Briefly: In our opinion, full (150% of the regular full position) speculative short positions in gold, silver and mining stocks are justified from the perspective at the moment of publishing this alert. Gold moved back and forth on Friday and the accompanying volume was high, but that’s not the only important thing that we can discuss today. The week is over and we have weekly changes and weekly volume levels to analyze and we saw major moves in the important ratios. Additionally, we discovered a self-similar pattern in gold that has critical and volatile implications going forward. Let’s start with Friday’s session and the changes in the gold market (chart courtesy of Gold moved sharply back and forth as both positive and negative data was released and ultimately it ended the session a few dollars higher (based on kitco’s prices, the closing price was $1,279.60). Why was the reaction so significant? The reason could be technical – the apex of the triangle was likely to be accompanied by a turnaround and since we just saw a more visible top a couple of days ago and apparently gold doesn’t want to form a bottom here, then the only remaining outcome is a local daily top that doesn’t change much – which is what we saw. Why do we think that gold doesn’t want to bottom here? Because if it did, it would have ended Friday’s session much higher. The USD Index moved lower, so gold had a good reason to close the session visibly higher, especially that it moved quite high on an intraday basis. Yet, it declined before the session was over and closed only insignificantly higher. If gold doesn’t want to move higher, then silver must really hate that “thought”. The white metal declined once again and even though gold closed a bit higher, it managed to close lower. The move lower by itself is already bearish as it took place on visible volume, but it’s very bearish once we take into account Thursday’s breakdown. We previously commented on it in the following way: Silver declined and it reversed before the end of the session, which appears to be a reversal. But does this reversal really have bullish implications? It doesn’t seem to be the case. The volume wasn’t huge enough to confirm the reversal and it was not low enough to invalidate the bearish implications of the decline either. The key thing to the proper analysis of the silver price swing is the awareness of what the USD and S&P 500 did. The former declined a bit, while stocks truly soared, which created perfect circumstances for a silver rally. Yet, instead of a rally, we saw a decline and a move below the rising support line based on the August and October lows. Consequently, silver’s action was very bearish as it showed great weakness in this market. Moreover, the mentioned support line could be viewed as a neck level of a head and shoulders pattern (with a rather long right shoulder, similar to the one that we saw in the euro), which serves as an additional bearish indication (it’s only a small addition to the bearish implications of the breakdown as such, as its implications are bearish regardless of the H&S formation being in place or not). On Friday, the general stock market declined significantly but almost the entire decline was reversed before the end of the session. If we consider Thursday and Friday together, the S&P 500 index still rallied considerably, but silver declined and was unable to invalidate its breakdown. The implications are strongly bearish. Let’s move back to gold for a few minutes. In Friday’s alert, we wrote the following regarding the above chart featuring gold priced in the euro: In terms of the euro, the bearish signals are much more profound. Gold has just broken below the rising, medium-term support line and the most recent local top was formed approximately at the apex of the triangle pattern (in terms of time). The latter makes it considerably more likely that an important top was just formed and thus that the breakdown that we just saw will be confirmed. As far as the apex of the triangle is concerned, it’s actually a combination of two such patterns – they are based on the same tops and bottoms, but in one case (red lines) they are based on the intraday extremes and in the other case (black lines) they are based on the daily closing prices. The most recent top took place right between the apexes created based on both patterns. The mentioned breakdown is almost confirmed. Almost, because we would prefer to see three consecutive closing prices below the support line to see it as strong resistance, but we have already seen two of them, a weekly close and also a failed attempt to move back above the line. The breakdown is very close to being fully confirmed and the bearishness of the implications increased significantly based on Friday’s session. Speaking of breakdowns, we saw one in the gold to S&P 500 ratio, which… is nothing new, but still quite exciting and important. Why? Because due to several failed attempts to break below this level, we had to be skeptical toward the breakdown this time. The question was: ”Would this time be any different?” It turned out that this time was different as the ratio moved back to the previously broken level, verified it as support and then continued to move lower on huge volume (precisely, the ratio itself doesn’t have volume, so what we mean is the ratio of volumes). Why would the above be a big deal? Because this ratio moves in tune with gold when it comes to major price moves and – more importantly – there was only one similar case in the past 15 years when we saw a similar breakdown and it was in the early stages of the 2012 – 2013 decline. Back then, it was a warning sign that practically nobody noticed. You’ll probably not see it anywhere (except for this publication) this time either. Naturally, the implications are strongly bearish as the breakdown now appears believable. Mining stocks, just like gold moved back and forth and ended the session higher, however, the move was too tiny in terms of daily closing prices to be viewed as bullish. It’s more of a big-volume reversal and the implications thereof are bearish. From the weekly point of view, we see that mining stocks declined and broke below the rising support lines based on the 2016 and 2017 lows and that the breakdown took place on big volume. All that happened after two weeks of low-volume upswings that we commented on in last Monday’s alert: Finally, the weekly volume levels in the GDX ETF paint a very bearish picture for the following weeks. The GDX ETF is after 2 small, weekly rallies that were accompanied by very low volume when compared with the previous weeks. The last week had less trading days, but that doesn’t explain the previous week’s low volume reading. Moreover, we didn’t see similarly low volume readings in the past Novembers, which suggests that we are correct to view the low volume levels as something important and meaningful. The only comparable situation from the recent past took place in mid-2014 (marked with a black arrow). In the following weeks, the GDX price was cut by a third. The bearish implications of the above just became more bearish as back in 2014, the first big-volume weekly decline meant that the big slide had just begun. The breakdown can also be seen in the case of the HUI to S&P 500 index ratio. In other words, by looking at gold stocks’ performance relative to other stocks. The breakdown is clear and confirmed by both weekly and monthly closing prices. The implications are bearish. All in all, the medium-term outlook is clearly bearish based on the above and based on the factors that we discussed previously and it seems that we’ve been correct to be holding the short positions in metals and miners (especially in silver and miners). Still, it seems that the vast majority of the potential that these positions have is still to be realized. This is particularly the case given the similarities between what we’re seeing now and what we saw before the previous slides. We already discussed some of those similarities above, but there’s also something else that is likely in play right now. In early October, we described the analogy in performance between 2008 and the current period (at the moment) in gold stocks. It was almost two months ago, so even if you read it at that time, it might be worth reading it once again today (by the way, we are making that alert available publicly, so if you know someone who’s interested in precious metals, but has doubts about using technical analysis to analyze it, please send them the link to that alert – they might change their minds - - - -more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same/) – it’s truly amazing how the similarity continued almost to the letter even though the two cases are almost a decade apart. Even the initial retracement of the HUI Index (38.2%) was identical. However, today we are not going to repeat the October analysis – we are going to discuss something alike… in gold. That’s right, the gold market features similarities to its performance back in 2008. Before moving to details, let’s state that the analogy is far from perfect. That’s probably why we didn’t discover it earlier. However, it’s not the point to be picky about a technique, but rather to see if there is anything that it can give us and make us particularly aware of things that could come. With regard to the latter goal in mind, it seems that we have something very valuable. In both cases, we have a sharp rally