Friday, November 4, 2016

Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification



Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification 
  http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php  
97
97 Parties have ratified of 197 Parties to the Convention
On 5 October 2016, the threshold for entry into force of the Paris Agreement was achieved. The Paris Agreement entered into force on 4 November 2016. The first session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA1) will take place in Marrakech in conjunction with COP 22 and CMP 12. More information available soon.

The Paris Agreement pdf-icon entered into force on 4 November 2016, thirty days after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 % of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Depositary.

The list below contains the latest information concerning dates of signature and receipt of instruments of ratification by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, as Depositary of the Kyoto Protocol. The dates in the third column are those of the receipt of the instrument of ratification, acceptance (A) or approval (AA).

Authoritative information on the status of the Paris Agreement, including information on signatories to the Agreement, ratification and entry into force, is provided by the Depositary, through the United Nations Treaty Collection website, which can be accessed here, and the Depositary Notifications which are available here.

Background information related to the ratification, acceptance, approval or accession of the Paris Agremeent, as well as its entry into force can be found here.


Paris Agreement
  Paris, 12 December 2015


Entry into force: 4 November 2016

Status: Signatories: 193. Parties: 97

Note: The Paris Agreement was adopted on 12 December 2015 at the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015. In accordance with its article 20, the Agreement shall be open for signature at the United Nations Headquarters in New York from 22 April 2016 until 21 April 2017 by States and regional economic integration organizations that are Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Participant Signature Ratification
Acceptance (A)
Approval (AA)
AFGHANISTAN 22 Apr 2016

ALBANIA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
ALGERIA 22 Apr 2016 20 Oct 2016
ANDORRA 22 Apr 2016

ANGOLA 22 Apr 2016

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
ARGENTINA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
ARMENIA 20 Sep 2016

AUSTRALIA 22 Apr 2016

AUSTRIA 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
AZERBAIJAN 22 Apr 2016

BAHAMAS 22 Apr 2016 22 Aug 2016
BAHRAIN 22 Apr 2016

BANGLADESH 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
BARBADOS 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
BELARUS 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016 A
BELGIUM* 22 Apr 2016

BELIZE 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
BENIN 22 Apr 2016 31 Oct 2016
BHUTAN 22 Apr 2016

BOLIVIA (PLURINATIONAL  STATE OF) 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 22 Apr 2016

BOTSWANA 22 Apr 2016

BRAZIL 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
BRUNEI DARUSSALAM 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
BULGARIA 22 Apr 2016

BURKINA FASO 22 Apr 2016

BURUNDI 22 Apr 2016

CABO VERDE 22 Apr 2016

CAMBODIA 22 Apr 2016

CAMEROON 22 Apr 2016 29 Jul 2016
CANADA 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC 22 Apr 2016 11 Oct 2016
CHAD 22 Apr 2016

CHILE 20 Sep 2016

CHINA* 22 Apr 2016 3 Sep 2016
COLOMBIA 22 Apr 2016

COMOROS 22 Apr 2016

CONGO 22 Apr 2016

COOK ISLANDS* 24 Jun 2016 1 Sep 2016
COSTA RICA 22 Apr 2016 13 Oct 2016
COTE D'IVOIRE 22 Apr 2016 25 Oct 2016
CROATIA 22 Apr 2016

CUBA 22 Apr 2016

CYPRUS 22 Apr 2016

CZECH REPUBLIC 22 Apr 2016

DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF KOREA 22 Apr 2016 1 Aug 2016
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO 22 Apr 2016

DENMARK (1) 22 Apr 2016 1 Nov 2016 (A)
DJIBOUTI 22 Apr 2016

DOMINICA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 22 Apr 2016

ECUADOR 26 July 2016

EGYPT 22 Apr 2016

EL SALVADOR 22 Apr 2016

EQUATORIAL GUINEA 22 Apr 2016

ERITREA 22 Apr 2016

ESTONIA 22 Apr 2016

ETHIOPIA 22 Apr 2016

EUROPEAN UNION* 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
FIJI 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
FINLAND 22 Apr 2016

FRANCE 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
GABON 22 Apr 2016 2 Nov 2016
GAMBIA 26 Apr 2016

GEORGIA 22 Apr 2016

GERMANY 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
GHANA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
GREECE 22 Apr 2016 14 Oct 2016
GRENADA 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
GUATEMALA 22 Apr 2016

GUINEA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
GUINEA-BISSAU 22 Apr 2016

