The scandals surrounding the Clinton Foundation and the influence-peddling that went along with is largely being covered up by the US Corporate Media. The once-great Democratic Party has proven itself, under the Clinton Era from the 1990s onward to have a veritable viper's-nest of corruption. The Clinton Administration---and the Obama Administration which is an extension of it---are fraught with a series of illegal activities, including more than a few unsolved murders.
The Corporate Media, since 1992, has been an integral part of the Clinton Machine. Recall that in 1996 President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which gave rise to the media monopolies we have today. In 2000, Clinton also repealed the segment of the Communications Act of 1934, which obligated mass-media outlets to provide rebuttal time for a person or party who was personally attacked.
Here is a list of media figures and entities which donated over $250, 000 to the Clinton Foundation:
1. Carlos Slim, CEO of Telmex and largest stockholder in the New York Times
2. James Murdoch, of 21st Century Fox
3. Newsmax Media Group
4. Thomson-Reuters
5. Google
6. The News Corporation Foundation
7. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing
8. Richard Mellon Scaife (died 2014).
In the 2016 race, Hillary Clinton is by far the largest recipient of donations from Big Media. Her list of top individual donors include Comcast, Time-Warner, News Corp, CBS Television and the Disney Corporation; all of which donated more money to Clinton than to any other candidate.
It's also quite noteworthy that Clinton's supposed 'right-wing opponents' figure quite prominently on both lists. But follow the money. News Corp, for example, is heavily invested in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who are a source of oil industry and defense contracting dollars---and who likewise enjoy a cozy relationship with the Clintons. Companies like News Corp reap big advertising dollars selling anti-Clinton news stories at the same time they reap benefits from Clinton policies. Does anybody from the Alt-Right side still want to argue that Cultural and Moral issues don't belong in politics or economics?
This type of Government-Media collusion demonstrates exactly why a Financial Oligarchy is no better than an Authoritarian Government. Godless Capitalism and Godless Communism have the same corrosive and corrupting effects on a society. It's no argument to appeal to the so-called 'Free Market' here. Our Declaration of Independence acknowledges the moral truth that Human Rights are derived from God; and a godless society is bound to be unfree, regardless of its economic system.
It is also no argument to plead the First Amendment and pretend that these crimes are protected speech or that people have a right to choose alternatives. When a company like Newsmax is preaching to a Conservative audience at the same time it is throwing over one million dollars into the Clinton Foundation's coffers, then it is clear that an intent to deceive is in full operation here: that there is no real alternative mass-media outlet. The idea that there is a balanced Liberal and Conservative mass-media in the US is an illusion: exactly like the illusion that the Far Left and the Alt-Right are two different ideologies.
But the behind-the-scenes posturing serves another purpose. By setting up a series of controlled opposition, the Political and Corporate Elites can keep the unthinking and uncritical American public polarized and divided. While Americans are fighting at political rallies and politicians are slinging mud at the media circuses; the Smart Boys on Wall Street go on rioting in the spoils and laughing up their sleeves.
President Obama arrived in China for his final appearance at a G-20 economic summit, and things have gotten off to rather shaky start. A few days before Obama's arrival, Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau defied the White House by reaching an agreement with China to apply for membership in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Then Russian President Putin arrived to cheering crowds of welcoming Chinese citizens.
Obama, however, received a more frosty reception. In fact, he really got no reception. Air Force One landed on a runaway without the usual fanfare. The red-carpet staircase and high-level Chinese diplomatic officials were absent. Obama was compelled, like an ordinary citizen, to exit the plane on ordinary metal stairs.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry stated that "China provides a rolling staircase for every visiting foreign leader, but the US side complained that the driver doesn't speak English and can't understand US security instructions."
The Chinese officials also prohibited journalists traveling with the President from approaching him for security reasons. This led to a heated verbal exchange between White House Staff Chief Susan Rice and the Chinese Airport Security Official who flatly told her,
"This is our country, this is our airport."
Scuffles have reportedly broken out between Obama's entourage and Chinese security details.
The US Corporate Media outlet, The Wall Street Journal fumed that "The Chinese barred Mr. Obama from including his travelling press contingent in the motorcade. The hosts have also refused a White House request for a joint press conference with Mr. Xi, and they also plan to block Mr. Obama's solo press briefing from appearing live on Chinese television."
