Several FBI 'Moles' And Why This Is Important To Markets

The media is likely to jump to incorrect conclusions about what has been going on, and what is currently going on inside the Trump White House, as soon as more names are revealed.

I have already specified from a long long time ago that the UK's Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) was involved, and I mean AT THE TOP because of strategy and policy THAT THEY ARE MAKING -  I talked about Sir Alex Allan and mentioned ex-London Met Deputy John Yates; but these names were discussed here only because they already had profile to do with 'dubious' activities and events (the Leveson Media Illegal Wire-Tapping Inquiry, and illegal listening-in to various South East Asian heads of state). They are not the main strategic thinkers at all.

I mean I've known for a long while who ALL the figures are and I could name names that are unlikely to EVER appear in the public media!

As far as the actual FBI 'moles' inside the Trump Campaign are concerned, I will add the name of Alex Nix to the shortlist of those already 'outed' because as soon as his name becomes more obvious in the wider MSM, then it will be easy for people to jump to completely incorrect conclusions: Robert Mercer, who paid Nix whilst he was running Cambridge Analytica, is ONE OF THE US MILINT ASSETS WHO EXPOSED NIX AND HALPER! Mercer is a 'good guy.'

This thing is so far-reaching and has so many highly-placed and really big-time power-brokers involved and with such enormous ambit of nefarious spider-webbing, that once the White House turns up the heat on the conspirators - there is likely to be extreme reactions.

Najib Razak

I mean, even as we speak, can you imagine what would be the consequence, if Najib Razak spilled the beans on all those previously 'connected folk' in NYC and Washington and London who arranged for him to 'disappear' the billions of dollars he was given to shut up about the missing airliner scam...

We are talking about people with HUGE egos getting caught and stuck into the spotlight - and you can hardly see a bigger ego than to witness the comments of Sir Richard Dearlove, actually 'opine' in his expert view, that 'there is some substance to what is in his friend/colleague Christopher Steele's 'dossier.'

The reality is there is no substance at all - so why on earth would someone with as significant a past CV as Dearlove, ex-Chief of MI6, say something as obviously false and tendentious and aggressively anti an elected sitting US President, as what he did say, and in the way he said it? It was a lie, it was false, and he knew it to be false when the words were carefully sent out of his lips after the carefully pre-planned question was put by the BBC interviewer.

No. It's not just 'FBI moles' that are the important fact here - it is who is ultimately behind them, and what was their agenda. And frankly, how did they even know Donald Trump was such a real threat to beat the utterly corrupted Hillary Clinton from such a long a way off from the eventual election? 

Things are never really what they look like, are they. It was never Russian spies and operatives who arranged the election for Trump - it was somebody that made sure that INTERFERENCE FROM MI6(!) and Dearlove and Halper and Nix and the rest (there are a lot of others) was curtailed.

I keep saying this, but I have a document from a Russian source which I will release as soon as the Mueller nonsense is brought to a complete and formal halt. And when you read it it will make your head spin. 

There is no prospect US markets can fall on the strength of current economic data - but if London and what is behind that crowd go nuts and turn nasty because of being found out and pinned to the wall under the spotlight so to speak, they might try to Crash everything out of anger. Personally, if I were looking at it, I would seek to confiscate all the capital of anyone who was involved in subverting the US FBI to spy on US citizens without cause.

Now wouldn't that be amusing.

Might even make Assange chuckle.

As The FBI 'Mole' Is Revealed

Well don't ever forget I told you first.

The 'extract' from the Russian book I posted as a free downloadable PDF SPECIFIED London Secret Service involvement in all of this.

There is a ton of literally 'fake news' or, more properly, deliberate propaganda being pushed on-line and even in the conventional print media at the moment, trying to so-called 'walk back' the Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel's revelation regarding a possible FBI 'mole' inside the Trump Campaign.

The thrust of this 'walk-back' is that there were 'unwitting sources' within the Trump Campaign, and those being named are of course Carter Page, but also George Papadopoulos - but this is simply not the case at all. There definitely was a real mole, at least one, and that person is 'being rumored across the Web' as Stefan Halper, an associate of the one-time Chief of the UK Secret Intelligence Service aka 'MI6' - Sir Richard Dearlove.

To some extent I am personally extremely gratified that being one of those who have kept the embargo rule to do with the basis document from which the extract I posted was taken, Robert Mueller has found himself floundering somewhat for want of 'the fire.' Or maybe 'the light...'

Soon enough Mueller will be completely shut down.

And then I will freely reveal the document in question. The assistance this kind of document can be to you, or to someone who cares about what they are doing, is that through the lens it provides you, your enemies will be revealed. And when you know your enemy and where they go hunting, you can stay away from that part of the forest, especially once the fight-to-the-death begins between the top-line predators. Which it will. In fact, it's already begun, has it not?!

Blend 17

And then comes the time when you are able to purchase your own personal 'first Rolls Royce.'