GUYANA 22 Apr 2016 20 May 2016
HAITI 22 Apr 2016

HONDURAS 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
HUNGARY 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
ICELAND 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016 A
INDIA* 22 Apr 2016 2 Oct 2016
INDONESIA 22 Apr 2016 31 Oct 2016
IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF) 22 Apr 2016


IRELAND 22 Apr 2016

ISRAEL 22 Apr 2016

ITALY 22 Apr 2016

JAMAICA 22 Apr 2016

JAPAN 22 Apr 2016

JORDAN 22 Apr 2016

KAZAKHASTAN 2 Aug 2016

KENYA 22 Apr 2016

KIRIBATI 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
KUWAIT 22 Apr 2016

KYRGYZSTAN 21 Sep 2016

LAO PEOPLE'S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC 22 Apr 2016 7 Sep 2016
LATVIA 22 Apr 2016

LEBANON 22 Apr 2016

LESOTHO 22 Apr 2016

LIBERIA 22 Apr 2016

LIBYA 22 Apr 2016

LIECHTENSTEIN 22 Apr 2016

LITHUANIA 22 Apr 2016

LUXEMBOURG 22 Apr 2016

MADAGASCAR 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
MALAWI 20 Sep 2016

MALAYSIA 22 Apr 2016

MALDIVES 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
MALI 22 Apr 2016 23 Sep 2016
MALTA 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
MARSHALL ISLANDS* 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
MAURITANIA 22 Apr 2016

MAURITIUS 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
MEXICO* 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
MICRONESIA* (FEDERATED STATES OF) 22 Apr 2016 15 Sep 2016
MONACO 22 Apr 2016 24 Oct 2016
MONGOLIA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
MONTENEGRO 22 Apr 2016

MOROCCO 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
MOZAMBIQUE 22 Apr 2016

MYANMAR 22 Apr 2016

NAMIBIA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
NAURU* 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
NEPAL 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
NETHERLANDS 22 Apr 2016

NEW ZEALAND (2) 22 Apr 2016 4 Oct 2016
NIGER 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
NIGERIA 22 Sep 2016

NIUE* 28 Oct 2016 28 Oct 2016
NORWAY 22 Apr 2016 20 June 2016
OMAN 22 Apr 2016

PAKISTAN 22 Apr 2016

PALAU 22 Apr 2016 22 April 2016
PANAMA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
PAPUA NEW GUINEA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
PARAGUAY 22 Apr 2016 14 Oct 2016
PERU 22 Apr 2016 25 Jul 2016
PHILIPPINES 22 Apr 2016

POLAND* 22 Apr 2016 7 Oct 2016
PORTUGAL 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
QATAR 22 Apr 2016

REPUBLIC OF KOREA 22 Apr 2016 3 Nov 2016
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA 21 Sep 2016

ROMANIA 22 Apr 2016

RUSSIAN FEDERATION 22 Apr 2016

RWANDA 22 Apr 2016 6 Oct 2016
SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS 22 Apr 2016 22 April 2016
SAINT LUCIA 22 Apr 2016 22 April 2016
SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES 22 Apr 2016 29 Jun 2016
SAMOA 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
SAN MARINO 22 Apr 2016

SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE 22 Apr 2016 2 Nov 2016
SAUDI ARABIA  3 Nov 2016  3 Nov 2016  
SENEGAL 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
SERBIA 22 Apr 2016

SEYCHELLES 25 Apr 2016 29 Apr 2016
SIERRA LEONE 22 Sep 2016 1 Nov 2016
SINGAPORE 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
SLOVAKIA 22 Apr 2016 5 Oct 2016
SLOVENIA 22 Apr 2016

SOLOMON ISLANDS* 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
SOMALIA 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
SOUTH AFRICA 22 Apr 2016 1 Nov 2016
SOUTH SUDAN 22 Apr 2016

SPAIN 22 Apr 2016

SRI LANKA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
STATE OF PALESTINE 22 Apr 2016 22 Apr 2016
SUDAN 22 Apr 2016

SURINAME 22 Apr 2016

SWAZILAND 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
SWEDEN 22 Apr 2016 13 Oct 2016
SWITZERLAND 22 Apr 2016

TAJIKISTAN 22 Apr 2016

THAILAND 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA 22 Apr 2016

TIMOR-LESTE 22 Apr 2016

TOGO 19 Sep 2016

TONGA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 22 Apr 2016

TUNISIA 22 Apr 2016

TURKEY 22 Apr 2016

TURKMENISTAN 23 Sep 2016 21 Oct 2016
TUVALU* 22 Apr 2016 22 April 2016
UGANDA 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
UKRAINE 22 Apr 2016 19 Sep 2016
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016 A
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND 22 Apr 2016

