Supreme Court Upholds Trump’s Travel Ban

Donald Trump was vindicated by the Supreme Court regarding the dispute over the provisional entry ban for citizens from six countries. The Supreme Court of the United States overturned the provisional injunctions of subordinate authorities. Of course mainstream media is once again misrepresenting the decision. The New York Times wrote: ‘On Monday, the justices agreed to review both appellate decisions, but their unsigned opinion did not address the merits of those cases. ‘
The ‘unsigned opinion’ was Per Curiam meaning it was the UNANIMOUS decision of the entire court and this did not requite an opinion written by one Justice. This is a STAY to allow Trump to do what the travel ban was all about – a review. Such stays are typically Per Curiam when granted for the Supreme Court rarely grants such a stay. Here we have two lower courts interfering with the Executive Powers, for which there was absolutely NO historical precedent. If ISIS openly sent in 1,000 people to be terrorists, they would be able to freely enter all because the lower courts were playing politics rather than law.

This post was published at Armstrong Economics on Jun 27, 2017.

Report: Syrian Government Not Responsible for Alleged Khan Sheikhoun Chemical Attack

Early on the morning of April 7, American warships stationed in the Mediterranean Sea fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack carried out by the Syrian regime. But in a report published on Sunday at the German newspaper Die Welt, veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh throws cold water on the claim of Syrian culpability, exposing yet another instance of military action based on flawed – or in this case, entirely nonexistent – intelligence.
Russian Intelligence and the April 4 Strike
On April 4 at about 6:55 a.m., Syrian time, the Syrian government carried out an airstrike on a two-story cinder block building determined by Russian intelligence to be a rebel command center, where commanders of the Syrian opposition’s most radical Islamist factions frequently met. The strike killed up to four jihadist leaders, according to an intelligence estimate.
Hersh sets the scene:
The Syrian target at Khan Sheikhoun […] was depicted as a two-story cinder-block building in the northern part of town. Russian intelligence, which is shared when necessary with Syria and the U. S. as part of their joint fight against jihadist groups, had established that a high-level meeting of jihadist leaders was to take place in the building, including representatives of Ahrar al-Sham and the al-Qaida-affiliated group formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra.

This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on June 26, 2017.

Justice Thomas Calls Out The Supreme Court For Not Believing In The Second Amendment

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas had stern words for his colleagues when the Court declined to hear a case challenging California’s handgun laws, saying that the jurists do not understand the importance of self-defense.
The case, supported by the National Rifle Association, involves San Diego resident Edward Peruta, who challenged his county’s refusal to grant him permission to carry a concealed firearm outside of his home.
‘For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the Second Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous,’ Thomas wrote after most members of the court declined to hear the California case.
‘But the Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it,’ Thomas said.

This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on June 26, 2017.

New Jersey Passes Bill Requiring Schools To Teach Kids How To Interact With Cops

The state Assembly of New Jersey passed a bill on Thursday that would require K-12 students to be taught how to interact with police officers ‘in a manner marked by mutual cooperation and respect.’ Although the Senate still needs to take action for the bill to become a law, it had an overwhelming amount of support in the assembly; passing 76-0.
The bill is aimed at ‘teaching’ kids how to own responsibility for not interacting in a proper manner when a police officer demands compliance and mandates that school districts begin teaching kids how to talk to law-enforcement officers. Schools will be forced to begin this new indoctrination program starting in kindergarten, and the ‘instruction’ would continue as part of the social studies curriculum all the way through grade 12. The bill is facing harsh blowback from not only the minority community but those skeptical of police actions.

This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on June 26, 2017.

Lawyers Representing Bernie Sanders Supporters Fear for their Life

Jared Beck is not a lawyer likely to file a frivolous motion in Federal court. He’s an honors graduate of Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review, and a Phi Beta Kappa and summa cum laude graduate of Harvard College. Prior to setting up his own practice with his equally impressive wife, Elizabeth Lee Beck, he worked for two prominent corporate law firms where he represented clients like Cadbury, General Motors and Snapple.
Jared Beck is one of the lead lawyers representing supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders in a Federal lawsuit that charges that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and its former Chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, engaged in overt acts to undermine the Sanders’ presidential primary campaign while boosting the prospects of Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Presidential nominee. The lawsuit makes charges of fraud, negligent misrepresentation, deceptive conduct, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence. Under the DNC’s bylaws, it must act in a fair and impartial manner to all Democratic candidates during the primaries.
The lawsuit on behalf of Sanders’ supporters was filed on June 28, 2016. In less than two months, two young men who were potential witnesses in the case were dead. Seth Rich was a 27-year old DNC employee who was shot to death in Washington D. C. on July 10, 2016. Police continue to work on the theory that the murder was a botched robbery, despite the fact that nothing was taken from Rich’s body.

