TRUMP: Nuclear deal calls for US to defend Iran against Israeli attack…

Screen Shot 2015-09-03 at 11.38.28 AM

“If Israel attacks Iran according to that deal, I believe… that we have to fight with Iran against Israel,” Republican presidential candidate tells CNN.

In a telephone interview with CNN Tuesday, Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump said that under the auspices of the Iran nuclear agreement, if Israel were to attack the Islamic Republic, the United States would have to come to the Tehran’s aid.

Trump has vocally opposed the deal since announcing his run for president, saying that the United States “should have doubled up the sanctions for another couple of months” and that the 24-day notice Iran receives before sites can be inspected is unacceptable.

But Trump added an unconventional twist to the opposition argument, suggesting that under the terms of the deal the United States was required to fight alongside Iran if Israel were to attack.

“You know, there is something in the Iran deal that people I don’t think really understand or know about,” the real estate mogul said. “And nobody is ever to explain it that if somebody attacks Iran, we have to come to their defense.”

Trump added, “And I’m saying this – that includes Israel? And most people say, yes. So, if Israel attacks Iran according to that deal, I believe… that we have to fight with Iran against Israel.”

In one of its annexes, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action calls for cooperation by Western powers with Iran on nuclear safety “as appropriate.” Such cooperation may include training and workshops for Iran to ward against sabotage of its declared, legal civilian nuclear facilities.

Nowhere in the agreement, however, is the United States or any other party required to come to the defense of Iran should the country be attacked.

On Wednesday, the Obama administration secured the support of 34 senators for its landmark nuclear agreement with Iran, ensuring its safe passage through a vote scheduled in Congress this month.

Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat from Maryland, announced her support for the deal on Wednesday morning. She followed announcements from two Democratic colleagues, senators Chris Coons of Delaware and Bob Casey, Jr. from Pennsylvania, the previous day.

Congress may still vote and pass a resolution disapproving of the deal when it reconvenes next week.

Michael Wilner contributed to this report.

REPORT: Hacker Threatens To Sell Hillary’s ENTIRE UNRELEASED Private Emails For $500K…

Screen Shot 2015-09-03 at 11.30.41 AM

Exposed! Libya Security Briefs, Algeria Hostage Info & More — Hacker Threatens To Sell Hillary Clinton’s ENTIRE UNRELEASED Private Emails For $500K

Just as email-gate looked to be winding down, has exclusively learned a person claiming to be a computer specialist has come forward with the stunning news that 32,000 emails from Hillary Clinton‘s private email account are up for sale. The price tag — a whopping $500,000!


Promising to give the trove of the former Secretary of State’s emails to the highest bidder, the specialist is showing subject lines as proof of what appear to be legitimate messages.

PHOTOS: Exposed! 10 New Revelations From Hillary Clinton’s Recently Released Emails — Overworked Staff And Guilty Pleasures!

“Hillary or someone from her camp erased the outbox containing her emails, but forgot to erase the emails that were in her sent box,” an insider reveals to Radar of the Presidential contender’s latest nightmare.

Radar has learned that some of the topics discussed in the email appear to include everything from Benghazi to the Algerian hostage crisis — with subject lines such as:

“H Libya security latest. Sid” (with attachment)
“H FYI, best analysis so far of hearing Sid,’ about the latest security
in Libya”
“H Algeria latest French Intel on Algeria hostage Sid”
“H Latest French Intel in Algeria hostage Sid” (with attachment)
“H Latest Libya intel internal govt discussions high level” (with
“H HIGHLY IMPORTANT! Comprehensive Intel Report on (with attachment)”

Warns the insider, “If these emails get out to the public domain, not only is Hillary finished as a potential Presidential nominee, she could put our country’s national security at risk.”

Story developing.

The US Economy Is Not Awesome

Screen Shot 2015-09-03 at 11.06.31 AM

Fed has driven the financial bubble to higher and higher extremes

by  David Stockman | David Stockman’s Contra Corner | September 3, 2015

When the bubble vision stock peddlers get desperate, they talk decoupling. So by the end of today’s bloodbath you would have thought China was on another planet, and that “commodities” were some trinket-like collectibles gathered by people who don’t wear long pants, drink coca cola or jabber on their cell phones.

On these fine shores, of course, its all awesome from sea to shinning sea. So don’t be troubled. Buy the dip.

Never mind that we are in month 74 of this so-called recovery and that after year upon year of promised “escape velocity” the reliable signs of said event are still few and far between. But the “recovery” narrative stays alive because there is always some stray factoids of seasonally maladjusted, yet-to-be-revised “incoming data” that can excite the MSM headline writers and bubble vision talking heads.