that preceded a top, then we saw some kind of consolidation and another attempt to move higher, which failed (mid-2008 and second half of 2012) and started a decline. The decline was more or less twice the size of the decline from the key (March 2008 and late 2011) top. In 2008, we saw a corrective upswing that was followed by a move to almost the final bottom and from mid-2013 to early 2015 we saw several such corrective upswings. After the initial bottom (September 2008 and the final part of 2015) gold soared sharply. The sizes of the upswings differ on a relative basis, but it’s understandable as back in 2008 the moves took place in a very short time, so the levels of emotionality among market participants were much higher. After the sharp rally, gold consolidated a bit (late September 2008 and mid-2016), then declined and moved close to the previous highs once again (October 2008 and September 2017). The decline that started thereafter in 2008 was the biggest and sharpest decline in many years. Naturally, this does not bode well for the near-term gold outlook. Conversely, it seems that we can expect the most important part of the decline to be just around the corner. The above implication is not the only interesting thing about the analogy, though. The detail that could be important going forward is the moment when the decline took a breather. At this time, the moves take more time, so the pauses could be longer and more visible as well and if we get enough bullish confirmations once gold moves to certain price levels, we might even adjust the trading position temporarily. In 2008, the first interim pause was at the most recent important low and the second pause was approximately the level from which the sharpest part of the previous huge rally started, which was strengthened by another support level (the previous low). We don’t have price levels that would be 100% analogous, but we can see which levels are most similar. In our view, the most recent important lows would be close to the $1,200 level (March, May, and July 2017 bottoms) and the next strong support will be provided by the $1,120 - $1,130 area. That’s approximately from where gold soared most sharply in early 2016 and this level is strengthened by the December 2016 low. These levels are most likely to generate support strong enough to trigger at least corrective rallies based on the analogy to what we saw in 2008 and based on their own strength as support. Naturally, that’s what appears likely based on the data that we have today and the likely scenario could change as new developments unfold. There’s one more thing that we left for the analytical dessert. Namely, back in 2008 the previous key low (September 2008 low, which is analogous to the late 2015 bottom) didn’t trigger even a small rally. Consequently, even though a bottom or at least a correction will be widely expected once gold moves below $1,100, gold may continue to move lower and slide through $1,050 like a hot knife through butter. Finally, there’s one more thing that makes the current situation in gold similar to 2008 – the overall increase in the volume levels. We already discussed, why the yearly volume levels at record highs should not be viewed as bullish (final part of the November 14 alert that we’re linking to) and today we would like to add the observation that back in 2008 the volume levels also broke to new highs and stayed there for a long time. Yes, the volume has been growing almost constantly, but the 2008 and 2017 buildups in volume still stand out. The growth is much sharper than in other years and no other period is comparable to those years. Since the 2008 volume buildup was followed by a sharp decline in the precious metals sector, it seems that we might see something similar also this the next year. Summing up, there are multiple bearish signals in the gold market and in the rest of the precious metals sector and the analogies to previous major declines further support the bearish outlook. The big decline in PMs appears to be underway as the previously discussed long-term signals remain in place: gold’s huge monthly volume, the analogy in the HUI Index, the analogy between the two most recent series of interest rate hikes, and the RSI signal from gold priced in the Japanese yen. To summarize: Trading capital (supplementary part of the portfolio; our opinion): Short positions (150% of the full position) in gold, silver and mining stocks are justified from the perspective with the following stop-loss orders and exit price levels / profit-take orders: Gold: exit price: $1,218; stop-loss: $1,366; exit price for the DGLD ETN: $51.98; stop-loss for the DGLD ETN $38.74 Silver: exit price: $15.82; stop-loss: $19.22; exit price for the DSLV ETN: $28.88; stop-loss for the DSLV ETN $17.93 Mining stocks (price levels for the GDX ETF): exit price: $21.23; stop-loss: $26.34; exit price for the DUST ETF: $29.97; stop-loss for the DUST ETF $21.37 In case one wants to bet on junior mining stocks' prices (we do not suggest doing so – we think senior mining stocks are more predictable in the case of short-term trades – if one wants to do it anyway, we provide the details), here are the stop-loss details and exit prices: GDXJ ETF: exit price: $30.28; stop-loss: $45.31 JDST ETF: exit price: $66.27; stop-loss: $43.12 Long-term capital (core part of the portfolio; our opinion): No positions (in other words: cash) Insurance capital (core part of the portfolio; our opinion): Full position Important Details for New Subscribers Whether you already subscribed or not, we encourage you to find out how to make the most of our alerts and read our replies to the most common alert-and-gold-trading-related-questions. Please note that the in the trading section we describe the situation for the day that the alert is posted. In other words, it we are writing about a speculative position, it means that it is up-to-date on the day it was posted. We are also featuring the initial target prices, so that you can decide whether keeping a position on a given day is something that is in tune with your approach (some moves are too small for medium-term traders and some might appear too big for day-traders). Plus, you might want to read why our stop-loss orders are usually relatively far from the current price. Please note that a full position doesn’t mean using all of the capital for a given trade. You will find details on our thoughts on gold portfolio structuring in the Key Insights section on our website. As a reminder – “initial target price” means exactly that – an “initial” one, it’s not a price level at which we suggest closing positions. If this becomes the case (like it did in the previous trade) we will refer to these levels as levels of exit orders (exactly as we’ve done previously). Stop-loss levels, however, are naturally not “initial”, but something that, in our opinion, might be entered as an order. Since it is impossible to synchronize target prices and stop-loss levels for all the ETFs and ETNs with the main markets that we provide these levels for (gold, silver and mining stocks – the GDX ETF), the stop-loss levels and target prices for other ETNs and ETF (among other: UGLD, DGLD, USLV, DSLV, NUGT, DUST, JNUG, JDST) are provided as supplementary, and not as “final”. This means that if a stop-loss or a target level is reached for any of the “additional instruments” (DGLD for instance), but not for the “main instrument” (gold in this case), we will view positions in both gold and DGLD as still open and the stop-loss for DGLD would have to be moved lower. On the other hand, if gold moves to a stop-loss level but DGLD doesn’t, then we will view both positions (in gold and DGLD) as closed. In other words, since it’s not possible to be 100% certain that each related instrument moves to a given level when the underlying instrument does, we can’t provide levels that would be binding. The levels that we do provide are our best estimate of the levels that will correspond to the levels in the underlying assets, but it will be the underlying assets that one will need to focus on regarding the signs pointing to closing a given position or keeping it open. We might adjust the levels in the “additional instruments” without adjusting the levels in the “main instruments”, which will simply mean that we have improved our estimation of these levels, not that we changed our outlook on the markets. We are already working on a tool that would update these levels on a daily basis for the most popular ETFs, ETNs and individual mining stocks. Our preferred ways to invest in and to trade gold along with the reasoning can be found in the how to buy gold section. Additionally, our preferred ETFs and ETNs can be found in our Gold & Silver ETF Ranking. As a reminder, Gold & Silver Trading Alerts are posted before or on each trading day (we usually post them before the opening bell, but we don't promise doing that each day). If there's anything urgent, we will send you an additional small alert before posting the main one. ===== Latest Free Trading Alerts: On Wednesday, Trump nominated Goodfriend to the Fed’s Board of Governors. What does it mean for the gold market? S&P 500 index lost 0.2% on Friday, following volatile trading session and a bounce off support level at 2,600 mark. Is this a topping pattern or just another consolidation within medium-term uptrend? ===== Hand-picked precious-metals-related links: ===== In other news: ===== Thank you.