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA 22 Apr 2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 22 Apr 2016 3 Sep 2016 A
URUGUAY 22 Apr 2016
19 Oct 2016

VANUATU* 22 Apr 2016 21 Sep 2016
VENEZUELA (BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF) 22 Apr 2016

VIET NAM 22 Apr 2016 3 Nov 2016 AA
YEMEN 23 Sep 2016

ZAMBIA 20 Sep 2016

ZIMBABWE 22 Apr 2016


(1) With territorial exclusion in respect of Greenland. See pdf-icon C.N.819.2016.TREATIES-XXVII.7.d of 1 November 2016.
(2) With a territorial exclusion. See pdf-icon C.N.723.2016.TREATIES-XXVII.7.d of 4 October 2016.6.


*Declarations
(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations were made upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.)

Belgium
Declaration made upon signature:
“This signature engages also the Walloon Region, the Flemish Region and the Brussels-Capital Region.”

China
Declaration:
In accordance with the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China and the Basic Law of the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, the Government of the People’s Republic of China decides that the Agreement applies to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China.

Cook Islands
Declaration:
The Government of the Cook Islands declares its understanding that acceptance of the Paris Agreement and its application shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under international law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change and that no provision in the Paris Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from principles of general international law or any claims or rights concerning compensation due to the impacts of climate change. The Government of the Cook Islands further declares that, in light of the best available scientific information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emissions reduction obligations in the aforesaid Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent a global temperature stabilisation level at or above 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels and as a consequence, such emissions will have severe implications for our national interests.

European Union
Declaration:
“Declaration by the Union made in accordance with Article 20(3) of the Paris Agreement The following States are at present Members of the European Union: the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Republic of Estonia, Ireland, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the French Republic, the Republic of Croatia, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Poland, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The European Union declares that, in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 191 and Article 192(1) thereof, it is competent to enter into international agreements, and to implement the obligations resulting therefrom, which contribute to the pursuit of the following objectives: - preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment; - protecting human health; - prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources; - promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change. … The European Union will continue to provide information, on a regular basis on any substantial modifications in the extent of its competence, in accordance with Article 20(3) of the Agreement.”

India
Declaration:
“The Government of India declares its understanding that, as per its national laws; keeping in view its development agenda, particularly the eradication of poverty and provision of basic needs for all its citizens, coupled with its commitment to following the low carbon path to progress, and on the assumption of unencumbered availability of cleaner sources of energy and technologies and financial resources from around the world; and based on a fair and ambitious assessment of global commitment to combating climate change, it is ratifying the Paris Agreement.”

Marshall Islands
Declaration:
“…the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands declares its understanding that ratification of the Paris Agreement shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under any other laws, including international law, and the communication depositing the Republic's instrument of ratification shall include a declaration to this effect for international record; FURTHERMORE, the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands declares that, in light of best scientific information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emission reduction obligations in Article 3 of the Kyoto Protocol, the Doha Amendment and the aforesaid Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent global temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-Industrial levels and as a consequence, will have severe implications for our national interests…”

Mexico
Interpretative declaration:
… in accordance with their national legal framework, and in consideration of the best and most up-to-date scientific information available and incorporated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Mexican States understands greenhouse gas emissions to mean the release into the atmosphere of greenhouse gases and/or their precursors and aerosols into the atmosphere, including, where applicable, greenhouse compounds, within a specific area and during a specific period of time.

Micronesia (Federated States of)
Declaration:
“The Government of the Federated States of Micronesia declares its understanding that its ratification of the Paris Agreement does not constitute a renunciation of any rights of the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia under international law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change, and that no provision in the Paris Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from principles of general international law or any claims or rights concerning compensation and liability due to the adverse effects of climate change; and The Government of the Federated States of Micronesia further declares that, in light of the best available scientific information and assessments on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emission reduction obligations in the Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent a global temperature increase above 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels, and as a consequence, such emissions will have severe implications for the national interests of the Government of the Federated States of Micronesia.”