Today the data on construction spending and housing took their turn in the awesome circle. Thank heavens that the headline writing software used by the financial press doesn’t yet read graphical data. Otherwise they might have reported that private residential construction soared in July—–well, all the way back to January 2002 levels!

And those are the nominal dollars that the Fed has done its level best to depreciate in the 13 years since then. In fact, on an inflation-adjusted basis the housing construction spend is still at 1992 levels.

Screen Shot 2015-09-03 at 11.09.13 AM

What had the headline software giddy, of course, was the year over year comps, which were in double digits. Yet did the talking heads bother to note the deep hook in last summer’s data?

No they didn’t. Otherwise they might have seen that the two-year stack in July came in at a hardly fulsome 3.7% annual rate and that nominal private housing spending is still 7% below December 2007 and 43% below the early 2006 peak.

More importantly, they might have noticed that this is no longer your grandfather’s housing market. The US housing stock got way over-built during the Greenspan bubble and the incoming generation of home-buyers has gotten buried in $1.2 trillion of student debt.

So notwithstanding the mini-boom in multi-family apartment construction, the $380 billion annual rate of spending in July amounted to only 2.1% of GDP. That’s the same rock bottom ratio registered in July 2013, and is clear evidence that the housing needle has not really moved at all.

Indeed back in January 2002 when the $380 billion annualized mark was first crossed, housing construction accounted for 3.7% of GDP, and during much of the prior two decades it had posted at 4-5% of GDP.

In short, housing has been sent back to the minor leagues as a GDP contributor and, even then, may be soon running out of gas. The apartment construction boom was partially driven by tax credits, which have expired. And despite the periodic bursts of hopium from Wall Street analysts, there is no sign that the kids are moving out of mom and pops basement or that single family starts are breaking out of the sub-basement of history.

Read more

Developments in Fox Lake Murder

Woman charged with faking report about suspects in Fox Lake cop killing

By Dan Moran, Lauren Zumbach and Lisa Black

Tribune Newspapers

A Vernon Hills nanny claimed to have spotted two possible suspects in the killing of a Fox Lake police officer, launching a massive police search of cornfields Wednesday night in Lake County before she admitted lying, according to authorities.



Vigil held for fallen Fox Lake officer as manhunt continues

The search by about 85 officers and three helicopters near Volo was called off after five hours and the woman, Kristin Kiefer, 30, was charged with disorderly conduct and falsifying a police report, according to the Lake County sheriff’s office. Bond was set at $1,000 Thursday morning in Lake County court.

State’s Attorney Michael Nerheim spoke to reporters after a bond hearing for Kristin B. Kiefer, 30, of Vernon Hills, who is charged with filing a false police report that diverted investigators overnight Wednesday in the search for suspects in the shooting death of Fox Lake police Lt. Joe Gliniewicz. (Lisa Black, Chicago Tribune)

“This redirected the entire focus of this investigation for about five hours,” Lake County State’s Attorney Mike Nerheim said Thursday. “It’s very frustrating … It’s a waste of time; it’s a waste of resources.”

Nerheim said some of the officers who responded had been up all night the previous night.

Nerheim said he did not know Kiefer’s motivation, though authorities Thursday night said that she fabricated the events to get the attention of the family that employs her has a nanny.

The search began around 9:20 p.m. after Kiefer told police she was headed north on Route 12 near Route 120 in Volo when she pulled over because of car trouble, the sheriff’s office said.

Kiefer said she saw two men near a cornfield on the side of the road. They tried to get into her car, she said, but then fled into the cornfield because they feared she was calling the police, authorities said.

In court Thursday morning, prosecutors said that Kiefer told authorities that the men had asked for a ride to Wisconsin.

Woman charged with faking report about suspects in Fox Lake cop killing

Prosecutors said Kiefer insisted that her story was true. But she began to backtrack when she was told by authorities that DNA testing was being conducted on a door she said one of the men had tried to open.

Prosecutors also said the woman made a false police report in Cook County last year when she contacted authorities claiming to have information about a missing person. She was not charged in that case. The woman is not a live-in nanny, prosecutors said.

The area the incident occurred is less than 10 miles south of Fox Lake, where Lt. Charles Joseph Gliniewicz was killed Tuesday morning. Authorities have said he was chasing three men when he was shot. No one is reported in custody.

Based on the woman’s report, Lake County sheriff’s deputies set up a perimeter as about 85 federal, state, and local law enforcement officers began searching the area, the office said. Eleven canine units and three helicopters were also called in.

Officers blocked southbound Route 12 at Route 120, and Gilmer Road south of Route 120. Squad cars came from as far away as Northbrook, Palatine, Lincolnshire and Waukegan.

