The West: signs of endtimes.

The Daily Mail takes time from bemoaning Brexit and tackles the state of robotics:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3665545/The-robot-looking-love-Sony-reveals-plans-create-emotional-droid-bonds-humans.html

We have robot teachers. a real life R2D2, a robo dog, killer robots and robots that can bond to humans. A "fully functional" Mr Data is not far off.

A scientist predicts that AI robots will increase intelligence faster than humans. Actually he is not quite right. Humans are decreasing in intelligence. Look at the news item from Utah: a transgender woman (?) has been nominated as a Senate candidate from Utah. Her name? Misty Snow (Utah). Is this the sign of decreasing human IQ or inhaling cannabis smoke? I honestly do not know.

Then there is the Quinnipiac Poll

51 - 42 percent that Clinton would better respond to an international crisis; [really?]

46 percent would trust Clinton more on sending U.S. troops overseas, while 44 percent would trust Trump more;

54 - 35 percent would trust Clinton more to make the right decisions regarding nuclear weapons;

46 - 43 percent that Clinton would do a better job getting things done in Washington.

 

Does this sound to you as humans increasing their intelligence?

Discontent with EU spreads.

There are now thirty four proposed referenda to quit the EU:

 

 

There is even a movement in Germany, home of Frau Merkel. Meanwhile, the EU leadership now wants to do away with nations altogether and wants a common army and economy.

Idiot of the day: Judge Richard Posner.

His citation is for stating that "there is no value in studying the US Constitution."

Posner dismisses the Constitution and its importance on the ground that when it was written its writers could not envision the technology of today.

Before we examine Posner's statement, we should ask: Why do we have a Judge who rules on constitutional issues if he does not think that the constitution is relevant today?

Posner's statement is pure idiocy. There is nothing in the Constitution that is technology dependent. The separation of powers? Not dependent on technology. The power of the States vs the Federal govt, the power of Congress to make laws or decide the budget, the inalienable rights of individuals, the limitation on how many terms a President can serve, etc, etc, NONE of these are technology dependent. True that technology creates some uncertainties in how laws are to be applied,  but that is why we have courts.

Obama's War on the Constitution.

On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?
After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”
So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.
Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.
Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “

The efforts to sabotage Brexit.

Strong efforts are under way to sabotage Brexit.


1. Article 50 of the founding document of the EU states that a country that wishes to leave the EU must formally notify ALL EU members of its intention. Then there is a two year period to negotiate the terms of leaving. British PM Cameron said he will not do that(notification). This delays the process at least until a new PM is elected.


2. Strong propaganda efforts are under way to change public opinion enough so Brexit does not occur. These efforts include: a) articles about people regretting their vote; b) articles about how business is going to leave Britain; c) blackmail by Scotland to secede.


Remember that the English invented the Ragman Rolls negotiations ( from which footdragging negotiations we got the word 'rigamarole'). The idea is to drag out the process till people get tired of the whole thing.

The Profound Racism of the Left.

The Left wants to build an Utopia. While, paying lip service to equality, it really believes that only themselves are enlightened enough to lead Mankind into such Utopia. The Left rejects the God ordained Utopia (Heaven), so it rejects God as well. It rejects the roots of Western civilization, which is Christianity. This leads the Left into strange ways of "thinking."

Going on the tenet that "my enemies' enemies are my friends" the Left tries to populate the Western countries by non-Westerners; among them Muslims and non-Europeans. Did they believe that their control of the Media and the Arts would allow them to transform Muslim immigrants into a cadre of Utopian Socialists intent on destroying the family and embracing homosexuality? I think they did and they were profoundly wrong.

The Left believes that it will be able to enlist colored people into building their Utopia and regards white Europeans as obstacle to a Utopia (Socialism). The Left, therefore has a hatred of white people and has been importing non-whites to subdue the local populations, or trying to build up existing colored populations through "affirmative action."

Disagreeing with the racism of the Left is labeled "RACISM" by the Left and those who reject Socialism are labeled as "racist."  The Left controls the institutions of higher education, which is a path to a better paying job. If you reject the Left's Utopia, you are weeded out of the teaching profession.

The EU was set up to "progress" toward Social Democracy. It is a failure. The people of England finally saw the light. Not all of them, but enough to vote down the EU's march toward a Left-inspired Utopia. Brexit is a good start!

WHY the Brexit?

Here is one commentator's answer:  "People imbued with common sense cannot understand why, either in Great Britain, or in ,or in the United States, the people that run the show would want to leave the borders wide open and allow the nations to be flooded with people who are not going to end up advancing the nation... It's not racism. It's not sexism.  It's not bigotry.  All of the things that the elites and their media cohorts are gonna try to chalk this up to, it's not about any of that.  It's about a desire to be self-reliant because they just don't trust the people who claim to have all the answers and solutions for all the problems.  They don't trust the elites anymore. They don't trust the ruling class. The ruling class has made a mess of pretty much everything."

How arrogant and nonsensical did the EU beaurocracy in Brussels operate? At one point they banned open jars of olive oil on restaurant tables. I rest my case.

BREXIT!

By now the news should be out: The British voted to take their country back. Here are some numbers.

 

Final tally: OUT - 51.9%; IN - 48.1%

Scotland, London and some big city areas voted IN, the rest voted OUT.

David Cameron resigned (effective October?), Jeremy Corbyn of Labor is being challenged.

France, Italy and Holland may also have a referendum.

The British pound fell from $1.5 to $1.33.

Gold was up $59/oz.

 

Larry Edelson predicted that the EU disintegrates this year and that Japan would be bankrupt.

Our turn comes next year.

 

What does victory look like for Eurosceptics?

 

This is what it looks like.

 

 

Nigel Farage has no seat in Parliament so he may be out after his cause won. Just like Churchill.

Democrats do un-American activities.

