Follow Trump As He Tries To Make

America Great Again

The 2017 Trump

Presidency
The First 100 Days
January 30, 2017 - February 14, 2017

See How Main Stream Media Are Trying

To Destroy The United States And
The Trump Presidency
Compiled From The Internet By Fred James
 PRINTED FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY

Not For Sale

____ of 10 Copies

[Articles and Pictures & Cartoons Found On The Net]

Disclaimer: We encourage all comments and feedback on our articles as we value free speech and
everyone's right to express themselves. We also will not tolerate abusive language, threats or other
behavior that could be considered unlawful. Anything to the contrary will be deleted.

©2017
WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS:
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code)
governs the making of photo copies or other reproductions of copyrighted material.
Under certain conditions specified by law, libraries and archives
are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction.
One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be
"used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research."
If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction
or purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement.

This printing typeset / compiled by Fred James

F.R.E.D. Productions
February 2017
FIRST EDITION
0987654321
 CONTENTS
Trump’s Travel Ban Plainly Excludes Countries Tied To 93% Of All US Terrorism

“Muslim Ban” Media Lie Leads To Enraged Mob Of Mindless Left-Wing Zombies Physically Attacking Trump
Supporter In Broad Daylight

50 Members Of The Republican Study Committee Implore Trump: “Fire The IRS Chief”
Obama Bombed 5 Out Of 7 Countries Trump Banned -- Media Didn't Care
SURPRISE! Muslim Brotherhood Behind Anti-Trump Airport Protests (VIDEO)
BLM Anti-Trump Protest In Seattle: ‘We Need To Start Killing People’
EXCLUSIVE – Islamic State Supporters React Angrily to Trump’s Temporary Refugee Halt
Trump Aide Calls Immigration Order A 'Massive Success Story'
Why The Cold War Between Tech CEOs And Trump Is About To Go Nuclear
Trump Defends Travel Ban: 'This Is Not About Religion'

Kellyanne Conway Rages Against "Misinformation" Over Trump's Immigration Order Resistance From Within:

Federal Workers Push Back Against Trump

Neocons McCain & Graham V. Trump On Muslim Immigration Suspension
Conway: Inconvenience For 1% Of Travelers 'Small Price To Pay' For Security
Trump Slams McCain, Graham: "Stop Trying To Start World War III"
No One Talks Of The Diseases Muslims & Hispanics Have
These 'Rogue' White House Accounts Are Just Liberal Bait
Nobody Is Listening To Your Nonsense Anymore! (Video)

When Trump Does Something Right, We Must Back Him As With The Executive Order Ban On Muslims Entering The
US

President Bannon?
Trump’s Bloodless Coup Against America’s Enemies From Within
New Rasmussen Poll Reveals Silent Majority Approves Of Immigration Ban
Obama Moves to Undermine Trump Presidency After Only 10 Days
The Left Is Self-Destructing
Temper Tantrum: USA Today Columnist Demands Brady End Friendship With Trump
Trump Files With FEC For 2020 Election Bid, Outmaneuvers Nonprofit Organizations
Trump Authorizes Congress To Pursue Criminal Charges Against Hillary
BREAKING: Trump Just Ordered Gowdy And Chaffetz Back On Clinton Case To “Go After Everything”
Anti-Trump State Department Staff Oppose His Entry Into America
Progressives Ready All-Out Assault On Trump's Supreme Court Pick
President Trump Exposes McCain And Graham For Trying To Start Word War III
Trump Fires Acting Attorney General For Refusal To Enforce 'Extreme Vetting' Order
US CODE - Trump's Ban Is Absolutely Constitutional
America Don’t Be Fooled. “Fake Tears” Schumer And Nancy Pelosi Have A History Of Killing Muslims
Trump Set To Pull U.S. Out Of The Paris Agreement Within Days
A Jarring New Level Of Confrontation And Conflict Hits Washington
Anti-Trumpism Still Raging

Hackers Took Down D.C.’S CCTV System For A 48-Hour Span Leading Up To Trump’s Inauguration, Demanded
Ransom
Judge Jeanine: 'Impressive' Gorsuch Has the Right Credentials & Temperament

President Trump: Nationalist Capitalism, An Alternative To Globalization

Obama Actually Committed More Religious Discrimination Than Any That Trump Is Accused Of
Despite Majority Of Americans In Favor Of Trump Immigration Policy, 900 State Department Staff Dissent
Report: Russian Spy Linked To Trump “Golden Showers” Dossier Mysteriously Found Dead
Trump Regulatory Freeze Halts $180 Billion Of Proposed Obama Rules, New Study Shows
US Diplomats Draft ‘Dissent Memo’ To Denounce Trump’s Ban: Report
‘Media Against Trump - Trump Card In His Hands’
Insanity: Democratic Senator Wants Open Borders And More Gun Control
Trump Administration Freezes Out CNN From Interviews And Staff Appearances
Petraeus: World Order Under 'Unprecedented Threat'
White House Press Briefing Room “Skype Seats” Filled, Intellihub, Other Alt Media, Denied
Obama, Hillary, Schumer, And Trump: Will The Real Enemies Of The Moslem World Please Stand Up
New Study Reveals Shocking Information About Trump’s Voter Fraud Claims (VIDEO)
“NY Slimes” Runs 31 Anti-Trump Pieces In One Issue!
Pair Arrested In London Over Crippling Cyber Attack On Washington DC's CCTV Network Just Days Before
Trump Admin Cracks Down On #Fakenews By Icing Out CNN
Trump’s Travel Ban Doesn’t Target Muslims, He Has ‘Sovereign Right’ To Impose It – Emirati FM
White House Blackballs CNN; Refuses To Send Surrogates On "Fake News" Network
Trump’s National Trade Council Director Calls TTIP Dead
Lawsuits Pile Up Against Trump Travel Ban And Anti-Sanctuary City Executive Orders
Donald Trump Versus Google And The Shadow Government
Blame Obama, Not Trump: Twitter Trolls Pelosi For Yemen Policy Memory Loss
US Code Allows For Banning Refugees With Diseases
Donald Trump ‘Upset And Angry’ Over Refugee Deal Discussed With Malcolm Turnbull
Trump Threatens UC Berkeley Funds Over Breitbart Protests
Pundits Stunned After Trump Hangs Up On Australia Prime Minister, Slamming "Dumb Deal"
Sedition: Media Promotes Idea Of A Military Coup To Remove Trump From Office
Left-Wing Journalist: Violence Against “Racists” To Stop Trump Should Be Tolerated
The Deep State In The Age Of Trump
If Americans Truly Cared About Muslims, They Would Stop Killing Them By The Millions
‘What The F*** Chuck’: Thousands Of Angry Protesters Scream Outside Schumer’s Home
CONFIRMED: Russian Cyber Spies Charged With Passing Secrets To US
Researchers: Fake News Did Not Alter Election Results
U.S. Eases Restrictions On Cyber-Security Sales To Russian Spy Agency
Trump Vows To Repeal Political Limits On Churches
Soros Insider Demands Military Overthrow Trump
The Trump Show xxx
 .
Trump’s Travel Ban Plainly Excludes
Countries Tied To 93% Of All US Terrorism
Matt Agorist
January 30, 2017
On Friday, the world erupted in chaos after President
Donald Trump signed an Executive Order suspending
entry into the United States for people traveling from Iran,
Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
These seven countries originally came from the Obama
administration and were labeled as “countries of concern.”
“There were further travel restrictions
already in place from those seven
countries,” Sean Spicer said Sunday on
ABC’s “This Week.” “What the president
did was take the first step through this
executive order of ensuring that we’re
looking at the entire system of who’s
coming in, refugees that are coming in,
people who are coming in from places that
have a history or that our intelligence
suggests that we need to have further
extreme vetting for.”
Trump is simply building off of restrictions the Obama
administration already put in place in 2015 on certain
travelers who had visited Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria on or
after March 1, 2011. Libya, Somalia, and Yemen were
added to the list only months after the original limitations.
So, all Trump did was temporarily ban those countries
instead of merely keeping the current restrictions.
Sounds reasonable, right? Well, if we look at the bigger
picture, and the history of these seven countries —
especially in regards to terrorism — something very fishy
appears.
Those seven countries have never
produced a terrorist in the United States
who has ever caused the death of a
single American. Yes, you read that
correctly.
Only seven percent of all terrorist-related acts in the
United States have originated from people in those
countries, and not a single one of them has killed a US
citizen.
As the Daily Caller reports:
In 2006, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, a
naturalized American citizen born in
Tehran, Iran, plowed a Jeep into a crowd of
people on the campus of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill “to punish the
government of the United States.” No one
died in the attack. Nine people were
injured, but none of them seriously. Taheri-
azar was arrested and now resides in
prison.
In 2016, Somali refugee Abdul Razak Ali Artan injured 13
people — none critically — when he drove a Honda Civic
into a group of people on the campus of Ohio State
University. Artan then got out of his car and stabbed
people with a butcher knife. Police on the scene then shot
and killed him.
Also in 2016, Dahir Adan, a Kenya-born Somali
immigrant and naturalized U.S. citizen, armed himself
with a pair of steak knives and entered the Crossroads
Center shopping mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota. Adan then
stabbed — and punched — 10 people. Victims who were
hospitalized were all released by the next day. An off-duty
police officer shot and killed Adan inside a Macy’s store.
Taheri-azar, Artan and Adan are the only three Muslims
from the seven nations covered by Trumps’ executive
order to commit terrorist acts in the United States since
September 2001.
Out of the 43 people who carried out terrorist attacks on
US soil, only three of them came from the seven countries
on Trump’s list — the other 40 terrorists came from
countries who were not banned.
This handful of attacks on American soil
hardly justifies restricting the travel from
these countries once we look at the
countries Trump did not ban — who are
responsible for 93% of all terrorism in
the United States causing death on a
massive scale.
During the same period those three terrorists mentioned
above attempted to cause harm to Americans, 40 terrorists
from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab
Emirates, Kyrgyzstan, Kuwait, Nigeria, Afghanistan,
Lebanon, and Guinea wreaked havoc in America.
However, people from those countries are still welcome to
apply for U.S. visas and travel permits.
So why is it that all these other countries were left off the
ban list when it is common knowledge that they are
responsible for the overwhelming majority of the terrorism
within the United States?
Well, if we zoom out again, we can a propose a potential
reason for Trump conveniently leaving these known
producers of terrorism off the list.
Trump, being the international businessman that he is, has
business holdings worldwide. None of those holdings are
in those seven banned countries. On the other hand,
however,
Trump holds major business stakes in
several of the countries absent from this
list.
As the Free Thought Project previously reported, during
his campaign, Trump registered eight companies tied to
hotel interests in Saudi Arabia alone. In case you’ve been
under a rock for the last 17 years, the majority of hijackers
on 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia. And, last year, the
federal government declassified a 28-page report, detailing
the fact that they covered up the Saudi Arabian
government’s role in the attacks on 9/11.
.
Saudi Arabia is responsible for the
death of 2,369 Americans — they are not
on the list.
Trump also has holdings in Egypt, whose citizens killed a
total of 162 Americans. Trump Marks Egypt and Trump
Marks Egypt LLC are the President’s business dealings in
this country, who, conveniently, is also absent from his
list.
Another country, who is also absent from Trump’s list is
the United Arab Emirates. Trump’s organization has a
plethora of holdings in this country, including a licensing
and management deal in Dubai for two golf courses and a
whole neighborhood of luxury villas currently under
construction.
A total of 314 Americans were killed by UAE citizens
between 1975 and 2015, according to CATO.
Trump also does business in Turkey as he currently
licenses his name to two luxury towers in Istanbul. As
we’ve reported many times in the last year, Turkey has
repeatedly been caught aiding the Islamic State through
protecting their oil routes as well as providing them
sanctuary and even training.
As the debate of immigration and border walls heats up, it
is important for those on both sides to have all the
information available to make sound decisions. Please
share this article so that those who are ignoring these facts
can see the truth.
 “Muslim Ban” Media Lie Leads To Enraged Mob Of
Mindless Left-Wing Zombies Physically Attacking Trump
Supporter In Broad Daylight
By: Mike Adams
Date: January 30, 2017

Conformity is diversity

Hatred is tolerance

Consensus is fact

I will explore this new Orwellian motto of the mentally ill

Left in an upcoming podcast. Until then, I have another
podcast to share with you (below the following video)
which shows the left-wing violence now being carried out
against supporters of President Trump:

Amid yells of “PEACE!”, a mob of enraged, mindless left-

wing zombies physically attacked a Donald Trump
supporter at the PDX airport yesterday. The video below
depicts the mayhem and madness that has now gripped the
zombified Trump-hating left-wing mobs being openly
encouraged by a traitorous, dishonest media run by Soros-
funded journo-terrorists. (They even cheer after knocking a
man unconscious…)

What we are witnessing today is the complete collapse of

civility and credibility across the political left, where
people who consider themselves “tolerant” literally engage
in violent attacks and assaults against those with whom
they disagree.

This brings me to my new summation of the philosophy of

the mindless, mentally ill Left:
.
 50 Members Of The Republican Study Committee Implore
Trump: “Fire The IRS Chief”
By: JD Heyes
Date: January 30, 2017
A few years ago, John Koskinen, head of the Internal
Revenue Service when it was being weaponized by the
Obama White House to target conservative organizations
seeking tax-exempt status ahead of the 2012 election,
repeatedly gave false and incomplete testimony to a series
of congressional committees trying to get to the bottom of
the scandal.
And now, dozens of Republican lawmakers in the House
want President Donald J. Trump to do what the Congress
itself could not:
Fire him.
As reported exclusively by the Washington Examiner, 50
members of the House Republican Study Committee, a
group of the most conservative members of Congress,
want the new president to terminate Koskinen’s
employment at the IRS – and as soon as possible.
Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., is expected to make the
request as chairman of the RSC, after quietly, but urgently,
circulating a letter inside the GOP conference to garner
support.
Though Trump has already nominated most of his Cabinet,
he has remained silent thus far on the fate of the IRS and
its embattled chief. But conservatives are gunning hard for
Koskinen after the way he allowed his agency to be hyper-
politicized by the previous administration. (RELATED:
Find out just how the bureaucracy is targeting average
Americans today at BigGovernment.news)
“You have the authority to remove
Commissioner Koskinen,” Walker says in
his letter to the president, adding that “we
encourage you to dismiss him in the most
expedient manner practicable.”
In October 2015, House Oversight Chairman Jason
Chaffetz, R-Utah, drew up articles of impeachment against
Koskinen. Since that time, conservatives have said that the
IRS chief is guilty of interfering with a congressional
investigation and aiding/abetting the continued targeting of
conservative non-profit organizations.
In his letter, Walker reintroduces the same issue to the
115th Congress. He also heavily criticizes the IRS for
“improperly targeting conservative groups,” and for failing
to “demonstrate that officials have definitively ceased
targeting conservative groups.” He is attempting to build
on last year’s failed impeachment attempt that was
launched by the House Freedom Caucus, the Washington
Examiner reported.
“The consideration of the impeachment of
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in the
House in late 2016 was a clear indication
that Congress and the American people
have no confidence in Commissioner
Koskinen or his ability to discharge his
duties,” Walker wrote.
But that was then; when the nation was hyper-focused on
the presidential race, the House Freedom Caucus
attempted to force House Speaker Paul Ryan to pursue
impeachment, but as he struggled to keep the Republican
majority together, he pleaded with conservatives to wait
until after the election to focus on personnel changes at
IRS.
Unwilling to wait, on Dec. 5, Freedom Caucus Chairman
Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, introduced a privileged resolution on
the House floor in an attempt to force an impeachment
vote. It failed due to a lack of leadership
support. (RELATED: Keep up with the latest on the
Trump administration at WhiteHouse.news)
AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Ryan, said the
opposition to the effort had more to do with a scheduling
conflict.
 “It would have triggered automatic the case for Koskinen’s impeachment.
consideration lasting into next year, filling “When Congress issues a subpoena,
up weeks of floor time and crippling our compliance is not optional. Imagine if a
ability to hit the ground running on Trump taxpayer failed to comply with an IRS
administration confirmations and summons or subpoena, what would they do
Obamacare repeal,” she said in a to you?”
statement at the time.
See his opening remarks below:
But now, after a month of 2017, Republicans still have not
voted on a measure to repeal Obamacare, and Koskinen
still has his job. So Walker’s letter is the first to try to
change that; if he’s not successful, Koskinen could stay on
at the IRS until November 12, 2017.

For Chaffetz, the impeachment case was practically open-

and-shut.

“When Congress asks you a question,

you’re expected to give a truthful answer,”
he said during opening remarks in making
 Obama Bombed 5 Out Of 7 Countries
Trump Banned -- Media Didn't Care
Chris Menahan
Information Liberation
Jan. 30, 2017

While the lying media is freaking out over President

Trump's travel ban for seven Middle Eastern countries
deemed security risks, they didn't give a damn about
Obama bombing them.

Though the media is currently in a tizzy because Trump's

executive order held up around 300 people at airports,
Obama's bombings were reported as completely reasonable
to bring about peace.

Out of the seven countries that were banned by President

Trump last Friday, five were bombed by the Obama
administration: Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and Somalia.

Trump banning these people from America is bad, Obama bombing these people is good.

12
Where were the George Soros funded organizations
protesting the "nearly 100 attacks" that have occurred since
2009 in Yemen "resulting in the deaths of hundreds of
militants, but also many civilians?"
Did Chuck Schumer shed a tear for the 62 Syrian troops
killed and 100 more wounded that the Obama
administration "accidentally bombed" in 2016?
13
Did Schumer openly weep when the Obama administration
was "duped into attacking Somali troops" and killed 22 of
them in an air strike late last year?
It's fine for the Nobel Peace Prize
winning President to bomb these people
in their own countries, but for President
Trump to temporarily prevent them from
traveling to our country to keep America
safe is "un-American" and "un-
constitutional."
 SURPRISE! Muslim Brotherhood Behind Anti-Trump
Airport Protests (VIDEO)
Jim Hoft
Jan 30th, 2017 10:54 am

Six years ago Barack Obama banned
refugees from Iraq from entering the US
for six months.
Democrats said nothing.
This weekend Donald Trump signed an executive order to
refuse refugees from seven terrorist states.
It appears radical Muslim Brotherhood
activists are behind the anti-Trump
protests.
CNN has video proof that Muslim Brotherhood
sympathizers are organizing these “fake travel ban”
protests.

But this time Democrats lost it.

Hundreds of liberals protested Trump at airports across the

US after 109 foreigners out of 325,000 foreign travelers
were detained at airports across the United States.

Protest against the Immigration Ban at Detroit

Metropolitan Airport.

This is what democracy looks

like.#NoBanNoWall
pic.twitter.com/z2mwO7tFpU
— rayyan latif. (@RoundRotis) January 30,
2017
The video below shows members of EADHR leading
protesters at the Dallas Airport.
Now this…

14
 BLM Anti-Trump Protest In Seattle:
‘We Need To Start Killing People’
Justin Caruso
3:32 PM 01/30/2017
During an anti-Trump protest in Seattle this weekend, an
activist associated with the Black Lives Matter (BLM)
movement took to the megaphone to voice her support for,
among other things, “killing people,” and “killing the
White House.”
While she said that, another protester can be heard saying,
“Burn it!”
She also says, “White people, give your fucking money,
your fucking house, your fucking property, we need it
fucking all,” as another protester responds “reparations!”
15
“Fuck white supremacy, fuck the U.S.
empire, fuck your imperialist ass lives. That
shit gotta go.”
At 1:50 in the video clip, she goes,
“And we need to start killing people. First
off, we need to start killing the White
House. The White House must die. The
White House, your fucking White House,
your fucking Presidents, they must go!
Fuck the White House.”
“Pay the fuck up, pay the fuck up. It ain’t
just your fucking time, its your fucking
money, and now your fucking life is
devoted to social change,” she said.
While speaking, she was wearing a jacket that said “Black
Lives Matter” on the back.
According to the channel that uploaded the clip to
YouTube, the activist saying these things is a teacher.
 EXCLUSIVE – Islamic State Supporters React Angrily to
Trump’s Temporary Refugee Halt
By Aaron Klein And Ali Waked
30 Jan 2017
Islamic State sympathizers and militants
predictably reacted angrily to President
Donald Trump’s temporary halt on
refugees while the government revamps
its flawed security screening process.
Breitbart Jerusalem obtained access to correspondence
posted in a closed chat group that utilizes the encrypted
Telegram messaging service. The chat group serves as an
internal Twitter of sorts for IS jihadists and sympathizers,
and it has been used in the past to issue IS
communications.
“The madman Trump is still ignorant of
politics, science and culture,” IS supporter
Abu Maslama wrote to his associates on
the Telegram app. “That Islam-hating
Crusader prevents Muslims from entering
America. That failed Nazi thinks that this
will stop the mujahedeen from striking his
country. Doesn’t he understand that his
country will implode? When that happens,
he’ll panic and backpedal on his Islam-
hating policies.”
Maslama offered no explanation as to how the U.S. will
purportedly implode from implementing stricter security
16
screening procedures aimed at keeping terrorists out of the
country. He also falsely claimed that Trump was
preventing Muslims from entering the country. In
actuality, Trump’s executive order halts visas for 90 days
for “immigrants and non-immigrants” from Syria,
Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran, and Iraq. The order
further suspended the entry of all refugees for 120 days,
indefinitely blocked Syrian refugees from entering and
lowered the ceiling to 50,000 for refugees allowed to enter
the U.S. during Fiscal Year 2017.
Meanwhile, Telegram user Omra Alfarouq, another IS
supporter, wrote:
“The decisions made by that fool (Trump)
will drag America and its supporters into a
war against each other that will be sparked
by the mujahedeen, who will take
advantage of it to settle in.”
Utilizing racist language, Alfarouq continued,
“The confrontations with the blacks that
started under the donkey Obama will
repeat itself, but this time in a much
broader way among the Americans. And
the Muslims will exploit these
confrontations to strike in the heart of the
infidel country. Don’t think victory will come
on its own. It will emanate from their
stupidity and their criminal acts that attest
to their hatred of Islam. Allah in his wisdom
will strengthen the mujahedeen and lead
them to victory.”
An IS supporter who messages under the name
 “IS Will Live Forever” wrote: “Trump and
(Vladimir) Putin the Crusaders’ hatred for
Islam is conspicuous and their policies only
prove it. The war against the Crusaders
began and will end with their defeat. We
are at the end of times, and what times
they are – the times of the oppressed
mujahedeen on the face of the earth. The
wisdom of Allah will allow the mujahedeen
and the oppressed to rise up and cut off the
heads of Crusaders… and whoever
supports them among those who falsely
claim to be Muslim.”
IS, al-Qaida and other terrorist groups have reportedly
been seeking ways to take advantage of the Middle East
refugee crisis with the goal of infiltrating Western nations.
17
Last November, a car-ramming and mass stabbing attack
was carried out at Ohio State University by Somali refugee
Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who was reportedly inspired by
IS.
In 2013, ABC News first revealed that two years earlier,
the State Department imposed a freeze over the processing
of Iraqi refugees for six months. The halt was the result of
the discovery of two al-Qaida members admitted as
refugees from Iraq who were living in Bowling Green,
Kentucky and who had admitted to targeting U.S. troops in
Iraq. The network at the time also cited FBI agents
conceding that
“several dozen suspected terrorist
bombmakers, including some believed to
have targeted American troops, may have
mistakenly been allowed to move to the
United States as war refugees.”
Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and
senior investigative reporter.
 Trump Aide Calls
Immigration Order A 'Massive Success Story'
By Rebecca Savransky
01/30/17 07:45 AM EST
The White House is defending President Trump's
executive order barring refugees and people from seven
predominately Muslim countries from entering the U.S,
with one official calling it a "massive success story."
“It really is a massive success story in
terms of implementation on every single
level,” a senior administration official told
reporters during a briefing late Sunday
The official also called for the media to stop its "false,
misleading, inaccurate, hyperventilating" coverage of the
"fractional, marginal, minuscule percentage" of travelers
who were "set aside for further questioning" under the
order.
The order was drafted with help from "several of the top
immigration staff on Capitol Hill," the official said.
The official also said the ban was put into place without
warning because
"everybody here can use their imaginations
to imagine 25 reasons that wouldn't make
sense from a security standpoint, a
management standpoint, from just an
airport-safety standpoint, you name it."
.
18
Trump's executive order signed Friday bars Syrian
refugees indefinitely and halts the U.S. refugee
resettlement program for four months. It also denies entry
for 90 days to people from seven predominately Muslim
countries: Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and
Libya.
After the order was signed, reports emerged of refugees
being detained upon arrival at U.S. airports and new details
continued to surface about the exact scope of who would
be impacted.
Top aides to the president on Sunday defended the order,
denying it constituted a Muslim ban and pointing to the
Obama administration for identifying the seven countries
included in the order.
The Trump team also stood behind the executive order's
implementation amid backlash from some lawmakers and
protests that broke out Saturday and Sunday in cities
across the country.
During the Sunday briefing, one of the officials sought to
clarify some pieces of the order, saying that green card
holders are "exempt" from the order.
“Some of the confusion stemming from the
green-card issue is just semantic in
nature,” the official said. “I think some of
the confusion stems from the semantic
debate about the meaning of the word
'exemption.' Again, internally, we've been
clear on this from the beginning, and we've
waived people through.”
The official also said the implementation of the order had
been "done seamlessly and with extraordinary
professionalism."
 Why The Cold War Between Tech CEOs
And Trump Is About To Go Nuclear
By Tyler Durden
Jan 30, 2017 6:35 PM
Over the weekend, openly defiant CEOs, particularly
among the tech sector, expressed their displeasure with
Trump's Friday executive order temporarily banning
refugees and limiting travel from seven Muslim countries,
with both words and deeds, among which the following
(summary courtesy of Axios):
 VCs funding the ACLU: Several venture capitalists,
as well as a few entrepreneurs, took turns soliciting
donations to the American Civil Liberties Union through
social media and personally matching those donations.
 Airbnb volunteers to help provide housing for
impacted immigrants: The home-sharing company
said that it will work with travelers and organizations to
provide housing for those impacted by the executive
order, whether through volunteer hosts or by funding
housing.
 Lyft and Uber commit millions of dollars to legal
aid: On Sunday, Lyft said it will donate $1 million to the
ACLU over the next four years. Later in the day, Uber
said it will create a $3 million legal defense fund for
impacted drivers, as well as provide legal assistance
and compensate their lost wages.
 Google is setting up a $2 million crisis fund: The
search giant has set up a fund that will donate to the
American Civil Liberties Union, Immigrant Legal
Resource Center, International Rescue Committee,
and UNHCR.
On Monday morning, former US Treasury Secretary Larry
Summers, speaking in an interview with Bloomberg
Television, said that he is “gratified” by what he heard
from the tech community. “As global businesses, they
have a huge stake in the United States being a nation of the
Statue of Liberty rather than being a nation of refugee
camps.” He added that “they have a huge stake in the
United States supporting an open and tolerant global
system, they have that stake for their employees, their
customers, they have it for the reputation of the United
States and they have spoken out.”
That may be, but the biggest reason for the anger by tech
CEOs at the Trump administration is a simple, and a more
selfish one. The reason for the simmering cold war
between tech CEOs and Trump can be summarized in just
three letters: H1-B.
19
The bottom line is that tech CEOs fear
Trump will single them out for outsourcing
jobs or shut down the so-called H-1B visa
program they use to hire high-skilled
foreign employees for crucial engineering
and technical jobs.
Donald Trump sitting down with tech CEOs during less turbulent times
And, as Axios adds, White House officials say they are
right to be nervous, especially about changes to the visa
program. Chief strategist Steve Bannon and policy chief
Stephen Miller are known to be deeply skeptical of the
program, and will have a strong, vocal ally when Jeff
Sessions gets confirmed as Attorney General. Some further
observations:
 Trump's mixed messages: On the campaign trail, he
promised to "end forever the use of H-1B as a cheap
labor program." He later signaled in a meeting with
tech leaders that he's most concerned about
companies misusing the visas to displace lower-wage
American workers.
 How it works: Visas are capped at 65,000 a year, with
20,000 additional visas for foreign workers with
master's degrees. The demand for the visas is so high
that the cap is usually exceeded within a few days of
the application window opening. The visas are
distributed to companies through a lottery system.
Tech companies such as Microsoft, Google, IBM, Cisco,
Apple, Intel and Facebook say the visas are crucial for
specialized jobs they can't fill domestically because of a
shortage of American graduates with the right technical
skills. When CEOs spoke out over the weekend about the
ban, they pointed out the importance of allowing the "best
and brightest" to work in the U.S.
 ***
Which is why if a news report about Trump's next
imminent executive order is accurate,
the simmering cold war between the
tech CEOs and Trump is about to
nuclear.
Bloomberg reports that the Trump
administration has drafted an executive
order aimed at overhauling the work-visa
programs technology companies
depend on to hire tens of thousands of
employees each year.
If implemented, the reforms could force wholesale changes
at India companies such as Infosys Ltd. and Wipro Ltd.,
and shift the way American companies like Microsoft
Corp., Amazon.com Inc. and Apple Inc. recruit talent.
Companies would have to try to hire
American first and if they recruit foreign
workers, priority would be given to the
most highly paid.
The draft of Trump’s executive order covers an alphabet
soup of visa programs, including H-1B, L-1, E-2 and B1.
The first is a popular program with technology companies
and is aimed at allowing them to bring in high-skill
workers when they can’t find local hires with the
appropriate skills. The legislation caps the number of
people who can enter the U.S. annually at 85,000,
including those with undergrad and master’s degrees.
The average salary of an H-1B worker at
Apple is reportedly more than $100k.
“Our country’s immigration policies should
be designed and implemented to serve,
first and foremost, the U.S. national
interest,” the draft proposal reads,
according to a copy reviewed by
Bloomberg. “Visa programs for foreign
workers … should be administered in a
manner that protects the civil rights of
American workers and current lawful
residents, and that prioritizes the protection
of American workers -- our forgotten
working people -- and the jobs they hold.”
The foreign work visas were originally
established to help U.S. companies recruit
from abroad when they couldn’t find
qualified local workers. But in recent years,
there have been allegations the programs
have been abused to bring in cheaper
workers from overseas to fill jobs that
otherwise may go to Americans. The top
recipients of the H-1B visas are
20
outsourcers, primarily from India, who run
the technology departments of large
corporations with largely imported staff.
“If firms are using the program for cheap
labor, I think it will affect them and they will
have to pay workers more,” said Ron Hira,
an associate professor at Howard
University. “If tech firms are using the
program for specialized labor, they may
find there are more visas available.”
The Trump administration did not respond to a request for
comment on the draft. The proposal is consistent with the
president’s public comments on pushing companies to add
more jobs to the U.S., from auto manufacturing to
technology.
It’s not clear how much force the executive order would
have if it is signed by the president. Congress is also
working on visa reforms and the parties will have to
cooperate to pass new laws. Zoe Lofgren, a Democratic
congresswoman from California, introduced a bill last
week to tighten requirements for the H-1B work visa
program.
"My legislation refocuses the H-1B program
to its original intent – to seek out and find
the best and brightest from around the
world, and to supplement the U.S.
workforce with talented, highly-paid, and
highly-skilled workers,” Lofgren said in a
statement.
Meanwhile, as Bloomberg adds, India’s
technology companies, led by Tata
Consultancy Services Ltd, Infosys and
Wipro, have argued they are helping
corporations become more competitive
by handling their technology operations
with specialized staff.
They also contend the visa programs allow them to keep
jobs in the U.S. and that if they have to pay more for staff,
they will handle more of the work remotely from less
expensive markets like India. Trump, however, see things
differently.
“Inspections and investigations in the past
have shown no cases of wrongdoing by
Indian IT services companies, which have
always been fully compliant with the law,”
said R Chandrashekhar, president of
Nasscom, the trade group for India’s
information technology sector. “The
industry is open to any kind of checks in
the system, but they should not cause any
hindrance to the smooth operation of
companies.
The proposed Trump order is also aimed at bringing more
transparency to the program.
It calls for publishing reports with basic
statistics on who uses the immigration
programs within one month of the end
of the government’s fiscal year. The
Obama Administration had scaled back
the information available on the
programs and required Freedom of
Information Act requests for some data.
Whatever specific changes are implemented, they are
likely to add to the expenses for India’s technology
.
21
companies. That may accelerate a shift to new kinds of
services, such as cloud computing and artificial
intelligence, said Raja Lahiri, partner at the Mumbai-based
partner at consultancy Grant Thornton India
“The visa challenges are not going to go
away easily,” he said. “They will continue to
be a challenge for Indian IT companies.”
But while the pain for India will be acute, it will be Silicon
Valley that may be most impacted, as suddenly its favorite
source of cheap, skilled labor is eliminated. How it will
responds remains to be seen.
 Trump Defends Travel Ban:
'This Is Not About Religion'
Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:50AM

implemented the most secure policies over

the next 90 days."

US President Donald Trump speaks before signing an executive

action in the Oval Office at the White House, Saturday, Jan. 28, 2017,
in Washington, DC. (Photo by AP)
President Donald Trump says his Demonstrators chant during a protest in front of the Trump
executive order banning people from International Hotel Washington on January 29, 2017 in Washington,
DC. (Photo by AFP)
seven Muslim-majority countries from
entering the United States “is not about
religion,” amid protests and backlash in Tens of thousands of protesters have rallied in US cities
the country and around the world. and at major airports over Trump’s executive order.
"America is a proud nation of immigrants
The order also sparked a global backlash, including from
and we will continue to show compassion
American allies that view the restrictions as divisive and
to those feeling oppression, but we will do
discriminatory.
so while protecting our own citizens and
border," the president said in a statement
Sunday. Governments from London and Berlin to Jakarta spoke out
against Trump’s executive order.
"We will keep it free and keep it safe, as
the media knows, but refuses to say."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the global fight
against terrorism did not justify "putting people of a
Trump rejected criticism suggesting his executive order specific background or faith under general suspicion.”
amounts to the "Muslim ban" he proposed as a presidential
candidate.
Merkel expressed her concerns to the US president during
a phone call and reminded him that the Geneva
"To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as Conventions require the international community to accept
the media is falsely reporting," he said. war refugees on humanitarian grounds, her spokesman
"This is not about religion -- this is said.
about terror and keeping our country
safe."
Meanwhile, attorneys general from 15 states and
Washington, DC, issued a statement condemning Trump's
On Friday, Trump signed an executive order that imposes "dangerous" and "unconstitutional" immigration policy
a 90-day entry ban for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and pledged to fight it.
Sudan, Libya and Somalia, blocks refugees from Syria
indefinitely, and suspends all refugee admissions for 120
Muslims living in the United State were involved in only
days.
one-third of 1 percent of all murders in the country in
2016, according to a new study by Duke University,
Trump said the US would contradicting Trump’s policy of portraying Muslims as
dangerous and banning them from entering the US.
"again be issuing visas to all countries once
we are sure we have reviewed and
22
 Kellyanne Conway Rages Against "Misinformation"
Over Trump's Immigration Order
By Tyler Durden
Jan 30, 2017 2:36 PM
After exposed Obama, Bush, and Clinton's previous
anti-immigration actions amid the backlash against
President Trump's executive orders, administration senior
adviser Kellyanne Conway appeared on CNBC this
morning and was visibly angry at the "information
underload" from the mainstream media and bullhorn-
touting, crying politicians.
"The media and politicians have an
obligation to calm the public [with facts]
about what this policy does, and more
importantly does not, do... this is why
[Trump] has to tweet, so that the media
will cover the tweet [facts]"
It's pretty clear Conway's frustration is growing (and who
can blame her)...
Additionally, in an effort to dispel some more
misinformation, Breitbart offers seven inconvenient facts
about Trump's refugee actions...
1. It is NOT a “Muslim ban.”
You will search the Executive Order in vain for mentions
of Islam, or any other religion. By Sunday morning, the
media began suffering acute attacks of honesty and writing
headlines such as “Trump’s Latest Executive Order:
Banning People From 7 Countries and More” (CNN)
and printing the full text of the order.
Granted, CNN still slips the phrase “Muslim-majority
countries” into every article about the order, including the
post in which they reprinted its text in full, but CNN used
the word “Muslim,” not Trump. The order applies
to all citizens of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan,
23
and Yemen. It does not specify Muslims. The indefinite
hold on Syrian refugees will affect Christians and Muslims
alike.
As Tim Carney at the Washington Examiner points out, the
largest Muslim-majority countries in the world
are not named in the Executive Order.
More countries may be added to the moratorium in the
days to come, as the Secretary of Homeland Security has
been instructed to complete a 30-day review of nations that
don’t provide adequate information for vetting visa
applicants.
It’s also noteworthy that the ban is not absolute.
Exceptions for “foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic
visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas
for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-
4 visas” are expressly made in the order. The Departments
of State and Homeland Security can also grant exceptions
on a “case-by-case basis,” and “when in the national
interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to
nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are
otherwise blocked.”
There is a provision in the Executive Order that says
applications based on religious persecution will be
prioritized
“provided that the religion of the individual
is a minority religion in the individual’s
country of nationality.”
This has been denounced as a “stealth Muslim ban” by
some of the very same people who were conspicuously
silent when the Obama administration pushed Christians –
who the most savagely persecuted minority in the Middle
East, with only the Yazidis offering real competition — to
the back of the migration line.
2. The order is based on security
reviews conducted by President Barack
Obama’s deputies.
As White House counselor Kellyanne Conway pointed out
on “Fox News Sunday,” the seven nations named in
Trump’s executive order are drawn from the Terrorist
Prevention Act of 2015. The 2015 “Visa Waiver Program
Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of
2015” named Iraq, Iran, Sudan, and Syria, while its 2016
update added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen.
“These are countries that have a history of
training, harboring, exporting terrorists. We
can’t keep pretending and looking the other
way,” said Conway.
3. The moratorium is largely temporary.
Citizens of the seven countries named as security risks are
banned from entering the United States for the next 90
days. Refugee processing is halted for 120 days. The
longest-lived aspect of the ban may prove to be the halt on
Syrian refugees, but that isn’t given a time frame at all. It
will last “until such time as I have determined that
sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to
ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with
the national interest,” as President Trump wrote.
4. Obama banned immigration from Iraq,
and Carter banned it from Iran.
“Fact-checking” website PolitiFact twists itself into knots
to avoid giving a “true” rating to the absolutely true fact
that Jimmy Carter banned Iranian immigration in 1980,
unless applicants could prove they were enemies of the
Khomenei theocracy.
One of Politifact’s phony talking points states that Carter
“acted against Iranian nationals, not an entire religion.” As
noted above, Trump’s Executive Order is precisely the
same – it does not act against an “entire religion,” it names
seven countries.
As for Barack Obama, he did indeed ban immigration from
Iraq, for much longer than Trump’s order bans it from the
seven listed nations, and none of the people melting down
today uttered a peep of protest. Richard Grenell summed it
up perfectly in a Tweet:
5. Trump’s refugee caps are comparable
to Obama’s pre-2016 practices:
David French, who was touted as a spoiler candidate to
keep Donald Trump out of the White House during the
presidential campaign – in other words, not a big Trump
fan – wrote a lengthy and clear-headed analysis of the
24
Executive Order for National Review. He noted that after
the moratorium ends in 120 days, Trump caps refugee
admissions at 50,000 per year… which is roughly the same
as President Obama’s admissions in 2011 and 2012, and
not far below the 70,000 per year cap in place from 2013
to 2015.
Obama had fairly low caps on refugees during the worst
years of the Syrian civil war. He didn’t throw open the
doors to mass refugee admissions until his final year in
office. Depending on how Trump’s review of Syrian
refugee policy turns out, he’s doing little more than
returning admissions to normal levels after a four-month
pause for security reviews.
6. The Executive Order is legal:
Those invoking the Constitution to attack Trump’s order
are simply embarrassing themselves. The President has
clear statutory authority to take these actions. As noted, his
predecessors did so, without much controversy.
Most of the legal arguments against Trump’s order
summarized by USA Today are entirely specious, such as
attacking him for “banning an entire religion,” which the
order manifestly does not do. Critics of the order have
a political opinion that it will in effect “ban Muslims,” but
that’s not what it says. Designating specific nations as
trouble spots and ordering a pause is entirely within the
President’s authority, and there is ample precedent to
prove it.
It should be possible to argue with the reasoning behind
the order, or argue that it will have negative unintended
consequences, without advancing hollow legal arguments.
Of course, this is America 2017, so a wave of lawsuits will
soon be sloshing through the courts.
7. This Executive Order is a security
measure, not an arbitrary expression of
supposed xenophobia.
Conway stressed the need to enhance immigration security
from trouble spots in her “Fox News Sunday” interview.
French also addressed the subject in his post:
When we know our enemy is seeking to
strike America and its allies through the
refugee population, when we know they’ve
succeeded in Europe, and when the
administration has doubts about our ability
to adequately vet the refugees we admit
into this nation, a pause is again not just
prudent but arguably necessary. It is
important that we provide sufficient aid and
protection to keep refugees safe and
healthy in place, but it is not necessary to
 bring Syrians to the United States to fulfill
our vital moral obligations.
French’s major objection to the Executive Order is that
applying it to green-card holders is “madness,” but
unfortunately many of the terrorists who attacked
Americans during the Obama years were green-card
holders. Daniel Horowitz and Chris Pandolfo addressed
that subject at Conservative Review:
Both liberals and conservatives expressed
concern over hundreds of individuals going
over to fight for ISIS. We are already
limited in how we can combat this growing
threat among U.S. citizens. Given that it is
completely legal to exclude non-citizens
upon re-entry, Trump extended the ban to
legal permanent residents as well.
If a Somali refugee is travelling back to Somalia (so much
for credible fear of persecution!), government officials
should have the ability to prevent that person from coming
back when necessary. Obviously, there are some
individuals from these seven countries who already have
green cards and we might not want to exclude.
That is why the order grants discretion to
the State Department to issue case-by-
case exemptions for “religious persecution,
“or when the person is already in transit
and denying admission would cause undue
hardship.”
.
25
A CBP agent is always stationed at any international
airport from which these individuals would board a direct
flight to the United States (Paris and Dubai, for example).
That individual would not allow anyone covered by this
ban onto a U.S.-bound flight unless he grants them a
hardship exemption.
Indeed, it appears that green card holders returning
yesterday from those seven countries were all granted
entry.
Because he is a progressive globalist,
Obama deliberately blinded us to security
threats, in the name of political correctness
and left-wing ideology.
Ninety or 120 days isn’t much time for Trump to turn all
that around, especially because it is unlikely much will
change in the seven countries Trump named.
The hysterical reaction to Trump’s order illustrates the
very thing that worries advocates of strong immigration
security: Americans’ security is the lowest priority, far
below progressive ideology, crass political opportunism,
and emotional theater.
We’re being effectively told by the theatrical class to
tolerate a certain amount of Islamic terrorism because their
feelings would be hurt by the tough measures we need
protest ourselves from a tough enemy. But this time,
President Trump is proving tough enough to push our
security up into the top priority.
 Resistance From Within:
Federal Workers Push Back Against Trump
By Juliet Eilperin, Lisa Rein And Marc Fisher
January 31, 2017

The signs of popular dissent from President Trump’s Then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates at the Justice
Department on May 15, 2015. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington
opening volley of actions have been plain to see on the Post)
nation’s streets, at airports in the aftermath of his refugee
and visa ban, and in the blizzard of outrage on social
At the Justice Department, an employee in the division that
media. But there’s another level of resistance to the new
administers grants to nonprofits fighting domestic violence
president that is less visible and potentially more
and researching sex crimes said the office has been
troublesome to the administration: a growing wave of
planning to slow its work and to file complaints with the
opposition from the federal workers charged with
inspector general’s office if asked to shift grants away
implementing any new president’s agenda.
from their mission.
Less than two weeks into Trump’s administration, federal
“You’re going to see the bureaucrats using
workers are in regular consultation with recently departed
time to their advantage,” said the
Obama-era political appointees about what they can do to
employee, who spoke on the condition of
push back against the new president’s initiatives. Some
anonymity for fear of retaliation. Through
federal employees have set up social media accounts to
leaks to news organizations and internal
anonymously leak word of changes that Trump appointees
complaints, he said, “people here will resist
are trying to make.
and push back against orders they find
unconscionable.”
And a few government workers are pushing back more
openly, incurring the wrath of a White House that, as press
The resistance is so early, so widespread and so deeply felt
secretary Sean Spicer said this week about dissenters at the
that it has officials worrying about paralysis and overt
State Department, sends a clear message that they “should
refusals by workers to do their jobs.
either get with the program, or they can go.”
Asked whether federal workers are dissenting in ways that
At a church in Columbia Heights last weekend, dozens of
go beyond previous party changes in the White House,
federal workers attended a support group for civil servants
Tom Malinowski, who was President Barack Obama’s
seeking a forum to discuss their opposition to the Trump
assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights
administration. And 180 federal employees have signed up
and labor, said, sarcastically:
for a workshop next weekend, where experts will offer
advice on workers’ rights and how they can express civil
disobedience. “Is it unusual?” There’s nothing unusual
about the entire national security
bureaucracy of the United States feeling
like their commander in chief is a threat to
U.S. national security. That happens all the