The canine units were unable to detect a scent, and the helicopters were unable to locate anyone in the area, the sheriff’s office said.

A 30-year-old woman has been arrested for filing a false police report, after allegedly lying about seeing two of the three suspects in the killing of a Fox Lake police officer, prompting an intense search that lasted about five hours in neighboring Volo. (CBS Chicago)

Kiefer stuck by her story but “through further investigation … it was learned Kiefer lied about the entire account of her events,” authorities said. “Kiefer informed detectives she fabricated the events as she wanted attention from a family where she is employed as a nanny.

“Additionally, she indicated she chose this location to fabricate the event, as she was aware of the death of a police officer in the area.”

Kiefer lives in the 0-100 block of Tanwood Court in Vernon Hills.

The Economics of Bernie Sanders

Screen Shot 2015-09-03 at 10.45.15 AM

Sanders shockingly similar to Mussolini

by William L. Anderson | | September 3, 2015

As the political campaign of Hillary Clinton continues to run aground, Democrats are flocking to the campaign of Bernie Sanders, the self-described “socialist” US senator from Vermont, who has been a fixture in that state for more than three decades.

Not unlike the presidential campaign of Ron Paul, Sanders is drawing large, enthusiastic crowds who are very receptive to his message of increased state control of the US economy.

Obviously, when a person running a campaign based upon socialist principles is drawing attention and big crowds, we might ask just what does Sanders mean by “socialist,” and what would he do if he were elected president of the United States? To better answer that question, I am taking a closer look at what we would call the “economics” of Bernie Sanders.
What Do We Mean by “Socialism”?

Before looking at Sanders’s platform, however, I believe it is important to note that when socialists speak of “victories” in the economy, they are not talking about actual results, but rather political achievements in the forms of laws being passed that mandate certain policies. Whether or not these policies actually achieve what socialists claim will be accomplished is another story altogether, but results are irrelevant to socialists.

This should surprise no one because, after all, socialism is based upon political control of the economy. True (or at least original) socialists believe that state agents via the “magic” of their authority should allocate all resources to where there is the greatest need for them. Political representatives, not surprisingly, determine what constitutes the greatest need. The state would take ownership of all factors of production and then wisely determine the needs and how production of goods would fulfill them.

Ludwig von Mises in 1920 in his short work, Socialism (three years later expanded into a book), exploded the socialist myth by pointing out that in a world of scarce resources, economies needed private ownership, prices, profits and losses to determine where resources should be directed. The early years of the “experiment” of the Soviet Union proved Mises correct, and socialists then sought to redefine what socialism actually meant.

In the USSR, and later in China and North Korea, the state took ownership of factors of production, but tried to create a parallel economy by using shadow prices and production functions via the mechanisms championed by Polish communist Oskar Lange, who admitted that Mises had pointed out serious flaws in the original plans of socialists. We also know how that “experiment” turned out, which is why there no longer is a USSR, China has abandoned much of the economics of Mao, and North Korea is a failed state where most people live in grinding poverty.

But people like Bernie Sanders, while maybe not rejecting the old socialism spiritually, nonetheless have embraced a “socialism” in which government takes ownership of large portions of what has been produced by private enterprise and transfers wealth from one group of people to another. A look at the Sanders website spells out his brand of “socialism” that he says is based upon what Nordic countries like Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have done, levying high taxes with governments using that funding for social programs like medical care and other public welfare initiatives.
Secondary Socialism

A number of people have pointed out that the Sanders “program” is not socialism per se, but rather is something based upon socializing the results of private enterprise, or what one might call secondary socialism. The Bernie Sanders regime would take control of some of the produce of private enterprise, as opposed to taking outright control of factors of production, which would remain in private hands. If this reminds one of thefascism of the 1930s, that is because Sanders is promoting a version of the governing models of Germany under Adolph Hitler and Italy under Benito Mussolini.

Of the two, Sanders certainly is closer to Mussolini. Like Sanders, Mussolini called himself a socialist and was a leader in the Italian Socialist Party. Like Sanders, Mussolini decried “profiteers” and the wealthy, and spoke out against political corruption. Like Sanders, Mussolini spoke of a larger “national purpose” and sought to harness nationalism as a political force. Like Sanders, Mussolini sought to impose more and more controls on Italian businesses in order to direct production in a way to satisfy political purposes. Like Sanders, Mussolini built political power by appealing to Italian voters by saying that other Italians were well-off because they had gained their wealth on the backs of the poor.

Having similar economic proposals to Hitler and Mussolini does not make Sanders either of those two men and it is important to emphasize that while Sanders regularly employs the powerful political tool of appealing to voter resentment of others, he is not advocating the kind of genocide that ultimately helped to characterize the fascism of Central Europe in the 1930s and 40s. Bernie Sanders is an economic nationalist, and economic nationalism was at the heart of European fascism, but we do not want to make unwarranted accusations against Sanders, either.

