Sunday, May 10, 2026

Prime Minister Mark Carney Celebrates “Europe Day” by Meeting with Barack Obama and Alex Soros During Toronto Strategy Session


Be of good cheer. As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney meets with Barack Obama, Alex Soros, and a mix of global figures and intelligence operatives in Toronto, the number of people who grasp the true purpose of this gathering is far greater than the attendees might imagine.

The gathering, officially dubbed a “think tank” meeting, was closed to the media. Barack Obama gave the keynote address, and the assembly of political leftists took place as the U.S. and Canada remain at odds over differing worldviews and an economic dispute surrounding the USMCA trade agreement.

That said, the global audience of pragmatic ‘noticers’ understand that following Prime Minister Carney’s recent remarks in Europe and Canada about the next era of globalism being strengthened by the joint efforts of the British Commonwealth (Canada, Australia, U.K) and Europe, while putting the travels of Obama into context with his continued meetings at Number 10 Downing Street, the content of the ‘think tank’ assembly is transparent.

All of the figures are aligned in common interest to strategize ways to defeat their indefatigable nemesis known as Donald J Trump. It is both the policy of economic nationalism and the outcomes of seismic shifts in geopolitical alignment that cause the brain trust of leftists to assemble with urgency.  There is a myriad of Trump victories recently that have begun to destroy their precious systems of control.

President Trump is using the combined power of the U.S. Treasury, U.S. Military and U.S. Economy as a wrecking ball against one-hundred years of Euro-centric control operations.  Heck, even the recently paused tariffs against EU automobiles is connected to the larger objective of ending the never-ending Marshal Plan. And, then there’s that little reference point of King Charles failed recent tour, against the backdrop of Starmer’s electoral collapse.

I doubt very much the arrival of Pete Buttigieg and Elissa Slotkin (CIA) will offset the leftist defeats in the redistricting effort.  But, well, sure, I guess assembling to try and organize internal operations against Godzilla Trump may benefit from Soros and his Bazooka Joe glasses.

In the economic competition, Canada faces the biggest vulnerability, as its entire system of investment, banking, and production relies heavily on maintaining trade preferences that benefit from the $30 trillion U.S. economy. Prime Minister Carney’s control measures are ultimately futile attempts to counter Trump’s insistent and justified reciprocity stance. This push for control stems from a place of fear.

Canada and the EU are trying to use China as a counterbalance and shield against Trump’s direct hits to their interests.  However, along with all of those who can see the big picture behind the leftist assembly, Big Panda (Beijing) and Big Grizzly (Russia) well understand what is happening.  Remember, all varieties of bears are omnivorous, and while Pandas may be cute the Kamchatka is very underrated.

Thankfully, a God in control of all things doesn’t give us a President we need, He anoints a President He needs.  The audience disliked Moses immensely, and the same can be said for David; however, each served His purpose.

Like I said at the beginning, be of good cheer.  Prime Minister Carney may have blocked and controlled visibility on the assembly by restricting media access, but given what is very visible and viral on social media, a Great Awakening is very evident.


Iran war is draining world’s oil buffer at an unprecedented pace

 Rapidly shrinking stockpiles mean that the risk of even more extreme price spikes and shortages

A storage facility at Tanjung Priok Port in Jakarta, Indonesia.

The world has burned through oil inventories at a record speed as the Iran war throttles flows from the Persian Gulf, eating into the very buffer that protects against supply shocks.

The rapidly shrinking stockpiles mean that the risk of even more extreme price spikes and shortages is getting ever-closer, leaving governments and industries with fewer options to cushion the impact of the loss of more than a billion barrels of supply, two months into the near-closure of the Strait of Hormuz. The sharp depletion will also mean the market stays vulnerable for longer to future disruptions even after the conflict ends.

Morgan Stanley estimates global oil stockpiles dropped by about 4.8 million barrels a day between March 1 and April 25 — far exceeding the previous peak for a quarterly drawdown in data compiled by the International Energy Agency. Crude accounts for almost 60% of the decline, and refined fuels the rest.

Crucially, the system also requires a minimum level of oil, which means that the “operational minimum” is reached long before the inventories actually hit zero, said Natasha Kaneva, JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s head of global commodities research.

Article content

“Inventories are acting as the shock absorber of the global oil system,” she said. But “not every barrel can be drawn.”

There are some signs that the drawdown may have slowed slightly in recent days, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which pointed to weaker demand from China, the world’s top oil importer — leaving more available for other buyers. Still, global visible oil stocks are already close to their lowest since 2018, the bank said.