image: wikicommons Here’s some good advice. Please don’t place valuables likes money and passports in a planes overhead compartment! A couple was flying from Chicago back to Munich last week when they forgot some very precious and valuable cargo onboard. The couple left a bag containing $166,0 in the planes overhead compartment! Lucky for them, the story has a happy ending… The couple was able to go through customs using ID cards, not realizing that the bag they left behind contained their passports and “American cashier’s checks – worth a total of $166,0,” according to T+L. The man had just inherited the large sum of money from his mother. A cleaner saw the bag on the plane and turned it over to the airline. The airline then gave it to the local police who found the cashier’s checks inside. When the police figured out who the owners of the bag were, they had already left the airport. According to T+L the “police tracked them down to their home about two hours away“. Once the man was told what he had left on the plane he headed right back to the airport to claim the valuable bag! Lucky for them this story ended well!


Postpartum depression has become more visible as celebrity moms including Brooke Shields, Drew Barrymore and Chrissy Teigen have publicly shared their struggles with feeling sad and hopeless after birth. But when a father – Adam Busby, from reality TV show “OutDaughtered” – recently opened up about his own postpartum depression, he received instant backlash, including comments telling him to “man up.” Despite the skepticism, postpartum depression in fathers is very real, with estimates that around 10 percent of men report symptoms of depression following the birth of a child, about double the typical rate of depression in males. Postpartum depression in women has been linked with hormonal shifts, but the role of hormones in men’s postpartum depression has been unknown. In an attempt to solve this mystery, my colleagues and I recently tested whether men’s levels of the hormone testosterone are related to their postpartum depression risk during early parenthood. We found that men’s testosterone levels might predict not only their own postpartum depression risk, but their partner’s depression risk as well. Testosterone levels in flux through life changes Testosterone is an androgen hormone, responsible for the development and maintenance of male secondary sex characteristics. It promotes muscle mass and body hair growth, and motivates sexual arousal and competitive behavior. Many studies have found that testosterone dips in new fathers across the animal kingdom. Among animals that engage in the biparental care of offspring – Mongolian gerbils, Djungarian hamsters, California mice and cotton-top tamarins – males show lower testosterone levels following the birth of pups. Human males also often show declines in testosterone around the birth of their infants. In one of the largest studies of testosterone and fatherhood, anthropologist Lee Gettler and his colleagues followed over 600 single men in the Philippines for about five years. If men became partnered fathers during that time, their testosterone levels decreased more than the men who stayed single. Gettler also found that fathers who spent more time with their children showed lower testosterone, suggesting that testosterone may be suppressed by paternal caregiving. Along similar lines, psychologist Robin Edelstein and I found that men assessed repeatedly over their partner’s pregnancy showed declining testosterone levels from early to late pregnancy. Men whose testosterone dropped more dramatically were more likely to report postpartum commitment and investment in their romantic relationships with their partners. Researchers still haven’t identified exactly what causes men’s testosterone to change over the transition to parenthood. Possible suspects include proximity to the partner or infant, increased stress or disrupted sleep and exercise routines. Lower testosterone, higher depression Previous research has linked testosterone with men’s depression levels in general. Low testosterone may contribute to the feelings of lethargy and disinterest in normally pleasurable activities that characterize depression. In fact, some psychiatrists have even suggested prescribing testosterone supplements to treat depression in men. However, no studies had specifically looked at the potential role of testosterone in fathers’ postpartum depression. My colleagues and I analyzed data from the Community Child Health Research Network, a National Institutes of Health-funded study of new parents’ health and well-being. The study recruited moms after the birth of an infant and followed them for several years, along with their partners. At one of the study sites, in Lake County, Illinois, men also provided saliva samples for testosterone analysis when their infants were around nine months old. Both moms and dads reported on their symptoms of depression several times across the first few years of parenthood. We found that dads with lower testosterone reported feeling more depressed. This fits with other research into how testosterone and depression work together. But ours is the first study to observe this relationship specifically in fathers of infants. Given that many men show drops in testosterone over the transition to parenthood, this finding may help explain why the postpartum period is such a high-risk time for depression in men. An unexpected side effect – for the moms We were surprised when we examined links between men’s testosterone and their partners’ depression. Yes, low testosterone seemed to put men at higher risk for depressive symptoms. But men’s levels had the opposite effect for their partners: Women with lower-testosterone partners actually reported fewer symptoms of depression. Why would that be? We tested one possible explanation by looking at how women rated their relationships. It turned out that moms paired with low-testosterone men reported higher relationship satisfaction, and their higher relationship satisfaction predicted lower rates of depressive symptoms. In other words, having a low-testosterone mate might make for a better-quality relationship, in turn reducing the likelihood that women will become depressed. We know social support from a partner can protect women against developing postpartum depression, so our finding fits with that research. Lower-testosterone men may be more dedicated to their relationships or spend more time with children, helping to relieve some of the pressure on moms. At around 15 months postpartum, we also checked moms’ ratings of whether their partners hurt, threatened, yelled at or insulted them. If men had higher testosterone, moms reported higher levels of intimate partner aggression about six months later. Testosterone is associated with more aggressive and competitive behavior. Our finding shows a potential dark side to high testosterone in the postpartum period. Dads also told us about their parenting stress at 15 months postpartum, reporting on emotions such as feeling trapped by parenting responsibilities, believing their children made too many demands on them and lacking warm feelings toward their children. At first, we didn’t find a link between men’s testosterone levels and their parenting stress. But after we statistically controlled for the relationship between low testosterone and depression, we saw that higher testosterone put men at greater risk of experiencing problems in the parenting relationship. This result suggests that, once you adjust for their potentially lower risk of depression, high-testosterone men may find parenting to be more stressful. A happy medium for testosterone? Our results suggest that fathers of infants might be at risk at both sides of the postpartum testosterone spectrum. At low levels, they might be more vulnerable to depression. But at high levels, they might have less satisfying and more aggressive relationships, less happy partners and more parenting stress. In terms of resilience to depression and stress, men with average levels of postpartum testosterone seemed to fare best. Our findings reveal that men’s postpartum testosterone has a complex relationship with family health. From an evolutionary perspective, lower testosterone during the transition to parenthood may help motivate men to invest in their family. In the animal kingdom, lower-testosterone males spend more time with infant pups and show less aggression toward them. So it makes sense that human males would show shifts in testosterone as they adapt to parenthood. But these shifts may make men more vulnerable to mood disorder symptoms. Perhaps this is because lower-testosterone men are taking a more hands-on role in the family and helping more with infant care. Their contributions are great news from the family’s perspective, but may put men at heightened risk of some of the same depressive symptoms that many new mothers face. After all, caring for infants is hard, draining work. In modern industrialized societies like the United States, many new parents lack the extended family support networks that can help lighten the burden of childcare. And in the U.S., paternity leave is a rarity, and many dads struggle with family-unfriendly work arrangements that drain time and energy. Just as new moms can feel overwhelmed and isolated after spending long hours tending to their babies, so too can dads. If new dads (or moms) are experiencing depressed moods after the birth of their infants, they can take some comfort in the fact that these feelings are normal – and may even be rooted in our evolutionary biology. There’s no shame in seeking help, whether it’s talking to a friend, prioritizing sleep and exercise, or visiting a therapist. Postpartum depression affects the whole family and should be taken seriously. Darby Saxbe, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.


Days after Steven Bannon’s blustery, accusatory interview on “60 Minutes,” in which he warned the apostates blocking President Trump’s agenda that he’s coming after them, Trump confirmed it -- there is no such thing as Trumpism. In recent weeks he’s assured Democrats he backs legalizing the Dreamers, affirmed a commitment to foreign aid in front of the United Nations, and said he’s adding troops in Afghanistan. Will Trump now accept “better” terms he wants in the Paris climate accord? Too bad for Bannon, because none of this is remotely the fault of his favorite punching bags, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, just Trump himself. Bannon’s new self-described role as “wingman” growling from outside instead of inside the White House -- where as chief strategist he fought openly against the “globalist” forces he believed included Trump’s family members -- isn’t going very well. Trump keeps screwing things up for the Breitbart News commander. After getting fired last month he lamented to the Weekly Standard that “the Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over.” But upon reflection, Bannon realized that lame duck talk diminishes his own power, so he’s in overdrive fighting for scraps of a policy vision the president embraces spasmodically. Bannon says he’s enjoying having “my hands back on my weapons,” but he’s outside looking in at a West Wing filled with elites from Goldman Sachs -- the very definition of “the swamp” that Bannon is always frothing about. There, a president is spending political donations on legal fees while his staffers go deep in debt with mounting lawyer bills, visitor logs are kept secret so voters have no idea who is permitted into the Oval Office to influence the president, and a kleptocracy thrives where Trump and his children continue to be enriched by business connected to foreign governments, including the Chinese. Cabinet secretaries are using government planes for private use and private planes for government work -- violations that would have sparked endless Breitbart bonfires under President Obama. In reality, however, there was little left of Trumpism to trumpet even before Bannon was fired. He’s got the travel ban (or at least a modified version of it), and maybe the promised withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement; Bannon will claim credit if Trump pulls out of the Iran nuclear deal -- but that’s about it. On trade and immigration, the president has retreated from Bannon’s barricade-crashing proposals and has not withdrawn from NAFTA, not imposed tariffs on Chinese steel imports, has three times backed off threats over funding for a border wall and now come out in favor of what Bannon calls “amnesty.” Yet Bannon has declared war, promising to take out incumbent Republican senators who aren’t sufficiently loyal to the president. Targets are guilty of insufficient fealty to Trump himself, not to an agenda once thought of as Trumpism. With the backing of loyal mega-donor Robert Mercer, the Bannon forces are targeting Sen. Jeff Flake, and potentially Sens. Bob Corker and Roger Wicker as well. GOP leaders are incensed over the millions more they will spend protecting those lawmakers, money that could be spent trying to knock off Democrats. Currently Bannon is working to elect Roy Moore to replace sitting Sen. Luther Strange in the Alabama Senate race. Trump has endorsed Strange, also backed by McConnell. Bannon is backing the more Trumpian candidate and, well, Trump is not. Bannon, ironically, purports to be interested in protecting GOP majorities in Congress. Before he could imagine Trump giving away the store on DACA to Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, Bannon declared in his “60 Minutes” interview that preserving President Obama’s executive order would cause a GOP civil war. He expects Dreamers to run out their permits and “self-deport,” because “amnesty is non-negotiable.” He also said, “I’m worried about losing the House now because of this,” adding that his fear is “in February and March it will be a civil war inside the Republican Party.” But if civil war in the GOP isn’t Bannon’s aim, it's hard to know what is. He blames everything on Ryan and McConnell. “They do not want Donald Trump’s populist economic agenda to be implemented. It’s very obvious. It’s obvious as night follows day,” he told Charlie Rose. In the name of Trumpism, Bannon swallows heavy doses of denial. After all, when Trump threatened to withdraw from NAFTA, the president’s kids and other aides made calls to the Canadian government and arranged for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to call Trump and talk him off the ledge. It wasn’t Ryan or McConnell. Trump’s approval ratings remain low, Bannon said, “because he hasn’t -- we haven’t gotten the wall built.” Earth to Steve: Trump has signaled to Congress the wall is a joke. In the wake of the DACA debacle, Breitbart called the president “Amnesty Don,” yet Bannon himself has stayed sheepishly silent. Ann Coulter, author of “In Trump We Trust,” tweeted: “Looks like Bannon got it wrong. That shadowy force trying to nullify the 2016 election . is @realDonaldTrump.” Rep. Steve King told the Associated Press the president was destroying his support by betraying his campaign promise, and that his base is “irreparable, disillusioned beyond repair.” King added, “No promise is credible.” Sam Nunberg, a close Bannonite, conceded: “The reality is sinking in that the Trump administration is on the precipice of turning into an establishment presidency.” But Bannon isn’t just breaking plates at Breitbart, he’s building his own brand. Last week, like any other dime-a-dozen elitist, Bannon attended an investor conference in Hong Kong. He told the exclusive gathering he speaks to Trump every two-to-three days, despite White House denials that the president has spoken more than once with Bannon since he left. Before Trump disappointed him on DACA, Nunberg had hailed Bannon’s increased influence with Trump. “I think Steve leaves and a week later he [Trump] pardons Arpaio and they suspend DACA. I don’t think there was any coincidence there,” Nunberg told BuzzFeed. Bannon remains fixated on the threat China poses to the United States, has grimly predicted we will be at war with that nation within five-to-10 years over its buildup of military installations in the South China Sea, and said we’re already “at economic war” with China. Yet his domestic bark in this regard doesn’t seem to be the same as his overseas-investor-conference bite. Once there, the New York Times described Bannon as “more subdued about the purported Chinese threat.” The Wall Street Journal reported he described Trump’s great respect for President Xi and prospects for trade, but that “the U.S. needs to play a stronger role in changing the system in China, an attendee recalled.” It’s a far cry from a trade war on steel. Perhaps over time, Bannonism will go the way of Trumpism. A.B. Stoddard is associate editor of RealClearPolitics and a columnist. She is also host of "No Labels Radio" on Sirius XM's POTUS Channel. Secret Message from God Found in Human DNA (See What It Says)


