Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mnuchin Hold Press Conference – 1:30pm EST…

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin hold a press conference to discuss terror related issues and national security. The Press Conference relates to This Executive Order.

UPDATE: Video and Transcript Added


[Transcript] – SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Hello, everybody. So, Secretary Pompeo and I are here today to talk about the President’s new executive order. And after that, we’d be happy to take a few questions.

So, today, the President signed a new executive order which underscores his decisive leadership in fighting global terrorism. This administration has intensified our counterterrorism sanctions effort. We’ve designated more than 230 individuals and entities in 2018, the most designation of any year in the last 15 years.

The new executive order, “Modernizing Sanctions to Combat Terrorism,” which was signed today, greatly enhances our ability to identify, sanction, and deter perpetrators of terrorism worldwide.

Among other provisions, the EO allows the U.S. government to better target terrorist group leaders; provides new tools to pursue individuals who participate in terrorist training; authorizes secondary sanctions on foreign financial institutions that have knowingly conducted or facilitated significant financial transactions with sanctioned persons; and targets those actors for, or on behalf of, a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

Utilizing this new executive order, today, Treasury sanctioned over two dozen individuals and entities from 11 terrorist groups. Specifically, we have leaders, operatives, and financiers from over 11 terror organizations, including Iran’s Qods Forces, Hamas, ISIS, al Qaeda, and their affiliates.

The government has taken more action than we ever have before. The U.S. is — Treasury is enhancing our efforts to deny terrorists access to the U.S. financial system. We will continue to make sure that the security of the United States and to protect innocent people from becoming victims of terrorist attacks.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, Steven. Today’s executive order marks the most significant update to counterterrorism sanctions authority since September of 2001. It significantly expands authorities to target terrorists and those who finance their activities.

Specifically, today’s action amends Executive Order 13224 by adding clauses that allow the Departments of State and Treasury to first directly target leaders of terrorist groups and their associated entities without having to tie terrorist leaders to specific acts.

Second, it more effectively and efficiently targets individuals and entities who participate in terrorist training, and provides new authorities to impose sanctions on foreign financial institutions that knowingly do business with terrorists.

The Trump administration has already used existing sanctions authorities more aggressively than any administration before us. And now we’re immediately putting these new authorities to good use, as Secretary Mnuchin said.

Today, the Department of State announces the designation of 12 terrorist leaders. They include: ISIS Wali of Iraq and former amir of improvised explosive devices; four senior members of Hizballah’s Jihad Council; and leaders from Hamas, Palestinian-Islamic Jihad, ISIS-Philippines, ISIS-West Africa, and TTP in Pakistan.

Further, we’re announcing the designation of Hurras al-Din, an al Qaeda-affiliated jihadist group in Syria, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Entity.

As these actions show, today’s executive order by President Trump adds further muscle to U.S. counterterrorism efforts. It will help us to ensure that the deadly attacks of September 11 that occurred 18 years ago this week are never repeated on American soil. Never.

At this time, Secretary Mnuchin and I are happy to take a couple of questions on this topic.

Yes, sir.

Q Did John Bolton fire — get fired, or did he quit? And did he leave the White House because he disagreed with you in particular over talks with the Taliban?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So, last night, the President asked for Ambassador Bolton’s resignation. As I understand it, it was received this morning.

Q Was it because of this disagreement?

Q Secretary Pompeo, about Syria —

SECRETARY POMPEO: Go ahead. Yes, ma’am. In the back.

Q Go ahead.

Q Was it because of this disagreement?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I’ll leave it to the President to talk about the reasons he made the decision.

But I would say this: The President is entitled to the staff that he wants at any moment. This is a staff person who works directly for the President of the United States, and he should have people that he trusts and values and whose efforts and judgments benefit him in delivering American foreign policy. That’s what, as Cabinet members, Secretary Mnuchin and I try and do each and every day. And when the President makes a decision like this, he’s well within his rights to do so.

Q Secretary Pompeo, can you describe your working relationship with John Bolton as it was today?


Q And also, does his departure make it easier for you to do your job and for the administration to accomplish the President’s foreign policy agenda?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Look, I don’t talk about the inner workings of how this all goes. We all give our candid opinions. There were many times Ambassador Bolton and I disagreed; that’s to be sure. But that’s true for lots of people with whom I interact.