The worst is their attempt to deprive us our constitutional right to own and bear arms. Yes, the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees an American citizen the right to own and bear arms. This right can be only denied to felons. Yet, the Democrats try to undermine this right. We are constantly subjected to a barrage of "gun control" propaganda aimed at depriving us of this right.

 

The latest shameful effort is the sit in by the Dems. Even some people I know question the right to own "assault weapons." By assault weapons they mean a rifle with collapsible stock, a pistol grip and the heat dissipating metal over the barrel and a clip that contains various number of bullets.  

 

Let's get some facts straight:

 

1. There are basically three types of weapons:

 

a) single action firearms that fire one bullet per one trigger pull. The trigger has to be activated by a physical action.

b) semi-automatic firearms where the discharges gas is used to eject the spent cartridge and put in the next cartridge into firing position - one bullet fired per one trigger pull;

c) automatic - works like b) but the cartridge is inserted into firing position continuously. In an automatic, one trigger pull will fire bullets as long as the trigger is being depressed.

 

Manufacturers discovered that the look of the AR-15 sells, so many semi automatic rifles have those looks. THEY ARE NOT ASSAULT WEAPONS. Only those rifles that are fully automatic can be considered "assault weapons."

 

Real assault weapons are illegal to own without a special license.

 

There are toy guns (air rifles) that look like the AR-15.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=toy+ar-15&biw=1600&bih=754&tbm=isch&imgil=F0TLL-ZLKLgTmM%253A%253B1982pE2QwSJsyM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fguide.alibaba.com%25252Fshop%25252Ftoy-guns-military-soldier-ar-15-dart-rifle-gun-saf_9399515.html&source=iu&pf=m&fir=F0TLL-ZLKLgTmM%253A%252C1982pE2QwSJsyM%252C_&usg=__oGKtHPsOv601ZgbAqjzVAlRxbd4%3D&ved=0ahUKEwjnzMuvkr7NAhWEz4MKHfxOCHEQyjcIYQ&ei=M9VrV6fnJYSfjwT8naGIBw#tbm=isch&tbs=rimg%3ACVYPBMSkkxKKIjg0ygbA0V5I_1NCGJCPvSHXOZ8j8if_1SLawWnRYP1VbX_10Skd1p_1a1Xi8Y4ILbJJMX0Rx_1J89FYVrSoSCTTKBsDRXkj8ESB5sB61vB5GKhIJ0IYkI-9Idc4RioNSCZplTS0qEglnyPyJ_19ItrBG0F0trthjPDCoSCRadFg_1VVtf_1EX5rDmNreQGsKhIJRKR3Wn9rVeIRjF_1eKaC-qZ0qEgnxjggtskkxfRFG8rvLx5wyjyoSCRHH8nz0VhWtEbwf7krYTih8&q=toy%20ar-15&imgrc=E1MzYwaR8FnX-M%3A

 

These are illegal in NY State.

 

 

This is the Colt AR-15. It does not have the collapsible stock and the heat dissipating part.

 

 

 Above are two toy guns available for decades now. They both have magazines and the one on the bottom has the collapsible stock, a pistol grip and the forward grip.

 

 

The last weapon is a SIG SAUER MCX like the one used by the Florida jihadi to kill 49 people. It is no more lethal than other AR-15s. The high casualty number was due to the fact that the jihadi had no armed opposition (it was a gun free zone) and participants could not use another entrance.

 

Weapons do not kill by themselves. It takes a jihadi to pull the trigger.

Gold: is the paradigm changing?

Andrew Maguire gave an interesting interview on KWN. In past weeks Andrew claimed that the gold paradigm(as to how the gold price could be manipulated) was going to change. Now he reports that the change has actually taken place. Here are the basic points:

1. how the 'wash and rinse' cycle used to work.

The bouillon banks would be underwritten by the FED to keep the price of gold down. The banks would help drive up the price of gold options. Sophisticated traders would set a stop loss (which would be known to the bouillon banks). This is the wash part. Since, on the COMEX the paper contracts outnumber the gold actually sold 92 to 1, the gold price would be set by  the paper contracts. At some point in the cycle, the bouillon banks would dump a whole bunch of paper sales (usually at the least busy times), forcing the gold price down. Traders would have to sell their contacts at a loss. This was the rinse.

2. The last time this was done was when the gold price was taken down from 1,300 to 1,200.

3. This cycle was buttressed by the FED, which trumpeted a coming increase in interest rates. This, in turn would raise the rate of the Dollar and help suppress the gold price.

4. The wash and rinse cycle was then put into operation to get gold down, before the FED announced that it is not raising interest rates.

5. The attempt to force gold down was only partly successful.

6. Big money is going into gold, but on the metal side. These buyers do not have a stop loss so they will not be forced to sell if the FED sponsors another drop.

7. The short interest in silver and gold is at the highest ever. A move above 1,300 will force short covering,  which will move gold past 1,400.

8. My research of the gold price shows the Friday close at 1,290, while some quote sites show a price of 1,302.

Next week could be interesting.

The most disturbing video of the Islamic invasion of Europe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPKqM-TV2i8

Milo gets it.

My wife considers me a pessimist. Maybe I am. And I am seldom surprised. But I was surprised by this man's (Milo's) understanding of the menace of Islam and the insanity of the Left. Milo gets it that the attitude of Muslims toward homosexuals is absolute hostility and it is universal rather than just the opinions of a few extremists.  He also understands that Islam is not complacent in exterminating its enemies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLqkizGtFo0&feature=youtu.be&t=12m9s

I disagree with this man on many fronts; one being his statement that Social Conservatism is dead.

The real War on Women.

Half of [UK] Muslims Say Gays Should Be Outlawed

If you've wandered down the Old Kent Road recently, you'll know that in parts of the British capital they already are.