Nauru
Declaration:
“… the Government, of Nauru declares its understanding that the ratification of the Agreement shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under international law concerning State responsibility [for] the adverse effects of climate change. FURTHER, the Government of Nauru declares that no provisions in the Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from the principles of general international law. AND FURTHER, the Government of Nauru declares its understanding that Article 8 and decision 1/CP.21, paragraph 51 in no way limits the ability of Parties to UNFCCC or the Agreement to raise, discuss, or address any present or future concerns regarding the issues of liability and compensation. The Republic of Nauru put forth its concern intended to recognize and acknowledge its national interest...”

Niue
Declaration:
“The Government of Niue declares its understanding that acceptance of the Paris Agreement and its application shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under international law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change and that no provision in the Paris Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from principles of general international law or any claims or rights concerning compensation due to the impacts of climate change.
The Government of Niue further declares that, in light of the best available scientific information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emissions reduction obligations in the aforesaid Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent a global temperature stabilisation level at or above 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels and as a consequence, such emissions will have severe implications for our national interests.”

Poland
Declaration made upon signature:
“The Government of the Republic of Poland recognizes that under Article 9 paragraph 1 of the Paris Agreement developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention. In this context the Government of the Republic of Poland notes that Poland is a Party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change not included in Annex II.”

Solomon Islands
Declaration:
“… the Government of Solomon Islands declares its understanding that acceptance of the aforesaid Paris Agreement shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under international law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change; FURTHER, that the Government of Solomon Islands declares that no provision in this Paris Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from principles of general international law or any claims or rights concerning compensation due to impacts of climate change; AND that the Government of Solomon Islands declares that the low ambition of the Paris Agreement and its adequacy to stabilize global temperature to safe level of below 1.5 degree Celsius, such emissions will have severe impacts and undermining our sustainable development efforts…”

Tuvalu
Declaration:
“The Government of Tuvalu hereby notifies that it will apply the Paris Agreement provisionally as provided for in paragraph 4 of Decision 1/CP.21. […] The Government of Tuvalu further declares its understanding that acceptance of the aforesaid Paris Agreement and its provisional application shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under international law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change and that no provision in the Paris Agreement can be interpreted as derogating from principles of general international law or any claims or rights concerning compensation due to the impacts of climate change. The Government of Tuvalu further declares that, in light of the best available scientific information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emissions reduction obligations in the aforesaid Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent a global temperature stabilisation level at or above 1.5 degrees Celsius relative to pre-industrial levels and as a consequence, such emissions will have severe implications for our national interests.”

Vanuatu
Declaration:
“WHEREAS the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu declares its understanding that ratification of the Paris Agreement shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under any other laws, including international law, and the communication depositing the Republic’s instrument of ratification shall include a declaration to this effect for international record; FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Republic of Vanuatu declares that, in light of best scientific information and assessment on climate change and its impacts, it considers the emission reduction obligations in Article 3 of the Kyoto Protocol, the Doha Amendment and the aforesaid Paris Agreement to be inadequate to prevent global temperature increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-Industrial levels and as a consequence, will have severe implications for our national interests...”
      

NYPD TO CONVICT HILLARY


BREAKING:  NYPD  HAS  JUST  COME   FORWARD  TO  CONVICT  HILLARY  

NYPD Ready to Make Arrests in Anthony Weiner Case

MAKES ME SICK this Pedophilia and sexual Predator is allowed to walk around let alone be leader of the free World!!
Hillary involved too......
 

Erik Prince: NYPD Ready to Make Arrests in Anthony Weiner Case

Huma-Abedin-Anthony-Weiner-Hillary-Clinton-Sexting-2-AP
by John Hayward4 Nov 20163408

Blackwater founder and retired Navy SEAL Erik Prince told Breitbart News Daily on SiriusXM that according to one of his “well-placed sources” in the New York Police Department, “The NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making” in the Anthony Weiner investigation, but received “huge pushback” from the Justice Department.

