The video released Wednesday is of Amjad Fseisi, who told one of O’Keefe’s undercover reporters that he works for Deloitte as a CIA contractor.
Fseisi didn’t appear to have first-hand knowledge about high-level CIA operations, but he nevertheless responded in the affirmative when asked about whether the agency worked to undermine Trump and withhold information from him.
BREAKING – EXPOSING THE CIA: “So the agencies kind of, like, all got together and said, we’re not gonna tell Trump…Director of the CIA would keep [information from Trump]…” A project manager working in Cyber Operations for the @CIA and an @NSAGov contractor with top-secret… pic.twitter.com/TXq8ZjJEBq
According to Fseisi, the intelligence community hated Trump because he “would call Putin and tell him sensitive intelligence information.”
“So the agencies kind of, like, all got together and said, we’re not gonna tell Trump…Director of the CIA would keep [information from Trump],” he said.
“Gina Haspel….And I believe Mike Pompeo did the same thing too … [They] kept information from him [Trump] because we knew he’d fucking disclose it.”
Fseisi also said the CIA continues to monitor Trump’s ex-wife, presumably referencing Marla Maples.
He also made a few intriguing geo-political observations, such as that Israel steals information from the U.S.
“For example, Israel, our ally. I don’t trust them. Do you know why? They steal shit from us: information. So do we,” he said. “Nobody’s really our friends. Nobody.”
The CIA reportedly responded to O’Keefe’s latest expose. In a statement, agency spokesperson said the comments Fseisi made “are absolutely false and ridiculous.”
“CIA is a resolutely apolitical institution that provides intelligence support to policymakers, including the President of the United States, irrespective of who occupies the office,” said CIA Press Secretary Chelsea Robinson.
“We are a foreign intelligence-focused agency and do not monitor the former President. The individual making these allegations is a former contractor who does not represent the CIA.”
Nahla Al-Arian, the wife of Sami Al-Arian, who pleaded guilty in 2005 to fundraising and providing other support for the terrorist group Islamic Jihad, was photographed alongside several Columbia students. The case against Al-Arian was highly dubious, according to his former lawyer, acclaimed constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley.
Now residing overseas, Sami Al-Arian bragged on social media earlier in the week about his wife’s involvement with anti-Israel protests, according to the New York Post.
🚨#BREAKING: New York City Hall has informed CBS News that there is evidence suggesting the presence of the wife of a known terrorist among the protestors on the Columbia University campus. pic.twitter.com/tOF1br3vHx
New York City Mayor Eric Adams seemed to confirm Nahla Al-Arian’s presence as well after the NYPD’s raid, noting there were multiple “outside agitators” in the encampment.
“There were individuals on the campus who should not have been there. They were people who are professionals and we saw evidence of training,” Adams said. “I know that there are those who attempting to say, ‘Well, the majority of people may have been students.’ You don’t have to be the majority to influence and co-op an operation. That is what this about.”
A spokesperson for Adams later confirmed that “one of the individuals” in question was a person whose “husband was arrested for and convicted for terrorism on a federal level.”
While there was no evidence of wrongdoing on Nahla Al-Arian’s part, the NYPD’s head of counterterrorism said Al-Arian’s involvement is still troubling.
“We have no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing on her part but that’s something I wouldn’t want influencing my child if I were a parent of somebody at Columbia,” Rebecca Weiner, the deputy commissioner of intelligence and counterterrorism for the department, said.
“These students don’t come in the door knowing how to barricade themselves behind barriers that they’ve created, right? These are all skills that are taught and learned and that presents a problem.”
New York police arrested 173 protesters on Tuesday night with charges ranging from trespassing, criminal mischief, and burglary.
Data from the Chicago Police Department showed 609 arrests were for driving/traffic offenses, 75 for violent misdemeanors, 313 for other nonviolent offenses, nine listed as unknown or not listed, and nine for violent felonies. The data did not include illegal juveniles.
