The Consent of the Governed- The Sunday Collage

The Declaration of Independence is a relatively simple and well written document which was signed by 56 men. There are a couple of opening paragraphs, a giant list of grievances, and then a closing paragraph right above their signatures. Here then, are the opening paragraphs. Please pay close attention to the second one.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Among other things, the Founders were upset that they had been ordered to pay (paltry by today's standards) 3% taxes by a King on a completely different continent. Taxation without representation.

So what representation do we have?

When your government ignores the will of the people and sets about the task of imposing monumental taxes and seizing better than 1/2 of all of your income- that isn't a reasonable tax- that is thievery.

That is not consent. Nobody has consented to that.

In America, a majority of us were against Obamacare. Not only did we fail to give our government consent, but they imposed this tax on us. Then they had it rubber stamped- as though the Supreme Court- was the final say on the matter.

The final say occurs when the people of America- the ones who are getting fleeced- have had enough. I am one of those people.

I am being governed by a golfing President mired in at least 5 scandals, an Attorney General who is clearly failing to do his job on multiple fronts, and a Congress bought and paid for by corporate interests- a Congress whose members offer no help (and then only to rich crony capitalists) help that is implied just so  long as you bring a large checkbook to help them get re-elected. Throw in an unelected, privately owned Federal Reserve Bank which refuses to be audited and which counterfeits our currency at will.... and voila!

That is our current governance.

I didn't consent to any of that. I want a President that represents "we the people" instead of special interests like health care insurers, bankers, or other corporate interests. An Attorney General who enforces the law EQUALLY. A Congress that is term limited, reformed, and who will work on behalf of the millions of us- the vast majority- who are not being represented at all. I want a national currency, issued by our government and limited in quantity and thus quality, and I want the Federal Reserve as it stands now-abolished.

Government never sits down and negotiates. It never thinks it has to. Government is the study of incremental ism, the slow erosion of individual freedoms whereby governments confiscate your wealth, your liberty, and your way of life. They do it bit by bit, slowly, so that nobody becomes immediately aware.When you finally realize that they have literally stolen and confiscated everything you possess it's often too late. I think we are pretty close to that now.

Our government doesn't negotiate. They arm themselves. Have you noticed all of the military police uniforms, military armament, M-16's or AR-15's, tactical vehicles and MRAPS? Governments don't always believe they have the consent of the governed- rather they think that is un neccessary. Instead, they believe they have the upper hand, the power, and the might to impose their will on you.

It has begun. They know what's coming. They are arming themselves and they are going to call on those police agencies they have armed. They are going to label dissenters as criminals like they have Edward Snowden. They have the capability to spy on everyone. They are going to confiscate every last bit of wealth that we have while trying desperately to hold on to their power because governments do not negotiate with the governed. Negotiations only occur after a great deal of bloodshed. The founders knew this. They knew when they signed that document that the King would view every one of them as traitors and show them no mercy.

They had courage back then. Or at least the ability to understand that the King really didn't give two shits about having the consent of the governed.

I don't think there is any better example of arbitrary and capricious government than the one we have now. It is interesting to watch this unfold, week after week. I am kind of proud of the fact that I never fell for the government's bribes. I didn't participate in SWAT teams- military style clothing- and I certainly wouldn't have taken or tried to use an MRAP. I was amazed at the amount of pressure my peers exerted on me to participate- they truly make you feel like an outsider when you don't- and they weren't afraid to call you various names. In the Treasure Valley- every city thinks they have to have their own SWAT team and MRAP. It is a horrific waste of taxpayer money because those services are seldom needed and they are duplicated everywhere.

One day all of that is going to be used against honorable- but fed up people. All the pieces are in place now. The government isn't going to negotiate. It isn't going to take responsibility for a 60 trillion dollar debt (all liabilities) or a health care system that is collapsing in front of us- which was never much more than a half assed attempt by the democrats to buy votes. I am actually a little worried about how our country is going to look 50 years from now.

I wonder how much more "consent" the "governed" can extend.  

Paul Craig Roberts Drinks the Ferguson Kool-Aid

Wow, what courage. Paul Craig Roberts gets into the act. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/08/21/ferguson-justice-american-police-state-paul-craig-roberts/

Paul Craig Roberts' site does not take comments. Lucky for him.