My mission is always to make sure, as I run the Department of State, is to deliver America’s diplomacy and to work with a team — whether it’s at Treasury or the President’s staff — to make sure we get good outcomes.

I know everyone has talked about this for an awfully long time. There were definitely places that Ambassador Bolton and I had different views about how we should proceed.

Q With John Bolton out of the picture, is it now possible to see some less hawkish Iran policy? And does this open the path for the President to meet with Rouhani?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I would say Secretary Pompeo and myself and the President are completely aligned on our maximum pressure campaign. I think you know we’ve done more sanctions on Iran than anybody. And it’s absolutely working.

Now, the President has made clear he is happy to take a meeting with no preconditions, but we are maintaining the maximum pressure campaign.

Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.

Q So, Secretary Pompeo, for clarity on this, can you foresee a meeting between President Trump and the Iranian leader later this month surrounding the United Nations?


Q Would the President support that, and do you support that actively?

SECRETARY POMPEO: The President has made very clear he is prepared to meet with no preconditions.

Q Just to follow up quickly on the original guidance for this briefing: Bolton was on the guidance to be here, so were you two blindsided by what occurred today, that he’s no longer with the administration? Was it news to you today? Because last night you were told he would be here today.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah. I’m never surprised.

Q Well, let me ask it this way —

SECRETARY POMPEO: And I don’t mean that on just this issue. And I think Secretary Mnuchin would say the same thing. We work very closely with the President of the United States. I think we have a pretty good understanding of how he’s thinking about things — I think you’d agree, Steven — at nearly all times.

And so, you know, our mission says not to talk about these inner workings and the palace intrigue that I know you are so curious about —

Q Well, I’m just curious —

SECRETARY POMPEO: — but rather to talk about the things that matter to American foreign policy.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I would just add that people who knew should know, and don’t get into, you know, the administrative things if a notice went out. Because yesterday, the three of us were (inaudible).

Q Secretary Pompeo, thank you very much. I appreciate it.


Q Secretary Pompeo, a question about Syria. We reported on Syria and the refugee camps last night. Our David Muir was there. And he talked about how these refugee camps — ISIS fighters are blending in. There’s children dancing around the ISIS flag. Are you concerned about these refugee camps becoming a breeding ground — a training ground for terrorists, for ISIS fighters?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So there’s a long history of just exactly what you’re describing: camps in Iraq, camps other places where prisoners were detained and extremist elements breeding in those places.

But we’ve been working diligently on this. We have conducted enormous operations against ISIS, even after the fall of the caliphate, as recently as the last handful of days. We are very focused on this.

The success that we had moving down the Euphrates River Valley that our Department of Defense led with the SDF forces was truly remarkable. We will not take our eye off the ball, ensuring that whether it’s ISIS or other radical Islamic extremist groups continue to be under pressure from the United States of America. And that was — just to close it up, and that would include in these camps that you’re referring to.

Yes, go ahead.

Q The White House says that National Security Advisor Bolton’s foreign policy was not aligned with the President’s philosophy. How was it out of alignment?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Well, I’ll leave that to the White House to talk about. Other than to say, I think President Trump — I watched his campaign. I’ve now worked with him first as CIA Director and now as Secretary of State. Someone asked, “Would the policy be different absent any individual being here?”

These have been the President’s policies. We give him our best wisdom. We share with him our understanding. When I was intelligence director, we did our best to make sure that he had the facts and data available so he could make good decisions. But I don’t think any leader around the world should make any assumption that because some one of us departs, that President Trump’s foreign policy will change in a material way.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: The one thing I would just say to follow up, because the President has been very clear on this: The President’s view of the Iraq War and Ambassador Bolton’s was very different. And the President has made that clear.

Yeah. Go ahead.

Q Mr. Secretary —

SECRETARY POMPEO: Sure. Way in the back. Yes, ma’am.

Q On Venezuela. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.

Q Are you no longer planning to impose tariffs on Mexico if they don’t continue with the immigration plan?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So we’re looking forward to our meeting with Foreign Minister Ebrard here in just a little bit. We’re going to talk about the progress that’s been made, which has been substantial and real and material, and has made America more secure.

But at the same time, we know there is still work to do and we’re going to talk about how best we can jointly deliver that. We are deeply appreciative of what the President of Mexico and the Foreign Minister have done to increase the capacity to deter migration into the United States. And you can see the numbers have improved substantially. But we also know, A, it needs to be sustained, and, B, we’ve still got real work to do.