The Tribune claimed that the numbers disproved the notion of a “migrant crime wave” since the bulk of arrests made were for nonviolent crimes—although there have been several high-profile fatalities involving illegals who killed innocent people, including young children, while driving without a valid license.
“It’s certainly not a violent crime wave,” Graham Ousey, a Democrat donor and criminologist at the College of William & Mary in Virginia, told the outlet. “It is the impact of people who are deprived of resources.”
But that justification has not sat well with many Chicagoans, who have become increasingly frustrated with the city expending its resources on illegal immigrants.
“We’re simply not enforcing quality-of-life laws around our shelters,” City Council member Raymond Lopez said. “Politically, we have an environment that is making excuses for those low-level offenses as something that should be forgiven or ignored without realizing that it has a very real snowball effect in our neighborhoods.”
Lopez also pointed out that the data from the Chicago Police Department only reflected the crimes reported. Plenty of his residents, he explained, have stopped bothering to report incidents of immigrant crime at all.
Lopez was one of several Chicago leaders who have railed against the city for spending millions of dollars on illegal immigrants while ignoring problems plaguing the city’s legal residents.
“We are not taking care of our own,” said Chris Taliaferro, who represents the city’s 29th Ward, during a recent council meeting. “We have all but forgotten the residents on the West Side and South Side.”
The Chicago City Council recently voted 30-18 to approve a request made by Mayor Brandon Johnson for an additional $70 million in order to help deal with the ongoing immigration crisis. That money is on top of a $150 million in the budget already allotted to caring for illegals.
Despite bitter criticism and fingerpointing that extended both to the Biden administration and to rival Republican officials—who have no influence whatsoever in state or local politics—Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson approved a plan last fall to give illegals $9,000 each in assistance while seeking appropriate work and shelter, on top of their other welfare benefits.
Obama made the comment during an interview on the “SmartLess” podcast alongside former President Bill Clinton after co-host Jason Bateman asked the two presidents about Trump’s rise in the GOP.
President Obama on @SmartLess with Presidents Biden and Clinton: You watch Trump's campaign, you watch his career, he's never changed. No one in New York will do business with Trump or lend him money. He is not considered a serious guy. I was surprised he was elected, but I… pic.twitter.com/ywL36hr0YA
“I have been surprised that there haven’t been guardrails inside the Republican Party. Trump didn’t surprise me,” Obama replied. “I mean, he comes from New York. There’s nobody in New York who does business with him or lend him money. He’s not considered a serious guy here.”
Obama went on to say that he expected more Republicans to condemn Trump when he arrived on the scene.
“So I was surprised he was elected, but I wasn’t surprised in terms of his behavior. I did expect, and I suspect Bill and Joe, you’d agree with this, that there would be some folks in the Republican Party who would say, no, you can’t go that far. You can’t start praising Putin and saying that his intelligence is better than the U.S. intelligence agencies,” Obama continued.
Regardless of Obama’s opinion, Trump is, in fact, still considered a “serious guy” in New York City — at least, by the blue collar and union workers who broke with Obama in 2016.
HAPPENING NOW: President Trump greeted with chants of “WE LOVE TRUMP” at surprise early morning stop with union workers in New York City pic.twitter.com/Ron0WYihKD
Video footage from Trump’s visit to Manhattan last week for his hush money trial showed crowds of workers cheering him and chanting “USA!”.
“There’s not a Democrat in there,” Trump said afterwards. “These are people. Look at that building. Look what we can do. We’ve built a lot of great buildings in this city with these people, and they’ve given me great support. They’re really amazing.”
Trump also predicted that he might flip New York in the 2024 election. He said that while there are “some very bad people” in New York, “we have the greatest people, and they’re right behind me.”
DHS has been accepting tens of thousands of Venezuelan, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Cuban illegal immigrants every month through its controversial parole program, which congressional Republicans have blasted as a violation of standing immigration law.
From January to August 2023, DHS accepted roughly 200,000 illegals into the U.S. via the program, and sent 161,562 of them to Florida in four cities: Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Orlando, and Tampa Bay, Fox News reported Tuesday.