U.S. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton acknowledges the crowd at a campaign rally in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, U.S. November 1, 2016. Hillary Clinton’s campaign is refocusing on Donald Trump and turning away from the latest investigation of her emails, reminding voters of all the reasons why she believes Trump is unqualified to be president. At three Florida rallies Tuesday, CBS News’ Nancy Cordes reports that Clinton ticked through her opponent’s most notorious comments about the opposite sex. “I want all the girls in America to know: you are valuable,” Clinton said at a rally in Fort Lauderdale. “Don’t let somebody like this bully tell you otherwise!” To another crowd in Dade City, Florida, she added: “He calls women ugly, disgusting, nasty, all the time. He doesn’t see us as full human beings.” For proof of her closing argument, Clinton turned to former Miss Universe Alicia Machado, who Trump publicly shamed in 1997 for gaining a little weight. “He said to me, Miss Piggy, Miss Housekeeping, Miss Eating Machine,” Machado said, joining Clinton in Dade City. It’s a closing argument aimed not just at female voters but also the men who love them. The Clinton campaign released a series of ads Tuesday -- all of them with the same message. “I wouldn’t feel good as a father voting for somebody like that,” one man says in an ad. In Columbus, Ohio, President Obama warned that Trump is unlikely to change. “If you disrespected women before you were elected, you will disrespect women once you’re president,” he said. But in Fort Lauderdale, a protester interrupted Clinton with a sign that said her husband, former President Bill Clinton, is a rapist -- a common sight at Clinton rallies that set her off last night. “I am sick and tired of the negative, dark, divisive, dangerous divisions and behaviors of people who support Donald Trump,” Clinton said. Aides to the Democratic nominee insist the race is not as tight as new polls suggest. And yet they’ve begun airing ads in four states that supposedly tilt their way: Michigan, Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico. The campaign says that is not a sign of nervousness -- it’s a sign that they still have a startling $150 million in the bank so why not put it to good use, especially if it helps Democrats down the ballot. But that doesn’t explain why Clinton has added a stop in one of those states -- Michigan -- to an already packed schedule.


Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house on the University of Virginia campus. CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. — Rolling Stone’s deputy managing editor admitted on the stand Thursday that mistakes were made with the magazine’s since-discredited campus rape story, testifying that it “broke a lot of us.” “Everyone was yelling at us and rightfully so,” Sean Woods said of the reaction to the story after gang rape claims made by a University of Virginia student, identified only as Jackie, were called into question. “We needed people to know that we were addressing it as our story was falling apart.” The editor testified at the defamation trial against Rolling Stone, which is being sued for $7.85 million by former UVA associate dean Nicole Eramo, who claims the magazine’s “A Rape on Campus” story painted her as being indifferent to Jackie’s allegations that she was gang raped at a fraternity. “I’m sorry if I hurt you,” Woods told Eramo in court. “If? Did you hurt her or not? …Do you think Ms. Eramo was hurt by this story!” the former dean’s lawyer, Libby Locke, asked him angrily. “I do. I think she is a public figure and subject to criticism,” Woods explained. Earlier, he’d said that none of the journalists involved with the piece ever fully “recovered.” “You pick up the pieces and you move on,” he said. “I think all of our reputations were trashed. It was a terrible blow.” Woods said he offered to resign after they decided to retract the story in Dec. 2014, but Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner wouldn’t let him. He testified that he was in denial when he left a voicemail for Jackie after the story was retracted saying, “We are standing behind the story. We want to stand by the story.’” “It’s like the stages of grief,” he told jurors.


Chelsea Clinton strikes a pose during the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Tuesday, Aug. 26, 2008. Photos: Chelsea Clinton through The Years Photos: Presidential Daughters Photos: White House Weddings WASHINGTON Newly leaked emails show consternation among those closest to Hillary Clinton about how Bill Clinton’s business dealings might damage his reputation and potentially affect her presidential hopes. The emails, posted Monday by the WikiLeaks organization, also give insight into tension and turmoil within the Clinton Foundation while Clinton was serving as secretary of state. The chief operating officer of the family charity was reported to be threatening to commit suicide over the stress. WikiLeaks began releasing on Friday what it says are years of messages from the accounts of Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta. Podesta has acknowledged his emails were hacked, but warned the messages may have been altered or edited to do political damage to Clinton. It wasn’t immediately clear who hacked Podesta’s emails, though U.S. intelligence officials last week blamed the Russian government for a series of breaches and leaks intended to influence the presidential election. The emails that circulated among Podesta, Chelsea Clinton and former Bill Clinton aide Doug Band detail internal tensions that simmered inside the Clinton Foundation and appear to have played a role in Band’s departure from the family charity. Internal concerns among Clinton family intimates about Band and the private corporate advisory firm he co-founded, Teneo Holdings, have been previously detailed in several media accounts. But the new emails provide raw glimpses of an apparent power struggle between the Clintons’ daughter and Band, who worked closely for Bill Clinton for more than a decade after the end of the Clinton administration. In an email exchange from December 2011, Chelsea Clinton tells Podesta and others - including Clinton adviser and current Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe - that she’s increasingly concerned about Teneo. The email includes a forwarded news article that alleges that Bill Clinton had collected $50,0 a month through Teneo from MF Global, the commodities brokerage formerly run by former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, while MF Global was preparing to file for bankruptcy. Chelsea Clinton told Podesta and others that two people separately came up to her at a London event for the Clinton Foundation to raise concerns that someone representing Teneo clients had been calling members of the British Parliament “on behalf of President Clinton” without her father’s knowledge. Chelsea Clinton said the calls had people in London “making comparisons” between the “profit motivations” of the former president and former Prime Minister Tony Blair. “Which would horrify my father,” Chelsea Clinton wrote. Band wrote in an email that Chelsea Clinton seemed more concerned about critical news coverage about MF Global, a derivatives broker, and Band’s advisory firm, Teneo, than published reports about Bill Clinton’s infidelity. “I realize it is difficult to confront and reason with her but this could go (too) far and then we all will have a real serious set of other problems,” Band vented in an exchange sent to Podesta. “I don’t deserve this from her and deserve a tad more respect. . She is acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she’s doing because she, as she has said, hasn’t found her way and has a lack of focus in her life.” The emails reflect the ascendance of Chelsea Clinton - as early as 2011 - inside the family charity. The younger Clinton was recently was anointed as the Clinton Foundation’s future leader if her mother wins the presidency next month. Bill Clinton announced in August that he planned to step down from the charity’s board if his wife becomes president. Chelsea Clinton will remain on the organization’s board. Bill Clinton explained in a letter to supporters in August that he would resign and stop raising funds for the charity to eliminate “legitimate concerns about potential conflicts of interest.” Calls seeking comment from the Clinton Foundation and from Teneo, where Band works, received no response Monday. Also in December 2011, Clinton Foundation chief operating officer Laura Graham contacted Band to complain that stress she blamed on the former president and Chelsea Clinton was causing her to consider suicide. Band wrote that when Graham called him, she was in her car parked near the water with her foot on the gas pedal. He said he dissuaded her from hurting herself. “She called me to tell me the stress of all of this office crap with wjc and cvc as well as that of her family had driven her to the edge and she couldn’t take it anymore,” Band wrote in an email to Podesta and Cheryl Mills, then Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff. Graham later departed the Clinton Foundation, taking a new job with the Empire State Development Corporation. Phone messages left for Graham on Monday received no response. © 2016 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


As we are writing this, Donald Trump is clothed in his war regalia as he prepares for a battle with the judiciary, the press, the CIA and probably innocent Americans. The good news is that we have a powerful and high-ranking military officer is not going to let Trump oppress the world. Air Force Chief of Staff Dave Goldfein may not have called Trump out directly, but his words are pointed at the president. In his interview with the press, Goldfein didn’t spare words of wisdom that Trump should better listen to. Earlier this week, President Trump aka ‘Orange Tyrant’ was at the MacDill Air Force Base to give his ridiculous and meaningless speeches. Imagine what he told the military officers who left what they should be doing to listen to him if they don’t like him, he is not going to like them. Barely a day after the president made this comment; Goldfein apparently seemed to implicitly attack what the president said. He said that “This is a great opportunity to step back and remind ourselves and the American people of the oath we take as members of the military.” Goldfein said that the oath they too and they always retake every time they were promoted was to defend and support the American Constitution against any enemy both in the domestic and foreign arena. By design, these military officers do not pledge to defend or support any leader or party because they are apolitical. The military is not too friendly with the president according to Goldfein, one day; the military may be protecting the people from Trump. Goldfein indirectly criticized the disastrous raid in Yemen authorized by Trump, the assurance of Trump that the SEAL was going to have a field only pointed out that he was a local fish without the experience of swimming in the international waters. One of the things that Goldfein is proud of is the fact that the military cannot lose sight that they go to war with their values. People who are critical of the efforts that the military undertakes each day to stop causalities are not aware of who the military are. Indeed, Goldfein is a true patriot who defends the real values of American. We are happy with the service that he is offering passionately to our country to ensure that our ideals are maintained. It doesn’t look like the upper class of the military really like Trump. They have rejected the requested Trump made for the military to go for the fascist-style military parade for his Inauguration Day. Americans need patriots like Goldfein. It is time for each one of us to stand up.