Go ahead, Steven.


Q Can I?


Q On Venezuela, we know that Ambassador Bolton was trying to keep up the pressure in Venezuela (inaudible). And we know that Ambassador Bolton and President Trump disagreed on many things regarding to Venezuela. What can we expect now with the departure of Ambassador Bolton?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I think you know that the Treasury Department and the State Department have been incredibly active on sanctions. Everything we do in is consultation with the State Department. Again, we have a massive sanctions program that’s working.

But I would just add, we are concerned about the people there and what’s going on, the humanitarian crisis. And I know the Secretary has worked with their neighbors extensively.

Go ahead.

Q Is this national security team a mess?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Absolutely not. That’s the most ridiculous question I’ve ever heard of. So —

Q Well, you’ve had three national security advisors in three years. Three national security advisors in three years.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Let me just say, the national security team, which is what you asked, consists of the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, myself, the Chief of Staff, and many others. So —

Q Can you disagree with the President without the risk of being fired?

Q What is the way forward in Afghanistan now with (inaudible)?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I’m sorry. I’m sorry. We’ll take one more. Yes ma’am. In the red.

Q Thank you, sir.


Q There were reports this week that the CIA had to pull a top Russian asset out because of concerns that his identity could be exposed. Under which administration was this source burned?. And is there currently an investigation into how his identity got leaked to the media?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, I’ve seen that reporting. The reporting is materially inaccurate. And you should know, as the former CIA Director, I don’t talk about things like this very often. It is only the occasions when there is something that I think puts people at risk, or the reporting is so egregious as to create enormous risk to the United States of America that I even comment in the way that I just did.

And I won’t say anything more about it. I know the CIA put out a statement. Suffice to say that the reporting there is factually wrong.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Thank you, everybody.

END 1:43 P.M. EDT

This entry was posted in Big Government, CIA, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, President Trump, Secretary of State, Secretary Pompeo, Terrorist Attacks, Uncategorized, US Treasury, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mnuchin Hold Press Conference – 1:30pm EST…

  1. Katherine McCoun says:

    first press question about Bolton v. the topic at hand. So typical of press. Gossip and drama v. content and actual issues/topics/events

    Liked by 10 people

    • GB Bari says:

      Well…you DO have to admit that the Bolton action was truly the 800 pound gorilla in the room at that hour. Pompeo and Mnuchin were the ideal officials to handle the rabid frothing presstitutes who were ready to pounce. I thought the President’s representatives did exceptionally well.


  2. Katherine McCoun says:

    Interesting – press asks will Bolton’s leaving open the door for less hawkish policy going forward

    Liked by 5 people

  3. Katherine McCoun says:

    A sharper than usual “reporter” asks a decent question re refugee camps being breeding grounds for terrorism. She was professional and it the question was on topic v. gossip

    …and then back to the bolton and gossip

    Liked by 10 people

  4. NICCO says:

    The judas media in their usual form.This is why we don t need this pressr as long as they act like thisSounded like little boy acosta hollering out at the end as usual wanting his cookies.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Patience says:

      Cold, rain, snow and wind will make the awaiting-helicopter-talks all the better!

      Liked by 14 people

    • bertdilbert says:

      I long for the day when the politically motivated media asks Trump if something he did was politically motivated and her responds “That was a stupid question, a very stupid question coming from the politically motivated press.”

      Then he turns and heads towards the chopper….

      Liked by 2 people

  5. Katherine McCoun says:

    I like Pompeo’s handling of the press. Interesting Pompeo and Mnuchin working together.

    Addressing Mexico’s actions re SW border.

    Venezuela question re policy without Bolton and

    then q: “is national security team a mess?”

    A: ridiculous question – consist of many more than just bolton

    Pompeo practically laughing at the press questions now.

    Q: CIA russia agent etc. reporting inaccurate.

    Wish I could stay at computer as this is a good watch…gotta cook and off to piano lesson, life of homeschool mom. son asks me how will I find anything to do when he goes to college…will miss him but Very possible to stay busy. This is example!

    Liked by 13 people

    • Chimpy says:

      Agreed. Pompeo is excellent at the podium. Munching not so much, but it’s great to see them side-by-side and obviously aligned.