The parole program allows illegal immigrants to receive work permits and a two-year authorization to live in the U.S. As of February 2024, more than 400,000 illegal immigrants from the four designated countries have been granted access to the country through the program.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas recently claimed the program is a “safe and orderly way to reach the United States” and has “led to a reduction in numbers of those nationalities.”
When asked about whether the program is legal, Mayorkas insisted that it “is a key element of our efforts to address the unprecedented level of migration throughout our hemisphere, and other countries around the world see it as a model to tackle the challenge of increased irregular migration that they too are experiencing.”
However, even the DHS was forced to admit in a statement to lawmakers that “all individuals paroled into the United States are, by definition, inadmissible, including those paroled under” the Biden administration’s new parole program.
“These documents expose the egregious lengths Secretary Mayorkas will go to ensure inadmissible aliens reach every corner of the country, from Orlando and Atlanta to Las Vegas and San Francisco,” House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green, R-Tenn., said in a statement.
“Implementing a program that allows otherwise inadmissible aliens to fly directly into the U.S. — not for significant public benefit or urgent humanitarian reasons as the Immigration and Nationality Act mandates — has been proven an impeachable offense.”
(Headline USA) Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said Wednesday she would call a vote next week on ousting House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., forcing her colleagues to choose sides in a difficult showdown after Democratic leaders announced they would provide the votes to save the Republican speaker’s job.
Speaking outside the Capitol, Greene ranted against Republican Party leaders at the highest levels and pushed back against their public entreaties, including from Donald Trump, to avoid another messy political fight so close to the November election. With her was Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., one of the few lawmakers to join her effort.
The Motion to Vacate the Speaker WILL be called for a vote next week.
Members have a weekend to decide whether to embrace the #Uniparty that became obvious in the U.S. House when Hakeem Jeffries and the entire Democrat leadership team announced they want to keep Mike Johnson. pic.twitter.com/PfgBhuQ7Kw
“We need leaders in the House of Representatives that are going to get this done,” said Greene, holding up a red “MAGA” hat from Trump’s “Make America Great Again” campaign movement.
“Mike Johnson is not capable of that job,” she said.
In pressing ahead next week, she said that “every member of Congress needs to take that vote and let the chips fall where they may.”
The standoff with Greene, one of Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters, risks throwing Republican control of the House into a fresh round of chaos as rank-and-file lawmakers will have to choose between ousting Johnson, R-La., as speaker or joining with Democrats to keep him on the job.
Johnson, in his own statement, said Greene’s move was “wrong for the Republican Conference, wrong for the institution, and wrong for the country.”
Democrats see in Johnson as pushover who’s willing to lead his Republican Party away from the far-right voices who’ve opposed runaway spending and Biden’s proxy war in Ukraine.
The Democratic leader, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-NY, and his team issued a joint statement this week saying it was time to “turn the page” on the GOP chaos, announcing that the Democrats would vote to table Greene’s motion to vacate the speaker’s office, essentially ensuring Johnson is not evicted from office — at least on this attempt.
“From the very beginning of the Congress, House Republican have visited chaos, dysfunction and extremism on the American people,” Jeffries said Wednesday.
“Marjorie Taylor Green is the star of the show. The show is called Republicans Gone Wild,” he added. “It is undermining the well-being of the American people and preventing us from delivering real and meaningful results on the issues that matter.”
Johnson’s public opponents are few, at this point, and less than the eight that it took to oust now-former Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., last fall in the first ever removal of sitting speaker from the powerful office that is second in the line of succession to the president. Just one other Republican, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona, has joined Greene and Massie in their effort.
Greene and Massie said they were giving their colleagues the weekend to weigh their options before calling for the vote on her motion to vacate next week. Or, they said, Johnson could simply resign, pointing to the example of a previous speaker, Republican John Boehner of Ohio, who stepped aside in 2015 when hard-liners threatened to oust him.
They listed a list of complaints against Johnson, including his leadership in securing the aid for Ukraine.