Oh, and while we're on the subject of what rape denier Doug Saunders calls "urban myths", here's Heather Mac Donald:

Actually, there was no precedent in Germany or the rest of Europe for mass peacetime sexual assaults, much less ones where the police merely look on. "I have never experienced such a thing in any German city," a victim told the New York Times. But people who did name the attacks for what they were—a manifestation of Muslim misogyny and an alarm bell regarding mass immigration—were vilified as racists. An old-school German feminist, Alice Schwarzer, denounced the New Year's assaults as a "gang bang" designed to terrorize women; she found herself condemned by other feminists and "antiracists..."

The New York Times provided a stunning example of the inevitable "defining sexism down" that will be necessary to accommodate such immigration. The problem on New Year's Eve, it reported, was that migrants from war-torn countries were "unfamiliar with German culture." Translation: the norm that you don't jam your fingers up women's vaginas in public is just a quaint German custom, akin to wearing lederhosen.

The goal of the Muslim invaders is to force women off the street, make them cover up and be out on the street only accompanied by a male relative or a husband. This issue is dividing Europe. The PM of Hungary declared in a speech that the Hungarian Constitution guarantees equal rights for men and women and the country will not accept the idea of men hunting women in the streets. Of course, women's rights can be protected only by keeping Muslims out.

It must be confusing to be a Liberal.

1. How is it that a man who has genital  reassignment surgery, breast implants, hormonal therapy for life and a name change makes him a woman, whereas genetically modified food is not OK, because it is not natural?

2. Consider that a man who claims to be a woman is not only allowed to use women's bathrooms, but is allowed to compete in sports as a woman? Given the physical difference, it must be hard to promote women's sports if men are allowed to compete against women?

3. Liberals have a great affinity for Islam, because Muslims are anti-Christian. Then Muslims are anti-gay and kill gays in rather inventive ways. For example, Iranians hang them from cranes, the Taliban drops a wall on them and some Arabs throw them off from roof tops or just shoot them.

Must be confusing to be a Liberal.

$ collapse, IRA confiscation, recessio.

Those are the headlines the Washington Times prints as projections for this year. Here are the headliners:

"

Chinese Yuan to Replace The US Dollar by October 2016? Federal Government to Steal our 401Ks & IRAs to Solve Fiscal Crisis? Warning: Economists Expect an  80% Stock Market Crash to Strike in 2016 National Debt Hits $19 Trillion,  Total value of IRA’s $23 Trillion… is your retirement account safe?

Special: Click here for your Gov't Debt Survival Guide

Former U.S. Congressman Warns of Imminent Currency Collapse by Fall 2016 IRS Loophole Now Allows You to Store Your IRA/401k at Home How to Invest for the Imminent Dollar Collapse 6 Signs Point to A 2016 Global Recession

Granted that the "US Congressman" (Ron Paul?) is a bear, how close are we to these predictions coming true? The FED is trying to control the economy, the currency and the gold price at a cost that goes higher everyday. In fact, they hazard our future on trying to prove the economic laws null and void. Will we have economic martial law? Will the Obama regime confiscate IRAs and 401k's and "pay" for them with worthless bonds? And if that happens will Congress impeach and remove Obama from office?

Mrs Clinton is barred from Federal office.

Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server illegal, it "disqualifies" her from holding any federal office.

Such as, say, President of the United States. Very specifically points to one federal law, Title 18. Section 2071.

For those of us who do not have United States Code committed to memory, here's what it says:

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term œoffice does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Yes, it explicitly states "shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States."

European banks real from NIRP

from Casey Research.

Negative interest rates are spreading like a plague.

As you’ve probably heard by now, many interest rates around the world have “gone negative.”

Normally, you earn interest on the money in a savings account. With negative rates, you pay the bank to hold your money. In other words, negative rates turn savings upside down. They basically “tax” the money in your account.

Negative rates were unheard of for most of history. But, as you’re about to see, they’re starting to take over the world.

In this issue, we’ll tell you exactly what’s happening…and what to do about it.

• The European Central Bank (ECB) started using negative rates two years ago…

The Bank of Japan (BOJ) introduced them earlier this year. Denmark, Sweden, and Switzerland have them too.

Today, $10 trillion worth of government bonds pay negative yields. That’s up from $6 trillion in February, a staggering 67% increase in just four months.

The Wall Street Journal reported today that government bond yields in Japan, Germany, and the U.K. have just fallen to record lows.

• Negative rates have even seeped into the corporate bond market…

At least $36 billion worth of corporate bonds have negative rates.

Iconic American businesses Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), General Electric (GE), and Philip Morris (PM) all have bonds trading with negative rates. So if you buy a Johnson & Johnson bond today, you’re essentially paying a fee to lend the company money.

• Central bankers said negative rates would “stimulate” economies…

The idea is that folks will spend more money if you “tax” their savings. According to mainstream economists, this will grow the economy.

It hasn’t worked.

Europe and Japan are both growing at their slowest rates in decades. Their stock markets are also doing poorly. The STOXX Europe 600, which tracks 600 large European stocks, is down 12% over the past year. The Nikkei 225, Japan’s version of the S&P 500, is down 16% since last June.

• Negative rates have backfired…

Folks aren’t spending more money. They’re hoarding cash to avoid paying negative rates.

In Japan, sales of home safes have skyrocketed. According to Business Insider, safe sales are now at the highest level since the 2008 global financial crisis.

Europeans are doing the same thing. Business Insider reported last week:

"Safe sales have shot up through the roof in Europe," said Hickmore [portfolio manager at Aberdeen Asset Management]. "People are taking cash out, and even with security costs, it's better returns than your negative rates. It's crazy, crazy behavior."

• Huge corporations have also gone to extreme lengths to avoid negative rates…

German insurance giant Munich Re recently pulled €10 million ($11 million) from its account with ECB.

Munich Re is the world’s second-biggest “reinsurer.” It insures insurance companies.

Like other large European financial institutions, Munich Re keeps money with the ECB. This arrangement used to make sense. Not anymore.