Prince began by saying he had no problem believing reports that the FBI was highly confident multiple foreign agencies hacked Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER
LISTEN:
“I mean, it’s not like the foreign intelligence agencies leave a thank-you note after they’ve hacked and stolen your data,” Prince said to SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.
Prince claimed he had insider knowledge of the investigation that could help explain why FBI Director James Comey had to announce he was reopening the investigation into Clinton’s email server last week.
“Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating it. Through a subpoena, through a warrant, they searched his laptop, and sure enough, found those 650,000 emails. They found way more stuff than just more information pertaining to the inappropriate sexting the guy was doing,” Prince claimed.
“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said.
“The amount of garbage that they found in these emails, of criminal activity by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress was so disgusting they gave it to the FBI, and they said, ‘We’re going to go public with this if you don’t reopen the investigation and you don’t do the right thing with timely indictments,’” Prince explained.
“I believe – I know, and this is from a very well-placed source of mine at 1PP, One Police Plaza in New York – the NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making in this investigation, and they’ve gotten huge pushback, to the point of coercion, from the Justice Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge someone that had been unrelated in the accidental heart attack death of Eric Garner almost two years ago. That’s the level of pushback the Obama Justice Department is doing against actually seeking justice in the email and other related criminal matters,” Prince said.
“There’s five different parts of the FBI conducting investigations into these things, with constant downdrafts from the Obama Justice Department. So in the, I hope, unlikely and very unfortunate event that Hillary Clinton is elected president, we will have a constitutional crisis that we have not seen since, I believe, 1860,” Prince declared.
Marlow asked Prince to clarify these revelations.
“NYPD was the first one to look at that laptop,” Prince elaborated. “Weiner and Huma Abedin, his wife – the closest adviser of Hillary Clinton for 20 years – have both flipped. They are cooperating with the government. They both have – they see potential jail time of many years for their crimes, for Huma Abedin sending and receiving and even storing hundreds of thousands of messages from the State Department server and from Hillary Clinton’s own homebrew server, which contained classified information. Weiner faces all kinds of exposure for the inappropriate sexting that was going on and for other information that they found.”
“So NYPD first gets that computer. They see how disgusting it is. They keep a copy of everything, and they pass a copy on to the FBI, which finally pushes the FBI off their chairs, making Comey reopen that investigation, which was indicated in the letter last week. The point being, NYPD has all the information, and they will pursue justice within their rights if the FBI doesn’t,” Prince contended.
“There is all kinds of criminal culpability through all the emails they’ve seen of that 650,000, including money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs,” he stated.
“So the plot thickens. NYPD was pushing because, as an article quoted one of the chiefs – that’s the level just below commissioner – he said as a parent, as a father with daughters, he could not let that level of evil continue,” Prince said.
He noted that the FBI can investigate these matters, “but they can’t convene a grand jury. They can’t file charges.”
“The prosecutors, the Justice Department has to do that,” he explained. “Now, as I understand it, Preet Bharara, the Manhattan prosecutor, has gotten ahold of some of this. From what I hear, he’s a stand-up guy, and hopefully he does the right thing.”
Marlow agreed that Bharara’s “sterling reputation” as a determined prosecutor was “bad news for the Clintons.”
Prince agreed, but said, “If people are willing to bend or break the law and don’t really care about the Constitution or due process – if you’re willing to use Stalinist tactics against someone – who knows what level of pressure” could be brought to bear against even the most tenacious law enforcement officials?
“The point being, fortunately, it’s not just the FBI; [there are] five different offices that are in the hunt for justice, but the NYPD has it as well,” Prince said, citing the Wall Street Journal reporting that has “exposed downdraft, back pressure from the Justice Department” against both the FBI and NYPD, in an effort to “keep the sunlight and the disinfecting effects of the truth and transparency from shining on this great evil that has gone on, and is slowly being exposed.”
“The Justice Department is trying to run out the clock, to elect Hillary Clinton, to prevent any real justice from being done,” he warned.
As for the mayor of New York City, Prince said he has heard that “de Blasio wants to stay away from this.”
“The evidence is so bad, the email content is so bad, that I think even he wants to stay away from it, which is really telling,” he said.
Prince reported that the other legislators involved in the case “have not been named yet,” and urged the NYPD to hold a press conference and name them.
“I wish they’d do it today,” he said. “These are the unusual sliding-door moments of history, that people can stand up and be counted, and make a real difference, and to save a Republic, save a Constitution that we actually need and love, that our forefathers fought and died for. For any cop that is aware of this level of wrongdoing, and they have veterans in their family, or deceased veterans in their family, they owe it to them to stand up, to stand and be counted today, and shine the light of truth on this great evil.”
“From what I understand, up to the commissioner or at least the chief level in NYPD, they wanted to have a press conference, and DOJ, Washington people, political appointees have been exerting all kinds of undue pressure on them to back down,” he added.
Marlow suggested that some of those involved in keeping the details quiet might want to avoid accusations of politicizing the case and seeking to influence the presidential election.
“Sure, that’s it. That’s the argument for it,” Prince agreed. “But the fact is, you know that if the Left had emails pointing to Donald Trump visiting, multiple times, an island with underage sex slaves basically, emails, you know they’d be talking about it. They’d be shouting it from the rooftops.”
“This kind of evil, this kind of true dirt on Hillary Clinton – look, you don’t have to make any judgments. Just release the emails,” he urged. “Just dump them. Let them out there. Let people see the light of truth.”
Prince dismissed the claims of people like Clinton campaign CEO John Podesta and DNC chair Donna Brazile that some of the damaging emails already released by WikiLeaks were fabricated, noting that “forensic analysis done shows that, indeed, they are not fabricated; they are really legitimate.”
“This is stuff coming right off a hard drive that was owned by Weiner and his wife Huma Abedin, Hillary’s closest adviser for the last 20 years,” he said of the new bombshells. “This is not from some hacker or anybody else. This is a laptop seized from a warrant in a criminal investigation.”
Prince confirmed that based on his information, Abedin is most likely looking at jail time, unless she cuts a deal with prosecutors.
“There’s a minimum of obstruction of justice and all kinds of unlawful handling of classified information,” he said. “Because remember, this laptop was in the possession of Weiner, who did not have a security clearance. And many, many of those emails were from her Yahoo account, which had State Department emails forwarded to them, so she could easier print these messages, scan them, and send them on to Hillary. That’s the carelessness that Hillary and her staff had for the classified information that the intelligence community risks life and limb to collect in challenged, opposed areas around the world.”
“That’s not who you want in the White House,” Prince declared.
Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

