of communications all the time. And so, to treat this as though it’s some kind of aberrational event, I think, is really kind of naive
GLENN GREENWALD: It wasn’t just Hillary Clinton in 2016 who lost this election. The entire Democratic Party has collapsed as a national political force over the last decade. They’ve lost control of the Senate and of the House and of multiple statehouses and governorships. They’re decimated as a national political force. And the reason is exactly what Joe said. They become the party of international globalization. They’re associated with Silicon Valley and Wall Street billionaires and corporate interests, and have almost no connection to the working class. And that is a much harder conversation to have about why the Democrats have lost elections than just blaming a foreign villain and saying it’s because Vladimir Putin ran some fake Facebook ads and did some phishing emails. And I think that until we put this in perspective, about what Russia did in 2016 and the reality that the U.S. does that sort of thing all the time to Russia and so many other countries, we’re going to just not have the conversation that we need to be having about what these international institutions, that are so sacred—NATO and free trade and international trade organizations—have done to people all over the world, and the reason they’re turning to demagogues and right-wing extremists because of what these institutions have done to them. That’s the conversation we need to be having, but we’re not having, because we’re evading it by blaming everything on Vladimir Putin. And that, to me, is even more dangerous for our long-term prospects than this belligerence that’s in the air about how we ought to look at Moscow.
Indictments and First Year Law
Mish: I now wish to return to a statement my friend made regarding the idea "No question Russia did it".
From Glenn Greenwald
As far as the indictments from Mueller are concerned, it’s certainly the most specific accounting yet that we’ve gotten of what the U.S. government claims the Russian government did in 2016. But it’s extremely important to remember what every first-year law student will tell you, which is that an indictment is nothing more than the assertions of a prosecutor unaccompanied by evidence. The evidence won’t be presented until a trial or until Robert Mueller actually issues a report to Congress. And so, I would certainly hope that we are not at the point, which I think we seem to be at, where we are now back to believing that when the CIA makes statements and assertions and accusations, or when prosecutors make statements and assertions and accusations, unaccompanied by evidence that we can actually evaluate, that we’re simply going to believe those accusations on faith, especially when the accusations come from George W. Bush’s former FBI Director Robert Mueller, who repeatedly lied to Congress about Iraq and a whole variety of other issues. So, I think there we need some skepticism. But even if the Russians did everything that Robert Mueller claims in that indictment that they did, in the scheme of what the U.S. and the Russians do to one another and other countries, I think to say that this is somehow something that we should treat as a grave threat, that should mean that we don’t talk to them or that we treat them as an enemy, is really irrational and really quite dangerous.
Mish - Six Questions
  1. Is this a trial or a witch hunt? 
  2. Do we need to see the evidence or do we believe known liars? 
  3. Is Trump guilty of treason? Before we even see proof Putin was involved?
  4. Is the CIA incapable of fabricating evidence?
  5. Even if Russia interfered in the election, why should anyone have expected otherwise?
  6. Has everyone forgotten the US lies on WMDs already?
Irrational and Dangerous
I don't know about you, but I have no reason to believe known liars and hypocrites.
I disagree with Trump all the time, in fact, more often than not.
The amount of venom on Trump over this is staggering. 
Adding a missing word, I stand by my previous statement: "Nearly every political action that generates this much complete nonsense and hysteria from the Left and Right is worthy of immense praise." 
If you disagree please provide examples. The only two I can come up with are Pearl Harbor and 911. In both, the US was directly attacked. 
For rebuttal purposes I offer Vietnam, Syria, Iraq, Russia, Iran, WWI, treatment of Japanese-American citizens in WWII, and McCarthyism.
Greenwald accurately assesses the situation as "really irrational and really quite dangerous."
Indeed. 
And if indictments and accusations were crimes, we wouldn't need a jury.

Wednesday, July 18, 2018

We're Living In A Deep State Paradise

Clowns to the left of us... jokers to the right... what a hoot it is to watch them jump and howl.
Trade barriers... LGBT bathroom policies... the Dow... Elizabeth Warren... Rudolph Giuliani... unemployment... QT [quantitative tightening]... Canadians sneaking across the border to buy our shoes – there’s no shortage of louche entertainment in yesterday’s events.
But what about tomorrow? We learn from the papers that computers can beat us at chess, write better essays, and drive our cars.
So far, so good.

