Category Archives: History

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, September 6, 2019: 

The success (or failure) of a conspiracy is the degree to which people are persuaded that one doesn’t exist. That’s what upset Adam Posen the most about William Dudley’s exposure of the innermost workings of the Federal Reserve in his op-ed at Bloomberg last week.

Posen scored Dudley for his intemperate and revealing article. He said his column was “horribly mistaken,” adding that “It feeds conspiracy and it was totally irresponsible to talk that way.”

Adam Posen is highly-regarded among his Deep State peers, having received his PhD in political economy and government from Harvard and then serving as a consultant to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an economist at the Federal Reserve, a fellow at the Brookings Institute, and a voting member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England.

Much better known, with equally strong ties to the Deep State, is Lawrence Summers.

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, September 5, 2019: 

When The New American reviewed William Dudley’s Bloomberg article suggesting moves by which the Federal Reserve could hurt President Trump’s reelection chances, Dudley’s tight connections to the Deep State were revealed:

Dudley’s credentials are impeccably Deep State: He is a graduate of UC-Berkeley who worked for Goldman Sachs for more than 20 years, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, a member of the board of directors of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and the Committee on the Global Financial System, and serves as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and vice-chairman of the Fed’s Open Market Committee.

The review said that Dudley’s opinion piece destroyed “a pervasive myth that has hidden the Federal Reserve’s agenda for decades, and the exposure of the deadly work of Deep State officials to bring the U.S. into a global economic and political system run by them.”

Criticisms of Dudley’s surprising revelations came from many sources, the most telling from members of the Deep State itself. The first was from

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, September 2, 2019:

Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden is wearing out his welcome, even among his friends. His latest lie — a war story some version of which he has been telling for years — has finally caught up to him. During a campaign stop in New Hampshire last week, Biden relieved himself of the latest version:

This guy climbed down a ravine, carried this guy up on his back under fire. The general wanted me to pin the Silver Star on him. I got up there, and this is the God’s truth, my word as a Biden. He stood at attention. I went to pin it on him. He said, “Sir, I don’t want the damn thing. Do not pin it on me, sir. Please, sir, do not do that. He died! He died!”

But, as the Washington Post reluctantly pointed out, Biden got nearly every detail wrong: “Almost every detail in the story appears to be incorrect. Based on interviews with more than a dozen U.S. troops, their commanders and Biden campaign officials, it appears as though the former vice president has jumbled elements of at least three actual events into one story of bravery, compassion and regret that never happened.”

What’s worse, when Biden was confronted with this “jumble” and asked to explain himself, he added to the pile: “The central point [of the story] is it was absolutely accurate what I said — the story that he refused the medal because the fella he tried to save, and risked his life saving, died. That’s the beginning, middle and end.”

Biden got it wrong when he told and retold the story of how his first wife and daughter were killed by a drunk driver. But it was slander: The driver wasn’t drunk, he was never charged with a DUI, and later examiners concluded that she pulled out in front him without warning.

He got it wrong about his so-called scholastic achievements. He plagiarized parts of other people’s speeches without attribution.

What is wrong with the man? Is he losing his mind, as some are charging? Or has he lost all sense of honor? Kevin Williamson, writing for the National Review, doesn’t know: “If Biden here is lying with malice aforethought, then he ought to be considered morally disqualified for the office [of the presidency]. If he is senescent, then he obviously is unable to perform the duties associated with the presidency…. The evidence points more toward moral disability than mental disability.”

Williamson ticked off a few more of Biden’s lies:

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, August 28, 2019: 

Elizabeth Warren has a credibility problem that simply won’t go away. The label Donald Trump tattooed on her public persona back in 2016 has stuck. If she wins the Democrat Party’s nomination for president, he can be counted upon to remind voters of her inability to escape the moniker he so skillfully applied: “Pocahontas.”

As Bill Scher, the liberal counterpart to a conservative foil on his Bloggingheads TV show, wrote in Politico: “If she becomes the Democratic nominee for president, Warren would still face a ‘Pocahontas’ problem, one that threatens the core of her candidacy.”

That core would be credibility, most of which she lost when reports surfaced that she

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, August 19, 2019: 

As we noted on Friday, Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden’s gaffes are so plentiful and outrageous that “the president has no doubt been collecting them in a special file to be rolled out during presidential debates next year if Biden survives the primaries.” There is increasing concern that his campaign just might not survive that long.

Uber-progressive Eric Levitz, associate editor for New York magazine’s Intelligencer, is one who is now seriously questioning Biden’s candidacy. In his “Note to Biden Backers” Levitz suggests that “A senescent gaffe machine might not be the safest bet” for them in 2020.

For a time, wrote Levitz, backing Biden was the sensible thing to do when compared to his competition. He asked rhetorically,

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, July 5, 2019:  

CNN‘s breathtaking decline in its audience following the release of the Mueller Report is symptomatic of the problem facing the entire mainstream media: CNN assumed that President Trump was guilty of all manner of offences involving collusion with Russia during his campaign for the presidency in 2016. The network was the head cheerleader of that parade, but following the release of the Mueller Report the entire mainstream media has suffered a mighty, perhaps fatal, blow to its claim of journalistic integrity.

CNN‘s decline in its audience is simply staggering. In April Nielsen reported that its prime time ratings dropped 26 percent from a year earlier, while in its most coveted 25- to 54-year old demographic (which drives advertising revenue) it lost 41 percent of its audience.

The decline extended into the second quarter, with CNN‘s 25-54 demographic suffering a 37 percent decline compared to the second quarter of 2018.

It isn’t just CNN that has lost so much of its audience and credibility.

This article was published by the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, July 5, 2019: 

When pressured to defend itself against claims that it was biased against Donald Trump, the mainstream media responded that it was just reporting the “facts.” Defending its nearly total commitment to the proposition that the president colluded with Russia during his presidential campaign in 2016, Jeff Zucker, president of CNN, responded: “We are not investigators. We are journalists, and our role is to report the facts as we know them, which is exactly what we did.” Martin Baron, executive director of the Washington Post, echoed Zucker: “Our job is to bring facts to light.” Dean Bacquet, executive director of the New York Times repeated the canard: “We wrote a lot about Russia, and I have no regrets. It’s not our job to determine whether or not there was illegality.”

But what if the “facts” are wrong?