Some people have asked about the computer projections for a tremendous increase in civil violence. There is absolutely no resolution to the great divide that has unfolded politically. The Democrats advocate violence as Hillary clearly states...
She says that civility can ONLY return when the Democrats take back the government. Clearly, this is throwing down the gauntlet that it shall be their way or no way. This is the end of Democracy for what she is saying is there is to be none.
Back at the beginning of the current Private Wave on the Economic Confidence Model in 1985, I warned that we would face a Crisis in Democracy...
It would begin as the government loses power over the economy and the people, it first becomes more abusive. We have been gradually witnessing this trend with the hunt for taxes.
The next stage is the violence. This is what will carry us into the peak of 2032. By that time, the hatred we are witnessing today drawn on political lines is simply that what will happen is all civility vanishes and this will build into violence and end in civil war. Unfortunately, this is not my OPINION. It is simply a correlation of trends that repeat throughout history.
Hillary is effectively advocating the destruction of the United States. She has simply stated bluntly that democracy will no longer be tolerated unless the Democrats win and then subjugate the opposition. She just can not see what she is doing.
So welcome to the new reality of where this madness is going.
The embattled Supreme Court nominee secured 50 votes in the Senate and was sworn in as Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The Democrats knew that they would lose so they turned the appointment into a dramatic confrontation that was so outrageous at this point NOBODY in their right mind would ever again throw their hat into the ring. This was all staged and it is intended to be taken all the way into 2020. My live sources say the strategy will make Kavanaugh as a poster child and they will label him as a rapist from here on out.
We have crossed the line. There is no going back.
We will now face the Decline & Fall of the United States and this is part of the shift of the Financial Capital of the world to China after 2032. When I lived in New Jersey, at the home next door, a bitter divorce took place. The wife refused to agree with anything and even refused to sign their taxes. The house had been on the market and was under contract for $2.6 million. She refused to sign just to spite her husband. The IRS seized the house, put it up for auction, and sold it for $750,000.Her bitterness wiped out her own future. This is what is taking place on a national level.
* * *
Social media seemed to agree with Armstrong...
Not surprising that this wretched hag would jump on the violence bandwagon driven by Democrats these days. I guess they want civil war. That would be a terrible thing and surely would not end well for them. #DemocratViolencepic.twitter.com/LSzXc0ymCH
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will not appear in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday to discuss reports that he wanted to secretly record President Trump and then use the recordings to remove him from office under the 25th Amendment, reports the Daily Caller's Chuck Ross, citing an anonymous House Judiciary Committee aide, and later confirmed by CNN.
Rosenstein said he was joking when he made the comments to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and FBI attorney Lisa Page, however that claim has been refuted by the FBI's former top attorney.
"We have many questions for Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and expect answers to those questions. There is not at this time a confirmed date for a potential meeting," the aide told the Caller.
"Don’t think he is coming," added one Republican lawmaker on Wednesday.
The same lawmaker told TheDCNF on Tuesday that Rosenstein was likely to testify before the House Judiciary and House Oversight & Government Reform Committees to answer questions about claims he discussed wearing a wire during his interactions with Trump.
Members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus had called on Rosenstein to testify about his remarks, which were first reported by The New York Times on Sept. 21.
The conservative lawmakers, including North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, have been staunch critics of Rosenstein because of his failure to respond to requests for documents related to the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia probe. -Daily Caller
On Tuesday we reported that the FBI's former top attorney, James Baker, told Congressional investigators last week that Rosenstein wasn't joking about taping Trump.
"As far as Baker was concerned, this was a real plan being discussed," reports The Hill's John Solomon, citing a confidential source.
"It was no laughing matter for the FBI," the source added.
Solomon points out that Rosenstein's comments happened right around the time former FBI Director James Comey was fired.
McCabe, Baker's boss, was fired after the DOJ discovered that he had leaked self-serving information to the press and then lied to investigators about it. Baker, meanwhile, was central to the surveillance apparatus within the FBI during the counterintelligence operation on then-candidate Trump.
