Central Banks ? Wrong, Of Course.

Central Banks? Wrong, Of Course.

We are all a strange bunch.

Take the Bank Of Canada . They produce a statement that talks about a economic slow down.

Well, welcome to the reality , experts. Any person who reads the news could have told the bank that. You can’t see tens of billions of dollars of investment dry up in the oil and gas sector and massive new government regulatory measures and think this will not effect our economic growth. Not rocket science , just some common sense without the jargon.

Problem is we keep giving them headlines about another prediction while putting in small print the facts that they were wrong about the last one.

Kevin Carmichael of the Financial Post headline is ‘Doves back to roost as BOC holds on rates.’ Catchy but why does’t he call a spade a spade and headline ‘ BOC Predictions Prove Incorrect or some such wording. He covers it but in the body of too long an article.

Let’s look at it.

The BOC predicted that the GDP in the fourth quarter of last year would grow by an annual rate of 2.3% . And said that in October of last year. Guess what . It was 0.4% . Then they said the first quarter of 2019 would grow by 0.8% . And it was 0.3%.

So why talk about another BOC prediction without some honest criticism. .

What was the introduction to the TV Show years ago called Naked City? ‘There are many stories in the Naked City; this is just one of them. ‘

We have many Institutions in this country that need a overhaul ; the BOC is just one of them.

Hillary Clinton E-Mails Found In Obama White House

Judicial Watch: FBI Admits Hillary Clinton Emails Found in Obama White House

APRIL 23, 2019

Also Confirms Over 49,000 Clinton Server Emails Found on Weiner Laptop

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a senior FBI official admitted, in writing and under oath, that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President. The FBI also admitted nearly 49,000 Clinton server emails were reviewed as result of a search warrant for her material on the laptop of Anthony Weiner.

E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, made the disclosure to Judicial Watch as part of court-ordered discovery into the Clinton email issue.

U.S District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, as well as Priestap, to be deposed or answer writer questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

Priestap was asked by Judicial Watch to identify representatives of Hillary Clinton, her former staff, and government agencies from which “email repositories were obtained.” Priestap responded with the following non-exhaustive list:

Bryan Pagliano
Cheryl Mills
Executive Office of the President [Emphasis added]
Heather Samuelson
Jacob Sullivan
Justin Cooper
United States Department of State
United States Secret Service
Williams & Connolly LLP
Priestap also testifies that 48,982 emails were reviewed as a result of a warrant for Clinton email account information from the laptop of Anthony Weiner, who had been married to top Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

A complete copy of Priestap’s interrogatory responses is available here. Priestap, is serving as assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division and helped oversee both the Clinton email and the 2016 presidential campaign investigations. Priestap testified in a separate lawsuit that Clinton was the subject of a grand jury investigation related to her BlackBerry email accounts.

“This astonishing confirmation, made under oath by the FBI, shows that the Obama FBI had to go to President Obama’s White House office to find emails that Hillary Clinton tried to destroy or hide from the American people.” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “No wonder Hillary Clinton has thus far skated – Barack Obama is implicated in her email scheme.”

Priestap was ordered to answer the written questions by United States District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth when he ruled in January that Judicial Watch’s discovery could begin in Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. This action came in Judicial Watch’s July 2014 FOIA lawsuit for:

Copies of any updates and/or talking points given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency concerning, regarding, or related to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

Any and all records or communications concerning, regarding, or relating to talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency.

Judicial Watch’s discovery seeks answers to:

Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system;
whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith; and
whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.

The Great Philosopher , Roger Scruton , On His Firing .

Should I Forgive the Journalist Who Got Me Fired?

Published in The Spectator (UK) on April 18, 2019


I travel back from London with the St. Matthew Passion filling my head, after the moving performance from the Elysian Singers and Royal Orchestral Society under Sam Laughton at St. James’s Piccadilly. Why does that last chord send shivers down the spine? The dark instrumentation, the sense that it is not an ending but a beginning, that this shadow-filled saraband will repeat itself for ever? Or is it just the story — surely one of the greatest narratives in all literature, in which nothing is redundant and yet everything is said? I arrive home with the chord still in my head, C minor with a B natural thrust like a sword into its heart. It foretells the week ahead. I devote the rest of the day to my report for the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission.


The commission has concluded that beauty in ordinary architecture is inseparable from the sense of place. I explain it to the family. It is almost the first time we have sat down to dinner since work started on the commission some three months ago. What a relief when it will be over at last, and we can be together in the place that is ours.