      Liked by 2 people

      • I have seen Mnuchin give other press conference where his strengths were better highlighted. His grasp of complex economic relationships and dry wit makes subjects that would be normally out of my reach, fascinating. The present presser was only tangentially in his wheelhouse. He is the main advisor planning which sanctions and how to apply those sanctions to best effect the maximum pressure. That was not discussed today and the press don’t have enough of a grasp of the subject to develop questions on that topic.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Kather8n3 McCoun says:

      The stupid question was from Acosta! Typical 🤣🤣🤣

      Liked by 3 people

    • Chuck says:

      Kids leave for college and you get busier. Eventually you retire, then you get REALLY busy.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. Rowdyone says:

    Bolton is a hawk who believes the U.S. should project military strength to further American interests around the world. The President is neither hawk or dove but prefers using America’s economic might to positively influence foreign policy. This will be one of Trump’s most significant legacies.

    Liked by 18 people

  7. I have, through my many years, watched a long parade of politically motivated, bumbling bureaucrats.
    It is such a pleasure and makes me feel so proud to see these extremely bright, articulate patriots communicate real information through that mob of Jerry Springer mentality, Forrest Gump intelligence press corps.

    Liked by 13 people

  8. grlangworth says:

    “… will Bolton’s leaving open the door for less hawkish policy going forward…”

    This press conference was to announce an EO that substitutes a day-and-night sniper campaign to supersede the one-shot blunderbuss approach.

    Liked by 8 people

    • STEALTH is thy word, DEADLY is the other!!!

      PDJT is setting something up and this is just the beginning!!!

      Guess Friday is going to be a scorcher!!!

      Anyone one taking bets…What are the optics of having Mr’s Pompano & Mnuchin together at a press conference? Anyone??????

      Liked by 3 people

    • Ma McGriz says:

      “This press conference was to announce an EO that substitutes a day-and-night sniper campaign to supersede the one-shot blunderbuss approach.”

      And almost without exception, it went right over their heads.
      No response.
      Nothing. There.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Night Flight says:

    The press are like comment trolls; they never stay on point or push false reporting.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Tiffthis says:

    The press is terrible to watch. A lesson on how NOT to behave in public 💯

    Liked by 3 people

  11. sunnyflower5 says:

    Liked by 9 people

  12. pigletrios says:

    Once again that dink Acosta just shines doesn’t he?

    Liked by 2 people

  13. jrapdx says:

    As a rule seems the further back the reporter is from the front row, the better the question asked. The front row denizens act like they’re privileged to ask the most ridiculous things that Pompeo and Mnuchin laugh at and never take seriously. At least the administration will be able to say they’d given the press the “access” so often demanded and so obviously abused.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. pageoturner says:

    Bolton must really have pissed Trump off one time too many.

    I’ll bet Bolton was a class A, self-important leaker.

    Liked by 1 person

    • TarsTarkas says:

      IMO two hard-headed strong-minded individuals who clashed one too many times over fundamental differences in policy and philosophy. I always liked Bolton’s blunt no-nonsense no BS style, even if I didn’t agree with his policies. And from what I know he was a good soldier who at the end would say ‘yes sir’ and obey orders instead of trying to run foreign policy himself like many of his predecessors. Hopefully a successor will be another in the same mold, unafraid to speak his mind to the President but able to carry out assignments with diligence and without complaint.


    • That’s a possibility…a leaker. Trump sounded ticked off.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. trapper says:

    Here is the original EO that this EO amends. Most importantly, the original EO contains the Annex listing the names of persons and organizations it addresses:

    Click to access 13224.pdf

    Liked by 3 people

  16. ristvan says:

    Glad to see the terror sanctions ‘modernized’. This should help with Iran. Another PDJT as CEO move.
    Good CEO’s are a special breed. I have worked with and for both good ones and bad ones. Decisive big picture strategic thinking (China trade, USMCA, NoKo, Paris Accord, Iran), yet no detail or process too small to go untouched if it can be bettered significantly. VA choice, VA accountability, terror sanctions, Fanny and Freddy, criminal reform, … The ‘PDJT as CEO’ details list is endless.

    Pompeo is looking and sounding more and more presidential for 2024, in my opinion. Clear, succinct, direct, and getting visibly more fit.