The Chinese media---which is largely state-run---has, of this writing, even yet to report on Obama's arrival in China. Although there are several articles and photographs of President Xi greeting other leaders. Xinhua News did provide a summary, of sorts on the meeting between Xi and Obama, which reads more like a standard press release. In fact, there has really been more coverage of Putin gifting Xi with the Chinese president's favorite brand of Russian ice cream than much of anything Obama has said or done.
We suppose that it is understandable---after tolerating 8 years of our Administration's arrogance---that China would let the American elites know what they really think of them.
In more relevant news, post-BREXIT British Prime Minister Teresa May made an important commitment to strengthening Sino-British economic ties, heralding the beginning of a 'Golden Age' of free trade.
"This is the beginning of a Golden Age of UK-China relations" May said at a press conference, "The message I will bring to the G-20 is that Britain is now open for business, as a bold, confident, outward-looking country, we will be playing a key role on the world stage."
Ironically, Obama---who threatened that Britain would "go to the back of the trade queue" if it ratified BREXIT---arrived in China via the back-exit of an airplane, while Britain forged new trade ties.
Obama's staff scuffles with Chinese officials...
As does the US media.
DC Leaks released a new batch of documents relevant to the ever-deepening Soros Scandal. The Corporate Media has obligingly swept most of Soros' crimes under the rug---not surprising since we've seen from previous revelations Soros' cozy relationships with the Media Cartels.
What we learned today is that this foreign national and Wall Street freebooter, Soros, has not only orchestrated media campaigns in Europe, he's been meddling in the 2016 US Elections as well. Soros' Open Society Foundation plopped down a whopping $650,000 in 2015 to formulate a scheme to exploit Pope Francis' visit for ends politically profitable to Soros.
"The initiative's grantees sought to use this opportunity {of the Papal visit} to mobilize their tens of thousands of members in local chapters in 11 states to build towards a set of concrete policy reforms to be advanced in 2016."
The grantees referred to herein were the PICO National Network and the Faith in Public Life Foundation. Both are nominally Christian organizations: the latter is a Soros-funded front group, while Soros' Open Society Foundation is a major contributor to PICO. PICO was founded in 1972 by a radical priest who'd studied under Saul Alinsky.
The goals of these two groups, as outlined in 2015 OSF Board Meeting was that they should "jump at the opportunity to shift US national paradigms and priorities in the run-up to the 2016 presidential campaign." Or, in plain English, to dupe unwitting Catholics into supporting Soros' Cultural Marxism under the guise of Christian moral duties. How they were to achieve this was fairly clear:
"Improve co-ordination with local chapters to push for a range of state and local policy changes related to economic and racial justice. Engage individual bishops to voice more publically support of economic and racial justice issues; to create a critical mass of bishops...we can emphasize the Pope's searing condemnation of what he calls 'an economy of exclusion and inequality' and his dismissal of trickle-down economics."
The document further shows that Soros---using the same tricks he'd employed in the Maidan Coup---sought to develop a sophisticated PR campaign through major Corporate Media outlets: CNN, NPR, NBC, and various other news outlets.
"The impact of our work and the relationships it has fostered can be seen in the broad range of religious leaders hitting back at presidential candidates for their use of fearmongering." the Foundation's leaders trumpeted in the Spring of 2016.
The OSF even got intelligence from inside the Papal Curia via a sympathizer with their goals, Cardinal Oscar Madariaga, of Honduras. The Cardinal---who is an outspoken anti-Semite and admirer of Fidel Castro's economic policies---was contacted to attempt to arrange Papal visits with low-income American Catholics. What a vile act: to turn a symbol of Christian humility into a cheap propaganda photo-op for the American Left. But such is character of George Soros; a man who would not hesitate to use even the Pope for personal gain.
So how do all the Smart Boys who think there's nothing wrong with Soros' foreign intrigues feel about him doing it in their own backyards? When we had sane government, we used to treat people like Soros as undesirable aliens and prohibit their activities in domestic politics. But that was then, this is now. In our enlightened Postmodern Era, the news that concerns us are sex scandals and the newest antidepressant dope---and Soros and his cohorts go on laughing all the way to the bank.
While the Corporate Media headlines are stirring up this week's outrage here in the Prozac Nation---which currently is over football jerseys and supposedly sexist girls' clothing---important developments are happening in more emotionally stable countries. Most notably the G-20 Economic Summit, hosted in China this year.
President Xi Jinping opened the conference with an inspiring speech outlining China's innovative approach to the global marketplace. Now in the 2016 elections, globalism, like social justice, has become a taboo subject. The Chinese President made some interesting remarks on this phenomenon, expressed in an interesting editorial in China's official party newspaper The Global Times.