ALERT!!! Line 3 still reads as if they are going to own our money


ALERT!!!   Line 3 still reads as if they are going to own our money...that still needs to be changed......

"Exchanging Your ZIM" - Anonymous Guest Post


http://inteldinarchronicles.blogspot.com/2016/10/exchanging-your-zim-anonymous-guest-post.html


Entry Submitted Anonymously at 2:13 PM EDT on October 5, 2016

The zim we hold are very valuable national assets so don’t rush to redeem as they only will give us lower rates. Banks arbitrage all the time and they will profit even at 3500. The smart move is.........


1. Redeem only one note and see what nda looks like, cross out forced arbitration or other clauses we don’t like, and sign under protest and do it out loud in front of 6 bankers so they will flip and be on our side, then post them online for all to see with names redacted.

2. Use money to buy 10% or more stock in wf, which is cheap now because of scandal.

3. as bank shareholder demand the best deal that the bank get and that is 10,000 or whatever china pays

4. Fire ceo and bring in new board, new blood trained to be honest from top down

5. with all this money we must own the banks and not let them own us with nda.

6. put 99% of money in other banks so we can have leverage with wf, that we still have firepower to sue and destroy bank with political power and not just class action lawsuits

Bernie sanders said the business model of banks is fraud, and this is what they do, and only to their own customers because that’s where the money is, especially zim. Wf want nda to steal our money, cover up fraud, and reduce the power that rightfully belong to us, so take them down with regime change, and wait for real rv at real rate with china. A real nda to keep our mouth shut should be only 1 page, not 8

Abbott downing bankers are low level employees of wf, tell them that we deal with folks way above their pay grade so don’t mess with us


--- END ---

The question has been raised as to whether requiring the signing of NDAs is even legal under the common law of the Republic.  Also, the statement has been made that the 'Supreme Court' (of the Republic?) has been reviewing the legality of being required to sign NDAs. We have tried to get documentation on that one and have not yet been able to obtain it. If anyone can get to us answers as to the legality of NDAs under the Republic and under common law, please send it to us and we will publish it. 

The bank applying their stamp to YOUR account documents automatically turns your funds over to the banks for their ownership.  Do NOT get nor allow your banking documents to be stamped by the bank. 

Another concern revealed to us earlier is about how to 'bank' the ZIM.  Investigate custodial accounts and be aware of how you can and cannot spend the money.  This apparently does not apply to the Dinar and Dong.  If anyone can obtain correct information on this subject and get it to us, we will be happy to post it for everyone.

America's Day of Reckoning



 
New Evidence Reveals That a Stealthy Alliance of 57 Nations Has Formed With the Intent to Undermine America. See Who They Are, Their Exact Scheme and What This Rogue Economist is Doing to Prepare for the Inevitable!
  