I have to tell you guys- as a retired cop- I am beyond weary of listening to armchair quarterbacks telling cops how to police and criticizing every police incident wherein someone gets shot. In order to do this- these writers have to make all kinds of wild ass assumptions because no facts have been established yet. They never let the facts get in the way of their opinions.

So there. I have told you that I am a retired cop and my agenda is predictable. I know something about policing and I support cops. Most importantly, I know something about getting both sides of a story and letting some facts get established before popping off at the mouth. Remember Obama and the beer summit?

Or how about all of those brainiacs who jumped to conclusions about Trayvon Martin?

People had no problem ever, telling me how to do my job. It was a fascinating thing to behold. Very often I had to bite my tongue, especially around politicians who always think they know everything. No other profession on the planet is subjected to the scrutiny of millions of experts- like policing is. Oddly enough, not once in my life have I ever told an engineer, a doctor, plumber, or roofer how to perform their jobs. 

What these writers are doing is simply spewing their own opinions about the state of American policing. It's a convenient fact that they have Michael Brown (unarmed) as a conduit- a necessary soapbox to stand on while you utter your opinions.

I don't think all cops are innocent but I have to tell you- the odds are enormously in their favor. Over the years I have reviewed several trial transcripts, read numerous investigations, talked to several cops who have shot people and I have this to report. I have never known a cop to be indicted after a shooting and I have probably spoken to 10 or 15 of them. I have never spoken to a cop who was happy or proud to have shot someone. This is not gladiator school. Most cops are very distraught post shooting and the shooting becomes a life altering event. The majority of cops quit within a year although that percentage is declining because of better post shooting counseling and therapy. In the old days, you just got a slap on the back and jumped back into the squad car after a day off. The judicial proceedings after an officer involved shooting are arduous and painful. Cops are not sociopaths and the vast majority of police applicants are given several forms of psychological testing to weed out those who are. That happens long before any shooting starts.

Here's the bottom line. People just hate being told what to do and forced to suffer the consequences if they don't. It's that simple and it has always been that simple. Very often- the only people who have the authority to tell you what to do are cops. And that's why people dislike them. Everything else is just rhetoric.

Look, I think Darren Wilson will probably not be indicted and the shooting will be ruled as justified. Why?  Because you are not entitled to attack a police officer or anyone else for that matter. Cops are not required to let some 6'3", 300 pound thug, beat you to a pulp or try to take your gun and shoot you with it. Armed or unarmed. People do a lot of really stupid things. Eighteen year old kids with undeveloped frontal lobes do more than their fair share of stupid things. Some don't survive. I don't think that would shock anyone. Here's the NY Post's version of events, slanted decidedly the opposite direction of Paul Craig Roberts. http://nypost.com/2014/08/19/witnesses-say-ferguson-teen-attacked-cop-before-shooting

Eighteen year old kids are not entitled to break into my house either. And maybe I won't shoot you- but then again if you rush me unarmed- I might have to take my chances then and there- undeveloped frontal lobe and all.

At the end of the day, the very best we can do is support the process. By that I mean we continue to subject would be police officer applicants to polygraphs, background investigations, psychological testing, urine testing, and everything else to weed out potential bad eggs. Most places do a pretty good job of that. Police officers get a tremendous amount of training in use of force. Again, law enforcement agencies do a pretty good job of training officers in lethal and non lethal weapons. But lastly, we have to support a judicial process that reviews all of the facts including eye witness accounts, forensic evidence, autopsies, and toxicology. Thankfully, they do not rely on the opinions of bloggers like Mr. Roberts. Those facts get presented to a jury of non biased people to mull over and determine if the officer acted appropriately. Do the survivors get the benefit of the doubt? Probably. We have a system that is based in part on giving the benefit of the doubt to the accused.

Was Michael Brown a victim or a volunteer? Our judicial review system will decide.

It's not a perfect system- but it's the best that's ever been devised. Let the process work. We once had a rule of law in this country wherein people were innocent until proven guilty. Let's see if it still works. In the meantime, here's my sage advice.

If you don't enjoy greeting cops on the roadside, try to obey our laws. If you cannot, try to restrain yourself from beating up the cop who's job it is to enforce the law. Oddly enough, if you obey our laws and refrain from beating up cops- you may not find yourself in handcuffs or on the business end of a handgun.