When we speak of globalism in economic theory, it is really the classical free-market model actually practiced by the United States from the post-Civil War Era to the 1980s which we are discussing. The new course that China is following in global economics is similar in its pattern to our former one. The Chinese currency is backed by gold, as ours formerly was, enabling China to create the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank---an alternative to the IMF and World Bank. The New Silk Road Project is based on bilateral trade agreements---unlike NAFTA or the EU models which feature inflexible politically-motivated bureaucracies.
Contrary to the heated rhetoric thrown about in the Government-Media Complex, global free trade is not a bad thing. As Xi pointed out, the real source of Western discontent with international trade is that the West's own economic policies---which it has pursued since the 1990s---has failed.
The early 1990s saw Reagan-Era prosperity in the US break down---due largely to the 1st Bush Administration's abandonment of Reaganomics. At the same time, the Soviet system in Russia and the Maoist system in China were abandoned. A technology revolution brought the US economy from the brink of collapse, but it also left the US the world's lone Superpower. This has been the geopolitical premise the US has followed since roughly 1989. The so-called Pax Americana: world domination by the economic, political, social, and military American elite permeates the thinking of nearly all American policymakers and pundits. And this is essentially how Western thinking understands globalism.
This same policy has been applied domestically as well as abroad; and we see in the West the same elites benefitting through a network of cronyism and corruption while unemployment and underemployment swell against a backdrop of sluggish economic growth and inflation. The civil unrest this situation has caused led to the urban street riots and the rise of the Alt-Right here---and the rise of chaos and terrorism in countries like Iraq and elsewhere that US elites have occupied.
As the Chinese article points out, "The West has never recovered from the 2008 financial crisis and shows no signs of doing so. Policy response in both the US and Europe has been grossly inadequate, where monetary policy and quantitative easing have failed to stimulate growth."
Arguably, we have never really recovered from the financial crisis of 1991-92. The technology industry provided a stimulus, but our infrastructure and our agricultural and industrial base has never recovered. The dollar has continued to be devalued and public debt is running out of control unabated since that period. The response has not only been inadequate---it has been nearly nonexistent. American politicians have mostly engaged in window-dressing augmented by considerable Corporate Media propaganda keeping the public in a state of denial about any of this.
China, meanwhile, has become the unquestioned leader in the world economy, which is why this G-20 Summit may be the most important in history. The balance of power is clearly shifting in China's direction---because it's leadership is facing problems and solving them, unlike ours. As China's Xinhua News reported: "As Xi stated, this sought-after world economy should be established through exploring new sources of growth, expanding space for development, joining forces, and laying the foundations for win-win solutions." Contrast that with the gloomy rhetoric of Trump and Clinton: who talk of building border walls or expanding the welfare state.
The worst-case scenario is that US elites will react to Chinese economic dominance the only way they know how: start a shooting war, an idea that some Neocons are already floating. It would make a lot more sense to abandon our failing economic policies; focus on becoming internationally competitive again; and working with, not against, China because they've proven that they can get the job done without destabilizing governments or launching airstrikes.
But until the Ameroboob pulls his head out of the Hookah Lounge and stops worrying about sexist t-shirts and racist football jerseys, China will go on to world leadership in global economics.
Labor Day, like many holidays here in the Prozac Nation, has largely been hijacked by the Cultural Marxists. The American political Left fancies itself the defenders of the working man. Very few of the Liberal leadership has ever engaged in productive work in the private sector, they are supported mostly by the historical reputation of the late 19th to mid 20th centuries---when the Democratic Party actually did work in the interests of Labor.
For this extended weekend, we recommend a television series about a tough man with three tough jobs: I Led 3 Lives. The series was syndicated on independent stations from 1953-1955, and is one of the few television series ever based on an autobiography. I Led 3 Lives also has the distinction of being the first popular and highly-rated espionage dramas on television. For reasons that will become obvious, the Postmodern Cultural Marxists in the media have an especial dislike for this series and it's rarely ever seen on television today.