26
 time. It’s totally usual. Nothing to worry
about.”
The permanent bureaucracy, the backbone of the federal
government and the bulwark against many presidents’
activist intentions, is designed to be at least a step removed
from the crosswinds of partisan politics.
But for years, many conservatives have argued that the
federal bureaucracy is stacked against them, making it
harder for them to get things done even when they control
the White House, Congress or both.
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), a Trump
adviser and longtime critic of the bureaucracy, said the
pushback against the new administration reveals how
firmly entrenched liberals are and how threatened they feel
by the new regime. He cited an analysis by the Hill
newspaper that showed that 95 percent of campaign
donations from employees at 14 federal agencies went to
Hillary Clinton last fall.
“This is essentially the opposition in
waiting,” Gingrich said. “He may have to
clean out the Justice Department because
there are so many left-wingers there. State
is even worse.”
Gingrich said Trump might push for civil service revisions
to make it easier to fire federal workers. He predicted that
the public would back the president over federal
employees.
The signs of resistance in federal offices range from low-
level grumbling and angry opposition posted online to
anonymous promises of outright insubordination as new
policies develop.
The State Department has emerged as the nexus of
opposition to Trump’s refugee policy, in part because it
has an official dissent channel where Foreign Service
27
employees can register opposition without fear of reprisals.
The channel, formed in 1971, has been used to raise policy
objections to the Vietnam War and other conflicts. Several
hundred employees signed the dissent cable objecting to
Trump’s refugee policy.
Secretaries of state have taken the dissent channel so
seriously that they have altered policies in response to
complaints. In 2002, then-Secretary Colin Powell presided
over the awarding of a prize for “constructive dissent” to
an employee who had pushed back against a deputy
secretary.
But State Department employees are nervous enough now
that the American Foreign Service Association on Tuesday
sent out an advisory called “What You Need To Know
When You Disagree With U.S. Policy.” The note spelled
out employees’ legal protections but warned that “walking
out in protest of a U.S. government policy, even just
temporarily, would be considered a strike” and can result
in being fired.
Other agencies that lack that kind of tradition are in more
turmoil. When the White House last week ordered an end
to all advertising and other outreach activities encouraging
Americans to sign up for health plans through Affordable
Care Act marketplaces, employees at the Health and
Human Services Department protested, pointing out that
the ban on ads and robo-calls would probably result in less
coverage of the most desirable customers — young and
healthy adults whose scant use of medical care can help
lower prices for everyone else.
The internal protest, combined with an outcry on social
media and from the insurance industry, prompted the
Trump administration to revise its directive in less than 24
hours.
Leaders of government workers unions and other
associations say their members will do their jobs
professionally and energetically, even if they disagree with
the president’s politics or methods.
“There is no evidence we are seeing of a
widespread federal bureaucracy revolt,”
said Bill Valdez, president of the Senior
Executives Association, a nonprofit that
advocates for career federal managers. He
said many managers are telling workers,
“Don’t get involved in the drama happening
elsewhere.”
The new administration’s talk of swift changes in the role
and scope of some departments has frustrated many
workers, said Randy L. Erwin, president of the National
Federation of Federal Employees, but although
 “federal workers are now extremely
concerned . . . federal workers are used to
seeing the political winds change direction.”
Workers at some agencies say they have seen no sign of
opposition. At the Education Department, which Trump at
one point suggested be dismantled, one official said the
new administration has been surprisingly agreeable: no
major changes in policy, no troubling directives.
“We’ve been, I think, heartened by how
things are going here,” the official said.
But the level of worry is particularly high at places such as
the Environmental Protection Agency. The head of that
agency’s union got an email Tuesday from a local union
leader asking for guidance on what to tell workers to do
“if they receive an illegal order from
management.”
The union representing scientists and other EPA
employees is exploring the formation of a fundraising arm
to “defend federal scientists we anticipate will be
disciplined for speaking out or for defending scientific
facts,” particularly about climate change, said Nicole
Cantello, vice president of Local 704 of the American
Federation of Government Employees, which represents
EPA workers in the Chicago area.
John O’Grady, a career EPA employee who heads a
national council of EPA unions, said Trump’s firing of
acting attorney general Sally Yates on Monday night after
the Obama-era holdover had refused to implement
Trump’s refugees ban
“sends kind of a chilling effect through the
agency. I’m afraid at this point that many
federal employees are just fearful for their
jobs, and they want to keep their heads
down.”
Two Twitter feeds, @altUSEPA and
@ActualEPAFacts, have attracted more
than 200,000 followers and call themselves
part of “the Resistance.” They appear to be
run by outside activists, rather than agency
employees.
Top EPA officials have tried to reassure anxious
employees. In an email to employees, Don Benton — a top
Trump adviser to the EPA — insisted that media reports of
crackdowns on public speech and scientific autonomy
were
“just not accurate. . . . Changes will likely
come, and when they do, we will work
together to implement them.”
28
In any administration, one man’s principled resistance is
another’s outrageous defiance. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.),
Trump’s nominee for attorney general, said in 2015 that it
is the obligation of a federal worker to stand up against
improper orders.
In a confirmation hearing for Yates, Sessions said:
“You have to watch out, because people
will be asking you do to things you just
need to say no about.” Like any CEO, with
a law firm — sometimes the lawyers have
to tell the CEO: ‘Mr. CEO, you can’t do
that. Don’t do that.’”
Presidents appoint the heads of agencies and a few
officials at the top of each department, but the great
majority of those who implement any administration’s
agenda are civil servants who enjoy legal protections
meant to encourage them to blow the whistle on fraud and
corruption.
Short of formal whistleblowing, workers are finding small
ways to express their opposition. At the Justice
Department, some career civil servants asked their bosses
whether they were allowed to protest their new president
by marching or contacting a member of Congress. The
answer was yes, if they did so on their own time and in
their personal capacity.
The day after the November election, the department’s
ethics office said workers could wear clothing that
contained a political message. One lawyer who had worn a
Hillary Clinton T-shirt beneath another layer of clothing
said that once the advice was issued,
“I took the layer off.”
In the past few days, protest accounts have popped up on
social media from employees at several agencies. An
immunologist who formerly worked at the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention created what he called a
“resistance page,”@viralCDC, for CDC employees to post
vaccine and public health information that workers believe
the Trump administration may seek to remove from public
view.
There has been no freeze on communications at the CDC,
said spokeswoman Kathy Harben.
Similarly, a Twitter account protesting Trump’s policies
has popped up in the Defense Department. Using the
handle @Rogue_DoD, a service member has tweeted
everything from Defense Department documents warning
about the effects of climate change to an opinion piece
accusing Trump of insufficient consultation with Defense
Secretary Jim Mattis.
Career staff members in at least five departments said they
are staying in close contact with Obama administration
officials to get advice on how to handle Trump initiatives
they consider illegal or improper.
Former labor secretary Thomas Perez, who also headed the
Justice Department’s civil rights division under Obama,
said he has not been in contact with his former employees
but is working to mobilize grass-roots opposition.
“We’re mindful of our ethical
responsibilities,” said Perez, who is running
for chair of the Democratic National
Committee. “We’re also mindful that we’re
in an existential crisis.”
While many federal workers have begun to consider
avenues of dissent only since the inauguration, others had
been preparing for weeks. In the last days of Obama’s
tenure, several departments catalogued data and reports
and got them into the hands of allies outside the
government.
The use of social media as outlets for worried government
workers has spread through much of the bureaucracy.
After Trump complained about the National Park Service
using Twitter to compare the crowd sizes at his
inauguration with the far larger assembly at Obama’s
gathering in 2009, a gag order temporarily silenced the
official social media account.
In response, an ex-employee at Badlands National Park
who still had access to its Twitter feed started posting facts
.
29
about climate change. The rogue tweeter won more than
60,000 followers before park officials regained control of
the account.
Social media accounts have popped up to defend the
Smithsonian Institution and the National Endowments for
the Arts and the Humanities. Employees at some
Smithsonian units have been reminded that policies
prohibit them from using their work devices to post
political comments.
“We don’t intend to change the way we do
things,” said Smithsonian Secretary David
J. Skorton. “That’s not out of a sense of
defiance, it’s not out of a sense of not
wanting to be accountable, it’s out of a
sense of believing in the mission of the
Smithsonian, which is to do research and
share information with the public.”
Academics have debated for years whether bureaucracies
inevitably grow to a point where they, as political scientist
Michael Nelson of Rhodes College put it, “ineluctably
overpower” their political masters.
“Time and time again,” he wrote, “major
efforts to make administration more
responsive to political control have had the
opposite effect. It is enough to chasten
even the boldest reformer if, like the
sorcerer’s apprentice, his every assault on
his tormentors doubles their strength.”
 Neocons McCain & Graham V. Trump
On Muslim Immigration Suspension
By Stephen Lendman
1-30-2017
In office barely over a week, Trump’s full domestic and
geopolitical agenda remains to unfold, despite a disturbing
first few days warranting criticism.
Russophobe, neocon, uber-hawk Senators John McCain
and Lindsey Graham have been around forever - in
Congress since 1987 and 1995 respectively, urging one
war of aggression after another. Both represent a clear and
present danger to freedom.
Below is their statement in response to Trump’s
suspension of Muslim immigration from seven designated
countries. Here’s what Trump said first:
“America is a proud nation of immigrants
and we will continue to show compassion
to those fleeing oppression, but we will do
so while protecting our own citizens and
border.”
“America has always been the land of the
free and home of the brave. We will keep it
free and keep it safe, as the media knows,
but refuses to say.”
“My policy is similar to what President
Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas
for refugees from Iraq for six months.”
“The seven countries named in the
Executive Order are the same countries
previously identified by the Obama
administration as sources of terror.”
“To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as
the media is falsely reporting. This is not
about religion - this is about terror and
keeping our country safe. There are over
40 different countries worldwide that are
majority Muslim that are not affected by this
order. We will again be issuing visas to all
countries once we are sure we have
reviewed and implemented the most
secure policies over the next 90 days.”
“I have tremendous feeling for the people
involved in this horrific humanitarian crisis
in Syria. My first priority will always be to
protect and serve our country, but as
30
President I will find ways to help all those
who are suffering.”
Fact:
Targeting individuals in designated
countries for their faith spurns compassion.
They’re human beings in need, not
terrorists.
Fact:
“America has always been the land of the
free and home of the brave” for its
privileged few alone, not for most others,
least of all for its most needy and
vulnerable, notably its people of color.
Fact:
The best way, maybe the only way, to keep
America safe is to stop attacking other
countries aggressively, ones posing no
threat to anyone.
Fact:
Most certainly Trump’s order is a Muslim
ban. No Judeo/Christian nations were
targeted, none where other religions are
predominant, none against any US ally.
Fact:
His order is all about politics, unrelated to
border and national security protection.
Fact:
The way to show “tremendous feeling” for
long-suffering Syrians is by ending support
for terrorists attacking them, along with
ordering a halt to US and allied warplanes
bombing the country’s infrastructure and
government sites.
Fact:
“(H)elp(ing) all those who are suffering”
requires ending US wars of aggression,
 instituting policies treating everyone
equitably at home and abroad, strictly
observing rule of law principles, and
working cooperatively with all nations.
Here’s the McCain/Graham statement:
“Our government has a responsibility to
defend our borders, but we must do so in a
way that makes us safer and upholds all
that is decent and exceptional about our
nation.
It is clear from the confusion at our airports
across the nation that President Trump’s
executive order was not properly vetted.”
“We are particularly concerned by reports
that this order went into effect with little to
no consultation with the Departments of
State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland
Security.”
“Such a hasty process risks harmful
results. We should not stop green-card
holders from returning to the country they
call home.”
“We should not stop those who have
served as interpreters for our military and
diplomats from seeking refuge in the
country they risked their lives to help.”
“And we should not turn our backs on those
refugees who have been shown through
extensive vetting to pose no demonstrable
threat to our nation, and who have suffered
unspeakable horrors, most of them women
and children.”
31
“Ultimately, we fear this executive order will
become a self-inflicted wound in the fight
against terrorism. At this very moment,
American troops are fighting side-by-side
with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL.”
“But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots
from coming to military bases in Arizona to
fight our common enemies. Our most
important allies in the fight against ISIL are
the vast majority of Muslims who reject its
apocalyptic ideology of hatred.”
“This executive order sends a signal,
intended or not, that America does not
want Muslims coming into our country. That
is why we fear this executive order may do
more to help terrorist recruitment than
improve our security.”
Fact:
McCain and Graham represent the worst of
US governance - hard-right, extremist,
militant, ruthless, contemptuous of
fundamental rights at home and abroad.
Fact:
Criticizing Trump’s immigration order
ignores the imperial horrors both senators
support, deplorable US domestic policies
exclusively serving monied interests at the
expense of most others, along with police
state enforcement laws, tyranny by any
standard.
McCain, Graham and most others in Congress should
clean up their own act before criticizing others.
 Conway: Inconvenience For 1% Of Travelers
'Small Price To Pay' For Security
© REUTERS/ Mike Segar US
04:09 30.01.2017(Updated 04:29 30.01.2017)
Trump’s senior counselor Kellyanne
Conway said on Sunday while
commenting on the president’s
executive order barring immigration
from select Muslim-majority countries
that the chaos it caused was “a small
price to pay” for the safety of
Americans.
Conway defended the ban in an interview with Fox News
saying that it shouldn't be regarded as an administration
failure even though it triggered mayhem at many airports,
including the detention of travelers with legitimate papers.
The adviser pointed out that the number of those detained
at US airports was relatively small.
Trump's advisor said,
"325,000 people from overseas came
into this country just yesterday through our
airports. You're talking about 300 and
some who have been detained or are
prevented from gaining access to an
aircraft in their home countries and must
stay for now."
Conway emphasized that that is only 1 percent of those
who arrived, and that this sacrifice is incomparable
with the grief of the children whose parents were killed
in the 9/11 attacks. (Most of the perpetrators of the 9/11
.
32
attacks were from Saudi Arabia, a country not among the
seven whose nationals are currently banned.)
"I think in terms of the upside being
greater protection of our borders, of our
people, it's a small price to pay."
The top White House aide added that calling President
Donald Trump's executive order a "Muslim ban" was
wrong, as there are 46 other majority Muslim countries not
included.
As for those detained upon arrival, she explained that their
situations will be handled on a case-by-case basis via a
routine screening process and if there is no threat, then
they can expect to be released in due course.
White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus also defended
the way the order was being implemented, saying
without sudden implementation, people intending to harm
Americans would be able to move up their travel in order
to get into the country before the "grace period" was over
Trump on Friday signed an executive order temporarily
suspending immigration from seven predominantly
Muslim countries: Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya
and Yemen. The order also suspends the flow of Syrian
refugees into the country and halts all refugee resettlement
in the US for 120 days as the administration reviews the
vetting process.
On Saturday, a federal judge in New York issued an
emergency stay on implementation of Trump's order. In a
tweet published several hours later, the US president
signaled that he will fight to keep the order in place.
"Our country needs strong borders and
extreme vetting, NOW," Trump said
in the tweet. "Look what is happening
all over Europe and, indeed, the
world — a horrible mess!"
 Trump Slams McCain, Graham:
"Stop Trying To Start World War III"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 30, 2017 5:04 AM

Shortly after Senators McCain and Graham issued their
"joint statement on President Trump's Executive Order
on immigration"...
U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham
(R-SC) released the following statement today on the
President’s executive order on immigration:
those refugees who have been shown through extensive
vetting to pose no demonstrable threat to our nation, and
who have suffered unspeakable horrors, most of them women
and children.
“Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-
inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. At this very
moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi
partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots
from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common
enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are
the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of
hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that
America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is
why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist
recruitment than improve our security.”

President Trump decided to let them have it...

“Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but

we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all
that is decent and exceptional about our nation.

“It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the

nation that President Trump’s executive order was not
properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that
this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the
Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security.

“Such a hasty process risks harmful results. We should not stop

green-card holders from returning to the country they call home.
We should not stop those who have served as interpreters for our
military and diplomats from seeking refuge in the country they
risked their lives to help. And we should not turn our backs on Hard to argue with that!
.

33
 No One Talks Of The Diseases
Muslims & Hispanics Have
By Patricia Doyle PhD
1-30-2017

Hello Jeff –
Trump is trying to stop this influx of refugees into the
US...many carrying infectious diseases. Where are the
news media on the amount of AIDS-infected Somalians
who admit that they find raping women and children to be
perfectly fine. It's a crime they commit at home all the time
and it's something they will continue to do in Europe...and
in your town USA as well.
Why not put a health stop on all incoming refugees?
Syrians have Leishmaniasis and other diseases and Yemen
and Haiti have Cholera. Is a nation not allowed to protect
itself from infectious diseases? Since when do refugees
take preference over American citizens in America?
Brazil has Yellow Fever now spreading and Africa now
has several countries with active Cholera outbreaks. And
let us not forget Chagas spreading locally in Texas and
Louisiana due to influx of illegal Latinos from Mexico and
Central and South America. Florida now has Leprosy
spreading there due to refugees and illegals
Insanity? No, it's not Donald Trump…it
is insanity on the part of the elitist
bankers and media.
Patty
See the DISEASE MAP at
PROMEDMAIL.ORG

Jeff, you have to check out the Promed health map and http://www.healthmap.org/en/
note the clusters of diseases in Europe and elsewhere in
heavily muslim-invaded areas. http://www.promedmail.org/

34
These 'Rogue' White House Accounts Are Just Liberal Bait
We All Want To Believe Things We Already Agree With.
By Luke O'Neil
Jan 30, 2017

An intrepid mole embeds deep within the corridors of

power, firing off missives of resistance as authorities work
to ferret them out. Will they be apprehended before they
save the country from the brink of ruin? If it sounds like
the fiction of a heavy-handed spy thriller, that's because it
is. Except the medium in this case isn't some paperback
airport novel, it's a popular Twitter account: Rogue
POTUS Staff.

The account, which has amassed 320,000 followers in the

past few days—100 of which are otherwise smart people I
know, including numerous journalists—and spawned
credulous media reports like this one, presents itself as the
work of "the unofficial resistance team inside the White
House."

"We will not reveal our identity to anyone!"

the account explains in its bio. "The only
way to keep a secret is to keep it secret!"

Indeed.

The account, an update on a well worn Twitter trope —

@NYTFridge or @CondeElevator—purports to be a direct
look into an exclusive milieu that readers are naturally
interested in hearing about.

35
 "rogue" government resistance accounts that have flooded
Twitter since Trump took office. The trend began last
week, when the National Park Service found themselves at
odds with the president after retweeting two posts that
were critical of him and, more importantly, the size of his
inauguration crowd. Soon thereafter, the administration
reportedly ordered the Parks Service, and other
government agencies, to temporarily curtail their social
media use.
It is also, like many others before it, almost certainly fake.
It comes amidst a veritable gold rush of so-called "alt-" or
.

36
 Nobody Is Listening
To Your Nonsense Anymore! (Video)
By Voice Of Reason
Monday, January 30th, 2017

turned into nothing more than headline readers, or sound

bite seekers. That’s the only rational explanation for how
media organizations like CNN, with all their
dishonesty, can still be in business. The following video
takes a few minutes to shred the article that follows it from
CNN for its ridiculously biased reporting, then sets the
record straight on a number of issues the author of the
article made no effort to communicate honestly.

“If you can keep it,” Franklin said. Time will

tell I suppose… but it doesn't look good
unless people wake up!
There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the
Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was
approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of
government the delegates had created. His answer was:

"A republic, if you can keep it."

In the American political system, the press, or the media,

has often been referred to as the Fourth Estate, or the
fourth branch of government, because of the influence it
can have on holding the other branches of government
accountable. Our Founding Fathers knew that if the
country they established was going to survive, it would
need to have an "educated and informed electorate,” which
is one of the reasons why they said that Congress shall
make no law that “abridges the freedom of speech, or the
press.”
John Adams, our nation’s second president once said,
"Our Constitution was made only for a
moral and religious people. It is wholly
inadequate to the government of any
other." It’s hard to imagine if the Founders
ever envisioned the situation where the
country finds itself today, where the “free
press” is anything but free, and many
Americans dare not speak of even their
own of “morals” or religion” in public, lest
they be branded a bigot, or labeled
intolerant by the "fourth estate," or by
people in the "free press."
Despite the fact that we live during a time when almost
any information a person could ever need isn’t much more
than a few clicks away, the majority of Americans have
CNN Reports:
When President Donald Trump declared at the Pentagon
Friday he was enacting strict new measures to prevent
domestic terror attacks, there were few within his
government who knew exactly what he meant.
Administration officials weren't immediately sure
which countries' citizens would be barred from
entering the United States. The Department of
Homeland Security was left making a legal analysis on
the order after Trump signed it. A Border Patrol agent,
confronted with arriving refugees, referred questions only
to the President himself, according to court filings.
Saturday night, a federal judge granted an
emergency stay for citizens of the affected countries
who had already arrived in the US and those who are
in transit and hold valid visas, ruling they can legally
enter the US.

37
Trump's unilateral moves, which have drawn the ire of
human rights groups and prompted protests at US
airports, reflect the President's desire to quickly make
good on his campaign promises. But they also
encapsulate the pitfalls of an administration largely
operated by officials with scant federal experience.
It wasn't until Friday — the day Trump signed the order
banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries
for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for
120 days — that career homeland security staff were
allowed to see the final details of the order, a person
familiar with the matter said.
The result was widespread confusion across the
country on Saturday as airports struggled to adjust
to the new directives. In New York, two Iraqi nationals
sued the federal government after they were detained at
John F. Kennedy International Airport, and 10 others
were detained as well.
In Philadelphia, a Syrian family of six who had a visa
through a family connection in the US was placed on a
return flight to Doha, Qatar, and Department of
Homeland Security officials said others who were in the
air would be detained upon arrival and put back on a
plane to their home country.
Asked during a photo opportunity in the Oval Office
Saturday afternoon about the rollout, Trump said his
government was "totally prepared."
"It's working out very nicely," Trump told reporters.
"You see it at the airports. You see it all over. It's
working out very nicely and we're going to have a
very, very strict ban, and we're going to have
38
extreme vetting, which we should have had in this
country for many years."
The policy team at the White House developed the
executive order on refugees and visas, and largely
avoided the traditional interagency process that
would have allowed the Justice Department and
homeland security agencies to provide operational
guidance, according to numerous officials who spoke to
CNN on Saturday.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and
Department of Homeland Security leadership saw the
final details shortly before the order was finalized,
government officials said.
Friday night, DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that
the executive order restrictions applying to seven
countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and
Yemen — did not apply to people with lawful permanent
residence, generally referred to as green card holders.
The White House overruled that guidance overnight,
according to officials familiar with the rollout. That
order came from the President's inner circle, led by
Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Their decision held
that, on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green
card holders to enter the US.
There had been some debate whether green card
holders should be even allowed to board international
flights. It was decided by the Department of Homeland
Security they could fly to the US and would be
considered on a case-by-case basis after passing a
secondary screening.
But the guidance sent to airlines on Friday night,
obtained by CNN, said clearly, "lawful permanent
residents are not included and may continue to
travel to the USA."
As of Saturday afternoon, Customs and Border
Protection continued to issue the same guidance to
airlines as it did Friday, telling airlines that fly to the US
that green card holders can board planes to the US but
they may get extra scrutiny on arrival, according to an
airline official.
Before the President issued the order, the White
House did not seek the legal guidance of the Office
of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department office that
interprets the law for the executive branch. A source
said the executive order did not follow the standard
agency review process that's typically overseen by the
National Security Council, though the source couldn't
specifically say if that included the decision to not have
the order go through the Office of Legal Counsel.
 Separately, a person familiar with the matter said career
officials in charge of enforcing the executive order were
not fully briefed on the specifics until Friday. The
officials were caught off guard by some of the
specifics and raised questions about how to handle
the new banned passengers on US-bound planes.
Regarding the green card holders and some of the
confusion about whether they were impacted, the person
familiar with the matter said if career officials had known
more about the executive order earlier, some of the
confusion could have been avoided and a better plan
could be in place.
Administration officials also defended the process
Saturday. They said the people who needed to be
briefed ahead of time on the plane were briefed and that
people at the State Department and DHS who were
.
39
involved in the process were able to make decisions
about who to talk and inform about this.
Bannon and Miller were running point on this order and
giving directives regarding green cards, according to a
Republican close to the White House.
But even after the Friday afternoon announcement,
administration officials at the White House took several
hours to produce text of the action until several
hours after it was signed. Adviser Kellyanne Conway
even said at one point it was not going to be released
before eventually it did get sent out.
Administration officials also seemed unsure at first who
was covered in the action, and a list of impacted
countries was only produced later on Friday night, hours
after the President signed the document at the
Pentagon.
 When Trump Does Something Right, We
Must Back Him As With The Executive Order
Ban On Muslims Entering The US
By Patricia Doyle Phd
1-30-2017
Hello Jeff - We must support Trump when his actions are
correct for the the safety and well-being of the American
people.
I cannot believe the anti-Trump protests at airports and
across the nation. Trump is trying to prevent the historic
killing and terror events which are a major part of muslim
'culture'. Imposing even a 90 day ban on incoming
muslims from murder and terror states like Somalia Iraq
& Sudan is strictly logical and represents a bare minimum
of common sense. What are White Americans thinking of
protesting someone who is making good on part of his
promises to the voters to protect them from terrorist
butchery? These Muslims want to kill us and subjugate out
culture to theirs. They have defiled Europe and Australia
already. Their history is horrifying in its sheer death and
violence.
One man complained that his Iraqi fin ace was only 21
and therefore could not possibly be a terrorist. Is he
joking? There have been scores of female suicide bombers
and facilitators of terror in many, many countries. Austria
just stopped a terror event planned by a 12 year old.
Americans wanted this ban especially on refugees coming
from these countries but now the lame liberals are out in
force protesting Trump when he does something to stop
the influx of terror and save their lives. There are either
being paid by globalist communist Soros or there are
completely insane…just like those Germans who have
taken these savages into their homes with catastrophic
rapes and murders resulting.
What made me laugh was the protest in Israel. Israel is
protesting our muslim ban and President Trump when the
.
40
Israelis have not taken in ONE SINGLE MUSLIM
'REFUGEE.' Yet they can protest America for trying to
slow the invasion here? Well, i guess it has to do with the
PROFIT that Israeli Jewish 'refugee relocating companies'
are making in the US and elsewhere. They are relocating,
for big money, Muslim 'refugees' who ultimately rape and
kill people in EVERY host country they are moved into.
The day when Israel takes in a Muslim refugee then I
might not be so upset by their protest of America and Mr.
Trump.
Of course, the segment of the US population protesting
and working hard to get these savages into the US are the
lawyers. They are at airports protesting and helping get
the Muslim travelers released and into the US to walk
among us, infect us and ultimately destroy us.
When the next terror event happens, we have only
ourselves to blame for allowing the invasion of the West to
continue.
What is the sense of building a wall on the taxpayer dole
when Americans will protest and do their best to see to it
that 'refugees' and illegals get to circumvent it? Anyone
protesting Trump's anti-Muslim anti-'refugee' anti illegal
policy has no right to complain when the unthinkable
happens. When someone in their family os raped and
given a death sentence of AIDS, or some other disease.
they have no right to complain. We tried to warn them.
Look to Europe.
Patty
 President Bannon?
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
JAN. 30, 2017
Credit Illustration by Selman Design; Photos by Damon Winter/The
New York Times
Plenty of presidents have had prominent political advisers,
and some of those advisers have been suspected of quietly
setting policy behind the scenes (recall Karl Rove or, if
your memory stretches back far enough, Dick Morris). But
we’ve never witnessed a political aide move as brazenly to
consolidate power as Stephen Bannon — nor have we seen
one do quite so much damage so quickly to his putative
boss’s popular standing or pretenses of competence.
Mr. Bannon supercharged Breitbart News as a platform for
inciting the alt-right, did the same with the Trump
campaign and is now repeating the act with the Trump
White House itself. That was perhaps to be expected,
though the speed with which President Trump has moved
to alienate Mexicans (by declaring they would pay for a
border wall), Jews (by disregarding their unique
experience of the Holocaust) and Muslims (the ban) has
been impressive. Mr. Trump never showed much
inclination to reach beyond the minority base of voters that
delivered his Electoral College victory, and Mr. Bannon,
whose fingerprints were on each of those initiatives, is
helping make sure he doesn’t.
But a new executive order, politicizing the process for
national security decisions, suggests Mr. Bannon is
positioning himself not merely as a Svengali but as the de
facto president.
In that new order, issued on Saturday, Mr. Trump took the
unprecedented step of naming Mr. Bannon to the National
Security Council, along with the secretaries of state and
defense and certain other top officials. President George
W. Bush’s last chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, was so
concerned about separating politics from national security
41
that he barred Mr. Rove, Mr. Bush’s political adviser, from
N.S.C. meetings. To the annoyance of experienced foreign
policy aides, David Axelrod, President Barack Obama’s
political adviser, sat in on some N.S.C. meetings, but he
was not a permanent member of the council.
More telling still, Mr. Trump appointed Mr. Bannon to the
N.S.C. “principals’ committee,” which includes most of
those same top officials and meets far more frequently. At
the same time, President Trump downgraded two senior
national security officials — the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, a role now held by Gen. Joseph Dunford
Jr., and the director of national intelligence, the job that
Dan Coats, a former member of the Senate Intelligence
Committee and former ambassador to Germany, has been
nominated to fill.
All this may seem like boring bureaucratic chart-making,
but who sits at the National Security Council table when
the administration debates issues of war and peace can
make a real difference in decisions. In giving Mr. Bannon
an official role in national security policy making, Mr.
Trump has not simply broken with tradition but has
embraced the risk of politicizing national security, or
giving the impression of doing so.
Mr. Trump’s order says that the chairman of the Joint
Chiefs and the director of national intelligence will attend
the principals’ committee meetings only “where issues
pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be
discussed.” Could there be any national security
discussions when input from the intelligence agencies and
the military will not be required? People in those jobs are
often the ones to tell presidents hard truths, even when
they are unwelcome.
As his first week in office amply demonstrated, Mr. Trump
has no grounding in national security decision making, no
sophistication in governance and little apparent grasp of
what it takes to lead a great diverse nation. He needs to
hear from experienced officials, like General Dunford. But
Mr. Bannon has positioned himself, along with Mr.
Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as the president’s
most trusted aide, shutting out other voices that might offer
alternative views. He is now reportedly eclipsing the
national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
While Mr. Trump long ago embraced Mr. Bannon’s
politics, he would be wise to reconsider allowing him to
run his White House, particularly after the fiasco over the
weekend of the risible Muslim ban. Mr. Bannon helped
push that order through without consulting Mr. Trump’s
own experts at the Department of Homeland Security or
even seeking deliberation by the N.S.C. itself. The
administration’s subsequent modifications, the courtroom
reversals and the international furor have made the
president look not bold and decisive but simply
incompetent.
As a candidate, Mr. Trump was immensely gratified by the
applause at his rallies for Mr. Bannon’s jingoism. Yet now
casually weaponized in executive orders, those same ideas
are alienating American allies and damaging the
presidency.
.
42
Presidents are entitled to pick their advisers. But Mr.
Trump’s first spasms of policy making have supplied
ample evidence that he needs advisers who can think
strategically and weigh second- and third-order
consequences beyond the immediate domestic political
effects. Imagine tomorrow if Mr. Trump is faced with a
crisis involving China in the South China Sea or Russia in
Ukraine. Will he look to his chief political provocateur,
Mr. Bannon, with his penchant for blowing things up, or
will he turn at last for counsel to the few more thoughtful
experienced hands in his administration, like Defense
Secretary Jim Mattis and General Dunford?
 Trump’s Bloodless Coup Against
America’s Enemies From Within
By DCwhispers
Posted On January 30, 2017
Consider the names:
Flynn, Priebus, Tillerson, Mattis, Sessions, Zinke,
Kelly, Coats, Pompeo, Kushner, Bannon, Conway,
Pence, and Priebus, among others.
And then there is of course, President Donald Trump,
the architect of this roiling team of male and female alpha
personalities who, despite various superficial differences,
share one very strong common thread – an unwavering
belief that America must once again fight to protect its
own so that it can again be powerful enough to do the
same for the world.
And to do that, there is much house-cleaning to be done
among the long-entrenched globalist factions that have
come to dominate the rank and file of the U.S. government
over the last few decades. Team Trump is doing a
masterful job of exposing those factions, drawing them
out, and quickly sending them packing.
Within the last week, staffing has been gutted throughout
various agencies, and either replaced with like-minded
“America First” loyalists, or those positions are being left
vacant – perhaps permanently. The ODNI is undergoing a
considerable shake-down, and is currently relegated to
second-tier status. Trump does not trust the entirety of the
U.S. Intelligence monstrosity, having been informed
multiple times that the nation’s enemies beyond have
carefully over many years infiltrated the ODNI and its
affiliate intelligence branches with a multitude of enemies
from within. (and so far unreported by the Mainstream
Media is the administration’s ongoing intelligence
43
blackout against the United Nations. Trump and his inner
circle hold little respect and even less trust for the
monolithic globalist institution.)
And so arrives the much-publicized temporary
immigration ban placed upon seven countries with long
histories of promoting terrorist activity. On the surface,
this ban appears to be merely another campaign promise
being kept by President Trump. Behind the scenes, though,
far away from the predictably frantic cries of the media
elites, (so many of which are now financially beholden to
foreign/anti-American interests outside the United States)
this single executive order is helping to shine a light upon
those within our government who are now opposing such a
fair-minded use of protect-America-first authority.
With a single stroke of his pen, President Trump is using
his executive authority to vet personnel within multiple
government agencies. Certainly many in the State
Department have already been exposed and are now
vacating en masse like cockroaches suddenly bathed in
light. What would have been logistically impossible in four
or even eight years on a case-by-case basis is being done
successfully in a matter of weeks from Mr. Trump’s newly
arrived place inside the Oval Office.
This is a bloodless coup being attempted by the first true
political outsider to have ever been elected to this nation’s
highest office. Donald Trump has surrounded himself with
a small army of loyalists devoted to restoring the hope and
prosperity of America to its rightful owners – the
American people. The President is absorbing wave after
wave of anti-America media backlash and pushing
forward, each new order another beam of light being And while failure is not an option, it might very well be
shined into the darkest corners of a diseased government this endeavor’s most probable outcome.
infested by a malignant contagion determined to eventually
kill its host.

This week’s Supreme Court nominee will be one of many

similar gestures intended to restore order to chaos, and
government to its people. Many more are to follow, and
the cries of opposition will grow louder and more unstable
as the war within the war, rages.

In doing so, Mr. Trump risks everything.

The difference between success and failure is precarious at

best.
.

44
 New Rasmussen Poll Reveals
Silent Majority Approves Of Immigration Ban
By Tyler Durden
Jan 30, 2017 8:25 PM
While vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary
protesters may get a lot of media attention, a new
Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent
majority of Americans, men and women who don't have
time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to
work to provide for their families, support Trump's
temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim
countries in the Middle East and Africa. In fact, per the
new poll, 57% of likely U.S. voters actually approve of
the ban while only 33% were opposed.
A new Rasmussen Reports national
telephone and online survey finds that 57%
of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary
ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until
the federal government approves its
ability to screen out potential terrorists
from coming here. Thirty-three percent
(33%) are opposed, while 10% are
undecided.
Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block
on visas prohibiting residents of Syria,
Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and
Yemen from entering the United States
until the government approves its ability
to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two
percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban,
and 11% are undecided.
This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend
protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-
month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on
visitors from these seven countries.
45
Like most issues, support for the immigration ban was
heavily split along party lines with 82% of Republicans
supporting the executive order versus only 34% of
Democrats and 53% of Independents.
The refugee ban is supported by 82% of
Republicans and 59% of voters not
affiliated with either major party.
Democrats are opposed by a 53% to
34% margin.
The numbers are nearly identical for the temporary ban on
visas from these seven terrorist-plagued nations.
Men and women are in general
agreement on both measures. Younger
voters are slightly less supportive than their
elders are.
Blacks oppose both bans more than
whites and other majority voters do.
As we pointed out earlier (see "Is A Constitutional Crisis
Imminent In The Wake Of Trump's Immigration Ban?"),
the ACLU, flush with $24 million in donations from just
this weekend alone, has vowed to fight Trump's
immigration ban all the way to the Supreme Court on
grounds that it targets people of a certain religion, in direct
violation of the First Amendment.
That said, many legal scholars have
asserted that Trump's immigration ban will
stand up against Constitutional tests, with
GWU professor Jonathan Turley saying the
ban can't be viewed as a "Muslim ban"
given the "vast majority of Muslims
around the world are not affected by the
limitations placed on these seven
countries.”
Still, some observers said the courts ultimately might
uphold Trump’s order.
Its alleged anti-Muslim thrust “is not
clear to me,” said Eugene Volokh, a
professor at UCLA School of Law.
 Judges might interpret the order as targeting people from which, at least according to Rasmussen, is a fight he's
countries where “jihadist sentiments” are common, he said. winning.

The president generally has broad

authority to exclude non-citizens from
coming into the country, Volokh said.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington

University, predicted the courts would not interpret the
order as a religious ban.

“It is not on its face a Muslim ban,” he

said. “That dog simply won’t hunt. No
judge can look at the order and analyze
it as a Muslim ban because the vast
majority of Muslims around the world
are not affected by the limitations
placed on these seven countries.”

But while the ACLU is looking for a Supreme Court battle,

Trump continues to fight in the court of public opinion,
.

46
 Obama Moves to Undermine
Trump Presidency After Only 10 Days
Chris Menahan
Jan. 30, 2017

Do your paid protesters have a "constitutional right" to

smash Trump supporters over the head with metal objects?
Even though Bush made no effort to interfere with Because that's what they're doing.
Obama's presidency, Obama has moved to undermine
Donald Trump's presidency after only 10 days in office.

President Obama issued the following statement attacking

Trump this afternoon through his spokesman Kevin Lewis:
President Obama is heartened by the level of engagement
taking place in communities around the country. In his
final official speech as President, he spoke about the
important role of citizens and how all Americans have a
responsibility to be the guardians of our democracy — not
just during an election but every day.

Citizens exercising their Constitutional right to assemble,

organize and have their voices heard by their elected You undermined real American values for eight years
officials is exactly what we expect to see when American straight, that's why we voted to restore these values by
values are at stake. electing President Donald Trump.

With regard to comparisons to President Obama's foreign While President Trump restricted travel from seven
policy decisions, as we've hard before, the President countries you labeled as dangerous, you bombed 5 out of
fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating the 7 and actively killed people in those nations, including
against individuals because of their faith. innocent civilians.

President Trump's travel ban is not a
Muslim ban and does not "discriminate
against individuals because of their
faith."
Obama knows this, that's why he simply used vague
language to imply it.
You don't have the moral high ground.
President Trump is trying to protect America from the
refujihadists you helped flood this nation with who are
going on stabbing sprees left and right.
This election was a repudiation of everything you believe
in. Take a clue from former president Bush and shut the
hell up and get out of our politics.

47
 The Left Is Self-Destructing
Paul Craig Roberts
January 30, 2017

The mindlessness is unbearable. Amnesty International
tells us that we must “fight the Muslim ban” because
Trump’s bigotry is wrecking lives. Anthony Dimaggio at
CounterPunch says Trump should be impeached because
his Islamophobia is a threat to the Constitution. This is not
to single out these two as the mindlessness is everywhere
among those whose worldview is defined by Identity
Politics.
One might think that Amnesty International should be
fighting against the Bush/Cheney/Obama regime wars that
have produced the refugees by killing and displacing
millions of Muslims. For example, the ongoing war that
Obama inflicted on Yemen results in the death of one
Yemeni child every 10 minutes, according to UNICEF.
Where is Amnesty International?
The easiest and surest way for the Trump administration to
stop the refugee problem, not only for the US but also for
Europe and the West in general, is to stop the wars against
Muslim countries that his predecessors started. The
enormous sums of money squandered on gratuitous wars
could instead be given to the countries that the US and
NATO have destroyed.
The simplest way to end the refugee
problem is to stop producing refugees.
This should be the focus of Trump, Amnesty, and
Dimaggio.
Is everyone too busy hating to do anything sensible?

It is very disturbing that the liberal/progressive/left prefers

Clearly America’s wars on Muslims
to oppose Trump than to oppose war. Indeed, they want a
wreck far more lives than Trump’s ban
war on Trump. How does this differ from the Bush/Obama
on immigrants.
war on Muslims?

 Why the focus on an immigration ban and not on wars

that produce refugees?
 Is it because Obama is responsible for war and Trump
for the ban? Is the liberal/progressive/left projecting
Obama’s monstrous crimes onto Trump?
 Is it that we must hate Trump and not Obama?
The liberal/progressive/left is demonstrating a mindless
hatred of the American people and the President that the
people chose. This mindless hatred can achieve nothing
but the discrediting of an alternative voice and the opening
of the future to the least attractive elements of the right-
wing.

Immigration is not a right protected by the US The liberal/progressive/left will end up discrediting all
Constitution. Where was Dimaggio when in the name of critics, thereby empowering those to whom the
“the war on terror” the Bush/Obama regime destroyed the liberal/progressive/left are most opposed.
civil liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution? If
Dimaggio is an American citizen, he should try
immigrating to the UK, Germany, or France and see how
far he gets.

48
 Temper Tantrum: USA Today Columnist
Demands Brady End Friendship With Trump
By Curtis Houck
January 30, 2017 | 1:46 PM EST
Talk about losing your mind, folks. In a Monday morning
post, USA Today columnist Nancy Armour decreed that
New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady “has some
explaining to do” about why he’s friends with President
Trump and Brady “no longer gets a pass” for simply
associating with him.
Lauding Colin Kaepernick as “eloquent” and fretting he
faced criticism he faced for his National Anthem
kneeldowns, Armour used Kaepernick to argue that Brady
deserves to be berated in the public square for having a
long-standing friendship with Trump.
Armour began with this diatribe, showcasing the left’s
authoritarianism when it comes to demanding conformity
of opinions:
Tom Brady no longer gets a pass on his friendship with
Donald Trump.
Not after this weekend, when the country boiled over in
rage and indignation at Trump’s decision to turn
America’s back on refugees. Not after this season, when
Colin Kaepernick was pilloried from coast to coast for
trying to draw attention to the shortcomings of our
country.
And not when he’s about to command the NFL’s biggest
stage.
Recapping the left’s complaints about Trump’s campaign,
Armour whined that Trump’s “doubled
down on his hatred in his first week as
president” and went DEFCON 1 worrying
that, supposedly, the American people are
“angry and frightened” that “the ideals
49
that have made this country
exceptional...are being abandoned.”
If only Armour would have been like this during any of the
scandals or missteps during the Obama administration.
“Brady might not agree with Trump’s
views or his policies, as he seemed to
indicate last week...but in refusing to
publicly disavow Trump's actions,
Brady is giving tacit endorsement to
both Trump and the chaos he has
created,” she continued.
Armour’s intolerance reached a climax when after
publishing a quote from Brady admitting that he doesn’t
have to “agree with everything” friends think, she
determined people aren’t allowed to be friends if
someone’s name is Donald J. Trump:
“No, it’s not.”
“It’s only now, when he’s facing
questions and criticism, that he thinks
the friendship should be off limits. But it
doesn't work that way. If you stake out a
position, you need to own it. Or if you’ve
had a change of heart, explain why,” she
hypocritically added.
For all of the negative talk, she flipped the script by
holding up the failed San Francisco 49ers quarterback:
If Brady needs an example of how that’s
done, he can look at Kaepernick.
From the day his national anthem protest became public in
August, Kaepernick has been open, available and
consistent with his opinion. It has not been a popular one;
as the protests spread across the league, the San Francisco
49ers quarterback was portrayed as anti-American, anti-
military and anti-police – all of which he denies.
He’s had insults, slurs and worse directed at him. He was
blamed for the drop in TV ratings early in the season. One
person last week even tried to say Trump’s election was
partly the result of Kaepernick’s protests.
It would have been easy for Kaepernick to brush off
questions or say he’d rather talk about football, as Brady
has done. Instead, he’s been eloquent in detailing his
concerns over police brutality in minority communities.
He’s sparked conversations and reflection in NFL locker
rooms and beyond.
Armour concluded by proving that while liberals shout
about wanting the government out of their bedrooms, they
are interested in who you speak to:
50
Regardless of whether he was duped into
being a prop or is genuinely friends with
Trump, Brady inserted himself into the
national firestorm. He can’t be surprised
that people want to know more. And now
expect more.
In short, this should be none of Armour’s (or anyone
else’s) business.
 Trump Files With FEC For 2020 Election Bid,
Outmaneuvers Nonprofit Organizations
William Craddick
January 30, 2017
A document from the Federal Elections Commission
(FEC) indicates that Donald Trump took steps last week to
outmaneuver nonprofit organizations, leaving them unable
to officially campaign against him over the next few years
of his Presidency.
Filed on January 20th, 2017, the letter states that, while not
an official announcement for reelection, Donald Trump
has filed an FEC Form 2 in order to “ensure compliance
with the Federal Election Campaign Act.” This is an
unprecedented, although legal, move for the President to
make. Barack Obama did not file for his 2012 re-election
bid until April 2011. Having filed (even if not formally
announcing a bid) as a candidate, Trump would be able to
coordinate with PACs and other similar organizations.
More importantly, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations would
no longer be able to engage in “political speech” which
.
51
could theoretically affect the results of the 2020 U.S.
Presidential Election without running the risk of losing
their nonprofit status. The move effectively bars interest
groups from creating nonprofits which they could funnel
money into for the purposes of opposing Trump’s
initiatives. This will likely create chaos for political
opponents of Trump such as George Soros, who has sunk
significant amounts of money into various nonprofit
groups with the intent of opposing Trump’s government.
How 501(c)(3) organizations will comply with the FEC’s
regulations when participating an actions which qualify as
political speech remains to be seen.
The move is consistent with Trump’s campaign promises
to reduce the financial influence of private special interest
groups on Washington.
 Trump Authorizes Congress To
Pursue Criminal Charges Against Hillary
By Sean Adl-Tabatabai
Posted On January 31, 2017

If you sat there and heard what he said to

me about pursuing oversight and
government, you would be inspired. And for
him to convey a message of ‘don’t slow
down,’ I think was a good message.”

The news that the President support’s the criminal

President Trump has
authorized Congress to pursue criminal
charges against Hillary Clinton, even if
that means she ends up in prison.
Chairman of the United States House Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform, Jason Chaffetz, told
members of the committee that a recent meeting between
him and the President revealed a desire by Trump to
ensure Hillary Clinton receives whatever justice she
deserves.
Chaffetz told members:
investigation comes just days after the Oversight
Committee ordered FBI Director, James Comey, to hand
over the contents of Hillary Clinton’s email server.
Trump’s words will likely bolster their resolve in exposing
any criminal wrong doing by the former Secretary of State
in their continued investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use
of a private email server.
“This was never a political targeting in the
beginning and just because there was a
political election doesn’t mean it goes
away,” Jason Chaffetz told reporters earlier
in the month. “There were a lot of other
characters that were involved in this that
we have to look at.”

“President Trump visited Philadelphia when

we were at our planning and strategy
session.
I went backstage with the President here’s
what he said:
‘You do a great job. Listen, I understand
I’m the president and you have a job. You
do the oversight. Don’t slow down. Go after
everything you want to go after. You look at
everything you want to look at.’
.

52
 BREAKING: Trump Just Ordered Gowdy And Chaffetz
Back On Clinton Case To “Go After Everything”
Posted by Matthew Bernstein
Feb 1, 2017
Gowdy Is On His Way There Now!
You are sure to recall that during the presidential election,
there was a lot of talk about Hillary Clinton and the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This is
a committee that is designed to go after government
officials that have broken the law. Notably, Trey Gowdy
and Jason Chaffetz reside on this board, and are well-
known for their vicious work during the Clinton case.
The case? Hillary put the entire nation in jeopardy with her
decision to use a private email server, delete thousands and
thousands of emails despite being told not to, and involved
the State Department in several pay to play schemes
through her Clinton Foundation.
Hillary Is Done For!
In other words, she is someone that should be spending her
time in a jail cell. Several people were concerned that her
case would be dropped moving into the New Year.
However those fears have now vanished.
53
Jason Chaffetz is the chairman of the House Oversight
Committee, and has just announced that President Donald
Trump instructed him and the Committee to pursue every
available avenue they deem appropriate. Trump has made
it clear that putting the safety of the American people at
risk like Hillary did is well deserving of punishment.
Hillary Is About To Get Bad News
Chaffetz said that the conversation between President
Trump and himself took place after the 2017 GOP retreat
in Philadelphia. This was also his second time ever
speaking with the president in person.
The Utah Republican spoke to the committee saying,
“He came up to me and said, ‘you do a
great job. You do a great job,’ which of
course I agreed with. Then he said, ‘listen, I
understand that I am the President. You
have a job to do. You do oversight. Don’t
slow down. You go after everything you
want to go after. You look at everything you
want to look at.’”
President Trump made it clear during the debates that he
was going to appoint a special prosecutor in the case
against Hillary Clinton.
Newsflash: that time has now come.
Chaffetz continued,
 “If you sat there and heard what he said to
me about pursuing oversight of the
government and the function that we fulfill,
you’d be pretty inspiring, and it was
inspiring to me. For him to convey the
message, ‘don’t slow down, do your job,
there’s a lot to get after with the
government,’ I think that’s a good
message.”
Chaffetz Has The Support Of President Trump
Again, this is just adding to the fact that Hillary is going to
face some serious battles with the House Oversight
Committee. Chaffetz has already said that he will continue
to investigate her use of a primary email server while in
charge of the State Department.
“Just because there was a political election
doesn’t mean it goes away.” He also called
the classified emails that surfaced on the
server “the largest breach of security in the
history of the State Department.”
If you couple that with all the WikiLeaks emails that had
come out during the days leading up to the election, you
can clearly see that Hillary was using this to gain a
political advantage. A lot of people that were donating to
her Foundation did so because she had promised some sort
of political favor.
Again, she put the security of the country at risk because
of her decision to use a private server. Not only did she do
that, but she actively tried to say that it wasn’t a big deal as
other people had done that, like Colin Powell.
No, Powell used a personal email account that was used
for unclassified materials, like lunch runs or anything
.
54
related to that. Hillary actively put the safety and security
of the country at risk because of her decision, and she
should suffer the consequences for it.
Hillary Did The Crime, Now She’ll Do The Time
Actions have consequences, and putting the safety of the
nation at risk is a pretty big action. Therefore, it requires a
big consequence. The other thing to realize is that there is
no way that Hillary can be saved. There were fears that
former President Barack Obama would have pardoned
Hillary over this. Now that he is out of office, there is no
way that she can be saved. We’re finally going to see
justice!
Also, one of Hillary and Bill Clinton’s global foundations
was shut down mere months after she lost the election.
That is just further proof that she was using it as a way to
get political favors. Now that she isn’t in office, how can
she promise those favors?
Not to mention that Hillary’s other foundation is still being
investigated by the FBI in several different states. There is
a lot going on for the former Secretary of State, and
absolutely none of them are any good for her. I wouldn’t
be surprised if the FBI placed charges against her for her
“charity.”
Share this article to show that President Trump has just
given Chaffetz the ability to go after what he wants. That
means that Hillary Clinton is finally finished and justice
will prevail. Trump did say that he was going to restore
law and order to the country. Going after someone that put
the nation in danger is a good way to start.
 Anti-Trump State Department Staff
Oppose His Entry Into America
By Stephen Lendman
1-31-2017
It’s more about politics as usual than “protecting the nation
from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.”
On January 30, a draft letter supported by over 100 career
foreign service officers and other diplomats expressed
opposition to Trump’s action - headlined “SENSITIVE
BUT UNCLASSIFIED (SBU).”
“(I)t runs counter to core American values
of nondiscrimination, fair play, and
extending a warm welcome to foreign
visitors and immigrants,” it said.
Fact: These and similar values are important, ones
America consistently spurns at home and abroad, waging
endless wars on humanity.
SBU: The EO “will not achieve its stated
aim of to protect the American people from
terrorist attacks by foreign nationals
admitted to the United States.”
Fact: True enough! State-sponsored terrorism is a
homeland threat, not violence from refugees or other
foreign nationals.
.
55
SBU: Trump’s EO “will increase anti-
American sentiment.” It’ll be
“counterproductive.”
Fact: Indeed! It’ll make more enemies than friends abroad.
It’ll do nothing to make America safer.
SBU: “We have a special obligation to
maintain an immigration system that is as
free as possible from discrimination, that
does not have an implied or actual religious
tests, and that views individuals as
individuals, not as part of stereotyped
groups.”
Fact: US immigration was never free and fair, favoring
Western Europeans, white Christians from inception, Jews
post-WW II over other religious faiths, largely demeaning
people of color.
State Department staffers against Trump’s action should
either resign or carry out their duties as ordered by
superiors.
Either way, they’re free to express their views. America’s
First Amendment is endangered, but it’s still the law of the
land.
 Progressives Ready All-Out Assault
On Trump's Supreme Court Pick
By Seung Min Kim And Edward-Isaac Dovere
01/31/17 05:09 AM EST
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has already conceded that
he believes President Donald Trump won't pick a "mainstream"
candidate. | AP Photo
Progressive groups will mount a multi-phase effort against
President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee,
targeting specific Democratic and GOP senators and
preparing a broader assault on Republicans to pressure
them against blowing up the filibuster — even as some
Senate Democrats pledged Monday to block Trump’s pick.
Leaders of key groups have been meeting privately to
coordinate strategy for the past month, and have already
begun to talk protest plans in senators’ home states and at
the Supreme Court in Washington, with early
conversations about fundraising and advertising underway.
They are still outraged by the Republican blockade of
Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland last year
but are trying to cast their own opposition as different —
particularly as Trump already has issued a series of
executive orders that have prompted court challenges
nationwide.
Foremost is Trump’s far-reaching and controversial
executive order to ban immigrants from several
predominantly Muslim nations, a directive sure to be a
focus in the coming Supreme Court fight.
“There is now an urgency to oppose
anyone who won’t be a powerful check on
the Supreme Court against the executive
branch excesses and impulses,” said Nan
Aron, founder and president of the Alliance
for Justice. “I would predict that there will
be a huge outcry if the nominee cannot
demonstrate that he or she could be
56
independent and serve as the check on
presidential power.”
On the Democratic side, progressives are zeroing in on
red-state Democrats like West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and
North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp. Among Republicans,
they’re looking at Arizona’s Jeff Flake and Nevada’s Dean
Heller, who are both up for reelection in 2018, and the
moderate Susan Collins of Maine.
And while conservative forces are already putting the
finishing touches on a $10 million ad blitz targeting red-
state Senate Democrats who will come under enormous
pressure to back Trump’s nominee, People for the
American Way is readying a television ad campaign of its
own as a counterbalance.
“There will be resources available to make
the case,” said Marge Baker, the group’s
executive vice president. “This is a fight
that we’re going to be in, in an absolutely
serious way.”
The advocates contend they have both the progressive
energy to pressure Democrats to hold the line, and enough
of a buffer in a Democratic caucus of 48 members to lose
several while still being able to block a nominee.
“There is a lot of energy in the progressive
space to say, ‘This seat was stolen from a
Democratic president, period. It was grand
larceny,’” said Brad Woodhouse, president
of Americans United for Change.
“Democrats in the Senate, and
progressives and liberals who care about
the unprecedented nature of that theft by
Republicans, shouldn’t roll over for Donald
Trump and his Supreme Court pick.”
Along the way, they’re hoping to drive a major wedge
between Republicans in the Senate, many of whom are
wary of blowing up the filibuster completely, and Trump,
who’s made clear that’s what he wants if Democrats don’t
confirm his nominee.
“I don’t advocate taking the same approach
that GOPers took to Garland (in refusing
 meetings, hearings and votes),” said one
former Obama White House official. “I’d
advocate for close, intense scrutiny at
every stage of the process — which I think
will eventually lead just about every Dem to
oppose the nominee and likely at least
some GOPers.”
For months, groups such as the Alliance for Justice and
People for the American Way have done extensive
research on the nearly two dozen judicial candidates whom
Trump named during his campaign, with special focus
recently on names that have popped up more frequently —
such as Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Thomas
Hardiman and 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
Neil Gorsuch, two jurists reportedly at the top of the pack.
The pro-abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice
America has also been distributing its own research on
where potential nominees stand.
A broad array of liberal groups, including People for the
American Way, The Leadership Conference on Civil and
Human Rights, Alliance for Justice Action Campaign, and
Center for American Progress Action Fund, have
organized a protest for Tuesday night at the steps of the
Supreme Court against Trump’s nominee, who’ll be
announced earlier that evening.
Senate Democrats — who are also waging a political fight
over Trump’s executive orders and Cabinet nominees —
for the most part have tried to reserve judgment until the
president actually unveils his pick. Democrats have been
insisting on a so-called mainstream nominee, although
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has conceded
that he believes Trump won’t pick such a candidate.
Still, Democrats are almost sure to face a massive level of
pressure from the base to hold the line against Trump’s
pick.
“They need to fight like hell and do all they
can to confirm only someone who is fair
and an independent judge who can serve
as a check to this president,” said Ellen
Buchman, executive vice president for field
and communications at the Leadership
Conference for Civil Rights.
.
57
Though the advocacy groups insist they are not simply
trying to go tit for tat over the obstruction of Garland,
there’s little doubt that the lingering frustration over how
Obama’s final nominee was treated has permeated thinking
among many Democrats.
“That’s how we see this,” one Democratic
senator said of the Garland blockade. “The
anger, we feel it in our stomach.”
Whenever the Supreme Court fight begins in earnest,
Democrats won’t be hungry for help from the outside.
The Constitutional Responsibility Project, organized by
former Obama aides last year to push for Garland’s
confirmation, will be reconstituted at the offices of
SKDKnickerbocker, with Sheila O’Connell, most recently
Chris Van Hollen’s 2016 Senate campaign manager,
coming on board.
The opposition-research group American Bridge is
preparing a full-research, rapid-response and video-
tracking operation to “expose the nominee as too
conservative and out of step with mainstream Americans,”
said Kevin McAlister, a spokesman for the group.
And End Citizens United, a political action committee that
advocates for campaign finance reform, is readying a
national grass-roots campaign that will push its 3 million
members to flood senators with calls, emails and petitions,
as well as a digital advocacy effort, spokesman Adam
Bozzi said.
All that is to counter the expected assault and pressure
from conservatives, who backed the Senate GOP’s nearly
yearlong blockade of Garland but now expect Democrats
to fall in line.
Schumer “said it’s hard for him to imagine a
nominee … from President Trump who
Senate Democrats could support,” Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
said Monday. “We don’t even have one yet.
I hope we can get past that and get down
to our serious work.”
 President Trump Exposes McCain
And Graham For Trying To Start Word War III
Neocon Warmongers Have Long Pushed Policies
That Could Start World War Three
By Alex Thomas -
01.31.2017 @5:15 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — After the neocon duo of Senators John
McCain and Lindsey Graham publicly criticized his
executive order on immigration from the Middle East,
President Trump took to Twitter to destroy the noted
warmongers.
Responding to a joint statement by the Senators, Trump
noted that they were both failed presidential candidates
before ridiculing them for their long history of being weak
on immigration.
Amazingly, Trump then went on to out the duo as high
level warmongers who have been pushing for World
War III for the vast majority of their political careers. Take
note that this criticism is exactly what the alternative
media has been saying for years.
As Trump said, McCain and Graham have long,
undisputed records of warmongering and are both the very
.
58
definition of the Rhino Republicans that Americans voted
against in droves during the last election.
It is also blatantly obvious why McCain would come out
against Trump’s executive order as he has been personally
working against the Trump Administration since before the
president-elect was even inaugurated.
In what led many to label him an actual traitor, McCain
was the person who personally handed the disinformation
dossier on Donald Trump to the FBI in what was a direct
action against the incoming president designed to help
leftist opposition.
“In the wake of the release of a
disinformation dossier on President-elect
Donald Trump, it has been revealed that
none other than establishment Republican
John McCain was responsible for passing
the document to the highest reaches of the
FBI,” I reported at the time.
“The fact that we now know Rhino
Republicans like McCain are directly
working in the background to stop the
Donald Trump Administration before it even
begins should make it clear once and for all
that the establishment, at all levels, is firmly
against the incoming president-elect.”
Make no mistake, there is currently a war brewing between
establishment Republicans who want war and the more
populist wing of the party who are sick of the continual
nation building this country as engaged in overseas for
decades.
 Trump Fires Acting Attorney General For Refusal To
Enforce 'Extreme Vetting' Order
Published Time: 31 Jan, 2017 02:24Edited Time: 31 Jan, 2017 12:58

the Senate to those posts. It remains to be seen if this move

will face a legal challenge.