On Tuesday, at a meeting of the commissioners and advisory board, I explain our work so far: visits, conversations, focus groups and the public spirit and decency of all the people we have encountered. Even if the politicians are at a loss to understand the problem, the people seem clear about it. The problem is ugliness — the glass and concrete cubes in the towns, the houses dumped in the fields without streets, centres or public spaces, the abuse of historic settlements and cherished landscapes that once were somewhere and now are nowhere. Do we have a solution? I am determined to find one.


To Paris on the Eurostar — always a treat, not least because it leaves from St. Pancras, the clearest proof that beauty, utility, popularity and adaptability all go together. Something similar greets you in the Gare du Nord, though here it is the façade and the street that generate the sense of place. I am met by Damien Seyrinx, my publisher, and we go straight to the 16ème, where I am to discuss the French translation of Fools, Frauds and Firebrands on France Culture. Unlike the BBC, the radio palace is sparsely frequented, with isolated figures working in boxes, some of them reading books. The interviewer is polite, and I am looked on with gentle compassion before being dispatched back to a peculiar country that cannot make up its mind about anything but which nevertheless is still admired, not least because it can produce something so weird as a conservative philosopher. I am pressed for time and Damien orders a taxi moto, which speeds me to the Gare du Nord in 20 minutes of hair-raising architectural glimpses. I telephone home, to learn that I have been sacked from my position as chair of the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission. It was bound to happen, but I am astonished to learn that it is because the slanderous stories about me are all being recycled. How did this come about? I must have given an interview somewhere! And then I recall a slimy whippersnapper from the New Statesman who came to visit, saying the paper wished to write about my books.


Miraculously my family forgive me for that interview. The children are adamant that there should be no resentment but even a measure of sympathy towards the journalist. He probably thought that you make friends on the left by making enemies on the right. I open the computer: hundreds of emails in support, but nothing official to say what I have done wrong. If there is evidence to incriminate me then obviously the New Statesman must make the tapes of the conversation public: how else will any of us know what we are allowed and not allowed to say, when working for this government?


I am more cheerful on Friday. Emails arrive from friends in Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Latvia, Slovenia and the US all saying that they had once believed in British conservatism but can do so no longer. My favourite rabbi from Jerusalem offers to rally ‘Jews for Scruton’, my favourite architect from Homs quotes consoling verses from the Quran, my favourite journalist on Le Figaro says we’ll come out fighting. The family is right; don’t feel resentment, but be grateful instead. If this hadn’t happened I would not have known the weight of friendship behind me.


The week ends with a trip to Cambridge for the memorial celebration for one of the dearest of my friends, the mathematician, biologist and musician Graeme Mitchison, who died of a brain tumour last year. He would have understood exactly what Bach meant by that C minor chord with a hole in it.

Sir Roger Scruton is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Canada And Competing—NHL

LIke Our Economy Canadian NHL Teams Can’t Compete

I know, I know , its sacrilege.

But Canadian based NHL Teams can’t compete with American based NHL Teams.

Just look what just happened !

We had Winnipeg, Calgary and Toronto make the playoffs.

First round ? Wiped out!

The Toronto Maple Leafs went down for the third time to ignominious defeat to the less talented Boston Bruins . Winnipeg Jets , another talented team, were embarrassed by a rejuvenated, hardworking St. Louis Blues team. And Calgary got bumped by talent actually showing itself in the Colorado Rockies.

If anyone was listening or watching the Toronto sports scene for the last few years you would have no choice but to come away with the notion that the Toronto Maple Leafs would go to the Stanley Cup finals . I mean they were just so good. They bragged that they had the best coach in all of hockey and paid him accordingly; they had Mathews, Warner, Tavares , Nylander, O’Reilly, Marleau and Anderson . And an impressive , or so the Maple Leaf brass said, back up group.
But they blew it again.

The last time a Canadian based team won the Stanley Cup was 1993—26 years! No Canadian young person has ever experienced a Stanley Cup win by one of their country’s teams.

Is there a linkage between economic competition and NHL competition ? The US is always in the top five globally economically, their productivity, their competitiveness , and Canada can’t break the top ten. This past year the US is number one, Canada number 12 in The Global Forum’s Competitiveness Rankings.

So who is moving on in the NHL playoffs:

New York Islanders , Boston Bruins, Columbus Blue Jackets , San Jose Sharks , Colorado Rockies, St. Louis Blues , Carolina Hurricanes or Washington Capitals and Dallas Stars.

Not a Canadian based team to be found . Old Canadian hockey people like Foster Hewitt and Danny Gallivan must be turning over in their graves.

Does it have to do with the will to win? A team approach? Better trading and drafting .

Whatever it is , Canada should look at what the US based teams do , don’t you think?

$430 Million —Canadian Federal Liberal Government Splurges On Electric Car Subsidies

$430 Million —Canadian Federal Liberal Government Splurges On Electric Car Subsidies

Money isn’t a problem folks .