These days, Munich Re has to pay €4 for every €1,000 it stores with the central bank for a year. That’s because the ECB’s key rate is currently -0.4%. That might not sound like much. But for Munich Re—which oversees about €231 billion—it adds up quickly.

Munich Re put the money it withdrew into other currencies and gold.

• This week, one of Germany’s largest banks said it might soon do the same thing…

Reuters reported on Wednesday:

Commerzbank, one of Germany's biggest lenders, is examining the possibility of hoarding billions of euros in vaults rather than paying a penalty charge for parking it with the European Central Bank.

The company made the announcement one month after it said negative rates were eating into earnings. Its profits fell 52% during the first quarter.

Commerzbank would become the first major European bank to take this step. We don’t think it will be the last. According to the Financial Times, negative interest rates cost German banks €248 million last year.

• Negative rates are eating Europe’s banks alive…

Spanish banking giant BBVA’s (BBVA) profits fell 54% last quarter. First-quarter profits at Deutsche Bank (DB), Germany’s largest bank, were down 58%. Swiss bank UBS’s (UBS) profits plunged 64%.

Last week, Deutsche Bank's CEO said it could continue to struggle as long as negative rates are in place:

In the banking world, we are currently struggling with negative interest rates.

We will struggle more as the effect of those negative interest rates plays out into our deposit books.

European banks are now trading like they’re in a financial crisis. Deutsche Bank’s shares have plunged 41% over the past year, and they’re down another 5% today as we write. BBVA is down 37% since last June. UBS is down 25%.

Negative Interest Rate: last gasp of a failing system.

Why NIRP (Negative Interest Rates) Will Fail Miserably

by Tyler Durden - Feb 12, 2016 10:51 AM

   

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

What NIRP communicates is: this sucker's going down, so sell everything and hoard your cash and precious metals.

The last hurrah of central banks is the negative interest rate policy--NIRP. The basic idea of NIRP is to punish savers so severely that households and businesses will be compelled to go blow whatever money they have on something--what the money is squandered on is of no importance to central banks.

All that matters is that people and enterprises are forced to spend whatever cash they have rather than "hoard" it, i.e. preserve and conserve their capital.

That this is certifiably insane is self-evident. If an economy depends on bringing future spending into the present by destroying savings, that economy is doomed regardless of NIRP, for eventually the cash runs out and spending declines anyway.

But NIRP will fail completely and totally due to another dynamic-- one I addressed last month in Another Reason Why the Middle Class and the Velocity of Money Are in Terminal Decline. As correspondent Mike Fasano noted, negative interest rates force us to save even more, not less:

"People like me who have saved all their lives realize that they their savings (no matter how much) will never throw off enough money to allow retirement, unless I live off principal. This is especially so since one can reasonably expect social security to phased out, indexed out or dropped altogether. Accordingly, I realize that when I get to the point when I can no longer work, I'll be living off capital and not interest. This is an incentive to keep working and not to spend."

If banks start charging savers interest on their cash, savers will have to save even more income to offset the additional costs imposed by central banks on their savings.

A third dynamic dooms the insane negative interest rate policy: what does it say about the stability and health of the status quo if central banks are saying the only way to save the status quo is to force everyone to empty their piggy banks and spend every last dime of cash?

What exactly are we saving by destroying savings and capital? Isn't capital the foundation of capitalism? The answer is we are saving nothng but a rotten-to-the-core, parasitic, predatory banking system, coddled and enabled by corrupt central banks and states.

What NIRP says about central banks is that they have run out of options and are now in their own end zone, heaving the final desperate Hail Mary pass that has no hope of saving them from complete and total defeat.

NIRP also says the economy that needs NIRP is sick unto death and doomed to an implosion of impaired debt, over-leveraged risk-on bets and asset bubbles generated by stock buybacks and central bank purchases of risky assets.

The central bankers are delusional if they think NIRP will inspire confidence in investors, punters, households and enterprises. Rather, NIRP signals the failure of central bank policies and the end-game of credit expansion as the solution for all economic ills.

What NIRP communicates is: this sucker's going down, so sell everything and hoard your cash and precious metals. If that's what the central banks want households and enterprises to do, NIRP will be a rip-roaring success

Zika map of the United States.

Making the flying car: California dreaming.

Three years ago, Silicon Valley developed a fleeting infatuation with a startup called Zee.Aero. The company had set up shop right next to Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, Calif., which was curious, because Google tightly controls most of the land in the area. Then a reporter spotted patent filings showing Zee.Aero was working on a small, all-electric plane that could take off and land vertically—a flying car.

In the handful of news articles that ensued, all the startup would say was that it wasn’t affiliated with Google or any other technology company. Then it stopped answering media inquiries altogether. Employees say they were even given wallet-size cards with instructions on how to deflect questions from reporters. After that, the only information that trickled out came from amateur pilots, who occasionally posted pictures of a strange-looking plane taking off from a nearby airpo 

Turns out, Zee.Aero doesn’t belong to Google or its holding company, Alphabet. It belongs to Larry Page, Google’s co-founder. Page has personally funded Zee.Aero since its launch in 2010 while demanding that his involvement stay hidden from the public, according to 10 people with intimate knowledge of the company. Zee.Aero, however, is just one part of Page’s plan to usher in an age of personalized air travel, free from gridlocked streets and the cramped indignities of modern flight. Like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, Page is using his personal fortune to build the future of his childhood dreams.

The Zee.Aero headquarters, located at 2700 Broderick Way, is a 30,000-square-foot, two-story white building with an ugly, blocky design and an industrial feel. Page initially restricted the Zee.Aero crew to the first floor, retaining the second floor for a man cave worthy of a multibillionaire: bedroom, bathroom, expensive paintings, a treadmill-like climbing wall, and one of SpaceX’s first rocket engines—a gift from his pal Musk. As part of the secrecy, Zee.Aero employees didn’t refer to Page by name; he was known as GUS, the guy upstairs. Soon enough, they needed the upstairs space, too, and engineers looked on in awe as GUS’s paintings, exercise gear, and rocket engine were hauled away.