"I am honored to serve President Trump in

this role until Senator Sessions is
confirmed. I will defend and enforce the
laws of our country to ensure that our
people and our nation are protected,"
Boente said as Acting Attorney General in
the press release.

Sally Quillian Yates and Dana J. Boente © Reuters / Wikipedia

President Donald Trump has fired acting Attorney General

Sally Yates, making Dana Boente, the US Attorney for the
Eastern District of Virginia the new acting attorney
general.

Yates was relieved of her post Monday, just hours after

news broke that she was instructing Department of Justice
lawyers not to defend the executive order.

“I am responsible for ensuring that the

positions we take in court remain
consistent with this institution’s solemn
Yates "betrayed the Department of Justice
obligation to always seek justice and stand
by refusing to enforce a legal order
for what is right,” Yates wrote in a letter,
designed to protect the citizens of the
according to the New York Times. “At
United States," a press release from the
present, I am not convinced that the
Office of the Press Secretary read.
defense of the executive order is consistent
with these responsibilities nor am I
Boente, an Obama appointee, was confirmed by the Senate convinced that the executive order is
to his previous US Attorney post. The Trump lawful.”
administration told reporters Monday evening that was
good enough to allow him to sign Foreign Intelligence
Trump responded to Yates' move on Twitter, calling it an
Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants authorizing surveillance
example of Democrats' obstruction
of perceived foreign threats in the US.
"for purely political reasons."
This is unprecedented, as Boente's Senate confirmation did
not grant him FISA approval power. That authority is
reserved to the US attorney general and deputy attorney
general, who until now have been directly confirmed by

59
Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who served under
President Obama, tweeted support for Yates after her
termination.

60
 US CODE - Trump's Ban
Is Absolutely Constitutional
1-31-2017

61
 America Don’t Be Fooled. “Fake Tears” Schumer And
Nancy Pelosi Have A History Of Killing Muslims
How Many Muslims Were Killed In Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya? Guess Which
Democrats Supported The Killing?
Alex Christoforou
January 31, 2017
They cry over Trump’s executive order to enforce
Obama’s immigration act from seven Muslim majority
nations.
They scream that the ban is undermines “American
values” and is “evil”.
Do we need to go over the numbers as to how many people
of Muslim faith were killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria,
and Libya? One million, five million?
“Fake Tears” Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are
anything but sympathetic toward Muslims.
Their voting record in Congress and the Senate show two
Democrats who have a history of supporting destructive
wars in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, while pushing
for sanctions against Iran and Syria…sanctions with the
sole purpose of creating unrest and suffering.
Most of the countries mentioned above, are part of the list
of seven countries on the immigration executive order that
“Fake Tears” Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are so torn up
over.
Democrat Senator from NY, “Fake Tears”
Chuck Schumer:
 Voted YES on designating Iran’s Revolutionary Guards
as terrorists. September 2007.
 Voted YES on $86 billion for military operations in Iraq
& Afghanistan. October 2003.
 Voted YES to authorize force in Iraq. October 2002.
62
 Voted YES on allowing all necessary force in Kosovo.
May 1999.
 Voted YES on authorizing air strikes in Kosovo. Mar
1999.
 Sponsored shutting down Iranian foreign reserves. May
2013.
 Sanctions on Iran to end nuclear program. Apr 2009.
Democrat Representative from California, Nancy
Pelosi.
 1998: Saddam has engaged in development of WMDs.
August 2011.
 2002: No question Saddam has WMD. October 2008
 Voted NO on removing US armed forces from
Afghanistan. March 2011.
Pelosi on the destruction of Libya (via The Hill)…
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the White
House violated neither the Constitution nor the War
Powers Resolution when it launched military operations in
the war-torn African nation in March without Congress’s
endorsement.
“The limited nature of this engagement
allows the president to go forward,” Pelosi
told reporters at the Capitol. “I’m satisfied
that the president has the authority he
needs to go ahead.”If we had boots on the
ground … then that’s a different story,”
Pelosi added. “I don’t think they should
stop the support that they’re giving to
NATO to stop the humanitarian disaster.”
Key Democrats were supporting US action to prevent the
impending humanitarian catastrophe in Libya…
March 23, 2011 – Nancy Pelosi:
“Acting upon the United Nations Security
Council’s resolution to use ‘all measures
necessary’ to protect the Libyan people
and the Arab League’s call for a no-fly-
zone, the United States joined the
 international community in preventing an
imminent humanitarian crisis in Libya.
Actions taken by the international
community have already prevented
Qaddafi from implementing his threat to
‘show no mercy’ to his own people,
including those living in the city of
Benghazi.”
“Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical
and biological weapons. There’s no
question about that.”
–Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Nov. 17, 2002
“Fake Tears” Schumer on Syria sanctions (via USA
Today)…
Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand are
pushing the Syrian Human Rights
Accountability Act, which would bar
officials in President Bashar Assad’s
regime implicated in human rights abuses
from traveling to or doing business with the
United States and ban companies from
selling weapons or sensitive technology to
the Syrian government.
“Syria continues to show it has no desire to
curb the bloody crackdown that has
become synonymous with Assad’s regime,”
Schumer said. “We must do everything
that we can to make it clear to Assad
that his time is up.”
“If Syria won’t willingly change its brutal
approach and continues to violate the
.
63
human rights of those seeking to exercise
their voices, then we will do everything we
can to send the strongest message
possible to that nation’s leadership that this
behavior is beyond the pale and not without
consequence,” Schumer said.
Nancy Pelosi on supporting up the removal of Assad in
Syria (via The Hill)…
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said
Friday that it was time for the United States to “take it to
the next step” in Syria in response to possible chemical
weapons use, although she said that did not include putting
“troops on the ground.”
“I myself think that we have tolerated for
too long all of the assaults on the Syrian
people made by its own government,”
Pelosi told reporters. “I think we have to
take it to the next step. That does not mean
troops on the ground.”
House members leaving the briefing said that Kerry had
discussed the potential steps the U.S. could take.
“The secretary laid out what some of those
options would be,” said Rep. Brad
Sherman (D-Calif.). “It’s everything from
diplomatic opposition to Assad, to
supporting refugees, to cash for groups,
to weapons for groups, to a no fly zone
— all of those are on the table.”
 Trump Set To Pull U.S. Out Of
The Paris Agreement Within Days
Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt To Replace Ebell
By Caleb Stephen -
01.31.2017 @8:51 AM EST
Edward Scott Pruitt (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)
(INTELLIHUB) — While liberals in cahoots with
Muslims around the country have been in hysterics over
President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on persons from
seven countries known to have clear links to Islamic
terrorism, it has just been revealed that Trump has yet
another bombshell surprise for them and judging by the
reactions so far, they’re not going to like this one.
Myron Ebell, the former head of Trump’s Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) transition team — a position he
held until Trump’s inauguration — said the U.S. would
pull out of the Paris agreement within a matter of days.
Trump, a climate change skeptic who has previously called
climate change a hoax created by China, campaigned on a
pledge to boost the U.S. oil and gas drilling and coal
mining industries by slashing regulation.
He had promised to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement
which aims to curb global warming — a nonexistent issue
based on scientific data.
Ebell said the President was determined to undo the
policies of the Obama administration including
unraveling Obama’s climate action plan and defunding
U.N. climate change work, The Independent reported. The
.
64
president signed two memos Jan. 26 scrapping funding to
United Nations agencies who give full membership to
designated terrorist organizations or who support abortion
funding programs.
“I expect Donald Trump to be very
assiduous in keeping his promises, despite
all of the flak he is going to get from his
opponents,” he told reporters Monday in
London.”
“He could do it by executive order
tomorrow, or he could wait and do it as part
of a larger package. There are multiple
ways and I have no idea of the timing.”
“The U.S. will clearly change its course on
climate policy. Trump has made it clear he
will withdraw from the Paris Agreement.”
The agreement, adopted by 194 countries last December, is
a successor to the Kyoto Protocols.
Ebell, who helped direct the EPA’s transition after the
Republican real estate tycoon was elected in November
until he was sworn in on January 20, said it was difficult to
predict the timing of any action because government
departments are still in transition.
Ebell currently serves as the Director of Global Warming
and International Environmental Policy at the Competitive
Enterprise Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington.
Trump appointed Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt,
who has led 14 lawsuits against the EPA, to replace Ebell
as the agency’s administrator, although a vote on his
nomination has not been scheduled yet.
 A Jarring New Level Of Confrontation
And Conflict Hits Washington
By CARL HULSE
JAN. 31, 2017
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, center, and the Republican leadership
at a news conference on Tuesday in Washington. Credit Gabriella
Demczuk for The New York Times
WASHINGTON — President Trump made clear in his
fiery inaugural speech that he was going to challenge the
Washington establishment. Now the establishment is
quickly pushing back, creating a palpable air of uncertainty
and chaos in the opening days of his administration.
The new president fired an acting attorney general who
refused to defend the administration’s executive order on
immigration. Democrats on Tuesday boycotted Senate
confirmation hearings to prevent votes on cabinet
nominees. State Department employees opposed to the
administration were urged to quit if they didn’t like Mr.
Trump’s direction.
Even after years of unbreakable gridlock and unyielding
partisanship, it was a jarring new level of confrontation
and conflict, and it was contributing to a building sense of
crisis just as the new president prepared to make the
momentous announcement of a new Supreme Court
nominee — a selection certain to further inflame tensions.
Republicans, adjusting to the new era, seemed blindsided
by the rapid pace of events and the worrying failure of the
new administration to engage in the information-sharing
and consultation that would typically accompany the
issuance of a potentially explosive proposal like the freeze
on visas for refugees and immigrants from select countries.
“It’s regrettable that there was some
confusion with the rollout,” Speaker Paul D.
Ryan told reporters Tuesday, noting that
65
top Republicans learned of the contents of
the order only as it was being issued.
That secretive, closely held approach may be the preferred
choice of the president and self-proclaimed disrupters like
his senior adviser, Stephen K. Bannon, who is quickly
emerging as the power in the West Wing, but not by more
conventional politicians who definitely don’t like to be
caught off guard.
Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York,
said similar failings had emerged in the early days of
previous administrations but would not be tolerated for
long.
“You get a brief period you’re allowed for a
learning curve, but after that, you have to
get your act together,” Mr. King said.
Still, the main Republican objection seemed to be with the
handling of the executive order by the inexperienced and
understaffed White House rather than the actual content of
the order.
Several Republicans noted that they were fully supportive
of the border control effort and that the substance mirrored
legislation the House had passed last year. Unlike the
Democrats, there was almost universal support among
Republicans for the firing of Sally Q. Yates, the acting
attorney general.
Republicans say they remain eager to work with the
president to reverse what they see as Obama
administration overreach and put their own conservative
stamp on the government.
In their view, the furor and continuing tumult in official
Washington isn’t necessarily upsetting to the voters back
home.
“President Trump has made clear that he is
a man of action and we are ready,” said
Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of
Washington, a member of the House
Republican leadership.
How ready remained an open question. Most in Congress,
regardless of party, take their role seriously as members of
a coequal branch of government and they don’t take well
to being kept out of the loop on matters for which they will
be held to account.
In other corners of the establishment, the reaction to the
first days of the Trump era was not nearly as enthusiastic
as that of Ms. McMorris Rodgers. One usually plugged-in
Republican consultant who didn’t want to be identified
picking a fight with the new president said a continuation
of the turmoil would quickly call into question the basic
competency of the new administration. He noted that
despite being in the middle of past Supreme Court
confirmation fights, he surprisingly had not heard from the
White House for ideas on how to handle the coming one.
Senator Angus King, an independent from Maine who is
part of the Senate Democratic Caucus, called the executive
order on immigration a “disaster” and pointed to Mr.
Trump’s reliance on an extremely tight circle of advisers.
“This president, you know, he listens to a
very narrow group of people, and as we’ve
learned this weekend, can make some very
bad decisions,” Mr. King said in an
interview on CNN. “We need to get some
people around him as quickly as possible
who can rein in those impulses like what
we saw this weekend.”
At least part of the mounting consternation in the capital
was because of the clear break with ingrained rituals and
ways of doing business.
.
66
When Democrats were clashing with President George W.
Bush, there was a general expectation of how things would
go and the realization that both sides understood their
roles. Over eight years of the Obama administration, the
two parties settled into a predictable pattern of
Republicans opposing the president and Democrats trying
to find a way around it. Despite frequent visits to the brink
of crisis, the adversaries tended to find a resolution before
the damage was beyond repair.
With the Trump team, no one as yet is sure what to
anticipate, leaving nerves jangled and people wondering
what is next — a rollback of gay legal protections (denied
by the White House), or a move against the young
undocumented immigrants in the so-called Dreamers
program? What about a clash with Iran or an embrace of
Russia?
Mr. Trump and his team seem in some ways to be enjoying
the confusion they have come to create.
“We’re going to be changing a lot of — a lot
of the rules,” the president exclaimed
Tuesday at a White House meeting with
pharmaceutical executives.
His comments were aimed at what to do about drug
development and pricing. But they seemed to imply so
much more, keeping Washington on edge.
 Anti-Trumpism Still Raging
By Stephen Lendman
1-31-2017
Nationwide street protests following Trump’s entry into
America order are more about him than his EO. Are pro-
Hillary dark forces behind them?
Was Obama appointee, acting Attorney General Sally
Yates, part of it. Agree or disagree with his action, she
refused to enforce it, a legitimate cause for dismissal, a
White House statement saying:
She “betrayed the Department of Justice by
refusing to enforce a legal order designed
to protect the citizens of the United States.
This order was approved as to form and
legality by the Department of Justice Office
of Legal Counsel.”
“Tonight, President Trump relieved Ms.
Yates of her duties and subsequently
named Dana Boente, US Attorney for the
Eastern District of Virginia, to serve as
Acting Attorney General until Senator Jeff
Sessions is finally confirmed by the Senate,
where he is being wrongly held up by
Democrat senators for strictly political
reasons.”
Militantly anti-Trump Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer blasted Trump’s EO. His over-acting was
inexcusable. Referencing the Statue of Liberty, he said
“(w)e will not let this evil order extinguish
that great torch.”
“(T)his order is against what we believe in
in America…We will not let this evil order
make us less American. We will fight it with
everything we have and we will win this
fight.”
Though the order was all about politics, not its stated
purpose, it’s far short of “evil.” Where’s Schumer’s
outrage over the real thing - endless imperial wars he
supports, Wall Street favoritism he champions, along with
force-fed austerity harming millions and homeland police
state repression?
The defining feature of Congress is hypocrisy. House
Democrats are preparing legislation to overturn Trump’s
EO - a nonstarter given GOP Speaker Paul Ryan’s
opposition and Trump’s certain veto if legislation reaches
his desk. The effort is pure grandstanding, nothing else.
67
In 2011, House and Senate Democrats supported Obama’s
six-month ban on Iraqi asylum-seekers - on the phony
pretext of preventing possible domestic terrorist attacks.
On Sunday, top House judiciary, homeland security and
foreign affairs committee members demanded an
“emergency” meeting with DHS in a letter sent to
Secretary John Kelly, saying:
“As ranking members of the committees of
jurisdiction for matters of immigration,
border security, and admission of refugees,
we write to you on an emergency basis to
request a meeting to discuss the
implementation and guidance concerning
the Executive Order.”
A DHS statement said
“(w)e are committed to ensuring that all
individuals affected by the executive
orders, including those affected by the
court orders, are being provided all rights
afforded under the law.”
“We are also working closely with airline
partners to prevent travelers who would not
be granted entry under the executive
orders from boarding international flights to
the US. Therefore, we do not anticipate
that further individuals traveling by air to
the United States will be affected.”
Separately, Kelly said green card holders are exempt from
Trumps’s EO.
For good or ill, it stands. Congressional Democrats don’t
have enough votes to rescind it. “Methinks thou dost
protest too much” applies to their ranks.
Led by House and Senate minority leaders Pelosi and
Schumer respectively, congressional Dems intend an
upcoming rally outside the Supreme Court against
Trump’s EO.
A combination protest/candelight vigil is planned, joined
by local refugees as convenient props.
Democrat party outrage is all about anti-Trumpism,
unrelated to his EO - part of a persistent plot to
delegitimize him and undermine his agenda.
 Hackers Took Down D.C.’S CCTV System
For A 48-Hour Span Leading Up To
Trump’s Inauguration, Demanded Ransom
Officials And Others Unsure Of What May Have Taken Place
During A Massive Citywide CCTV Outage
By Shepard Ambellas -
01.31.2017 @2:11 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — Between the dates of Jan. 12 and Jan.
15, for about a 48-hour span, 70% of the CCTV cameras in
Washington D.C. were rendered useless by hackers adding
an element of uncertainty in regards to what may have
taken place in and around D.C. just days before Donald
Trump’s Inauguration.
Secret Service and city officials said that cyber attackers
used ransomware to infect nearly 130 of 187 network
storage devices linked to the city’s closed-circuit camera
network, disallowing the storage of any incoming imagery
data also while simultaneously requesting a ransom to be
paid.
According to the city’s Chief Technology Officer official
Archana Vemulapalli, the attack prompted city officials to
willingly take the entire CCTV network offline by
removing all related software, later forcing a reboot of
each site independently, which left at least a 48-hour
window of opportunity for criminal activity to take place
without being recorded.
Although city officials claim that the hack appeared to be a
“localized” extortion attempt, one must question what
group or agency is actually responsible and what attackers
intentions really were.
Vemulapalli said that on the day of Jan. 12 D.C. Metro
Police noticed that four camera pods were not properly
functioning and reported their findings to the technology
office (OTCO), who later identified the devices to be
infected with ransomware thus prompting a “citywide
sweep,” as reported by the Washington Post.
Police Chief fill-in Peter Newsham addressed the hack
publically and said that there was ‘no known significant
impact’ as a result of the hack, but an active open
investigation may suggest otherwise as it was admitted that
city officials took the cameras offline themselves,
ultimately creating a window of opportunity for illicit
activity to occur undetected which also dovetails with the
68
stand down ordered on police body cameras during the
Inauguration, as reported by Intellihub on Jan. 18.
Furthermore, a report by TendMicro.com details how
“Ransomware is a type of malware that
prevents or limits users from accessing
their system, either by locking the system’s
screen or by locking the users’ files unless
a ransom is paid. More modern
ransomware families, collectively
categorized as crypto-ransomware, encrypt
certain file types on infected systems and
forces users to pay the ransom through
certain online payment methods to get a
decrypt key.”
Additionally, ant to point out that ransomware prices can
be set to any amount and are often requested in
cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.
1RedDrop.com reports:
The most alarming part about all this is that
ransomware is now being sold under the
ransomware-as-a-service model, similar to
a lot of cloud computing offerings. Under
this model, ransomware can be purchased
and deployed even by people with no
hacking experience. The buyer then
commits to give the seller a percentage of
the “take”, usually set at 40%.
One of the most active ransomeware groups today is
Cerber, which actually offers a “ransomware for
dummies” type of package that provides the buyer with all
the resources they need. That makes Cerber potentially far
more dangerous than any other hacking group, including
Locky, which operates with just one person, or threat
actor, and doesn’t sell or share its methods with anyone.
The Herjavec Group published a report titled
“Hackerpocalypse: A Cybercrime Revelation” which
maintains that by the year 2021 “cybercrime will cost the
world in excess of $6 trillion annually” and is growing
rapidly.
The report mentions how
“Cybersecurity Ventures predicts global
annual cybercrime costs will grow from $3
trillion in 2015 to $6 trillion by 2021, which
includes damage and destruction of data,
stolen money, lost productivity, theft of
intellectual property, theft of personal and
financial data, embezzlement, fraud, post-
attack disruption to the normal course of
.
69
business, forensic investigation, restoration
and deletion of hacked data and systems,
and reputational harm.”
All of which will create a vast market for individuals,
corporations, and governments to defend against cyber
crime which is
“projected to exceed $1 trillion over the
next five years.”
D.C. authorities are currently investigating the matter and
all ransomware has been removed from the entire system.
H/T: Tabertronic/Twitter
 Judge Jeanine: 'Impressive' Gorsuch Has the Right
Credentials & Temperament
January 31, 2017
On "Hannity" tonight, Judge Jeanine Pirro praised
President Donald Trump for fulfilling another of his
campaign promises by nominating Judge Neil Gorsuch to
the Supreme Court.
Judge Jeanine pointed out that Gorsuch is known as a
constitutional originalist and a defender of religious
liberty, much like the justice whose seat he's filling,
Antonin Scalia.
70
She praised Gorsuch's "incredible
credentials" and "judicial temperament,"
and also singled out a remark he made
after being nominated.
"A judge who likes every outcome he
reaches is very likely a bad judge,
stretching for results he prefers, rather than
those the law demands," Gorsuch said.
She said that reinforces that he won't be influenced by
policy or his own personal opinion, but by the Constitution
and the letter of the law.
Judge Jeanine said that Gorsuch understands the solemnity
of the position, and he's prepared for the confirmation fight
that Senate Democrats are likely to put up.
.
 President Trump:
Nationalist Capitalism, An Alternative To Globalization
Trump Is A Market Realist Who Recognizes That Military Conquest Is
Costly And, In The Contemporary World Context,
A Losing Economic Proposition For The US.
By James Petras
January 31, 2017
During his inaugural speech, President Trump clearly and
forcefully outlined the strategic political-economic policies
he will pursue over the next four years. Anti-Trump
journalist, editorialists, academics and experts, who appear
in the Financial Times, New York Times, Washington Post
and the Wall Street Journal have repeatedly distorted and
lied about the President’s program as well as his critique of
existing and past policies.
We will begin by seriously discussing President Trump’s
critique of the contemporary political economy and
proceed to elaborate on his alternatives and its weaknesses.
President Trump’s Critique of the Ruling Class
The centerpiece of Trump’s critique of the current ruling
elite is the negative impact of its form of globalization on
US production, trade and fiscal imbalances and on the
labor market. Trump cites the fact that US industrial
capitalism has drastically shifted the locus of its
investments, innovations and profits overseas as an
example of globalization’s negative effects. For two
decades many politicians and pundits have bemoaned the
loss of well-paid jobs and stable local industries as part of
their campaign rhetoric or in public meetings, but none
have taken any effective action against these most harmful
aspects of globalization. Trump denounced them as “all
71
talk and no action” while promising to end the empty
speeches and implement major changes.
President Trump targeted importers who bring in cheap
products from overseas manufacturers for the American
market undermining US producers and workers. His
economic strategy of prioritizing US industries is an
implicit critique of the shift from productive capital to
financial and speculative capital under the previous four
administrations. His inaugural address attacking the elites
who abandon the ‘rust belt’ for Wall Street is matched by
his promise to the working class:
“Hear these words! You will never be
ignored again.” Trump’s own words portray
the ruling class ‘as pigs at the trough’
(Financial Times, 1/23/2017, p. 11)
Trump’s Political-Economic Critique
President Trump emphasizes market negotiations with
overseas partners and adversaries. He has repeatedly
criticized the mass media and politicians’ mindless
promotion of free markets and aggressive militarism as
undermining the nation’s capacity to negotiate profitable
deals.
President Trump’s immigration policy is closely related to
his strategic ‘America First’ labor policy. Massive inflows
of immigrant labor have been used to undermine US
workers’ wages, labor rights and stable employment. This
was first documented in the meat packing industry,
followed by textile, poultry and construction industries.
Trump’s proposal is to limit immigration to allow US
workers to shift the balance of power between capital and
labor and strengthen the power of organized labor to
negotiate wages, conditions and benefits. Trump’s critique
of mass immigration is based on the fact that skilled
American workers have been available for employment in
the same sectors if wages were raised and work conditions
were improved to permit dignified, stable living standards
for their families.
President Trump’s Political Critique
Trump points to trade agreements, which have led to huge
deficits, and concludes that US negotiators have been
failures. He argues that previous US presidents have
signed multi-lateral agreements, to secure military
alliances and bases, at the expense of negotiating job-
creating economic pacts. His presidency promises to
change the equation: He wants to tear up or renegotiate
unfavorable economic treaties while reducing US overseas
military commitments and demands NATO allies shoulder
more of their own defense budgets. Immediately upon
taking office Trump canceled the Trans-Pacific Partnership
(TPP) and convoked a meeting with Canada and Mexico to
renegotiate NAFTA.
Trump’s agenda has featured plans for hundred-billion
dollar infrastructure projects, including building
controversial oil and gas pipelines from Canada to the US
Gulf. It is clear that these pipelines violate existing treaties
with indigenous people and threaten ecological mayhem.
However, by prioritizing the use of American-made
construction material and insisting on hiring only US
workers, his controversial policies will form the basis for
developing well-paid American jobs.
The emphasis on investment and jobs in the US is a
complete break with the previous Administration, where
President Obama focused on waging multiple wars in the
Middle East, increasing public debt and the trade deficit.
Truth and Lies: Garbage Journalists and Arm Chair
Militarists
Trump’s inaugural address issued a stern promise:
“The American carnage stops right now
and stops right here!”
72
This resonated with a huge sector of the working class and
was spoken before an assemblage of the very architects of
four decades of job-destroying globalization. ‘Carnage’
carried a double meaning: Widespread carnage resulted
from Obama and other administrations’ destruction of
domestic jobs resulting in decay and bankruptcy of rural,
small town and urban communities. This domestic carnage
was the other side of the coin of their policies of
conducting endless overseas wars spreading carnage to
three continents. The last fifteen years of political
leadership spread domestic carnage by allowing the
epidemic of drug addiction (mostly related to uncontrolled
synthetic opiate prescriptions) to kill hundreds of
thousands of mostly young American’s and destroy the
lives of millions.
Trump promised to finally address this ‘carnage’ of wasted
lives. Unfortunately, he did not hold ‘Big Pharma’ and the
medical community responsible for its role in spreading
drug addiction into the deepest corners of the economically
devastated rural America. Trump criticized previous
elected officials for authorizing huge military subsidies to
‘allies’ while making it clear that his critique did not
include US military procurement policies and would not
contradict his promise to ‘reinforce old alliances’
(NATO).
Among the most outrageous example of the mass media’s
hysteria about Trump’s New Economy is the systematic
and vitriolic series of fabrications designed to obscure the
grim national reality that Trump has promised to address.
We will discuss and compare the accounts published by
‘garbage journalists (GJ’s)’ and present a more accurate
version of the situation.Truth and Lies: Garbage
Journalists and Arm Chair Militarists
The respectable garbage journalists of the Financial Times
claim that Trump wants to ‘destroy world trade’. In fact,
Trumps has repeatedly stated his intention to increase
international trade. What Trump proposes is to increase US
world trade from the inside, rather than from overseas. He
seeks to re-negotiate the terms of multilateral and bilateral
trade agreements to secure greater reciprocity with trading
partners. Under Obama, the US was more aggressive in
imposing trade tariffs that any other country in the OECD.
Garbage journalists label Trump as a ‘protectionist’,
confusing his policies to re-industrialize the economy with
autarky. Trump will promote exports and imports, retain
an open economy, while increasing the role of the US as a
producer and exporter.. The US will become more
selective in its imports. Trump will favor the growth of
manufacturing exporters and increase imports of primary
commodities and advanced technology while reducing the
import of automobiles, steel and household consumer
products.
Trump’s opposition to ‘globalization’ has been conflated
by the garbage journalists of the Washington Post as a dire
threat to the ‘the post-Second World War economic order’.
In fact, vast changes have already rendered the old order
obsolete and attempts to retain it have led to crises, wars
and more decay. Trump has recognized the obsolete nature
of the old economic order and stated that change is
necessary.
The Obsolete Old Order and the Dubious New
Economy
At the end of the Second World War, most of Western
Europe and Japan resorted to highly restrictive
‘protectionist’ industrial and monetary policies to rebuild
their economies. Only after a period of prolonged recovery
did Germany and Japan carefully and selectively liberalize
their economic policies.
In recent decades, Russia was drastically transformed from
a powerful collectivist economy to a capitalist vassal-
gangster oligarchy and more recently to a reconstituted
mixed economy and strong central state. China has been
transformed from a collectivist economy, isolated from
world trade, into the world’s second most powerful
economy, displacing the US as Asia and Latin America’s
largest trading partner.
Once controlling 50% of world trade, the US share is now
less than 20%. This decline is partly due to the dismantling
of its industrial economy when its manufacturers moved
their factories abroad.
Despite the transformation of the world order, recent US
presidents have failed to recognize the need to re-organize
the American political economy. Instead of recognizing,
adapting and accepting shifts in power and market
relations, they sought to intensify previous patterns of
dominance through war, military intervention and bloody
destructive ‘regime changes’ – thus devastating, rather
than creating markets for US goods. Instead of recognizing
China’s immense economic power and seek to re-negotiate
trade and co-operative agreements, they have stupidly
excluded China from regional and international trade
pacts, to the extent of crudely bullying their junior Asian
trade partners, and launching a policy of military
encirclement and provocation in the South China Seas.
While Trump recognized these changes and the need to
renegotiate economic ties, his cabinet appointees seek to
extend Obama’s militarist policies of confrontation.
Under the previous administrations, Washington ignored
Russia’s resurrection, recovery and growth as a regional
and world power. When reality finally took root, previous
US administrations increased their meddling among the
Soviet Union’s former allies and set up military bases and
war exercises on Russia’s borders. Instead of deepening
trade and investment with Russia, Washington spent
73
billions on sanctions and military spending – especially
fomenting the violent putchist regime in Ukraine. Obama’s
policies promoting the violent seizure of power in Ukraine,
Syria and Libya were motivated by his desire to overthrow
governments friendly to Russia – devastating those
countries and ultimately strengthening Russia’s will to
consolidate and defend its borders and to form new
strategic alliances.
Early in his campaign, Trump recognized the new world
realities and proposed to change the substance, symbols,
rhetoric and relations with adversaries and allies – adding
up to a New Economy.
First and foremost, Trump looked at the disastrous wars in
the Middle East and recognized the limits of US military
power: The US could not engage in multiple, open-ended
wars of conquest and occupation in the Middle East, North
Africa and Asia without paying major domestic costs.
Secondly, Trump recognized that Russia was not a
strategic military threat to the United States. Furthermore,
the Russian government under Vladimir Putin was willing
to cooperate with the US to defeat a mutual enemy – ISIS
and its terrorist networks. Russia was also keen to re-open
its markets to the US investors, who were also anxious to
return after years of the Obama-Clinton-Kerry imposed
sanctions. Trump, the realist, proposes to end sanctions
and restore favorable market relations.
Thirdly, it is clear to Trump that the US wars in the Middle
East imposed enormous costs with minimal benefits for the
US economy. He wants to increase market relations with
the regional economic and military powers, like Turkey,
Israel and the Gulf monarchies. Trump is not interested in
Palestine, Yemen, Syria or the Kurds – which do not offer
much investment and trade opportunities. He ignores the
enormous regional economic and military power of Iran,
Nevertheless Trump has proposed to re-negotiate the
recent six-nation agreement with Iran in order to improve
the US side of the bargain. His hostile campaign rhetoric
against Tehran may have been designed to placate Israel
and its powerful domestic ‘Israel-Firsters’ fifth column.
This certainly came into conflict with his ‘America First’
pronouncements. It remains to be seen whether Donald
Trump will retain a ‘show’ of submission to the Zionist
project of an expansionist Israel while proceeding to
include Iran as a part of his regional market agenda.
The Garbage Journalists claim that Trump has adopted a
new bellicose stance toward China and threatens to launch
a ‘protectionist agenda’, which will ultimately push the
trans-Pacific countries closer to Beijing. On the contrary,
Trump appears intent on renegotiating and increasing trade
via bilateral agreements.
Trump will most probably maintain, but not expand,
Obama’s military encirclement of China’s maritime
boundaries which threaten its vital shipping routes.
Nevertheless, unlike Obama, Trump will re-negotiate
economic and trade relations with Beijing – viewing China
as a major economic power and not a developing nation
intent on protecting its ‘infant industries’. Trump’s realism
reflect the new economic order: China is a mature, highly
competitive, world economic power, which has been out-
competing the US, in part by retaining its own state
subsidies and incentives from its earlier economic phase.
This has led to significant imbalances. Trump, the realist,
recognizes that China offers great opportunities for trade
and investment if the US can secure reciprocal
agreements, which lead to a more favorable balance of
trade.
Trump does not want to launch a ‘trade war’ with China,
but he needs to restore the US as a major ‘exporter’ nation
in order to implement his domestic economic agenda. The
negotiations with the Chinese will be very difficult
because the US importer-elite are against the Trump
agenda and side with the Beijing’s formidable export-
oriented ruling class.
Moreover, because Wall Street’s banking elite is pleading
with Beijing to enter China’s financial markets, the
.
74
financial sector is an unwilling and unstable ally to
Trump’s pro-industrial policies.
Conclusion
Trump is not a ‘protectionist’, nor is he opposed to ‘free-
trade’. These charges by the garbage journalists are
baseless. Trump does not oppose US economic imperialist
policies abroad. However, Trump is a market realist who
recognizes that military conquest is costly and, in the
contemporary world context, a losing economic
proposition for the US. He recognizes that the US must
turn from a predominant finance and import economy to a
manufacturing and export economy.
Trump views Russia as a potential economic partner and
military ally in ending the wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan
and Ukraine, and especially in defeating the terrorist threat
of ISIS. He sees China as a powerful economic competitor,
which has been taking advantage of outmoded trade
privileges and wants to re-negotiate trade pacts in line with
the current balance of economic power.
Trump is a capitalist-nationalist, a market-imperialist and
political realist, who is willing to trample on women’s
rights, climate change legislation, indigenous treaties and
immigrant rights. His cabinet appointments and his
Republican colleagues in Congress are motivated by a
militarist ideology closer to the Obama-Clinton doctrine
than to Trumps new ‘America First’ agenda. He has
surrounded his Cabinet with military imperialists,
territorial expansionists and delusional fanatics.
Who will win out in the short or long term remains to be
seen. What is clear is that the liberals, Democratic Party
hacks and advocates of Little Mussolini black shirted street
thugs will be on the side of the imperialists and will find
plenty of allies among and around the Trump regime.
 Obama Actually Committed More Religious
Discrimination Than Any That Trump Is Accused Of
Where Was The Outrage Against The Obama Administration? Where Is
The Outrage Against The People Protesting Against Trump?
By Ron A. Y. Rich —— Bio And Archives
January 31, 2017
Any intellectually honest people who care about
immigration should be far more upset with President
Obama’s immigration policies than President Trump’s
Syrian Christians constitute 10% of the Arabs in Syria, yet
during the Obama administration, they constituted from
.5% to 1% of the refugees permitted to escape into
America from Syria. It is patently obvious that Christians
face far greater persecution in Syria and other Arab
countries than Muslims, so the statistic described above
demonstrates clear discrimination against Christians by the
Obama administration, based 100% on religion and 0% on
counter-terrorism. If anything, Christians are less likely
than Muslims to be members of ISIS or Muslim
fundamentalists or terrorists.
Note the contrast with the policies of the Trump
administration, where the ban on immigrants from certain
ISIS-infested countries makes no mention of religion and
does not take religion into account. It is clearly based on
an attempt to prevent potential or actual terrorists from
infiltrating our country. The hypocrites of the left also
conveniently fail to note that the 7 Arab countries singled
out for the ban are precisely the identical Arab countries
singled out for extra careful security measures by the
Obama administration, so on top of everything else, the
leftists and others who focus on the 7 Arab countries
singled out by Trump are hypocritical in their outrage.
The Unites States State Department even under Obama
found that Christians in more than 60 countries face
persecution from their governments or the surrounding
75
neighbors simply because of their belief in Jesus. Yet what
did Obama do about it? How many Democratic politicians
and Hollywood actors and actresses complained about
this?
An estimated 322 Christians are killed because of their
faith each month. What is the estimate of Democratic
politicians and Hollywood actors and actresses
complaining about this?
A Pew Research Center Poll found that more than 75% of
the world’s population centers are areas with severe
religious restrictions, many of them Christian. What
percentage of Democratic politicians and Hollywood
actors and actresses are complaining about this?
The fact that Christians are singled out more than Muslims
is obvious. The question is why more Christians, let alone
more people of all religions as well as atheists haven’t
spoken up about the discrimination.
An estimated 2/3 of Christian Arabs left the “Palestinian”
areas between 1949 and 1967, when these areas were
exclusively under the control of Arab Muslims, but their
numbers have grown subsequent to that time when these
areas became partly under Israeli control.
The contrast is even greater in Israel proper. There were an
estimated 34,000 Christians in the area now encompassed
by Israel in 1949; now there are an estimated 150,000,
constituting approximately 9% of the Israeli Arab
population, and 2% of the total Israeli population.
Under Jordanian rule, Christians were forbidden to
purchase land and houses, and many were persecuted,
tortured, and murdered because of their religion.
The Palestinian Authority notoriously denies Jewish
historical ties to Jerusalem, but they not as notoriously, but
equally despicably, deny Christian ties to Jerusalem as
well.
Bethlehem and Nazareth used to be populated by
Christians in the majority. After Jordanian control and
now Palestinian Authority control, they are in the minority.
Three quarters of the Christians who used to live in
Bethlehem now live abroad. Many of Jerusalem’s
Christians now live in Australia. Chile alone has become
the home to 30,000 Christians who used to live in Israel
and Jordan.
In 2002, a la Hamas in Gaza, Muslims took over the
Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and fired at Israeli
soldiers from it, knowing that Israel tries to avoid firing at
religious holy places and civilians.
In the recent fighting, 100,000 Christians fled from Mosul
, and for the first time in almost 2,000 years, virtually none
are left. How many of the anti-Trump protestors are
protesting? How many did Obama let into America?
.
76
In Nigeria, thousands of Christians were denied schooling,
clean water, heath care, and ultimately their very lives.
Saudi Arabia tortures and murders Muslims who convert
to Christianity as a matter of course, and is not exactly a
haven to Christians unfortunate enough to have been born
there.
The atrocities against Christians may be worst in Syria, but
they continue in one way or another in many parts of the
world. Yet, coming back to our opening paragraph, the
Obama Administration only permitted ½ to 1% of the
Syrian refugees who were Christian to enter the United
States, vs. 99 to 99.5% Muslims, which is a far more direct
and outrageous implementation of discrimination based on
religion than anything proposed or implemented by the
Trump Administration.
Where was the outrage against the Obama Administration?
Where is the outrage against the people protesting against
Trump?
 Despite Majority Of Americans In Favor Of Trump
Immigration Policy, 900 State Department Staff Dissent
By Tyler Durden
Jan 31, 2017 6:15 PM

Just yesterday we noted that, according to a Rasmussen White House spokesman Sean Spicer
poll, while the vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary said on Monday he was aware of the
protesters may get a lot of media attention, the silent memo but warned career diplomats that
majority of Americans, men and women who don't have they should either "get with the program
time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to or they can go."
work to provide for their families, support Trump's
temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim Seems these 900 folks may soon suffer the same fate as the
countries in the Middle East and Africa. acting Attorney General who decided to publicly announce
her defiance of Trump's immigration order just yesterday.
Now, Reuters/Ipsos, the pollsters who mastered the
application of the Democrat "oversample" in the months
leading up to the presidential election last November, is
out with another poll that confirms the Rasmussen results,
namely that the silent majority of Americans agree with
Trump's immigration ban. Per Reuters:

The Jan. 30-31 poll found that 49 percent

of American adults said they either
"strongly" or "somewhat" agreed with
Trump's order, while 41 percent
"strongly" or "somewhat" disagreed and
another 10 percent said they don't know.
But the responses were split almost entirely
along party lines. Some 53 percent of
Democrats said they "strongly
disagree" with Trump's action while 51
percent of Republicans said they
"strongly agree."
The Reuters/Ipsos poll found 31 percent of
Americans feel "more safe" because of
the ban, compared with 26 percent who
said they felt "less safe." Some 38 percent
said they felt the United States was setting
"a good example" of how best to confront
terrorism, while 41 percent said the country
was setting "a bad example."
Of course, popular opinion of the American people didn't
stop 900 Clinton loyalists in the State Department from
signing a "dissent memo" in defiance of their new boss.
A senior State Department official confirmed that the
memorandum in the department's "dissent channel" had
been submitted to management.
77
For those who missed it, below is our note from yesterday
on the Rasmussen poll.
***
While vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary
protesters may get a lot of media attention, a new
Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent
majority of Americans, men and women who don't have
time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to
work to provide for their families, support Trump's
temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim
countries in the Middle East and Africa. In fact, per the
new poll, 57% of likely U.S. voters actually approve of
the ban while only 33% were opposed.
A new Rasmussen Reports national
telephone and online survey finds that 57%
of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary
ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until
the federal government approves its
ability to screen out potential terrorists
from coming here. Thirty-three percent
 (33%) are opposed, while 10% are
undecided.
Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block
on visas prohibiting residents of Syria,
Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and
Yemen from entering the United States
until the government approves its ability
to screen for likely terrorists.
Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and
11% are undecided.
This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend
protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-
month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on
visitors from these seven countries.
That said, many legal scholars have
asserted that Trump's immigration ban will
stand up against Constitutional tests, with
GWU professor Jonathan Turley saying the
ban can't be viewed as a "Muslim ban"
given the "vast majority of Muslims
around the world are not affected by the
limitations placed on these seven
countries.”
Still, some observers said the courts ultimately might
uphold Trump’s order. Its alleged anti-Muslim thrust “is
not clear to me,” said Eugene Volokh, a professor at
UCLA School of Law. Judges might interpret the order as
targeting people from countries where “jihadist
sentiments” are common, he said.
The president generally has broad
authority to exclude non-citizens from
coming into the country, Volokh said.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington

University, predicted the courts would not interpret the
order as a religious ban.

“It is not on its face a Muslim ban,” he

said. “That dog simply won’t hunt. No
judge can look at the order and analyze
it as a Muslim ban because the vast
majority of Muslims around the world
Like most issues, support for the immigration ban was
are not affected by the limitations
heavily split along party lines with 82% of Republicans placed on these seven countries.”
supporting the executive order versus only 34% of
Democrats and 53% of Independents.
But while the ACLU is looking for a Supreme Court battle,
Trump continues to fight in the court of public opinion,
The refugee ban is supported by 82% of which, at least according to Rasmussen, is a fight he's
Republicans and 59% of voters not winning.
affiliated with either major party.
Democrats are opposed by a 53% to
34% margin. The numbers are nearly
identical for the temporary ban on visas
from these seven terrorist-plagued nations.
Men and women are in general
agreement on both measures. Younger
voters are slightly less supportive than their
elders are.
Blacks oppose both bans more than
whites and other majority voters do.

As we pointed out earlier (see "Is A Constitutional Crisis

Imminent In The Wake Of Trump's Immigration Ban?"),
the ACLU, flush with $24 million in donations from just
this weekend alone, has vowed to fight Trump's
immigration ban all the way to the Supreme Court on
grounds that it targets people of a certain religion, in direct
violation of the First Amendment.
.

