D.C. Lawmaker Admits Rothschilds Control White House & World Bank

 A Washington D.C. lawmaker has shown how the Rothschilds secretly control the American government and World Bank on behalf of the New World Order. The British and Jewish banking system, along with the German Banks. The Rothschild Family controls all the Central Banks known as the Fed, or Federal Reserve.

DC lawmaker blows whistle on how Rothschilds control White House and world bank

“There’s this whole concept with the Rothschilds — control the World Bank, as we all know — infusing dollars into major cities,” said White, according to video footage released after the official meeting earlier this month. “They really pretty much control the federal government, and now they have this concept called resilient cities in which they are using their money and influence into local cities.”

Thefreethoughtproject.com reports: According to the video, no one challenged the councilmen and his statements were accepted at face value. It was essentially a non-story until the Washington Post got ahold of it and ran a story calling his remarks “anti-semitic.”

Had White called them hateful names or bashed them on their religion and culture, this certainly could be the case. However, simply criticizing a group who wields massive influence over the world due to their centuries of control in the banking industry is hardly anti-semitic.

However, White provided fodder for the Post when he took to Facebook after his remarks and oddly suggested that the Rothschilds can control the weather too.

As the Post reports, White’s views didn’t draw public criticism until Sunday, when The Washington Post published an article about his recent Facebook posting that suggested a brief snowfall in the District was “climate control” by the Rothschilds, who “create natural disasters they can pay for to own the cities.”

It is most certainly outlandish to claim that the Rothschilds can control the weather. However, it is not anti-semitic and calling it so is irresponsible on behalf of the Post.

It is also important to point out that the Rothschild family is indeed one of the most influential groups of people in the world and this influence comes in spite of their documented criminal behavior. Their massive influence is also important to point out because most of it is wielded without holding any form of a public office.

Money is simply thrown around the world to maintain their power.

As the Free Thought Project has reported, the Rothschild banking dynasty is a family line that has been accused of pulling the political strings of many different governments through their control of various economic systems throughout the world. Historically, there is ample evidence to show that the family has used insider trading to bilk money from both private and public funds.

Towards the end of the Napoleonic Wars, in 1813, Nathan Mayer Rothschild saw Napoleon’s war efforts as a threat to his business practices and decided to step in to help defeat the French conqueror. He became the most important financier of the British war effort pouring the equivalent of $900 million dollars in today’s dollars in 1815 alone. The defeat of Napoleon, and subsequent ending of the Napoleonic Wars, which started in 1803 and raged throughout the continent for 12 years before finally coming to an end in 1815.

During the Battle of Waterloo in the Napoleonic wars, Nathan Rothschild was responsible for one of the oldest cases of “insider trading,” which led to the Rothschild family robbing a whole nation blind. When the battle of Waterloo took place in 1815, horse messengers were the fastest method of communicating information. The Rothschild’s took advantage of this by having their own spies on the frontlines of the battle that would then expedite the information to the family faster than the messengers used by the military.

When the British won the battle, Nathan Rothschild, was, of course, the first to know, and he immediately went to the stock exchange and started selling stocks while putting out the rumor that the French had won the war. This created a panic on the floor of the stock exchange and investors all over England began frantically selling their stocks. With the price of all stocks plummeting Rothschild was able to buy out the whole English market for a fraction of its cost. When word returned that the English had actually been victorious, the value of the market soared, and overnight Nathan Rothschild expanded his family’s wealth and cemented their position as one of the richest and most influential families in the world.

Although the Rothschild family now keeps a very low public profile, they still have significant business operations across a wide spectrum of sectors. While you may not find any single particular Rothschild on the Forbes’ most rich list, the family is estimated to control $1 trillion dollars in assets across the globe, thus having a strong voice across the geopolitical spectrum that many perceive as a hidden hand manipulating events silently from behind a veil of virtual secrecy and silence.

While White was way off with the weather manipulation ideas, the ideas of Rothschilds funding politically friendly allies to maintain their influence across the world is out in the open for all to see. And no, it doesn’t make anyone anti-semitic to point that out.

It is also important to note that the Rothschilds garner so much attention because of their elusive nature and their centuries of history. However, they are no different than the other mega-billionaires who throw their money and influence around to grant themselves special privileges like monopolies and legislation to weed out their competitors.

Despite the best efforts of Alex Jones and the like, these corporate owners of government cannot be nailed down to just a few old rich men. This is because the owners can be anyone.

The US political system and most political systems worldwide are set up in such a manner that they allow for anyone with enough money to steer policy that benefits them personally. Politicians are hardly particular when it comes to who’s throwing money at them, so ownership is constantly in a state of flux.

The controlled politicians, the rigged system, and the elite are not some vast conspiracy as much as they are a tendency of the state in general. As long as a system exists that allows government force to be bought and sold for the benefit and privilege of a few, these atrocities will continue and Rothschilds will maintain their lush lifestyles at the expense of freedom and the democratic process.

The money shoved into the pockets of politicians on behalf of special interest groups, aka bribery, has become so mainstream and widely accepted that no one even bats an eye at the billions doled out to their elected officials on behalf of lobbyists every year.

Republicans and Democrats alike sit back in their plush, taxpayer-funded offices in white marble buildings, rubbing elbows with elite businessmen who pay them to write laws that create unfair advantages for their industries.

In the extremely rare case that a politician resists this corruption and refuses to conform, they are ridiculed by fellow lawmakers, painted as kooks by the MSM, and their supporters labeled as radical nutjobs. One need only look at how the media and the political establishment treated Ron Paul to see proof of this claim.

Meanwhile, We The People argue over the various privileges granted to us and how much of our paychecks can be stolen by the almighty rulers on high.

Until we wake up to the fact that there are very few differences between politicians with a ‘D’ and politicians with an ‘R’ we will continue to see these “owners” make the decisions instead of the people.

see video:

http://yournewswire.com/dc-lawmaker-rothschilds-control-white-house...

Views: 16

Reply to This

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service