Here's a letter that took a lot of guts to write. From a sitting Police Chief. Police Chiefs everywhere are remarkably silent on the Ferguson fiasco. Utter an opinion and lose your job. That's how the system works. http://www.lawofficer.com/article/lifeline-training/open-letter-captain-ronald-s-j

The Buzzards Are Circling- The Sunday Collage

This week, I'd like to talk a little bit about the Ferguson, Missouri riots/fiasco. I think I can shed a little light on this. The whole thing has left me looking like this dude sans the headgear and lipstick.


I'd like to start with a lack of judgement or what happens when good judgement is not employed in my meandering, make a short story really long, self deprecating, sort of way.

In rural America, bar fights are common. Bar fights are almost always over before the cops can arrive. When seconds count, cops are minutes away. That sort of thing. So it was, I caught this bar fight call many moons ago. By the time I arrived, whatever fight had taken place was over. The fight involved one local smart ass and three very young and buff, Air Force guys. In those days, we couldn't arrest anyone for that type of misdemeanor (battery) unless someone wanted to press charges- which almost never happens.

Just before I left the bar that evening, I did the smart ass a favor. I told him he should probably leave the bar because once I was gone, I had an eery feeling that the fly boys were going to extract some revenge. He refused to go. In fact, he told me it was a free country and he didn't have to do shit. Undoubtedly, this was the same sound judgement that our local hero had employed earlier that evening which led to my being called.

Twenty minutes later, I helped the ambulance crew quiet down our bloody and beat up smart ass and take him to the hospital while he was strapped to the gurney. I noted that he was not proclaiming anything about it being a free country. Worse yet, the bartender told me it was our local smart ass who had first confronted and then taken a swing at one of the airmen after I had left. That didn't work out too well for Chuck Norris- who got his ass kicked. Oddly, the young airmen didn't stick around waiting for me to return.

As a lawman I often said "The only way to get into a bar fight is to do your drinking in a bar." This type of profound and insightful thinking was something I picked up the hard way. In fact, I had a wake up call of my own once and fortunately, I decided that maybe getting into bar fights was not going to help my career along.

I once squared off with a cowboy named "Shellico" in a bar about 50 miles east of Moonbat Valley in the little town of Mackay. Shellico was one of these guys who thought he was tough and he was a big guy- about my size. He was interlocking fingers with other bar patrons and then forcing them to their knees. Loser bought drinks. He had whipped a few people, much smaller than him, before yours truly decided to have a go. Now I'd been lifting weights for years and I was pretty sure old Shellico was about to scrub the floor with his knees but as life would have it- that's not quite how things turned out.

Once we interlocked fingers, Shellico immediately had the upper hand. Very quickly he was trying to drive me to my knees. Unfortunately for him, I was just as big as he was and pretty strong. So Shellico's plan B was to try and drive me out the front door of the bar. This worked for a few seconds, up until the part where I wedged myself up against the door frame and I felt Shellico's strength and grip waning. We were having quite the battle. The next thing that happened was that I began driving Shellico all the way back through the bar and across the dance floor and rather than bring him to his knees- I just sort of threw him through a pile of stacked tables and chairs. He landed on his ass and he came up swinging. He was pissed. About that time, the bartender- a very large woman- got between the two of us with a sawed off pool cue and told Shellico to hit the bricks. She bought me a drink.

My father was in the bar with an old friend of his- watching all of this drama unfold. The old man turned to my father and asked, "Aren't you gonna help your kid?" My father said,"'No, not unless there is trouble." Those were the good ol days.

I wished I could tell you that I was something less than 22, that I wasn't half drunk, that I didn't pick that fight, or that I wasn't a new cop at the time. I plead guilty on all four counts. Nobody ever said ya know Brian- you have excellent judgment when you've been drinking. However, I did learn something that day. I quit doing my drinking in bars, and oddly, I have not been in a bar fight since 1983. Well, unless I was called to one.  

The point of my telling you about all of this personal stupidity has to do with judgement. I haven't always employed the best judgement and I can damn sure tell you that drinking never enhanced the judgement I did have. So it was, I was pretty much a late bloomer. Somewhere around my 30th birthday, I finally began to develop what might loosely be called- a trace of intelligence.

