Ninety miles from the South Eastern tip of the United States, Liberty has no stead. In order for Liberty to exist and thrive, Tyranny must be identified, recognized, confronted and extinguished.
infinite scrolling
Thursday, December 13, 2018
China Makes First Big U.S. Soybean Purchase Since Chinese Capitulation To Trump
CHICAGO (Reuters) – China on Wednesday made its first major purchases of U.S. soybeans since President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping struck a trade war truce earlier this month, providing some relief to U.S. farmers who have struggled to find buyers for their record-large harvest.
Trump told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday the Chinese were already buying a “tremendous amount” of U.S. soybeans and would also soon cut tariffs on U.S. autos.
The purchase of over 1.5 million tonnes of beans is the most concrete evidence yet that China is making good on pledges the U.S. government said Xi made when the two leaders met on Dec. 1 and agreed to a 90-day detente to negotiate a trade deal.
Global markets had whipsawed since then, with little sign that China was making the substantial purchases of U.S. farm, energy and industrial products that Trump said would start immediately after the meeting.
Investors have been skeptical about the progress made toward ending a trade war that has disrupted the flow of hundreds of billions of dollars of goods between the world’s two largest economies. The arrest in Canada of a top Chinese executive from technology giant Huawei Technologies Co Ltd also stoked concern in markets that the trade war could worsen.
In another sign of concessions to the United States, China appears to be easing its high-tech industrial push, dubbed “Made in China 2025,” which has long irked Washington.
China has also told state oil trader Unipec to buy U.S. oil, and...
Trump told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday the Chinese were already buying a “tremendous amount” of U.S. soybeans and would also soon cut tariffs on U.S. autos.
The purchase of over 1.5 million tonnes of beans is the most concrete evidence yet that China is making good on pledges the U.S. government said Xi made when the two leaders met on Dec. 1 and agreed to a 90-day detente to negotiate a trade deal.
Global markets had whipsawed since then, with little sign that China was making the substantial purchases of U.S. farm, energy and industrial products that Trump said would start immediately after the meeting.
Investors have been skeptical about the progress made toward ending a trade war that has disrupted the flow of hundreds of billions of dollars of goods between the world’s two largest economies. The arrest in Canada of a top Chinese executive from technology giant Huawei Technologies Co Ltd also stoked concern in markets that the trade war could worsen.
In another sign of concessions to the United States, China appears to be easing its high-tech industrial push, dubbed “Made in China 2025,” which has long irked Washington.
China has also told state oil trader Unipec to buy U.S. oil, and...
THE REAL COLLUSION: Obama’s FBI Paid More on Russian Dirt and Fake News in 2016 Election Than Russia Did
On Tuesday Google CEO Sundar Pichai was called in to testify before the House Judiciary Committee.
Pichai was called in to explain Google business practices including data collection and targeting of conservative voices.
During questioning Pichai dashed the hopes of Democrats everywhere when he admitted Russia spent only $4,700 on advertisements during the 2016 election.
Which is next to nothing… In a campaign where Hillary Clinton spent nearly a billion dollars!
Russia also paid around $70,000 on Facebook ads to attract both Trump and Hillary supporters. Russia spent around $6,000 on Facebook ads the last six weeks of the election which had no effect on the election.
So we are looking at a total of around $75,000 spent by Russia to run ads on US social media during the 2016 election — both to promote Hillary AND Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, the FBI spent much more for Russian dirt than Russia paid on collusion.
The FBI picked up the tab for the Steele dossier along with the DNC and Hillary campaign. The FBI paid Christopher Steele’s travel and other expenses while he was putting together his slanderous dossier on Trump.
4,282 people are talking about this
The Clinton campaign paid DNC lawyer Marc Elias and his law firm Perkins Coie paid Fusion GPS and later denied knowledge of the same dossier they paid for.
And the FBI paid Michael Steele from Fusion GPS $160,000 for travel expenses while he was digging up dirt for his fake dossier.
The FBI actually spent more on fake news during the 2016 election than Russia did!
You won’t see THAT in the liberal mainstream news anytime soon!
Pichai was called in to explain Google business practices including data collection and targeting of conservative voices.
During questioning Pichai dashed the hopes of Democrats everywhere when he admitted Russia spent only $4,700 on advertisements during the 2016 election.
Which is next to nothing… In a campaign where Hillary Clinton spent nearly a billion dollars!
Russia also paid around $70,000 on Facebook ads to attract both Trump and Hillary supporters. Russia spent around $6,000 on Facebook ads the last six weeks of the election which had no effect on the election.
So we are looking at a total of around $75,000 spent by Russia to run ads on US social media during the 2016 election — both to promote Hillary AND Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, the FBI spent much more for Russian dirt than Russia paid on collusion.
The FBI picked up the tab for the Steele dossier along with the DNC and Hillary campaign. The FBI paid Christopher Steele’s travel and other expenses while he was putting together his slanderous dossier on Trump.
BREAKING: FBI picked up the tab for Steele dossier along with Hillary; FBI paid Steele's travel and other expenses
And the FBI paid Michael Steele from Fusion GPS $160,000 for travel expenses while he was digging up dirt for his fake dossier.
The FBI actually spent more on fake news during the 2016 election than Russia did!
You won’t see THAT in the liberal mainstream news anytime soon!