Remember when our Princeling said the budget will take care of itself —-he meant it—-all the way to a new deeper debt hole.

Now its electric cars to help make the deficit and debt continue.

$130 million for charging stations and $300 million in tax incentives to buy electric cars. This in the latest budget.

Tis all to help those environmentally unsafe , slave labor Cobalt Mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Over 65% of the world’s cobalt used in batteries in electric cars comes from there.

And there is graphite in those batteries ,too. And where does this come from? Two of the largest producers are China and India. Not known for high environmental standards one might say. How about Mozambique and Russia, two other big producers.

So this Canadian Government that goes around the world preaching environmental purity is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to increase electric car use with the consequence that more undemocratic countries with low environmental standards will see more cobalt and graphite production.

Oh? What about that Paris Environmental Agreement that Canada is spending millions on, too?

Hypocrisy costs a lot.

Make The Poor Richer, Not The Rich Poorer—Arthur Laffer

Exclusive: Art Laffer Explains Why USA Thriving with Maga Economics…Challenges Socialist Sanders to Debate

ROBERT Kraychik

Arthur Laffer, economist and author of Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive Our Economy, praised President Donald Trump’s economic policies while warning of Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) socialistic prescriptions for increased economic centralization, offering his analysis in a Monday-aired interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily with host Alex Marlow.

Laffer cheered Trump’s nomination of Stephen Moore to the Federal Reserve’s governorship. “I think Steve Moore is an excellent person, a wonderful guy, a journalist who has specialized in economics. [He] knows his stuff pretty well. He’s amazing. He’s held a lot of big-time jobs over the years and I’ve known him for probably 25 years, and he would be an excellent member of the Federal Reserve board, to be honest, and he would bring diversity [and] a different viewpoint. ‘

Laffer added, “Plus … [Stephen Moore] gets along with people very, very well, so I think the people on the Federal Reserve board in very short order would like him a lot, and would confide with him and talk with him and hear different views. and I think it would make U.S. policy better.”

Laffer lauded Trump’s understanding of economics. “The president understands very well the role of lower tax rates create incentives to increase output and economic production,” he determined. “The tax bill was a classic example of it, not only cutting the statutory rate from 35 to 21, but 100 percent expensing of capital purchases, [and] territoriality instead of a global tax system. All that stuff is just really, really great.”

“Deregulation is really good for the American economy, as well,” continued Laffer. “On all this stuff, [Donald Trump] has just done a great job. All the deregulation — from energy to all sorts of other things — across the board … it is really important to the prosperity of the U.S. economy.”

The American and Chinese economies are interdependent, assessed laffer.

“I think [Donald Trump] is trying to get a good trade deal where we have free trade globally for the United States,” stated Laffer. “I’m just hoping — keeping my fingers crossed, it’s still a work in progress – but I think he’s going to get it. China is the big country to get that deal with, because they’re so important to the United States and we’re so important to them. Both countries have a real obligation to make a great deal for both countries.”

Laffer went on, “Reducing barriers to trade [is important]. … Without China, there is no Walmart, and without Walmart, there is no lower class or middle class prosperity. We desperately need China and they desperately need us.”

Laffer continued, “If we reduce the trade barriers by getting rid of the stealing of intellectual property and all these things that have been going on that really should have been gotten rid of long ago, if we can get it to where we have truly honest free trade honoring laws and respecting individual countries, if we could get a true free trade deal, that would launch the U.S. way up into the atmosphere, and China, too.”

“When foreign countries put on trade barriers to U.S. products — which they do much more so than we do to their products — but those barriers that they put on hurt their countries just as much as they hurt us,” assessed Laffer. “There is no advantage to a foreign country putting on trade barriers to U.S. exports to that country. Unretaliated, that hurts their country and our country.”

Laffer explained, “Let’s imagine that Japan discovered a cure for Alzheimer’s, and let’s imagine that the U.S. discovers a cure for colon cancer, and let’s imagine Japan — true to form — prohibits us from selling a cure for colon cancer in Japan. Should we get even with them and not allow them to sell their cure for Alzheimer’s in the U.S.? I don’t think so. Free trade benefits both countries, and when any one country puts barriers on it — no matter what those barriers are — it hurts every country.”

Democrat and left-wing economic proposals would hurt prosperity, said Laffer.

“My dream has always been to make the poor richer, not to make rich people poor. Poor people need to be made better, not rich people pulled down. If, in fact we have a change of administration in 2021 — on January 20th, a new president — I am very concerned about the future of America, just the way I was when Barack Obama took office.”