Identified Undesirable

Alas, these same computers can also pick our face out of a crowd... cancel our credit cards... and take away our passports. Using algorithms and Big Data, they can also identify us as “undesirable”... or worse.
That’s when your editor sees the scaffold going up in front of him... and there is the hangman approaching with a noose in his hands.
Last week, a couple of reports added to his soucis.
First, the IRS announced that it would block passports for 362,000 Americans who are late on their taxes.
From where in the Constitution does the tax collector get the right to confine citizens who have never been convicted of a crime? We don’t know.
We believe our own accounts with the IRS are in good order. But the “tax code” had 74,608 pages in 2016; there is plenty of room for disagreement, ambiguity, and interpretation.
Our own tax return is more than two inches thick. It is prepared by professionals.
Could they make a mistake? Of course, they could. Could the IRS make a mistake… or worse, intentionally try to make life difficult for us?
It would never do such a thing, you say.
In 2013, the IRS apologized for targeting conservative groups for extensive auditing. It admitted that it had given especially harsh treatment to groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names and promised it wouldn’t do it again.
Of course, it won’t. And it won’t make mistakes, either.

Targeted by Spooks

Already, in addition to the IRS’s “no passport” list are the feds’ “no fly” and “hit” lists.
An interesting feature of these lists is that you never know if you are on them… or why. The feds don’t have to prove anything.
An interesting case arose recently wherein a man found out, apparently by accident, that the feds were trying to kill him.
He went to a wedding in the Middle East… and in came a missile attack. Who were they shooting at? Then, he realized it was him! He thought it was an accident; the spooks had mistaken him for someone else.
But there was nowhere to go to appeal... no court in which he could prove his innocence. 
The whole matter was hidden from view, behind a sordid screen of “national security.”
Meanwhile, in May, China officially began its “social credit” system. The idea is to amalgamate electronic sources of information on each of its 1.4 billion citizens and then target them for rewards or punishments, depending on their scores.
The Week magazine was on the case:
Government documents show a plan to block poorly scored citizens from air or rail travel for up to a year, though perhaps less for minor infractions like leaving a bike parked on a footpath. More than 7 million citizens have already been blocked from travel, Human Rights Watch reports, for offenses like “insincere” apologies.
For the first time in history, the internet, with its electronic surveillance, and the collusion of data accumulators – Google, Facebook, Amazon, and others – make it possible for the authorities to control and manipulate every aspect of life.
Algorithms can now do what used to require whole squads of spooks, snitches, and sinister agents.
Did you ever attend a meeting of the group Americans for Limited Government? Did you ever talk to a known undesirable? Do you believe Congress is run by a bunch of incompetent crooks? Do you read the Diary? Are you insincere?
Put away the waterboards. Send the torches and pliers back to the tool shop. There is no longer any need to ask, let alone to torture. The feds already know everything.

Deep State Paradise

The National Security Agency (NSA) has been monitoring our telephone conversations for years. Amazon, Facebook, Google, and others know what we do, what we want, and even what we think. And now, Big Technology is working with the feds to use this data to control us.
Again, back in China… The New York Times:
In some cities, cameras scan train stations for China’s most wanted. Billboard-size displays show the faces of jaywalkers and list the names of people who don’t pay their debts. Facial recognition scanners guard the entrances to housing complexes. Already, China has an estimated 200 million surveillance cameras – four times as many as the United States.
That’s just one piece of the system. The data flow in from GPS, social media, credit cards, banks, job sites – just about everywhere.
Then, the feds can manipulate outcomes simply by editing the “news”… or denying access to important services… or applying individualized rewards or penalties. Even highway tolls can be adjusted for each car, depending on what behavior the authorities want to modify.
The New York Times again…
“This is potentially a totally new way for the government to manage the economy and society,” said Martin Chorzempa, a fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
“The goal is algorithmic governance,” he added.
Just 18 years ago, America’s five largest corporations were companies that provided essential goods and services – ExxonMobil, General Electric, Ford, General Motors, and Walmart.
Now, the five largest corporations all truck in data: Apple, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Microsoft, and Facebook.
And they are using this data – in collusion with the feds – to create a Deep State paradise.
“But what do I have to fear,” asks the good citizen? “I don’t do anything wrong. I have nothing to hide.”
Here at the Diary, we have a sunny disposition and undying faith in public officials. What do we have to worry about? After all, the “government is all of us,” Hillary Clinton assured us. It would never do anything that wasn’t for our own good, would it?
We are serene… and overjoyed, of course. With so much new control, the Deep State will help us be better people… never jaywalking… never speeding… never trying to save on our taxes… and certainly, never, ever criticizing our democratically elected leaders, no matter what numbskulls they appear to be.
In short, it will work like a lobotomy, helping us be model citizens.
We’re all for it. Sincerely.
NSA, are you listening?