Thought Police: Public University’s Rules Now Prohibit Offensive Facial Expressions
When George Orwell famously wrote about a dystopian future where your every thought is monitored, he shouldn’t have set it in Great Britain. It would have been much more accurate had he instead written about American college campuses.
We've known about the alarming trend of coddling and control at colleges for a while, but it may be getting worse. At the publicly-funded University of Montana Western, college administrators seem to be doing their best Big Brother impressions.
That university recently published a policy which threatens punitive action against students for making — wait for it — “mean facial expressions.”“While discussions may become heated and passionate, they should never become mean, nasty or vindictive in spoken or printed or emailed words, facial expressions, or gestures,” theofficial Civility Standards at Montana Western declare.
Who decides what a mean facial expression looks like? Nobody seems to know.
“The policy says students must promote an atmosphere of civility and that their discussions should never become ‘mean, nasty, or vindictive,’ but those are all entirely subjective terms that could be applied to punish constitutionally protected speech,” Laura Beltz of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education explained to Campus Reform.
She’s right: People use a variety of facial expressions when upset, flustered or merely just excited. If you roll your eyes or raise your eyebrows, is your academic career over?
“If it is the responsibility for students to uphold these standards, it follows that they may be punished for perceived violations of these standards, in this case, for failing to promote civility or for having a discussion that is deemed mean, nasty, or vindictive,” Beltz pointed out.
Being punished for making a face seems like something that belongs in kindergarten, not a major university attended by serious young adults. But that certainly seems to be how the policy is written.
“According to the policy, violations of the Student Code of Conduct can result in suspension of a student’s technology account, suspension, or in extreme cases, expulsion,” explained Campus Reform.“Even if the policy isn’t actually applied that way, students who read the policy and see how vague it is are likely to self-censor instead of taking the risk that something they say will be seen as mean, nasty, vindictive, or not civil,” Beltz added. “This sort of chilling effect on protected speech is unacceptable at a public university like Montana Western.”
If someone doesn't think...
We've known about the alarming trend of coddling and control at colleges for a while, but it may be getting worse. At the publicly-funded University of Montana Western, college administrators seem to be doing their best Big Brother impressions.
That university recently published a policy which threatens punitive action against students for making — wait for it — “mean facial expressions.”“While discussions may become heated and passionate, they should never become mean, nasty or vindictive in spoken or printed or emailed words, facial expressions, or gestures,” theofficial Civility Standards at Montana Western declare.
Who decides what a mean facial expression looks like? Nobody seems to know.
“The policy says students must promote an atmosphere of civility and that their discussions should never become ‘mean, nasty, or vindictive,’ but those are all entirely subjective terms that could be applied to punish constitutionally protected speech,” Laura Beltz of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education explained to Campus Reform.
She’s right: People use a variety of facial expressions when upset, flustered or merely just excited. If you roll your eyes or raise your eyebrows, is your academic career over?
“If it is the responsibility for students to uphold these standards, it follows that they may be punished for perceived violations of these standards, in this case, for failing to promote civility or for having a discussion that is deemed mean, nasty, or vindictive,” Beltz pointed out.
Being punished for making a face seems like something that belongs in kindergarten, not a major university attended by serious young adults. But that certainly seems to be how the policy is written.
“According to the policy, violations of the Student Code of Conduct can result in suspension of a student’s technology account, suspension, or in extreme cases, expulsion,” explained Campus Reform.“Even if the policy isn’t actually applied that way, students who read the policy and see how vague it is are likely to self-censor instead of taking the risk that something they say will be seen as mean, nasty, vindictive, or not civil,” Beltz added. “This sort of chilling effect on protected speech is unacceptable at a public university like Montana Western.”
If someone doesn't think...
New NY AG to Suspend Rule of Law Regarding Trump Family
The incoming Attorney General for the formerly great state of New York has announced one of her priorities is a wide ranging investigation of the President and his family.
In other words she’s suspending the rule of law and the American system of justice when it comes to the Trumps.
She has no crime to investigate but is investigating the family in search of one.
That is the opposite of how our system is supposed to operate.
NBC News has the story, but of course they’re practically giddy about it:
New York Attorney Gen.-elect Letitia James says she plans to launch sweeping investigations into President Donald Trump, his family and “anyone” in his circle who may have violated the law once she settles into her new job next month.
“We will use every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business transactions and that of his family as well,” James, a Democrat, told NBC News in her first extensive interview since she was elected last month.
James outlined some of the probes she intends to pursue with regard to the president, his businesses and his family members. They include:
- Any potential illegalities involving Trump’s real estate holdings in New York, highlighting a New York Times investigation published in October into the president’s finances.
- The June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian official.
- Examine government subsidies Trump received, which were also the subject of Times investigative work.
- Whether he is in violation of the emoluments clause in the U.S. Constitution through his New York businesses.
- Continue to probe the Trump Foundation.
“We want to investigate anyone in his orbit who has, in fact, violated the law,” said James, who was endorsed by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
James campaigned on passing a bill to change New York’s double jeopardy laws with an eye on possible pardons coming out of the White House. James told NBC News she wants to be able to pursue state charges against anyone the president were to pardon over federal charges or convictions and whose alleged crimes took place in the state. Under current New York law, she might not be able to...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)