 
 This reveals everything :   Click here to watch it
 
http://pro.strategicinvestment.com/NDPCUR1/PNDPS429/?h=true 
 
 

Soros' quiet overhaul of the U.S. justice system


GEORGE  SOROS'  QUIET 'OVERHAUL'  OF  THE  U.S.  JUSTICE  SYSTEM 

OR - How to turn this nation inside out  and upside down for your own political purposes

 
Progressives  have  zeroed  in  on  'electing'  prosecutors  as  an  avenue  for  criminal  justice  reform,  and  the  billionaire  financier  is  providing  the  cash  to  make  it  happen.

While America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system.

The billionaire financier has channeled more than $3 million into seven local district-attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors.

His money has supported African-American and Hispanic candidates for these powerful local roles, all of whom ran on platforms sharing major goals of Soros’, like reducing racial disparities in sentencing and directing some drug offenders to diversion programs instead of to trial. It is by far the most tangible action in a progressive push to find, prepare and finance criminal justice reform-oriented candidates for jobs that have been held by longtime incumbents and serve as pipelines to the federal courts — and it has inspired fury among opponents angry about the outside influence in local elections.

“The prosecutor exercises the greatest discretion and power in the system. It is so important,” said Andrea Dew Steele, president of Emerge America, a candidate-training organization for Democratic women. “There’s been a confluence of events in the past couple years and all of the sudden, the progressive community is waking up to this.”

Soros has spent on district attorney campaigns in Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico and Texas through a network of state-level super PACs and a national “527” unlimited-money group, each named a variation on “Safety and Justice.” (Soros has also funded a federal super PAC with the same name.) Each organization received most of its money directly from Soros, according to public state and federal financial records, though some groups also got donations from nonprofits like the Civic Participation Action Fund, which gave to the Safety and Justice group in Illinois.  

The Florida Safety and Justice group just poured nearly $1.4 million — all of which came from Soros and his 527 group — into a previously low-budget Democratic primary for state attorney in Central Florida before Tuesday’s vote. The group is backing Aramis Ayala, a former public defender and prosecutor, in her campaign against incumbent Jeff Ashton, whose jurisdiction covers over 1.6 million people across two counties in metro Orlando.

One TV ad from Florida Safety and Justice boosts Ayala, touting her “plan to remove bias so defendants charged with the same crime receive the same treatment, no matter their background or race.” The Soros-funded group is also attacking Ashton with ads saying he “got rid of protections that helped ensure equal treatment regardless of background or race. ... Take two similar traffic incidents that happened on the same night. A white man got off with a slap on the wrist, while the black man faces prison.” 

Opponents of Soros’ favored candidates have laced into the billionaire, saying that his influence has wildly tipped the scales of local elections and even charging that he made residents less safe.

“As a candidate and citizen of Caddo Parish, if an outsider was that interested in the race, I wanted to know exactly what he had in mind for the criminal justice system if he were to win,” said Dhu Thompson, a Louisiana attorney who lost a district attorney race to a Soros-backed candidate, James Stewart, in 2015. Soros gave over $930,000 — more than 22 times the local median household income — to the group boosting Stewart.

“I know some of his troubling opinions on social issues, especially the criminal justice system,” Thompson said. “I’ve never known him as an individual who was very strong on some of our crime and punishment issues. I felt it was very detrimental to the safety of Caddo Parish, and that’s why I took such a strong stand against him.” A Soros representative declined to comment on his involvement in the DA races.

Progressive operatives and activists say that the recent uptick in news coverage of racial justice issues,  especially police-involved deaths of African-Americans, helped sparked intense new interest in the powerful role of district attorneys who did not indict officers in some high-profile cases. So has the longer-term reform push to shrink the U.S. prison population and promote treatment over punishment for drug users. 

Reform groups have spent years advocating criminal justice policies and legislation that would reduce incarceration rates. Liberal donors have long given to policy-focused nonprofits. The Soros-chaired Open Societies Foundation, for example, works on drug policy and criminal justice reform and has supported other reform groups like the California-based Alliance for Safety and Justice — which, despite its similar name, has had no involvement in district attorney races, a spokeswoman said.

Prosecutorial discretion gives district attorneys a huge say in the charges and sentences that defendants face. But reform efforts have not traditionally focused on harnessing that power.

“They are often a very invisible part of the criminal justice system and the political system,” said Brenda Carter, director of the Reflective Democracy Campaign, an arm of the progressive Women Donors Network.  “Many people can’t name their district attorney. It’s not an office people think about a lot.”

Carter’s group commissioned research in 2015 that found that 95 percent of elected local prosecutors in the U.S. are white and three-quarters overall are white men. It also highlighted a Wake Forest University study that found that a vast majority of prosecutors — 85 percent — run for reelection unopposed.