“What appears in the next 5 to 10 years will be incredible”

Zee.Aero now employs close to 150 people. Its operations have expanded to an airport hangar in Hollister, about a 70-minute drive south from Mountain View, where a pair of prototype aircraft takes regular test flights. The company also has a manufacturing facility on NASA’s Ames Research Center campus at the edge of Mountain View. Page has spent more than $100 million on Zee.Aero, say two of the people familiar with the company, and he’s not done yet. Last year a second Page-backed flying-car startup, Kitty Hawk, began operations and registered its headquarters to a two-story office building on the end of a tree-lined cul-de-sac about a half-mile away from Zee’s offices. Kitty Hawk’s staffers, sequestered from the Zee.Aero team, are working on a competing design. Its president, according to 2015 business filings, was Sebastian Thrun, th­e godfather of Google’s self-driving car program and the founder of research division Google X. Page and Google declined to speak about Zee.Aero or Kitty Hawk, as did Thrun.

Flying cars, of course, are ridiculous. Lone-wolf inventors have tried to build them for decades, with little to show for their efforts besides disappointed investors and depleted bank accounts. Those failures have done little to lessen the yearning: In the nerd hierarchy of needs, the flying car is up there with downloadable brains and a working holodeck.

But better materials, autonomous navigation systems, and other technical advances have convinced a growing body of smart, wealthy, and apparently serious people that within the next few years we’ll have a self-flying car that takes off and lands vertically—or at least a small, electric, mostly autonomous commuter plane. About a dozen companies around the world, including startups and giant aerospace manufacturers, are working on prototypes. Furthest along, it appears, are the companies Page is quietly funding. “Over the past five years, there have been these tremendous advances in the under­lying technology,” says Mark Moore, an aeronautical engineer who’s spent his career designing advanced aircraft at NASA. “What appears in the next 5 to 10 years will be incredible.”

 

Northern California in particular has had a long fascination with flying cars. In 1927 a now mostly forgotten ­engineer named Alexander Weygers first began thinking up the design for a flying saucer that could zip between rooftops. In 1945 he received a patent for what he described as a “­discopter,” a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) machine with room inside for passengers to walk around, cook, and sleep. He depicted smaller versions landing in pods atop buildings in downtown San Francisco. No discopters were built, though it’s believed that the U.S. Army, which paid visits to Weygers’s compound in Carmel Valley, Calif., tinkered with a prototype.

Today, the world’s premier ­flying-car enthusiast is Paul Moller, 79, a professor emeritus at the University of California at Davis. Fifty years ago, when he was teaching mechanical and aeronautical engineering, he developed a specific vision: an aircraft you could park in your garage, drive a few blocks to a small runway, then take skyward. He tested his first prototype, the XM-2, in 1966. The XM-2 resembled a flying saucer with a seat at its center protected by a plastic bubble. It managed an altitude of 4 feet, while graduate students held it steady with ropes. “We were worried if the machine got out of control, we might kill a few people,” Moller says.

“Self-flying aircraft is so much easier than what the auto companies are trying to do with self-driving cars”

In 1989 his M200X made it to 50 feet above the ground. Then came the M150 Skycar, the M400 Skycar, the 100LS, the 200LS, the Neuera 200, and the Firefly, all variations on the same Jetsonian idea. In January 2000, Moller gave a speech on flying cars at the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), the birthplace of the graphical user interface and, for nerds, sacred ground. Afterward, an engineer in his late 20s walked up and said he was interested in the concept but was skeptical that streetworthy personal aircraft were technically feasible; at the time, Moller didn’t recognize young Larry Page.

Moller kept trying. He says he burned through more than $100 million developing his designs and declared personal bankruptcy in 2009.

That same year, Moore, the NASA researcher, published a paper describing a concept plane called the Puffin. Moore’s big idea was to use electric motors, which are quieter and safer and have far fewer moving parts than internal combustion engines or conventional turbines. “By going to electric propulsion, you get rid of the vast majority of the complexity, cost, and unreliability,” Moore says. “This is why com­panies looking at this area aren’t insane.” Moore credits Musk’s Tesla and other automakers with advancing the technology. “Electric motors were mostly used in industrial settings where they were stationary, and no one cared about their weight that much,” Moore says. “It wasn’t until the automotive industry got interested that they started to get more lightweight.”

Carmakers invested in other areas, too, that are helpful for building small electric planes, particularly batteries and the semiconductors that control them. Self-driving systems, like the kind Google uses in its Koala cars, are perhaps a decade away from mainstream use on the roads, but they may already be good enough for the skies. “Self-flying aircraft is so much easier than what the auto companies are trying to do with self-driving cars,” Moore says.

Moore’s paper circulated, rekindling excitement. Sometime in 2009, a small group of engineers had begun meeting in Silicon Valley to discuss funding an electric-plane project. One of them was JoeBen Bevirt, a mechanical engineer and entrepreneur who had studied under Moller at UC Davis. Another was Ilan Kroo, an aeronautics and astronautics professor at Stanford. And another was Page. Although it initially looked as if they might all team up, Kroo and Page broke off to start Zee.Aero. Alone, Bevirt founded Joby Aviation, a company he hopes will beat Zee.Aero to market and prove that his efforts with Moller—and the older man’s life’s work—weren’t in vain.

 

Bevirt owns a 500-acre compound near Santa Cruz, Calif. To get there, you turn onto idyllic California State Route 1 and drive past the boardwalk, a few blocks of strip malls, and 15 miles of undeveloped, windswept coastal dunes. Then you turn onto a dirt road, pass a lake and a grove of towering redwoods, and walk through gardens overflowing with lavender and roses. It’s here that Bevirt has built a series of workshops, plus housing for about half of his 35 employees.