“Are you going to embrace Hakeem Jeffries like Mike Johnson has?” said Massie, before a poster-photo of Jeffries handing Johnson the gavel when the Republican first became speaker last fall.
“They’ve got a weekend to think about it, but more importantly, Mike Johnson has a weekend to think about it.”
(Jacob Bruns, Headline USA) In a misguided attempt to stop his 6-year-old son from being “too fat,” a New Jersey man allegedly forced the child to run on a treadmill until he sustained injuries that later may have contributed to his death from blunt force trauma, the New York Postreported.
The trial of Christopher Gregor, 31, began Tuesday, with the court set to determine whether Gregor was guilty of causing the death of his son, Corey Micciolo, in the 2021 treadmill incident.
In footage from the Atlantic Heights Clubhouse fitness center, Gregor can be seen putting his son on the treadmill while repeatedly raising the speed and the incline of the machine, causing Micciolo to fall off on several occasions. Gregor then appears in the video footage to force Micciolo back onto the treadmill to repeat the cycle.
According to the arrest warrant for Gregor, footage indicates that he may have even bitten the child’s head.
Gregor was accused of endangering his son “specifically by having [Micciolo] run on a treadmill and increasing the speed, causing [Micciollo] to fall, placing [him] back on the moving treadmill while appearing to bite his head, causing the said child to fall several more times,” the warrant said.
After the incident, the boy’s mother, Breanna Micciolo, reported the injuries to the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency.
At an initial doctor’s visit, the boy told the doctor that his father had made him run “because he was too fat.”
But that visit was not the end of Micciolo’s medical issues resulting from the treadmill workout.
Two weeks after the workout, Gregor rushed Micciolo to the hospital after he woke up from a nap stumbling, nauseous and slurring his words.
As doctors took a CT scan, Micciolo began having seizures. Doctors tried to perform life-saving measures, but were ultimately unsuccessful.
Early reports indicate that liver damage that resulted from blunt force trauma was the one cause of the child’s death. The renal failure subsequently led to inflammation and sepsis. The autopsy also suggests that Micciolo suffered an acute heart injury in the hours leading up to his death.
In fact, while Gregor faces a “child endangerment” count for the treadmill episode, the specific charge related to Micciolo’s death—that he “knowingly caused serious bodily injury resulting in the death of another”—stems from a separate April 2 incident, according to CourtTV.com.
Gregor’s defense planned to argue that the “blunt force trauma” was the result of “lifesaving techniques”—suggesting that Gregor may have attempted to administer CPR to Micciolo at some point on the morning of April 2 and injured his heart in the process.
Breanna Micciolo, who was the first witness to testify in the trial, said that Gregor was absent from Corey’s life for his first four years. She said she had reported him for abuse more than 100 times but nothing was done.
After learning the autopsy results, he reportedly searched his phone for ways to flee.
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Over the last year, the House Weaponization Subcommittee has revealed numerous instances of the Biden administration pressuring tech companies to censor politically inconvenient content, including truthful information.
On Wednesday, the Weaponization Subcommittee released an 880-page report that synthesizes all the research it’s done over the last year. The report shows that the Biden administration pressured Facebook, Twitter, Google and Amazon to censor content. The report also shows that the White House’s pressure was effective.
🚨 #BREAKING: Weaponization Committee Exposes the Biden White House Censorship Regime in New 800 Page Report
This interim report details the months-long campaign by the Biden White House to censor Americans on Facebook, Amazon, and YouTube.
— Weaponization Committee (@Weaponization) May 1, 2024
“By the end of 2021, Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon changed their content moderation policies in ways that were directly responsive to criticism from the Biden Administration,” the report stated.
According to the report, the White House’s pressure on Facebook was mostly related to content about the COVID-19 vaccine.
For instance, one email obtained by the Weaponization Subcommittee showed an unnamed Facebook employee telling executives Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg in April 2021 that “we are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the White House and the press, to remove more COVID-19 vaccine discouraging content.”