I Led 3 Lives is based on a best-selling 1950 autobiography of Herbert J. Philbrick of the same title. Philbrick was a married owner of a small advertising business and a local leader, which gave cover for his double life as a mid-level member of a Communist cell group engaging in various plots against the United States. That in turn gave cover for his triple life: a special operative for FBI Counter-Intelligence. The stories and character follow the book fairly closely. The real-life Philbrick was part of the late 1930s anti-war movement, who became intrigued about Communism after hearing some speeches. He joined a Communist cell, but being an honest and intelligent man, the scales soon fell from his eyes, and he saw Communism for what it really was. A devout Christian, Philbrick was disgusted with the Communists' intolerance for religion; hatred for the traditional family; and contempt for democracy and the rights of the individual. He exposed their activities to the FBI; and an agent---called Jerry Dressler in the series---enlisted Philbrick's services as a counterspy. Philbrick served his country in this capacity until 1948.
Needless to say, a series which portrays the Far Left in its true colors is not going especially well-received among today's media elites. One does not have to watch too many episodes of I Led 3 Lives before some very uncomfortable comparisons start becoming quite apparent. The Communist leaders in this series are, in their words, behaviors, and attitudes, so closely parallel to the modern Politically-Correct Left that it's somewhat frightening. For example in one episode, Philbrick meets an attractive female courier, who in turn reports him to the Party for "seeing her as an attractive woman and not a fellow-Communist". Philbrick gets a scolding and a reprimand that there is no gender difference in Communism.
A scenario which sounds all too familiar in today's PC social climate.
Even more troubling are the various Communist plots Philbrick breaks up---which aim at infiltrating and spreading Communist social values in the schools, media, and churches. (Again, does this sound familiar?) In many ways, I Led 3 Lives has a strangely prophetic tone about it.
There's also a lot of traditional espionage in this series: breaking up spy rings, intercepting secret plans, and preventing assassination attempts---all based on real-life stories. As was true of Golden Age espionage dramas in general, I Led 3 Lives relied heavily on realism and Philbrick has to operate on his own initiative and by his wits continually. Other than Agent Dressler, only Philbrick's wife knows of his secret identity---though she appears infrequently in the series, she stands by her man like a true heroine.
Like the espionage series Blue Light, which we reviewed here earlier, the realism in I Led 3 Lives, shows an especial emphasis upon the real-life impact the activities that the forces of evil and haters of human liberty has on real people. I Led 3 Lives, though not as violent a show as Blue Light, nonetheless does not glamorize the subject or mitigate in the slightest the truly evil nature of those who hate---and wish to destroy---the traditions and freedoms we collectively used to respect.
From the perspective of 2016, I Led 3 Lives is the portrait of an era where men and women were fighting to prevent our culture from turning into what it, unfortunately, largely has turned into. There's probably no other series that runs so counter to the modern politically-correct myth that the so-called Progressives represent long-standing American historical traditions. I Led 3 Lives shows these people for what they did, what they are now doing, and what they intend to do---with no obfuscation of the truth.
Watching a captivating and engrossing series based on real-life adventures---and aggravating the PC Left at the same time---what better way to spend a long weekend? Better still, most of the series is available for free viewing on Youtube, and available on DVD as well. The quality of the episodes are all very well-preserved.
As most of us are aware, the US Corporate Media ceased to be an actual journalistic enterprise sometime ago. Most of what is promoted as news is actually editorial commentary, and intentionally slanted commentary at that. The level of outright propaganda and corporate cronyism in the media has gotten so bad that private companies are now openly offering services to ghostwrite editorial content on the behalf of interested parties.
Keybridge Communications, a Beltway-based PR firm, claims on its own website that it "specializes in writing and placing op-eds." Keybridge's founder, it is said was a former writer for the Wall Street Journal. Now, the company goes on to boast that,
"With some of the country's most influential trade groups and global corporations as clients, we run many of the major op-ed campaigns in the US. We place roughly 3,000 op-eds per year."
So here we have an open admission that---if you're a reader of American op-ed pieces--- chances are you've read one actually penned by Keybridge. And their services aren't limited to writing op-eds: their advertising brochure for prospective clients gives an extensive price list of everything from arranging from radio talk-show interviews to blog management. And they even provide a sample of five op-eds written for the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Los Angeles Daily News, USA Today, and Newsday.
Nothing that Keybridge is doing is actually illegal (although it certainly ought to be). As David Swanson, the activist who exposed Keybridge states: "Paying $5,000 for this service is not simply about paying for research and editing. It's paying for the unfair advantage of having your op-ed pitched by people who've built cozy relationships with editors and in some cases used to be op-ed page editors themselves...it's part of the corruption of a thoroughly corrupt communications system. It's part of the rigging of everything that builds cynicism and resentment."