Suddenly you see that the truly rich, the truly self-reliant and self-made - are not merely unique people but they are also very often alone, or at least kind of 'lonely.'

It's all just for you. The rich lifestyle is a lonely experience;
basically, it's just you.

You will observe how selfish the experience of buying and owning your first Rolls Royce really is. I mean, sure, there are a lot of short videos on YouTube that appear to show people who own them, or things similar to them, but there is something missing from the statements being made in all those videos about the actual experience, which is namely, the sheer personal and very lonely nature of the experience. You can't really share the actual experience itself in the sense of the commonality of feelings except to someone else who is doing the same thing at the exact same time...

And you know, there are a lot of people who wouldn't even like or at all appreciate owning the thing in the first place. My wife's aunt forced her husband to send back the Rolls he bought because she thought it was far too pretentious a thing to own - now bearing in mind this is a fellow who owns an authentic Da Vinci or Michelangelo painting...! ...I'm never sure which and I don't ask. 

Who can share this experience, this frustration and inability to explain the feelings involved to the rest of society which simply just does not understand?

Pure luxury and self-indulgence at these supreme levels re things only you and I fully comprehend - let me show 'us:'

Yesterday, arriving somewhat late to 'the party' to do with it, I opened a small glass jar of Blend 17. I got it at a deep discount of retail price '99 cents' from another multi multi millionaire friend-of-mine, Tony Galati, at his huge market in Wanneroo - 'the Spud Shed.' 

It's got this ultra premium dusky rose/white gold-and-black packaging around it, but the actual container itself is in all other respects the same as the normal glass jar of Vegemite.

Now in the first place, you have to be one of the tiny global minority of people who actually love this item - the usual way of imbibing it being on toast slathered with melting golden, real, full-salted butter.

What an amazing, unique luxury sensation! It's like molten... molten... molten... black liquid silk enriched with many mysterious strange vitamins, and ...salt.

He he he he he ha ha ha ha haaaaaargh! No one else will ever understand; 'except me and thee, and I'm not even certain about thee.'

La Plenitude

Here is some Australian music for you:

Well, actually, it is a collaborative effort between the lyricist and (American) singer, and the musical arranger and composer who goes by the commercial name of 'Elypsis' (happens to be a young Australian fellow).

Any American-Australian cultural link-up has the chance of some quite harmonic characteristics: both places are departures from the squandered British Empire, remnants of the types of people and personalities from that modern culture, mixed up with the very ancient and ineffable features of indigenous cultures (Aboriginal in one case, and American Indian in the other). I don't think the end results are 'all mixed up,' but rather they do find unique ways of blending the very old with the recent.

And of course, when we speak of British, we speak of Europe too; of 'Roman Civilization...'

'Plenitude' is the French expression used these days among the Champagne cognoscenti, to describe the three waves of 'fullness' in the aging of Champagne wine - I mean I would personally definitely use the same word for something like the mighty Penfolds Grange (a red wine), which also goes through these phases where the wine is said to be 'closed' and doesn't completely render its fullness of flavor potential.

'P2' - a second plenitude Dom Perignon (about 14 years old)

And I think we might do well to consider cultures such as the American, and the Australian, in a similar light to do with times and phases: we are, in my estimation, at the very beginning of a great Second Age of the post-British Empire 'modern' culture. 

On the one hand, living as an intellectual inside either of the American or the Australian culture is a highly isolated thing - there is a total lack of intelligence and thoughtfulness in both places, among the presumed 'leading edges' of society. There were early shoots in Australia during the time of Don Dunstan and Gough Whitlam and these were vigorously and quickly destroyed by both Left and Right sides of the political spectrum.

Where the 'destroyers' got things wrong - which they inevitably always do when it comes to these huge questions of great historic Epochs, really - is that they never themselves understood or fully grasped what the underlying economics of their cultures were all about. As indeed the modern Chinese will now also soon discover, that they too, are lacking in fundamental wisdom about economics.

And you can see this in recent idiotic remarks by people like Warren Buffet - who for years and years I told everyone I knew, was always but only living on the wisdom donated him by his early mentor, the great Benjamin Graham. Buffett recently called Bitcoins 'rat poison to the tenth power squared...' Or something like that.

In the modern world you have to specialize
in intellectual isolationism

This is just resentment speaking, it's not intelligence. And let me be the first person you ever heard say that Buffett is not now nor was he ever, quite the brilliant genius that everyone else makes him out to be...

The Bitcoin is unquestionably, at least it is in my mind anyway, because of its characteristic revolutionary, walk-away-from-tradition, very Australian vibe - the invention and creation, as indeed the current mythology is - of an Australian, some guy who called himself 'Satoshi' and who has disappeared off the planet. More or less.

The trouble with all those who want to decry digital cryptocurrency is that they fail to examine that it is functioning as money in the most ancient traditional way there is: namely, people use it in accordance with the obtaining technology of the day. And the obtaining technology is not paper, nor roads, nor buildings - it is electronics and iPhones and other similar gadgets.