This post was published at Wall Street On Parade By Pam Martens and Russ Marte.

The American Bar Association Stifles Legal Education

The Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications is a nonprofit accrediting agency for journalism programs. Bradley Hamm, the dean at Northwestern’s Medill School of Journalism, has called the council’s accreditation-review process ‘flawed,’ ‘superficial,’ ‘extremely time-consuming,’ and ‘sort of a low bar.’
So he’s gotten out. Northwestern University has effectively terminated its relationship with the council, calmly embracing its new status as unaccredited.
The online journal Inside Higher Ed, which points out that the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley, has done the same, quotes Dean Hamm as saying that, ‘as we near the 2020s, we expect far better than a 1990s-era accreditation organization that resists change – especially as education and careers in our field evolve rapidly.’
This is a tremendous blow – when two of the most prominent and celebrated journalism programs in the country refuse to acknowledge the authority and legitimacy of an accreditor, it’s tough for the accreditor to argue that the resistant institutions are merely upset about their ability to maintain accreditation. If other journalism schools are frustrated with the council’s obsolete standards, and its tendency to micromanage curricula, more of them will likely follow the example of Northwestern and Berkeley.

This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on June 26, 2017.

Does Mueller’s Team’s Democratic Bias Confirm Gingrich’s “Time To Rethink” Warning?

Newt Gingrich is once again driving the narrative surrounding the multiple investigations into President Donald Trump and his campaign. After Gingrich asserted in a tweet Friday that it’s “time to rethink” the assumption that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team of prosecutors will behave impartially, Axios has followed up with a report noting that nearly every member of Mueller’s team has contributed to Democratic candidates. The Axios report echoes a similar story by CNN, which previously reported on donations by three members of Mueller’s team.
‘The donations:
James Quarles: Donated almost $33,000 to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. He has also donated about $2,750 to Republicans – the only lawyer on Mueller’s team to have done so.
Jeannie Rhee: Donated more than $16,000 since 2008 to Democrats, including the maximum donation possible to Clinton in both 2015 and 2016. Rhee has also donated to Obama.
Andrew Weissmann: Donated more than $4,000 to Obama in 2008 and $2,000 to the DNC in 2006.


This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 25, 2017.

Chapter 22: Culture and Capital

Christian Economics: Teacher’s Edition
And if you faithfully obey the voice of the Lord your God, being careful to do all his commandments that I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, if you obey the voice of the Lord your God. Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed shall you be in the field. Blessed shall be the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground and the fruit of your cattle, the increase of your herds and the young of your flock. Blessed shall be your basket and your kneading bowl. Blessed shall you be when you come in, and blessed shall you be when you go out (Deuteronomy 28:1 – 6). The Lord will establish you as a people holy to himself, as he has sworn to you, if you keep the commandments of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. And all the peoples of the earth shall see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they shall be afraid of you. And the Lord will make you abound in prosperity, in the fruit of your womb and in the fruit of your livestock and in the fruit of your ground, within the land that the Lord swore to your fathers to give you (Deuteronomy 28:9 – 11).
AnalysisThis passage and its parallel in Leviticus 26 present the case for obeying biblical law. The bulk of each chapter lists negative sanctions for disobeying. The chapters deal with sanctions. Sanctions reinforce God’s law.
The nation of Israel was set apart by its legal order. ‘The Lord will establish you as a people holy to himself, as he has sworn to you, if you keep the commandments of the Lord your God and walk in his ways’ (v. 9). Biblical holiness means being set apart ethically. It has to do with sanctification. Israel’s holiness was comprehensive. It involved every aspect of Israelite culture. Biblical holiness is corporate, not just individual. Deuteronomy 28 had to do with Israel as a nation. It had to do with Israel as the manifestation of the kingdom of God. That is, it had to do with the civilization of God. This is the meaning of a kingdom. It is a separate culture. This separation is above all ethical: issues of moral right and wrong. This is why any discussion of either economic theory or practice apart from a discussion of ethics is a monumental conceptual error. There is no such thing as a value-free social order. This includes economics. There is therefore no such thing as value-free social analysis. This includes economics. The economist should be familiar with biblical causation. It is ethical. But modern economists pride themselves on an illusion: value-free economic theory.

This post was published at Gary North on June 23, 2017.