At the same time, I do not want to let Sanders off the hook. He promotes economic nationalism and has built his campaign upon resentment, the kind of which Henry Hazlitt wrote in 1966 in his famous, “Marxism in One Minute.” Hazlitt wrote:

The whole gospel of Karl Marx can be summed up in a single sentence: Hate the man who is better off than you are. Never under any circumstances admit that his success may be due to his own efforts, to the productive contribution he has made to the whole community. Always attribute his success to the exploitation, the cheating, the more or less open robbery of others. (Emphasis mine)

As one moves through the website for the Sanders campaign, there is plenty of resentment for others. First, there is the ubiquitous “One-Percent” that is the main focus of the typical Sanders stump speech:

This campaign is sending a message to the billionaire class: “you can’t have it all.” You can’t get huge tax breaks while children in this country go hungry. You can’t continue sending our jobs to China while millions are looking for work. You can’t hide your profits in the Cayman Islands and other tax havens, while there are massive unmet needs on every corner of this nation. Your greed has got to end. You cannot take advantage of all the benefits of America, if you refuse to accept your responsibilities as Americans.

While I would agree wholeheartedly that the US economy is in serious trouble, it is not because of the “greed” of billionaires. It is because the US government, through the Federal Reserve System, has created what David Stockman has called the “casino economy” that has substituted trading of sovereign debt and monetary manipulation for a real economy with interest rates that reflect actual economic fundamentals. Like the Bush and Clinton administrations before it, the Obama administration has promoted political entrepreneurship and demonized market entrepreneurship.
Sanders’s List of Recycled Twentieth-Century “Solutions”

Americans are not jobless because some people are not paying “their fair share” of taxes; they are jobless because the US government insists on directing resources from higher-valued uses to lower-valued uses, as determined by consumer choice. They are jobless because Washington insists on remaking the economy in its own image, and there is nothing in the entire Sanders campaign that would change any of the things that vex the US economy the most.

So, what does Sanders propose to “revitalize” the US economy? Here are some things listed on his website:

Raise taxes on US corporations (ironically, corporate tax rates in the Nordic countries are substantially lower than current corporate taxes in the USA, something that has escaped Sanders’s notice);
Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour;
Expand the reach of labor unions and vastly expand their membership;
Make it illegal for US corporations to manufacture goods abroad, and then sell those goods in the USA;
Impose new taxes on financial transactions;
Spend at least a trillion dollars on building and repairing roads, bridges, and utilities;
Create a “youth jobs program” in which unemployed young people are given government-sponsored jobs (Sanders sees no connection between high minimum wages and youth unemployment);
Enact “equity pay” that will “guarantee” that women are paid the same as men for comparable work;
Break up banks and financial institutions;
Enact a Canada-style single-payer healthcare system;
Provide free tuition for all public colleges and universities;
Expand Social Security benefits;
Require businesses to provide 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave, at least 10 days of paid vacation a year, and seven days per year of paid guaranteed sick leave.

Notice that there is nothing in the Sanders platform that calls for “nationalization” of the means of production, nor does he propose to do away with the price system. In other words, Sanders’s vision of socialism is not what Mao or Trotsky or Lenin proposed, yet there is not one thing in the entire platform that would reverse the dangerous economic trends of the past decade.

Instead, Sanders proposes to direct huge amounts of resources in the direction of constructing something akin to a European welfare state. To put it another way, Sanders wishes to “turn back the clock” to create or promote social and economic structures that already have been undermined by the modern “sharing” economy.

If one reads Sanders’s platform from another perspective, it would be the New Deal. Indeed, there is nothing Sanders has written or said from the stump that would not be reminiscent of a New Deal rally (with the possible exception in appealing to black Americans, which was not part of the Democratic Party agenda in the 1930s, as well as Sanders’s appeal to furthering the Sexual Revolution). Bernie Sanders pushes an economic agenda that is frozen in time.

The problem, economically speaking, is that Bernie Sanders proposes nothing that actually would enable entrepreneurs to help bring about a true economic recovery. In Sanders’s world, entrepreneurs are parasites and employers are oppressors who seek to harm their employees, and wealth is defined by how much governments have in their treasuries.

If I could put the economics of Bernie Sanders into a nutshell, it would be this: Burden private enterprise with one directive after another, and then demonize it when it ultimately falls down under the awful weight of taxes, higher costs, and mandates. While many people believe that instituting the Sanders economic agenda would help turn the USA into another Sweden or Denmark, the more likely outcome would be turning this country into another Venezuela.