Which brings  me to the Michael Brown shooting. Here's a good link to give you the chronology of events in case you are unfamiliar with what happened. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/michael-brown-ferguson-missouri-timeline/14051827/

To sum it up- there has been a week long, shit ton of bad judgment going on which stretches all the way up to the head of our executive branch- a guy who can't even string together a couple of useful comments while playing golf at Martha's Vineyard. http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/07/23/another-16-day-vacation-in-marthas-vineyard-rumors-of-lavish-house-shopping-it-can-only-be-the-obamas-133543

Normally, this is how it works in the world outside of Ferguson, Missouri.

A suspect, armed or unarmed, gets shot or killed. The officer(s) involved are sequestered away or simply placed on paid leave with their families after reports have been filed. Their names are not disclosed for a pre-determined length of time. That type of policy has been developed and is in place well in advance of any incident in most places. That way, once an incident occurs, everyone knows by policy what will take place. Another agency, or perhaps even a team of investigators assembled by a local prosecutor or state attorney general's office, takes over with the hope that an unbiased investigation will take place.

Officer involved shootings are incredibly manpower intensive. Done right, they can easily take twenty to thirty investigators and hundreds of man hours. That's why you must develop the protocol and have it in place prior to an incident because it's going to involve a lot of people under a lot of stress and they are going to need leadership.

After the investigation is complete, evidence is reviewed and eventually submitted for a series of judicial proceedings including inquests, inquiries, and grand juries. The judicial system essentially determines the course of events.

In other words, there is a process for determining guilt or innocence. We call that the rule of law.

The rule of law breaks down when nobody protects the integrity of the process. In other words, once the shooting occurs, the protocol must be followed. The Police Chief or designee, must inform the public how that process works and how you will proceed and you must explain it. You can't simply shoot somebody, armed or otherwise, and then conduct your own investigation or simply neglect to inform the citizens (you work for) that you have a policy or explain how it works.

Without protocol or policy, chaos ensues. There is something small cities should all learn here.

In the Ferguson case- none of this happened. In fact, I am not sure they even have any protocol because nobody ever mentions it. The protocol would have prevented the release of surveillance photos. However, days after the shooting-the police department begins to release pictures of the deceased who apparently was stealing boxes of cigars from a store without ever addressing an officer involved shooting policy or what they were preparing to do. Unbelievable, except that- seeing is believing.

To be honest, I didn't follow any of the Ferguson events in any of our corporate propaganda TV outlets so I might have missed something significant.

Ok, so let's say a complete lack of policy or protocol occurred and the Chief quite frankly didn't know what to do. Maybe the city was simply that unprepared. Then the riots begin. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/15/ferguson-police-shooting/14118187/

Rioters have no excuse for plundering and looting cities. That is simply lawless behavior. Pretty soon, another guy gets shot- this one with a gun by a county police officer and then the state of Missouri steps in and takes over this mess with the state police.

So if all of this bad judgement and poor performance wasn't bad enough- President Obama vacationing in Martha's Vineyard had this to say.

EDGARTOWN, Mass. (AP/ABC News) - President Barack Obama said Thursday that there is no excuse for the use of excessive force by police in the tense aftermath of the shooting death of an unarmed black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri, and no excuse for violence against the police.

This is what the "smartest guy in the room" has to say? Why didn't Obama just tell the rioters to go ahead and loot some more- maybe kill a few more people?

You would think that this alleged Professor, Constitutional scholar, lawyer, and President of ours might say something about the rule of law, an impartial investigation, and allowing the judicial process to handle this incident just like it does the thousands of other shooting cases.

No, he doesn't say that at all. Instead, he says some worthless, presumptuous shit just like he did when police officer James Crowley arrested that black homeowner and Harvard professor. Remember that incident? The one where Obama concluded that the cops were out of line prior to learning any facts about the incident at all? To save face, Obama had the "beer summit." http://www.boston.com/news/politics/gallery/073009_beer_summit_obama/

Often, I have noted that every major incident requires a series of bad steps and poor judgment. It's nothing other than sheer speculation at this point to opine about what might have been prevented.

I kind of understand not having a policy in place- or overlooking one- or failing to implement it. In small town America, shootings happen so infrequently that quite frankly I know Chiefs who think it will never happen to them. We call that the normalcy bias. 

Failing to have a policy or not implementing one and/or not disclosing it to the public- might have led to the riots as the public might have thought there would be a cover up. However, I come from the school of thought that says rioting, grand theft, arson, and malicious injury is inexcusable. You simply do not have the right to justify your criminal behavior.