(ThyBlackMan.com) Even though I am black, I was raised on Superman’s; truth, justice and the American way. I always believed Americans were the world’s good guys. As a kid, I watched my mom cry over “I Love Lucy” TV stars Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz getting a divorce. I remember our entire family, mom, dad and five kids gathered around our single television; nail-biting tension in the air as we nervously awaited the final out for our Baltimore Orioles to win the World’s Series over the Pittsburgh Pirates. Despite our country’s racial issues, we patriotically embraced the distinct American culture. We were Americans. When President JFK said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country“, I believe a majority of Americans agreed with him. For years, I sang my song, “Celebrate America” at Naturalization Oath of Allegiance Ceremonies. I thought it was pretty cool that mine was the first song new Americans heard after taking their oath of allegiance. I witnessed thousands of immigrants who jumped through all the hoops, learned our language and history and tearfully pledged their allegiance. I still remember a gentleman who appeared to be in his 90s, raised to his feet from a wheelchair by a grandchild on each arm. Their entire family wept as he took his oath. Clearly, it meant something extremely special to become an American. It pained me deeply watching Obama lower the bar, redefining and dumbing down what it means to be an American. Obama rolled out the red carpet welcoming tens of thousands of illegals to invade our country for welfare benefits; even benefits unavailable to American citizens. For immigrants legally becoming new citizens, Obama made pledging to defend our county optional. Assuming Hillary would win the WH, Obama figured his illegal invaders would eventually be gifted voting rights. It did not matter to Obama that they had no desire to embrace our culture, respect our flag or learn to speak English. In essence, Barack Obama took the majestic shine off of becoming an American. The late queen of cosmetics, Mary Kay Ash said the speed of the leader is the speed of the gang. Unarguably, Obama’s disdain and disrespect for Americanism trickled down infecting our country. Public schools banned the singing of “God Bless the to be an America“. Students were barred from wearing t-shirts to school featuring the U.S. flag on Cinco De Mayo claiming it was hateful and insensitive to illegal Mexican students. Multimillionaire pro athletes refused to stand for our national anthem, proclaiming themselves victims of America. Their example of dissing our flag trickled down to high and middle school athletes across America. Under Barack Obama, JFK’s words inspiring Americans to strive for excellence for the good of their country were thrown on the junk-heap of forgotten history. Obama’s new Americanism was about demonizing and punishing self-reliant achievers, pandering to lazy parasites and addicting as many Americans as possible to big government dependency. Due to decades of our Leftist controlled public schools abandoning teaching U.S. history, far too many Americans quickly surrendered their precious God-given and fought for freedom and liberty for a free Obama phone and his promise to Robin Hood the rich. Ben Franklin said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Barack Obama actually launched an ad campaign begging illegals to apply for food stamps. Using a Hispanic soap opera , Barack Obama told illegals that applying for as many U.S. government freebie programs as possible was the honorable thing to do for their families. It was also painful watching Barack Obama insidiously divide Americans into supposed victimized voting blocs; blacks, Hispanics, women, transgenders and so on. Suddenly, we became an entitlement-minded gimme-society; everyone running around claiming America abused them and therefore owed them a living. I kept thinking what the heck is going on. We are better than this. I wanted to scream from the roof tops, “This is not who we are. Darn it, we are AMERICANS!” In my song, “We Are Americans” , I ask my fellow Americans to repent and return to our founding principles. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that Mark Levin recently penned a book in which he brilliantly articulated the source of my heartache for my country; the well-orchestrated cultural and moral decline of America. Levin’s book is titled, “Rediscovering Americanism And The Tyranny of Progressivism” The good news is Donald Trump winning the WH in an electoral landslide proves that despite decades of Leftists trying to convince Americans that we are the greatest source of evil in the world, the masses still love our country and long to see her made great again. And for that, I am extremely hopeful and grateful. Prayerfully, Trump will usher in us becoming Americans again. Staff Writer; Lloyd Marcus Chairman of The Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama. Please help me spread my message by joining my Liberty Network. Lloyd is of the American Tea Party Anthem and author of Confessions of a Black Conservative, foreword by Michele Malkin.


Only hours after President Donald Trump's aide, Kellyanne Conway, had a fiery exchange with CNN's Chris Cuomo over whether or not the White House was obsessed about Hillary Clinton, the president completely undercut her argument. On Thursday morning, the president, spending his " Executive Time" watching "Fox & Friends," angrily tweeted about his Democratic opponent in 2016, while slamming the infamous dossier in an attempt to distract from the ongoing probe by special counsel Robert Mueller into the Trump campaign's alleged ties to the Kremlin. Disproven and paid for by Democrats “Dossier used to spy on Trump Campaign. Did FBI use Intel tool to influence the Election?” @foxandfriends Did Dems or Clinton also pay Russians? Where are hidden and smashed DNC servers? Where are Crooked Hillary Emails? What a mess! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2018 But just the night before, Conway vociferously defended Trump and insisted no one in the White House cared about Clinton. "We don't care about her. Nobody here talks about her," Conway said. "Nobody here talks about Hillary Clinton, I promise you." "We don't care about her. Nobody here talks about her." Kellyanne Conway claimed that while many cannot get over the 2016 presidential election, the White House does not talk about Hillary Clinton. pic.twitter. 73q9nZnF5 — CNN (@CNN) January 11, 2018 Conway also asserted that the public still had not gotten over the election and that most haven't moved on. Trump, however, was handing out electoral maps last year touting his victory. "So many people can’t get over the election results," Conway said. Cuomo fired back, "Says my friend who can’t keep Hillary Clinton’s name out of her mouth." "I'll make you a deal," Conway said. "I'll never talk about her [Clinton] again, but then you can't talk about the 2016 election." "I'm not, I haven't mentioned the election once," Cuomo replied. In recent months, Conway has tweeted about Clinton on numerous occasions herself. It took Hillary abt 5 minutes to blame NRA for madman's rampage, but 5 days to sorta-kinda blame Harvey Weinstein 4 his sexually assaults. — Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) October 10, 2017 So, Hillary blames Bernie 4 Trump's "Crooked Hillary", blames Obama 4 "lay off Bernie", blames Bernie Bros 4 sexism. — Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) September 5, 2017 The two continued to talk over each other, and Cuomo brought up the alleged Russian election meddling, as well as the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting in which top Trump campaign officials met with a Russian lawyer with potential ties to the Kremlin in order to receive dirt on Clinton. "The idea that we would have to look any further than Hillary Clinton to beat Hillary Clinton is a fantasy," Conway said. The CNN host added, "Is we inconclusive of Don Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort, who went to a meeting with a Russian lawyer who was promising dirt on Hillary Clinton?" "And what came of that meeting? Absolutely nothing," Conway responded. "That's not the point," Cuomo emphasized. "The point is why you went." In essence, Conway's behavior was a larger metaphor of the Trump presidency. Either Conway — who delivered to America the phrase "alternative facts" — was deliberately lying about Trump's personal obsession with deflecting and pointing the finger at Clinton, or she has proven yet again that the right hand still has truly no idea what the left is doing. The exchange didn't end on television, though, continuing on Twitter Thursday morning. So fun to see the predictable heads exploding, but I should've finished that sentence #CuomoPrimeTime @CNN. "Nobody in the White House talks about Hillary Clinton" when noting whose presidential leadership = historic tax cuts & economic boom, reg reform, put ISIS in retreat. — Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) January 11, 2018 hey kellyanne - good thing no one talks about hrc in the white house. is "nobody" new potus code name? — Christopher C. Cuomo (@ChrisCuomo) January 11, 2018 Hey @ChrisCuomo - when we are forced to about hrc it's because you and your colleagues can't let go of an election lost. Sad!Proven further by after a 30-minute interview about policy and accomplishments, HRC is all you and others can say. 5EspkRE — Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) January 11, 2018 And the coda of this story comes from Kellyanne Conway, who went on "Fox & Friends," where she talked about Hillary Clinton. "We only have to talk about her because people won't let go of an election she lost miserably." -- @KellyannePolls on Hillary to @foxandfriends this morning.Yes, really. — Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) January 11, 2018


