Russian parliament approves Damocles Sword to confiscate Western assets if necessary

When the U.S. issued sanctions against Russia in early 2014, they did so without international approval, and without a resolution from the United Nations.  In essence, the Obama administration used the dollar as an economic weapon against the Eurasian power in response to their taking the Crimea after the U.S. backed rebels unlawfully overthrew the government in Ukraine.

However, in addition to these sanctions were pressures the U.S. placed on their allies and on their vassal states in Europe and the Far East, making the sanctions a full fledged proxy war that held European businesses stuck in the middle.

And as the economic sanctions on Russia near their third year in play, on Oct. 29, Russia’s upper chamber of their legislature approved a new bill that would make it legal for the government to confiscate foreign assets held within the country.

Russia’s upper chamber of parliament has approved a bill to allow retaliatory measures in response to the seizure of Russian assets abroad, the RIA Novosti news agency reported Wednesday.

The law gives authorities the power to limit the legal immunity of a foreign country and its property on Russian territory in response to similar restriction in that country.

It now awaits President Vladimir Putin’s signature before becoming law.

Under current legislation, Russian courts cannot seize assets belonging to foreign governments. According to Deputy Justice Minister Dmitry Aristov, this puts Russia in a weak position to protect its interests, the TASS news agency reported Wednesday.

Aristov said the introduction of the law become a priority following a number of “illegal” actions against Russia and its property overseas.

Earlier this year, Russian assets were seized in Belgium and France after the arbitration court in The Hague ordered Russia to pay $50 billion in compensation to former shareholders oil firm Yukos, which was dismembered in the mid 2000s after its owner, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was jailed on charges of tax evasion. – Moscow Times

With the U.S. at odds with Russia over ISIS and the ongoing conflict in Syria, tensions have reached a point where property and assets everywhere in the world are in danger of confiscation or sanction by either side.  And while this new legislation is meant to provide powers to President Putin as a last resort against Western aggression, it sets up the potential for Russia to collapse European nations by both confiscating assets, and even defaulting on loans.

Russia-Threatens-to-Pull-Off-dollar-Crash-Economy

When the world is in transition, and headed towards a new monetary or economic paradigm, geo-politics are often involved as the old system refuses to make way for the new.  And with so many nations seeking an end to America’s polar control over finance and trade, and a return to economic nationalism without the need for a middleman, strong protections such as the one being passed in Moscow are often the only deterrent to keep further sanctions from being imposed.

Kenneth Schortgen Jr is a writer for Secretsofthefed.comExaminer.com, Roguemoney.net, and To the Death Media, and hosts the popular web blog, The Daily Economist. Ken can also be heard Wednesday afternoons giving an weekly economic report on the Angel Clark radio show.

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. . . Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. . . Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” . . Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. . . Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. . . “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” . . Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. . . The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” . . But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? . . At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. . . “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: . . For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. . . However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. . . A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” . . However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . . -Obama’s Iran nuke deal -Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server -Obama IRS targets conservatives -Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters -Obamacare & Obama’s false promises -Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order -Benghazi-gate -Operation Fast & Furious -5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl -Extortion 17 -‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session -Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval -Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law -Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act -Illegally conducting war against Libya -NSA: Spying on Americans -Muslim Brotherhood ties -Miriam Carey -Birth certificate -Executive orders -Solyndra and the lost $535 million -Egypt -Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress -Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers -Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’