Laffer added, “The great recession was caused by the prospects of Obama becoming president, and that is exactly what happened and had a horrible economy. So I think this election in 2020 is really, really, really important, and so far I don’t see a Democrat — now, I’ve voted Democrat half the time, I’m a Clinton Democrat, I’m a Kennedy Democrat, I’m a Reagan Republican, and I’m a Trump Republican — when I see this, I don’t see a Democrat who would be pro-growth and lead to more prosperity. I would be very worried about the U.S. economy if Trump were to be defeated and if Republicans didn’t pick up the House and the Senate.”

“[A Bernie Sanders presidency] would crush the economy,” concluded Laffer. “People don’t work to pay taxes. They work to get what they can after tax, and it’s that very personal incentive that motivates people to apply that extra little bit to make a little bit more, to develop a little bit more, to hire a few more. When you raise that tax rate, it has been demonstrably shown it causes real hardships in the economy. Bernie Sanders’ ideas are just plain wrong. I’d love to debate him on it anytime.”

Breitbart News Daily broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter @rkraychik.

Oh, My Gosh, Forgot It Was Earth Day —But To AL Gore And Other Misguided Souls — There Are Fewer Violent Tornadoes—Imagine That !

April 22, 2019 1:56 pm | AEIdeas

About the author, Mark Perry

Mark J. Perry is concurrently a scholar at AEI( American Enterprise Institute) and a professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus. He is best known as the creator and editor of the popular economics blog Carpe Diem. At AEI, Perry writes about economic and financial issues for American.com and the AEIdeas blog.

Inconvenient weather fact for Earth Day: the frequency of violent tornadoes fell to a record low in 2018

To help observe Earth Day 2019 today let me present an “inconvenient violent weather fact” displayed graphically above of the annual US tornado count from 1954 to 2018 based on data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information.

In 2018, there were only 12 tornadoes in the US that registered in the strong to violent categories of F3, F4 or F5 (all 2018 tornadoes were category F3), which was the fewest annual number of F3+ tornadoes in 65 years going back to 1954 when NOAA started reporting annual US tornado data, and below the previous record low violent tornado count of 15 F3+ tornadoes in 2017 (13 F3s and 2 F4s). In addition to setting a new record low, last year’s strong/violent tornado count of 12 was slightly more than one-fourth of the 44.74 average number of annual violent tornadoes since 1954. The trend line in the chart above shows that the frequency of strong/violent tornadoes in the US has been declining consistently since the 1950s. For example, the average number of annual F3+ tornadoes in the first half of the sample above was almost 56 compared to an average annual count of fewer than 34 tornadoes during the second half of the sample.

As James Taylor wrote in Forbes back in 2012 (five years before the record-setting lows in the last two years):

Tornadoes are becoming less frequent and less severe as our planet modestly warms. Yet global warming alarmists focus attention on the few tornadoes that still do occur and say that global warming is causing these increasingly rare tornadoes.

For example, here’s what Brad Johnson of the progressive activist organization Center for American Progress wrote in 2012 trying to link global warming to tornadoes (“Poisoned Weather: Global Warming Helped Fuel Killer Tornadoes“):

Carbon pollution from fossil fuels is poisoning the weather, helping drive the conditions that created the killer tornado outbreak last week across the heart of the United States. “It is irresponsible not to mention climate change,” climatologist Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research told ThinkProgress Green. “The environment in which all of these storms and the tornadoes are occurring has changed from human influences (global warming). As spring moves up a week or two, tornado season will start in February instead of waiting for April.”

Scientists have not found a measurable trend in tornado intensity and number. However, with greater greenhouse pollution scientists expect changes. “The number of days when conditions exist to form tornadoes is expected to increase” as the world warms, atmospheric scientist Robert Trapp told Reuters. NASA climate scientist Anthony D. Del Genio wrote in 2011: “As the climate warms, we might experience fewer storms overall, but more of the strongest storms.” They have identified the risk of longer tornado seasons with stronger thunderstorms.

Bottom Line:

The frequency of strong to violent tornadoes in the US has declined consistently and significantly over time, especially since the peak ten-year period between 1965 to 1974 when there were 709 F3+ tornadoes at an average rate of more than 70 per year. in contrast, over the most recent 10-year period from 2009 to 2018, there were only 311 F3+ tornadoes at an annual rate of only 31.

It’s also important to note that the decline in violent tornadoes has taken place despite the improved scientific ability over time to find, track, and measure tornadoes.

At least based on the evidence to date, I think we can dismiss the connection between “poisoned weather and tornadoes” suggested by Brad Johnson and the earlier predictions of Al Gore (and others) that global warming would cause tornadoes to increase in frequency and intensity. We can add Gore’s prediction to the list of many other spectacularly wrong predictions that have been made about the climate and environment since the time of the first Earth Day in 1970.