And I expect that the leader of the free world, a judicial officer himself in charge of that branch of government which controls all of law enforcement and the military- might have something more useful to say than "there is no excuse for excessive force" as though somehow the facts were already in. You'd think the beer summit might have taught our knucklehead in chief a lesson or two about waiting for the facts to be gathered before uttering your opinions. Nope. Same as it ever was.

I can't help but think the buzzards are already circling this administration. I don't even think Obama is remotely interested in his job anymore and at this point, he might as well phone it in while playing golf and vacationing. Wait until the market crashes or the new Obamacare premiums go supernova. We may have to pry this guy out of a White House closet. Really.

The Story Of Butte America

Kickstarter project clip, 4 minutes long. 10 views when posted.

"The shame based fear of being ordinary." - The Sunday Collage

This is actually the third piece I have written this week. I'd didn't like the other two.

Each week I consume a couple hundred articles, about 75 blogs, and I usually have a book or two on the side. Mostly what I read online is the same regurgitated crap.   

What I truly yearn for is something original. I am so tired of reading the same old schtick, week in- week out. And I figure if I'm tired of the same old schtick- maybe you are too.

This week I began reading a book called "Daring Greatly." I wasn't even 25 pages in and I realized this author had something original to say. Among all of the interesting speculation she offered regarding the growing narcissism in this country, the author mentioned "the shame based fear of being ordinary."

That phrase stopped me dead in my tracks. Like a time machine it took me back to 2008.

Imagine for a moment that you are living in a culture which measures your usefulness as a human being based primarily on how much wealth you can accumulate. That's how we measure your worth. Oh sure, credentials and a little power and prestige certainly help. But the way we measure self worth in America is done with money. That's how we keep score.

Your parents, your relatives and friends, and your adversaries will all measure and judge you the same way. You'll return the favor because you've been taught the same rules.

So what happens to those millions upon millions of people who never measure up to the expectations of their family, friends, and culture or worse yet- fail to live up to their very own expectations? 

Do those  people who see themselves as failures- do they ever get right? Do they ever get happy?

Yes, I think it's possible given the right set of circumstances.

In 2008 I met a man with two degrees, one a masters degree in engineering. He was a tree trimmer in New Orleans. The night I met him he said he had a promising future behind him. He was no longer bound by the shame of being ordinary. In fact, he loved being ordinary. But in order to celebrate and love being ordinary, he had to set aside all of the faulty beliefs that had been instilled in him- seemingly from birth. That is a whole lot of cultural programming and guilt to shit can. Not a small job.

Then you must set about the task of doing whatever makes you happy and ignoring what others might think of that. Indeed, what others think of you is none of your business anyway.

Years ago when I became a cop, I had all the right reasons. I wanted to help people. I discovered some interesting stuff. Nobody seemed to care. When you worked your ass off, or nearly got killed- nobody cared. Years later when I became the Chief, I saved every dime I could- often returning at least 6 figures back to the city every fiscal year. Nobody cares. In fact, other chiefs and department heads spent every last penny, every year. We all got treated the same. Burn through what they give you- they'll give you more tax money next year.

So doing the right thing within a completely apathetic society is probably over rated. I am going to tell you right now that I know some of those old department heads and they are retired now. They do not sit around and feel guilty for having spent every penny they were authorized to spend.

The point being is that you are the only one responsible for your happiness. You can only do those things which make you happy. You are an idiot to think that anyone else is responsible for your happiness or that others must rely on your for their happiness. That is simply foolish.

Having learned all of those things in the school of hard knocks- meant I no longer had to commit to a body of work wherein nobody really cares how you perform as long as it is simply adequate. Having recognized that harsh reality- I was able to focus on my own happiness rather than trying (and failing) to make others happy. That is the lesson of 25 years of intimate law enforcement.

Today, being ordinary feels pretty damn good. I don't secretly covet others and their possessions. I don't keep score that way. I am not interested in a bigger, nicer car. I like my little bungalow and my Harley. I enjoy my ordinary every day life, my afternoon naps, and the ability to do whatever pleases me without someone demanding that I do more and instilling a little guilt in me.

You know what's different today? Instead of forever wanting, I am grateful for what I have. I simply don't use the old cultural scoring system anymore. It never liked it anyway.