78
 Report: Russian Spy Linked To Trump “Golden Showers”
Dossier Mysteriously Found Dead
Piper McGowin
January 31, 2017
Note: This is supposedly a picture of Oleg
Erovinkin. When the only picture available
of someone is of this poor quality, it calls
into question whether its even a legit
picture at all or if its just a fake/composite.
As The Daily Sheeple previously reported, just before the
inauguration, an unsubstantiated 35-page dossier of “intel”
discussing Trump in compromising sexual situations
involving prostitutes and pee came out, supposedly
originating with a former British MI6 agent who received
the info it contained from a Russian KGB agent.
If you play along with this story, now its being reported
that the Russian source of the info given to the British spy
has been found dead under mysterious circumstances.
As reported by The Telegraph:
Oleg Erovinkin, a former general in the
KGB and its successor the FSB, was found
.
79
dead in the back of his car in Moscow on
Boxing Day in mysterious circumstances.
Erovinkin was a key aide to Igor Sechin, a
former deputy prime minister and now head
of Rosneft, the state-owned oil company,
who is repeatedly named in the dossier.
Erovinkin has been described as a key
liaison between Sechin and Russian
president Vladimir Putin.
According to RIA Novosti, Erovinkin’s body was
“found in a black Lexus… [and] a large-
scale investigation has been commenced
in the area. Erovinkin’s body was sent to
the FSB morgue”.
Although foul play was initially suspected and for overtly
obvious reasons, later reports have apparently suggested
the man simply died of a heart attack (in the back of his
car?), leading to the further suggestion of an assassination
cover up.
The speculation is that Erovinkin was murdered by the
Kremlin according to the now outed former MI6 spy
Christopher Steele who remains in hiding since the dossier
became public.
There is still no proof to back up any of the claims made
within the dossier, which evidence suggests was just a
4chan prank on the CIA.
 Trump Regulatory Freeze Halts $180 Billion
Of Proposed Obama Rules, New Study Shows
By Tyler Durden
Jan 31, 2017 5:25 PM
On his first day in office, President Trump instructed Chief
of Staff, Reince Priebus, to send a memo to all executive
agencies imposing a regulatory moratorium that effectively
froze all pending rules and regulations proposed by the
Obama administration on their way out of Washington
D.C. Now, accorded to a new study from the American
Action Forum, that simple one-page memo from Priebus
potentially saved Americans $180 billion.
According to American Action Forum (AAF)
research, this memo put a hold on $181
billion in total regulatory costs,
including $17 billion in annual costs,
and 5.5 million hours of paperwork.
This moratorium freezes 22 rulemakings with annual costs
above $100 million and 16 measures with more than $1
billion in long-term costs.
From vehicle-to-vehicle communications to efficiency
standards for air conditioners and furnaces, Obama's
parting regulations ran the gamut.
The largest rules subject to the moratorium are a mix of
those still in the proposed stage, recently finalized, and
concluded but not yet published. Below are the top five
rules likely subject to the regulatory freeze:
 Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications: $108 billion in
total costs
80
 Efficiency Standards for Air Conditioners: $12.3 billion
in total costs
 Efficiency Standards for Furnaces: $9.2 billion in total
costs
 Hospital and Critical Access Reform: $5.7 billion in total
costs
 Efficiency Standards for Uninterruptible Power
Supplies: $4.6 billion in total costs
Shockingly, while tiny compared to the $180 billion price
tag of his new regulations, Obama did offer up $1.9 billion
of cost savings tied to a new energy efficiency rule and a
reorganization of the Food Stamp Program, among other
things.
There are some regulations the Trump Administration
might consider allowing soon.
There are at least 18 recently-finalized
or still-proposed measures that reduce
compliance burdens.
There are five additional regulations that claim notable
reductions in federal paperwork.
Combined, these deregulatory rules
could save $1.9 billion in total costs and
41.4 million hours of paperwork.
The largest measure by far is a DOE proposal on general
service lamps. It claims to eliminate $1.4 billion in
regulatory burdens ($93 million annually) by lowering the
purchase price of lamps and increasing their efficiency.
The rulemaking also claims $481 million in benefits.
In a bit of a last-minute surprise, the
Obama Administration revised its Food
Stamp Program (SNAP) for eligibility
and certification.
As AAF detailed in the past, the previous Food Stamp
paperwork burden went from 24 million hours to 118
million hours.
The revised SNAP rule aims to cut 40.5
million hours of paperwork and save
$286 million annually.
The rule has an effective date of March 7, 2017, so it could Frankly, we find it shocking that America has managed to
fall under criteria three of the moratorium, but after a operate for the past 11 days without these parting
review, the measure could be a good candidate to keep. regulatory gifts from the Obama administration.

81
 US Diplomats Draft ‘Dissent Memo’
To Denounce Trump’s Ban: Report
Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:52AM

countries, who view the “knee jerk” directive as an “attack

on Islam,” the report added.

Additionally, the memo warns that most terror attacks on

US mainland have been carried out by native-born or
naturalized US citizens “who have been living in the
United States for decades, if not since birth.”

"Given the near absence of terror attacks

US President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with small
business leaders in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in
Washington, DC, January 30, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
In a rare move, dozens of American
diplomats across the world have drafted
a formal “dissent memo” to express
their objection to US President Donald
Trump’s entry ban against
several Muslim countries, according to
a report.
committed in recent years" by visa holders
from these seven nations, “this ban will
have little practical effect in improving
public safety,” the draft adds.
“Decades from now, we will look back and
realize we made the same mistakes,” it
concludes.

The draft, which has been circulating among diplomats and

associates abroad over the past few days, denounces the
ban as an “un-American” move and warns that it would
actually harm efforts to protect the US from terrorists,
ABC News reported Monday.

“This ban ... will not achieve its stated aim
to protect the American people from
terrorist attacks by foreign nationals
admitted to the United States,” the draft
reads.
After signing the executive order on Friday, Trump said
his administration was seeking to keep what he called
“radical Islamic terrorists” out of the US.
Under the new measure, citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria,
Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia are banned from
entering the US for at least 90 days while Syrian refugees
are blocked indefinitely. Other refugee admissions will
also be halted for 120 days.
Demonstrators protest against US President Donald Trump and his
administration's ban of travelers from 7 countries by Executive
Order, during a rally outside the US Supreme Court in Washington,
DC, January 30, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
Trump has come under immense pressure from politicians
and rights groups to rescind the ban. Protests have also
been held inside and outside the US.
Major Republican figures like Senators John McCain and
Lindsey Graham have also criticized the ban, creating
further confusion in Washington.
Unaffected by the attacks, Trump fired the acting attorney
general, Sally Yates, after she defied the rule.

The draft criticizes the Trump administration for

“alienating” the governments of the Muslim-majority
.

82
 ‘Media Against Trump - Trump Card In His Hands’
Published Time: 31 Jan, 2017 15:56
Activists gather at Terry Shrunk Plaza to protest against President
Donald Trump's travel ban in Portland, Oregon, U.S. January 30,
2017. © Steve Dipaola / Reuters
The majority of Americans don’t trust the media and don’t
like them. Therefore the US media being so openly one-
sided against President Trump is very good for him, said
Lew Rockwell, chairman of the Ludwig von Mises
Institute.
Protests have continued across the US for a third day over
President Donald Trump's executive order that temporarily
bars migrants from seven Muslim-majority countries from
entering America.
The immigration freeze applies to Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and will remain in force
83
for 90 days. They were initially identified as "countries of
concern" under the Obama administration.
Trump denied the immigration restrictions are a "Muslim
ban" as many are claiming, and accused the media of false
reporting.
RT: Despite protests, Trump shows no sign of changing
his policy. Do you see these protests dying down soon?
Lew Rockwell: A lot of these kids are being paid by
George Soros and similar people, and it’s openly being
paid – this is not hidden. I must say there is a level of
hysteria that I haven’t seen. I myself years ago was at anti-
Vietnam demonstrations; people were not hysterical: they
weren’t beating up people, there weren’t this type. If you
see any of the demonstrations – these are the most hate-
filled groups of people that one could possibly encounter,
even though they are chanting about:
“love, not hate” – for them it is “hate, hate,
hate!”
They are also violent. The left has always been extremely
violent since the days of the French revolution… That is
concerning. I frankly don’t exactly know what they hope
to achieve – Soros and the rest of the people, who are
organizing this. It seems to me it bothers every normal
person, closing up traffic and that sort of thing. These are
not intended to persuade anyone, but rather to intimidate…

RT: There are some people who say that they are not
particularly anti-Trump, but anti this policy he is putting
in place.
LR: That may very well be the case, but, in my
experience, there is virtually 100 percent overlap. So it is
not only anti-Trump… But just the fact that they call it a
“Muslim ban": it is not a Muslim ban. We know there are
50 majority Muslim countries in the world; that [ban]
applies to seven. I don’t think by the way, that it is a tragic
coincidence, but all these countries have been bombed
either by Clinton, Bush, Obama, or all three of them.
These people demonstrating – they couldn’t have cared
less about that. This [ban] they freak out about – I don’t
think it is about Muslims, I don’t think it is about
immigration – it is about power, it is about control. These
are the same people, who wanted to shut up anybody who
doesn’t agree with their PC agenda…
84
RT: US mass media has been attacking Trump even before
he was elected. What’s your take on that? Will it affect his
Presidency somehow?
LR: First of all, having the media against him is one of the
trump cards in his hand. It is very good for him, because
Americans don’t by and large, by the vast majority, as a
matter of fact, don’t trust the media, don’t like the media.
So the fact that the media are so openly one-sided has hurt
them, and I would say helped Trump. They are purveyors
of fake news…
We need new media. Of course there are new media. There
are new websites, and new publications, but they are not
part of the ‘ancient’ old media. There is a replacement
going on. The old media are worried about their futures.
They see their TV ratings going down; their circulation of
their publications going down. My guess is they know they
are through. How long will this process take: five years –
more, less? I don’t know. There is a new day coming in
terms of media. It is a very good development for America
and the whole world.
 Insanity: Democratic Senator
Wants Open Borders And More Gun Control
Pushes “Absolutely No Screening” Process For Incoming Refugees
By Alex Thomas -
01.31.2017 @9:07 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — The liberal freak out over President
Trump’s executive order targeting 7 countries with a
temporary travel ban has reached new heights with almost
every news outlet dedicated to attacking the order and
hysterically spreading disinformation to the American
people.
Now, during an appearance on MSNBC, Senator Chris
Murphy (D-CT) has revealed that the left not only doesn’t
support Trump’s order, but actually wants literally no
screening process for incoming refugees.
appeared on CNN and suggested more
gun control would keep the U.S. safer than
President Trump’s immigration suspension.
Like Murphy, Friedman focused on “assault
weapons,” claiming the focus should be on
barring persons on the terror watch list
from buying such guns.”

Responding to a question about whether or not there was

any merit to Trump’s order, Murphy revealed the shocking
fact that the left doesn’t even believe in the security
screening previously set up by the Obama administration.

“I would argue that we should go towards a

discussion about absolutely no screening,”
Murphy declared before moving on to
suggest yet even more gun control.
“So, I would go towards a sort of European
bent in looking at screening. And then
maybe let’s just make sure that if folks get
to this country, and we suspect them of
having connections to terrorism, that they
shouldn’t be able to get an assault weapon.
That’s a huge liability in our law today.”
Others within the establishment are also pushing gun
control in the midst of the freak out over the travel ban
while conveniently ignoring the documented flaws within
the terror watch list.
Breitbart reported,
“Both Murphy and Friedman overlooked the
fact that neither of the San Bernardino
attackers (December 2, 2015) nor the
Orlando Pulse attacker (June 12, 2016)
were on a terror watch list, so the passage
of such gun control would have been
impotent to stop them. The key to stopping
attacks is keeping attackers out of the
country or sending them out via
deportation, once we realize they are here.”
This is the height of insanity folks and once again shows
that the establishment left is willing to sacrifice all
common sense in their push to secure the goals of the
globalist elite.

“Also on the morning of January 30, New

York Times columnist Thomas Friedman
.

85
 Trump Administration Freezes Out
CNN From Interviews And Staff Appearances
The White House Has Refused To Send Its Surrogates Onto CNN Shows,
Effectively Icing Out CNN From Trump Administration Press Coverage.
Alex Christoforou
February 1, 2017

House was also in a quasi-war with Fox News when he

was the POTUS…

It’s not unusual for a White House to tangle with certain

outlets.

A former official in President Barack

Trump has taken the war against CNN “fake news” to the
next level.
Politico is reporting that the Trump White House will not
allow its staff and surrogates to appear on CNN, and will
instead go to
“places where we think it makes sense
to promote our agenda.
Well, it’s official…according to a note from Politico, the
White House has confirmed that surrogates of the Trump
A spokesperson for Fox News did not immediately respond
administration will no longer appear on CNN and will opt
to a request for comment.
to go to “places where we think it makes sense to promote
our agenda.”
Zerohedge further reports…
“We’re sending surrogates to places
where we think it makes sense to
promote our agenda,” said a White
House official, acknowledging that CNN is
not such a place, but adding that the ban is
not permanent.
A CNN reporter, speaking on background, was more blunt:
The White House is trying to punish the
network and force down its ratings.
“They’re trying to cull CNN from the
herd,” the reporter said.
Before the liberal left gets bent out of shape regarding the
Trump Administration’s embargo of CNN, Obama’s White
Obama’s office acknowledged that they
had their “battles with Fox,” and that
there may have been some times where
“we sent people on other networks and
not on Fox.” But as a general rule, the
official said, officials would go on the
network.
“I think, in my hazy recollection is it would
be unusual to do all [the networks] except
one. What drives that is sometimes amount
of time available to the person doing them,”
the official said. “If they are stiffing CNN
intentionally, that is different than what
normally happens.”
Of course, this development should come
as little surprise to anyone who has been
paying attention given that Trump has
constantly blasted CNN as a “Fake News”
outlet ever since his heated exchange with
Jim Acosta at a press conference on
January 11th.
But while the Trump administration has
refused to send surrogates on CNN talk
shows, Spicer has confirmed that the “Fake
News” outlet won’t be frozen out of press
briefings. Speaking at an event at George
Washington University on Monday, Spicer
pointed out that he’s answered CNN’s
questions in the regular daily briefings but
also noted that he’s

86
 “not going to sit around and engage actually get something right.”
with people who have no desire to
.

87
 Petraeus: World Order
Under 'Unprecedented Threat'
By Rebecca Kheel
02/01/17 10:46 AM EST
Retired Gen. David Petraeus warned lawmakers on
Wednesday that the world order created in part by the
United States in the 20th century is under “unprecedented
threat from multiple directions,” pointing to Russia, China,
Islamist extremists and cyber threats.
Those threats are compounded by an America whose
“resolve about its defense has become somewhat
ambivalent,” he added.
“Americans should not take the current
international order for granted,” Petraeus
said at a House Armed Services
Committee hearing. “It did not will itself into
existence. We created it. Likewise, it is not
naturally self-sustaining. We have
sustained it. If we stop doing so, it will fray
and, eventually, collapse."
Petraeus, former director of the CIA, spoke at a hearing
about the “state of the world.”
Many of Petraeus’s remarks hinted at pushing back against
statements and policies from President Trump, who had
considered Petraeus as a candidate for his secretary of
State.
In speaking about the threat from extremists, Petraeus
stressed that the majority of Muslims who reject
extremism are the "most important ally" in fighting the
Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and al Qaeda.
His comments come amid continued backlash at Trump’s
executive order banning travel from seven Muslim-
majority countries for 90 days, suspending all refugees for
four months and halting Syrian refugees indefinitely.
Critics have called the order a Muslim ban and said it plays
into extremists’ narrative that the West is at war with
Islam.
“We must also remember that Islamic
extremists want to portray this fight as a
.
88
clash of civilizations, with America at war
against Islam,” Petraeus said Wednesday.
“We must not let them do that; indeed, we
must be very sensitive to actions that might
give them ammunition to use in such an
effort.”
Petraeus also warned that adversaries such as Russian
President Vladimir Putin are seeking to encourage
American ambivalence about its defense and institutions
such as NATO.
“President Putin, for instance, understands
that, while conventional aggression may
occasionally enable Russia to grab a bit of
land on its periphery, the real center of
gravity is the political will of the major
democratic powers to defend Euro-Atlantic
institutions like NATO and the EU,”
Petraeus said. “That is why Russia is
tenaciously working to sow doubt about the
legitimacy of these institutions and our
entire democratic way of life.”
Trump has said he wants to improve relations with Russia
and has called NATO obsolete.
Former CIA Deputy Director John McLaughlin, who
spoke at Wednesday's hearing alongside Petraeus, also
warned about the difficulty in dealing with Russia.
“There is nothing at all wrong with aiming
for an improved relationship with Russia,
but the U.S. must be aware that Russia
calculates its interests in a cold-eyed
clinical way and Washington will have to be
equally dispassionate in dealing with
Putin,” he said. “Historically, when Russia
encounters weakness or hesitation, it
demands more, then blames the opponent
for escalation when the opponent resists —
then calls for discussions, which it uses to
consolidate its gains. Deals don’t come
easily.”
 White House Press Briefing Room “Skype Seats”
Filled, Intellihub, Other Alt Media, Denied
What Gives?
By Shepard Ambellas -
02.01.2017 @9:22 AM EST

After presenting a few examples I then came to the

conclusion that

“CNN is nothing more than a fake news

conglomerate, to say the least, and
deserves to have its White House press
pass revoked.”

So why would the White House even let CNN through the
door? And what makes CNN, for example, more worthy
than Intellihub or even a video blogger like Mark Dice,
Jennifer Boyer/Flickr who has also informally requested a White House press
pass on several occasions?
(INTELLIHUB) — It looks like there will not be any
“Skype seats” made available for the alternative media in
the White House press briefing room anytime soon as
some agencies and bloggers formally requested.

These so-called Skype seats were first announced by

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer on Jan. 23 and
according to official White House terminology, the seat
warmers will be considered “inaugural panelists.”
Additionally, one of the requirements to be an inaugural
panelist is that the person has to live over 50 miles away
from Washington D.C. in able to gain press access via the
Internet.

According to Fox News “Natalie Herbick of FOX 8 in

Cleveland, talk radio host Lars Larson, WPRI Rhode
Island’s Kimberly Kalunian and Jeff Jobe of Kentucky’s
Jobe Publishing” were named.

However, the new announcement of the panelists has some

in the alternative media world scratching their heads and
wondering what gives. How could mainstream figureheads
and agencies be deemed more worthy or credible than
alternative figureheads or agencies?
On Jan. 21 I myself requested a White House press pass in
an email addressed to the president titled “Please
I mean take a look at CNN, which is nothing more than a Consider A Press Pass For Intellihub News & Politics.”
fake news propaganda factory or MSNBC’s Brian Williams
who is best known for his bald-faced lie as Intellihub’s
The email read as follows:
Lexi Morgan reported in Feb. of 2015.
Dear Mr. President,
In fact, just this last Saturday I did a piece which
questioned: What is CNN?
89
 I congratulate you on becoming the 45th President of the from Shep’s World. Get the Podcast.
United States and I am truly looking forward to you and Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter.
your wonderful team making America great again.
Longform bio:
I know you are busy so I will keep this short.
HTTPS://WWW.INTELLIHUB.COM/ABOUT/SHEPARDA
I would really love for myself (Intellihub.com) to be MBELLAS/
included in daily press briefings as the mainstream
media can no longer fully be trusted to get real Thank you for your time.
information out to the masses IMHO.
Best Regards,
Intellihub covered your presidential run positively the
entire time — and just so you know, on a sidenote, when
Shepard Ambellas
I was 19-years-old (39 now) I predicted that you would
one day become the POTUS.
While I really did not expect to receive a press pass, as I
knew the chance would be one in a million, I did expect to
I hope you will consider letting me attend daily briefings
get a response from someone at the White House, which I
and I truly appreciate everything you do. never got.

Just in case you are not aware of my work, I have

But I ask again, what makes the people who were
included a brief bio below:
approved to attend White House press briefings better than
those in the so-called “alternative media”? And let me be
Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist clear, I do not consider Intellihub to be in the “alternative
and the founder and editor-in-chief of media” I consider Intellihub to be “independent media” as
Intellihub News & Politics we just do our own thing.
(Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for
producing Shade: The Motion Picture
I have a feeling that this is a question in which we will
(2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s
never get an answer as the powers-that-be are scared real
America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a
truth reaching the masses. Maybe they would rather see
regular contributor to Infowars. Read more
‘controlled truth.’
.

90
 Obama, Hillary, Schumer, And Trump: Will The Real
Enemies Of The Moslem World Please Stand Up
By Eric Sommer
February 1, 2017
Beijing.
It’s heart-sickening to see the U.S. corporate media
fawning over war criminals posturing as humanitarian
friends of Moslem refugees and immigrants when their
wars of aggression have killed hundreds of thousands of
Moslems, destroyed their societies, and turned enormous
numbers into the refugees they now claim to care for.
Contrary to their widely-reported public statements of
sympathy for Moslem immigrants or refugees, Hillary,
Obama, Schumer, and other U.S. political figures whose
wars have devastated Moslem countries are among the last
people on Earth who can claim friendship for Moslems or
refugees..
Trump’s presidential order – which they claim to be
outraged by – applies to the predominantly Islamic
countries of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and
Yemen, the very countries which their own wars have laid
waste to. The order bars entry of refugees awaiting U.S.
resettlement for 120 days. Syrian refugees are forbidden
to enter the U.S. until further notice. It also bars the
citizens of the seven countries from entering the U.S. with
ordinary visas for a 90 day period.
A 2015 UN report states that there are 63.5 million
refugees compelled to flee impoverished and warfare
riddled countries. This is the largest number of refugees in
human history. A large proportion of them are Moslems
fleeing the societies rendered non-functional by U.S.-led
military invasions, interventions, and use of Jihadist
proxies in the Middle East and North Africa, with over one
million left dead. Virtually all of the Democratic and
Republican party political figures now professing
sympathy for Moslem immigrants and refugees were
supporters of these criminal wars.
It’s important to state – and it should be emphasized – that
we are dealing with actual war criminals here. These are
individuals who have orchestrated military aggression and
invasions against Moslem countries and peoples which
have never attacked the U.S. or any other country.
Bush launched the fake ‘War on Terror’ used by himself
and later by Obama to justify their wars. Bush instigated
91
the invasion of Afghanistan, and the Iraq war which killed
up to a million Moslems and turned countless others into
refugees. His regime also sponsored the secret black-site
prisons in Europe where Moslem’s were tortured.
Obama, who has said he is ‘heartened’ by the public
protests against Trumps order, continued Bush’s wars in
Afganistan and Iraq, producing thousands of additional
Moslem deaths and large numbers of refugees. He also
launched the U.S-led military support of the terrorists who
destroyed the government of Libya, causing the deaths of
tens of thousands of Libyan Moslems, and converting the
previously relatively peaceful and secular country into a
battle ground between terrorist militias. Large numbers of
refugees subsequently fled the country in order to survive.
Obama also greatly accelerated the use of drones, begun
under Bush, to assassinate Moslems who he and his
advisors lablelled as ‘terrorists’ in countries ranging from
Pakistan to Africa, without anything resembling a trial or
legal due process.
It should also be noted that the Obama administration
deported 2.5 million immigrants, more than the total
number deported by all previous presidents combined.
His administration also determined that immigrant children
as young as three had no right to a lawyer and must appear
by themselves in court.
Hillary Clinton – while serving as Obama’s secretary of
state – orchestrated the anti-Libyan propaganda campaign
and the subsequent aerial bombardment of Libya by U.S.-
led air forces which enabled the terrorists on the ground,
mis-labeled as fighting for human rights, to overturn the
Libyan government. She also supported the use of drones
for international assassinations of Moslems based on
labeling particular individuals as ‘terrorists’ without trials
or any proper legal steps.
Charles Schumer, democratic party leader in the U.S.
Senate, was widely shown a few days ago in corporate
media with crocodile tears for Moslem refugees and
immigrants. But along with Barack Obama, Joseph Biden,
and Hillary Clinton, he previously voted for Bush’s ‘secure
fence act’ of 2006 and supported the Iraq war and the other
wars which have devastated predominantly Moslem
countries.
Human rights, or the lives of Moslems, can have little or
nothing to do with the concerns of such people. Their
concerns are based on their political positions in the U.S.,
their fear of the growing political awakening of American
workers, and the desire of the military-security and finance
capital and giant corporate groups, including oil
companies, which they represent to recruit skilled foreign
workers and maintain ‘friendly’ relations with forces in the
middle East willing to help the U.S.military drive to gain
total control of the oil-rich region.
As for Trump, his policies are really an extension of the
war crimes and anti-immigrant policies of those who
preceded him. He has loaded his cabinet with military
92
generals, billionaire, and extreme right-wing ideologues,
all of who received overwhelming support and votes from
the Democrats and Republicans alike in the U.S. Senate.
Nor did Obama, Hillary, or Bush make any public
objections to his cabinet choices.
With only a few days as president, Trump has not – so far
– killed large numbers of Moslems. His real immediate
crime in the eyes of U.S. political elites – which has
suddenly earned him enemies in both parties – is that his
overtly anti-democratic and authoritarian measures,
including his anti-immigrant policies, have ‘taken the
mask off’ and revealed what those elites themselves really
are and what the U.S. state has really become.
 New Study Reveals Shocking Information About Trump’s
Voter Fraud Claims (VIDEO)
By Michael Depinto [THE VOICE OF REASON]
Date: February 01, 2017

Washington Time Reports:

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
As was the case when candidate Trump said things on the
campaign trail, now that he is president, often times after
Donald Trump makes certain comments he is immediately
laughed at by both the Democrats and the mainstream
media. Considering how often both groups have
underestimated Trump, and how often he’s proven them
wrong, one would think they might have learned by now to
hold off on the ridicule, at least temporarily.
When Donald Trump said he believes he not only won the
electoral vote, but that he also won the popular vote if all
the fraud was removed from the final numbers, the far-left
went bananas. At least they’re consistent, right? Now
President Trump has launched an investigation into the
alleged voter fraud, and Democrats and the mainstream
media are in full panic mode.
What follows in the video below, and in two posts that will
follow this one, should demonstrate that there is good
reason for the far-left to begin panicking. Based on what
we’ve learned from two separate nonpartisan watchdog
groups who estimate as many as seven million votes for
Hillary could have been fraudulent, what we’ve learned
about a newly opened investigation by Inspector General
of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), John
Roth, that is investigating why Obama’s DHS attempted to
hack several state’s election systems, and what we’ve
learned about a new study performed by political
scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion University, it
looks like Democrats might have good reason to be
nervous…
Hillary Clinton garnered more than
800,000 votes from noncitizens on Nov.
8, an approximation far short of
President Trump’s estimate of up to 5
million illegal voters but supportive of
his charges of fraud.
Political scientist Jesse Richman of Old
Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia,
has worked with colleagues to produce
groundbreaking research on noncitizen
voting, and this week he posted a blog
in response to Mr. Trump’s assertion.
Based on national polling by a consortium of universities,
a report by Mr. Richman said 6.4 percent of the estimated
20 million adult noncitizens in the U.S. voted in
November. He extrapolated that that percentage would
have added 834,381 net votes for Mrs. Clinton, who
received about 2.8 million more votes than Mr. Trump.
Mr. Richman calculated that Mrs. Clinton would have
collected 81 percent of noncitizen votes.
“Is it plausible that non-citizen votes
added to Clinton’s margin? Yes,” Mr.
Richman wrote. “Is it plausible that non-
citizen votes account for the entire
nation-wide popular vote margin held by
Clinton? Not at all.”
Still, the finding is significant because it means noncitizens
may have helped Mrs. Clinton carry a state or finish better
than she otherwise would have.

93
Mr. Trump’s unverified accusation to congressional
leaders this week, as reported by The Washington Post, has
sent the issue skyward.
He apparently was referring to all types
of fraud, such as the “dead” voting or
multiple votes from the same person.
But the thrust of his estimate appears to
be that illegal immigrants and
noncitizens carried the popular vote.
He returned to the issue Thursday in Philadelphia, where
he spoke to congressional Republicans mapping this year’s
legislative calendar.
“We also need to keep the ballot box safe
from illegal voting,” the president said.
“And, believe me, you take a look at what’s
registering, folks. Take a look at what’s
registering. We are going to protect the
integrity of the ballot box, and we are going
to defend the votes of the American citizen,
so important.”
The mainstream media reacted to Mr.
Trump’s assertion with derision. Liberal
pundits said there is no evidence of
fraud.
CNN’s Jake Tapper called it “a stunning
allegation for which the White House is
providing no evidence. And there is a
reason they are providing no evidence
— there is no evidence. It is not true.”
Esquire.com said, “The most bizarre lie
of Donald Trump’s presidency so far is
his claim of widespread voter fraud in
an election he won.”
But conservative activists say the liberal media are
ignoring evidence — that noncitizen voting is illegal and,
thus, fraud. They say the Justice Department in the Obama
administration was more concerned with preventing states
from cleansing rosters of dead and inactive voters than in
mounting any investigation into fraud.
“Most voters are never asked for voter ID, so it is
dishonest to suggest that with the tens of millions of illegal
and legal aliens here, there is no voter fraud,” said Tom
Fitton, who heads the conservative watchdog group
Judicial Watch. “If the key Old Dominion study results on
the 2008 election are applied to 2016 — 1.41 million
aliens may have voted illegally, with 1.13 million voting
for Democrats.”
“A federal voter fraud investigation is
long overdue,” Mr. Fitton said. “It would
be a simple matter of analyzing voter
registration databases against federal
94
databases of aliens and deceased
individuals. Why is the left afraid to
even ask the questions? The jig is up.”
There does not appear to be any concerted postelection
effort by states to take on the daunting task of checking
voter rolls and ballots to verify citizenship. In some states,
no ID is required to register and vote.
Mr. Richman relies on a one-of-a-kind poll: the
Cooperative Congressional Election Survey. Every two
years, a consortium of 28 universities produces a detailed
report on voters and their views based on polling by
YouGov.
Tucked inside the lengthy questionnaire is a question on
citizenship status: A significant number of respondents
anonymously acknowledged they were not citizens when
they voted.
Three professors at Old Dominion
University — Mr. Richman, Gulshan A.
Chattha and David C. Earnest — took
these answers, did further research and
extrapolated that of a 19.4 million
estimate of adult noncitizens, about
620,000 were illegally registered to vote
in the 2008 presidential election. Using
other measuring tools, they said, the
actual number of noncitizen voters
could be as low as 38,000 and as high
as 2.8 million.
The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 2012 that there are 22
million noncitizens in the country. The group comprises
illegal immigrants and people in the U.S. legally on a visa
or permanent resident green card. Of this 22 million, 20
million were 18 or older, the U.S. voting age requirement.
Conservatives have long suspected that
Democrats are tacitly encouraging
illegal immigrants to vote. Liberal
leaders have created “sanctuary cities”
across the nation that refuse to work
with federal immigration enforcement
authorities.
President Obama was asked during the campaign last year
if illegal immigrants had anything to fear from federal
authorities if they voted in the presidential race.
“Many of the millennials, Dreamers,
undocumented citizens — and I call them
citizens because they contribute to this
country — are fearful of voting,” he was
asked on a Latino YouTube channel. “‘So if
 I vote, will Immigration know where I live?
Will they come for my family and deport
us?’”
“Not true, and the reason is, first of all,
when you vote, you are a citizen yourself,”
Mr. Obama said. “And there is not a
situation where the voting rolls somehow
are transferred over and people start
investigating, etc. The sanctity of the vote
is strictly confidential.”
Some conservatives interpreted Mr.
Obama’s answer as a go-ahead signal,
.
95
with his questionable assertion that
voter rolls are off limits to federal
investigators.
The WikiLeaks dump of Clinton
campaign manger John Podesta’s
emails contained one message on
directing immigrants to vote. He said
immigrants should obtain driver’s
licenses and then attest at a polling
place that they are U.S. citizens.
 A Daily Web Page Summary Of The Dirty Lies, Glaring Omissions,
Half Truths & Globalist Bias Of The NY Times Front Page Headlines
"All The News That Sulzberger's Propaganda Rag Saw Fit To Distort"

“NY Slimes” Runs 31 Anti-Trump Pieces In One Issue!

By Mike King
Based On NYT Monday Issue Of 1/30/17

(6 attacks)  Building a Wall of Ignorance

 Trump’s Unfashionable Tax Idea
 Travelers Stranded and Protests Swell Over Trump  Allies in Combat, Now Unwanted
Order
 Bannon Seizes a Security Role From Generals LETTERS SECTION
 How Trump’s Rush to Enact Immigration Ban
Unleashed Global Chaos (4 attacks)
 U.S. Commando Killed in Yemen in Trump’s First
Counterterrorism Operation
 The Outcry Over Trump’s Refugee Ban
 In Face of Trump’s Order, Some Muslim Nations Are
 The Continuing Kerfuffle Over Trump’s Tax Returns
Conspicuously Silent
 The Art of the Scam’
 Demonstrators in Streets, and at Airports, Protest
 The Most Thankless Job: Trump’s Press Secretary
Immigration Order
LOCAL / NEW YORK
NATIONAL SECTION
(1 attack)
(10 attacks)
 Refugee Ban Endangers ‘Part of American Legacy’
 Lives Rewritten With the Stroke of a Pen
 Demonstrators in Streets and Airports, Protest
Immigration Order BUSINESS SECTION
 Rulings on Trump’s Immigration Order Are First Step
on a Long Legal Path (3 attacks)
 In a Week, Trump Reshapes Decades of Perceptions
About America  Silicon Valley’s Ambivalence Toward
 Trump’s Immigration Order Jolts Iraqis, U.S.’s Top Trump Turns to Anger
Allies Against ISIS  Sean Spicer, Trump Press Secretary, Is
 Disorder at Airports as Travelers Are Detained Without ‘Not Here to Be Someone’s Buddy’
Lawyers  Executives’ Response to Immigration Order
 Christian Leaders Denounce Trump’s Plan to Favor Runs Gamut From Caution to Fury
Christian Refugees
 As Democrats Take to the Streets, Lawmakers Rush to ARTS SECTION
Keep Up
 Growing Number of GOP Lawmakers Criticize Trump’s
(1 attacks)
Refugee Policy
 Howls Over Import Tax Complicate Plans to Overhaul
Code  Visa Ban Leaves Artists in Limbo, and Institutions
Perplexed
OP /ED SECTION
*
(6 attacks)

 Donald Trump’s Muslim Ban Is Cowardly and

Dangerous
 Trumpian Characters Are the Stuff of Fiction
 No, Trump, Not on Our Watch
96
The Piranha Press is in a feeding frenzy.

Move over Barry Goldwater. Move over Richard Nixon.

Move over David Duke. Heck, even Vlad the Bad Putin
has never been hit this hard. Count em'! Thirty one hit
pieces against Orange Man spread throughout all sections
of the Sulzberger's Slimes. Only the Sports and Obituaries
sections were spared of the slime. Be careful Orange
Man, and beware the Establishment Republican'ts around
you (Priebus, Pence et al.)

The only historical personages who have gotten it this bad

were The Great One (that's Hitler for you newbies) and
Senator Joe McCarthy. Of course, Orange Man is no
Hitler, but these attacks are badges of honor. And speaking
of the great McCarthy, it is as interesting as it is hopeful to
note that there is only a one-degree separation between
McCarthy and Orange Man -- that direct link being
McCarthy's sidekick, attorney Roy Cohn. Cohn, who died
of AIDS in 1986, may have been a closeted sodomite and a
chosenite, but his anti-Communist credentials were as
solid as they come. He defended the great Senator to the
very end, and was hated by many of his fellow Tribesmen
for it. Surely, Cohn must have schooled a young Orange
Man on the ways of the world.

97
 It's amazing, isn't it? We meant that line about OM being
omitted from Sports & Obituaries as a wise-crack. But
with today's poop-pie about the "controversy" over the
New England Patriots football team's owner (Robert
Kraft), head coach (Bill Belichick) and the star-player /
Quarterback (Tom Brady) all being "friends of Trump"
appearing in the SPORTS section, we can now say that
only the Obituaries Section remains "Trump-free" -- and
let's pray that it stays that way! The Slimes has truly
become a caricature of itself now. Let's see what
tomorrow's crossword puzzles bring!
McCarthy -- Cohn – Trump

1- The great anti-Communist Senator with his young

and loyal aide, Roy Cohn.
2- Politically ruined by Eisenhower's "string pulling",
McCarthy dies suddenly at the young age of 47 ---
killed by the same forces attacking Orange Man.
3- Roy Cohn (an anti-communist described by
POLITICO as "a Jewish anti-Semite and a
homosexual homophobe" (here) was described as
a "mentor" to Trump during the 1970 & 80's.

Getting back to the feeding frenzy of the Piranha Press, we

have to wonder: how much longer until we start seeing
anti-Trump crossword puzzle questions in the Slimes?

A 5 letter word for evil that starts with a 'T' and ends with
a 'P'. Hmmm.

One would think that even the most dim-witted specimen

of Boobus Americanus would start to question the
objectivity of Sulzberger's Slimes because of this hate-
filled spree. Right? We will add another point to Orange
Man's "plus column" over this barrage, even as our
worries continue to increase over the political debt he may
now owe to Satanyahu's bunch of "Greater Israel" ultra-
nationalists.

THE VERY NEXT DAY

NY Times (Sports): N.F.L. Transcripts Leave Out a

Couple of Things: Trump and Goodell

By BENJAMIN HOFFMAN and KEN BELSON

This "too-good-to-pass-up" headline in today's Slimes

really caught our eyes (made them pop out, actually!)
because it related directly to a line which we had just
published, in jest, only yesterday when we ridiculed
Sulzberger's Slimes and its anti-Trump pieces as follows:

"Thirty one hit pieces against Orange Man spread

throughout all sections of the Sulzberger's Slimes. Only the
Sports and Obituaries sections were spared of the slime."

98
Patriotic Patriots? Tom Brady -- Bill Belichick --
Robert Kraft --- oh, the bloody "controversy!"

Boobus Americanus 1: The New York Times was

wall-to-wall with stories and editorials attacking
Sugar: Wrong again Boobuss! It's the media and the
Trump today.
rent-a-mobss that sstir up trouble.

Boobus Americanus 2: Trump has done nothing but

Editor: Amazing that some people still can't see
stir up controversy since his inauguration.
that the press, far from being an honest referee, is
actually part of the crooked game.
*

99
 Pair Arrested In London Over Crippling Cyber Attack On
Washington DC's CCTV Network Just Days Before
Trump Was Sworn In As President
 A British Man And A Swedish Woman, Both 50, Were Arrested In London
 The Pair Were Suspected Of Being Involved In A Hack Which Brought Down CCTV
 More Than 120 CCTV Cameras In US Capital Went Dark Days Before Inauguration
By Mail Online Reporter
Published: 20:57 EST, 1 February 2017 | Updated: 02:23 EST, 2 February 2017
Two suspected hackers have been arrested in London by
detectives investigating a crippling cyber attack which Donald Trump waves to the crowds after being sworn in as
brought down Washington DC's CCTV cameras eight days President. The cyber attack brought down many of the
before the inauguration of President Donald Trump. CCTV cameras in Washington a week before his
inauguration
The Sun reported that police swooped on a house in
Streatham, south London last month after the US It was believed the cyber attack could have been a dry run
government reported 123 of 187 security cameras in for another attempt on January 20, the day of the
Washington went offline, amid fears it may be linked to an inauguration.
attempt on Trump's life.
But Brian Ebert, a Secret Service official, told the
Just hours before the 45th President was sworn in, a 50- Washington Post the safety of the Trump family and the
year-old British man and a Swedish woman, also 50, were general public had never been in jeopardy.
detained by the National Crime Agency.
The security bill for President Trump's inauguration was at
least £75million, with 25,000 armed police and National
Guardsmen turning the city into a fortress.

But the Secret Service were concerned about the CCTV

blackout, with cameras out of action between 12 and 15
January.

Archana Vemulapalli, Washington's Chief Technology

Officer denied the city had paid a ransom to the hackers to
get the cameras back online. He said they had removed the
sophisticated software used by the hackers and rebooted
the system.

The NCA said the man and the woman were arrested on
January 19 and bailed until April 2017.

100
 Trump Admin Cracks Down
On #Fakenews By Icing Out CNN
Ryan Saavedra
Feb 1st, 2017 1:22 Pm
CNN Gets Iced Out By Trump
CNN picked the wrong President to wage war against. On
a daily basis one can tune into any number of media outlets
and see reports of how CNN is once again distorting the
news.
The New York Times recently said that CNN is “Sidelining
The Issues And Real Reporting…[and is] Substance
Free.” A recent survey from the Washington Times found
that CNN is the least trustworthy source of news among
TV networks and CNN was crushed by Fox News for
inauguration coverage according to Nielsen ratings.
It now appears that the Trump administration is beginning
to crack down on fake news by freezing out CNN from
interviews.
According to Politico, A CNN reporter said that: The
White House is trying to punish the network and force
down its ratings.
.
101
From Politico:
Administration officials are still answering
questions from CNN reporters. But
administration officials including White
House press secretary Sean Spicer and
senior counselor Kellyanne Conway
haven’t appeared on the network’s
programming in recent weeks.
Spicer, speaking at an event at The
George Washington University on Monday,
denied that CNN is being frozen out,
pointing out that he’s answered CNN’s
questions in the regular daily briefings.
But, he added
“I’m not going to sit around and engage
with people who have no desire to actually
get something right.”
Rest assured, even though it seems like just about
everybody knows CNN is highly untrustworthy according
to articles and surveys, at least the network’s President
believes they are better than ever saying, “I think our
credibility is higher than ever, and our viewership is higher
than ever, and our reporting is as strong as ever.”
CNN’s President says this after previously saying that the
network was too liberal last year.
 Trump’s Travel Ban Doesn’t Target Muslims,
He Has ‘Sovereign Right’ To Impose It – Emirati FM
Published Time: 1 Feb, 2017 16:51
Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan.
© AFP
Speaking at a conference with his Russian counterpart, the
foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates maintained
that President Trump’s travel ban on several Muslim
countries is not anti-religious or otherwise prejudiced
against Muslims.
According to Emirati FM Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-
Nahyan, President Donald Trump’s order to bar
individuals from certain Muslim countries from the US is a
“sovereign decision” that would be a mistake to interpret
as anti-Muslim.
“Without doubt, countries have the
sovereign right to make decisions to ensure
their sovereignty. The US president used
this sovereign right,” the UAE’s top
diplomat said.
“There are attempts to claim that this
decision is aimed against a religion, but it is
not aimed against a specific religion, this is
a temporary decision, it is important to take
these points of view into account,” he
continued.
“Some of these countries that were on this
list are countries that face structural
problems,” he noted, stressing “these
countries should try to solve these issues...
and these circumstances before trying to
solve this issue with the United States”
The Emirati FM was speaking at a joint press conference
with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
The UAE is one of America’s primary allies in the Gulf
region. It is also involved in the Saudi-led coalition’s air
102
campaign in Yemen, and the fight against Islamic State
(IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).
Another major US ally in the region, Saudi Arabia, did not
take any official position on the travel ban. However, its
national airline, Saudi Airlines, controlled by the Saudi
royal family, issued a statement saying that citizens from
the seven countries affected by the ban
"will not be permitted to travel with Saudi
Airlines. Citizens with diplomatic visas or
who work for international organizations
and hold valid visas are an exception," as
reported by CNN.
Meanwhile, a group of UN experts also sharply criticized
Trump’s travel ban, saying that it violates international law
and could lead to refugees being tortured if sent home. The
experts also urged the Trump administration to protect
people fleeing persecution and stick to the principle of
non-discrimination based on race, nationality or religion in
a joint statement.
"Recent US policy on immigration also risks
people being returned, without proper
individual assessments and asylum
procedures, to places in which they risk
being subjected to torture and other cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment, in direct
contravention of international humanitarian
and human rights laws,” the statement
says.
On Friday, President Trump chose to block citizens from
seven Muslim countries from entering the United States
for a period of 90 days to prevent “radical Islamic
terrorists” from carrying out attacks on American soil.
The countries included in the ban are Syria, Iran, Iraq,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
Another of Trump’s executive orders puts a 120 day ban
on all refugee admissions.
Sheikh Abdullah also welcomed the idea of creating safe
zones in Syria if they were temporary, served only
humanitarian purposes, and were established under
international supervision. The FM said he would like to
hear more ideas from Washington on the matter.
For his part, FM Lavrov said that Russia could support the
idea, but only with the agreement of the Syrian
government and close cooperation with it. The FM pointed
out that Washington’s initiative is markedly different from
that which has been proposed by other Western partners.
.
“There have been ideas of creating some
areas where an alternative Syrian
government could sit, and use those areas
for regime change,” Lavrov said.

103
 White House Blackballs CNN; Refuses
To Send Surrogates On "Fake News" Network
By Tyler Durden
Feb 1, 2017 2:25 PM
Well, it's official...according to a note from Politico, the
White House has confirmed that surrogates of the Trump
administration will no longer appear on CNN and will
instead go to
"places where we think it makes sense
to promote our agenda."
“We’re sending surrogates to places
where we think it makes sense to
promote our agenda,” said a White
House official, acknowledging that CNN is
not such a place, but adding that the ban is
not permanent.
A CNN reporter, speaking on background,
was more blunt: The White House is
trying to punish the network and force
down its ratings.
“They’re trying to cull CNN from the
herd,” the reporter said.
Of course, this development should come as little surprise
to anyone who has been paying attention given that Trump
has constantly blasted CNN as a "Fake News" outlet ever
since his heated exchange with Jim Acosta at a press
conference on January 11th.
104
In fact, since that fateful January 11th tussle, Trump's
surrogates, including Conway, Spicer, Chief of Staff
Reince Priebus and even Vice President Mike Pence, have
made the rounds on the major Sunday political talk shows,
with the notable exception of CNN’s “State of the Union"
hosted by Jake Tapper. Tapper noted the absence this past
weekend:
"We invited the Trump White House to
offer us a guest to provide clarity and an
explanation of what the president just
did, especially given so much confusion,
even within its own government by those
who are supposed to carry out this order,”
Tapper said on Sunday as he introduced a
segment about the Executive Order
banning visitors from some countries and
putting a hold on the United States’ refugee
policy. "The Trump White House
declined our invitation.”
But while the Trump administration has refused to send
surrogates on CNN talk shows, Spicer has confirmed that
the "Fake News" outlet won't be frozen out of press
briefings. Speaking at an event at George Washington
University on Monday, Spicer pointed out that he’s
answered CNN’s questions in the regular daily briefings
but also noted that he's
"not going to sit around and engage
with people who have no desire to
actually get something right."
Of course, Trump's stance toward CNN is not terribly
different from how the Obama administration handled Fox
News. That said, somehow we suspect the mainstream
media will be slightly more outraged over Trump's toward Fox News over the years.
treatment of CNN than they were over Obama's hostility
.

105
 Trump’s National Trade Council
Director Calls TTIP Dead
By Stephen Lendman
2-1-2017
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
(TTIP) is TPP’s counterpart - both measures constituting
assaults on personal freedoms.
They’re anti-consumer, anti-ecosanity,
jobs-killing corporate sweetheart deals,
letting them operate unaccountably at the
expense of the general welfare.
They empower profit-making over human
health, welfare, labor rights, digital freedom
and virtually all other consumer protections.
Interviewed by the Financial Times on Tuesday, Trump’s
chief trade advisor, Peter Navarro, called the euro an
“implicit Deutsche Mark.”
Accusing Germany of currency manipulation, he said its
undervaluation gives the country an advantage over its
main trading partners, calling its policy a major problem in
negotiating a US trade deal with European countries -
pronouncing TTIP dead.
“It does the American economy no long-
term good to only keep the big box
factories where we are now assembling
‘American’ products that are composed
primarily of foreign components,” he said.
.
106
“We need to manufacture those
components in a robust domestic supply
chain that will spur job and wage growth.”
Germany “continues to exploit other countries in the EU as
well as the US,” he maintains, adding the Trump
administration will pursue bilateral trade deals, favoring
America.
Germany is the dominant EU country, the world’s 4th
largest economy (after America, China and Japan), an
exporting powerhouse, 2nd largest to China, taking full
advantage of low euro valuation.
“The German structural imbalance in trade
with the rest of the EU and the US
underscores the problem,” Navarro
claimed. He called the Brexit vote the death
knell of a US/EU deal.
He supports an import tax, retaliation likely to follow from
affected countries, if implemented.
“I worry about the actual impact America’s
trade deficit in goods is having on our rates
of economic growth and income growth,”
he said.
America’s 2016 trade deficit was a whopping $666 billion
- up from $531.5 billion in 2015.
 Lawsuits Pile Up Against Trump
Travel Ban And Anti-Sanctuary City Executive Orders
Published Time: 1 Feb, 2017 05:09Edited Time: 1 Feb, 2017 10:48

men back to Iran and halt enforcement of the executive

order for seven days.

Tuesday also saw foreign nationals take individual action,

with a Libyan college student filing in Colorado and an
Iranian father of three bringing a lawsuit in Chicago. The
Iranian is a young doctor whose visa was canceled after he
traveled to the United Arab Emirates to get married, the
Chicago Tribune reported.
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera (L) and Mayor Ed Lee
© Kate Munsch / Reuters

Four states are suing over President Donald Trump’s

executive order restricting US entry, as is the city of
Boston, while other lawsuits were filed in Colorado and
Texas. At the same time, San Francisco is challenging the
constitutionality of his sanctuary cities order.

On Tuesday, Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and

Washington all separately challenged the executive order
that the Trump administration says will protect the US
from “radical Islamic terrorists,” but which the states say
is actually a violation of religious freedom, Reuters
reported.