“I found that to be shocking, and I think people are waking up to the untapped potential for intervention in these seats to really change the day-to-day realities of criminal justice,” Carter said. “It’s been really gratifying for us to see the research taken up and run with by different groups around the country.”

Armed with that knowledge, progressive groups including Color of Change began researching potentially interesting district attorney races around the country, multiple sources said. (The organization declined to comment.)

“It’s hard to find this information!” exclaimed Steele, the Emerge America president. “You can’t just Google ‘hot DA races.’ So part of the issue is identifying what potential races there are.”

Soros’ spending started on these races about a year ago, when he put over $1 million into “Safety and Justice” groups that helped elect two new district attorneys in Louisiana and Mississippi and re-elect a third — Hinds County, Miss., DA Robert Shuler Smith — who has since been charged by the Mississippi attorney general with improperly providing information to defendants.

The other Mississippi district attorney Soros’ spending helped elect, Scott Colom, has now represented a four county stretch of the eastern part of the state for eight months. Colom said in an interview that he has focused on prosecuting violent crime in his new position while trying not to burden local prisons with first-time, low level drug offenders.

“I’ve expanded the charges eligible for pre-trial diversion,” Colom said, adding that the number of people in the program in his jurisdiction has doubled since he took office seven months ago. “It’s all focused on the individual person, on trying to find a plan with the best chance possible of avoiding criminal behavior.”

“I’m sure there are plenty of people out there who think prison is too nice and we need to spend more on it,” Colom continued. “But it seems like a large majority of people out there get it and realize there have to be priorities. Just because a fella commits a crime doesn’t mean the best outcome is sending them to jail. ... As much as possible, I want to take people from being tax burdens to taxpayers.”

After the Louisiana and Mississippi races, Soros next piled money into two of the biggest jurisdictions in the country: Houston’s Harris County (his lone losing effort so far) and Chicago’s Cook County, where he funded one of several groups that helped Kim Foxx defeat  incumbent state’s attorney Anita Alvarez in a high-profile primary campaign dominated by the 13-month delay between the police shooting of Laquan McDonald and the indictment of the police officer involved.

In late spring, $107,000 from a Soros-funded New Mexico super PAC helped Raul Torrez win his Democratic district attorney primary by a 2-to-1 margin in Albuquerque’s  Bernalillo County.  Torrez’s Republican opponent dropped out of the general election soon after, citing the potentially exorbitant cost of opposing the Soros-backed candidate in the general election.

While Soros has spent heavily in 2015 and 2016, a broader national push into local prosecutor campaigns is expected to intensify in the next few years, thanks to longer-term planning and candidate recruitment. A Safety and Justice group has already organized in Ohio, according to campaign finance filings there. But it has not yet disclosed raising or spending any money.

“There’s been a realization that there’s not very much we can do this year, when you’re coming up to an election,” said Steele. “You have to have the right candidates. That’s a big piece of the puzzle and why I’m part of this conversation. ... A lot of the conversations I’m having are about 2017 and 2018, about looking forward to next year in Virginia and other places.”

That means more local candidates should prepare for the shock of one of the biggest donors in American politics flooding their neighborhoods with ads.

Colom, the Mississippi prosecutor, says he has never met Soros — like other district attorney candidates supported by the Democratic billionaire this year. He said there was no hint that hundreds of thousands of dollars were coming to aid his campaign until advertising started pushing the same criminal-justice reform message that Colom had been touting — albeit on a much cheaper scale.

“The first I heard of it, someone told me they liked my radio ad and I was thinking that doesn’t sound like one of mine,” Colom said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/george-soros-criminal-justice-reform-227519

Steve Pieczenik Update - "US Takeover May Be Near" - November 4, 2016



Published on Nov 4, 2016
The United States may experience a transition of power however this transition will not be abrupt, nor cataclysmic, nor unprecedented. In a republic such as ours power shifts quite often, as a matter of fact.

In this Talk, Dr. Steve Pieczenik shares his unique experience as a political insider and offers his advice on how to handle it without compromising the strength and autonomy of our great nation.
SEE MORE AT: http://StevePieczenik.com



UPDATE 7:27pm EST, November 4th, 2016

Corey Goode Confirms via Twitter that  Dr. Steve Pieczenik and the agencies he represents is part of the Earth Alliance.  See below for Twitter confirmation.....