I'm anxious to get back to this book.The next section is about fear and scarcity and how we convince ourselves into thinking we never have enough. Does that sound familiar? "Daring Greatly" by Brene Brown, ISBN 978-1-592-40733-0. 

Jersey Cop: Obama Doesn't Obey the Constitution, So We Don't Have To Either

The Criminal Fraud and Theft Commission or... CFTC for Short

Free markets? This one comes under the heading, "Putting frosting on shit and calling it cake." Remember Edward Snowden?

The Commodity Futures and Trading Commission was designed to prevent market manipulation. Quite simply, that mission has become so corrupted over the years that the CFTC could be dismantled tomorrow and I doubt anyone would notice. Markets might actually improve. Secondly, we can have no true price discovery of commodities nor can we really even have an intelligent conversation about manipulated pricing because it's based on a manipulated,  "garbage in- garbage out" data stream.

The Commodity Futures and Trading Commission oddly came about in 1974, three short years after President Nixon told France that they could no longer exchange American dollars for physical gold. In so doing, Nixon put the final nail in the coffin for the world's reserve currency. Nixon then cut a deal with Saudi Arabia and thus OPEC, to price oil in dollars- a move which guaranteed that the rest of the world would have to trade their currencies in for our dollars to buy oil. This was a brilliant move. Everyone would need dollars to buy oil. That move has greatly lengthened the lifespan of the dollar and ushered in the era of the petro dollar. That era continues to this day. Barely.

Thus the CFTC was created to regulate futures markets. Or was it? Personally, I think it was a paper tiger- a commission billed as being a regulatory body to make people feel safer- but in actuality the CFTC has become an interferent presence which allows banks and other trading desks to manipulate markets and thus profit from them. JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs have actually gone years without suffering a single day's trading losses. It is mathematically impossible to never suffer a loss while trading every day- the only way you can perform that miracle is if you have been given a license to steal.

Please consider the following statement that was issued after the 2008 banking collapse. Up until that point- nobody had ever heard of such a thing.

Since 1991 the CFTC has given secret exemptions from hedging regulations to 19 major banks and market participants, allowing them to accumulate essentially unlimited positions.^[21] These exemptions came to light only after the 2008 financial crisis had unfolded and Congress requested information on market participants. A trader or bank granted an exemption as a bona-fide hedger can affect the price of a commodity without being either its producer or consumer.^[22

Is it just me or does that sound as though the CFTC in fact- has no regulatory mission at all? It is simply an illusory mechanism which presents itself as some highly regarded regulatory and oversight body (governed by 4 lawyers and 1 banker, who are all from the banking industry) when in fact- it does neither. It's real mission is to run interference while allowing  big trading desks to steal with impunity.

While researching this piece over the weekend, I stumbled onto this...a well researched post regarding the criminal activity that the CFTC engages in while pretending to be regulators. http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/05/17/cftc-caves-to-wall-street-will-continue-to-allow-cartel-to-control-derivatives-market/

I spent all day trying to find the 19 major banks which have been given licenses to steal but in fact, they are not disclosed anywhere. I think it's a pretty safe bet that banks like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, and Bank of America are all part of the scam.

Yesterday, I read a piece on Zerohedge http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-04/another-settlement-%E2%80%93-jp-morgan-receives-slap-wrist-despite-years-fraudulent-cftc-dat about a fine that JP Morgan had to pay for giving out fraudulent commitment of traders or COT numbers every week. Today I noted a blog on Dave's site wherein he went into some detail about what a fraudulent scam the COT report is and the fact that all data from all banks is funneled to JPM. Apparently, JP Morgan manipulates that data at will and has been doing so since 2012 or about the time gold started to tank. Here's Dave's piece. http://investmentresearchdynamics.com/the-cftc-commitment-of-trader-data-is-rigged-after-all/#comments

It's one giant, fraudulent, mess and between the CFTC, a banana republic presidential administration which includes that buffoon Eric Holder- it's as though the rule of law has been suspended at least through 2016.

I don't expect anything to happen until this administration gets shown the door. I think the full scope of criminal intent will eventually be discovered sometime after Obama and his minions can no longer obstruct an investigation.

I can't even begin to imagine how many people must know about all of the criminal activity taking place and I'll be damned if anyone comes forward.

They must have heard about Edward Snowden.