The order, signed last Friday, puts a 90-day pause on US

Another of Trump’s controversial executive orders dealt
entry for those with passports from Iran, Iraq, Libya,
with sanctuary cities, a broadly defined term for cities that
Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, while also halting for
do not fully cooperate with federal immigration
120 days, the resettlement of refugees program and barring
enforcement. In it, Trump threatened to cut funding to such
any Syrian refugees indefinitely.
cities, which include Los Angeles and New York. San
Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera called it
New York joined the ACLU’s lawsuit, which was the first
against Trump’s order temporarily prohibiting US entry,
“not only unconstitutional, it's un-
filed on behalf of Hameed Khalid Darweesh and Haider
American."
Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi; both Iraqis detained at JFK
International Airport on Saturday. Virginia joined with the
suit brought Monday by the Council on American Islamic Along with San Francisco, Boston is also suing over the
Relations on behalf of 27 people. order, which it says runs counter to the separation of state
and federal powers as codified in the Tenth Amendment.
"It discriminates against people because of
their religion, it discriminates against
people because of their country of origin,"

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said

Tuesday, according to Reuters. The state is supporting a
lawsuit initially brought by two Iranians who teach at the
University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, which
prompted a federal judge to block any effort to send the

107
 Donald Trump Versus Google
And The Shadow Government
Author: Phil Butler
01.02.2017
Google, the mega-tech giant that did everything possible to
see Hillary Clinton in the White House may be “over”
soon. Per news from Bloomberg, President Donald
Trump’s executive order on limiting immigration from
some countries has decimated the world’s biggest name in
search. Google Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai has
raised his hands in despair.
When are Google, Facebook, Microsoft and the cabal of
ultra-liberal money machines going to give the rest of us a
break? This is what I have to say about Pichai’s
grandstanding on Mr. Trump’s decree to temporarily stop
people from seven Muslim nations from entering the US
for 90 days. Now Google expects the world at large to
believe it runs off the brain power of rocket scientists from
Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya?
While the US president takes the wise road toward vetting
who comes and goes from Muslim nations, Sundar Pichai
makes use of owned mainstream media to register still
more protests. Yes, the new socialists in America are led
by the likes of top Googlers and Bill Gates wannabes, we
all know this. But this is thick indeed.
Once again a mysterious insider who refused to be named
leaked “facts” Google employees affected by the
Homeland Security moves of Friday. Already Google and
the others have their legal eagles all over the situation.
Bloomberg also reported on Facebook Inc. Chief
Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg voicing his “concern”
over Mr. Trump’s moves, and Microsoft Corp. made a
securities filing on cautioning investors that immigration
restrictions “may inhibit our ability to adequately staff our
108
research and development efforts.” The message is clear as
always, the liberal technocrats intend leveraging the
investor set against Trump and any move at nationalism.
But here’s what I have to say.
Pichai and his handlers Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Eric
Schmidt had best consider the other side of this Trump
coin. Half of America vehemently supported Donald
Trump for many of the reasons Silicon Valley and Wall
Street seem to hate him. “Half” of three hundred million
people either buy or do not buy products of these
companies. Furthermore, Mr. Trump holds the toilet
flusher on a vast information network now, and
information network that can eradicate corporate misdeeds
ultimately. I think Google execs had better consider who
they were in bed with during the Obama administration,
who they betrayed, and what shady deals were made. Even
on the “up and up” Trump and the hordes sick unto death
of the 1% rabble, can create initiatives to compete with
Google and the others. In fact, I would not be surprised if
Trump is not already at this. Google needs a competitor,
and so do the others.
Maybe this is the whole point. What if the technocrats and
Hollywood set were so in bed with Washington that their
greatest fears are come true? What if the inevitable
“swamp draining” sees them down the tubes? Now that
explains a lot of liberal tooth gnashing and George Soros
rallies, doesn’t it? It also explains the whining and crying
that is now stretched so thin. Google cannot be operated
without its brilliant Syrian and Libyan geniuses. Just for
fun, I searched Google’s 73,329 employees on LinkedIn
for people in these countries. Guess how many I found in
Libya? None and none in Syria, Somalia, Sudan either.
From Yemen there is a Googler named Rashad AL-
Khmisy, who is manager of Google Developer Group
(GDG) Sana’a, Yemen. He’s also associated with
Greenpeace, so I am sure they will be drafting press
releases soon, as should Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia
Foundation. Interestingly, I found this Googler active at
TEDxSanaa, and sponsored by none other than USAID
and the Yemen Kuwaiti Bank (YKB). Granted AL-Khmisy
seems harmless enough even after some scrutiny, and not
even the 20 or so Iranian people attached to Google seem
like head choppers to me. What is alarming is how Google
seems to be setting up a kind of “sanctuary” ecosystem
inside the United States. The Bloomberg headline, “Google
Recalls Staff to U.S. After Trump Immigration Order”
screams this. With Mr. Trump confronting so-called
“sanctuary cities” where Hillary Clinton voters rule, now it
appears those that profited most from US taxpayers and
customers now want a new kind of civil war. It’s almost as
if there is a shadow government running in the
background.
I’ll tell you what my friends, if these technocrats are
running a shadow control cabal in the background,
President Trump needs to smack them down hard, and
smack them down now. I’ve watched these people
consume innovation, ideas, and resources like firewood the
last 20 years. Just the other day a Google product manager
came to my Facebook profile to call me a traitor. And this,
right in front of my wife, kids, friends, and so on. Imagine
what that means, for a higher up in Seattle to just come out
and assail somebody for a moderate view on Russia and
Putin. But things are getting worse, CNN and other
mainstream media are in knock-down-drag-out war with
the new president over who is lying. Clearly CNN and the
others have presented us all with “Fake News” out the
wazoo these last years. Unsubstantiated allegations fly
today like silica in a sandstorm. Now this from Google,
Microsoft, and Facebook. I hope President Trump shows
America once and for all just who’s been misleading
whom.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, exclusively for the online
magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
http://journal-neo.org/2017/02/01/donald-trump-versus-google-and-the-shadow-government/

109
 Blame Obama, Not Trump:
Twitter Trolls Pelosi For Yemen Policy Memory Loss
Published Time: 1 Feb, 2017 11:04Edited Time: 2 Feb, 2017 12:45

Pelosi, a staunch opponent of Trump, claimed at a town

hall hosted by CNN that the current administration were
“grand illusionists” who created a new problem to
disguise the previous one.

“This comes back to Abraham Lincoln who

probably has tears in his eyes.”

Pelosi’s comments sparked ire on Twitter, however, with

Pelosi made the comments on CNN. © Kevin Lamarque / Reuters some users quick to point out that it was in fact the
Democrats, under Barack Obama’s administration, who
Democrat representative Nancy Pelosi has come under fire carried out drone strikes on Yemen.
online for comments she made to a Yemeni refugee,
blasting Donald Trump’s recent executive order on Pelosi on Yemen
immigration and refugees as responsible for the plight of
the woman’s family. Curated Tweets by @RT_Viral
“Your family is suffering because our
president is reckless and his administration
is incompetent,” Pelosi told a Yemeni
refugee who said her mother could no
longer come to the US due to the ban.

Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Pelosi

was told by the Yemeni woman that her father died due to
a lack of medicine in Yemen and that her mother was now
unable to join her in the US.

110
 In a separate incident on Monday outside the Supreme
Court, Pelosi also overheard on her mic encouraging
Congressman Andre Carson to “tell them you’re a
muslim.”

Carson addressed a large crowd gathered to show

opposition to Trump’s travel ban

111
 US Code Allows For Banning
Refugees With Diseases
By Patricia Doyle
Hello Jeff - I found this looking for CDC laws that would keep
immigrants and refugees out of the US due to infectious
diseases.
The President can issue EOs on the list of diseases as well.
Leprosy, TB, AIDS, etc How come the US is not using the list
below on this page... i.e. TB, Diphtheria Leprosy etc?
We know that refugees with TB, Leprosy, Diphtheria, STDs have
all been allowed in. Even Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers have been
allowed in and some brought into the US by the CDC planes.
Trump needs to close this door to infected refugees and illegals.
Patty
Categories
Any of the following diseases: active tuberculosis,
infectious syphilis, gonorrhea, infectious leprosy,
chancroid, lymphogranuloma venereum, granuloma
inguinale, and HIV infection. (HIV infection will be
removed on January 4, 2010)
Quarantinable diseases designated by any Presidential
Executive Order. The current list of diseases includes
cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague,
smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fevers, severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and influenza caused
by novel or re-emergent influenza (pandemic flu).
General Questions and Answers
Final Rule Removing HIV Infection from
Immigration Screening:
Immigrants and refugees must undergo a medical exam as
part of the immigration process for entry into the United
States. The exam includes screening for any illness defined
as a communicable disease of public health significance.
All of these diseases can be easily spread between people.
Those immigrants and refugees found to have these
diseases may not enter the United States.
The screening process, along with this list of diseases
which can prevent entry into the United States, are
outlined in federal regulations written by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). If new diseases
emerge or as more is learned about diseases already on this
2-1-2017
list, regulatory changes can be made to alter the disease
list.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and
CDC are removing HIV infection from the list of diseases
that keep non-U.S. citizens from entering the United
States. General information about the change is provided
below:
What was the process for removing HIV from the list and
when will the change take effect?
HHS published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
on July 2, 2009 explaining the proposed changes in the
Federal Register and seeking public comment on those
changes. The proposed rule was based on the science that
HIV is not spread through casual contact. A public
comment period was open until August 17, 2009. These
public comments were considered in making the final
policy decision. After the comment period closed, CDC
carefully reviewed over 20,000 public comments. Most
comments supported the rule as proposed.
The final rule was published on November 2, 2009 in the
Federal Register. After the 60-day waiting period required
by federal guidelines, the final rule will go into effect on
January 4, 2010.
Before the effective date of January 4, 2010, what changes
will take place for non-U.S. citizens with HIV infection
who wish to enter the United States?
Until the final rule is in effect on January 4, 2010, non-
U.S. citizens who have HIV cannot come to the United
U.S. States unless granted a waiver by the Department of
Homeland Security. Also, all those applying for an
immigrant visa will have to be tested for HIV infection
during the immigrant medical exam until January 4, 2010.
Under the new rule, effective on January 4, 2010, HIV
testing will no longer be required as part of the immigrant
medical exam. In addition, waivers will no longer be
needed for HIV infection.
What diseases prevent non-U.S. citizens from coming to
the United States?
Diseases that can prevent entry to the U.S. fall into three
categories:
112
 Any of the following diseases: active tuberculosis,
infectious syphilis, gonorrhea, infectious leprosy,
chancroid, lymphogranuloma venereum, granuloma
inguinale, and HIV infection. (HIV infection will be
removed on January 4, 2010)
Quarantinable diseases designated by any Presidential
Executive Order. The current list of diseases includes
cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague,
smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fevers, severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and influenza caused
by novel or re-emergent influenza (pandemic flu).
Diseases reportable as a public health emergency of
international concern to the World Health Organization
under the International Health Regulations of 2005. These
diseases currently include: polio, smallpox, SARS,
pandemic flu and other public health emergencies of
international concern.
HIV infection will be removed as a communicable disease
of public health significance effective January 4, 2010. At
that time, HIV infection will not be used to keep people
from entering the United States.
Who is affected by the rule change?
Those who are not U.S. citizens will no longer be denied
entry to the United States based on their HIV status. This
would include: immigrants (including those in the United
States applying for change of status to lawful permanent
resident), refugees, and those seeking asylum. This also
includes temporary visitors for school, work or pleasure.
Why did CDC remove HIV infection from the list of
diseases that can prevent non-U.S. citizens from entering
the United States?
When the regulation preventing non-U.S. citizens from
entering the country was created in 1987, far less was
known about how HIV infection is spread and what puts
people at risk for HIV. Health experts now know that HIV
is not spread through casual contact like hugging or
shaking hands. Nor is HIV spread through the air, food or
water. In the United States, HIV infection is passed
between adults almost solely through unprotected sex with
someone who has HIV or by sharing needles or syringes
used by someone with HIV. Removing HIV infection from
the list of illnesses that prevent entry to the United States is
based on this improved knowledge of the risk of spreading
the disease.
Will the rule change increase the risk that average
Americans will contract HIV?
Allowing non-U.S. citizens with HIV infection into the
United States will not pose a risk to the public’s health
through casual contact. HIV infection is preventable and is
not spread through casual contact or day-to-day activities.
113
It is mainly spread through behaviors which involve the
exchange of bodily fluids during sex or sharing of needles.
HIV is not a new virus in the United States. Currently, it’s
estimated that more than 1 million Americans are living
with HIV. It is important to remember that any risk posed
by people with HIV is not a result of their nationality. The
risk of spreading HIV is only increased when a person
engages in specific behaviors, such as having unprotected
sex or sharing needles.
Why are HHS and CDC removing only HIV infection
when other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) are still
on the list of diseases that prevent entry?
Legislation passed in July 2008 removed language from
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to HIV.
This original text had mandated that HIV infection be on
the list of diseases that can keep people from coming to the
United States. The decision to remove HIV infection from
the regulations is because of this change in law and the
science of how HIV is spread. In the United States, HIV
infection is passed between adults almost solely through
unprotected sex with someone who has HIV or by sharing
needles or syringes used by someone with HIV. HIV is not
spread through casual contact.
CDC continues to review the list of diseases in the
regulations. If CDC seeks to remove other STDs in the
future, it will do so through the federal rulemaking
process.
Why does the law require 60 days before the final rule can
go into effect?
The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
requires a 60-day waiting period for any rule that has a
major economic impact. An economic analysis has shown
that this rule will have a major national economic impact.
Thus, this rule meets the OMB guidelines for the 60-day
waiting period.
The 60-day waiting period will begin on November 2,
2009. Thus, the final rule will go into effect on January 4,
2010.
Where can I find out more about the new rule?
For more information about the new rule, or to view the
rule in its entirety, please visit the Final Rule Removing
HIV Infection from U.S. Immigration Screening page.
For more information on HIV, please see
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv.
NOTICE: This web page is archived for historical
purposes and is no longer being maintained or updated.
The information is accurate only as of the last page update.
 Donald Trump ‘Upset And Angry’ Over Refugee Deal
Discussed With Malcolm Turnbull
Claire Bickers, Staff Writers, News Corp Australia Network
February 2, 2017 9:20am

US President Donald Trump has continued his public
stoush with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull
by declaring he needs to make “tough phone calls” because
nations are taking advantage of America.
At a speech in Washington DC overnight, Mr. Trump said
the world was in trouble but he was “going to straighten it
out”.
“When you hear about the tough phone
calls I’m having, don’t worry about it,” Mr.
Trump told the audience. “Just don’t worry
about it.
“They’re tough. We have to be tough,” he
said. “It’s time we have to be a little tough
folks.
“We are taken advantage of by every
nation in the world virtually. “It’s not going
to happen anymore.”
call made by our PM,” Mr. Carr told 7.30
host Stan Grant.
“I think it’s a reminder to Australians that
America is different, America has changed.
America is declaring it’s America first from
now on. That’s a quote from the
inauguration speech by the President. And
I just think it’s healthy if we absorb that fact.
Everyone supports this alliance in
Australia, there’s a consensus on that. It’s
one of the pillars of Australian foreign
policy but it’s not the be all and end all of
Australia’s international character. That’s
the point I’m making.”

The Washington Post revealed on Wednesday a weekend

call between Mr. Trump and Mr. Turnbull had ended
abruptly.

The president in a tweet called an asylum seeker deal

between Australia and former US President Barack Obama
“dumb”.

BOB CARR SAYS ROBUST CHAT IS ‘HEALTHY’
Former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr believes the
highly charged telephone call between Mr. Trump and Mr.
Turnbull is “healthy” for Australia.
Speaking on ABC TV’s 7.30, Mr. Carr said Mr. Trump’s
rudeness on the call between the two leaders and his
“highly offensive tweet” that followed was a reminder that
Australia was simply another alliance partner with the
USA.
Mr. Carr also said President Trump’s “unprecedented rude
treatment” was also a reminder of Australia’s status as an
independent nation.
“This is a healthy thing for Australia, the
response of Donald Trump to the phone
114
Former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr says the spat between
Donald Trump and Malcolm Turnbull is “healthy” for Australia. Picture:
Colin Murty The Australian
Mr. Carr, who served as Labor’s Minster for Foreign
Affairs from March 2012 to September 2013, said
Australia did not have a special relationship with
American as many assumed.
“Stan, take that point on the notion that
somehow we’ve got the most special
relationship with America in the world,” the
former NSW Premier said.
“I could easily give you a list of 20 countries
that hold that belief. America is the proud
possessor of an alliance system, it’s one of
the things that distinguishes the US and
advantages it over any other contenders for
global leadership. And it’s useful if
 Australians understand that Poland, for
example, would regard itself as having
every bit a special a relationship with the
US as Australia. That Barack Obama on
his farewell tour to Europe was talking
about Germany as America’s most
important partner in the world. In Britain,
the Trans Atlantic Alliance is regarded as
the apostles’ creed.
“We have to be practical about the alliance.
It is not the only path of our international
personality. And if this rude dismissal of the
representations by an Australian PM
altogether legitimate representations by
President Trump serves to remind
Australians of that great truth, then it’s a
good and healthy thing.”
“This was the worst call by far,” he is
quoted as saying.
“This is the worst deal ever.”
It is understood the President complained that he was
“going to get killed” politically and accused Australia of
seeking to export the “next Boston bombers”.
At one point, Turnbull suggested that the two leaders move
on from their impasse over refugees to discuss the conflict
in Syria and other pressing foreign issues.
But President Trump demurred and ended the call, making
it far shorter than his conversations with Shinzo Abe of
Japan, Angela Merkel of Germany, François Hollande of
France or Putin of Russia.

US PRESIDENT Donald Trump hit back on Twitter after CNN’s White House Correspondent Jim Acosta also
details of his shocking phone call with Prime Minister tweeted today that according to one of his sources,
Malcolm Turnbull were revealed, slamming the refugee President Trump pulled the phone away from ear and
deal as ‘dumb’. wanted to get off the call.

In the scathing tweet, he said: Sky News Australia sources also claimed today that
President Trump “yelled” at Mr. Turnbull in the heated
exchange.
“Do you believe it? The Obama
Administration agreed to take thousands of
illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I
will study this dumb deal!”

The tweet was posted around 11pm Washington time and

once again throws the refugee resettlement deal into limbo.

It comes after a report in The Washington Post , where

senior US officials briefed on the conversation said
President Trump hung up on Mr. Turnbull after 25
minutes, when their call was meant to be an hour long.

President Trump reportedly criticised Mr. Turnbull over

his refugee agreement formerly made with president
Barack Obama, and boasted about his electoral college US President Donald Trump speaks on the phone with Australia's Prime
win. Minister Malcolm Turnbull, alongside Chief Strategist Steve Bannon
and National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Picture: AFP
After a series of phone calls made on Sunday, Mr.
Turnbull was the last call President Trump took.

115
TURNBULL WON’T REVEAL DETAILS

Malcolm Turnbull has refused to go into details of his

discussion with President Trump on Sunday morning but
denied one aspect of the reports this afternoon.

“The report that the president hung up is

not correct, the call ended courteously,” he
told 2GB radio this afternoon.

He backed this statement up during an interview with Turnbull - I'm not going to comment on conversation with Trump
3AW radio, saying he was “disappointed” about the leak
but some information had not been accurate.

“It was a 25-minute call, it covered a

number of issues but the bulk of the time
was spent on the refugee resettlement
deal,” he said.

The Prime Minister also responded to President Trump’s

tweet, saying the facts were President Trump had given an
assurance during their conversation that the deal would go
ahead, White House press secretary Sean Spicer confirmed
that in a briefing on Wednesday and the US embassy in
Canberra reconfirmed it this afternoon.

“I do stand up for Australia but I can assure

you the call was courteous,” Mr. Turnbull
said. DEAL OR NO DEAL?

He said the deal had always proceeded on the basis that the A spokesperson for the US Embassy in Canberra said this
United States would do security checks on any individual afternoon President Trump would honour the refugee
that would be resettled in the US, as was their right. agreement.

Mr. Turnbull also refused to comment on the conversation
earlier at a press conference.
“I’m not going to comment on a
conversation between myself and the
President of the United States other than
what we have said publicly,” he said.
“You can surely understand the reasons for
that. I appreciate your interest, but it’s
better that these things - these
conversations are conducted candidly,
frankly, privately. If you see reports of
them, I’m not going to add to them.”
The details come as the White House and US State
Department are sending mixed messages on whether
President Trump will still honour a deal with Australia to
resettle refugees in the US.
Today, the White House confirmed President Trump has
not made a final decision on whether to honour a refugee
deal with Australia.
116
“President Trump’s decision to honour the
refugee agreement has not changed and
Spokesman Spicer’s comments stand,” the
spokesperson said.
“This was just confirmed to the State
Department from the WH and on to this
embassy at 13.15 Canberra time.”
But in a statement provided to ABC today, the White
House press office confirmed President Trump might still
torpedo the deal made between Mr. Turnbull and President
Obama.
“The President is still considering whether
or not he will move forward with this deal at
this time,” the statement read.
Meanwhile, a statement from the State Department appears
to contradict the message coming out of the White House.
“Out of respect for close ties to our
Australian ally and friend, we will honour
the agreement to accept some refugees
 from resettlement centres on Nauru and
Papua New Guinea,” a State Department
official said in a statement provided to the
ABC.
“Any refugees coming to US shores would
only come to the United States in
accordance with the recently signed
executive order.”

Mr. Turnbull yesterday brushed off reports from an

unnamed White House source that the agreement was not
yet finalised.

President Trump “doesn’t really care” that Australia has

been a long-term ally of the US, he is more concerned
about his domestic refugee policy, Mr. Rucker said.

“The thing you have to understand about

Donald Trump is that he is not a natural
diplomat, he is not a politician,” he told the
ABC.
US President Donald Trump still on the phone with Australia's Prime
“He has a career in real estate, in business
Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Picture: AFP
and deal-making, and he ran for President
as somebody who was going to disrupt the
TRUMP WAS ‘UPSET’ BY THE DEAL
world order.

One of the journalists behind The Washington Post report,

Philip Rucker, told Sky News Australia that his sources
told him that President Trump “got angry on the call” with
Mr. Turnbull.

“He blasted the Prime Minister,” he said.

“The Prime Minister and President Trump
agreed that the number of these refugees
would be allowed to be part of the
screening process.”

He also said the President was “upset” by the agreement

and said it was his “intention” to keep it, which gave him
room to negotiate on it.

Mr. Rucker also told the ABC he and his colleague Greg
Miller had been briefed on some of the exact quotations
from the Trump-Turnbull phone call by senior US
officials.
“He was going to make changes and he
Mr. Rucker said sources had told him President Trump’s was going to blow up the system, literally,
phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin was and disrupt what he sees as a world order
much longer. that is failing the world and making it more
dangerous and less safe.

117
 “And so he doesn’t really care so much that “I think Mr. Turnbull needs to confirm or
Australia is an ally over many, many years. deny the accuracy of that report.
“What he cares about is the refugee policy “He made it clear that he had a
that ... he views as dangerous for the constructive discussion and that the
United States. refugee deal, which Labor supports, was
“So he didn’t let diplomatic niceties get in on track.
the way of how he felt about that refugee “But now it appears another different
policy.” version of the same conversation has
emerged. I just say to Mr. Turnbull, ‘talk
ASSURANCES ON RESETTLEMENT DEAL straight to the Australian people. Tell us
what’s going on’.”
Mr. Turnbull told reporters in Canberra yesterday “We want to see the refugee deal happen,
President Trump had given an assurance that the deal but clearly President Trump and his people
would go ahead in their phone conversation on Sunday. are saying one thing happened in this
conversation, which is completely at odds
“The Trump administration has committed with what Prime Minister Turnbull has told
to progress with the arrangements to the Australian people. They both can’t be
honour the deal, if you like, that was right and I think it’s in the interests of the
entered into with the Obama Australian people for Mr. Turnbull just to be
administration,” Mr. Turnbull said. straight with the people and tell us what’s
really going on.”
“That was the assurance the president
gave me when we spoke on the weekend.”

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said on

Wednesday morning the deal to resettle refugees held on
Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island would be
honoured but the individuals would be subject to “extreme
vetting”.

“The deal specifically deals with 1250

people that are mostly in Papua New
Guinea being held,” he said.
“Those people, part of the deal, is they
have to be vetted in the same manner that
we are doing now.”
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull under fire today about his call to
President Trump. Picture: AAP

HOW TURNBULL DESCRIBED THE CALL

On Monday, Mr. Turnbull told media in Canberra that he

had had a “constructive” call with President Trump on
Sunday.

“The President and I acknowledged the

already strong and deep relationship
between the United States and Australia
and committed to making it stronger still,”
Mr. Turnbull said.
“We also recommitted our common
President Donald Trump up close while on the phone with Prime determination, our united purpose in
Minister of Australia Malcolm Turnbull in the Oval Office of the White defeating ISIL which continues to have an
House. Picture: AAP
impact - a dangerous, terrorist impact - not
LABOR: TURNBULL MUST CONFIRM OR DENY just in the Middle East but right around the
world, including in our own countries.
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten told media today:
118
 “We discussed the importance of border
security and the threat of illegal and
irregular migration, and recognised that it is
vital that every nation is able to control who
comes across its borders.
“We discussed the very principles that I
raised at the United Nations last year when
I made the point there that our strong
border protection - which the Coalition
Government, under the leadership of PM
Abbott in 2013, continued under my
Government and enhanced under my
Government - our strong border protection
gives Australians confidence in the
immigration system, gives them confidence
in our humanitarian programs, underpins
the commitment in our - the most
successful multicultural society in the
world.
Malcolm Turnbull assured Australians the deal was still on yesterday.
Picture: Kym Smith
“We also discussed the resettlement
arrangement of refugees from Nauru and
Manus, which had been entered into with
the previous administration, and I thank
President Trump for his commitment to
honour that existing agreement.”
Mr. Turnbull and Immigration Minister Peter Dutton
announced the “one-off” deal to resettle an undisclosed
number of asylum seekers in Australia’s offshore detention
centres just days after President Trump was elected in
November.
President Obama and Mr. Turnbull had made the
agreement earlier in 2016.
It has been touted as a way to close the detention centres
on Nauru and Manus Island.
119
TURNBULL WON’T ATTACK TRUMP BAN
Mr. Turnbull has been criticised for his refusal to comment
on President Trump’s executive order to ban the citizens
from several countries from entering the US.
While other world leaders including German Chancellor
Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Theresa May
had publicly criticised the travel ban, Mr. Turnbull said
Australia’s national interest was best protected by giving
private “frank advice” to “our number one ally”.
“When I have frank advice to give to an
American president, I give it privately, as
good friends should, as wise prime
ministers do, when they want to ensure
they are best able to protect Australians
and Australians’ national interest,” Mr.
Turnbull said.
“I don’t comment on American policy
publicly. My job is to get results for
Australia.”
Opposition leader Bill Shorten said an Australian leader
needed to stand up for the nation’s values.
“I absolutely support the American alliance
but let’s be clear, sometimes there are
issues where if the nation’s leader is silent,
it can be interpreted as agreement,” Mr.
Shorten said on Tuesday.
“If the Germans can speak up, if the
English can speak up, if the Canadians can
speak up, then why are we silent?”
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and former US President Barack
Obama revealed the deal last November. Picture: Kym Smith
HOW THE REFUGEE AGREEMENT UNFOLDED
November 13, 2016: The Turnbull Government unveils
the refugee resettlement deal with the United States agreed
to under the Obama administration. Australia will take
refugees from Central America in exchange for the US
resettling people currently on Nauru and Manus Island as
part of a one-off agreement.
January 27, 2017: President Trump signs an executive
order on immigration, banning citizens from seven
majority Muslim countries from entering the United States
for 90 days and halting all refugee resettlement for 120
days.
January 29, 2017: White House Press Secretary Sean
Spicer says he will honour pledge to resettle 1250 refugees
from Nauru and Manus Island during a 25-minute
conversation with Mr. Turnbull despite his executive order
on immigration.
.
120
Fe bruary 1, 2017: Media reports the White House has
backtracked on a promise to honour the refugee deal with
Australia, saying President Trump is still considering
whether it will go ahead. Mr. Turnbull says he’s confident
it will be given the green light.
February 2, 2017: Media reports President Trump
reportedly blasted Mr. Turnbull during a phone
conversation, calling the refugee resettlement agreement
the “worst deal ever”. Mr. Turnbull doesn’t comment on
the conversation, instead saying he is assured the deal will
still go ahead.
 Trump Threatens
UC Berkeley Funds Over Breitbart Protests
AFP
February 2, 2017

Los Angeles (AFP) - US President Donald Trump
threatened Thursday to withdraw federal funds from UC
Berkeley after violent overnight protests against a planned
appearance by a controversial editor of conservative news
website Breitbart.
Hundreds of students and other protesters chanting "shut
him down" smashed windows at the University of
California campus, set wooden pallets on fire and threw
fireworks and rocks as police in full riot gear responded
with tear gas.
from the state of California and tuition fees, as well as
grants and government and private contracts.
- Budget shortfalls -
About half of research at Berkeley is funded by the federal
government, according to the university website. Berkeley
however has been struggling in the past years with budget
shortfalls and spending deficits.
Yiannopoulos, who is the Breitbart technology editor, is
known for his provocative social media posts and was
banned from Twitter in July for fueling abuse directed at
"Ghostbusters" actress Leslie Jones.

The university was placed on lockdown as the sold-out

appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos, a conservative
firebrand, was canceled Wednesday evening.

"If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free
speech and practices violence on innocent
people with a different point of view - NO
FEDERAL FUNDS?" Trump wrote on
Twitter Thursday.
Trump's top political adviser Stephen Bannon is the former
chairman of Breitbart News.
UC Berkeley is one of the top public universities in the
United States. Its operating costs are funded by money
121
The British journalist is a vocal supporter of Donald
Trump -- nicknaming the US president "Daddy" during his
election campaign -- and has become one of the faces of
America's "alt-right" movement.
Similar protests at the University of California at Davis
last month also forced the cancellation of speeches by
Yiannopoulos and former pharmaceutical executive Martin
Shkreli.
The events at Davis and Berkeley were organized by
conservative student groups. A similar invitation to speak
at UCLA was rescinded and Berkeley was to be the last
stop of his tour.
Officials at the three University of California campuses
stressed that they did not invite Yiannopoulos or endorse
his ideas but were committed to free speech.
More than 100 UC Berkeley faculty members had signed
two letters sent last month to the school's chancellor,
urging him to cancel the event.
122
"Although we object strenuously to
Yiannopoulos’s views — he advocates
white supremacy, transphobia and
misogyny — it is rather his harmful conduct
to which we call attention in asking for the
cancellation of this event," read one of the
letters.
They cited as one example an incident in December at the
University of Milwaukee where Yiannopoulos -- a gay
crusader against "political correctness" -- openly mocked a
transgender student, displaying her name and photo on
screen.
 Pundits Stunned After Trump Hangs
Up On Australia Prime Minister, Slamming "Dumb Deal"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 11:21 AM

First, the AP reported that according to a transcript of a Vladimir Putin and Mexican President
phone call between the presidents of the US and Mexico, Enrique Pena Nieto, had angrily told him
Trump threatening to send US troops to Mexico if it was that the call was "the worst so far".
unable to stop the "bad hombres down there." Then, in a
separate report from the Washington Post, Trump labeled a
refugee swap deal with Australia "dumb" on Thursday
after a Washington Post report of an acrimonious
telephone call with Australia's prime minister, replete with
alleged "yelling" and which Trump hung up after just 25
minutes, that has threatened a rift in ties between the two
ally nations.

Trump on the phone with Australia's prime minister as aides Michael

Flynn and Steve Bannon listen.
The Post reported that Trump described the resettlement
plan as "the worst deal ever" and accused Australia of
trying to export the "next Boston bombers". At one point,
Trump reportedly informed Turnbull that he had spoken
with four other world leaders that day — including
Russian President Vladimir Putin — and that “this was the
worst call by far.” The Post also said Trump had boasted to
Turnbull about the size of his election victory.
Political analysts were dumbfounded and said such
acrimony was unprecedented, surpassing even the difficult
relations between former U.S. President Richard Nixon
and then Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, who
pulled Australian troops out of the Vietnam War. "Even
that was always done in the language of foreign policy
niceties," said Harry Phillips, a political analyst of 40 years
experience at Edith Cowan and Curtin universities in
Perth.

It said the call had been scheduled to last an hour but
Trump cut it short after 25 minutes when Australian Prime
Minister Malcolm Turnbull tried to turn to subjects such as
Syria. Turnbull told reporters the call with Trump at the
weekend had been frank and candid but refused to give
further details.
"I do stand up for Australia. My job is to
defend Australian interests," the former
Goldman employee said in Melbourne.
Turnbull refused to confirm the Post report
that Trump, who had earlier spoken to
world leaders including Russian President
As reports of the conversation hit headlines on both sides
of the world, Trump tweeted shortly before midnight in
Washington:
"Do you believe it? The Obama
Administration agreed to take thousands of
illegal immigrants from Australia. Why? I
will study this dumb deal."
The deal in question is a controversial agreement that
Australia agreed with former President Barack Obama late
last year for the United States to resettle up to 1,250
asylum seekers held in offshore processing camps on

123
Pacific islands in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. In return,
Australia would resettle refugees from El Salvador,
Guatemala and Honduras. The swap deal is at odds with
Trump's executive order last week that suspended the U.S.
refugee program and restricted entry to the United States
for travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries,
including Iran, Iraq, and Syria.
Many of those being held in the Australian detention
centers, which have drawn harsh criticism from the United
Nations and rights groups, have fled violence in countries
such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer and the U.S.
Embassy in Australia have both said Trump would honor
the deal. In several media appearances after Trump's tweet,
Turnbull reiterated that he believed the deal stood.
"He is saying that this is not a deal he
would have made, but the question is will
he honor that commitment? He has already
.
124
given it," Turnbull said. "I make Australia’s
case frankly, powerfully, forthrightly and
hopefully persuasively when I deal with
other leaders."
According to Reuters, the apparent breakdown between
Washington and Canberra that has developed over the
resettlement deal could have serious repercussions.
Australia and the United States are among the five nations
that make up the Five Eyes group, the world's leading
intelligence-sharing network.
The United States also plans to send extra military aircraft
to Australia's tropical north this year as part of a U.S.
Marines deployment that will bolster its military presence
close to the disputed South China Sea. Australia is also one
of 10 U.S. allies purchasing Lockheed Martin's F-35
fighter jet program.
The Post quoted unidentified senior U.S. officials briefed
on the conversation between Trump and Turnbull. It also
quoted the official read-out from the call, which
emphasized
"the enduring strength and closeness of the
U.S.-Australia relationship that is critical for
peace, stability, and prosperity in the Asia-
Pacific region and globally".
 Sedition: Media Promotes Idea
Of A Military Coup To Remove Trump From Office
Corporate Media Promoting The End Of American Democracy
By Alex Thomas
02.01.2017 @7:43 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — In yet another astonishing attack on
the very legitimacy of the Trump presidency, multiple
high-profile news outlets have published an article that
floats the idea of using the military to remove Trump from
office.
Writing for Foreign Policy, Georgetown University
professor and Schwartz senior fellow at the New America
Foundation, Rosa Brooks discusses three ways that the
left believes they may be able to remove the rightfully
elected president from office.
Brooks first touches on the ludicrous idea of impeaching
Trump for literally nothing more than intelligence agency
disinformation and political differences. She then moves
on to the played out idea of using the 25th Amendment to
remove the president which would require his entire
cabinet turning against him.
Finally Brooks gets to the more sinister idea being pushed
in leftist circles which would amount to the end of
American democracy as we know it and the beginning of
using military force to remove leaders that parts of the
country disagree with.
“The fourth possibility is one that until
recently I would have said was unthinkable
.
125
in the United States of America: a military
coup, or at least a refusal by military
leaders to obey certain orders,” writes the
Georgetown Professor.
Brooks continues,
“For the first time in my life, I can imagine
plausible scenarios in which senior military
officials might simply tell the president: “No,
sir. We’re not doing that,” to thunderous
applause from the New York Times
editorial board.”
Shockingly, the article by Brooks was not only published
in Foreign Policy but also republished by Yahoo News
where it appeared on their highly trafficked home page.
Make no mistake, this is a concerted effort to push the idea
of a military coup against Trump.
This is also a clear example of the thinking going on
within the establishment when it comes to their public goal
of removing Trump from office. When Steve Bannon calls
the media the opposition party, this is exactly what he
means.
 Left-Wing Journalist: Violence Against
“Racists” To Stop Trump Should Be Tolerated
“When Richard Spencer Was Punched, It Was A Cathartic Moment”
By Paul Joseph Watson -
02.01.2017 @3:58 PM EST
A video commentary published by the London Guardian
makes the argument that violence against “racists” should
be tolerated in order to stop Donald Trump.
The video features Nesrine Malik, a Sudanese journalist
living in London, arguing that physical attacks on Trump
supporters should not be condemned because his voters are
bigots.
Physical violence to advance a political goal – more
commonly known as terrorism – has been embraced by
segments of the left in the aftermath of Richard Spencer –
a leading “alt-right” figure – being punched in the face by
an Antifa protester during the the inauguration last month
in Washington DC.
“When they go low, going high is not
enough,” argues Malik, adding, “When
Richard Spencer was punched in the
street, it was a cathartic moment for many.”
126
Claiming that the attack on Spencer “caught us up,” Malik
goes on to assert that “reasoned debate” is no longer
sufficient when confronting “racists and misogynists”
“Why should we be better?,” she asks,
adding that the refusal to embrace violence
is “paralyzing liberal democracy”.
Malik says she wouldn’t encourage people to “punch
Nazis,” having just made a philosophical argument
encouraging that very thing.
She claims that “hard won freedoms” and “equalities” are
under threat, without being able to name a single one, and
that there is a “narcissism of good behavior” from liberals
“that needs to be jettisoned”.
Malik overlooks the fact that ordinary Trump supporters,
not Nazis, have already been the victims of numerous
vicious attacks by crazed leftists throughout his campaign
and after he won the election, including a mentally
disabled teenager who was kidnapped and tortured while
his abusers yelled “f**k Trump!”
She also fails to take into consideration the fact that once
violence against one set of people for having the wrong
opinion is normalized, it legitimizes violent attacks against
any group based on the same premise.
So when a far-right extremist commits violence against
minority or leftist groups, as happened in Quebec earlier
this week, Malik has forfeited the right to have an opinion
on it since she advocates the idea that you can violently
attack people if you dislike their belief system.
In essence, Malik’s argument is that simply labeling
everyone a ‘racist’ or a ‘misogynist’ “doesn’t work” and
that violence is now the only recourse.
Reaction to the video was vitriolic.
“You can justify anything as righteous, can’t
you Guardian? You’re so sensitive that you
 respond to words with a fist and think it’s
proportional?” said one respondent.
“In the political sphere the refusal to
condemn those who employ violence as
means of squashing dissent is equivalent
to condoning it,” added another.
“Remember when you guys said calling
someone a liar on the internet was
cyberviolence? First you tried to silence
.
127
people you hated, now you’re justifying
physical violence. This will not end well for
any of us,” commented another.
To witness the regressive left now brazenly embracing
violence and domestic terrorism is chilling but not that
surprising given their increasingly close alliance with
Islamists, to the point where ISIS is now working to recruit
far-left activists because the two groups broadly share the
same goal.
 The Deep State In The Age Of Trump
Just How Far Are The Forces Of Machiavellian Supremacy
Within The Deep State Willing To Go?
By Sartre -
02.01.2017 @8:57 AM EST
Politics as usual, especially the party version of
Republicans and Democrats is the latest endangered
species to hit the bone yards of extinction. Now, that does
not mean that competing power factions have all merged
into a collegial stew of some imaginable melting pot. No
the literal power behind the government that embeds the
deepest recess of manipulated reality still maintains and
uses their influence and coercion force to remain in
control. What actual effect Donald Trump will have to
break the connections that keeps the deep state in charge
can only be judged with the passage of time. Some contend
that Trump is actually an integral component of an elitist
fraternity of financial magnates that sit at the table of the
deep state.
Well, assessing the appointees to his cabinet concludes that
talented and accomplished achievers often have
accumulated great wealth. Those who condemn capable
people, out of hand, because of their money acumen are
fools who reside in their fantasy theories. Much like the 68
House Democrats, who boycotted the Trump inauguration,
their irrelevancy in the actual mix of shaping world affairs
approaches the insignificance and lack of credibility from
the Corporatist Mass Media.
In the era of Trump America First, how will divergent
cliques and kindred insiders react, respond or cooperate
with the new sheriff in town? The strange concept of
conducting affairs in a beneficial national interest has not
been tried in well over a century. So when the Hill
reported that the Trump team prepares dramatic cuts
“Overall, the blueprint being used by
Trump’s team would reduce federal
spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years”,
can only be viewed as a promising sign.
Notwithstanding, budgets do not translate directly into
political influence or clout. Consequently, understanding
the raw nature of power in this artificially concocted
construct that claims that globalization is the only course
for human endeavors requires an examination of a state
within a state.
128
With the long ongoing hubbub at the Central Intelligence
Agency, what better example of the deep state is there to
examine the conflict within? In case you missed the memo,
peel back the layers on the onion, CIA director John
Brennan is a Muslim convert? Understanding this
background puts Glenn Greenwald, not exactly a fan of
Trump, essay The Deep State Goes to War With President-
Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer, in
even a greater relevance.
“But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy
allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S.
election and impose its own policy dictates
on the elected president is both warped
and self-destructive.
For months, the CIA, with unprecedented
clarity, overtly threw its weight behind
Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to
defeat Donald Trump. In August, former
acting CIA Director Michael Morell
announced his endorsement of Clinton in
the New York Times
In general, Clinton defended and intended
to extend the decades long international
military order on which the CIA and
Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while
Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of
instability and extremist conviction —
posed a threat to it.”
Presenting a different perspective Charles Hugh Smith
offers a simple, yet succinct definition of the deep state:
“It is the unelected government that
continues making and implementing policy
regardless of who is in elected office.”
He goes on to ask: Does a Rogue Deep State Have
Trump’s Back?
“Given my thesis of a profound disunity in
the Deep State, and the emergence of a
progressive element hostile to neocons and
neoliberalism (including Wall Street), then
it’s not much of a stretch to speculate that
 this rogue Deep State opposed to neocon-
neoliberalism has Trump’s back, as a new
administration is pretty much the only hope
to rid the nation’s top echelons of the
neocon-neoliberal policies that have driven
the U.S. into the ground.
Rather than being the bad guys, as per the
usual Liberal world-view, the Armed Forces
may well play a key role in reducing the
utterly toxic influence of neocon-neoliberals
within the Deep State.
If you have wondered why academics like
Paul Krugman and the CIA are on the
same page, it’s because they are simply
facets of the same structure. Krugman is a
vocal neoliberal, the CIA is vocally neocon:
two sides of the same coin. I invite you to
study the chart above with an open mind,
and ponder the possibility that the Deep
State is not monolithic, but deeply divided
along the fault lines of Wall-Street-
Neocons-Neoliberals and the progressive
elements that rightly view the dominant
neocon-neoliberals as a threat to U.S.
national security, U.S. global interests and
world peace.”
This viewpoint might stretch the boundaries of normally
accepted interpretations, since the establishment has
seldom before needed to worry about an “Outsider”
gaining the Presidency of the United States. In light of the
desperate meltdown from intelligence agencies using their
unconvincing assets in the fake news media, a struggle for
the heart and soul of America is being played out between
the propaganda press and the real truth tellers.
So when President Trump Visits CIA:
“I Am So Behind You”,
the natural response is why does Ex-CIA chief Brennan
labels Trump ‘despicable’? Well, the struggle
demonstrates that the vision of the establishment is in a
total panic to save their imperial empire, while Trump’s
mission is to apply a nationalistic policy that is
diametrically in opposition to the globalists that thrive on
continued conflict.
When the deep state makes policy, the system destroys any
semblance of legitimacy.
Just how far are the forces of Machiavellian supremacy
within the deep state willing to go to eliminate opposition
to their power? When a lapdog publication like The New
Yorker runs a feature ROGER STONE VERSUS THE
“DEEP STATE”, you know that the cover-up can no
longer be contained or kept from the American public.
129
“Stone is intelligent and witty, and it is often
jarring to listen to him as he turns from a
sober analysis of politics to bizarre
conspiracy theories. He is a frequent guest
on Alex Jones’s Infowars radio show,
where he recently alleged that he was
poisoned by unspecified enemies in the
“deep state,” his term for American
intelligence operatives. He told me that the
C.I.A. invented the allegations of Russian
hacking and an influence campaign to help
elect Trump directed by Vladimir Putin
because the agency wanted to go to war in
Syria.
“The C.I.A. has their assessment,” he said,
emphasizing the last word. “Assessment
means guess. The President-elect hasn’t
been shown proof because there’s no proof
to be shown. The deep state needs to get
over it. Their candidate lost. They wanted a
wider proxy war in Syria, and Trump is not
for war. He is for détente.””
Nations always seek to develop their clandestine spying
networks. No rational citizen would argue to eliminate
intelligence acquisition on foreign countries or competing
interests. However, the progression of the deep state has
been fostered and enhanced by many elements in society.
Most have little respect for the constitutional separation of
powers delineated in the U.S. Constitution.
Espionage was a major factor in George Washington’s
victory in the American Revolution. Conversely, the CIA
has empirically established that the forces of imperium
have maintained control over the rightful authority of our
nation going back to the Allen Dulles era.
Donald Trump’s appointee, Mike Pompeo will become the
next DCI. It falls to him to defang the snake from making
policy. The role of intelligence is to gather, analyze and
interpret information. Black bag, covert wars and
overthrowing governments has no place under the auspice
of a band of Yale Skull and Bones internationalists.
The CIA must be restricted to providing superior and
accurate briefings to the President. The military command
needs to be placed in charge of any clandestine operations
that strictly follow an America First standard. Arrogant
civilians who profess to be connoisseurs of spy craft have
proven to be dilettantes of Operation Gladio
warmongering.
Pompeo would be well served if he would listen and heed
the wisdom of two ex-CIA patriots, Michael Scheuer and
Ray McGovern. Of course their counsel on the Middle
East would conflict with Jared Kushner love affair with
Israel. This example illustrates the complex twists that
complicate the feuds within the deep state.
Based upon the early direction in the Trump
administration, the deep state money changers will not be
challenged. Regretfully, the shadow governance is too
widespread and entrenched to be removed in one executive
action. This fundamental abdication of recognizing the
eternal enemy of the Republic will undermine any positive
attempts that revolve around the edges.
130
The deep state is the establishment which runs rough shot
over the lackeys in Congress who must beg for money for
re-elections. The entire executive branch of agencies and
departments has bred collectivist toadies among their ranks
of the welfare state. And the esquire class has perverted the
rule of law to mean whatever absurd pronouncement of
equity that the courts dictate. The deep state hates the
populist will of loyal Americans.
 If Americans Truly Cared About Muslims,
They Would Stop Killing Them By The Millions
Submitted By Glen Ford
Wed, 02/01/2017 - 14:17
Americans welcome only token numbers of people from
countries devastated by U.S. wars of aggression. Donald
Trump’s current ban on travelers affects nations that were
already targeted by President Obama, “a perfect example
of the continuity of U.S. imperial policy in the region.”
The memo from State Department “dissenters” contains
“not a word of support for world peace, nor a hint of
respect for the national sovereignty of other peoples.”
If Americans Truly Cared About Muslims, They
Would Stop Killing Them by the Millions
By BAR executive editor Glen Ford
“Since 2001, war has been normalized in
the U.S. -- especially war against
Muslims.”
In the most dramatic expression of insider opposition to a
sitting administration’s policies in generations, over 1,000
U.S. State Department employees signed on to a memo
protesting President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on
people from seven predominantly Muslim countries setting
foot on U.S. soil. Another recent high point in dissent
among the State Department’s 18,000 worldwide
employees occurred in June of last year, when 51
diplomats called for U.S. air strikes against the Syrian
government of President Bashar al Assad.
Neither outburst of dissent was directed against the U.S.
wars and economic sanctions that have killed and
displaced millions of people in the affected countries: Iran,
Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Rather, the
131
diplomatic “rebellion” of last summer sought to pressure
the Obama administration to join with Hillary Clinton and
her “Big Tent” full of war hawks to confront Russia in the
skies over Syria, while the memo currently making the
rounds of State Department employees claims to uphold
“core American and constitutional values,” preserve “good
will towards Americans” and prevent “potential damage to
the U.S. economy from the loss of revenue from foreign
travelers and students.”
In neither memo is there a word of support for world
peace, nor a hint of respect for the national sovereignty of
other peoples -- which is probably appropriate, since these
are not, and never have been, “core American and
constitutional values.”
“The diplomatic ‘rebellion’ of last
summer sought to pressure the Obama
administration to join with Hillary
Clinton and her ‘Big Tent’ full of war
hawks to confront Russia in the skies
over Syria.”
Ironically, the State Department “dissent channel” was
established during one of those rare moments in U.S.
history when “peace” was popular: 1971, when a defeated
U.S. war machine was very reluctantly winding down
support for its puppet regime in South Vietnam. Back then,
lots of Americans, including denizens of the U.S.
government, wanted to take credit for the “peace” that was
on the verge of being won by the Vietnamese, at a cost of
at least four million Southeast Asian dead. But, those days
are long gone. Since 2001, war has been normalized in the
U.S. -- especially war against Muslims, which now ranks
at the top of actual “core American values.” Indeed, so
much American hatred is directed at Muslims that
Democrats and establishment Republicans must struggle to
keep the Russians in the “hate zone” of the American
popular psyche. The two premiere, officially-sanctioned
hatreds are, of course, inter-related, particularly since the
Kremlin stands in the way of a U.S. blitzkrieg in Syria,
wrecking Washington’s decades-long strategy to deploy
Islamic jihadists as foot soldiers of U.S. empire.
The United States has always been a project of empire-
building. George Washington called it a “nascent empire,”
Thomas Jefferson bought the Louisiana Territory from
France in pursuit of an “extensive empire,” and the real
Alexander Hamilton, contrary to the Broadway version,
considered the U.S. to be the “most interesting empire in
the world.” The colonial outpost of two million white
settlers (and half a million African slaves) severed ties
with Britain in order to forge its own, limitless dominion,
to rival the other white European empires of the world.
Today, the U.S. is the Mother of All (Neo)Colonialists,
under whose armored skirts are gathered all the aged,
shriveled, junior imperialists of the previous era.
“The United States has always been a
project of empire-building.”
In order to reconcile the massive contradiction between
America’s predatory nature and its mythical self-image,
however, the mega-hyper-empire must masquerade as its
opposite: a benevolent, “exceptional” and “indispensible”
bulwark against global barbarism. Barbarians must,
therefore, be invented and nurtured, as did the U.S. and the
Saudis in 1980s Afghanistan with their creation of the
world’s first international jihadist network, for subsequent
deployment against the secular “barbarian” states of Libya
and Syria.
In modern American bureaucratese, worrisome barbarian
states are referred to as “countries or areas of concern” --
the language used to designate the seven nations targeted
under the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 signed
by President Obama. President Donald Trump used the
existing legislation as the basis for his executive order
banning travelers from those states, while specifically
naming only Syria. Thus, the current abomination is a
perfect example of the continuity of U.S. imperial policy in
the region, and emphatically not something new under the
sun (a sun that, as with old Britannia, never sets on U.S.
empire).
The empire preserves itself, and strives relentlessly to
expand, through force of arms and coercive economic
132
sanctions backed up by the threat of annihilation. It kills
people by the millions, while allowing a tiny fraction of its
victims to seek sanctuary within U.S. borders, based on
their individual value to the empire.
“The mega-hyper-empire must
masquerade as its opposite: a
benevolent, “exceptional” and
“indispensible” bulwark against global
barbarism.”
Donald Trump’s racist executive order directly affects
about 20,000 people, according to the United Nations High
Commissioner on Refugees. President Obama killed an
estimated 50,000 Libyans in 2011, although the U.S.
officially does not admit it snuffed out the life of a single
civilian. The First Black President is responsible for each
of the half-million Syrians that have died since he
launched his jihadist-based war against that country, the
same year. Total casualties inflicted on the populations of
the seven targeted nations since the U.S. backed Iraq in its
1980s war against Iran number at least four million -- a
bigger holocaust than the U.S. inflicted on Southeast Asia,
two generations ago -- when the U.S. State Department
first established its “dissent channel.”
But, where is the peace movement? Instead of demanding
a halt to the carnage that creates tidal waves of refugees,
self-styled “progressives” join in the macabre ritual of
demonizing the “countries of concern” that have been
targeted for attack, a process that U.S. history has color-
coded with racism and Islamophobia. These imperial
citizens then congratulate themselves on being the world’s
one and only “exceptional” people, because they deign to
accept the presence of a tiny portion of the populations the
U.S. has mauled.
The rest of humanity, however, sees the real face of
America -- and there will be a reckoning.
 ‘What The F*** Chuck’: Thousands Of
Angry Protesters Scream Outside Schumer’s Home
Samantha Chang
February 1, 2017

It looks like Chuck Schumer may cry some real tears

now.