The newly-installed constitutional assembly led by President Nicolas Maduro has ousted Venezuela's chief prosecutor on Saturday, a move that signals that the embattled government is making swift moves to consolidate power. Hails of "traitor" and "justice has arrived" erupted from the 545 pro-government delegates during the unanimous vote to remove the top law enforcement official, Luisa Ortega, from her post. The assembly replaced her with a staunch government supporter. The delegates said they were acting in response to a ruling by the government-attacked Supreme Court, which was separately considering a request to sanction Ortega. Speaking to journalists after her removal, Ortega said dozens of national guardsmen in riot gear barred her from entering her office, alleging that authorities wanted to get their hands on sensitive information implicating high-level officials in dirty dealings. "Do you know what they want to achieve with this? They want to hide the corruption and violation of human rights taking place in Venezuela that I will continue to denounce," Ortega said. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro plans to seat a new controversial constituent assembly in an effort to rewrite the country's constitution despite continued opposition protests. The new legislative body's constitution would nullify the other branches of government, leading opposition leaders to call on citizens to protest in the streets in objection. Maduro is expected to seat the 545-member body at the legislative palace in the capital of Caracas on Friday, just yards from the opposition-led National Assembly. He plans to attend the assembly's opening session and promised to use the assembly itself to attack his political opponents. "The only way they'll get us out of here is by killing us," National Assembly first vice president Freddy Guevara told the Associated Press. "They will never have a seat that the people of Venezuela gave us." Maduro's assembly was elected on Sunday, despite opposition claims that the election itself was rigged in favor of Maduro supporters, resulting in a boycott. The U.S. State Department condemned the assembly on Thursday, claiming the rigged election only served to empower "the Maduro dictatorship." Several U.S. lawmakers joined in the condemnation, including Sen. Marco Rubio who issued a message of support to the Venezuelan people in Spanish. "At a time of deep divisions in our own politics, both the left and the right here in the United States support the people of Venezuela and condemn the Maduro government," said Rubio. "Even those who sympathized and defended the late Hugo Chavez, condemn the direction Nicolas Maduro has taken your country." The senator added that Venezuelans are "only a free and fair election away from a better future." Sen. Bob Menendez, senior member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, claimed a "sham election" was used to elect the pro-Maduro assembly. "Nicolas Maduro's decision to move forward with a sham election to create a constituent assembly and shred his country's constitution offers yet another disturbing example of how dangerously unfit this man is to lead country," said Menendez in a statement released on Monday. Venezuela's legislative palace has been the scene of violent protests in recent weeks. Three months of bloody protests and a beleaguered economy have taken a serious toll on Venezuelans. Conditions are expected to worsen should Maduro and his supporters be successful in rewriting the constitution. The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Spanish police are looking for the missing migrants According to the mayor of the Cadiz town Rota, on Spain's southernmost coast, the authorities have found 12 of the migrants after they fled on foot and are looking for 30 others. It has been reported in the Spanish media that all of the asylum seekers are men and the missing migrants fled by running into nearby fields when they arrived. Around 30 migrants are on the run Wed, February 15, 2017 Migrants clash with each other in over crowded camps across Europe. Moroccan Police look at immigrants trying to jump the six-meter-high fence in Ceuta, Spanish enclave on the north of Africa, 09 December 2016. The 12 migrants who have been found are from the sub-Sahara and Morocco and they arrived on the beach known as Juan and Juana. A crane has moved the dinghy from the beach where the migrants managed to paddle their craft ashore despite strong winds in the area. In October, dozens of migrants protested about the living conditions in a Spanish detention centre. Thousands of migrants have come to Spain from Africa The protesters held up banners demanding freedom and dignity. After thousands of migrants from Africa crossed over to Spain in 2014 and 2015, the country’s authorities stepped up security and passed a law enabling its border police to refuse migrants the opportunity to apply for asylum. The European Union (EU) is now desperately attempting to cut the number of African migrants making their way to Europe. Thousands of migrants have targeted Spain as a route into the EU and the UK. Migrants have particularly targeted the Spanish colonies of Ceuta and Melilla in Morocco.


Hollywood will not easily recover from Harvey Weinstein -- not for a long time. The hypocrisy level has hit Defcon 1, 9.9 on the Richter scale. Hollywood’s politics have always been a self-serving charade, a liberal masquerade for a rapacious and lubricious lifestyle. But now, thanks to the Weinstein scandal, we see it more clearly than ever. And it couldn't be more repellent. (I had always thought Bill Clinton would have made the greatest studio executive of all time. Now I'm convinced of it.) If conservative investors had any courage, this would be the time to make a hostile takeover of the movie business. Unfortunately, they don’t. I know this from bitter personal experience. Wealthy conservatives are delighted to support the Philharmonic, but when it comes to popular culture they turn away, as if afraid to get their hands dirty. That this is a huge mistake should be obvious. They have abandoned the culture -- and our children -- to the creepiest people imaginable. What is going on in Hollywood is far from being just about Harvey. It’s approaching a pandemic. So many previously silent assaulted or raped women are coming out of the woodwork, it seems like a long-belated remake of “Cheaper by the Dozen.” No one knows who will be next or if it will stop at Harvey. The rot is everywhere, even, perhaps especially, in the precincts of “high art.” Gwyneth Paltrow says now is the time to put an end to these attacks on women. But where was she years ago when Harvey got “handsy” with her? Looking the other way while earning millions and garnering Oscars. Meryl Streep claimed she was clueless about Weinstein’s repulsive antics. Time to award her her greatest Oscar yet -- for playing someone deaf, dumb, and blind while living as a troglodyte in the Gobi desert. Either the woman’s a liar or an utter nincompoop. I’ll go with the former. As for the great feminist George Clooney -- the first male star out of the box to condemn Weinstein’s behavior -- let’s give him the Nobel Prize in virtue signaling. By coming forward, he was able to ace out his competition -- Howard Zinn-loving Matt Damon, who disgraced himself forever by covering up for Harvey a decade ago. (For those who may have missed it in the onslaught of sleazy details, Damon assured then New York Times reporter Sharon Waxman that Miramax’s high-paid Italian representative was a genuine “creative film executive” and not Harvey’s European procurer, as was, evidently correctly, rumored. Damon is the same “progressive” movie star who makes films opposing school choice for the masses while living in a thirty million dollar house and sending his kids to private school. I take it back -- maybe we should give him the Nobel in virtue signaling.)


(Source: KWES) ODESSA, TX (KWES) - An Odessa man and his company are donating $1 million to the American Red Cross towards Hurricane Harvey relief efforts. The Red Cross said they're expecting to spend $30 million from their funds on the rebuilding. As The Red Cross is helping with the aftermath, they're also preparing for an even stronger hurricane to hit the country. "This is a marathon, it's not a sprint, so this is gonna go a long way to help those people recover," said Tracy Austin, Executive Director of the American Red Cross of The Permian Basin. John Bushman, owner of Investment Centers of America (ICA), decided to give back after watching families and single mothers trying to survive the high floodwaters. He describes to us what he saw on TV. "So all she [single mother] can do is put out a white flag for the police to come help her. She's just standing there with an 8-month-old baby in her arms, I don't know where the other two minor children were that got mentioned were, probably on top of the roof already," said Bushman. "So if that doesn't bring tears to your eyes or makes you think, then I don't know [what will]." The American Red Cross can't ignore a stronger hurricane, Irma. Irma could possibly hit Florida or the east coast, needing the American Red Cross to give even more help. "We will deploy and we encourage everyone to take cover, to go to their shelters, and also to prepare in advance," said Austin. "Right now, that's our messaging to make those preparations in advance and to take cover and go to a shelter because this is going to be a massive storm." The American Red Cross won't know what help to deploy until after Hurricane Irma makes landfall. Even though many resources are in South Texas, they say they're "Red Cross ready." You can donate or sign up to volunteer at redcross.org Copyright 2017 KWES. All rights reserved.


Rolling Stone contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely, front, and Rolling Stone magazine Deputy Managing Editor Sean Woods, right, walk with their legal team to federal court in Charlottesville, Va., Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016. University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo is seeking $7.5 million from the magazine over its portrayal of her in a 2014 story written by Rubin Erdely. Closing arguments in the case are continuing. CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. - The reporter of a botched Rolling Stone article about a brutal gang rape at the University of Virginia willfully ignored facts and statements that disproved her preconceived storyline about the school’s callousness toward sexual-assault victims, an attorney for the former associate dean of students said in his closing arguments Tuesday. University administrator Nicole Eramo is seeking $7.5 million from the magazine over its portrayal of her in the 2014 story by Sabrina Rubin Erdely about the alleged sexual assault of a woman identified only as “Jackie.” Eramo claims she was unfairly portrayed in the article as trying to sweep Jackie’s sexual assault under the rug in order to protect the university. Attorney Tom Clare argued Tuesday that Erdely set out from the beginning to tell a story of “institutional indifference,” brushed off statements from her sources that didn’t fit that narrative and pushed her own views about the administration onto the vulnerable women she was interviewing. “Once they decided what the article was going to be about, it didn’t matter what the facts were,” Clare said. The story about Jackie’s rape set off a firestorm at the University of Virginia and in schools nationwide and prompted police to launch an investigation into the alleged assault. Eramo received hundreds of angry letters and emails and faced protesters outside her office. The story crumbled after other news outlets began asking questions and police found no evidence to back up Jackie’s claims. The article was officially retracted in April 2015. Eramo must prove that Rolling Stone statements about her made her appear “odious, infamous or ridiculous” and that the magazine acted with “actual malice,” meaning it knew that what it was writing about her was false or should have known it was false. A lawyer for Rolling Stone, Scott Sexton, said in closing statements there is no evidence the magazine knew a botched story about a gang rape at the University of Virginia was false before publishing it. While the women Erdely interviewed - including Jackie - told her that Eramo was their fiercest advocate, Clare argued that Erdely was so invested in her preconceived storyline that she was “blind to the facts.” He argued that Erdely purposely set out to make Eramo the “villain” because she knew she was an “easy target” and couldn’t speak publicly about Jackie’s case due to federal privacy laws. “It’s reckless, it’s cavalier and it’s intentional,” Clare said. Over the course of the more than two-week trial, the 10 jurors have watched 11 hours of video testimony, heard from a dozen live witnesses and have examined nearly 300 exhibits. Seven jurors will deliberate and three will be named as alternates. © 2016 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


