I can’t remember if I have ever written this up, or maybe just explained it in a interview at some point, but I have had several people ask, so I’ll explain it.

This is how Hillary Clinton “made” $100,000 off of an initial “investment” of $1000 in cattle futures back in the early 80’s.

It was textbook money laundering.

I know you’re shocked – SHOCKED to think that a Clinton could be involved in anything untoward, but I’m afraid it is true.

Back in the 80’s in Arkansas, Bill and Hillary were the power couple ascending first to the position of Attorney General and then to the governor’s mansion. Being the psychopathic whores that they both are, they were all about cashing in on their power and accepting de facto bribes and payola.

In Arkansas the Tyson family (as in Tyson chicken) were the big players at the time. Wal-Mart was still getting off the ground. Old Man Tyson wanted to buy off the Clintons, and so a money laundering scheme was hatched. A futures account would be opened with a broker named Red Bone (no joke) in HILLARY’S NAME. Red Bone cleared through a company called Refco, which would later become MF Global. That company through its entire history and iterations has always been a hive of villainy.

Anyway, the account was opened in Hillary’s name and Hillary made an opening deposit of $1000.

Every day at the opening bell Red Bone, per Old Man Tyson’s instructions, would put in two orders: Buy 50 contracts of live cattle futures AND sell 50 contracts of live cattle futures. (I’m just using 50 as a round number, I don’t know exactly what the quantites were.)

At the close the same thing would be done – buy 50 and sell 50.

On days in which the market was higher from the open to the close, Hillary’s account would be assigned the lower buy from the open and the higher sell from the close. If the close was $0.25 per pound higher than the open, the math would look like this:

$0.25 X 400 = $100 per contract
$100 per contract X 50 contracts = $5000

A live cattle contract is 40,000 pounds, so the coefficient is 400. Trust me on that. The price is actually quoted in “hundredweights”, hence the dropping of two zeroes.

Now here’s the money laundering bit. The “losing” trades, namely the sell executed at the open and the buy executed at the close at the same prices would be assigned to Old Man Tyson’s account.

On days when the market moved lower from the open to the close, Hillary was given the sell from the open and the buy from the close. Sell high, buy back low. Tyson got the opposite side.

Do that every day for a month or so and you can move $100k from Tyson to the Clintons very quickly. I think Red Bone also threw a few “losers” into Hillary’s account just to attempt to cover their tracks – and yes, he made commission on all of it. I didn’t back the commissions out of the calculation above, but of course Red Bone charged a hefty commission on every contract.

Giving the “good” trades to Hillary and the “bad” trades to Tyson is simply a way to move money from Tyson to the Clintons without Tyson writing the Clintons a check. This is called “money laundering”.

This case was actually the reason why the law was changed and brokers HAD to attach an account number to every order UPON ENTERING THE ORDER. I started in the business in 1997, and that change predated me by 15 years. I can’t imagine how it is that they let people assign account numbers at the end of the day – ever. That is just begging for unfair practices with regards to assigning of prices to customers. Favoritism, frontrunning, etc.

Oh, and Hillary claimed complete ignorance about all of this, which is, of course, a complete lie. She and Bill knew exactly what they were doing and why.

Too bad no one cared about the Clintons being psychopathic liars and conartists, because maybe then Hillary wouldn’t have been able to murder Ambassador Chris Stevens and run all of those guns and MANPADS to the Muslim Brotherhood/AlQaeda, amongst all of their many other crimes.

Things like this matter. Give a money laundering psychopath enough power and they will move on to murder, genocide and tyranny. Ignore these indicators at your own peril.

† Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy Name. Thy kingdom come. THY WILL BE DONE, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but DELIVER US FROM EVIL. †

Hey! What is the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven holding in her left hand? Why, it’s a MACE! And what is a mace? It is a weapon that is used to bludgeon one’s enemies. In other words, an assualt weapon. A very up-close-and-personal assault weapon. Our Lady uses her mace to bludgeon demons while holding Her Baby in her other arm. There is SO MUCH right with that – namely, everything! Yay!!

My gut feeling since the beginning has been that he is going to try to “unify” the Novus Ordo and the Old Mass, which has nothing to do with unification and everything to do with destroying/suppressing/forbidding anything that is not the Novus Ordo. IF he tries that or any other tactic, don’t worry. Don’t trouble yourselves. God sent us a saint long ago who gave us clear directions on how to proceed. I give you St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church. His friends call him Bob.

“Just as it is licit to resist the Pontiff who attacks the body, so also is it licit to resist him who attacks souls or destroys the civil order or above all, tries to destroy the Church. I say that it is licit to resist him by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will. It is not licit, however, to judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior.”
(St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice. II.29.)