As the former FBI general counsel, Baker was a senior figure with a pivotal position who had the ear of the FBI director.
Baker also is at the heart of surveillance abuse accusations, many from congressional Republicans. His deposition lays the groundwork for a planned closed-door House GOP interview with Rosenstein later this week.
Baker, formerly the FBI's top lawyer, helped secure the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, as well as three subsequent renewals. -Fox News
Meanwhile, the New York Times noted that McCabe's own memos attest to Rosenstein's intentions to record Trump - which led to Rosenstein reportedly tendering a verbal resignation to White House chief of staff John Kelly.
CNN anchor Don Lemon told network contributor Matt Lewis to "shut up" late Tuesday during an explosive debate over what constitutes a "mob" in light of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and his wife being chased out of a restaurant...
It was only a matter of time—the same day that Google announced it was shutting down Google+ in the wake of a data leak, two users filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in federal court in San Francisco, saying that their privacy had been violated.
The case, Matt Matic and Zak Harris v. Google, alleges that the company’s "lax approach" to security resulted in API bugs that exposed the private details of almost 500,000 Google+ users.
"Worse, after discovery of this vulnerability in the Google+ platform, Defendants kept silent for at least seven months, making a calculated decision not to inform users that their Personal Information was compromised, further compromising the privacy of consumers‘ information and exposing them to risk of identity theft or worse," Joshua Watson, the attorney for Matic and Harris wrote in the civil complaint filed on Monday.
LaCroix sparkling water boasts all natural ingredients, making it a popular and Instagramable alternative to sodas. In fact, its website explains that the "Natural Flavors" tag on its products comes from "natural essence oils extracted from the named fruit." Yet the company is now the defendant in a lawsuit over whether or not its natural label is misleading.
Lenora Rice is the lead plaintiff in a class action complaint against LaCroix and its parent company, National Beverage, alleging that the beverage could not be considered "all natural" as it contains chemical compounds that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has deemed synthetic or artificial. The compounds in question are ethyl butanoate, limonene, linalool, and linalool propionate. The suit also charges that the compounds have detrimental effects on health. For example, limonene can cause kidney toxicity and tumors. Linalool is used as a cockroach insecticide. Linalool propionate is a cancer treatment.
With names like those, it's easy to see Rice's concern. But, as it turns out, the whole lawsuit could be in bad taste.
Popular Sciencelooked into some of the chemical compounds found in LaCroix. As its research indicates, limonene and linalool are "naturally occuring chemicals," the first being an oil extract from orange peels and the second being found in flowers and plants like cinnamon. As for the supposed side effects, evidence of limonene's carcinogenic effects are noted as "inadequate." Similarly, linalool's use as an insectide is not proof of toxicity towards humans. (The article compares this to the fact that we continue to consume chocolate even though it could cause serious harm to our four-legged companions.) Additionally, the magazine observes that branding linalool propionate's anticancer agents as negative is a tough argument to make.
While there are many reasons to dislike LaCroix, whether it be for its cultish following or because paying out of the nose for a lightly flavored beverage is not your dig, it would seem that its alleged toxicity is not a cause for dismay.
The lawsuit against LaCroix has certain similarities to another legal fight, one between the state of California and coffee. The state's Proposition 65 requires businesses to warn consumers if cancer-causing agents are present in their products. After learning that acrylamide was present in coffee, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge ruled in March that coffee businesses, including large chains, would need to display labels that warned of carcinogens. The ruling has since been decried by both the FDA and California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Research has found that acrylamide was a byproduct of roasting coffee beans. Not only this, but a human would need to consume 35,000 cups a day to face a greater risk for developing cancer.
Brett Kavanaugh takes his seat amid debates about the Supreme Court’s 'legitimacy,' with substantial portions of the population thinking he’s a rapist.
LaCroix sparkling water boasts all natural ingredients, making it a popular and Instagramable alternative to sodas. In fact, its website explains that the "Natural Flavors" tag on its products comes from "natural essence oils extracted from the named fruit." Yet the company is now the defendant in a lawsuit over whether or not its natural label is misleading.