FILE - Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind. speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 5, 2017, with the Congressional Black Caucus members to discuss the nomination of Sen Jeff Sessions for attorney general. (AP Gibson) WASHINGTON, D.C. (WTHR) - Indiana lawmakers in Washington are joining the chorus against white supremacist groups. Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.) is co-sponsoring legislation with more than 30 members of Congress that calls for President Donald Trump "to strongly condemn white nationalists, the Ku Klux Klan, and other hate groups that make up the 'alt-right'." The lawmakers are also demanding the president fire officials in the Trump administration who support white supremacists, specifically naming Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller and Sebastian Gorka. BREAKING: I've introduced a resolution with 31 co-sponsors demanding Trump fire any staff who've endorsed or supported white supremacists. pic.twitter.com/2WuGMqhQPa— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) August 15, 2017 "The President of the United States and his advisors should serve as an example to the rest of the country," Rep. Carson said. "As the country unites against this violent and hateful movement, people who fail to stand up to white nationalism and neo-Nazism should not be in a position of power." The legislation, outlined in a release from Carson's office, also calls for Trump to "use all available resources" to address the growth of hate groups in the country and to "unite all Americans against hate." Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) took to Twitter Tuesday evening to denouce the groups:


Shelly Yost is a cashier at Kroger. One day, she noticed an older woman making a bizarre purchase. The woman was buying $2,0 worth of iTunes gift cards. Something seemed off. Yost asked the woman why she was buying so many gift cards. The elderly woman said her granddaughter was in jail with a broken nose and that she needed to buy the gift cards to bail her out. The story was a red flag. The cashier had heard this one before. The woman was in a panic. She was terrified for her granddaughter’s well-being. “I want to let you know your granddaughter is OK. This is a scam that we know happens,” Yost told her, but the woman refused to believe it. “I asked her if she would please wait, and let me call the Sylvania police, so they could tell her that they would never accept gift cards as payment for somebody in jail. I didn’t want her to go somewhere else.” Yost stalled the frightened woman for as long as she could while she quickly slipped away to call the police. Yost also noticed the woman had a keychain from an assisted living facility and called them. The police arrived and talked the woman down. The assisted living facility was grateful. “The next day, they showed up, and they were the most genuine people,” said Yost. “They hugged me so tight and thanked me over and over. And they handed me a card, which I took and said ‘Thank you’. When I opened it later, there was super-nice gift in there.” Please SHARE if you think Yost went above and beyond what any cashier would normally do! Due to restrictions, this video cannot be viewed in your region.


MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace Former George W. Bush communications director Nicolle Wallace reported Tuesday multiple senior Republican officials have told her that to expect that special counsel Robert Mueller is pursuing an obstruction of justice case against President Donald Trump. “Three Republicans with close ties to the Trump White House, all veterans from previous Republican administrations, tell me that it’s clear from their conversations and contacts with the president’s inner circle that Bob Mueller is trying to build an obstruction of justice case,” MSNBC host of “Deadline: White House” reported Tuesday. “One of them going even farther and saying that the White House is now flying blind and doesn’t know who else might already be cooperating with Mueller’s team,” Wallace explained. That was not the only major news Wallace broke in the first minutes of her show. Wallace also introduced former U.S. Attorney Chuck Rosenberg, who worked on the staff of both Robert Mueller and James Comey of the FBI. “Would you surmise that Donald Trump’s taxes are something that Bob Mueller either has or will seek to obtain?” Wallace asked. “I would, Nicolle, and here’s why. I was a federal prosecutor for a long time and a white collar prosecutor, at the beginning of any case what you need are leads, how do you get those? The first thing you do, you get credit reports and you get tax returns,” Rosenberg explained. “I don’t know that they have the tax returns, but I know what white collar tax attorneys do, they get tax returns,” Rosenberg noted.


The 100 Funniest Tweets From the Unending Nightmare That's Been the 2016 Election Illustration by Shakeil Greeley for GQ / Getty Images Laugh to stop yourself from crying. There are only seven days left in the 2016 presidential. Seven more days and, barring a last-minute constitutional crisis, this non-stop misery ride will finally be over. How long has it been? Eight? Twelve? Thirteen years? No one really knows any more. All we know is that the 2016 election has done to American democracy what cocaine did to Gary Busey's career, and, much like being stuck in an elevator with Gary Busey, it's hard not to pray for the sweet release of death. A presidential candidate bragging about sexual assault, a presidential candidate threatening to put is political opponent in jail, dog-whistle racism, actual straight-up racism; it's fair to say we're at a historic low-point in the story of American democracy. If only President Obama could wipe the Internet clean before he leaves office, so we never have to be reminded of this god-awful mess ever again. All that said, there was one bright light during these dark times: Twitter.com. Previously home to die-hard One Direction fans and a few hundred-thousand accounts pretending to be Will Ferrell, Twitter was undoubtedly responsible for some of this election cycle's most vile rhetoric—I mean, just look at Trump's tweets. But there's no denying it also came into its own during the 2016 election. It wasn't fun watching Donald Trump routinely debase our country's political system, but I'm not going to pretend the well-crafted tweets that sparked into existence as a result weren't also a welcome catharsis. To commemorate this bizarre time in our nation's history, we've compiled a chronological list of the 100 funniest* tweets of this genuinely terrible, and mostly unfunny, election. Hopefully, if there's anything left in the smoldering rubble that will be America after November 8th, they can be a reminder that there was at least some good in the parade of garbage. Now let's all agree to never ever do this ever again. *According to us. Please don't @ me. 1. /status/595313535489581056 2. /status/634155794724814848 3. /status/634517124124381188 4. /status/637482075638075392 5. /status/638537356342075392 6. /status/666764215949074432 7. /status/667828163557232644 8. /status/672896890237775872 9. /status/673952110761807875 10. /status/687844188881293312 11. /status/691284564170375170 12. /status/703051814669852673 13. /status/718541379966738433 14. /status/694968109040586754 15. TRENDING THIS VERY SECOND travel-and-eats Where to Eat and Drink in Houston, the New Capital of Southern Cool culture Serena Williams' Catsuit Is Banned from All Future French Opens news-and-politics No One Knows Why This QAnon Conspiracy Theorist Was in the Oval Office with Trump /status/695438054887026688 16. /status/701237173291524096 17. /status/708229794299645952 18. _ /713479005387767808 19. /status/713741562761584640 20. /status/716365904901083136 21. /status/720259227067920385 22. /status/727658556233670657 23. /status/728320591598526464 24. /status/728299373176737792 25. _ /733518431740252160 26. 11/status/751259888433582084 27. /status/740378718925950978 28. /status/740993607289688065 29. /status/740949015009710080 30. /status/742041665251205121 31. /status/743160996320129024 32. /status/751267557311586304 33. /status/754005058786910208 34. /status/754343099157979137 35. /status/755279481917566976 36. /status/755449902931607557 37. /status/755511596047298564 38. /status/756323071871574017 39. /status/756568645564850176 40. /status/756347488601272320 41. /status/757640786091671552 42. /status/758139850214244352 43. /status/758508667058659328 44. /status/758417030827696128 45. /status/758868709251293185 46. /status/758869304037158912 47. /status/759573678480887808 48. /status/760303035742576640 49. /status/760593157176176640 50. 71/status/761023573158789120 51. /status/717111637317173249 52. /status/763100832124456961 53. /status/771921076775489537 54. /status/772460287572185088 55. /status/772477614191742976 /status/772835879043928064 57. /status/774718154412961793 58. /status/775542746157158400 59. /status/775835316078784512 60. /status/776592616934805504 61. /status/776619326862299136 62. 7/status/776481595721129984 63. /status/776811718345449472 64. /status/777560106837929985 65. /status/779369940402921472 66. /status/779762088101212161 67. /status/780219640744120321 68. /status/782039812404412416 69. /status/783145829267898368 70. /status/783289615977414656 71. /status/783490647361671168 72. 5/status/784120727158951936 73. /status/784526072851357696 74. /status/784501181464846340 75. /status/784504443047911424 76. /status/784531620539822081 77. /status/784529991463755776 78. _ /784576626248024064 79. /status/784887498333827072 80. /status/784769252758806528 81. /status/784605739058880514 82. /status/785273637901185024 83. /status/785291824273428480 84. /status/785294315270660097 85. _ /785296514792976384 86. /status/785299378705670145 87. /status/7849859606312058 88. /status/786387229908152320 89. /status/786237633282400256 90. 0 /786983664571781120 91. /status/786936084710166528 92. /status/787830961895575552 93. _cupp_ /789088080426831872 94. /status/789588565604925441 95. /status/790293668183670784 96. 4 /790298630100021249 97. /status/791407536884764672 98. /status/791812553659875328 99. /status/792085787529674756 100. /status/792078001064280064 Up next: Trump Is Right: This Email Debacle Is Worse Than Watergate


