Wikileaks has arguably been the most important thing that has happened to elections, if not the veneer of democracy, in quite a long time. We’ve been able to see the true side of politicians and bureaucrats like never before.
In Hillary Clinton, we see a figure beholden to Wall St., working diligently to advance the influence of financial corporations over government policy and taxpayer money. Her mega-donor list is a who’s who of megabanks that also happened to benefit from the TARP government bailout.
In return for their money, Clinton gave speeches to Wall St. giants behind closed doors between 2013 and 2015. She told Goldman Sachs she was “far removed” from ordinary people and that “you need both a public and a private position.”
Generally speaking, the tenor of my commentaries reflects the severity of my beliefs. And recently, fears, which is why the past few weeks have spawned some of the deepest, and most serious, articles of my career. To wit, in the past two days alone, I published “the most important article I’ve ever written,” regarding my staunch belief that all hope for America will be lost if Hillary Clinton is elected; and “frankly, I’m terrified,” on how rapidly civility is collapsing in this historic political campaign, which is rapidly turning into the most polarizing political event since the Vietnam War – and perhaps, given the ugly direction things are turning, the Civil War. Not to mention, last week’s “mark this date, global war has begun” – of how, politically, economically, and monetarily, the “every man for himself” syndrome has taken hold; to the point that, frankly, it’s difficult to envision a scenario where major military confrontations do not result.
Well this is interesting.
The Hill reports:
A Democratic elector in Washington says that if his party’s presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, wins the state, he may shirk his duty to cast his vote for her in the Electoral College.
“How can I say and do and be who I am and then cast a vote for somebody that’s the same as [GOP nominee Donald] Trump?” Robert Satiacum Jr. asked Politico in an interview published Wednesday.
Now that American citizens are allowed to sue Riyadh for its alleged role in the 9/11 terror attacks, the Saudi press has launched an assault against the legislation.
In a controversial decision, US lawmakers voted to overturn President Barack Obama’s veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA). The legislation allows US citizens to sue foreign governments believed to be involved in terrorist activities on US soil.
Among the bill’s chief opponents was the Saudi government. Now that the bill is law, Riyadh’s newsrooms are having a field day.
We live in a world where the yield-starved and tech-savvy conspire in the basement of the underground and unaccounted. While the rise of Bitcoin and the explosion of alternative currencies may become the new scapegoat of behavioral finance, there is nothing quite like the reality of trickle down finance gone wrong.
Recently, EU officials called for putting safeguards on Internet currency.
The European Banking Authority called on the EU to develop safeguards for trading platforms. They were also called to start groups to oversee each Internet currency to ensure that no individual can manipulate the integrity of a particular virtual currency scheme and its key components. In the meantime, banks shouldn’t buy, hold or sell virtual currencies.