Estimating global inventories involves both art and science. A large part are strategic caches of crude and fuel controlled by governments, either directly or by requiring the industry to maintain a level of reserves that can be released when needed, or a combination of the two. But there’s also a huge amount in commercial stockpiles — the inventories of oil producers, refiners, traders and distributors held as part of normal business operations.

The most immediate points of stress are in a handful of fuel-import-reliant countries in Asia, with traders pointing to Indonesia, Vietnam, Pakistan and the Philippines as the biggest worries, potentially hitting critical levels of supplies in as little as a month. Larger economies in the region, particularly China remain comfortable for now.

However, European jet-fuel stocks are also depleting fast just as summer vacations approach, and some analysts predict they could hit critical levels as soon as June.

JPMorgan’s Kaneva warns that inventories in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development could reach “operational stress levels” early next month, if the strait doesn’t reopen, and then “operational minimum” floors by September. That’s the point when the world hits the bare minimum amounts of oil needed for pipelines, storage tanks and export terminals to function properly.

The US, which has become the supplier of last resort to the world, has already drawn down domestic inventories of crude and fuels to below historical averages as exports surge. US crude stocks, including the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve, have dropped for the last four straight weeks, according to government data. US distillate stockpiles were at their lowest point since 2005 at the end of last week, while gasoline stockpiles were hovering near their lowest seasonal levels since 2014.

While America’s oil drillers have started to turn the taps on, executives have warned that inventories are likely to keep falling in the short-term.

Even if the waterway reopens, Gulf output and shipping is unlikely to return to normal levels any time soon, meaning fuel users could have to dig even deeper into storage tanks.

The conflict has already sent physical crude and key fuel prices surging, threatening higher inflation and intensifying the risk of a global recession. It has left India suffering liquefied petroleum gas shortages, prompted airlines to cancel flights and hit US drivers with soaring gasoline costs.

Global oil consumption has already dropped sharply, in part because of supply disruptions, and in part because of higher prices. But as inventories get closer to critical levels, analysts, traders and executives warn that prices will need to spike to a level that chokes off significantly more demand in order to balance the market.

“A lot of the inventory and spare capacity has been depleted already,” Chevron Corp. Chief Financial Officer Eimear Bonner told Bloomberg TV on May 1. “We are going to start to see some import-dependent countries potentially start to face critical shortages as we get into the June-July time-frame.”

“Top of my mind in terms of places facing imminent shortage is gasoline in Asia, with countries like Pakistan, Indonesia or the Philippines likely to be the first to face issues with tank bottoms,” said Frederic Lasserre, head of research at energy trader Gunvor Group.

If the Strait of Hormuz doesn’t reopen by early June, some Asian countries will face a macroeconomic shock because of the shortage of gasoil, he predicted, while Europe may have one more month before the situation becomes difficult to manage.

To be sure, some analysts and traders say that the stress points are lower than what JPMorgan estimates, meaning that the industry could have a bigger buffer, while further demand loss would also help reduce the pressure on the system. The JPMorgan estimates assume demand destruction of 5.6 million barrels a day for June through September.

While Asia has been the most exposed to the loss of Middle Eastern oil, stockpiles in key economies are largely holding up, with China’s and South Korea’s levels so comfortable that they’re considering resuming refined-product exports that were earlier curbed. Stocks in the fuel-storage hub of Singapore were recently above seasonal averages. China’s crude inventories remain robust, with geospatial analytics firm Kayrros estimating they’ve actually risen during the war.

The energy transition may also mean that some nations need to store less fuel going forward. Gasoline and diesel may not be as crucial in nations like China, which has massively electrified its fleet of cars and trucks.

Oil inventories in the Asia-Pacific region outside of China have been hit hardest, falling by about 70 million barrels since the conflict began, Kayrros co-founder Antoine Halff said.

Kayrros said stockpiles in Japan and India are at an at least 10-year seasonal low, down 50% and 10%, respectively, since the war began. The region’s supplies of naphtha and LPG, both used for petrochemicals, have been particularly hit, according to Goldman Sachs.

Some Asian officials say stockpiles are sufficient, at least for now. Pakistan’s petroleum minister in late April said it has roughly 20 days of commercial reserves of refined products. India’s oil ministry said on May 3 that refineries have adequate crude inventories, though state-run refiners privately acknowledged that they’ve burnt through a sizable amount, without elaborating.

Diesel — the lifeblood of the global economy — is also facing a crunch. Countries hit hardest are those with limited domestic crude production and refining capacity, said Xavier Tang, a senior market analyst at Vortexa Ltd.

“Northeast Asian countries such as China, Japan and South Korea hold ample crude and product stocks in their storage tanks,” said Tang. “Vietnam, Philippines are in a more dire situation.”

In Europe, the critical product is jet fuel.