When St. Robert says “judge”, he means in this context “adjudicate”. In other words, you can’t put the pope on trial. But we can and must JUDGE if his actions are an attack on the Church, and I’d say that suppressing or otherwise attempting to destroy the Mass – for the second time in less than 50 years – can and must be construed as an attack on the Church.

Fraternity and Institute priests especially should hearken to these words. I know you’re out there. If he tries it, ignore him. Ignore him until he is dead, or he sends an army to “emancipate you” from offering the august and unbloody Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Make it clear that he is going to have to physically drag you off the altar. THIS is what should have been done 45 years ago. The promulgation of the Mass of Paul VI should have been ignored, and there were only two or three priests in the U.S. who did just that. One was in Rapid City, South Dakota. We are now probably going to get another chance to do the right thing. What a blessing from Our Lord – to be able to repeat a similar historical event with the benefit of hindsight!

Man up. Prepare to hold the line. If no one will stand up for Our Lord and His Mass after being beaten over the head with the cataclysmic fallout of the 1968 asteroid impact, then we are simply too stupid to merit survival, much less the unmeritable Beatific Vision.

I’ve had several requests to repost this piece, and the events of the last week convinced me. Pope Francis and most of the clergy today, heavily informed and massively influenced by the evil culture and lies of the Enemy have clearly redefined the concept of MERCY as INDIFFERENCE.

For some of these people this redefinition is a function of malice. For some it is a function of stupidity and an overall shallowness of intellect and incapacity for nuanced thought. I suspect that Pope Francis is more the latter than the former. But either way, the damage is massive and real and the malignancy of the intent does not alter the gravity of the result, nor the imperative to combat it.

One more time, just so there is no confusion, Francis is the Pope. Our Lord is angry with His lukewarm-at-best people. Very, very angry. Hence the chastisement. The problem with this pope is that on the night of March 13th, Jorge Bergoglio fell madly in love with the persona of Francis, and we’re all along for the ride. Ugh. But I digress.

People now believe and teach that not caring one way or another about sin and holding a passive, non-confrontational “live and let live” attitude toward sin is the manifestation of “mercy”. “Mercy” is a shrug of the shoulders. “Mercy” is looking away. “Mercy” is denying reality. “Mercy” is saying, “Who am I to judge?”

What this does is completely dilute to nothingness the love of Our Lord. No, our sins are of infinite offense to God because He is perfectly good. That is why His Mercy is so unfathomable and indicative of His infinite love for us. He is infinitely offended by every sin and yet His love is GREATER. If His mercy was manifested by His indifference, then His love for us would be cheap to the point of being meaningless, and thus not really love at all. THIS is what “hate the sin, love the sinner” really means. That axiom has been twisted by modernists and neocons into a sentimental platitude that they use as a pass to ratify indifference and thus AVOID TRUE CHARITY AND TRUE LOVE OF NEIGHBOR COMPLETELY.

Oh, how far we have fallen, and so quickly. The entire world is now convinced that the antipode to charity – indifference – is itself mercy, and remember, Our Lord is Himself Mercy with a capital M. Thus, Our Lord, according to these people, is the anti-caritas.

If you think I am making contortionisitic arguments here, you are sadly mistaken. What I am doing is called a “logical progression” and is utterly essential when combating heresy. All heresies begin as benign-sounding, specious, and even attractive platitudes that rapidly descend into glaring, satanic lies from the pit of hell once people start trying to build truth tables of logical progressions on their false premises.

Finally, the Introit from the Mass of a Confessor, which is taken from Psalm 36:

“The mouth of the just shall meditate wisdom and his tongue shall speak judgment: the law of His God is in his heart.”

Here is the original piece, penned and posted April 30, ARSH 2012.

When a shepherd would go out and search for a lost sheep that had wandered off, when he found the lost lamb, he would BREAK OR DISLOCATE ITS LEG, and then carry it back to the flock on his shoulders. This husbandry technique is called “hobbling.” We have all seen that image. Yeah. He wasn’t carrying it because it was fun. He was carrying the lamb because he had intentionally crippled it.

Why? Why break the animal’s leg? First, to keep it from wandering off again. Second, in order to train it to stay with the flock. While the leg was mending, the lamb would NOT wander off and learned to stay with the fold. This was done not just to protect the straying lamb, but also to protect the rest of the flock. Sheep are very gregarious. If one is heady and heads off on some tangent, the rest of the flock might go after it instead of staying with the shepherd.

You know, KINDA LIKE PEOPLE.