    Liked by 21 people

    • Landslide says:

      I just listened and as it ended, I thought, “Boy, he sounds GREAT. Bold, decisive, and professional. I’m liking him more & more for ‘24!”

      (And major kudos to Mnuchin for replying “That is the stupidest question I have ever heard.”) 👏🏼👏🏼

      Liked by 7 people

  17. David R. Graham says:

    Good, the EO I mean. State and Treasury ordered to work to the same end as DOD and just as assiduously. Exceedingly late but happily received news. That rationality can do wonders.
    Diplomacy, Finance, and War-Fighting are the three assets of statecraft.

    (I know, some posit that Information is a fourth asset, but information operations is integral with each of the three, not a separate function. Von Clausewitz’s Trinity is not superseded.)

    All the names named are Moslem. So who is The World’s Jerk? But no Afghans.

    When he said at the chopper yesterday that “they are dead”, did he mean Taliban persons or talks with them? I took it as the former but see headline writers taking it as the latter. “They are dead” is mafia locution. And he repeated the phrase, and with the native New York neighborhood intonation.

    I have said US has had no strategic reason for fighting in Afghanistan since the successful punitive expedition of 2001-03. With their recent bombing stunt, I think there now is one: to wit, the world has been jerked around enough by these Pashtun/Taliban/Haqqani drug-and sodomy-addled morons. Saddam Hussein was hung for less global jerking around.

    Time to join with Russia and India not just to subside Pashtun/Taliban/Haqqani rampancy but to reverse it, to subdue it. Subduct their behinds into the infernal region.

    Attack profiles of the last two days suggest things now going in that direction, we will see how assiduously and thoroughly. Key indicator that they are will be evidence of first-time-ever full-spectrum ops targeting Helmand Province north of the Helmand river, in the triangle it makes with the Kash river. That is the Pashtun/Taliban/Haqqani belly, for all these years a no-go zone for US/NATO forces. The right arrow there and they are headed into the infernal regions, rampancy reversed, not just sedated.

    Probably even the Chinese would help to some extent, tangentially. Then exploit the place for tourism, trade, and minerals. And if necessary, pin republican government to their backs with a bayonet.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Michael Todaro says:

      Recommission the Enola Gay. Pilots would line up to fly a war ending mission as in 1945. What a beautiful sight, a giant, billowing, mushroom cloud, towering above the camel dung desert for all to see, hear, and feel. So many lives would be saved as they were when the all powerful USA put an abrupt end to WWII. The USA defeated major industrial nations in less than 4 years. (18 years in Afcrapistan already)


  18. thedoc00 says:

    At the time he was hired, the President needed a hawkish point of view but not necessarily an advisor to generate solution sets because the President and Pompeo covered the bases. So, Bolton’s ability to see answers only in 1-dimension was not a hinderance. Now with elections approaching and major domestic issues growing in number, the President needs and advisor who can generate solution sets and act as a real complement to Secretary Pompeo.

    As SD said in the opening sentence of the Bolton thread, this was inevitable.

    Hopefully Bolton continues his past habit of moving on after being dismissed, without recrimination. The one saving grace about his single-minded solution set mentality of “tough response” (not nearly as military oriented as some short sited posters here carp about) is that he can continue being John Bolton without actually being accused of being betraying anything. He will speak his mind as he did before and during his tenure on the President’s staff.

    Liked by 3 people

    • He’ll move on, but not sure without recrimination. However, fear not as he will not be going to CNN………probably to MSNBC! Ha-ha-ha. As least his mustache is longer the Madcow’s hair.


    • Ma McGriz says:

      It’s hard not to wonder if this little back and forth he-said-he-said about who decided when wrt Bolton’s departure isn’t possibly a bait and switch to get the medias’ noses off the real significance and effects of today’s EO.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Just Beachy says:

        I mentioned changing the news cycle earlier. Same thought. And I may be on a paranoia roll today but the last question about the Russian source sounded planned to me…”Last question: yes in the back in red (so I’ll be absolutely sure to see you and call on you). I’ll have to see if can find out who she is to test my theory.


  19. David R. Graham says:

    Oh, FWIW, and I am very please to see Bolton out the door. I had wished he never came in it. Neither Secretary evidenced remorse for his departure. I take it as good news.