In another April 2021 email, Facebook executive and former UK politician Nick Clegg told his team that Andy Slavitt, a senior advisor to President Joe Biden, was “outraged … that we did not remove this post, which was third most highly ranked post in the dataset we sent him.”
According to the report, Facebook responded to the Biden administration’s pressure with enhanced censorship efforts. In August 2021, an unmaned Facebook employee circulated an internal email about additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against Covid and vaccine misinformation.”
“This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the US administration,” that email said.
Remarking on these chain of events, the Weaponization Subcommittee’s report said the Biden administration “completed its mission: one of the world’s largest social media platforms again succumbed to pressure and violated its own principles to appease a powerful government office.”
The 880-page report outlined similar issues with Google’s YouTube, Amazon and Twitter.
With YouTube, the White House repeatedly expressed particular concern about the platform’s “failures” to not censor “borderline content”—content that does not violate YouTube’s content-moderation policies.
“Like Facebook, YouTube ultimately capitulated and changed its content-moderation policies after months of pressure from the White House,” the report said.
“In September 2021, after continued criticism for not censoring ‘borderline’ or non-violative content, YouTube shared a new ‘policy proposal’ to censor more content criticizing the safety and efficacy of vaccines with the White House and asked for ‘any feedback’ they could provide before the policy had been finalized.”
Similarly, Amazon changed its bookstore’s content moderation policy in response to White House pressure, the report found.
According to the Weaponization report, the White House emailed Amazon in March 2021 about the “high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation at Amazon.”
“Immediately after the initial email outreach from the White House, Amazon internally accelerated its consideration of implementing a new policy that would disfavor anti-vaccine books,” the report said.
The Weaponization Subcommittee’s report didn’t focus as much on Twitter. Censorship on that platform has been revealed by previous subcommittee reports, a series of media articles known as the “Twitter Files,” and in the ongoing Missouri v. Biden litigation.
However, the report did mention again that the White House tried to cencor Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who was Biden’s Democratic primary challenger.
“For example, on just the third day of the Biden Administration, the White House emailed Twitter (now X) personnel to demand that a tweet by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. be ‘removed ASAP,’” the report said.
(Ken Silva, Headline USA) The House Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic issued an interim report Wednesday on its investigation into Peter Daszak and his firm, EcoHealth Alliance, recommending that they be banned from receiving federal taxpayer funds due to their risky coronavirus experiments conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
🚨NEW 🚨
Today, @COVIDSelect released a staff-level report recommending EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak be formally debarred and criminally investigated as a result of his actions prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
— Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (@COVIDSelect) May 1, 2024
The Covid Subcommittee report examined the millions of dollars of grant funds that the National Institutes of Health gave to Daszak’s EcoHealth, including its infamous May 2014 $3.7 million award for “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
The report found that EcoHealth failed to regularly update the NIH about its experiments at Wuhan, as was required by law. The report further found that EcoHealth used taxpayer dollars to conduct gain-of-function experiments—an allegation that had been denied by former NIH Director Anthony Fauci.
Furthermore, the report found that the NIH supported the Trump administration’s decision to terminate the $3.7 million grant to EcoHealth in April 2020.
The grant was reinstated last April. But according to Wednesday’s House Subcommittee report, Daszak and EcoHealth concealed the fact that unanalyzed samples and sequences—that the U.S. paid for—are in the custody and control of the Wuhan Institute.
“Daszak failed to inform NIH that a substantial number of samples or sequences—the same samples or sequences that were a primary purpose for reinstating EcoHealth’s previously suspended grant—were in the custody and control of the WIV, a now debarred organization. It remains unclear how many samples or sequences that the federal government paid for still reside at the WIV,” the report said.
“Since access to sequences and samples was a substantial reason for reinstating EcoHealth’s grant, it raises the question of whether NIH would have still reinstated the grant if it had knowledge of this issue.”