Conclusion to Part 1

Christian Economics: Teacher’s Edition
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1).
A. Rival FaithsFaith is basic to the lives of all people. Most of what believe we take on faith. We have not scientifically examined everything we believe. Most of what we fervently believe is not subject to the rigorous but narrowly focused techniques of scientific testing. We believe it anyway.
Leonard E. Read fervently believed in the productivity of human creativity. So do I, but it is not the foundation of my worldview. It was for Read. He called the free market a miracle, meaning a miracle of creativity. I do not call it a miracle. I call God’s creation of the cosmos in six days a miracle. In contrast to Read, I call the free market economy a predictable institutional result of society’s acceptance and enforcement of these principles, all of which are mandated in the Bible: the doctrine of linear time, the doctrine of ethical progress (progressive sanctification), private property, the rule of law, civil laws against theft, taxes below ten percent of income, men’s strict legal responsibility for their actions, the rejection of envy, wealth as a confirmation of the covenant, and men’s commitment to leaving an inheritance to their grandchildren.
Why did Read refer to a pencil as both a miracle and a mystery? First, it is the outcome of innumerable decisions. Second, there is no central planning agency coordinating these decisions. There could not be such an agency. No one knows how to make a pencil. Yet a pencil is common. It is also quite simple. Think of complex products as far greater miracles and far greater mysteries. How could this be? Read said it is the product of an Invisible Hand. But Read did not believe in a supernatural being that is shaped like a hand, yet invisible. The phrase is a metaphor, one coined by Adam Smith in 1759 and used again in 1776. People do not trust their futures to a metaphor. They want to believe in a world with causation based on ethics, where good things happen to law-abiding, ethically righteous people. This is what they teach their children. They do not teach their children to trust in an Invisible Hand (capitalized).
What is the source of the market’s remarkable ability to produce wealth? God or man? If man, does this mean as individuals or the state? How is the system of economic cause and effect sustained?
B. Rival ExplanationsHere is Read’s position:

This post was published at Gary North on June 24, 2017.

Preparing For War? US House Wants To Create First New Military Branch Since 1947

Via TheAntiMedia.org,
There’s currently a push in the halls of Washington D. C., to establish a new branch of the military by 2019, one whose focus would be operations among the stars. Proposed legislation by House representatives would create a ‘Space Corps’ that would serve ‘as a separate military service within the Department of the Air Force.’
It would be the first branch added to the military since 1947 when the Air Force was officially established.
On Tuesday, the top two lawmakers of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Representatives Mike Rogers and Jim Cooper, added the legislation to the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The subcommittee oversees military space operations and works within the umbrella of the House Armed Services Committee.
‘There is bipartisan acknowledgement that the strategic advantages we derive from our national security space systems are eroding,’ Rogers and Cooper said in a joint statement. ‘We are convinced that the Department of Defense is unable to take the measures necessary to address these challenges effectively and decisively, or even recognize the nature and scale of its problems.’

This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 24, 2017.

Bernie Sanders & Wife Under FBI Investigation For Bank Fraud

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and his wife Jane have lawyer’d up amid an FBI investigation into a loan obtained to expand Burlington College while she was its president.
As we noted just over a year ago, Burlington College, a small Vermont private school once led by the wife of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, said Monday it will close later this month, citing “the crushing weight” of debt incurred during the presidency of Jane Sanders who was in charge of the college until 2011.

This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 24, 2017.

One Trader Finds “Somewhere Cheap To Hide”

Authored by Kevin Muir via The Macro Tourist blog,
An interesting aspect of living in Toronto is the different people I get to meet. For example, although I know plenty of Bay Street types; traders, investment bankers, securities lawyers, portfolio managers (you know, all the people you try to avoid at cocktail parties), I am fortunate enough to count as my friends a more eclectic group of entrepreneurs that expose me to ideas that are a little different.
One of these individuals is a buddy who made his fortune in the mining business. I lose track when he tells me of all the different companies he founded and sold, but the important thing to note is that today he owns a uranium mine. Yup. You got that right. My pal, the uranium miner.

This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 23, 2017.

Trump Made Calls to Two High Law Enforcement Officials with Jurisdiction to Investigate Him

Former FBI Director James Comey has testified to Congress that he was uncomfortable with the multiple contacts by the President. Comey was fired by Trump after declining to give a pledge of loyalty to the President. Now, official government emails have been released documenting that another top law enforcement official with jurisdiction to investigate Donald Trump and his business associates received ‘uncomfortable’ contacts by the President and was then fired after declining to return a phone call.
Yesterday evening, Jason Leopold and Claudia Koerner, reporters for Buzzfeed, released emails they had obtained under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the U. S. Justice Department. The emails documented concerns raised to Justice Department officials by Preet Bharara, at the time the top Federal prosecutor in the U. S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, over a voice mail left by President Trump’s secretary, Madeline Westerhout, on March 9, seeking a call back to the President. This would have been the fourth contact by Trump to Bharara since Trump’s election win, the prior three having occurred while Trump was President-elect.
Bharara, after consulting with the Justice Department regarding the March 9 contact, called the President’s secretary back and informed her that it was the Justice Department’s advice that he not ‘speak directly to the President at this time.’ Bharara was fired two days later by Trump after refusing a request to resign.

This post was published at Wall Street On Parade By Pam Martens and Russ Marte.