Inventories in independent storage at the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp hub have plunged a third since the war started to a six-year low, according to Insights Global, which gets data from terminal operators.

“Since February, we have seen a steady drop in jet fuel stocks,” said Lars van Wageningen, research and consultancy manager at Insights Global. “Other regions like Asia and Australia also need to source this product, so everybody’s scrambling for whatever jet fuel they can get — with a cost.”

While there’s enough supply in the short-term, summer demand could cause stocks to dry up in five months, he said. The UK, Germany and France are most vulnerable because of heavy traffic and insufficient local production, he said.

Strategic stockpiles

Governments have already pledged to deploy a record 400 million barrels of oil from emergency reserves in a move co-ordinated by the IEA.

However, the US has only utilized about 79.7 million barrels of the 172 million it promised to release, as it it walks a fine line between providing enough supply to sustain global markets and pushing the oil store further toward depletion. The reserve is already poised to fall to its lowest level since 1982 if the administration completes the full release.

Germany is re-offering crude and jet fuel that wasn’t taken by the market when previously offered, and will take further measures if there’s a shortage, the economy ministry said.

Governments face a dilemma that if they release more stockpiles to rein in prices, it would only further erode the buffer.

Looking further ahead, the sharp reduction in global stockpiles will mean added pressure on the market once the strait reopens, as governments and companies rush to replenish them.

“We expect this destocking environment to continue over the next number of months and ultimately drive a restocking phenomenon longer-term,” Plains All American Pipeline LP Chief Executive Officer Willie Chiang said on an earnings call Friday. “Post-war, we would not be surprised to see several countries restock their SPRs above pre-war levels, essentially creating an additional layer of demand into the future.”

 https://nationalpost.com/news/world/iran-war-is-draining-worlds-oil-buffer-at-an-unprecedented-pace


President Obama Highlights an Ongoing ‘Conspiracy Against Rights’ During Interview with Media



I have been requested to put some context behind a recent set of statements made by former President Barack Obama to Stephen Colbert.  As many interested observers understand (some may gain deeper appreciation later on) statements -even defensive- made in furtherance of a conspiracy can be used later in court to highlight intent.

To encapsulate for those who requested, we first start with the recent statement by the former President. Listen closely:


On May 19, 2020, Acting DNI Richard Grenell declassified the hidden paragraph of the Susan Rice memo that was hidden for three years.  This enabled us to put a full context to the ‘memo to file‘ that was published by Susan Rice on January 20, 2017; an event that was timed to happen during President Trump’s inauguration.

The context was President Obama and Susan Rice holding a meeting with FBI Director James Comey during the transition period approximately two weeks before President Trump took office.   On January 5, 2017, President Obama and Susan Rice were discussing incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn with FBI Director James Comey.

When you understand the context, you understand exactly why the Intelligence Community tried to keep this paragraph hidden.  The motive to write the January 20, 2017, memo is clear.  Also, the IC did not ever expect this to be released. Here’s the formerly hidden paragraph:

Within this paragraph we find the motive for Susan Rice writing it (emphasis mine):

“Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding “by the book” as it relates to law enforcement.” … “Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.”  “Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing senssitive information.”  “President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.”  “Comey replied “potentially.””  “He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that “the level of communication is unusual.”

Remember, the position of President Obama and Susan Rice is that they were never aware of any FBI investigation of Flynn (or the Trump campaign); nor did they have any involvement in directing it to take place.

The content of this January 5th meeting makes the first part of their claim challenging to accept.   Thus, the need for Susan Rice to cover for it.

Here’s the full memo in context (including the redacted paragraph):

On January 5, 2017, James Comey officially put President Obama on notice about the FBI conducting an investigation and surveillance upon the Trump campaign.   Obviously, Obama already knew this; however, at these moments in real time each of the participants was trying to protect themselves by documenting all of the activity and making sure the entire group was attached to the legal risk if anything went wrong.

Now it gets a little uncomfortable for the Obama White House here because just a few days earlier DNI James Clapper created a document trail from the FBI to the Office of The President.  That trail created by Clapper was problematic, and that’s why the January 5th meeting was organized.

We learned from James Comey’s testimony, that a day or two prior to this January 5, 2017 meeting, DNI James Clapper briefed President Obama on the nature of the call between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Michael Flynn.

James Clapper received raw “intelligence cuts” about the call from FBI Director James Comey and used them to brief President Obama.

James Comey knew he gave the information to Clapper, and James Comey knew Clapper went to the White House to brief Obama.  As a consequence, it becomes very problematic for the Obama white house to claim they didn’t know about, nor direct, an FBI investigation of incoming President Trump or incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn given the fact they were briefed on the intercepted phone communications conveyed by the FBI, via DNI Clapper, to President Obama.