All of those reasons and more call for Daszak and EcoHealth to be cut off from the government dole, according to the House Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
“It is imperative upon the Administration to immediately begin suspension and debarment proceedings and ensure neither EcoHealth nor Dr. Daszak are awarded another cent, especially for dangerous and poorly monitored research,” the report said.
Daszak appeared Wednesday before the same committee to answer questions about EcoHealth and COVID. There, he denied any wrongdoing.
“The public nature of our work and our long-standing collaborations with Chinese scientists made us a target for speculation,” he lamented.
(Money Metals News Service) In the latest episode of the Money Metals Midweek Memo, host Mike Maharrey delves into the complexities of the current economic landscape including that of China as a member of BRICS, Federal Reserve policies, and stagflation.
China’s Growing Influence on the Global Economy
Mike Maharrey highlights concerns about China’s growing influence on the global economy and its implications for the United States. He suggests that China’s economic rise poses challenges to the dominance of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and could potentially undermine the country’s economic stability and geopolitical power.
Maharrey expresses apprehension about China’s accumulation of U.S. debt and its role as a major holder of Treasury securities. He argues that China’s large holdings of U.S. debt give it significant leverage over the American economy and could potentially allow it to exert influence over U.S. monetary policy and fiscal decisions.
Furthermore, Maharrey warns against complacency regarding China’s economic policies and ambitions, emphasizing the need for the United States to address its own fiscal and monetary challenges to maintain its competitive edge in the global economy. He cautions against underestimating China’s strategic objectives and urges policymakers to adopt measures to safeguard America’s economic interests and national security.
Overall, Maharrey advocates for a proactive approach to managing the economic relationship with China, including efforts to reduce dependency on foreign debt, strengthen domestic manufacturing and innovation, and preserve the integrity of the U.S. dollar as the world’s primary reserve currency. He believes that addressing the economic and geopolitical implications of China’s rise requires careful consideration and decisive action to protect America’s long-term interests and economic sovereignty.
How Does the Federal Reserve Operate and Enable Big Government?
Drawing parallels between hockey playoffs and the Federal Reserve’s battle against inflation, Mike Maharrey explains the failure of the Federal Reserve. As the Tampa Bay Lightning faced a disappointing defeat against the Florida Panthers, Maharrey draws analogies to the Fed’s struggle to contain inflation amid soaring debt levels and fiscal spending.
Mike Maharrey argues that the Federal Reserve enables big government in several key ways.
This means that the government can finance its spending by issuing debt that the Fed then buys, essentially creating money out of thin air. Consequently, this process allows the government to run larger deficits without immediate consequences, as it can rely on the central bank to purchase its debt and keep borrowing costs low.
Secondly, Maharrey emphasizes that the Fed’s monetary policy tools, such as quantitative easing (QE), keep interest rates artificially low. This makes it cheaper for the government to borrow money, thus encouraging deficit spending.
With lower interest payments on its debt, the government finds it easier to finance expansive programs and initiatives. This perpetuates a cycle of increased government spending, fueled by readily available and inexpensive credit facilitated by the Federal Reserve.
Furthermore, Maharrey highlights that the Fed’s pursuit of expansionary monetary policies, including low interest rates and asset purchases, stimulates borrowing and spending throughout the economy.
This environment encourages government spending as well since policymakers may be more inclined to fund projects or programs when borrowing costs are low. Thus, the Fed’s actions indirectly support the growth of big government by fostering an atmosphere of easy credit and spending.
Lastly, Maharrey underscores the role of the Federal Reserve in providing bailouts during times of financial crisis. By intervening to stabilize the economy and bail out large financial institutions, the Fed indirectly supports big government.
These bailouts prevent the collapse of major banks or corporations with close ties to government interests (cronyism), thereby maintaining the status quo and allowing government spending to persist unchecked.
Overall, Maharrey contends that the Federal Reserve’s policies contribute to the expansion of big government by providing cheap financing, liquidity, and bailouts that allow government spending to escalate beyond sustainable levels. He advocates for stricter limits on the Fed’s ability to monetize debt and intervene in financial markets to promote fiscal discipline and prevent government overreach.