Bevirt grew up nearby on an electricity-free commune where his mom worked as a midwife and his father built custom homes. From a young age, he learned his way around toolboxes and construction sites, and was an avid reader. After consuming the sci-fi classic The Forever Formula in elementary school, he decided he wanted to build the kind of personal aircraft the book’s hero flew and persuaded a friend to help. “We built lots of prototypes, but they always crashed and burned,” he says. They shifted to custom bikes.

The flying-car dream stuck with Bevirt as he entered UC Davis in 1991 to study mechanical engineering, and he quickly found himself working for Moller, building one prototype after another. Bevirt eventually concluded their shared dream wouldn’t be feasible until battery and motor technology improved. He figured he’d need to wait 20 years. “Paul had been working on this for 30 years, and he was 50 years ahead of his time,” he says.

Bevirt got his bachelor’s, and then a master’s in mechanical engineering from Stanford. He worked in biotech after graduation, co-founding a company called Velocity11 that built robots to sequence DNA. His next company, called Joby (his childhood nickname), sold camera accessories such as flexible plastic tripods. Joby turned Bevirt into a multimillionaire. In 2008 he started Joby Energy, a maker of airborne wind turbines whose technology Google later acquired. The 20-year mark was approaching, so in 2009 he also used some of his wealth to buy the 500 acres and start Joby Aviation.

Its headquarters is an engineer’s fantasyland. The focal point is a large wooden building where two dozen workers sit at a few rows of desks jammed with computers. Aside from the clusters of large black monitors, the place feels more like a barn than an office. Aircraft prototypes hang from the ceiling, as does a thick climbing rope for exercise. In the open kitchen, abutting a long redwood dining table in one corner, a cook uses ingredients from the nearby gardens to prepare three meals a day. While the smell of a Malaysian curry fills the room, a banjo twangs from speakers overhead.

The manufacturing happens at a series of buildings about 100 yards downhill, past gardens and an outdoor clay pizza oven. One of the buildings is an airy warehouse with a giant oven inside—but this one isn’t for pizza. It’s used to cure the ­carbon-fiber bodies of the planes and looks like a Quonset hut. Former members of Oracle’s America’s Cup sailing team, some of the world’s leading materials experts, oversee the curing process, baking the carbon fiber at about 194F. In another building, engineers build ­cantaloupe-size electric motors; in a third, they test electronics; in a fourth, they put the finishing touches on wings and other parts. Out back, there’s a large truck with an extendible arm atop its trailer like a cherry picker, which hoists propellers high into the air so engineers can perform wind tests while driving down a road at high speed. Robotic prototypes buzz around.

Bevirt funded Joby Aviation by himself until last year, when he was joined by Paul Sciarra, one of the co-founders of Pinterest. Sciarra grew up in New Jersey, taught himself to code, hit it big with Pinterest, then went looking for something new to throw himself into. He, too, concluded that electric motors and batteries appeared to have applications well beyond the auto industry. “The goal is to build a product that impacts the lives of lots of people,” Sciarra says. “Not just folks that are amateur pilots or wealthy, but everyone.”

Sciarra and Bevirt hope to begin flying a human-scale prototype plane later this year. They won’t give the exact ­specifications but suggest that it could hold, say, a family of four and travel 100 miles or so on a full charge. The vehicle looks like a plane-helicopter hybrid packed with propellers, about eight mounted on the wings and tail. For takeoff and landing, the propellers hang horizontally like a helicopter’s and rotate for forward propulsion once in the air. Joby Aviation has already built smaller prototypes and has models of the plane’s body, wings, and propellers scattered about the manufacturing facilities. Bevirt and Sciarra see the vehicle taking off from parking garages, roofs, or areas alongside highways. They want to offer flights as an Uber-like service—summon a plane when you need it.

The Joby aircraft looks similar to other vehicles being built around the world. In May the German company E-volo conducted manned flights of its Volocopter, a two-seat aircraft powered by 18 propellers. Other flying-car startups include AeroMobil, Lilium Aviation, and Terrafugia. Even Airbus has built a two-seater prototype at its Silicon Valley labs, say two people familiar with the designs.

In 2013, Red Bull held one of its Flugtag competitions in Long Beach, Calif. Flugtag is a televised spectacle where hobbyists see how far they can launch their homemade flying machines off a dock. It’s more about entertainment than sustained flight—the contraptions generally dive straight into the water, and everyone laughs. At this one, though, a group called the Chicken Whisperers stunned the assembled crowd. Dressed in full-body baby-chick outfits, the team pushed its glider off the dock and watched as it cruised 258 feet, breaking the previous record of 229 feet. The chickens danced. They clucked. They took a swim in the water. They were all Zee.Aero employees in disguise, having fun, trying out some designs.

In the six years since its founding, Zee.Aero has hired some of the brightest young aerospace designers, software engineers, and experts in motor and battery hardware. They’ve come from places such as SpaceX, NASA, and Boeing, and they’re all chasing after the goal presented succinctly on Zee.Aero’s spare website: “We’re changing personal aviation.”

At its outset, Zee.Aero was led by Kroo, the Stanford aerospace professor. He wrote the original Zee.Aero patent, No. 9,242,738, which shows a strange-looking one-seater aircraft with a long, narrow body. Behind the craft’s cockpit, rows of horizontal propellers run along both sides of the body of the plane to handle the VTOL work. There’s also a wing at the back with two more propellers that add forward thrust.

Zee.Aero worked on this design for a couple of years. Small, computer-controlled versions of the aircraft were photographed by reporters and hobbyists sitting in the parking lot at 2700 Broderick Way. None of the prototypes were big enough to fit a human.

Over time, the company realized this might not be the best design, according to three former Zee.Aero employees. Page also grew dissatisfied with the rate of progress. In 2015, Kroo returned to teach at Stanford full time but continued to advise Zee.Aero as “principal scientist,” while the com­pany’s engineering chief, Eric Allison, took over as chief executive officer. Under Allison, the company began work on a simpler, more conventional-looking design, now coming to life at the Hollister Municipal Airport.