Fulfilling his role as the titular head of “The Resistance,” Barack Obama took to Facebook Tuesday to snipe at the Trump administration’s announcement that it was rescinding the 44th president’s 2012 executive action called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. “We shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own,” Obama said. His post was florid and self-serving. But five words in his lengthy screed —“through no fault of their own” -- are undeniably true. It’s not the fault of the “dreamers” that their parents brought them here, without papers, as minors. On that we can agree. But whose fault is it that they are still in limbo? For that answer, Obama needn’t take to social media. He can simply look in the mirror. Ten years ago, a narrow consensus was forged in Washington, if only briefly. Its architects were Edward Kennedy and John McCain. Their carefully crafted legislation created a new temporary work visa, established an electronic data base for employers to check employees’ work status, and earmarked money for border enforcement. It also provided a path to citizenship for an estimated 11.6 million illegal immigrants, provided they paid a fine and back taxes, met English and civics requirements, and stayed on the right side of the law. President George W. Bush signaled his support. But the vote was going to be close, which Kennedy and McCain knew. Conservatives dismissed the path-to-citizenship as a fig leaf for amnesty. Organized labor hated the guest-worker program, known as Y-1. McCain and Kennedy could have overcome that opposition, albeit narrowly, except for one last little group of senators. Call it the Senate Presidential Wannabe Caucus. Its membership included Illinois freshman Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. That’s only two votes, but it was enough. On June 6, 2007, Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, introduced an innocuous-sounding rider to the McCain-Kennedy bill. Its official description was “an amendment to sunset the Y-1 non-immigrant visa program after a 5-year period.” As everyone in the Senate understood, this was a “poison pill” designed not to shore up the bill, but sink it. Dorgan got his way, too. The amendment passed 49-48, essentially killing comprehensive immigration reform. Kennedy was incensed. He’d implored Dorgan and Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid not to do it. McCain felt particularly sandbagged by Obama, who’d inserted himself into the legislative negotiations uninvited, wrangled a concession he wanted, then voted with Dorgan. McCain assumed Obama didn’t want George W. Bush or himself -- the man Obama expected to face in 2008 -- to get credit for immigration reform. Ted Kennedy, who ended up endorsing Obama over Clinton anyway, believed this, too. Kennedy died in 2009 before he could convince Obama to revisit this issue. It wouldn’t have mattered. The GOP was becoming more nativist, the Democrats more cynical. The chance for a legislative solution had come and gone. But what about a non-legislative solution? This turned out to be President Obama’s specialty, the niceties of constitutional democracy be damned. In June 2012, with shifting public opinion polls now in his favor, Obama issued DACA, which he called “a temporary, stopgap measure” to curb the practice of deporting undocumented Americans brought to this country before their 16th birthday. Was this constitutional? It might have been, had the president announced that because his Justice Department lacked the personnel to adequately adjudicate 11 million cases, it was necessary to prioritize law enforcement’s areas of emphasis and that, henceforth, no federal government resources would be spent on deporting the “Dreamers.” Wink. Wink. But that’s not what Obama did. He announced a formal new government program granting work permits to those without papers. This “temporary, stopgap” measure superseded existing federal immigration law and, two years later, Obama sought to expand DACA, prompting a legal challenge from several states. Was the president on shaky constitutional ground? One assumes so, if for no other reason than Obama repeatedly said so himself – and he did it in precise and colorful language. On Cinco de Mayo in 2010, he said, “Anybody who tells you … that I can wave a magic wand and make it happen hasn't been paying attention to how this town works.” “I am president, I am not king,” he said that October. “I can't do these things just by myself.” “I know some here wish that I could just bypass Congress and change the law myself. But that’s not how democracy works,” he said in April 2011. “I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books,” he added in July 2011. “… Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. Believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting … but that's not how our system works. That's not how our Constitution is written.” Later, he had the temerity to claim he hadn’t changed his stance, a howler that blew the minds of media fact-checkers. So that’s the backstory to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Tuesday announcement that the administration will rescind DACA because it’s unconstitutional. Trump has not spoken against DACA itself; moreover, he sent out a tweet reassuring “Dreamers” that they have nothing to worry about for six months. This gambit suggests that Trump wants DACA codified into law, apparently as part of a comprehensive package. Instead of responding to this overture in a spirit of compromise, Democrats chose vitriol and name-calling, their default position in the Trump era. Luis Gutiérrez, an Illinois congressman, called White House Chief of Staff John Kelly a “disgrace to the uniform he used to wear” over DACA. Remember last summer when every Democrat and most of the media went medieval on Trump for picking a fight with a Gold Star family? Well, John Kelly is a Gold Star dad, too. Luis Gutiérrez never wore the uniform. For sheer demagoguery, it was hard to top Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton’s erstwhile rival had this to say: “Trump’s decision on DACA is the ugliest and most cruel decision ever made by a president of the U.S. in the modern history of this country.” When one considers Woodrow Wilson re-segregating the federal workforce or FDR interning 110,0 Japanese-Americans who committed no crime, the thought occurs that this is possibly the most ignorant utterance by a U.S. senator in the modern history of this country. But historic amnesia was the Democrats’ de facto strategy and, in the interest of efficiency, they used the same talking points. “Trump is clueless & cruel,” tweeted former California Sen. Barbara Boxer. “Above all he is a coward.” Nancy Pelosi described it as “cowardice” and “cruelty.” Chuck Schumer called it “heartless.” And so it went. One wonders if this was DNC-circulated messaging, drawn up by some 24-year-old staffer. Someone apparently too callow to know that today’s Democrats are a historic anomaly. Normally Congress likes it when a president respects their prerogative to make law. Or perhaps these talking points weren’t written by a millennial. Perhaps they were written by a certain ex-president trying to help us forget that when he and Hillary Clinton -- along with Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, and Bernie Sanders -- had the chance to grant 11 million immigrants access to the American Dream, they instead chose, for partisan purposes, to keep them in the shadows. Alzheimer's-Blocking "Super Coffee" May Be The "Memory Saving Discovery" Of The Century


Harvey grew into a hurricane on Thursday and authorities have reinforced their warnings as wind speeds have risen to 125 mph. Harvey could potentially be the fiercest hurricane to hit the United States in years. Such strong gusts are expected to be accompanied by 3 feet of rain and 12-foot storm surges. Forecasters have called Harvey a "life-threatening storm" and say that million of people could be swamped as the storm moves through counties inland. (The Associated Press contributed to this report) The National Hurricane Center has issued an advisory on Thursday, instructing Texas residents along the Gulf of Mexico coast to "rush" their preparations as hurricane Harvey strengthens. The hurricane is forecast to become a Category 3 hurricane with sustained winds of 80 mph, according to National Hurricane Center. The center reportedThursday afternoon that the tropical storm will make landfall late Friday night or early Saturday morning along the south-central Texas coast. "Harvey has intensified quickly this morning, and is now forecast to be a major hurricane at landfall, bringing life-threatening storm surge, rainfall, and wind hazards to portions of the Texas coast," the center wrote. People residing like coastal cities like Corpus Christi were encouraged to evacuate from their homes on Thursday. The mayor Joe McComb, called for people to leave in the "strongest possible terms." Some are surprised how much the hurricane has strengthened. A hurricane warning was issued for the Texas coast early Thursday, blanketing an area from Port Mansfield to Matagorda. Forecasters indicated that Harvey could become a hurricane after regaining tropical storm strength and began drifting towards the Gulf of Mexico. Harvey’s maximum sustained winds increased to near 60 mph Thursday, re-establishing its status as a tropical storm. The U.S. National Hurricane Center said additional strengthening is expected, resulting in Harvey emerging as a hurricane by the time its expected to reach Texas’s southern coast Friday. Some Twitter users on Thursday voiced alarm over Harvey, while others noted its name’s resemblance to comedian Steve Harvey. Harvey was centered about 335 miles southeast of Port Mansfield around 8 a.m. local time Thursday and heading north-northwest at about 10 mph. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) ordered the State Operations Center to elevate its readiness level, freeing up resources there for possible rescue and recovery maneuvers. The governor also pre-emptively declared a state of disaster for 30 counties on or near the Texas coast to speed the deployment of state resources to those impacted. Texas emergency officials on Wednesday asked residents along the state’s upper coastline to relocate or prepare to head inland. People in low-lying areas were urged to seek higher ground, and individuals elsewhere were instructed to closely follow official announcements. Rice farmers in coastal Matagorda County late Wednesday rushed to harvest their crops as Harvey nears. People on South Padre Island, for their part, filled sandbags that evening to protect exposed businesses and houses from the storm. Other locations in the forecast path, finally, sought out generators, plywood and other goods from hardware stores as a safety precaution. The Associated Press contributed to this report.