Thousands of angry protesters demonstrated outside

Senator Schumer’s Brooklyn apartment building to protest
what they call his wimpiness in standing up to President
Trump.

A disheveled crew of leftist hippies blasted Schumer for

not doing more to obstruct Trump’s executive orders and
Cabinet picks while chanting “What the f**k, Chuck?!”
outside his residence.

“Senator Schumer needs to know we’re

watching him,” Brad Wolchansky told the
NY Post. “He works for us. We need him to
stand up to Trump and oppose his picks.”

About 3,000 protesters met up at Grand Army Plaza in

Brooklyn before marching over to Schumer’s luxury
apartment building.

The demonstration was organized on social media, where

one person shared Senator Schumer’s address on Twitter.

The anti-Trump protesters held signs that read, “Resist

Trump” and “Show Some Spine, Schumer” while urging
the New York senator to do more to obstruct the president.

“He’s talking the talk on social media, but is Meanwhile, conservatives grabbed their popcorn and
he walking the walk?” Cambra Moniz- enjoyed the spectacle as the left ate its own and wallowed
Edwards asked. “What the f–k, Chuck?!” in more childish protests.
133
 One person summed it best when he urged protesters to
keep whining while Trump keeps winning.

One person wondered if these “protesters” will ever stop

whining and get a job (and not the one George Soros is
paying them to do).

134
 CONFIRMED:
Russian Cyber Spies Charged With Passing Secrets To US
Russia Confirms Cyber Spies Held On Treason Charges For Passing
Secrets To US, But Denies They Hacked DNC Or Podesta,
And Repeats Denial Of Russian Involvement In
Publication Of DNC And Podesta Emails.
Alexander Mercouris
February 2, 2017
The Russians have finally provided the first definite
official information about the arrests of FSB officers and
hackers which have been taking place in Moscow since
December.
Dmitry Peskov, President Putin’s spokesman, has flatly
denied that the individuals who have been arrested were
involved in hacking Podesta and the DNC. Peskov has
also repeated Russia’s denial of the US intelligence
community’s claims that Russia passed the DNC’s and
Podesta’s hacked emails on to Wikileaks for publication
during the election. Here is what Peskov is reported to
have said
In any case, no matters of this sort can have any relation to
such absurd insinuations [about hacker attacks] or, as we
have already said, we categorically deny any assertions
about the possible complicity of the Russian side in any
hacker attacks
This must be true. As I have written previously, claims
that the individuals who have been arrested were involved
in hacking Podesta and the DNC are inconsistent with the
treason charges which have been brought against them.
The claims that they were look very much like
disinformation
135
the article in The London Times reads strongly as if it has
been written on the basis of information provided to The
London Times by the British intelligence service. That this
is so is strongly suggested by the highlighted words of the
above paragraph, which imply that Mikhailov, Stoyanov
and Dokuchaev were actually involved in hacking Podesta
and the DNC.
On the face of it that is extremely unlikely.
Firstly Mikhailov, Stoyanov and Dokuchaev cannot by any
stretch of the imagination be described as “high-level
figures” of the sort the article says are now the subject of a
“crackdown”.
Secondly, if they really were involved in hacking the DNC
and Podesta on the Kremlin’s orders then it is difficult to
see on what basis they are being charged with treason.
Even if they hacked Podesta and the DNC on their own
initiative, the treason charges are difficult to understand. It
would in that case be more logical to charge them with
theft.
In light of what Peskov has said, any further speculation
that the individuals who have been arrested were involved
in hacking Podesta and the DNC is obviously wrong, and
should be ignored.
It is now confirmed that – as I have been saying all along –
the individuals have been arrested for passing on
information to a foreign power, which – as I also
speculated – is confirmed to be the US. The official
Russian news agency TASS quotes a lawyer familiar with
the case as follows
No CIA is mentioned in the case. It is only the country that
is mentioned. Yes, the talk is about America, not about the
CIA
(bold italics added)
This is not a denial that the CIA was the US agency with
which the arrested individuals are supposed to have been
in contact. All that the lawyer is saying is that the CIA is
not referred to in the charges. However he explicitly
confirms that the country with which the arrested
individuals were in contact was the US.
Lastly the lawyer has poured cold water over the claims
that the individuals arrested had some connection to the
Shaltai Boltai group.
The lawyer rejected media reports that leader of the
Shaltay Boltay hacker group Vladimir Anikeyev was
among the suspects in the criminal case. “It does not
follow from official documents that Anikeyev and the
Shaltay Boltay group are mentioned in this criminal case,”
the lawyer said, declining to disclose other details of the
case.
136
It seems as if the Russian media talk about the Shalta-
Boltai group was all wrong. Conceivably it was
disinformation deliberately spread by the FSB to conceal
the actual direction of the inquiry. More likely it was
simply someone’s mistaken guess.
Whilst this information has finally resolved some of the
mysteries about the case – we now know definitely that at
least two FSB officers and a cyber specialist have been
arrested in Moscow charged with passing on secrets to the
US – the theory that these individuals were a source for the
US intelligence community’s claims about Russian
interference in the US election remains for the moment
speculation.
We will no doubt find out more shortly even though what
is clearly shaping up to be a major spy trial will be held in
private, as such trials usually are in most countries, not just
in Russia.
 Researchers: Fake News
Did Not Alter Election Results
By Charles Hartwell
2 Feb 2017
As social media sites like Facebook and Snapchat move to
eliminate “fake news” reports from their sites, researchers
from Stanford and New York Universities say Americans
can be sure of one thing: the phenomenon did not affect
the results of the presidential election.
The new study released last month investigated the
influence that fake news may have had on President
Trump’s victory.
NYU economics professor Hunt Allcott and Stanford
economics professor Matthew Gentzkow led the research.
The pair ran a series of tests to determine which fake news
articles were circulated, how much of it was circulated,
and the amount of voters that believed the stories to be
true.
Once they gathered an assortment of fake news stories,
Gentzkow and Allcott used fact-checking resources in
order to verify that these stories were fake. They then
conducted a post-election survey that consisted of 1,200
voters.
Participants were asked what their primary or “most
important” source of 2016 election news was. Next, they
were presented with a list of true and false news stories,
and asked two questions concerning each individual story.
The first was whether or not the participant remembered
seeing the story. The second question asked whether or not
they believed the story.
137
Although fake news stories in Trump’s favor were shared
more times (30 million compared to 8 million for Hillary
Clinton), the authors of the report had determined that
these stories still did not reach enough voters nationwide to
change the election results.
“The average American saw and
remembered 0.92 pro-Trump fake news
stories and 0.23 pro-Clinton fake news
stories, with just over half of those who
recalled seeing fake news stories believing
them,” the authors wrote. But, “for fake
news to have changed the outcome of the
election, a single fake article would need to
have had the same persuasive effect as 36
television campaign ads.”
The observers’ work also revealed that a majority of voters
were capable of accurately deciding whether or not a news
story was true. They concluded that an insignificant
number of American voters casted their final decision
based on false information.
“In summary, our data suggest that
social media were not the most
important source of election news, and
even the most widely circulated fake
news stories were seen by only a small
fraction of Americans,” the study
concludes.
 U.S. Eases Restrictions On Cyber-Security
Sales To Russian Spy Agency
Doug Stanglin , USATODAY
Published 12:29 P.M. ET Feb. 2, 2017
Press secretary Sean Spicer disputes the notion that the move by the
U.S. Treasury Department was 'easing' sanctions against Russia.
USA TODAY NETWORK
The U.S. Treasury Department on Thursday eased
economic sanctions on Russia, allowing some cyber-
security sales to the Russian Federal Security Service
accused of meddling in the U.S. electoral process.
Some Russian officials applauded the move as signaling a
thaw in relations with Washington. But several members
of Congress decried the move as pandering to Russia and
its hacking attempts. The Trump administration,
meanwhile, denied any easing of sanctions, describing the
changes as routine tweaking of complicated policy.
The move by Treasury makes changes to sanctions initially
imposed by President Obama in April 2015
and strengthened again in December, in reaction to alleged
"malicious cyber-enabled activities" by Russia's security
service, known as the FSB, in the U.S. electoral process.
The changes by the Office of Foreign Assets Control cover
"all transactions and activities" involving the FSB, the
successor to the KGB, that were banned
by Obama's executive orders. It specifically eases the ban
on sales of information technology products to the FSB.
138
President Trump disputed the notion that the modifications
of earlier sanctions amounted to an easing of sanctions.
"I'm not easing ... anything," he told
reporters.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the changes do
not mark a policy shift, describing them as "a regular
course of action" that Treasury takes to address unintended
consequences of sanctions.
While the White House tamped down speculation of a
policy change, former FSB director Nikolai Kovalyov, a
member of the State Duma, saw the move as a sign of
improving relations between Moscow and Washington.
"This shows that actual joint work on
establishing an anti-terrorism coalition is
about to begin," Kovalyov told Russia's
TASS news agency.
"Without easing these sanctions it would
have been impossible to take the next
step," he adds
In Washington, where Republican Sens. John McCain and
Lindsey Graham have called for strengthening, not easing
of sanctions on Moscow, the move by Treasury was met
with dismay among some members of Congress.
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., ranking member of a House
CIA subcommittee, accused the Trump administration of
“rewarding” the FSB for tampering with the U.S. elections.
“This is the same group (FSB) that, just a
month ago, our intelligence community
determined was responsible for the attack
on our democracy,” Swalwell told USA
TODAY. “We just made it easier for the
same group to import into Russia the tools
they could use to hack us or our allies
again.”
Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, a member of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the
Trump administration appeared to be going to "extreme
lengths" to put Russian interests above the United States.
"Allowing U.S. companies to do business
with the Russian intelligence service (FSB)
rewards Russia for its nefarious behavior
and emboldens Putin to act out in the
future," he said.
The Trump administration's starts and fits over
other policies, such as the recent travel ban, complicated
efforts to assess the meaning of the move by Treasury.
In the past, sanctions have been modified, for example,
when the Obama administration eased sanctions on Iran in
its landmark 2015 nuclear deal because the language of the
act inadvertently included a ban on the sale of medical
devices using nuclear medicine.
139
In the latest case, some U.S. companies had expressed
concern that the sanctions would limit their ability to sell
electronics to Russia. The FSB has control over imports to
Russia of devices with encryption technology.
Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov declined to
make a statement on the decision, TASS reported.
"First we need to understand what it is all
about," Peskov said, according to TASS. "If
we turn to the rocket engines matter, we
will see that our U.S. counterparts never
impose sanctions that could damage their
own interests."
Contributing: Donovan Slack in Washington; John Bacon
in McLean, Va.; he Assocaited Press
 Trump Vows To Repeal Political Limits On Churches
Thursday, 02 Feb 2017 10:48 AM
President Trump at Thursday's National Prayer Breakfast. (Reuters)
Warning that religious freedom is "under threat," President
Donald Trump vowed Thursday to repeal the Johnson
Amendment, an IRS rule barring pastors from endorsing
candidates from the pulpit."
"I will get rid of and totally destroy the
Johnson Amendment and allow our
representatives of faith to speak freely and
without fear of retribution," Trump said
during remarks at the National Prayer
Breakfast, a high-profile event bringing
together faith leaders, politicians and
dignitaries.
Trump made a similar pledge as a candidate but has not
detailed how he plans to scrap the rule or how quickly he
will proceed in doing do.
Religious conservatives whose overwhelming support
propelled Trump to the White House have been watching
closely for him to deliver on promised protections for
religious objectors to gay marriage and abortion. Kelly
Shackelford, head of First Liberty Institute, a non-profit
legal group that specializes in religious freedom cases, said
no other presidential candidate was "more outspoken on
their commitment to religious freedom" than Trump.
The president made no mention at the prayer breakfast of
other steps he may take on those issues, saying only that
religious freedom is a "sacred right." He used his remarks
to thank the American people for their prayers in his
opening days in office.
140
He also took a dig at Arnold Schwarzenegger, the new host
of "The Apprentice," the reality TV show Trump
previously headlined. Trump said that since
Schwarzenegger took over, the show's rating have been
down, and asked the audience to "pray for Arnold."
While the president's comments were likely to be warmly
received by religious groups, LGBTQ groups are anxious
that the president could use his executive powers to curb
rights.
"We think it is entirely possible there could
be an executive order that creates religious
exemptions," said James Esseks, LGBT
project director for the American Civil
Liberties Union. He added that the
"narrative" that Trump won't harm the
LGBTQ community was "not correct."
Earlier this week, the Trump administration announced
that the president would leave intact a 2014 executive
order that protects workers for federal contractors from
anti-LGBTQ discrimination, saying in a statement that
Trump
"continues to be respectful and supportive
of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout
the election."
During a Monday news briefing, White House spokesman
Sean Spicer offered no details on whether Trump could
still issue an executive order affecting the LGBTQ
community.
"There is a lot of executive orders, a lot of
things that the president has talked about
and will continue to fulfill, but we have
nothing on that front now," Spicer said.
For now, both sides are speculating on Trump's plans.
Gay rights supporters argue that he could sign an executive
order that would allow religious organizations that receive
federal money — like charities or hospitals — to make
hiring and other decisions based on religion. They also
said he could offer a more wide-ranging order.
Religious conservatives, who saw a series of defeats on
same-sex marriage, abortion and other issues under former
President Barack Obama, have been bolstered by Trump's
win. In a letter last year to Roman Catholics, Trump
pledged,
"I will defend your religious liberties and the
right to fully and freely practice your
religion, as individuals, business owners
and academic institutions."
141
Trump's Supreme Court pick this week was also
considered a positive sign.
A favorite of conservatives, Neil Gorsuch serves on the
10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he sided with
Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor when they
mounted religious objections to the Obama
administration's requirement that employers provide health
insurance that includes contraceptives.
 Soros Insider Demands Military Overthrow Trump
Ex-Obama Official Tied To Soros-Funded New America Foundation
Clifford Cunningham | Infowars.Com
February 2, 2017
A former Obama administration official,
now linked to a Soros-funded
foundation, has suggested Donald
Trump be declared mentally unfit to
hold office or overthrown in a military
coup.
Rosa Brooks, who served as Counselor to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy from 2009-2011 and as a
senior adviser in the State Department, outlined four ways
to remove President Donald Trump from office, most
notably by having him declared mentally unfit for office or
by launching a military coup.
Brooks now serves as the Schwartz senior fellow at New
America, formerly the New America Foundation, a think-
tank heavily funded by globalist billionaire George Soros.
The Board of Directors of New America is currently
chaired by Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
“Are we truly stuck with Donald Trump,”
Brooks asked in her posting for Foreign
Policy. “It depends. There are essentially
four ways to get rid of a crummy president.”
Brooks went on to outline four ways to remove President
Trump from office, including impeachment, declaring him
mentally unfit for office, or b having the military
overthrown him in a coup.
142
While waiting for the next election in 2020 is possible,
Brooks argued that after
“such a catastrophic first week, four years
seems like a long time to wait.”
Impeachment, while an option,
“take time: months, if not longer — even
with an enthusiastic Congress. And when
you have a lunatic controlling the nuclear
codes, even a few months seems like a
perilously long time to wait.”
Another option is “an appeal to Vice President Pence’s
ambitions” by having Trump removed from office after
being declared unfit for office under the terms of the 25
Amendment.
“The fourth possibility is one that until
recently I would have said was unthinkable
in the United States of America: a military
coup, or at least a refusal by military
leaders to obey certain orders,” Brooks
said. “The prospect of American military
leaders responding to a presidential order
with open defiance is frightening — but so,
too, is the prospect of military obedience to
an insane order. ”
“After all, military officers swear to protect
and defend the Constitution of the United
States, not the president. For the first time
in my life, I can imagine plausible scenarios
in which senior military officials might
simply tell the president: ‘No, sir. We’re not
doing that,’ to thunderous applause from
the New York Times editorial board.”
 The Trump Show
By Kim Codella
February 2, 2017
I think I understand President Trump.
He isn’t mad. He doesn’t have an Alt-Right-Nazi agenda.
He doesn’t have a new form of Tourette’s that kicks in two
minutes after one begins to speak. This is all just part of
the “Trump Show” -on and off the air since the late
1970’s. Rebranded the “The President Trump Show” the
star’s persona has changed little during his journey from
real estate mogul/T.V. celebrity to candidate and now
arriving @POTUS.
This is the wildest and most successful television-variety
show to hit the airwaves, period. Running 24/7, this one
has it all: money, beauty, power, sex, espionage, torture,
misogyny, racism, vulgarity, stupidity and the possibility
of thermonuclear war -all in HD and broadcast live. This
show is much better than that hippy dippy “West Wing.”
I hate “The President Trump Show” but it’s the best thing
on T.V. and its ratings are through the roof. I watch it
every day and talk about it with coworkers, friends and
.
143
family. We all repeat the show’s catch phrases like “clean
coal” “free and fair” and my favorite “keep its mouth
shut.” My 85-year-old father and I haven’t laughed
together like this since watching Carol Burnett when I was
a kid (thanks Mr. President). I’ve cried too. The “Real
Housewives” and “Walking Dead” can’t hold a Gucci
purse or a flesh-eating zombie to this circus.
The President Trump Show’s success is that it does
something no televised program has ever been able to do –
it can reach out from the screen, grab your job, your
health, your life, the people you love, the country you love,
people you haven’t met but empathize with and then slap
you upside the head with them (even “The Kardashians”
can’t do that).
The question for me and for you is, how long will we stay
tuned before we want to change the channel?
Shows get cancelled you know.
 “We Need To Start Killing People.. We Need To Start
Killing The White House – Seattle Social Justice Warrior
Caught On Tape Threatening Violence And
Demanding Reparations
By Mac Slavo -
02.02.2017 @4:39 PM EST

We recently warned that America is about to see
unprecedented protests and rioting from coast to coast.
But don’t take our word for it.
A social justice warrior involved in the Seattle street
protests tells you everything you need to know about what
the future holds and lends further evidence to the notion
that America sits on the precipice of widespread civil
unrest.
The woman, who also claims to be a pre-school teacher,
implies that it’s time for extreme measures, including but
not limited to killing people, starting at the White House.
If you’re white, it’s time you started kicking some of your
hard-earned wealth her way, including your cash and your
house:
White people… give your fucking
money… give your fucking house…
your fucking property… we need it
fucking all… you need to reparate black
and indigenous people right now…. Pay
the fuck off… it ain’t just your fucking
time.. it’s your fucking money…
Watch the her full speech (and then be sure to register your
kids with her pre-school):

Just so you know… we need to start

killing people… first off we need to start
killing the White House… the White
House might die… your fucking White
House… your fucking White House
must go…

As you’ll see below, when she claims it’s time to start

killing people she is most likely referring to white people
exclusively. But killing isn’t enough.

144
 The Left Openly Embraces Domestic
Terrorism, Calls For Military Coup Against Trump
Trump Opposition Now Using Violence, Threats Of Military Coup
By Alex Thomas -
02.02.2017 @4:39 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — Since the inauguration of Donald

Trump as the 45th president of the United States the hard The riots come at the same time that multiple corporate
left in this country has taken a sinister turn towards news outlets, as well as Hollywood celebrities, are openly
violence. pushing the idea of using the US military to remove Trump
from office.
From attacks on Trump supporters during the inauguration
to a massive riot in Berkeley last night, the left has gone Anti-Trump leftist Sarah Silverman, tweeting during the
full-scale domestic terrorist, complete with support from violence at Berkeley, openly revealed that she wants the
the corporate run establishment media. US military to join the protesters to remove the rightfully
elected president from office.
Last night’s riots took place after Breitbart editor Milo
Yiannopoulos attempted to speak on the campus of UC
Berkeley before having his event completely shut down by
anti first amendment leftists who have made clear that they
believe violence is the answer.

As Breitbart noted, “Far-left “anti-fascist” rioters assaulted

numerous attendees, started fires, smashed up shops and
ATMs, and attacked people’s cars at Breitbart Senior
Editor MILO’s UC Berkeley show on Wednesday.”
“The violence was instigated by a group of
about 150 masked agitators who came
onto campus and interrupted an otherwise
non-violent protest. The decision to cancel
the event was made at about 6 p.m., and
officers read several dispersal
announcements to a crowd of more than
1,500 protesters who had gathered outside
the student union, where Yiannopoulos
was to speak. He immediately was
escorted from the building and left
campus,” read the statement from the
school.
Shockingly, it isn’t just some random Hollywood celebrity
calling for a coup, as Soros connected Georgetown
Professor Rosa Brooks also recently promoted the idea in
both Foreign Policy and on the extremely popular
homepage of Yahoo.
As I reported yesterday,
“Writing for Foreign Policy, Georgetown
University professor and Schwartz senior
fellow at the New America Foundation,
Rosa Brooks discusses ways that the left
believes they may be able to remove the
rightfully elected president from office.”
“Brooks eventually gets to the more sinister
idea being pushed in leftist circles
which would amount to the end of
American democracy as we know it and the
beginning of using military force to remove
leaders that parts of the country disagree
with.”
“The fourth possibility is one that until
recently I would have said was unthinkable
in the United States of America: a military

145
 coup, or at least a refusal by military To recap, multiple anti-Trump propagandists are openly
leaders to obey certain orders,” wrote the pushing the idea of a military coup at the exact same time
Professor. as violent protesters are silencing free speech on campuses
throughout the country. Make no mistake, this is truly an
information war for the future of the country.
.

146
 A Psychological Divide:
Irrationality, Psychopathy And Trump’s Cult
By Ken Levy
February 2, 2017
Polls show that around 40% of the electorate approve of
Donald Trump’s first week and a half in office; 60% do
not. This is not a mere partisan divide; it is a psychological
divide as well. Most of the 60% simply cannot understand
how Trump’s faithful 40% can continue to support him.
So far, Trump has confirmed every bad impression he
created during the election: that he is reckless, autocratic,
mendacious, confrontational, gratuitously insulting,
obsessed with his popularity and image, cruel to refugees
and immigrants, dangerously intent on disrupting both the
federal government and long-standing international
relationships, suspiciously friendly toward Putin, and
oblivious to the appearance of corruption or hypocrisy.
What is so baffling about Trump’s supporters is that they
continue to stand by him when they were so uncharitable
and hateful toward Pres. Obama and Hillary for far less
serious transgressions. In addition to being unfair, their
attitude is fundamentally irrational.
Irrationality is defective reasoning; it generally involves
drawing the wrong inference. The usual causes of
irrationality are alcohol, drugs, ignorance, intense
emotions, and motivated belief. All of these contribute to
abnormal and often self-destructive behavior. For our
purposes, motivated belief is the most important. People
147
too often believe what they want to believe. Either they
deny reality because it conflicts with a belief to which they
are emotionally attached or they suffer from “cognitive
dissonance,” which is the state of believing two
contradictory propositions.
Trump may be engaging in what scholars refer to as
“rational irrationality”. Rational irrationality is deliberately
appearing irrational to achieve some further rational end.
For example, the Reagan administration knew that a
nuclear war would be devastating to humanity and
therefore fundamentally irrational (self-destructive). But
they still expanded our nuclear capabilities in order to
create the appearance that we would engage in this very
irrational behavior. This threat of “mutually assured
destruction” (MAD) was itself an irrational-seeming
means toward the very rational goal of deterring the Soviet
Union from launching their own nuclear weapons at us.
The rational-irrationality hypothesis would certainly
explain Trump’s penchant for childish Tweets, heavy-
handed domination, farfetched conspiracy theories, and
“alternative facts.” For example, Trump might very well
be lying about widespread voter fraud merely to instigate
an investigation into voter fraud that will itself pave the
way toward even more voter suppression in the 2018 and
2020 elections. Still, for the most part, Trump just seems to
be too impulsive and, as demonstrated by his clumsy
manner of speaking, too simpleminded to be this
calculating.
Instead, a more plausible hypothesis is that Trump just
enjoys lying for its own sake. He takes great pleasure – a
“duping delight” – in making up facts that suit his
immediate purposes and then using his Twitter account
and the mainstream media to disseminate them.
Pathological lying is just one of twenty attributes that Dr.
Robert Hare incorporated into his “Psychopathy Checklist-
Revised” (PCL-R), a list designed for psychologists to
evaluate whether patients suffer from the mental illness of
psychopathy. (Psychopathy overlaps significantly with
“Anti-Social Personality Disorder” in the fifth version of
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(DSM V)). The other nineteen attributes are glib and
superficial charm, grandiose self-worth, need for
stimulation or proneness to boredom, conning and
manipulativeness, lack of remorse or guilt, shallow affect,
callousness and lack of empathy, parasitic lifestyle, poor
behavioral controls, promiscuous sexual behavior, early
behavior problems, lack of realistic, long-term goals,
impulsivity, irresponsibility, failure to accept responsibility
for own actions, many short-term marital relationships,
juvenile delinquency, revocation of condition release, and
criminal versatility.
As evidenced by his public behavior over the last forty
years, and especially since June 2015, Trump clearly
satisfies most of these attributes. In addition to his
hyperbolic self-praise, pathological lying, and many racist
and misogynistic remarks, Trump has committed many
acts that range from shady to criminal: he “stiffed” many
independent contractors, spearheaded the fictitious
“Birther” conspiracy against Pres. Obama, donated
$25,000 to Florida State Attorney General Pam Bondi’s
campaign just days before she “coincidentally” terminated
an investigation into fraud allegations against Trump
University, engaged in self-dealing with the Trump
Foundation, bragged to Billy Bush about sexually
assaulting women, allegedly engaged in perverted sexual
behavior during a visit to Moscow in 2013, admitted to
engaging in voyeuristic behavior backstage at the Miss
Universe pageants, appears to be profiting from his public
office by refusing to divest himself of his businesses, and
still refuses to reveal his tax returns, which suggests that he
is trying to conceal tax evasion, corruption, and/or
questionable financial ties to other countries.
Given this lengthy record, his first week and a half in
office (described above), and Dr. Hare’s PCL-R checklist,
Trump seems to be a psychopath. Why, then, do 40% of
the electorate still support him? And what does their
enthusiasm for an apparent psychopath say about them?
Individually, most of Trump’s supporters are probably not
psychopaths. But the collective group is psychopathic.
Whether they believe Trump’s lies or not, they are all too
enthusiastic about his victimizing others – for example,
government officials, Obamacare beneficiaries, women
around the world who need healthcare from facilities that
provide abortions, and refugees from many Muslim
.
148
countries. Over the past several years, they have been
indoctrinated by Fox News, alt-right/alt-fact websites, hate
radio, their parents, their friends, Republican politicians,
and Trump himself into thinking that they, not the targets
of Trump’s venom, are the real victims; that the “other” is
entirely to blame for all of their misery, fear, and
deprivation.
In her brilliant and disturbing book The Cult Next Door:
A True Story of a Suburban Manhattan New Age Cult,
Elizabeth R. Burchard documents her own journey into,
and eventual escape from, a cult led by Dr. George
Sharkman. Ms. Burchard explains how many perfectly
moral, rational, and high-functioning individuals may be
easily manipulated and exploited by a charismatic
individual. The cult leader’s ploy is to seek out gullible,
timid, or anxious individuals; convince them that he has all
the answers; continue to repeat these answers; and play to
their sense of self-superiority by demonizing everybody
who doesn’t subscribe to his system. Since June 2015, this
has been Trump’s playbook, and it has proven to be very
effective – so effective that he is now occupying the
highest office in the country and issuing one toxic
executive order after another to make good on his
campaign promises.
While many predict that Trump’s followers will eventually
be disillusioned and abandon the “Trump Train,” their
prediction is naively optimistic. Cults don’t operate
rationally; cult members do not change their core beliefs
and behavior on the basis of facts and evidence. Instead,
they blindly follow their leader wherever he and his inner
circle decide to go.
If the 60% who do not support Trump want to avoid
calamity, they need to start talking not merely about how
to resist Trump and win the 2018 elections but also how to
de-program millions of people. Unfortunately, as Ms.
Burchard’s book demonstrates, this task is much easier
said than done. Once the mass of Trump’s supporters fell
under his bizarre spell, they were lost to reason. And
reason is pretty much the only tool left in the reasonable
majority’s arsenal.
 Twitter Now Working Directly Against
Trump White House, Donating Money To The Left
Social Media Giant Openly Funding Anti-Trump Operations
By Staff Writer -
02.02.2017 @7:40 PM EST

Shockingly, Twitter isn’t the only social media giant

working directly with leftist organizations as it was
recently reported that Facebook is secretly working with
progressive attack dog Media Matters to target “fake
news” on the platform.

Intellihub’s Alex Thomas reported,

“The left-wing propagandist group Media

Matters for America is secretly working
behind the scenes with Facebook to
combat so-called fake news, documents
released by the Washington Free Beacon
(INTELLIHUB) — Employees at Twitter have raised over
have revealed.”
$500,000 to support efforts to stop President Trump’s
executive order on immigration, a figure matched by the “The progressive advocacy group told
company’s Executive Chairman and CEO, according to a donors at a weekend retreat in Florida that
report by BuzzFeed News. it is in discussion with Facebook leadership
over how best to fight fake news and
The total, $1.59 million, will be donated to the left-wing propaganda, according to a briefing book
ACLU to be used in their efforts to not only stop Trump’s obtained at the high level event.”
immigration orders but also to push their leftist goal of “We’ve been engaging with Facebook
eventual open borders for all refugees. leadership behind the scenes to share our
expertise and offer input on developing
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has also publicly criticized the meaningful solutions,” reads the briefing
executive order on his massive platform that many book.
originally believed was nonpartisan.
We are clearly seeing a concerted effort throughout the
media, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood to directly work
against Donald Trump. While Trump obviously isn’t the
messiah, it is absolute fact that the entire globalist
establishment is directly attacking him.

149
 Schumer And Leadership Team
Refuse To Meet With Gorsuch
Kerry Picket - Reporter
3:55 PM 02/02/2017

The act appears to be revenge against Republicans for

holding the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia open and
not holding a hearing for Obama Supreme Court appointee
Merrick Garland.

The White House requested that Gorsuch meet with

Schumer, but aides said he declined in order to learn more
about the nominee’s record, The Washington Post
reported.

“By refusing to meet with Judge Gorsuch, Senate

WASHINGTON — Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer and other Democratic Senate leaders refused to
meet with Judge Neil Gorsuch Thursday.
.
Democratic leadership is taking Washington gridlock and
obstruction to a new low and placing Senators McCaskill,
Donnelly, Heitkamp, Tester, and other Democrats up for
reelection in 2018 on the endangered politicians list,”
Carrie Severino, chief counsel of the Judicial Crisis
Network, said in a statement.

150
Dem Boycott Foiled Again! GOP Senate Overrides Crybaby
No-Shows And Approves Trump’s Pick To Head EPA
Michael Dorstewitz
February 2, 2017

If their stunt didn’t work the first time, what made them
think it’d work if they gave it one more try?

Senate Democrats once again boycotted a committee

hearing on a Trump cabinet nominee, and just like the last
time, Senate Republican waived committee rules and
approved the nominee.

And with that, the Senate Environment and Public

Works Committee approved Oklahoma Attorney
General Scott Pruitt as President Donald Trump’s choice
to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

Pruitt was nominated by the president with the anticipation

that he will make the agency more industry-friendly.

The Democrats received little if any sympathy on social

Clip via Fox 10 Phoenix
media.

On Thursday morning, when Committee Chairman Sen.

John Barrasso gaveled the meeting to order, all 10
Democratic chairs stood empty. So the remaining 11
Republicans voted unanimously to suspend the rules
requiring the attendance of at least two minority party
members to be present in order to conduct business.

“Scott Pruitt will be voted out of committee

today,” the Wyoming Republican said. “He
will get to the floor of the United States
Senate and he will be confirmed as the
next administrator of the EPA.”
“All Democrats are invited to the
committee,” Barrasso added. “I met earlier
this morning with Sen. (Tom) Carper, the
ranking member. He indicated that
Democrats would not be attending. We’re
going to have a meeting today and we’re
going to make sure that Scott Pruitt is
advanced to the floor of the Senate.”

151
 On Wednesday, Democrats got burned when Treasury
secretary nominee Steven Mnuchin and Health and Human
Services secretary nominee Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., were
approval by the Senate Finance Committee. The
Democratic members were a no-show.

There’s an old saying: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool

me twice, shame on me. The Democrats should have
known better than to try this one twice.

152
 Donald Trump 'Yelled At Australian PM
During "Worst Ever" Phone Call About Refugee
Swap Deal - Then HUNG UP'
Malcolm Turnbull Denied The President Slammed The Phone Down
Saying The Conversation Ended Cordially - And He Insisted The US Will
Honour Obama's Refugee Deal
Bysteve Robson & Chris Kitching
13:20, 2 FEB 2017

Trump during his phone conversations with world leaders (Photo:

Rex Features)
Donald Trump "yelled" at the Australian Prime Minister
over the phone and then hung up on him in a row over a
refugee swap deal that the president has blasted as "dumb",
an explosive report has claimed.

The Washington Post claimed Trump blasted his

counterpart Malcolm Turnbull over his insistence that the
US stand by the deal agreed with former President Barack
Obama.

The call was scheduled for an hour but Trump cut it short
after just 25 minutes when Turnbull tried to discuss topics
such as Syria, the Post reported.

The President had spoken pleasantly with other leaders

including Vladimir Putin but described his call with
Turnbull as "the worst so far", it was claimed.

Amid reports of the "hostile" phone call Turnbull denied

claims that Trump hung up on him, and said the exchange
was "courteous". Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull reportedly "pushed
back" against Trump's tirade (Photo: Getty)

153
Twitter users have speculated that this picture shows Trump giving Trump is pictured during the phone call with Turnbull
Turnbull the finger during the angry phone call (Photo: Twitter) (Photo: Getty)

The Post reported that Trump described the resettlement

plan as "the worst deal ever" and accused Australia of
trying to export the "next Boston bombers", referring to the
Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.

The attack was carried out by two Chechen-American

brothers who moved to the US as children a short time
after their parents arrived on tourist visas in 2002 and
successfully applied for asylum.

A black and white photo released by the White House

following the conversation shows Trump on the phone at
his desk in the Oval Office.
Asylum seekers at the Manus Island detention centre in
Papua New Guinea (Photo: Reuters)
But social media users have been zooming in on Trump's
hand - and he appears to be raising his middle finger in a
rude gesture. The source went on: "[Trump's] tone was described as
“yelling” across the phone at Malcolm Turnbull.
The Post's report about the phone call last weekend has
pointed to a rare rift in ties between the US and Australia, "Malcolm Turnbull wasn’t just sitting there being berated
where Turnbull leads with a thin majority. by Donald Trump, he used this phone call to push back."

Turnbull said on Thursday he had spoken "candidly" and
"frankly" with Trump, but would not confirm that the
President had berated him and cut the call short.
He said: "I do stand up for Australia. My job is to defend
Australian interests."
But sources told Sky News Australia the Aussie PM
believes Trump is a "bully" and that "to combat a bully,
you need to bully back".
Trump took to Twitter to add more fuel to the controversy
by tweeting: "Do you believe it? The Obama
Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal
immigrants from Australia. Why? I will study this dumb
deal!"
The saga continued when Turnbull then felt the need to
respond further and he appeared live on several radio
shows in Australia.

154
 "I make Australia's case frankly, powerfully, forthrightly
and hopefully persuasively when I deal with other
leaders."

The Turnbull call came less than a day after Trump had
sparked confusion in Australia after saying it would apply
"extreme vetting" as part of the refugee resettlement deal.

The deal was agreed late last year between Australia,

which has fought alongside U.S. troops in Afghanistan and
Iraq, and the Obama administration.

As part of the deal, Washington agreed to resettle up to

1,250 asylum seekers (Photo: Reuters)

Anti-Trump protests were held in Sydney following his

inauguration (Photo: Getty)

Trump has blasted the refugee deal as "dumb" (Photo: Rex

Features)

A protester is approached by a police officer at a

demonstration last month (Photo: Alamy)

He insisted Trump had not hung up on him, and that the

call ended "cordially".

He also maintained that the US will honour Obama's

refugee deal, despite Trump's latest tweet.

Turnbull told reporters: "He is saying that this is not a deal

he would have made, but the question is will he honour
that commitment? He has already given it.

155
Trump was joined by Chief Strategist Steve Bannon (right)
and National Security Advisor Michael Flynn (Photo:
Getty)
Turnbull said he had spoken "candidly" and "frankly" with
Trump (Photo: Reuters)
As part of the deal, Washington agreed to resettle up to
1,250 asylum seekers held in offshore processing camps on
Pacific islands in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.
156
In return, Australia would resettle refugees from El
Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.
Turnbull would not comment on the contents of the call
other than to say he believed the resettlement deal
remained in place.
"These conversations are conducted candidly, frankly,
privately.
"If you see reports of them, I'm not going to add to them,"
he told reporters in Melbourne.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer and the US Embassy
in Australia have both said Trump would honour the deal.
The swap deal is at odds with Trump's executive order last
week that suspended the US refugee programme and
restricted entry to the US for travellers from seven
Muslim-majority countries - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia,
Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
 In A Shift, Trump Warns Against New Israeli Settlements
As Netanyahu Plots Major Expansion
By Elliot Hannon
February 2, 2017

This is in stark contrast to Trump’s tone before taking

office. As Slate’s Josh Keating noted last week, Trump’s
“campaign explicitly rejected the notion that settlement
building is an obstacle to peace or that Israel is occupying
the West Bank.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu took the election of Trump and his bluster as a
mandate to expand Jewish settlements deeper into
Palestine. “We can build where we want and as much as
we want,” Netanyahu said last week after the Israeli
government approved 2,500 new housing units in West
Bank settlements and hundreds more in East Jerusalem.

“The statement could signal a major

disappointment for many on the Israeli
right, including senior members of Prime
The White House abruptly changed course in its dealings
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
with Israel Thursday when it issued a statement urging
restraint by the Israelis when it comes to building new government, who hoped that Trump would
settlements, a hot button issue regionally and globally. abandon the two-state solution and
believed his attitude towards settlements in
the West Bank and East Jerusalem would
“While we don’t believe the existence of be far more supportive than that of
settlements is an impediment to peace, the Obama,” Haaretz noted.
construction of new settlements or the
expansion of existing settlements beyond
Newly sworn-in Secretary of State Rex Tillerson spoke
their current borders may not be helpful in
with Netanyahu Thursday, but the details of the
achieving that goal,” the White House said
conversation aren’t known.
in a statement. A senior administration
official also tamped down settlement
expansion hopes telling the Jerusalem Post “The Trump administration has not taken
Thursday “we urge all parties to refrain an official position on settlement activity
from taking unilateral actions that could and looks forward to continuing
undermine our ability to make progress, discussions, including with Prime Minister
including settlement announcements.” Netanyahu when he visits with President
Trump later this month,” the White House
read.
.

157
 Lawmakers Urge Trump to Remove Strategist Bannon
From National Security Council
© AP Photo/ Evan Vucci US
06:35 02.02.2017
White House chief strategist Steven
Bannon should be immediately removed
from the US National Security Council
(NSC), seven Democratic Congressmen
said in a letter to President Donald
Trump.
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Congressmen Cedric
Richmond, Mark Pocan, Michelle Grisham, Raul Grijalva,
158
Keith Ellison, Judy Chu and Barbara Lee signed the letter
to Trump calling for removal of Brannon from his current
position.
"We strongly denounce Mr. Bannon’s
inclusion in the Principals Committee and
standing invitation to attend National
Security Council meetings and demand you
[Trump] immediately undo this politicization
of America’s national security," the letter
stated on Wednesday.
On Saturday, Trump signed an executive order
to reorganize the NSC, which added Bannon as a
permanent member.
US House of Representatives Armed Services Committee
ranking member Adam Smith said on Monday the
Congress would have to think twice about any
recommendations it gets from the NSC due to the
reorganization ordered by Trump.
 House Votes To Overturn Obama Gun Rule
By Tim Devaney
02/02/17 04:09 PM EST
The House on Thursday struck down an Obama-era
regulation that could block some recipients of disability
benefits from buying guns.
The House voted 235-180 to roll back a rule that required
the Social Security Administration to report people who
receive disability benefits and have a mental health
condition to the FBI’s background check system. The
database is used to determine eligibility for buying a
firearm.
Critics said the rule stripped Second Amendment rights
from people who are not dangerously mentally ill, such as
those who have eating disorders or mental disorders that
prevent them from managing their own finances.
The National Rifle Association opposed the rule. While the
group says it supports keeping guns away from the
mentally ill, it said the determination about who is
mentally ill should be left to the courts.
“The Obama administration’s last minute,
back-door gun grab would have stripped
law-abiding Americans of their Second
Amendment rights without due process,”
said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top lobbyist.
Supporters of the rule said the step was necessary to keep
guns away from people with mental disorders like
schizophrenia and severe anxiety.
Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-Conn.) accused Republicans of
weakening the background check system.
159
"The House charged ahead with an
extreme, hastily written, one-sided
measure that would make the American
people less safe," she said.
Under the rule, which is set to take force in December, the
Social Security Administration (SSA) rule would report
disability recipients with severe mental disorders to the
FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check
System.
People entered into the system would be able to apply for
relief from the SSA, but not until after their names were
sent to the FBI. They would also be able to appeal in court.
House Republicans turned to the Congressional Review
Act to overturn the regulation. The law allows lawmakers
to roll back rules they disapprove of. Critically for
Republicans, the resolutions cannot be filibustered in the
Senate.
The NRA has raised concerns about a similar gun rule
from the Department of Veterans Affairs. But that rule was
issued so long ago, it is no longer eligible for repeal under
the Congressional Review Act.
The House also voted Thursday to strike down the Labor
Department’s blacklisting rule, which requires federal
contractors to report labor violations.
On Wednesday, the House voted to strike down the
Interior Department’s stream protection rule and the
Securities and Exchange Commission’s disclosure
requirements for oil and gas companies through the
Congressional Review Act.
The House is also expected Friday to strike down the
Interior Department’s methane emissions standards.
The Senate must approve each of these measures with a
simple majority before they are sent to President Trump to
sign.
- Updated at 7:27 p.m.
 US To Develop System Ensuring
Immigrants Embrace American Values - Trump
© AFP 2016/ NICHOLAS KAMM - US
19:17 02.02.2017
The United States is putting together an
immigration system that would ensure
immigrants share American values and
reject any form of discrimination,
President Donald Trump said on
Thursday at a National Prayer Breakfast
in Washington, DC.
160
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Trump also noted that those
coming into the United States for the purpose of spreading
violence or oppressing others based on their faith would
not be allowed to enter.
"We will develop a system to help ensure
that those admitted into our country fully
embrace our values of religious and
personal liberty and that they reject any
form of oppression and discrimination,"
Trump stated. "We want people to come
into our nation but we want people to love
us and to love our values, not to hate us
and to hate our values."
On Friday, Trump signed an executive order that suspends
entry to the United States for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days; bans all
refugees from entry for 120 days; and bars all Syrian
refugees from entering the country indefinitely.
 Republicans Impatient With
Anti-Trump Civil Servants
By Ben Kamisar
02/02/17 05:11 PM EST
Republican lawmakers are frustrated with mounting
dissent from civil servants over President Trump's
policies.
Amid unusually public tension between federal employees
and the new administration — including Trump’s firing of
the acting attorney general, State Department dissent and
frequent leaks to the media — some of Trump's allies in
Congress want federal employees to either do their jobs or
get out.
“When someone works full time for the
government, it should be no surprise to
them that they serve at the pleasure of the
[president],” Rep. Pete Sessions (R-
Texas), chairman of the powerful Rules
Committee, told The Hill.
“I’m not interested in politics by an agency
employee.”
But others in the GOP are looking to tamp down the
tension and go back to business as usual.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is trying to calm a
department that’s been roiled by Trump. During his
welcome address to State Department employees on
Thursday, Tillerson preached unity but didn’t directly
mention department opposition to Trump’s executive order
on refugees or the mass departure of top officials last
week.
“I know this was a hotly contested election
and we do not all feel the same way about
the outcome. Each of us is entitled to the
161
expression of our political beliefs, but we
cannot let our personal convictions
overwhelm our ability to work as one team,”
he said.
Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.) told The Hill
that things will ultimately “calm down” once the new
administration gets settled in.
“I’m an optimistic person, any time you see
a big change, folks are going to react to it
when their livelihoods are at stake, she
said.
“It’s going to be a long, bumpy ride, and
eventually everything will shake out.”
Trump came into office having made few friends among
the career employees who staff government agencies in
Washington.
His “drain the swamp” mantra and immediate freeze on
federal hiring was undoubtedly a tough sell among those
who count on the bureaucracy for their livelihoods. Voters
in the District of Columbia responded by delivering
Democrat Hillary Clinton an 89-point victory over Trump,
and she won handily in nearby Maryland and Virginia
districts, too.
But the expected clash between Trump and the civil
service reached a new level late last week, when Trump
signed an executive order freezing the refugee program
and banning citizens from seven majority-Muslim
countries from entering the United States.
The secrecy involved in the order’s production, prompted
in part by a White House staff worried about media leaks,
created confusion in federal agencies trying to implement
the order. And on Monday, Trump fired acting attorney
general Sally Yates, an Obama administration
holdover, after she refused to defend his executive order in
court.
Along with the pink slip, the White House said Yates had
"betrayed" the government in a statement.
That same day, White House press secretary Sean Spicer
dismissed an internal State Department dissent document
that pushes back against Trump’s immigration executive
order. Nearly 1,000 diplomats reportedly signed the
memo.
“They should either get with the program or
they can go,” Spicer said. He followed
up on Wednesday by explaining that while
all Americans have a right to speak their
mind, it’s their job to help the president
enact his agenda.
Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly, whose Northern
Virginia district includes a significant number of civil
servants, told The Hill that concerned federal employees
are reaching out to his office.
Dozens of social media accounts purporting to belong to
spurned agency staffers have popped up to muddy the
administration’s message. The unverified accounts
appeared after Trump administration clamped down on
multiple agencies’ social media activity in response to the
National Park Service retweeting a photo comparison
showing that Trump’s inaugural crowd was smaller than
former President Obama’s.
This week, a Washington Post report described a civil
servant support group in Washington, noting that 180
employees are expected to attend a workshop
“where experts will offer advice on workers’
rights and how they can express civil
disobedience.”
For all the talk about civil servants and their consciences,
though, Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas) thinks the issue is
simple.
“I don’t think it’s rocket science. All they
have to do is do their job,” Flores said.
“If they don’t want to do their jobs, they
should get another job.”
GOP lawmakers say that civil service dissent isn’t about
free speech.
“We should have more debate in this
country. Now that’s a different thing than if
you have a job to serve the president in the
executive branch and advance his
.
162
responsibilities, which are to faithfully
execute the laws that have been passed,”
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), a frequent
Trump critic during the campaign, told The
Hill.
“We need to rein in these independent
agencies and make them accountable to
the president again, regardless of who the
president is.”
Some Republicans floated questions about whether
dissenting employees could be violating the federal Hatch
Act by using their official positions for political action.
But while there were sporadic calls for punishment, most
lawmakers wouldn’t speculate as to what the best form of
recourse should be.
“To express political overtones by a
government employee I would think
violates the Hatch Act, and I would think
that anyone who has begun this process
should go through a procedure consistent
with a violation of the Hatch Act,”
Sessions, the Texas lawmaker, said.
“It concerns me, and I think it should be
looked at and adjudicated as necessary to
the rules of the department.”
Democratic lawmakers that spoke to The Hill were united
around the dissenting civil servants, framing their
opposition to Trump’s policies as protected speech that’s
about less about politics and more about protecting the
missions of federal agencies.
“People in civil service are committed to
what they believe the mission of their
agency is—they have a conscience and
they have the ability to speak up,” said
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), a longtime
member of Democratic leadership.
“We have free speech in this national and
they are, from the depths of their own
conscience, talking about what they thing is
the right thing.”
When asked by The Hill what she thought of Republican
worries that dissent could set a dangerous precedent for
employees looking to frustrate a president’s agenda,
DeLauro responded,
“Generally, this White House worries me.”
 Resistance From Within:
Federal Workers Push Back Against Trump
By Juliet Eilperin, Lisa Rein And Marc Fisher
January 31