    Liked by 5 people

  20. PageMarker says:

    Maybe with Bolton gone POTUS will move forward on North Korea with less internal opposition. With winter coming up fairly soon, loosening the embargo on heating oil and foodstuffs might be a decent gesture, perhaps with South Korean as an intermediary. With China threatening US on rare earth metals, there are apparently sufficient reserves in NoKo that some sort of deal would favor both sides. It seems POTUS would prefer a more diplomatic initiative with respect to Iran, something abhorrent to a neocon like Bolton. We’ll see soon enough, but there is potential for real results internationally and if the FED doesn’t screw the President on interest rate malfeasance, DJT could have secured enough success at home & abroad going into 2020 on an upswing.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. ristvan says:

    PM, three responses:
    1. Your observations on NoKo food and maybe fuel is a good one. Their corps got hit by a typhoon last week. Kim has asked to come back to the table. He gets a reward.
    2. Rare earths are not rare. The problem is the environmental cost of ore processing, which China just ignores.The US has one of the best RE deposits in the world at Mountain Pass CA. When China choked off supply, Moly Corp invested billions in ore processing to reopen. Then China loosened supply and Molycorp went bankrupt. The strategic answer is a US gov stockpile, or a purchase guarantee for the output of that mine.
    3. Fed is largely irrelevant to 2020 election. Times are good, and the recession mongering is reminiscent of suppression polls. CTH had a nice recent thread where Kudlow explained this well.

    Liked by 4 people

    • nimrodman says:

      Couldn’t PresTrump declare our rare earth resources a “strategic national resource” and provide subsidies that would stabilize extraction? We’ve certainly handed out enough funny money for windmills and solar panel subsidies, no?

      I’ve been hoping he’d declare the Uranium One holdings a strategic national resource and nationalize them.

      Leave Russia with a bag with no uranium in it
      Leave the Clintons with a bag with all the cash in it that Russia paid them in payoffs

      That’d create a meta-stable situation like a well-balanced seesaw with one side or the other destined to fall / jump off – with consequences for the other, gnomesayin’?

      I reckon the aggrieved party would be the one to jump off and the consequences would fall on the other side


    • PageMarker says:

      Rare earth mining is indeed a messy business, ristvan, but I was not aware of the Chinese approach to competition for those assets with respect to Moly Corp. ‘A purchase guarantee for the output’ sounds reasonable from a ‘defense’ perspective, but once again from the DC perspective, ‘we wouldn’t have this problem if there wasn’t a trade war.’ Irrational thinking, at least with respect to those bankrupted by a corrupt system. President Trump must be aware of China’s real ambitions and the only realistic course of action is to thwart them until the threat is eliminated. Hong Kong might go a long way in this endeavor.

      As for the FED, I would include the entire Central Banking System, the lifeblood of the Globalist System. It seemed to me back in 2016 that then President Elect Trump was indeed facing the possibility of a global recession, and the Trump Tax Cuts held that off for a bit longer than I would have anticipated. By changing the landscape, POTUS has repositioned the US as the world’s leading oil/gas producer that has considerable leverage on the global scene. Nevertheless, it does seem the global economy is in far worse shape than we here in the US. But if the US is not in recession, then it is not global, and those countries ought to follow our lead. Just the same, whatever happened to the 4 year business cycle?? Government intervention too dependent on ever increasing revenues to support an ever-expanding ‘socialist’ structure.


  22. David R. Graham says:

    On Bolton’s exit: Just a guess: it was not over staying in Afghanistan, it was over working with Russia. Further guess: Bolton’s departure and CNN’s inaccurate report about a US intel asset in Russia occurring on the same day is not a coincidence. I have no idea the details, but more is here than meets the eyes or ears.

    Final guess: Bolton got caught leaking the Russian intel story to hit CIA and keep US and Russia glaring at instead of talking to each other — such as for coordinating efforts in Syria and Afghanistan plus Iran — thus CIA’s highly unusual public censure of CNN’s story — and thus he was fired, or, he leaked the story to hit CIA etc., *after* he was fired, as a Parthian shot.

    In any case, I think truth/forthrightness and Mr. Bolton always have been strangers.


  23. CountryDoc says:

    Watching Pompeo and Mnuchin standing together smiling, fielding stupid questions from the press reminds me of several images:
    Two hunters sniping groundhogs or a flock of ducks flying in.

    Batman and Robin having a casual conversation while all the stupid bad guys keep throwing themselves at them and they easily deflect them away.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s