Hollister is a city of about 35,000 nestled among garlic and artichoke farms. Its airport is popular among amateur pilots because of favorable winds and a lack of commercial air traffic. There’s a flight school, a sky-diving business, and a few run-down buildings. The least shabby structure is Building 19, which has been taken over by a dozen or so Zee.Aero workers.

People working at the airport have caught glimpses of two Zee.Aero craft in recent months

The airport is open for business from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays, but Zee.Aero employees frequently run test flights when no one else is around. Nonetheless, people working at the airport have caught glimpses of two Zee.Aero craft in recent months. Both have a narrow body, a bulbous cockpit with room for one person upfront, and a wing at the back. In industry lingo, the planes are pushers, with two propellers in the rear. One of the prototypes looks like a small conventional plane; the other has spots for small propellers along the main body, three per side.

When the aircraft take off, they sound like air raid sirens.

The people at the airport haven’t heard Page’s name ­mentioned, but they long ago concluded Zee.Aero’s owner is super rich. Zee.Aero employees receive catered lunches—sometimes $900 worth of barbecue from Armadillo Willy’s, a local chain. Recently, the company purchased a $1 million helicopter to fly alongside the planes and gather data.

For Page, this project is deeply personal. He’s been known to spend evenings with Musk, both men thinking aloud about ways to fundamentally change transportation. Musk wants to build an upscale electric VTOL jet; Page wants the down-market version. In an interview with a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter a couple of years ago, Page confessed that he longed to take more risks like his industrialist friend. He wanted to dabble with new forms of investment outside the confines of Google and back projects that focused on atoms, not bits. “There’s a lot of money going into internet startup kinds of things, which is great,” he said. “But for some of the real problems we face, I think we need other kinds of investments, too. I have young kids, so I would like them to be safe. I’d like for pedestrians to be much safer. I’d like for blind people and old people and young people to get around.”

The former Zee.Aero employees describe the company as a fun place to work but don’t downplay the serious expectations from Page. He wants the flying-car future, and he wants it now. If the atmosphere grew tense with Kroo’s departure, it didn’t lighten up when the Kitty Hawk team arrived.

Kitty Hawk has about a dozen engineers, including some Zee.Aero veterans. Others came from Aerovelo, a startup whose claim to fame was winning the $250,000 Sikorsky Prize in 2013, for building a human-powered helicopter that could stay aloft for more than a minute. Kitty Hawk employees include Emerick Oshiro, who did self-driving car work at Google, and David Estrada, who handled legal affairs for Google X. They all listed the company as their employer on LinkedIn until they were contacted by Bloomberg Businessweek, at which point they erased any mention of Kitty Hawk from their profiles.

 

 

Page has drawn a line separating his two flying-car teams, employees say. It’s common for the Zee.Aero engineers to speculate over lunch about what their Kitty Hawk counterparts are up to. The former Zee.Aero employees think Page wanted to see if a smaller team could move faster, and the added pressure on Zee.Aero didn’t hurt. Two people say Kitty Hawk is working on something that resembles a giant version of a quadcopter drone.

There’s no guarantee that Kitty Hawk’s or Zee.Aero’s or anyone else’s flying cars will ever take to the skies. There are still technology problems to solve, regulatory hurdles to cross, and urgent safety questions to answer. Page once vowed to a colleague that if his involvement in the sector ever became public, he might pull support from the companies.

Here’s hoping that’s not true. If nothing else, these projects show that bold, some might say far-fetched, invention is alive and well in Silicon Valley. The place that spent the past decade focused on social network apps has trained its engineering powers on robots, cars, and now aviation. “We were promised flying cars, and instead what we got was 140 characters,” a local venture capitalist once put it. Page and his cohorts are trying to get us both.

 

Up and down politics.

A blogger claims that the best flowchart to illustrate politics is not the Right/Left divide, but the Up/Down paradigm. He illustrates it thues:

 

 

Accorning to this formulation those at the top think of those below as "$hitheads while those below think of the uppers as "A$$holes."

 

Bildenbergers discussing the "precariot."

In a publication called "Quartz."

Written by

Jason Karaian

8 hours ago

For when Davos isn’t exclusive enough, there is Bilderberg. The Bilderberg Meeting is an annual gathering of world leaders, executives, and assorted grandees, established in 1954 and named for the Dutch hotel where the secretive group first gathered.

Amid heavy security, around 130 people—including three prime ministers and 30 CEOs—will hold talks on the world’s most pressing issues this week. The four-day retreat starts on Thursday (June 9) at an undisclosed location in Dresden, Germany.

This year’s agenda includes predictable topics like “China,” “migration,” and “cyber security.” But one talking point is particularly intriguing, addressing the “precariat and middle class.”

The what? The “precariat” is a term popularized by British economist Guy Standing, describing a growing class of people who feel insecure in their jobs, communities, and life in general. They are…

…the perpetual part-timers, the minimum-wagers, the temporary foreign workers, the grey-market domestics paid in cash… the techno-impoverished whose piecemeal work has no office and no end, the seniors who struggle with dwindling benefits, the indigenous people who are kept outside, the single mothers without support, the cash labourers who have no savings, the generation for whom a pension and a retirement is neither available nor desired.

This marginalized group—“alienated, anomic, anxious, and angry,” according to Standing—is fueling the rise of populist politicians like Donald Trump in the US and similar rabble rousers in Europe and beyond. (Discussing this group alongside the middle class, which isn’t doing great either, is telling.) The resulting turmoil in politics, markets, and economics is a factor in nearly all of the Bilderberg meeting’s other agenda items.

So what will the bigwigs do about it? Conspiracy theorists may think that Bilderberg members are in league with the Illuminati, Freemasons, and Lizard People, hatching the New World Order from their secret hideouts. More likely is that the politicians and power brokers meeting in Germany this week are as taken aback by the travails of the increasingly marginalized masses as anybody else.