While we don't usually agree with Swanson on a lot of issues, he's absolutely correct here. This is the same Corporate Media who lectures us every day that countries like Russia are run by corrupt Oligarchs who spread disinformation through their controlled media. And very likely some group like Keybridge was paid to tell us so. That is not as remote a possibility as one might think: as we've seen in the recent Soros Foundation Scandal that George Soros and his gang of Wall Street freebooters set up media-public relations campaigns on a regular basis.
Our 1st Amendment to the Constitution obviously does not give any group the right to monopolize the avenues of communication and access to information. It guarantees the right to freedom of these things; and a corporate oligarchy controlling the press is essentially no different in principle than having an outright State Ministry of Propaganda controlling it. In either case, it's vested interests---and not the people---who benefit from this type of monopoly.
And it's also very likely the case that Keybridge is not the PR firm engaged in this kind of mass-media manipulation. In any event, it should be painfully obvious even to the somnambulant American public that our Fourth Estate is in desperate need of some serious reform. As uncomfortable a fact as this may be, it is becoming painfully obvious that media deregulation is not working. The laws regulating the mass-media instituted by the Truman Administration need to be brought back, as well as Anti-Trust and Conflict of Interest laws being enforced on the Corporate Media. All one has to do is compare the mass media of the Truman Era to today's media to see which system worked and which does not.
Brazil broke out in a series of riots yesterday and the governments of Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia withdrew their ambassadors in protest of a parliamentary coup overthrowing the elected president, Dilma Rousseff. Michel Temer, a politician with a shady past and a 6% approval rating among Brazilian citizens was sworn in as the new president.
Brazil is a member of the BRIC economic union and during the last decade has moved steadily out of the Beltway/Wall Street's sphere of influence.
We have seen the same pattern in the Brazil coup before in Ukraine. An elected pro-Russian government in a country with access to huge oil reserves; followed by foreign provocateurs organizing the largest-ever so-called 'Gay Pride Rallies'; followed but sudden and well media-hyped 'protests' against the current government. And the new 'popular leaders' like Temer---who meet with high-level US political and economic interests before seizing power---suddenly reversing national course in favor of pro-Western democracy. Temer's first speech, predictably, pointed out his commitment to supporting the LGBTQ Agenda.
"The first day of Temer's Administration made it clear that Neoliberalism is back in Brazilian politics." said Aline Piva, a Rousseff supporter. "Temer's Administration has moved to offset or revoke existing Latin American commitments, the developing world, and with Russia and China in favor of a push towards US-centered trade deregulation."
Temer himself was under investigation by the Rousseff Administration---as were many of the politicians instigating Rousseff's 'impeachment---after allegations surfaced of corruption and bribery around Brazilian oil company, Petrobras. Audio files have been leaked to the press already of Brazilian officials agreeing to Rousseff's impeachment in exchange for ending the corruption probe.
The Obama Administration was quick to applaud the coup, of course. Obama's spokesman Josh Kirby stated to the Corporate Media that Obama was satisfied that the coup followed the Brazilian Constitution and that he was "confident that we will continue the strong bilateral relationship existing between the two countries." To put a finer point on the issue, the US Ambassador to Brazil (who coincidentally was formerly ambassador to Paraguay during a coup there) wrote an op-ed for the pro-Temer news outlet O Globo:
"Brazil is an essential market for US corporations, and a must-play for US business."
A statement strangely reminiscent of the Soros-engineered press releases following the Ukraine coup in 2014. And Obama's toady in the UN, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon also endorsed Temer. Hardly surprising: the Rousseff Administration was moving Brazil away from the IMF and World Bank and supporting China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank as an alternative. Only a year ago, the current politicians leading the coup met with IMF and World Bank leaders at the time the first anti-Rousseff 'protests' were being organized and orchestrated.
"Temer has already talked about massive austerity programs" said Peter Koenig, a geopolitical analyst and former World Bank official, in an interview with Sputnik News, "The pattern is well-known. The World Bank will make certain that the debt level is so high that privatization of debt assets becomes unavoidable."
Koenig also stressed that Brazil, as a member of BRIC has greater security since Russian and Chinese currencies are tied to a Gold Standard, unlike the US.
It appears that, once again, the freebooters and political criminals in our own government have instigated a regime change, that will probably end in disaster as the previous attempts have. But the average American is too concerned about doing drugs and surfing internet porn to care very much. As long as our Corporate Media focuses on the need for regime change everywhere but here, the Wall Street freebooters will go on looting country after country and keeping the Ameroboob well-insulated from feeling uncomfortable about any of it.
Exporting American Exceptionalism to Brazil