Spears, boomerangs, woomeras - mollusk shell and paper-bark money. Buildings and vaults -  gold bricks and piles of paper.

iPhones and USB vaults - digital transaction tokens. Period. Bank it. It ain't happening any other way, sorry Warren. All money is rat poison, anyway; that's one of its standard definitions. Warren Buffett is an idiot. It's a waste of time listening to people like him - he's fixated about himself and about the past, which has moved by and gone now. Is he still rich? It simply doesn't matter. He will never be wealthy in tomorrow's world. He will be a constant loser, if he indeed even lives on for a few more years.

For My Friend Bill

I have plowed, desperately, around and around the internet, to find a pic somewhere, of the absolutely correct formation of the tuxedo protocol actually on someone.

There are one or two - not more than that - photographs which are indistinct in key sections, and which could possibly show someone wearing a tuxedo correctly, or, that is to say, the absolutely totally correct form of this particular attire; but as I say, these photos are indistinct and may not in reality be the real thing. Samuel L. Jackson has a photo that is perfect as long as one concedes those areas that are not distinct in the pic itself. But otherwise, his tie, his lack of collar gap, and a range of other elements, are all perfect.

Completely perfect tuxedo style

And this is quite at a distance from what has become commonplace now.

Not even Connery's Bond ever fully complied with tuxedo etiquette at its absolute peak of ordinary formal tradition. His beautiful white jacket iteration is totally acceptable but it is a form of 'sea rig' evening dress, meant for hotter climates, and not exactly a standard tuxedo.

If you ever consulted those 'style guides' you will come across this kind of phrase: 'usually there are no side-pockets but if you have them...' What is this 'but if you...' thing all the time? ...How about just don't.

And so, rather surprisingly, you could think, the one person who carried it off as close to complete perfection as is required by the etiquette, was Pierce Brosnan!

You like this, Billy, Billy, Billy-Baru...?
(Paraphrasing Ted Knight in 'Caddyshack').

He wears the correct attire, of: off-white or ice-white shirt with placket-covered buttons, no side pockets on the jacket, no vents, peak lapels, grosgrain SQUARE EDGED bow-tie, proper french cuffs, jacket single-buttoned in front. And on one occasion he wore the birds-eye buttoned shirt version. One stripe 'galon' down the sides of the trousers. Black patent pumps. 

All correct. 

Nothing else is 'correct.'

And there are significant reasons why someone of genuine breeding and class must adhere to the virtues of the absolutely conventional, strict traditional format, for wearing a tuxedo.

...I have to run along in a second to go to a show in the city, and so, I shall pick this all up after a few hours, and revisit things and complete this little post. For now, remember the old adage. You know, any old adage.

: )
  
Okay anyway, so now I'm back...

So what's the point of 'tuxedo etiquette?' The tuxedo was invented by Griswold Lorillard - now don't let anyone pretend things are otherwise! The story they trot out now about James Potter is a fabrication designed to cover up a social indiscretion, which we cannot go into here - and even though I have made a habit recently of committing the crime of revealing state secrets, I shall stop at revealing the promiscuous incidents to do with, or the habits of, members of authentic society. Anyway, Potter's ex-wife Cora Brown, became a famous actress who played the Comtesse De Winter on stage in The Three Musketeers.

The Lorillards were not only moguls of tobacco, but the younger Lorillard brothers were among the two or three really large tea merchants in the United States at the time, owning at least 40 ships at sea transporting tea. Consequently, the Lorillards were personally known to one of my own ancestors, a certainly particular lady, who owned the largest, and the fastest clippers ever to sail; ever. Her half-sister was the very famous Princesse de Caraman Chimay, Clara Ward.

A gown by Worth, owned by the sister of Clara Ward

Now there is a great secret about tuxedo etiquette, and no amount of purchasing of mansions on Lake Como next to the actor George Clooney, will ever give one access to such inner knowledge. 

So yes you can fiddle around with exact specifications for tuxedo etiquette, but don't do it.
  
Tuxedos are not about conformity or conservatism at all - after all, they were a departure from the standards of the day when they were first shown. And the fact that we maintain the exact same specifications to correctly wear (Elizabeth Barrett Browning split infinitives often, so shall I) tuxedos even now, has nothing to do with conformity or having a conservative mentality necessarily.

You can go surfing all you like, disporting your buff torso to all the eligible ladies to your heart's content. And they say that attending a British Public School attaches an automatic brand of status and supposed class to a young person. But this is the very soul and meaning of the nouveau riche -  for neither are these people from actual aristocratic society when there really was such a thing in Great Britain, nor are they honest about the sources of what appears to be 'their money' now, and certainly, these are the strata who have absolutely no clue at all about why men of genuine substance and worth stick to exact specifications when donning the attire known as 'the tuxedo.' Sven Raphael Schneider the style guru goes around the bull's eye closest of anyone, but even he refrains from publicly going deeply into the real lore of it.