In terms of the actual breaking of the leg, you might be thinking that a broken leg would kill an animal or be massively cruel. You would be wrong. The folks who taught me the cattle business used to herd and drive wild animals like elk and reindeer up on the tundras of Canada. One time they came across a large herd of elk and one of the animals had a fractured hind leg. The bone was totally severed and the leg was flopping completely free as the animal ran with the herd on three legs. When they came back to that herd a few weeks later, they spotted the animal, and its leg was almost fully healed. It had a slight deformity, but it was running on the broken leg. The point is that animals have a massive pain tolerance such that their perception of pain is fundamentally different than that of human pain. Additionally, they have a capacity for physical healing that humans likewise do not have. A untreated compound fracture in a human leg would kill the human. But animals are different, so the shepherding technique of breaking or dislocating the leg of a straying lamb would have been standard operating procedure.

I looked this up, and sure enough, up until just within the last century, people understood the symbolism of the Good Shepherd fairly widely, as many people were still involved in animal agriculture on roughly the same technological level as that of 2000 years ago. The Church, and thus the people understood that if God gently guides you back to the fold, but you keep persistently wandering off and being disobedient to God’s perfect will, endangering not only yourself but the rest of the flock as well, JESUS WILL PROVERBIALLY BREAK YOUR LEG, hoist you on His shoulders and haul you back to the flock. The alternative would be to let you get eaten by the wolves, and entice the wolves to attack the rest of the flock.

When Jesus Christ says, “I am the Good Shepherd,” He MEANS IT. CRACK!

Finally, this also illuminates the prophecy in Numbers 9:12 that the Passover Lamb shall not have any of its bones broken:

They shall not leave any thing thereof until morning, a nor break a bone thereof, they shall observe all the ceremonies of the phase. –Numbers 9:12

This was specifically emphasized by John in his Gospel:

For these things were done, that the scripture might be fulfilled: You shall not break a bone of Him. –John 19:36

Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God (Agnus Dei), slain for the sins of the world (Qui tollis peccata mundi). He was slain without any of His bones being broken because He is the prefect Lamb, in perfect union with the Will of the Father, Who never, ever strayed, and thus His bones, in particular His legs, were not broken.

If you remember the narrative from Calvary, when Jesus had died on the Cross, the Romans, spurred by an earthquake and the desire to get the three crucified Jews off of Golgotha before the beginning of the Passover (also prophesied in Numbers 9:12 – “They shall not leave any thing thereof until morning”), were ordered to break the legs of the three men in order to hasten death. If their legs were broken, they couldn’t hold themselves up on their crosses to breathe, and would thus asphyxiate in a matter of minutes. The two thieves had their legs broken with a cudgel by the Romans. When the Roman came to Christ, he saw that Our Lord was already dead. In order to make sure that Jesus was dead, the Roman, Longinus, took a spear and stabbed Jesus in His side, through to His Heart. This pierced the pericardial sac of water that had formed around His Heart as He went into shock and asphyxiated. Out of Jesus’ side poured first water (Baptism) followed by Blood (The Eucharist). So, while the good thief and the bad thief both had their legs broken, Jesus’ legs were NOT broken at the last second because He is the perfectly submissive Lamb to the Will of the Father.

Again, this symbolism would have been obvious to previous generations. It is only today that it has been lost. Beware of any clergy today who try to paint Jesus as utterly benign, effette and passive. He is anything but. Jesus will BREAK OUR LEG if that is what is required to get us safely to heaven and save us from the wolves. Priests and bishops would do very, very well to heed this example. The fact that there have been no excommunications in the wake of the pro-abort culture in government, especially now among such “c”atholics as Kathleen Sebilius, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Joe Biden and every member of the Kennedy clan is a testimony to the utterly piss-poor job of shepherding that today’s episcopacy is doing. UTTERLY. PISS. POOR.

For the love of God, and in the name of Christ the Good Shepherd, BREAK SOME LEGS! CRACK!

(Isn’t this image incredibly moving now that we know the full story and context?)

† Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy Name. Thy kingdom come. THY WILL BE DONE, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but DELIVER US FROM EVIL. †

Meet St. Ignatius of Loyola. He founded the Jesuit Order. Nice body armor, eh? Let’s be frank. The Jesuit Order today is not the same organization that was founded by Ignatius. The thing calling itself the Jesuit Order today should be suppressed. It is a hive of Marxists, sodomites and enemies of God and His Holy Church. Basta!

Just so you know that Ignatius was a solid dude who was highly in tune with reality, here’s a favorite quote:

The enemy is like a woman, weak in face of opposition, but correspondingly strong when not opposed. In a quarrel with a man, it is natural for a woman to lose heart and run away when he faces up to her; on the other hand, if the man begins to be afraid and to give ground, her rage, vindictiveness and fury overflow and know no limit.

Yep. Read that over and over again until you get it. Truer words never spoken.