Another intriquing treatment for cancer: Trojan horse.

https://www.facebook.com/Upworthy/videos/vb.354522044588660/1286448554729333/?type=2&theater

Yellen's fairy tales.

You can read Yellen's latest speech here:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20160606a.htm

It is a fairy tale fudge. The economy? Improving, but. Jobs? Disregard latest news. Interest rates? They are not sure. Inflation? Struggling to get to 2%. Food prices, of course, are excluded.

Etc, etc, etc.

The Couric Press: Sleazy and Criminal.

• Guns

Katie Couric’s Anti-Gun Producers Repeatedly Violated Federal Gun Laws

Stephanie Soechtig, the producer of Katie Couric's anti-gun documentary, admitted on camera that her team illegally purchased guns across state lines.

By Sean Davis

By Sean Davis

June 3, 2016

                                                            

                                                            

                                                                    

                         

 

           

 

By now you’ve probably heard about Katie Couric’s new anti-gun documentary “Under The Gun,” and how her producer doctored video of interviews with gun owners in order to make them look stupid and heartless. Couric’s producer and director, Stephanie Soechtig, admitted to doctoring the video, and Couric herself kinda sorta apologized for it.

But that’s not the worst thing that happened with the making of this documentary. It turns out that Couric’s production team deliberately conspired to violate federal gun laws. According to video obtained by Ammoland, a shooting sports news website, one of Couric’s producers deliberately committed at least four separate felonies by purchasing four separate firearms across state lines without a background check.

In the video, Soechtig openly admits that she directed one of her employees to purchase guns across state lines, and that he absolutely followed her orders:

SOECHTIG: We sent a producer out and he was from Colorado. He went to Arizona, and he was able to buy a Bushmaster and then three other pistols without a background check in a matter of four hours. And that’s perfectly legal. He wasn’t doing some sort of underground market.

[..]

And he just met someone in the parking lot of Wendy’s and bought a Bushmaster. Legally. Like, this is legal.

Except it’s not legal. Like, it’s illegal. Super duper illegal. Quadruple illegal in the case of the Soechtig employee who purchased four firearms across state lines without processing the sale through a federal firearms licensee (FFL) in his home state of Colorado.

Federal law is abundantly clear on what types of transactions require federal background checks. Gun owners tend to understand these laws incredibly well. Gun controllers like Soechtig do not. Under federal law, all gun purchases from an FFL must be accompanied by a federal background check. It doesn’t matter if the FFL sells a gun at a retail location, at a gun show, or out of the back of a car in a Wendy’s parking lot. All FFL transactions require a federal background check. It doesn’t matter who you are or where you’re from: if you buy a gun from an FFL, the FFL must confirm that you have passed a federal background check.

Next we have interstate purchases, all of which must be conducted through an FFL in the buyer’s home state. It is illegal to purchase a gun across state lines unless the transaction is processed through an FFL in the buyer’s home state. And what did we just learn about all FFL purchases? That they require federal background checks. Ergo, all interstate purchases must be accompanied by federal background checks.

What does that mean? It means that a producer who resides in Colorado cannot legally buy a gun in Arizona unless that gun is shipped to an FFL in Colorado, whereby that FFL confirms that the Colorado resident can legally own that firearm. The Colorado resident who bought the gun from someone in Arizona cannot take possession of that gun until the Colorado FFL receives the gun from Arizona and confirms that the Colorado buyer can legally own that weapon. Once that happens, the Colorado FFL would transfer possession of the gun to the Colorado buyer.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives even has a handy FAQ on its website which directly answers the question of whether you can buy a gun across state lines:

How may an unlicensed person receive a firearm in his or her State that he or she purchased from an out–of–State source?

An unlicensed person who is not prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms may purchase a firearm from an out–of–State source, provided the transfer takes place through a Federal firearms licensee in his or her State of residence.

[18 U.S.C 922(a)(3) and 922(b)(3); 27 CFR 478.29]

But that’s not what happened according to Soechtig’s very own testimony. According to Soechtig, she gave direct orders to an employee of hers who lives in Colorado to buy some guns in Arizona without undergoing a federal background check. He then acted on those orders, and, according to Soechtig’s own admission, proceeded to illegally purchase four separate firearms from a seller in Arizona. And if he was purchasing the guns for Soechtig rather than himself, you can add illegal straw purchases to the list of federal crimes.

Soechtig’s employee, acting on her orders, repeatedly violated federal gun laws. And he did so not just because of his own monumental ignorance, but because of the aggressive ignorance of Stephanie Soechtig, Katie Couric’s hand-picked producer, director, and writer of the anti-gun documentary.

Soechtig’s chest-thumping ignorance and arrogance on display in that interview–“Legally. Like, this is legal.”–are a perfect example of why so many gun owners care so little about the opinions of sanctimonious gun controllers. Because they have absolutely no clue what they’re talking about. They don’t understand how guns work. They don’t understand crime statistics. They don’t know the difference between semi-automatic and automatic. And they can’t even deign to spend 5 minutes researching actual gun laws before declaring that those laws just aren’t sufficient.

The one thing gun controllers all agree on, however, is that strong enforcement of commonsense gun laws is key to preventing senseless gun violence. Katie Couric, Stephanie Soechtig, and their entire anti-gun documentary team now have a chance to put their money where their mouths are. If enforcement of federal gun laws is essential to preventing gun violence, then Soechtig and her team must pay the price for their willful and admitted violations of federal gun laws.

When Soechtig and her team plea to federal charges for violating the nation’s commonsense gun laws, we’ll know they’re serious about cutting down on gun crime. Until then, we’ll know they’re just a bunch of ignorant, gun-trafficking profiteers who want to take away our rights while they violate with absolute impunity the very laws they demand.

Photo YouTube

Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.