If the FBI wasn’t investigating Flynn, then why was the FBI intercepting his calls?

Understandably President Obama and NSA Susan Rice would be worried about being attached to a potentially very unlawful investigation of the incoming administration and NSA Michael Flynn; hence the ‘stay behind’ meeting.

As a result of prior briefing material given to President Obama, he knew the FBI was monitoring the Trump transition team and intercepting Flynn’s communication.  The aspect of Obama questioning Comey about sharing sensitive information from Flynn; and Comey’s response; points to Obama/Rice knowledge of an FBI operation against Flynn.  

This is an FBI operation against Flynn (and Trump) that Susan Rice knows she needs to claim she and Obama did not know about.

From a hindsight perspective it gets very sticky for Obama/Rice to deny knowledge with that 1/5/17 meeting content in the fray. That’s the purpose of the Jan 20th CYA memo to file.  Think about it:

Question:  Ms Rice how can you claim to have no knowledge of an FBI investigation when the FBI was providing the White House FBI with intercepts of Flynn communication?

Are you saying the FBI intercepts were not authorized by President Obama?

Rice’s CYA memo was essentially saying exactly that.  She’s positioning FBI Director James Comey as rogue with his investigation, and that is a threat to James Comey.  Hence, Comey giving DNI Clapper the information knowing he would walk it into the White House. 

Without the memo FBI Director James Comey could claim President Obama and Susan Rice were well aware of the FBI’s Flynn operation. 

With the memo Obama/Rice position themselves as having no idea until FBI Director Comey started talking.

That’s the purpose for the memo; Obama & Rice protecting themselves from Comey if things go sideways.

Now, to further illustrate this intent, it’s worth remembering the letter from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler to the Senate:

Note the second to last paragraph, Rice’s letter in 2018 is trying to deny knowledge of FBI operations, writ large, against the Trump campaign or incoming administration.

This letter from Rice’s lawyer to the Senate Judiciary Committee is false, demonstrably false.  However, the written lie highlights that Susan Rice and Kathryn Reummler never expected that “classified paragraph” to ever be released.

….”President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.”….

Go back and read that second to last paragraph from Susan Rice in February 2018, and contrast it against what Susan Rice wrote on January 5, 2017.  See the problem?

When James Clapper walked directly into the White House with “intelligence cuts” on January 3, 2017, specifically from FBI Director James Comey, to share with President Obama, it is clear the white house legal team around Obama -specifically including Kathryn Reummler- went bananas.

DNI James Clapper was always a doofus, but usefully so.  However, in this context doofus Clapper -with his FBI cuts in hand- just infected the White House with direct knowledge of an ongoing FBI investigation of the incoming administration.  In that briefing Clapper just walked over their carefully assembled plausible deniability.  Clapper carried the evidence into the Oval Office, removing Obama’s ability to say he was unaware of any FBI surveillance of Michael Flynn (and Trump).

The white house next move was to call for the January 5, 2017, meeting with FBI Director James Comey, and the January 20th Susan Rice memo-to-file was supportive material for the intention of again putting the issue onto Comey, not Obama.  That is why Susan Rice memorialized the meeting as a cya to mitigate legal risk.

It must be emphasized that for three years the redaction of that key paragraph remained hidden.  The DOJ/FBI, Intelligence Community and Robert Mueller’s crew were trying to keep James Comey protected, while simultaneously maintaining the offensive against the Trump administration.

Imagine if this fully unredacted Susan Rice memo had been released in 2017 or 2018?  The sunlight would have been unbearable for a multitude of ongoing narratives.  Robert Mueller could never have attempted to prosecute Flynn in 2017 against the backdrop of a known and fabricated FBI investigation to target Donald Trump and Michael Flynn. An investigation that President Obama was fully aware of despite his denials.


Barbara Boyd Highlights Bad Week for Team Obama


Barbara Boyd argues Barack Obama helped politicize U.S. justice and led a “British intelligence-instigated” anti-Trump coup, then outlines three developments she says undercut his project: (1) UK local elections in which Keir Starmer’s Labour Party lost about 1,800 races and power in Wales and Scotland as Nigel Farage’s Reform Party surged on anti–open borders and anti–Net Zero messaging; (2) a 4–3 Virginia Supreme Court decision striking down Democrats’ fast-tracked redistricting referendum, keeping existing 2026 districts, alongside the U.S. Supreme Court’s April 29 ruling in Louisiana v. Callais against race-based gerrymandering; and (3) examples of “authentic” politics, citing J.D. Vance’s Iowa speech about deindustrialization and military sacrifice and viral AI ads boosting LA mayoral outsider Spencer Pratt’s critique of California leadership.