What is Stagflation?
Mike Maharrey defines stagflation as “that ugly playoff beard that just won’t go away.” While this is a humorous analogy, he essentially characterizes stagflation as a challenging economic scenario marked by both inflation and stagnant economic growth.
This definition aligns with the conventional understanding of stagflation as a situation where prices rise (price inflation as a symptom of monetary inflation) while economic activity remains sluggish (stagnation), posing unique challenges for policymakers and investors alike.
The official definition of stagflation is that it is an economic phenomenon characterized by a combination of stagnant economic growth, high unemployment, and rising prices (inflationary symptom).
Stagflation is a rare and challenging scenario because it involves a simultaneous occurrence of inflationary pressures and economic stagnation, which are typically contradictory in traditional economic theory. This situation can arise due to various factors such as supply shocks, cost-push inflation, or demand-pull inflation coupled with a slowdown in economic activity.
Stagflation poses significant challenges for policymakers as traditional monetary and fiscal policies aimed at addressing either inflation or unemployment may exacerbate the other problem.
Analysis of Federal Reserve Policy
Maharrey delves into the limitations of monetary policy tools in addressing inflationary trends exacerbated by fiscal spending. He highlights the Fed’s challenge in navigating stagflation, a scenario characterized by rising inflation and stagnant economic growth.
Despite the Fed’s hawkish rhetoric, Maharrey argues that interest rate hikes alone cannot offset the inflationary impact of expansive fiscal policies.
Mike Maharrey criticizes quantitative easing (QE) and asserts that it is a tool through which the Federal Reserve creates inflation. He argues that QE essentially involves the central bank injecting money into the economy by purchasing assets such as government bonds. According to Maharrey, this influx of money into the financial system leads to inflation by devaluing the currency and causing prices to rise.
Implications for Investors
In light of the looming stagflationary environment, Maharrey advises investors to reconsider their asset allocation strategies. He suggests that gold and silver, traditionally regarded as inflation hedges, may offer stability and resilience amid economic uncertainty.
By emphasizing the importance of long-term fundamentals over short-term market fluctuations, Maharrey encourages listeners to explore precious metals as a strategic investment option.
Why Should I Buy Gold and Silver?
Mike Maharrey advocates for buying gold and silver from Money Metals Exchange as a hedge against the risks associated with the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies and the potential for economic instability. He suggests that precious metals like gold and silver have historically served as stores of value and protection against inflation.
Maharrey argues that by holding physical gold and silver from Money Metals Exchange, investors can safeguard their wealth from the erosion caused by inflationary monetary policies, such as quantitative easing and deficit spending.
Furthermore, Maharrey believes that gold and silver from Money Metals Exchange offer protection against the devaluation of fiat currencies, which are subject to manipulation by central banks like the Federal Reserve. He contends that owning tangible assets like gold and silver provides a form of financial insurance, offering stability and security in times of economic uncertainty.
Moreover, Maharrey recommends buying gold and silver from Money Metals Exchange as a way to diversify investment portfolios and reduce exposure to the risks associated with traditional financial assets. By allocating a portion of one’s wealth to precious metals, investors can mitigate the potential losses that may result from market volatility, currency fluctuations, or inflationary pressures.
Overall, Maharrey views buying gold and silver from Money Metals Exchange as a prudent strategy for preserving wealth and hedging against the uncertainties created by government monetary policies and economic instability. He advises investors to consider adding precious metals to their investment portfolios as a means of protecting their purchasing power and ensuring financial resilience in the face of systemic risks.
Conclusion
Mike Maharrey concludes by urging listeners to stay informed and proactive in navigating the evolving economic landscape. With stagflationary pressures on the horizon and uncertainties surrounding Fed policies, Maharrey emphasizes the value of prudent investment decisions and diversification strategies.
By aligning with sound money principles and leveraging precious metals as a hedge against inflation, investors can better position themselves to weather market volatility and preserve wealth in the face of economic challenges.