The signs of popular dissent from President Trump’s Then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates at the Justice
Department on May 15, 2015. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington
opening volley of actions have been plain to see on the Post)
nation’s streets, at airports in the aftermath of his refugee
and visa ban, and in the blizzard of outrage on social
At the Justice Department, an employee in the division that
media. But there’s another level of resistance to the new
administers grants to nonprofits fighting domestic violence
president that is less visible and potentially more
and researching sex crimes said the office has been
troublesome to the administration: a growing wave of
planning to slow its work and to file complaints with the
opposition from the federal workers charged with
inspector general’s office if asked to shift grants away
implementing any new president’s agenda.
from their mission.
Less than two weeks into Trump’s administration, federal
“You’re going to see the bureaucrats using
workers are in regular consultation with recently departed
time to their advantage,” said the
Obama-era political appointees about what they can do to
employee, who spoke on the condition of
push back against the new president’s initiatives. Some
anonymity for fear of retaliation. Through
federal employees have set up social media accounts to
leaks to news organizations and internal
anonymously leak word of changes that Trump appointees
complaints, he said, “people here will resist
are trying to make.
and push back against orders they find
unconscionable.”
And a few government workers are pushing back more
openly, incurring the wrath of a White House that, as press
The resistance is so early, so widespread and so deeply felt
secretary Sean Spicer said this week about dissenters at the
that it has officials worrying about paralysis and overt
State Department, sends a clear message that they “should
refusals by workers to do their jobs.
either get with the program, or they can go.”
Asked whether federal workers are dissenting in ways that
At a church in Columbia Heights last weekend, dozens of
go beyond previous party changes in the White House,
federal workers attended a support group for civil servants
Tom Malinowski, who was President Barack Obama’s
seeking a forum to discuss their opposition to the Trump
assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights
administration. And 180 federal employees have signed up
and labor, said, sarcastically:
for a workshop next weekend, where experts will offer
advice on workers’ rights and how they can express civil
disobedience. “Is it unusual?” There’s nothing unusual
about the entire national security
bureaucracy of the United States feeling
like their commander in chief is a threat to
U.S. national security. That happens all the

163
 time. It’s totally usual. Nothing to worry
about.”
The permanent bureaucracy, the backbone of the federal
government and the bulwark against many presidents’
activist intentions, is designed to be at least a step removed
from the crosswinds of partisan politics.
But for years, many conservatives have argued that the
federal bureaucracy is stacked against them, making it
harder for them to get things done even when they control
the White House, Congress or both.
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), a Trump
adviser and longtime critic of the bureaucracy, said the
pushback against the new administration reveals how
firmly entrenched liberals are and how threatened they feel
by the new regime. He cited an analysis by the Hill
newspaper that showed that 95 percent of campaign
donations from employees at 14 federal agencies went to
Hillary Clinton last fall.
“This is essentially the opposition in
waiting,” Gingrich said. “He may have to
clean out the Justice Department because
there are so many left-wingers there. State
is even worse.”
Gingrich said Trump might push for civil service revisions
to make it easier to fire federal workers. He predicted that
the public would back the president over federal
employees.
The signs of resistance in federal offices range from low-
level grumbling and angry opposition posted online to
anonymous promises of outright insubordination as new
policies develop.
The State Department has emerged as the nexus of
opposition to Trump’s refugee policy, in part because it
has an official dissent channel where Foreign Service
164
employees can register opposition without fear of reprisals.
The channel, formed in 1971, has been used to raise policy
objections to the Vietnam War and other conflicts. Several
hundred employees signed the dissent cable objecting to
Trump’s refugee policy.
Secretaries of state have taken the dissent channel so
seriously that they have altered policies in response to
complaints. In 2002, then-Secretary Colin Powell presided
over the awarding of a prize for “constructive dissent” to
an employee who had pushed back against a deputy
secretary.
But State Department employees are nervous enough now
that the American Foreign Service Association on Tuesday
sent out an advisory called “What You Need To Know
When You Disagree With U.S. Policy.” The note spelled
out employees’ legal protections but warned that “walking
out in protest of a U.S. government policy, even just
temporarily, would be considered a strike” and can result
in being fired.
Other agencies that lack that kind of tradition are in more
turmoil. When the White House last week ordered an end
to all advertising and other outreach activities encouraging
Americans to sign up for health plans through Affordable
Care Act marketplaces, employees at the Health and
Human Services Department protested, pointing out that
the ban on ads and robo-calls would probably result in less
coverage of the most desirable customers — young and
healthy adults whose scant use of medical care can help
lower prices for everyone else.
The internal protest, combined with an outcry on social
media and from the insurance industry, prompted the
Trump administration to revise its directive in less than 24
hours.
Leaders of government workers unions and other
associations say their members will do their jobs
professionally and energetically, even if they disagree with
the president’s politics or methods.
“There is no evidence we are seeing of a
widespread federal bureaucracy revolt,”
said Bill Valdez, president of the Senior
Executives Association, a nonprofit that
advocates for career federal managers. He
said many managers are telling workers,
“Don’t get involved in the drama happening
elsewhere.”
The new administration’s talk of swift changes in the role
and scope of some departments has frustrated many
workers, said Randy L. Erwin, president of the National
Federation of Federal Employees, but although
 “federal workers are now extremely
concerned . . . federal workers are used to
seeing the political winds change direction.”
Workers at some agencies say they have seen no sign of
opposition. At the Education Department, which Trump at
one point suggested be dismantled, one official said the
new administration has been surprisingly agreeable: no
major changes in policy, no troubling directives.
“We’ve been, I think, heartened by how
things are going here,” the official said.
But the level of worry is particularly high at places such as
the Environmental Protection Agency. The head of that
agency’s union got an email Tuesday from a local union
leader asking for guidance on what to tell workers to do
“if they receive an illegal order from
management.”
The union representing scientists and other EPA
employees is exploring the formation of a fundraising arm
to “defend federal scientists we anticipate will be
disciplined for speaking out or for defending scientific
facts,” particularly about climate change, said Nicole
Cantello, vice president of Local 704 of the American
Federation of Government Employees, which represents
EPA workers in the Chicago area.
John O’Grady, a career EPA employee who heads a
national council of EPA unions, said Trump’s firing of
acting attorney general Sally Yates on Monday night after
the Obama-era holdover had refused to implement
Trump’s refugees ban
“sends kind of a chilling effect through the
agency. I’m afraid at this point that many
federal employees are just fearful for their
jobs, and they want to keep their heads
down.”
Two Twitter feeds, @altUSEPA and
@ActualEPAFacts, have attracted more
than 200,000 followers and call themselves
part of “the Resistance.” They appear to be
run by outside activists, rather than agency
employees.
Top EPA officials have tried to reassure anxious
employees. In an email to employees, Don Benton — a top
Trump adviser to the EPA — insisted that media reports of
crackdowns on public speech and scientific autonomy
were
“just not accurate. . . . Changes will likely
come, and when they do, we will work
together to implement them.”
165
In any administration, one man’s principled resistance is
another’s outrageous defiance. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.),
Trump’s nominee for attorney general, said in 2015 that it
is the obligation of a federal worker to stand up against
improper orders.
In a confirmation hearing for Yates, Sessions said:
“You have to watch out, because people
will be asking you do to things you just
need to say no about.” Like any CEO, with
a law firm — sometimes the lawyers have
to tell the CEO: ‘Mr. CEO, you can’t do
that. Don’t do that.’”
Presidents appoint the heads of agencies and a few
officials at the top of each department, but the great
majority of those who implement any administration’s
agenda are civil servants who enjoy legal protections
meant to encourage them to blow the whistle on fraud and
corruption.
Short of formal whistleblowing, workers are finding small
ways to express their opposition. At the Justice
Department, some career civil servants asked their bosses
whether they were allowed to protest their new president
by marching or contacting a member of Congress. The
answer was yes, if they did so on their own time and in
their personal capacity.
The day after the November election, the department’s
ethics office said workers could wear clothing that
contained a political message. One lawyer who had worn a
Hillary Clinton T-shirt beneath another layer of clothing
said that once the advice was issued,
“I took the layer off.”
In the past few days, protest accounts have popped up on
social media from employees at several agencies. An
immunologist who formerly worked at the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention created what he called a
“resistance page,”@viralCDC, for CDC employees to post
vaccine and public health information that workers believe
the Trump administration may seek to remove from public
view.
There has been no freeze on communications at the CDC,
said spokeswoman Kathy Harben.
Similarly, a Twitter account protesting Trump’s policies
has popped up in the Defense Department. Using the
handle @Rogue_DoD, a service member has tweeted
everything from Defense Department documents warning
about the effects of climate change to an opinion piece
accusing Trump of insufficient consultation with Defense
Secretary Jim Mattis.
Career staff members in at least five departments said they
are staying in close contact with Obama administration
officials to get advice on how to handle Trump initiatives
they consider illegal or improper.
Former labor secretary Thomas Perez, who also headed the
Justice Department’s civil rights division under Obama,
said he has not been in contact with his former employees
but is working to mobilize grass-roots opposition.
“We’re mindful of our ethical
responsibilities,” said Perez, who is running
for chair of the Democratic National
Committee. “We’re also mindful that we’re
in an existential crisis.”
While many federal workers have begun to consider
avenues of dissent only since the inauguration, others had
been preparing for weeks. In the last days of Obama’s
tenure, several departments catalogued data and reports
and got them into the hands of allies outside the
government.
The use of social media as outlets for worried government
workers has spread through much of the bureaucracy.
After Trump complained about the National Park Service
using Twitter to compare the crowd sizes at his
inauguration with the far larger assembly at Obama’s
gathering in 2009, a gag order temporarily silenced the
official social media account.
In response, an ex-employee at Badlands National Park
who still had access to its Twitter feed started posting facts
.
166
about climate change. The rogue tweeter won more than
60,000 followers before park officials regained control of
the account.
Social media accounts have popped up to defend the
Smithsonian Institution and the National Endowments for
the Arts and the Humanities. Employees at some
Smithsonian units have been reminded that policies
prohibit them from using their work devices to post
political comments.
“We don’t intend to change the way we do
things,” said Smithsonian Secretary David
J. Skorton. “That’s not out of a sense of
defiance, it’s not out of a sense of not
wanting to be accountable, it’s out of a
sense of believing in the mission of the
Smithsonian, which is to do research and
share information with the public.”
Academics have debated for years whether bureaucracies
inevitably grow to a point where they, as political scientist
Michael Nelson of Rhodes College put it, “ineluctably
overpower” their political masters.
“Time and time again,” he wrote, “major
efforts to make administration more
responsive to political control have had the
opposite effect. It is enough to chasten
even the boldest reformer if, like the
sorcerer’s apprentice, his every assault on
his tormentors doubles their strength.”
 Glaring NYT Hypocrisy
By Stephen Lendman
2-2-2017
The self-styled newspaper of record notoriously features
biased reporting and fake news, not the real thing on
virtually all issues mattering most.
It’s one-sided anti-Trumpism is disgraceful, abandoning a
fair and balanced assessment of his campaign rhetoric,
pledges and agenda so far in office.
There’s plenty to criticize if done accurately and
responsibly. There’s also room for praising what he gets
right. He’s only been in office two weeks, his full agenda
yet to unfold.
His executive order suspending entry into America was
deplorable, targeting six Muslim nations, banning entry
from a seventh, Syria, indefinitely on the phony pretext of
preventing domestic terrorist attacks from all seven.
Supplying armored vehicles to anti-Syria terrorists,
masquerading as moderates, is a prescription for continued
war, not resolution.
Failing to denounce US-installed Ukrainian putschists,
waging war on their own people suggests no relief for
beleaguered Donbass residents.
Approving a commando raid on Yakla village, Yemen,
resulting in the massacre of defenseless men, women and
children was indefensible. So is continuing drone war on
the devastated country and elsewhere.
Times criticism of last Sunday’s raid ignored its support
for all US imperial wars, waged on countries threatening
no one, responsible for millions of casualties, a
.
167
catastrophic refugee crisis, and unspeakable human
misery.
Earlier Times reports lacked outrage about devastating
wars waged by the Clintons, Bush/Cheney and Obama -
including genocidal sanctions on Iraq, responsible for the
deaths of 5,000 children under age five monthly.
Only Trump is singled out for criticism. The hypocrisy is
obvious.
A separate Times report blasted his “dark view of Islam.”
In stump speeches and other comments, he referred to its
radicalized elements, wanting Islamic extremists kept out
of America.
Washington has had a “dark view” of Islam for time
immemorial, portraying Muslims irresponsibly as violent,
gun-toting terrorists, especially since the 1990s, notably
post-9/11.
It’s not something new under Trump. Obama bombed
seven Muslim countries, waged imperial wars in multiple
theaters, exceeding the worst of Bush/Cheney.
So far, Trump’s bombing is confined to drone wars,
warranting justifiable criticism, especially if he fails to end
imperial conflicts still raging, an unlikely prospect, making
him a war criminal like his predecessors.
Criticizing him while failing to demand accountability for
high crimes committed by the Clintons, Bush/Cheney and
Obama is glaring hypocrisy - longstanding at The New
York Times.
 Trump Declares War On 9/11 Gatekeeper CNN
By IWB
Published February 2, 2017 · Updated February 3, 2017

CNN. Not only has Trump called the network a source of

“fake news”, the Trump White House has announced it
won’t even send surrogates to appear on CNN. And in
news that was largely missed by the alternative REAL
news media, NIST whistleblower Peter Michael
Ketcham, a fifteen year employee of the government
agency, has come forward to expose NIST’s report on the
collapse of World Trade Center building 7, as a total fraud.
We ask President Trump to respond to Ketcham’s
powerful testimony and launch a REAL investigation into
the events of September 11, 2001.

US President Donald Trump continues to expose

mainstream mockingbird media lies by declaring war on
.

168
169
'WAKE UP & JOIN THE RESISTANCE': Sarah Silverman
Calls For A Military Coup To Overthrow President Trump
 Comedian Sarah Silverman appeared to call for a military coup in a tweet Wednesday night
 'WAKE UP & JOIN THE RESISTANCE. ONCE THE MILITARY IS W US FASCISTS GET
OVERTHROWN. MAD KING & HIS HANDLERS GO BYE BYE,' she wrote
 The tweet was published as protests turned violent in Berkeley, California over a speech planned by
far-eight Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos
 During the primaries, Silverman supported Sen. Bernie Sanders, before backing Sec. Hillary Clinton
against Donald Trump
By Ashley Collman For Dailymail.com
Published: 12:56 EST, 2 February 2017 | Updated: 17:23 EST, 2 February 2017

Millionaire comedian Sarah Silverman appeared to call for

a military coup in a tweet last night, as protests against far-
right Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos turned violent.

'WAKE UP & JOIN THE RESISTANCE.

ONCE THE MILITARY IS W US
FASCISTS GET OVERTHROWN. MAD
KING & HIS HANDLERS GO BYE BYE,'
Silverman wrote.

Later she added:

'We're all gonna die sounds so dire but we

are though (all gonna die).'
Trump supporters and conservatives were quick to tear
Silverman's tweet to shreds, calling for her to be arrested
for treason and even using anti-Semitic rhetoric against the
Jewish stand-up comedian.
Silverman's tweets were published as protests against alt-
right editor Milo Yiannopoulos turned violent at UC
Berkeley
'You are delusional. Military? Lol. You, your
elitist friends, rioters & the convicts are
going to wake a sleeping giant,' one Twitter
user wrote.

Another user called The Socratic Hippie wrote:

'You're fighting for a lost cause, Sarah.

You're practically giving Trump a
second term, with your incendiary
rhetoric.'

The riots that broke out in Berkeley Wednesday night were

in response to a speech Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos
was scheduled to get at UC Berkeley.

Comedian Sarah Silverman seemed to call for a military coup in a

tweet Wednesday night

170
Silverman's tweets were not well received by conservatives During the presidential campaign, funnywoman Silverman
and Trump supporters on Twitter got serious about politics - becoming an outspoken
supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Though she stumped for Sanders on the campaign trail,

Silverman switched allegiances to Sec. Hillary Clinton,
when the former first lady won the party's nomination.

She even elicited boos at the Democratic National

Convention, when she told the 'Bernie or Busters' that they
were 'being ridiculous'.

Yiannopoulos, a 32-year-old right-wing provocateur, is a Protests in Berkeley, California against far-right editor Milo
vocal supporter of Trump and a self-proclaimed internet Yiannopoulos turned violent
troll whose comments have been criticized as racist,
misogynist, anti-Muslim and white supremacist. He was
banned from Twitter after leading a harassment campaign
against 'Ghostbusters' actress Leslie Jones.

His visit to Berkeley was sponsored by the campus

Republican club. The university has stressed it did not
invite him and does not endorse his ideas but is committed
to free speech.

But when protesters started smashing store windows in

their march through town, the university called the speech
off.
Several local businesses were damaged in the mayhem Wednesday
This morning, President Trump responded to the protests night in Berkeley
by threatening to cut the school's federal funding. That
would be a major blow to the nation's education system,
since Berkeley is the nation's top-ranked public university.
171
 Madsen - Trump 'Fascism Forever'
SCOTUS Pick - Rehnquist 2.0?
By Wayne Madsen
2-2-2017
President Trump further leads the United States into the
depths of fascism in his selection of Neil Gorsuch as the
replacement for the late Antonin Scalia on the U.S.
Supreme Court. In the early 1980s, while attending the
elite Jesuit-run male-only Georgetown Preparatory school
in Washington, DC, Gorsuch founded the "Fascism
Forever Club." Gorsuch served as president of the club
until his graduation in 1985. At the time he was attending
the prep school, Gorsuch's mother, Anne Gorsuch, served
as the administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency under Ronald Reagan.
Gorsuch entry in the 1985 Georgetown Prep School
yearbook
Anne Gorsuch was a harbinger for the anti-environmental
Scott Pruitt, Trump's pick to head the EPA. As EPA
administrator, Gorsuch attempted to quash the Clean Air
Act while she smoked two packs of Marlboros a day. She
died from cancer in 2004. Although the type of cancer was
never disclosed, Gorsuch died at the Aurora Medical
Center in Aurora, Colorado, which has top ratings for lung
cancer treatment.
The Fascism Forever Club was billed as an anti-faculty
group opposed to what it considered were "left-wing"
faculty members.
Gorsuch's 1988 Columbia graduation yearbook, in which Gorsuch
extols Kissinger's infamous quote about the illegal and the
unconstitutional
In his graduation yearbook at Columbia University in
1988, Gorsuch's photograph is shown alongside his
favorite quote, one made by Henry Kissinger on August
29, 1967:
"The illegal we do immediately, the
unconstitutional takes a little longer."
Kissinger made the statement while a
172
professor at Harvard, where Neil Gorsuch
would eventually attend law school.
Gorsuch's early flirtation with fascism complements other
fascist tendencies by the Trump administration, including
its disregard for the Constitution and Bill of Rights. On
February 2, Trump attended the annual National Prayer
Breakfast in Washington, DC, which is sponsored by the
secretive Fellowship Foundation led for decades by the 88-
year old Douglas Coe. The foundation traces its origins to
a Seattle Methodist minister named Abraham Vereide,
who advanced anti-labor fascist politics in the post-World
War I years. Vereide's anti-union and pro-business prayer
breakfast group, a cover for fascist policy-making, soon
went nationwide.
In 1989, Coe, who Hillary Clinton once called her
"spiritual mentor," said,
"Hitler, Goebbels and Himmler were three
men. Think of the immense power these
three men had... But they bound
themselves together in an agreement . . .
Jesus said, 'You have to put me before
other people. And you have to put me
before yourself.' Hitler, that was the
demand to be in the Nazi party. You have
to put the Nazi party and its objectives
ahead of your own life and ahead of other
people."
On the day "Punxsutawney Phil," the Pennsylvania
groundhog, predicted six more weeks of winter, Trump sat
with hundreds of creepy right-wing followers of Coe in the
ballroom of the Washington Hilton Hotel. They include
senators, U.S. representatives, ambassadors, corporate
executives, and leaders of foreign nations.
Trump's nomination of Gorsuch is reminiscent of President
Nixon's nomination of William Rehnquist to the Supreme
Court in 1972. Two years earlier, Nixon ordered the White
House guards to wear ornamental Prussian military-style
hats, something befitting Nixon's "imperial presidency,"
which ultimately led to his resignation over the Watergate
scandal. The Prussian hats did not last very long amid
ridicule by the press and late-night TV comedians.
Nixon's nomination of Rehnquist shocked many when it
was discovered that as a young lawyer in Arizona,
Rehnquist held views similar to those of the far-right John
Birch Society: Chief Justice Earl Warren and President
Dwight Eisenhower were "pinko" leftists, while Associate
Justices William O. Douglas and Hugo Black were
outright "commies." In the late 1950s, Rehnquist was
opposed to desegregation and lamented the fact that whites
and "negroes" might have to "glower at one another" over
integrated lunch counters. For all Rehnquist's far right-
wing views, Nixon did not like Rehnquist when he first
met him in the White House. The future Chief Justice was
a bureaucratic flunky in the Justice Department's Office of
.
173
Legal Counsel at the time. Nixon asked his counsel John
Dean about Rehnquist, "Is he Jewish? He looks it." Dean
replied that he was of Scandinavian descent.
Rehnquist's far-right background did not prevent him from
being confirmed by the Senate as both Associate Justice
and, later, as Chief Justice. And, although Gorsuch
admired fascism and Kissinger in his earlier years, that did
not prevent the Senate from confirming him unanimously
on a voice vote as a federal appeals court judge in July
2006.
 Democrats Fuming
Over Gorsuch Backed Him In 2006
By Cody Derespina
Published February 02, 2017

Debbie Stabenow, Maria Cantwell and Bob

Menendez).

In 2006, Leahy was – as he is now – the ranking member

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch easily won the
support of top Democratic senators for a lifetime
appointment to the bench ... in 2006.
What a difference a decade makes.
Several of the same senators who helped unanimously
confirm Gorsuch to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in
July 2006 are now railing against his nomination by
President Trump to the highest court in the land.
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the group tasked with
questioning Gorsuch prior to a full chamber vote. But
Leahy was not present during the session with Gorsuch at
the time. Indeed, the only senator to question him directly
was Republican Lindsey Graham, during testimony that
lasted just 20 minutes, according to official congressional
documents and The Denver Post.
Leahy did, however, submit six written questions, ranging
from queries on assisted suicide to consumer class-action
lawsuits and congressional powers.
Wyden, D-Ore., was the only other member of the
committee to submit questions, asking Gorsuch mainly
about the legality of a physician aiding a patient in dying
and Oregon’s assisted suicide law. Gorsuch wrote about
those topics in his 2006 book “The Future Of Assisted
Suicide and Euthanasia.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said

Though Wyden ended up voting for Gorsuch after
Wednesday he has "serious doubts" about Gorsuch. Sen.
receiving the judge’s answers, Wyden cited that Oregon
Ron Wyden, D-Ore., issued a scathing statement citing
law Tuesday as one of the reasons he would now oppose
Gorsuch's stance on assisted suicide, and saying nobody
Gorsuch being elevated to the high court.
who believes individual rights are "reserved to the people"
can support his nomination.

But if they have long harbored concerns Gorsuch is

extreme, they didn't much show it in 2006.

Schumer, Wyden and many others were in Congress at the

time of the unanimous voice vote on July 20 of that year.
The record does not reflect who specifically was on the
floor for the 95-0 tally, but it would have included most, if
not all, of the following Senate members that year:
Four former top Obama administration
officials (President Barack Obama, Vice
President Joe Biden and Secretaries of
State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry) and
12 current Democratic senators (Sens.
Schumer, Wyden, Dianne Feinstein,
Patrick Leahy, Patty Murray, Dick Durbin,
Jack Reed, Bill Nelson, Tom Carper,
“His opposition to legal death with dignity
as successfully practiced in Oregon is
couched in the sort of jurisprudence that
justified the horrific oppression of one
group after another in our first two
centuries,” Wyden said in a statement. “No
senator who believes that individual rights
are reserved to the people, and not the
government, can support this nomination.”

174
Schumer also has been a leading voice of the Gorsuch
opposition.
“Judge Gorsuch has repeatedly sided with
corporations over working people,
demonstrated a hostility toward women’s
rights, and most troubling, hewed to an
ideological approach to jurisprudence that
makes me skeptical that he can be a
.
175
strong, independent Justice on the Court,”
Schumer said in a statement.
The change in tone today could reflect the overall hostility
right now among Democratic lawmakers to numerous
Trump appointees, as well as specific concerns about
Gorsuch's judicial body of work since his confirmation to
the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Some of the senators now voicing skepticism also may still
be smarting over majority Republicans blocking then-
President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee
Merrick Garland last year. Leahy nodded at Garland in his
statement on Gorsuch, saying:
“From my initial review of his record, I
question whether Judge Gorsuch meets
the high standard set by Merrick Garland.”
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer on Wednesday
noted the dozen sitting Democrats who once backed
Trump's nominee.
“He’s a widely respected jurist who
deserves the nomination to be voted upon,”
Spicer said.
 US Eases Sanctions Against Russia
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 12:13 PM
Just moments ago, when reporting on the latest Putin
comment involving the recent flaring up of violence in
Eastern Ukraine, we said that "the biggest question
remains unanswered:
what side of the Ukraine-Russian
conflict will the new US State
Department under Rex Tillerson side
with, and will Trump slam the alleged
Russian violence as his predecessor
was so quick to do on virtually every
single occasion."
We may have just gotten the answer, because moments
ago the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets
Control, under Rex Tillerson, posted a Russia-related
general license notice on its website, according to which
US authorities eased sanctions against Russia’s Federal
Security Service - the successor agency to the USSR's
KGB - pertaining to licenses and permits for information
technology products in Russia.
According to the license,
"all transactions and activities" with
participation of the Russian Federal
Security Service, prohibited earlier by
executive orders of the US President,
are authorized with certain exceptions.
.
176
Also related to “transactions necessary and
ordinarily incident to comply with rules and
regulations administered by, and certain
actions or investigations involving, the
FSB,” according to Treasury website.
Cited by Tass, Russian Presidential spokesman Dmitry
Peskov has declined to make a statement on the United
States’ decision.
"First we need to understand what it is all
about," Peskov said. "If we turn to the
rocket engines matter, we will see that our
US counterparts never impose sanctions
that could damage their own interests."
While this initial de-escalation of sanctions against Russia
may or may not give John McCain an aneurysm, it will
certainly lead to a vocal outcries by Democrats and the
media against Rex Tillerson - whose proximity to Putin is
well-known - and of course, president Trump, accusing
them of immediately going soft on Russia, and leading to
even further sanctions elimination between the US and
Russia, thus alienating Europe, whose relations with
Moscow remain as icy as anything observed under the
Obama administration.
The full Treasury general license notice is on next page.
177
178
 Trump Threatens To Pull U.C. Berkeley Funds After
Violent Protesters Cancel Yiannopoulos Speech
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 2:33 PM

In the latest crackdown by less than tolerant liberals "We shut down the event. It was great.
against free speech, on Wednesday night hundreds of Mission accomplished," a protester told
protesters at University of California in Berkeley smashed CNN.
windows, set fires and clashed with police as they forced a
controversial "alt-right" speaker to cancel his appearance
at the liberal-leaning institution.

Two hours before Breitbart News editor Milo

Yiannopoulos was to give a speech at the student union,
protesters tossed metal barricades and rocks through the
building's windows and set a light generator on fire near
the entrance, footage from news outlets showed.

Some 150 "masked agitators" were responsible for the

violence during the otherwise largely peaceful protest of
about 1,500 people, the university said in a statement,
noting that the school "is proud of its history and legacy as
home of the Free Speech Movement" in the 1960s. Many
have expressed curiosity if the masked agitators are the
same ones who tried to provoke violence during Trump's
inauguration and if they are funded by certain financially
endowed "liberal" organizations linked to George Soros.

Donald Trump's chief strategist, Steve Bannon, previously

headed Breitbart News and CNN reported that many of the
protesters voiced opposition to the Republican president.

Police ordered protesters to disperse as the school put the

campus on lockdown. Protesters also tossed bricks and
fireworks at police in riot gear who fired rubber pellets
back at the crowd, according to SFGate.com, a news outlet
in San Francisco.

One protester at Berkeley held a sign that said "No Safe

Space for Racists" while other protesters danced to hip hop
179
music, footage from a Facebook Live feed showed.
Protesters later marched along streets near the campus
where some smashed storefront windows and car
windshields while clashing with police, the feed showed.
Yiannopoulos, whose account on Twitter was suspended
last year after he was accused of participating in the online
harassment of an African-American actress, criticized
"the Left", saying in a statement it was
"absolutely terrified of free speech and will
do literally anything to shut it down."
He also said on Fox News that he was evacuated by police
after protesters began throwing rocks and other objects at
the building.
"Obviously it’s a liberal campus so they
hate any libertarians or conservatives who
dare to express an opinion on their
.
180
campuses," he said. "They particularly
don’t like me."
On Thursday morning, in a barrage of tweets that touched
on topics as far ranging as Rex Tillerson, to the death of
Navy SEAL Ryan Owens to the Iran ballistic missile test,
Trump also lashed out at UC Berkley, and hinted that the
university which "does not allow free speech and practices
violence on innocent people with a different point of view"
may see its federal funding yanked.
Fox & Friends ran a segment on the protests just before
Trump's tweet, including Milo's comments last night to
Tucker Carlson. It appears that Trump may have been
inspired by this particular segment.
It was not immediately clear if any algos were confused by
the Trump tweet and interpreted it as referring to interest
rates or the Fed's hiking plans.
 Michael Savage Cautions Trump About Inner Circle
'Godfather Of Trumpmania' Says 'Too Much, Too Soon'
February 2, 2017
Michael Savage
He’s been dubbed “the Godfather of Trumpmania,” but
Michael Savage noted on his nationally syndicated radio
show Thursday that he also promised he would hold
Donald Trump accountable if the real estate billionaire
became president.
Savage said he’s concerned that Trump’s inner circle is
causing him to move too fast, leading to costly mistakes,
such as the raid on al-Qaida in Yemen, initially planned
under Obama, that resulted in the deaths of a Navy SEAL
and civilians.
He expressed particular concern about Kellyanne Conway,
Trump’s chief counselor and his former campaign
manager, describing her as an “unknown pollster” who
“came along late in the campaign and, by the way,
attacked Trump for a year straight.”
“I think Trump is in danger unless he wakes
up to the fact that those around him may
not be acting, let us say, in his best
interest,” Savage said.
Savage said Trump is “moving much too fast and on the
wrong issues.”
“He should have started with something
less controversial than he did, and he
should have gone a little slower,” said
Savage.
Savage’s message of borders, language and culture was a
fixture in the campaign, and Trump was a frequent guest
on Savage’s show. Savage has described his latest book,
“Scorched Earth: Restoring the Country After
Obama,” as “an architectural plan for Trump.”
181
Savage said he doesn’t have a problem with the fact that
Conway endorsed Ted Cruz in the Republican presidential
primaries. But she chaired a pro-Cruz political action
committee that ran advertisements critical of Trump and
made many statements on cable news shows.
On Feb. 10, for example, said Savage, she stated that
Trump “actually built a lot of his business on the backs of
the little guy,” has a history of “not paying contractors”
and “the little guys have suffered” because of him.
She also condemned Trump for “hurl[ing] personal
insults” and using “vulgar” language.
“The things that she said about Trump
during the campaign are now being used
against him by Trump’s worst enemies,”
Savage said.
Conway previously worked for Congressman Jack Kemp,
Sen. Fred Thompson, former Vice President Dan Quayle,
Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Mike Pence, who
now is Trump’s vice president. She founded The Polling
Company, which consults on Consumer Trends, in 1995
and has worked for political opinion research firms.
When Trump announced her appointment as counselor in
December he called her “a trusted adviser and strategist
who played a crucial role in my victory.”
Trump called her out at an inauguration-eve event to praise
her.
“There is no den she will not go into,”
Trump said. “When my men are petrified to
go on a certain network I say, ‘Kellyanne
will you go?’ Then she gets on and she just
destroys them. So anyway, thank you,
baby. Thank you. Thank you. Be careful.”
Savage, who was inducted into the National Radio Hall of
Fame last year, signed a new multiyear contract with
Westwood One in August.
“The Savage Nation” is syndicated across the U.S. by
Cumulus Media in more than 200 markets.
Savage is the author of more than 30 books, including New
York Times best-sellers. In 2007, he earned the coveted
“Freedom of Speech Award” from Talkers Magazine,
where he is consistently listed as one of the top talk shows
in the nation.
182
He holds a master’s degree in medical botany and a second
in medical anthropology. He earned a Ph.D. from the
University of California at Berkeley in epidemiology and
nutrition sciences.
 Google Cozies To Trump But Calls For His Impeachment
It Publicly Cozies Up To Trump While Privately
Calling For His Impeachment
By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times –
Thursday, February 2, 2017
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
Google, or rather its parent company Alphabet, got used to
dominating Washington under President Barack Obama’s
rule. Perhaps, that’s why they’d like to see President
Donald Trump impeached.
“Some of us may need to adopt Pence 2017 bumper
stickers,” Google’s cofounder Sergey Brin joked at a
company sponsored anti-Trump protest — the biggest
demonstration from a Silicon Valley corporation this week
— in response to Mr. Trump’s controversial immigration
executive order.
More than 2,000 Google employees attended the protest on
Monday, with it becoming a trending topic on Twitter with
the hashtag #GooglersUnite. The rally came 24 hours after
Google donated $2 million to the ACLU and Immigrant
Legal Resource Center, to help fight Mr. Trump’s
executive order, which was matched by $2 million in
donations from Google employees.
The week prior, Google lawyers flooded the California
office of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, demanding she oppose
Sen. Jeff Sessions’ confirmation as attorney general.
After investing millions ingraining itself within the Obama
White House, Google is suddenly on the outside looking in
with the Trump administration — and it clearly has Google
rattled — protesting Mr. Trump in private, and then
publicly trying to cozy up with him the next.
Eric Schmidt, Google’s former CEO and chair of
Alphabet, has traveled to Trump Tower a least twice to
meet with the president and his team, but hasn’t made any
real progress.
Maybe that’s because last week — before Mr. Trump
signed his immigration order — Mr. Schmidt told Google
employees that the Trump administration is
“going to do these evil things as they’ve
done in the immigration area and perhaps
some others.”
Google’s corporate mantra is “don’t be evil.”
183
And yet, like any firm, Google needs to make money, and
it’s benefited from peddling soft influence in the nation’s
capital. Now that a new sheriff is in town, Google needs to
at least pretend to play nice — or all be lost.
Alphabet cut ties with the Podesta Group, the Democratic-
leaning lobbying arm run by John Podesta, the brother of
Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, Bloomberg News
reported. It’s also sponsored GOP outreach parties in
Washington, working with the conservative The
Independent Journal Review to connect with conservative
lawmakers, The New York Times detailed.
In a lengthy Forbes profile on Mr. Trump’s son-in-law
Jared Kushnar, Mr. Schmidt lavished on the praise, saying
Mr. Kushnar was
“the biggest surprise of the 2016 election,”
and that “best I can tell, he actually ran the
campaign and did it with essentially no
resources.”
But, coming from a man who Mrs. Clinton has described
as her “longtime friend,” who helped design her
campaign’s voter targeting software, and from a company
that was accused of rigging its search results to favor Mrs.
Clinton throughout the 2016 contest, all of that may be too
much for the Trump team.
Google has denied it ever manipulated its
“autocomplete” function to steer users
toward a search for “Hillary Clinton crime
reform” when searching “Hillary Clinton
crimes,” and “Hillary Clinton India” instead
of “Hillary Clinton indictment.”
Still, there’s no doubt, Google’s culture — and profits —
were deeply rooted within the Obama administration, and
would continue under Mrs. Clinton.
When Mr. Obama looked to open Cuba, Google was there
offering to expand internet access. It also jumped into save
the blundering healthcare.gov website, and capitalized on
providing its fiber into low-income urban neighborhoods.
When Google was the target of a Federal Trade
Commission investigation for anti-competitive practices,
the government closed the case without any charges —
although similar ones have been made overseas and are
ongoing.
Megan Smith, a former Google vice president, was Mr.
Obama’s chief technology officer, with the Campaign for
Accountability, a nonprofit watchdog organization,
identifying 258 more instances of so-called revolving door
activity between Google and the Washington
establishment. Johanna Shelton, Google’s director of
public policy, visited Obama’s White House more than any
other corporate lobbyist, the watchdog found.
Before Mr. Obama took office, Google spent almost no
money trying to peddle political influence, now it’s a
behemoth. It spent more than $15 million in lobbying in
2016, according to the Center for Responsive Politics,
compared with $2.8 million in 2008. During Mr. Obama’s
2012 reelection campaign, Google employees were the
.
184
second-largest source of donations by any single U.S.
company, with Microsoft being number one.
At the Federal Communications Commission, Google
seemed to have free reign. It’s currently looking to get into
the cable set-top box business, as well as get spectrum —
that was reserved for broadcast companies — to offer Wi-
Fi services.
“It seems that whatever Google wants,
Google gets from [the FCC],” a broadcast
industry lobbyist told TV Newscheck last
year. Another one added: “What’s
frustrating is this gut reaction among
regulators that if Google says something,
it’s good, but if a traditional media company
says something, it’s questionable.”
Well, all of that may be ending.
 Media Launches "Full Frontal"
Cover Attack On Trump Administration
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 5:55 PM
Notice a theme here?
Bloomberg BusinessWeek
-(Insert hastily drafted, legally dubious, economically destabilizing executive order here

185
TIME - Steve Bannon, The Great Manipulator

186
 The Economist - An insurgent in the White House
Just lucky that America voted for this man
through the constitutionally-defined
electoral process and that a majority of
Americans agree with his executive orders.
Perhaps these magazines above should follow Reuters
lead:
187
 Cover what matters in people’s lives and provide
them the facts they need to make better decisions.
 Get out into the country and learn more about how
people live, what they think, what helps and hurts
them, and how the government and its actions
appear to them, not to us.
 Democrats Plot Protests At Trump's Speech To Congress;
Will "Refuse To Shake Hands"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 11:36 AM

The sore losers of the Left, after refusing to attend Trump's
inauguration, have apparently decided to double down on
their childish behavior by plotting a number of protests at
Trump's upcoming address to Congress. According to The
Hill, House Democrats are rallying behind a plan to make
the newly-elected President's first address to Congress as
uncomfortable as possible by inviting guests they say will
be harmed by his policies, including ethnic minorities,
LGBT people, undocumented immigrants and the
disabled.
“It is our hope that their presence in the
House Gallery will remind President
Trump that he is not the arbiter of
patriotism,” reads the letter. “This
country belongs to all of us, and his
rhetoric of intolerance will not stand.”
“We want to send a strong message to the
[president] that he cannot push these
communities aside, and he cannot change
the fabric of this country,” they wrote.
"Instead of celebrating the very diversity
that makes our country a beacon of
inclusion and equality, he has chosen to
vilify, bully and alienate women,
immigrants, people of color, people with
disabilities, and people of differing
faiths,” the Democrats wrote in their letter.
“His rhetoric emboldens those who seek a
scapegoat for the challenges this country
faces.”
Amazing that Trump was able to launch a full assault on
such an overwhelming percentage of the population yet
still win a national election.
chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus; Judy Chu
(Calif.), head of the Congressional Asian Pacific American
Caucus; and David Cicilline (R.I.) and Jared Polis (Colo.),
the co-chairman of the LGBT Equality Caucus.
Unfortunately, the childish behavior doesn't end there as
other Representatives are encouraging Democrats to avoid
shaking hands with Trump as he walks down the aisle to
take the podium.
Some liberals are also eyeing another form of protest
during the speech: When Trump walks down the center
aisle of the House chamber on the way to the dais, they’re
hoping no Democrats scramble to get in the picture for the
traditional handshake.
“We have to have a higher standard,”
Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) said.
“For sure I will not be nearby,” Rep.
Filemon Vela (D-Texas) echoed.
Of course, the sore losers of the left argue that their
protests are justified because Trump’s campaign rhetoric
has been combative from the very start, and he’s brought
that approach with him to the White House.
That said, we wonder whether those
same sore losers would admit that
Obama telling Republicans they would
have to "sit in the back of the bus" was
also "combative?" Also, who was it that
said, "elections have consequences and
I won?"

The protests were organized by a group of liberal

representatives who drafted a letter urging other House
members to invite defiant guests to the speech scheduled
for February 28th. The authors of the letter include Reps.
Jim Langevin (R.I.), who was shot accidentally as a teen
and became the first quadriplegic to serve in Congress;
Michelle Lujan Grisham (N.M.), head of the
Congressional Hispanic Caucus; Cedric Richmond (La.),
.

188
 Here Is The "Open Letter" Google, Apple, Facebook And
Others Are Sending To Donald Trump
By Tyler Durden
Feb 2, 2017 9:28 AM
In the backlash over Trump's executive order on
immigration, Alphabet, Apple, Facebook, Uber, Stripe,
CPG and various manufacturing companies have penned a
letter opposing U.S. President Trump’s travel ban, ReCode
reported overnight.
The letter stresses that the executive order's blanket
"suspension" - it avoids the word "ban" - is "not the right
approach" to strengthening national security. The letter
also argues in favor of supporting the DACA program. The
goal is to publish the open letter this week, said one of the
people, who asked not to be identified because the
discussions are private. Changes are still being made to the
document, and it’s possible it may not be released.
"We share your goal of ensuring that our
immigration system meets today’s security
needs and keeps our country safe," said a
draft of the letter.
"We are concerned, however, that your
recent Executive Order will affect many
visa holders who work hard here in the
United States and contribute to our
country’s success.”
The draft, noted by Bloomberg, also states that "our
nation’s compassion is part of what makes it exceptional,"
and continues by offering to help the administration come
up with ways to set up thorough screening while avoiding
a complete suspension to U.S. refugee programs. The
companies also offer aid in resolving the status of the
750,000 so-called "Dreamers," undocumented immigrants
brought to the U.S. as children and governed by the
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The
program, created by former President Barack Obama in
2012, has allowed more than 700,000 people to obtain
renewable two-year work permits.
The companies note that they hire
"both thousands of Americans and some of
the most talented people from abroad, who
work together to help our companies
succeed and expand our overall
employment."
189
The letter ends by asking President Trump to use the
companies as
"a resource to help achieve immigration
policies that both support the work of
American businesses and reflect American
values."
The full draft of the letter is below, courtesy of ReCode:
Dear President Trump,
Since the country’s birth, America has been the land of
opportunity — welcoming newcomers and giving them the
chance to build families, careers and businesses in the United
States. We are a nation made stronger by immigrants. As
entrepreneurs and business leaders, our ability to grow our
companies and create jobs depends on the contributions of
immigrants from all backgrounds.
We share your goal of ensuring that our immigration system
meets today’s security needs and keeps our country safe. We
are concerned, however, that your recent executive order will
affect many visa holders who work hard here in the United
States and contribute to our country’s success. In a global
economy, it is critical that we continue to attract the best and
brightest from around the world. We welcome the changes
your administration has made in recent days in how the
Department of Homeland Security will implement the
executive order, and we stand ready to help your
administration identify other opportunities to ensure that our
employees can travel with predictability and without undue
delay.
Our nation’s compassion is a part of what makes it
exceptional, and we are committed to helping your
administration identify approaches for thorough
screening without a blanket suspension of admissions
under the U.S. Refugee Admissions program.
While security and vetting procedures can and should always
be subject to continuous evaluation and improvement, a
blanket suspension is not the right approach.
Similarly, we stand ready to identify ways of helping to
achieve your stated goal of bringing clarity to the future of the
750,000 Dreamers in this country under the protections of the
 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program in a
way “that will make people happy and proud.” Removing
these protections by barring renewals would effectively end
the program and eliminate the ability for these Dreamers to
work and live without the fear of deportation.
The business community shares your commitment to growing
the American economy and expanding job creation across the
country. We hire both thousands of Americans and some of
the most talented people from abroad, who work together to
190
help our companies succeed and expand our overall
employment. As you contemplate changes to the nation’s
complex and interconnected immigration policies, whether
business and employment-based visas, refugees or DACA,
we hope that you will use us as a resource to help achieve
immigration policies that both support the work of American
businesses and reflect American values.
At least this draft contained no reference to any proposed H1-
B visa changes by the Trump administration.
 Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz

Contact President Trump,

Urge An Executive Order Stripping Sanctuary Berkley Of Federal Funds,
Bring Federal Charges Of Hate Crimes Against Leftist-Fascists Who
Pepper Sprayed And Beat Up Unconscious Republican Students And Who
Committed Arson, Vandalism And Rioting
Dr. Orly Taitz
February 2, 2017

FIRE OVER MILO AT BERKELEY...

PROTESTERS MOUNT ASSAULT...

Rampaging Students Destroying Campus...

191
 Trump: 'Nothing Off The Table' On Iran
© AFP 2016/ Brendan Smialowski - US
21:35 02.02.2017(Updated 02:57 03.02.2017)

between Iran and the US, China, France,

the UK, Russia, and Germany.

US President Donald Trump declared in

response to Iran's recent ballistic
missile test that no option including the
military is "off the table."

Trump was asked by reporters Thursday what he might do

after recent Iranian missile tests and the sea-strike
by Houthi rebels against a Saudi ship in the Red Sea.
While Flynn did not specify what exactly was entailed
by the warning to "put Iran on notice," Trump confirmed
Thursday that anything is possible.
"Nothing is off the table," the President said
when pressed on whether a military option
hasn't been considered.
Retired Gen. Flynn called out Iran for its "destabilizing
behavior" and said that Trump has "severely criticized" the
Obama's nuclear arms deal with Tehran. The National
Security adviser hinted that "Iran is now feeling
emboldened" due to "weak and ineffective" negotiations
with Iran. Trump is contemplating "a whole range
of options," including harsher economic sanctions, an
administration official said.
German newspaper, Die Welt, wrote on Thursday that Iran
tested another cruise missile, the "Sumar," in addition to a
medium-range cruise missile tested on Sunday. Die Welt
received the details from undisclosed Germany
intelligence operatives. A US official has confirmed that
Sunday's missile launch traveled some 630 miles
before exploding. Iranian defense officials said the test was
a success.
Tehran does not need a license from "any
country to defend itself," Velayati said. "The
American government will understand that
threatening Iran is useless," he noted.

A top Ayatollah aide slammed the
“inexperienced” US President over
“useless” threats issued by National
Security Adviser Michael Flynn
on Wednesday. Flynn made a highly
unusual appearance at the White House
media briefing to "put the Iran on notice."
“This is not the first time an inexperienced
person has threatened Iran,” said Ali Akbar
Velayati, senior adviser to Grand Ayatollah
Sayyed Ali Khamenei. Tehran has
continued testing nuclear-capable missiles
despite the nuclear arms deal signed
On January 20, the White House updated its website
to indicate that a "state-of-the-art" missile defense system
for adversaries Iran and North Korea would be a top
priority for the Trump administration.
As part of Trump's promise to put "America
first," the US will "pursue the highest level
of military readiness," the White House
said. America will need "every asset at its
disposal" to fulfill Trump's vow that "We
cannot allow other nations to surpass our
military capability."

192
 Billionaire Financier Soros
Continues To Fund Anti-Trump Protests
© Flickr/ Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung - US
22:04 02.02.2017(Updated 04:20 03.02.2017)
Despite media representing protests
against US President Donald Trump as
grassroots spontaneous uprisings,
there is actually a significant amount of
money being spent on special interest
groups to keep the disruptions
happening.
As we previously reported, billionaire financier George
Soros has provided funding to at least 56 of the “partner”
organizations, including National Resource Defense
Council and Planned Parenthood, on the Women’s March
on DC. MoveOn.org has also been consistently organizing
and calling for protests, and shocker, is also financed
by Soros.While protesters themselves may not always be
“paid” in any monetary way, the organizations often
provide them with legal aid, housing, food, or other
comforts to encourage protest or other activities that fit
their agenda.
“There’s kind of a tradition of paid
protesters. That’s not a job per say,
but special interest groups have funds, they
are somewhat quite organized. They will
pay people to protest in support of an
issue. They provide attorneys, they provide
places for them to stay, they rent houses,
they provide medics for them,” David
Carter, professor of the School of Criminal
Justice and director of the Intelligence
program at Michigan State University,
.
193
as well as a former Kansas City, Missouri,
police officer, recently told Sputnik News.
The source of funding for this unrest is important to note,
as organizations affiliated with the billionaire have been
deeply connected to color revolutions and political
uprisings across the globe, including Arab Spring. This
point has led many to question what his end goal is for the
US, where heavily-funded protests are raging on over a
fair and free election.
“Soros is effectively the puppet-master
pulling most of the strings in Kiev. Soros
Foundation’s Ukraine branch, International
Renaissance Foundation (IRF), has been
involved in Ukraine since 1989. His IRF
doled out more than $100 million
to Ukrainian NGOs two years before the fall
of the Soviet Union, creating the
preconditions for Ukraine’s independence
from Russia in 1991. Soros also admitted
to financing the 2013-2014 Maidan Square
protests that brought the current
government into power,” a report in the
New Eastern Outlook journal explained
in 2015.
These “democracy-building” projects have been used,
much like the Clinton Foundation in Haiti, to line Soros’
own pockets.
“Make no mistake that the events you’re
seeing transpire nationwide are being
orchestrated in part by a billionaire political
elite class that is looking to subvert the will
of the American people by attempting
to foment a new American revolution.
Soros’ formula has been duplicated
in numerous nations, and it looks as if he
now has the US in his sights as the next
target,” the Free Thought Project wrote
of Soros meddling in November 2016.
 Artists Around The World Respond
To Donald Trump Becoming USA’s President
Creative Minds Are Illustrating What Many Are Feeling As They
Contemplate A Donald Trump Presidency

The dust of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election is just
beginning to settle, and as it does, artists around the world
are illustrating what many are feeling as they contemplate
a Donald Trump presidency. The business tycoon’s
policies apparently won over a large percent of the United
States, but there are many around the world who are not
looking forward to witnessing what results from his
leadership, due to the many brash, bigoted, and ruthless
statements he’s made in the past.
Regardless of your thoughts on America’s President, the
unique and artistic ways people are depicting on Donald
Trump’s successful campaign are not to be missed.
Following are 40+ caricatures created by artists around
the world, who have more to ‘say’ about his status of
President than can be put into words:

194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
 John McCain Urges President Trump To Escalate Conflict
In Ukraine, By Sending Lethal Weapons
To Neo-Nazi Forces
Alex Christoforou
February 3, 2017

Syria, and Iraq, all he has to do is look

in a mirror.
McCain and his warmongering collection of
neocons are the problem. The sooner
McCain leaves the Senate, the better off
the US will be and the safer the world
will be.
McCain is personally responsible for much
of the mess in Ukraine. He has blood on
Senator John McCain is calling on President Trump to send lethal
aid to Ukraine.
his hands.
By the way, is there any doubt McCain
Let’s not forget that Senator John McCain was on the preferred Hillary over Trump?
ground in Kiev, rubbing shoulders with neo-nazi elements
overthrowing a democratically elected government in
Ukraine in 2014.

Can you imagine a Russian member of parliament roaming

the streets of a Black Lives Matter protest, holding private
meetings with anti-government elements in an effort to
overthrow the US government.

Here is John McCain with his neo-nazi friends, speaking to

the Maidan crowds, openly calling for the violent
overthrow of the democratically elected government…

Via MishTalk…

This bit of asininity just came in from

McCain: Send Weapons to Ukraine.
McCain also repeated idiotic comments on
Russian interference in the US election.
If McCain wants to understand the
source of the mess in Ukraine, Libya,

231

Via The Hill…
“In the first of what will be many tests for
your new administration, Russia and its
proxy forces launched attacks against
Ukrainian forces this week, killing at least
seven Ukrainian soldiers and wounding
dozens more,” McCain wrote in a letter to
Trump released Thursday.
“That this surge of attacks began the day
after he talked with you by phone is a clear
indication that [Russian President] Vladimir
Putin is moving quickly to test you as
commander-in-chief. America’s response
will have lasting consequences.”
Trump has expressed hope at improving relations with
Russia and on Saturday spoke with Putin for the first time
since Inauguration Day in what was described by the
White House as a “positive call” that “was a significant
start to improving the relationship.”
The call included discussion of “the main aspects of the
Ukrainian crisis,” according to the Kremlin statement
about the call, though the White House statement did not
mention Ukraine.
On Sunday, violence flared in the Avdiivka-Yasynuvata
area and was described by some as the worst escalation
.
232
since the conflict in eastern Ukraine began in 2014. Russia
has denied backing the separatists, but Western officials
have said otherwise.
The Russian Foreign Ministry has blamed Ukrainian
troops for the latest violence.
Under the annual defense policy bill, the U.S. president
already has the authority to send lethal aid to Ukraine such
as weapons and ammunition. Former President Barack
Obama opted not to use the authority, instead sending non-
lethal aid, such as economic assistance.
But McCain, a staunch Russia hawk, urged Trump to use
the authority given to him by Congress.
“Vladimir Putin’s violent campaign to
destabilize and dismember the sovereign
nation of Ukraine will not stop unless and
until he meets a strong and determined
response,” wrote McCain, chairman of the
Senate Armed Services Committee.
McCain also reiterated his call for Trump to maintain
sanctions on Russia and impose new ones for Russia’s
interference in the U.S. election.
Failing to provide more help to Ukraine, McCain said,
risks the country’s sovereignty and American credibility.
“Ukrainians are not asking Americans to do
their fighting,” McCain said. “Nearly 10,000
Ukrainians have died to protect their
homeland and many more are serving and
have sacrificed for the cause of a free and
united Ukraine. But America does have a
proud history of helping free people to
defend themselves.”
 Trump To Sign Executive Orders
Undoing Dodd-Frank, "Fiduciary Rule"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 3, 2017 10:41 AM

On Friday, President Donald Trump plans to sign an “Americans are going to have better
executive action to scale back the 2010 Dodd-Frank choices and Americans are going to have
financial-overhaul law, in a sweeping plan to dismantle better products because we’re not going to
much of the regulatory system put in place after the burden the banks with literally hundreds of
financial crisis. The order won't have any immediate billions of dollars of regulatory costs every
impact. But it directs the Treasury secretary to consult with year,” White House National Economic
members of different regulatory agencies and the Financial Council Director, and former Goldman
Stability Oversight Council and report back on potential president, Gary Cohn said in an interview
changes. with The Wall Street Journal. “The banks
are going to be able to price product more
"There are quite a few things that we could efficiently and more effectively to
do on Dodd-Frank ... that we think will have consumers.”
fairly immediate and dramatic impact," the
official said, including personnel changes at
regulatory agencies and additional
executive orders.

That likely includes a review of the CFPB, which vastly

expanded regulators' ability to police consumer products
— from mortgages to credit cards to student loans. Trump
administration officials, like other critics, argue Dodd-
Frank did not achieve what it set out to do and portray it as
an example of massive government over-reach.

Trump will also sign a presidential memorandum Friday

that instructs the Labor Department to delay implementing
the so-called "fiduciary rule" - an Obama-era rule that
requires financial professionals who charge commissions
to put their clients' best interests first when giving advice
on retirement investments. The "fiduciary rule" was aimed
at blocking financial advisers from steering clients toward
investments with higher commissions and fees that can eat
away at retirement savings.
The retirement advice rule was issued by the Obama
administration and was set to take effect in April. It has
been staunchly opposed by the financial services industry,
who argue the rule limits retirees' investment choices by
forcing asset managers to steer them to the lowest-risk
options. Opponents of the rule argued that the rule would
result in high costs that will ultimately make small
accounts unprofitable. While some lawsuits were filed
against the rule, companies like Bank of America Corp's
Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley had announced plans to
cooperate with the rule. The Labor Department had
estimated that it could cost firms as much as $31 billion
over the next decade to comply.
233
A senior White House official outlined the measures in a
background briefing with reporters Thursday. "We think
that they have exceeded their authority with this rule and
we think this is something that is completely
overreaching," the official told reporters at a briefing on
Thursday.
Trump pledged during the campaign to repeal and replace
the law, which also created the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau.
"Dodd-Frank is a disaster," Trump said
earlier this week during a meeting with
small business owners. "We're going to be
doing a big number on Dodd-Frank."
Cohn said the actions are intended to pave the way for
additional orders that would affect the postcrisis Financial
Stability Oversight Council, the mechanism for winding
down a giant faltering financial company, and the way the
government supervises big financial firms that aren’t
traditional banks, often referred to as systemically
important financial institutions.
More from the WSJ:
Trump blamed the political establishment
and Wall Street banks for leaving behind
many Americans and vowed to break up
both. Those promises have already been
called into question as he has filled his
administration with members of Congress
and Wall Street executives, including Mr.
Cohn, who retired as president of Goldman
Sachs Group Inc. to join the Trump
administration.
Adding to the potentially difficult optics for
Mr. Trump, he will sign the actions on the
same day he meets with a group of
business executives, including J.P. Morgan
Chase & Co. Chief Executive James Dimon
and BlackRock Inc. CEO Laurence Fink.
Asked about the potential political
pushback because of his Wall Street past,
Mr. Cohn said the administration’s goal of
deregulating financial markets “has nothing
to do with Goldman Sachs.”
“It has nothing to do with J.P. Morgan,” he
said. “It has nothing to do with Citigroup. It
has nothing to do with Bank of America. It
has to do with being a player in a global
market where we should, could and will
have a dominant position as long as we
don’t regulate ourselves out of that.”
The changes Cohn described are sure to face a fight from
consumer groups and Democrats, who say postcrisis
regulations are protecting average borrowers and investors
from abusive practices, while making the financial system
more resilient and bailouts less likely.
This path also may create political problems for Mr.
Trump, whose campaign was successful in swaths of the
Midwest where homeowners were hit hardest by the
housing crash sparked by the financial crisis.
Meanwhile, asked about the potential political pushback
because of his Wall Street past, in his WSJ interview Cohn
said the administration’s goal of deregulating financial
markets “has nothing to do with Goldman Sachs.”
“It has nothing to do with J.P. Morgan,” he
said. “It has nothing to do with Citigroup. It
has nothing to do with Bank of America. It
has to do with being a player in a global
market where we should, could and will
have a dominant position as long as we
don’t regulate ourselves out of that.” Cohn
234
said existing regulations put in place by
Dodd-Frank are so sweeping that it is too
hard for banks to lend, and consumers’
choice of financial products is too limited.
Democrats and consumer groups have pushed for tighter
controls on banks and other lenders, particularly after the
subprime mortgage crisis that helped fuel the global
financial crisis. But Cohn said that many of the postcrisis
rules haven’t solved the problems they were supposed to
be addressing. He said, for example, that there still isn’t a
solid process to safely wind down the collapse of a giant
faltering financial company or to ensure that those firms
have access to short-term liquidity.
“I’m not sitting here saying we want to go
back to the good old days,” Cohn said. “We
have the best, most highly capitalized
banks in the world, and we should use that
to our competitive advantage,” he added.
“But on the flip side, we also have the most
highly regulated, overburdened banks in
the world.”
Cohn also laid out a road map for how the Trump
administration plans to target new financial rules. He said
the Treasury Department would lead an effort to overhaul
mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
which were put into government conservatorship after the
crisis. He also said that the White House wouldn’t need a
change in the law to redirect the mission of the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau, created by the 2010 law and
which governs things like mortgage and credit-card rules.
(Please see related article on B10.)
He suggested the White House could influence the mission
of the bureau, set up as an independent agency, by putting
a new person at its helm to replace Richard Cordray, the
agency’s director. Asked about potential changes at the
agency, he said, “Personnel is policy.”
***
Trump said repeatedly during the presidential campaign
that the Dodd-Frank overhaul law was preventing banks
from lending, which he said made it harder for consumers
to access credit and get the economy to grow. Financial
analysts have had mixed views on this assessment. Some
believe that low demand from consumers has hurt the
ability of banks to lend, and low interest rates have hurt the
returns banks make on these loans. But smaller banks have
said they are dealing with a crush of new regulations
spurred by Dodd-Frank, something regulators have
struggled to address.
Cohn didn’t specify how all of these regulations should be
rewritten, but he said that financial markets have made
their own corrections and that the environment that fueled
the financial crisis no longer existed. He said, for example,
that even if mortgage restrictions are rolled back, it doesn’t
mean that there would be another boom in the subprime
lending market. That is because, he said, those loans can’t
be securitized and sold like they were before the financial
crisis because the market for those products isn’t the same.
.
235
“We don’t want to do it an unregulated
way,” he said. “We want to do it in a smart,
regulated way.”
Translation: we want our bubble, we want to be able to
securitize, package and sell it, we want to offload risky
exposure to momentum-chasing retail investors and,
potentially, widows and orphans.
236
 Trump Ghost Looms Over EU
Summit As Leaders Push Back
By Patrick Donahue And John Follain
February 3, 2017, 5:13 AM CST February 3, 2017, 6:39 AM CST
U.S. President Donald Trump loomed over a
Mediterranean gathering of European leaders, who used
the meeting Friday to hit back at the new administration
that has upended trans-Atlantic relations by dismissing the
European Union’s validity.
“It is unacceptable that there be, through a
certain number of statements by the
president of the United States, a pressure
on what Europe must be or what it must not
be,” French President Francois Hollande
told reporters Friday at the EU summit in
Valletta, Malta.
As the EU grapples with the region’s biggest migration
crisis since World War II, Britain’s impending exit and
how to hold the group together in an increasingly uncertain
world, several leaders showed themselves annoyed by the
new U.S. president’s biting remarks about the viability of
the EU project, which celebrates its 60th anniversary this
year.
Laying bare the tensions, Ted Malloch, who says he’s been
interviewed for the role of U.S. ambassador to the EU,
lashed out at the 28-member bloc in an interview with
Bloomberg TV on Friday. Following Trump’s lead, he
encouraged other member states to hold referendums
similar to the U.K., which voted last year to leave the bloc.
‘Overly Complex’
The EU “is an overly complex fairly bloated
bureaucratic organization,” Malloch said.
“Its ambitions have basically overstepped
its capabilities, so the question really is
what the European member states want to
see for that European Union.”
As the presidents and prime ministers filed into the Grand
Master’s Palace in the capital Valletta for their first
meeting, German Chancellor Angela Merkel struck a
calmer tone, urging the leaders to more forcefully tackle
the EU’s problems in defining any new relationship with
the U.S.
“Europe has its own destiny in its hands,”
Merkel told reporters. “The clearer we are,
how we define our role in the world, the
237
better we can maintain our trans-Atlantic
relationship.”
U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May, the EU leader who has
met with Trump, briefed the group on the new
administration, along with Merkel and Hollande, who have
spoken with him by phone. As British and EU negotiators
brace for Brexit, Merkel and May were locked in
conversation as the leaders made their way to Valletta’s
baroque St. John’s Co-Cathedral, home to Caravaggio’s
masterpiece, "The Beheading of Saint John the Baptist."
Defending Europe
The German leader, who has emerged as the bloc’s pre-
eminent counterweight in defending Europe’s liberal,
democratic order, last week condemned Trump’s executive
order halting the influx of refugees and blocking
immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries
into the U.S. Heading into an election year, Merkel is
likely to be pressured to take a tougher stance with Trump
as her Social Democratic challenger enjoys a sharp boost
in polls.
Trump “is playing with the security of the Western world,”
Martin Schulz, Merkel’s opponent in the September
election, told Spiegel Online.
In Malta, European Commission President Jean-Claude
Juncker said the EU is not “threatened” by Trump, “but I
do think there’s room for explanations because sometimes
I have the impression that the new administration does not
know the European Union in detail,” he told reporters.
Other leaders were less diplomatic. Austrian Chancellor
Christian Kern tied the influx of more than a million
refugees into Europe over the past two years to U.S.
military incursions in the region.
“There’s no doubt America shares a
responsibility for the refugee flows,” Kern
said.
Dalia Grybauskaite, the president of Lithuania, which
borders Russia and has taken a dim view of Trump’s
friendlier relations with the Kremlin, wryly noted the
president’s penchant for taking to Twitter for policy
pronouncements.
 “With tweet diplomacy we don’t need any told Bloomberg Television.
bridges, so we just tweet," Grybauskaite
.

238
Mainstream Media Doubles Down On Hypocrisy: Opposing
Trump Is ‘Necessary,’ But Opposing Obama Was Treason
By: Robert Jonathan
Date: February 03, 2017

This is the same Trump-attacking mainstream media

fakestream media (as Health Ranger Mike Adams calls it)
that now portrays Romney and John McCain as respected
statesman after unmercifully trashing both in the prior to
election cycles.

This ties in to the video embedded below created by

HeatStreet which exposes the hypocrisy of the fakestream
media in the way it covered the Tea Party during the
Obama administration.

According to various reports, left-wing billionaire George

Remember when the Democrat-media complex went
Soros help bankroll the Women’s March in Washington,
bananas because then-presidential candidate Donald
D.C. the day after Inauguration Day (the event where
Trump refused to commit in advance to accepting the
Madonna dropped F-bombs as well as telling the crowd of
results of the election?
her thoughts about blowing up the White House now that
Donald Trump has moved in).
His caution was understandable, given the primitive
registration, absentee ballot, and in-person voting
With Madonna as one example, it’s ironic, isn’t it, given
procedures currently in effect in our country that makes the
the edgy way celebrities generally behave on and off
process wide-open to fraud, especially in those states
camera, that they would denounce Trump for the
where photo ID is not required or where Obama-appointed
freewheeling, politically incorrect manner in which he
judges have blocked voter ID laws from going into effect.
conducts himself?
After the election, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Green
While Trump — a former Democrat and independent who
Party standard-bearer Jill Stein and their operatives all of a
ran for president as a Republican — regularly mixed with
sudden concluded that raising questions about the outcome
celebrities, and they with him, during his high-visibility
was no longer un-American. For reasons known only to
career in and out of show business, that was then and this
herself, moreover, Stein never sought a recount in states
is now.
that Clinton narrowly won.
Like their counterparts in the group-thinking liberal
During this time, amnesia overcame the media about their
corporate media echo chamber, many in the stage and
previous outrage over the very idea of contesting the
screen industry apparently are still having trouble coming
election. President Trump has properly described the
to grips with the final results of election 2016, perhaps
media as the “opposition party.”
because of the mainstream news media’s reliance on
flawed polling data rather than reporting about facts on the
Against this backdrop, recall that Obama and his fawning ground.
media entourage ridiculed Mitt Romney when the 2012
GOP hopeful warned about Russia’s intentions. Yet for the
The Women’s March received glowing, uncritical
past six months or so, the Democrats and their journalistic
coverage for patriotically speaking truth to power and
sycophants have behaved like they can’t wait to launch
whatnot, and perhaps much of it was deserved on free
World War 3 against Russia for supposedly interfering in
speech grounds, although the unconventional headgear
the election through email hacking. Their saber rattling
worn by some of the marchers may have been unseemly.
against Putin seems to have finally faded with the Trump
controversy du jour taking its place.
In contrast, the Tea Party was actually an organic
movement. It was comprised of ordinary people like those
next door or down the block who loved their country and
239
the U.S. Constitution (including the provision in the First
Amendment that protects the right to peacefully assemble,
just like for those participating in the Women’s March),
and were rallying for lower taxes and a smaller
government.

According to the mainstream media at the time, however,

the Tea Party was a hate-filled bunch of treasonous racists
who sought to de-legitimize Obama.

Bottom line: The reporting on the Tea Party by the media

was fake news before fake news was cool.
Parenthetically, Dilbert creator Scott Adams, who long
predicted an election win by “master persuader” Donald
Trump, has come up with a drinking game for each time
CNN, a.k.a. the Clinton News Network, describes the
Trump administration as being engulfed in chaos.

240
 With A Stroke Of The Pen, Donald Trump Will Wave
Goodbye To The Dodd Frank Act
By Editor
February 3, 2017
The fundamental issue is the existence of the Federal
Reserve and our system of dishonest money. That is
unlikely to be addressed by Trump unfortunately.
I sure wish the President had gone with John Allison
formerly of BB&T and CATO at Treasury instead of with
Goldman alum Mnunchin.
241
Dodd-Frank should be overhauled however. It is a real
burden on small banks and encourages large banks to
become even larger so that they achieve “too big to fail”
status. Just for instance.
(From Forbes)
Presently, banks exceeding $10 billion in
assets are subjected to increased
oversight, and those with $50 billion in
assets can be deemed a systemically
important financial institution and put under
exams administered by the Federal
Reserve such as stress tests. A day after
the election, Tom Michaud, CEO of
financial sector investment bank Keefe,
Bruyette & Woods told FORBES he’d like
to see an increase of SiFi designations to
just banks with $250 billion in assets and
above.
Such relief might have a potent impact on Main Street
because it would dramatically reduce overhead costs for
small and mid-sized lenders, potentially giving them
greater financial flexibility to make small business and
consumer loans. More broadly, bank CEOs like
JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon have said regulatory relief could
increase the flow of money into the broader economy.
 Now that Trump’s In Office, Media Suddenly Concerned
with US Military Killing Civilians
Matt Agorist
February 4, 2017
For the last eight years, Peace Prize recipient and
ostensible savior of the free world, Barack Obama, rained
down hell from the sky on brown people across the Middle
East. Obama far exceeded his predecessor, George W.
Bush, in the use of drone strikes, killing more civilians
than ever before and aiding in the creation and growth of
worldwide terror.
On top of this warlord president receiving the Peace Prize,
in his final days in office, Barack Obama was ironically
given the Department of Defense Medal for Distinguished
Public Service “as a token of appreciation for his service
as commander in chief” at a farewell ceremony on January
4. The medal is the highest honorary award at the
Department of Defense and is presented by the Secretary
of Defense.
In his last year alone, Obama authorized the United States
military to drop more than 26,000 bombs in 7 countries,
according to an estimate by the Council on Foreign
Relations. During the prior year, the numbers were similar.
An estimated 50,000 bombs in only 24 months fell onto
houses, churches, schools, and hospitals — all authorized
by the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize — his supporters,
as well as the corporate mainstream media, remained
silent.
Fast forward to last weekend.
Following in his predecessor’s footsteps, reports from
Yemen indicate that as many as 10 women and children
were killed in a raid authorized by Donald Trump. During
this raid, the 8-year-old granddaughter of Nasser al-
Awlaki, who was also the daughter of Anwar Awlaki was
shot in the neck and died after suffering for two hours,
according to Nasser al-Awlaki.
This is the 8-year-old girl killed in US raid in
Yemen, Arabic media reports
https://t.co/nPlWh6LqE3
US killed her teen American brother too
pic.twitter.com/QP0TsgdIfq
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January
29, 2017
242
What makes the tragedy of this 8-year-old girl killed by
Trump stand out, however, is the fact that Obama killed
her older brother and her father — who were both US
citizens — who were extrajudicially murdered without
trial.
As the Free Thought Project reported last month, below
are just a handful of the civilian slaughters that took place
under Obama.
In July 2016, over 100 civilians were killed in multiple
U.S. airstrikes in the town of Manbij, inlcuding 77 in one
attack. One of the U.S. airstrikes hit a children’s hospital.
Dozens of civilians were killed by U.S. bombs in Daquq,
Iraq while attending a funeral in an area where there was
said to be no ISIS presence.
The U.S. bombed two hospitals in the same month, in the
same city during operations in Mosul, Iraq. Both attacks
caused an unknown number of civilian deaths.
U.S. officials revealed in November 2016 that the military
investigated 257 allegations of civilian casualties and
deemed only 31 of them credible, just over 10 percent of
the total.
The aforementioned civilian deaths are only during the last
6 months of 2016, and are from Syria, only.
As Trump now takes the helm, the same media who
covered for Obama’s slaughter in the Middle East, are now
all of the sudden interested in exposing that same
slaughter.
When Obama approved a CIA drone strike in Yemen that
killed al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman,
mainstream corporate media was all but silent. The fact
that the president ordered a strike on an American citizen
with no due process and killed his teen son in the process
— was but a blip on the news cycle — including FOX
News.
Now, however, the same Praetorian guard who protected
Obama and Hillary Clinton during the WikiLeaks fiasco is
plastering headlines of Trump killing civilians all over the
internet.
Of course, this does not lessen the crimes of Trump.
However, what it does do is highlight just how easily
controlled people are by the media — on both sides.
Those of us who watched this madness unfold in 2009,
were blown away by the once ‘antiwar left’ now approving
of torture and extrajudicial killings — literally overnight
— because their guy was in power.
When Obama killed children in the Middle East, the right
was quick to denounce him while the left continued
praising him. Now, the exact same scenario is playing out,
again, right before our eyes.
While Trump ran on a platform of demilitarizing the
Middle East and concentrating only on ISIS, he’s quickly
showing his true intentions. Friday morning, the
President’s first Tweet was a threat to Iran.
243
Iran is playing with fire – they don't
appreciate how "kind" President Obama
was to them. Not me!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
February 3, 2017
And, just like Obama’s supporters did, Trump’s supporters
are cheering him on — even the ones who chastised the
left for failing to call out war crimes after Obama took
office.
The fact of the matter is Iran has never caused harm to the
United States. In fact, Iran hasn’t attacked another country
in over 200 years! And somehow, the US considers them a
threat?
No matter how good you thought Trump was or how bad
you thought Obama was, they are merely seat fillers on a
machine beholden to corrupt corporate interests with their
tentacles so far into the government that you can’t tell
where the state ends and the business begins. And, the
media plays right along with it.
Do not think for one minute that the mainstream media has
all of the sudden found their conscience and began to
question war. In fact, it is quite the opposite. The actions
of Trump are now being used to stoke divide in the United
States so people are too busy arguing to notice they are
being fleeced to kill more brown people for profit.
These wars have been the plan since before 9/11 and will
continue until they are defunded and the criminals behind
them exposed — or until, they are finished. But don’t take
our word for it, listen to 4-start general, and previous
Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Wesley Clark.
It is worth noting that 6 out of these 7 countries (with the
exception of Lebanon) identified by Clark in the video
above “to be taken out” are now the object of President
Trump’s ban on Muslims’ entry to the US: Iraq, Syria,
Somalia, Libya, Sudan, Iran and Yemen — with the US
now aiming its sights on Iran.
Please share this article with your friends and family so being used against them to foster more war and, in turn,
that they may not fall victim to the two-party manipulation more terrorism.

244
 Buzzfeed Sued For
Defamation Over Trump Dossier 'Fake News'
By Tyler Durden
Feb 4, 2017 7:25 PM
BuzzFeed (as well as editor in chief Ben Smith and former
British spy Christopher Steele) faces a new lawsuit over
its publication of an unverified dossier of claims against
President Trump and others, McClatchy reported Friday
evening. In response to the lawsuit, Politico reports that
BuzzFeed issued an apology on Friday evening
(presumably admitting to publishing 'fake news').
McClatchy reports XBT Holdings, a tech firm with
Russian ties named in the document, is suing over the
January 10 publication of what the suit calls “libelous,
unverified and untrue allegations.”
The dossier, which includes
uncorroborated allegations about Trump,
claims the Cyprus-based XBT, which is
owned by Russian tech magnate Aleksej
Gubarev, “had been using botnets and
porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant
bugs, steal data and conduct ‘altering
operations’ against the Democratic
Party leadership” in 2016.
In response to the lawsuit, Politico notes that BuzzFeed on
Friday evening issued an apology and said that it had
redacted Gubarev's name, and the names of his
companies, from the dossier.
245
"We have redacted Mr. Gubarev's name
from the published dossier, and
apologize for including it,” BuzzFeed
spokesman Matt Mittenthal told POLITICO
in a statement.
CNN Money and McClatchy were the first news
organizations to report on the existence of the lawsuit
against BuzzFeed. (You can read Gubarev's full
defamation complaint against Buzzfeed here.)
"Although Buzzfeed and Mr. Smith claim
that they had the dossier in their
possession for weeks prior to its
publication, and despite their claims that
they had four reporters working near full-
time on attempting to verify the claims
made in the dossier, prior to publishing the
Defamatory Article and the dossier, neither
Buzzfeed nor Mr. Smith contacted the
Plaintiffs to determine if the allegations
made against them had any basis in fact,"
the complaint states.
"After the dossier’s publication numerous
journalists (more than 30) contacted Mr.
Gubarev with some even arranging to
travel to Cyprus to discuss the publication
with Mr. Gubarev. During this time, and
up to the present day, neither Buzzfeed
nor Mr. Smith contacted the Plaintiffs to
determine if the allegations made
against them had any basis in fact."
The complaint also states that Gubarev is not a public
figure and that the publication of the dossier has ruined his
reputation.
"Plaintiff Aleksej Gubarev, who is
married with three young children is
not, in any way, shape, or form, a public
figure," the complaint states.
"As a result of Buzzfeed and Mr. Smith’s
reckless publication of defamatory
materials, he has found his personal and
 professional reputation in tatters. His The lawsuit, filed in London and Fort Lauderdale,
wife has found herself a target of online Florida, seeks unspecified damages, according to The
harassment and the family’s personal Hill, and says BuzzFeed’s story has been viewed nearly 6
security has been compromised." millions times.

Although BuzzFeed did not redact Gubarev's name when it

first published the dossier, it did redact the names of a few
other people mentioned in the dossier.
.

246
 Enemies Within: President Trump
Is In Extreme Danger
By: Mike Adams
Date: February 04, 2017
President Trump may have escaped the clutches of
Hillary Clinton. But can he escape the danger posed by the
Democratic/Communist Party who are agents of the
globalists and whose main goal is the destruction of the
United States?
The following comprise the “hit team” who want to take
him out and subjugate the American people.
Enemies Within
President Trump faces an unthinkable challenge. He is not
only faced with dealing with over 80 Congressmen who
are members of front organizations for the Communist
party and the Muslim Brotherhood, he has many of these
philosophical traitors to the Republic serving in senior and
mid-level management in the various agencies of the
Federal government. In other words, the President is
surrounded by traitors who are dedicated to the destruction
of the United States. Their traitors are your enemy whether
you realize it or not!
Please allow me to superficially review how extensive the
treason to the Republic is. This will be followed up by a
stunning revelation as the end of the article.
Treason In Our Midst
Was anyone else bothered by the fact the large body count
of Democratic Congressmen who did not attend the
Inauguration. These unpatriotic Congressmen were led by
247
the very radicalized John Lewis. Lewis belongs to the
Progressive Caucus which a clear front organization for
the Communist Party as are the other
disloyal Congressmen.
At minimum, I am concerned because these Congressmen
demonstrated that they will not work with this President.
This is troublesome because the Congress and the
President must work together for the good of the country.
At maximum, I am concerned about this development
because questions about these Congressmen are being
asked by my audience with regard to their real motivation.
Many of my readers and viewers are questioning if these
Congressmen want to simply be “out of the blast zone” for
what is coming. In other words they are positioning
themselves to survive the coup that is coming.
New Zealand Journalist, Trevor Loudon, documents,
through his new documentary entitled The Enemies
Within) how the Communist Party of the USA itself has
adopted a stealth plan to achieve revolutionary goals by
decisions made in the 1970s to infiltrate and manipulate
the Democratic Party. Loudon’s newest work documents
how Lewis is a member of several front organizations with
strong ties to the Community Party.
“The Communist and Muslim Brotherhood
infiltration plan is to form alliances with the
radical elements in organized labor in
conjunction with radicals in the African-
American community and the feminist
movement to establish a progressive
coalition on the left that could dominate the
national political agenda for decades to
come.”
John Lewis is a member of the Progressive Caucus which
is a front group for the Communist Party. Lewis is not
alone, but his actions and allegiances speak to his lack of
commitment to the Republic and most importantly, the
Constitution of The United States.
With these associations and his continual efforts in
dividing the country, this Congressman should resign. Our
country has reached its saturation point with treason from
its public officials. Lewis has lost all credibility. Fromer
Congressman, Alan West, has identified 80 of these
Congressman as belonging to front groups for either the
Communist party or the Muslim Brotherhood, or both.
The Muslim Brotherhood Invasion of DHS and the
White House
The Deputy Chief of Staff to former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin
This section is not about Muslims serving in the White
House. America has no problem with this so long as they
uphold their oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
This section is also not about The embarrassed and
disgraced wife of deposed Congressman, Anthony Weiner,
Huma Abedin, has undeniable family ties to the Muslim
Brotherhood. In an interview with FrontPageMag, anti-
Islamist activist and author Walid Shoebat explained that
Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, is and was deeply
involved with the Muslim Brotherhood and that Huma’s
brother, Hassan, is on the board of the Oxford Centre For
Islamic Studies (OCIS) where he is a fellow and partners
with other board members including “Al-Qaeda
associate, Omar Naseef and the notorious Muslim
Brotherhood leader Sheikh Youssef Qaradawi; both have
been listed as OCIS Trustees.” Has the FBI stopped vetting
Federal governmental employees in highly sensitive
positions?
Department of Homeland Security Deputy Mayor, Arif
Alikhan
In the publication, Discover the Networks, the editors
discuss the background as it relates to highly sensitive
federal agency employment (e.g. DHS) and the Muslim
terrorist affiliations of Arif Alikhan. Alikhan’s resume is
very impressive.
 “Former deputy mayor of Homeland Security and
Public Safety for the City of Los Angeles
 Was responsible for derailing the LAPD’s plan to
monitor activities within the Los Angeles Muslim
community
 Was appointed as assistant secretary for the
Office of Policy Development in Barack Obama’s
Department of Homeland Security in 2009
 Became a Professor of Homeland Security and
Counterterrorism in 2010.”
 Now serving as a distinguished, visiting professor
at the National Defense University.
Alikhan was responsible for derailing the LAPD‘s efforts
to monitor radical and potentially terrorist activities within
the city’s Muslim community, where numerous radical
mosques were known to have provided aid and comfort to
the 9/11 hijackers.
248
Alikhan, an openly devout Sunni Muslim, has
openly participated in a Muslim Public Affairs
Council fundraiser titled “Be the Change,” in order to
support that organization’s leadership-development
programs which openly advocates for the Sharia Law
takeover of the United States. The open support for this
Sharia Law intention to overthrow the U.S.
government, on the part of an American citizen, is
illegal. When such an advocate is a Federal employee in
a sensitive position this person should disqualify one from
holding sensitive positions within the government.
Obama Administration Advisory Council on Faith-Based
Neighborhood Partnerships, Eboo Patel
If you were on the FBI team vetting Presidential
appointees, would you grant your seal of approval to the
grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood’s founder, Siraj
Wahhaj, who was named as a co-conspirator in the 1993
World Trade Center bombing and who has defended the
convicted WTC bombers. Well, somebody thought Eboo
Patel, the man in question would make a splendid member
of Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based
Neighborhood Partnerships.
Additionally, Patel, himself, spoke at a Muslim Students
Association and ISNA Convention, while appearing on a
panel, and also being partnered with Tariq Ramadan.
Ramadan is the grandson of Siraj Wahhaj, who was named
as a possible co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade
Center bombing and has defended the convicted WTC
bombers. Wahhaj advocates for the Islamic takeover of
America under the banner of Sharia Law.
All of these people combined, plus GEORGE SOROS, are
poised to overthrow this government and the intention, to
do so, extends deep into every agency. Obama had 8 years
to plant subversive time bombs.
State Department Employee, Monika Wesolowski
For the past 72 hours, I have covered the case of State
Department employee, Monika Wesolowski. Through and
off-handed, unintentional comment, Monika revealed that
State Department brochures obfuscate the presence of
child-sex trafficking inside the territorial boundaries of the
United States.
Since I published the two part story about Monika, I have
heard from several Federal employees who verify the
aforementioned concern and further, they make claims that
parts of our Federal government are actually involved in
facilitating child-sex trafficking and the people’s resources
are involved.
 The Mainstream Media’s Downplaying Of UC Berkeley
Riot Shows Complicity With Left-Wing Violence
By: Don Wrightman
Date: February 04, 2017
Milo Yiannopoulos has been attracting violent opposition
crowds at many of his recent speaking events. Several
media outlets have been heavily mislabeling him, which
could have helped draw out the angry crowds to his recent
scheduled performances. At a UC Berkeley event, Trump
supporters were victims of violent left wing attacks. Fists
were flying outside of the campus event, where Milo
supporters were struck with flag poles and stomped while
they were down. Literal fireworks also added to the
mayhem in efforts to shut down the event. An interviewee
was also pepper sprayed while speaking with reporters.
Something is clearly amiss with both the violent
demonstration against free speech and the aftermath.
Many people on the left-wing are speaking out about the
attacks, but not in the manner you would expect; they are
standing up for the attackers. The haters are saying they
don’t condone hate speech, including Berkeley’s mayor
who condoned the riots as a reaction to hate speech. If only
they could realize how hypocritical they are. The
mainstream media have been legitimizing these anti-right
wing demonstrations for almost two years. (RELATED:
Find real news headlines hourly at Censored.news)
249
The media are complicit when they label the violent riots
as just protests and further downplay the severity when the
right is attacked. What would the left-wing owned media
stories look like if the situation was inverted at Hillary
Clinton’s commencement address at Wellesley College?
That would have also been blamed on right wing bigotry,
homophobia, and racism. There’s no winning against the
leftist media who continue to warp the minds of Americans
into standing up for corrupt globalist interests.
(RELATED: Read MediaFactWatch.com for more news
about the lying left-wing media.)
Donald Trump responded to the recent riots with a threat
to cease federal funding to the university. A statement
from UC Berkeley condemned both Milo’s presence at the
university and his perspectives. They called him a troll and
provocateur who aims hate speech at a wide array of
groups and individuals. The university is essentially
blaming Milo’s opinions and behavior for the violent
displays against Trump supporters. The worst part is that
many people don’t know or understand what types of
discussions actually take place at a Milo event, they just
know they oppose him because the media tells them to.
If you don’t like Milo, the simple solution is to not show
up at his events. The attacks went far beyond just Milo;
Trump supporters were the prime targets for the rioters. If
only the left-wing supporters could realize the façade they
are fighting for is ultimately designed to work against
them. If funding terrorists, depopulating the planet, and
being enslaved by a one-world government sounds
appealing to you, then keep on rioting. The media will
continue to stand against Donald Trump and his supporters
every at every chance possible. (RELATED: Find more
Donald Trump news at Trump.news)
 Berkeley Mayor Sides With The Unhinged Left-Wing
Terrorists, Blaming Milo For The Violence
By: Don Wrightman
Date: February 04, 2017
Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin failed to recognize the
recent events at the UC Berkeley campus as Left-wing
inspired terrorist attacks against free speech. Arreguin
sided with the unruly crowd who used force to intimidate
other protesters, physically attacking some of them.
Rioters also shot fireworks at the building where Milo
Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak. The left-wing
media continues to mislabel far-right speaker
Yiannopoulos as a white nationalist, among other falsities.
The brainwashed followers continue to hate on Milo for all
the wrong reasons.
Arreguin released a statement acknowledging that the
protesters had damaged property and resorted to violence
in opposition to Milo’s scheduled appearance, albeit he
said it was only a “small minority.”
He also said that the rioters “provided the
ultra-nationalist far right exactly the images
they want to use to try to discredit the vast
majority of peaceful protestors in
Berkeley…”
Arreguin failed to address that Trump supporters were
being viciously attacked by leftist Oakland thugs toting
anarcho-communist flags. 1,500 protesters reportedly
showed up to the UC Berkeley event, ten percent of whom
were reportedly there to incite the riots.
.
250
This begs the question, were these violent protesters paid
to put on a show? It’s not uncommon for George Soros-
affiliated groups to attend events like this and foolishly
support his atrocious agenda in a harmful manner. The
University released a statement saying the violence was
“instigated by a group of about 150 masked
agitators who came onto campus and
interrupted an otherwise non-violent
protest.”
Who do you think was responsible for organizing that
group of 150 masked men? (RELATED: Find more news
about rioting at Rioting.news)
Many police officers allegedly didn’t do their parts to calm
the riots. Arreguin’s statement wasn’t exactly appropriate
either. Now Berkeley is at risk of a federal investigation
scrutinizing the way the city dealt with the incident.
Arreguin expressed that Berkeley stands against bigotry,
fear-mongering, and violence towards anyone; yet he
senselessly justified the violence by insisting Milo’s
presence and perspectives were to blame for the unruly
display.
Yiannopoulos has said he would like an apology,
presumably from both the city and the university, however
that’s not expected to come any time soon. President
Donald Trump condemned the riots and threatened to
cease funding to the university due to their response to the
incident.
“If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free
speech and practices violence on innocent
people with a different point of view — NO
FEDERAL FUNDS?” tweeted President
Trump.
(RELATED: Read Conservative.news for more
conservative news.)
 Trump Doubles Down Against Judge's Order: Asks "What
Is Our Country Coming To?"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 4, 2017 3:54 PM

Having earlier slammed the "so-called" judge's decision to

put a temporary nationwide ban on his immigration
executive order, it appears President Trump is doubling
down against the judicial decision...

Adding "Because the ban was lifted by a judge, many very

bad and dangerous people may be pouring into our
country. A terrible decision"

But, as we detailed earlier, with the rhetoric rising on

either side, there is only one way this ends.

So get ready for the dramatic showdown, as the fate of

Trump's executive order is soon set to play out inside the
Supreme Court of the United States.

As a reminder, here is the authority that the president has

to make his decision... (hurt feelings or not)

251
 Judge’s Order To Block
Trump’s Immigration Travel Ban Is Ridiculous
The Judge Is Playing Games. He’s Lying.
By Jon Rappoport
February 5, 2017
He obviously doesn’t like Trump’s immigration travel ban,
so he’s cooking up reasons for slapping a temporary
restraining order on it.
A freshman in law school could point out holes in those
reasons big enough to drive a fleet of trucks through.
On February 3rd, Judge James Robart
issued his order (Case 2:17-cv-00141-JLR
Document 52 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 7):
he temporarily restrained the federal
government from enforcing Trump’s
immigration travel ban.
The Judge’s order is absurd for several reasons.
First of all, objections to Trump’s ban were entered into
the court by the States of Washington and Minnesota, as
the “injured parties.” But Judge Robart announced his
decision would affect all States—the whole country—
because immigration law must be applied “uniformly”
across the board.
Perhaps, but nowhere is it stated that a temporary
restraining order (TRO) issued by a judge must be applied
uniformly across the whole country.
Since when is a TRO the same as a law?
Speaking of law, no final legal/constitutional decision has
been rendered re Trump’s Executive Order on
immigration. It’s still up for grabs. The Judge is just
writing script to suit his bias.
The Judge may not like Trump’s ban; clearly, he does not.
The Judge may believe the ban will be overturned by a
higher court because it is unconstitutional. The Judge may
think Trump is committing an immoral act. But all that is
beside the point. The only thing Judge Robart was
empowered to do was issue a TRO or not issue a TRO.
Period.
Why should he have the right to apply his TRO, not a law,
to the whole of the United States? Maybe he’s a god we
haven’t been told about. If so, I’d like to see the evidence.
252
Next point: The judge made a number of comments to
justify issuing his the TRO:
“The States are likely to suffer irreparable
harm in the absence of [my] preliminary
relief [restraining order].”
That is absurd on its face. Irreparable harm? This means
harm that can never be fixed? Come on. The Judge may as
well have said,
“I’m biased. I don’t like Trump’s EO and I
don’t like him. So when I said ‘irreparable’, I
exaggerated by a few thousand miles. Ha-
ha.”
The Judge wrote:
“The EO [Trump’s Executive Order limiting
immigration] adversely affects the States’
residents in areas of employment,
education, business, family relations, and
freedom to travel.”
More fluff, nonsense, and outright deception. Does the
Judge seriously expect us to believe that the banning of
35,000 more refugees than the 2016 federal cap is going to
decimate the States?
(In his EO, Trump wrote:
“I hereby proclaim that the entry of more
than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017
would be detrimental to the interests of the
United States, and thus suspend any such
entry until such time as I determine that
additional admissions would be in the
national interest.” An NPR political editor
stated: “For 2016, the cap was 85,000.”
The difference is 35,000.)
Judge Robart wrote:
“In addition, the States themselves are
harmed by virtue of the damage…inflicted
upon the operations and missions of their
 public universities…as well as injury to the
States’ operations, tax bases, and public
funds.”
Same objections as above. Judge Robart is stretching the
truth to the breaking point. His definition of “harm” and
“irreparable harm” are coming from his private dictionary
of exaggerations. He’s winging it.
Case closed.
Except it isn’t.
A Judge who can take powers not granted to him, who can
invent, out of whole cloth, dire consequences where none
exist, is hustling the system he’s sworn to defend.
Court documents for Case 2:17-cv-00141-JLR:
1. Exhibit A, Trump’s Executive Order:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3438902-Executive-
Order.html
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/01/2017-
02281/protecting-the-nation-from-foreign-terrorist-entry-into-the-
united-states
2. Attorney General of Washington State’s complaint
asking Fed Judge for a temporary restraining order to bar
Feds from carrying out Trump’s Executive Order:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3442904-TRO-
Request-Ferguson-v-Trump.html
3. Feds rebuttal to the above:
253
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3443747-Admin-
Response-to-Ferguson-TRO.html
4. The Judge’s granting of the temporary restraining order
— and granting it nationwide:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3446391-Robart-
Order.html
5. The Feds’ appeal to the 9th Circuit (in San Fransisco) to
restore the Trump immigration ban:
Comment by Washington Post:
“The government argued the district court’s
injunction on Trump’s ban was ‘vastly
overbroad’ and was ‘accompanied by
virtually no legal analysis.'”
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/the-
department-of-justices-appeal-to-restore-the-trump-immigration-
ban/2320/
6. 9th Circuit order denying initial appeal by Feds:
Comment by Washington Post:
“The 9th Circuit issues its response to an
emergency motion filed by the Justice
Department to immediately reinstate the
executive order calling for a travel ban.”
[Note: 9th Circuit schedules the Appeal to
reconvene on Monday, Feb 6.]
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/9th-
circuit-order-denying-initial-justice-department-
appeal/2321/
 Look At Mainstream Media’s List Of Lies After Just Two
Weeks Of Trump Administration
By DCwhispers
Posted On February 5, 2017
If there was ever any doubt how
unhinged the Mainstream Media has
become in its desire to damage Donald
Trump via one false news story after the
other, this list makes that desire all too
clear.
There has never been a time in the
modern-era of American politics where
the media has been so exposed and
proven so corrupted by ideological
bent. Fake News does in fact exist. It’s
called the Mainstream Media.
Remember, this is merely a partial list of the false
reporting that has taken place just two weeks into the
Trump administration:
**NBC claims Trump is easing sanctions on Russia.
Story is disseminated thousands of times. When Trump
White House provides proof that agreement was actually
initiated by the Obama administration, NBC released a
hardly-seen retraction while other news agencies continue
to promote the false story.
**The New York Times had a front-page story with a
headline blaring how Homeland Security officials were
.
254
“blindsided” by the Trump Executive Order that put a
90-day pause on immigration from seven designated
nations known to harbor and promote terrorism. When
Homeland Security officials call out the story as patently
false, the media largely ignores that information.
**NBC, once again jumping the gun, runs with its own
“security chaos” story linked to what the NYT had
started on the same subject. NBC claims the Trump
Department of Justice “had no input” on the immigration
pause/ban executive order. The Trump White House then
submits a memo proving notification had been given to the
DOJ, who then APPROVED the immigration action days
prior to the executive order being signed by President
Trump.
The NBC story continues to be pushed, yet again, by other
media outlets. As for the correct version? Almost
completely ignored.
**Steve Clemons of The Atlantic tweets that the Trump
White House forced the resignation of several Secret
Service officials. This tweet is then re-tweeted thousands
of times and reported on as fact by various news agencies.
The Secret Service then calls out the story as “completely
false” and indicates Mr. Clemons never actually contacted
anyone from within the agency prior to making his claim.
**The Associated Press and CNN falsely claim Trump
threatened to send U.S. troops into Mexico. The report
was based on a phone call Trump had with Mexico
President Enrique Peña Nieto in which he noted how the
Mexican military was having a difficult time dealing with
the “bad hombres” in that country and that the U.S.
military would be willing to possibly help. The Trump
White House claimed the AP and CNN reports were
untrue, and that the comment was lighthearted. Both news
agencies did little follow-up to try and remedy the initial
false reports.
 Pence: Will Use 'All Legal Means
At Our Disposal' To Reinstate Immigration Ban
Foxnews.Com
Published February 05, 2017

On Friday, a federal judge in Seattle imposed a temporary

restraining order on Trump’s ban, in response to a case
filed last week by Washington state and Minnesota
challenging Trump’s constitutional authority to unilaterally
impose such a sweeping ban.

On Saturday night, a federal appeals court denied a Trump

administration request to lift the restraining order and
allow the immigration ban to continue.

“Under statutory law and under the

Constitution, that authority belongs to the
Vice President Mike Pence said Sunday that the federal president,” Pence also said Sunday.
judge who halted President Trump’s temporary
immigration ban “made the wrong decision” and vowed to
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the
use “all legal means at our disposal” to protect Americans.
Senate Judiciary Committee, told “Fox News Sunday” that
she has “no doubt” that the legal issue will ultimately go to
“From the outset of his campaign and the Supreme Court.
administration, the president of the United
States has made it clear to put the safety of
Pence also supported the new sanctions Trump imposed on
the American people first,” Pence said on
Iran after the country last week launched a medium-range
“Fox News Sunday.” “We are going to win
ballistic missile.
this argument.”
“They have flouted the U.N. security
Trump signed an executive order on Jan. 27 that
resolution,” he said. “What we are seeing
temporarily halted immigration from seven mostly Muslim
here is a hostile action, belligerent action,
nations and the United States’ Syrian refugee program.
taken by the Iranians. And we just are not
The order follows his steadfast argument that radical
going to put up with it anymore."
Islamic terrorism poses a major threat to Americans’
safety.
.

255
 Justice Department
Appeals Blocked Travel Ban
By Stephen Lendman
2-5-2017
A blizzard of Trump tweets addressed the issue. See
below. His entry into America suspension, targeting seven
predominantly Muslim countries created an international
firestorm.
It was a terrible move, unconstitutional, politically
motivated, unrelated to its stated purpose.
Instead of backing off, he’s contesting to get a judicial stay
overruled on appeal, a case likely heading for Supreme
Court resolution.
Or perhaps not with only eight justices. If the Court
divides four - four, the lower court’s ruling stands,
defeating Trump’s effort to reverse it.
US District Judge for the Western District of Washington
James Robart imposed a nationwide temporary restraining
order (TRO) on Trump’s EO. He’s considering whether to
invalidate it in the coming weeks.
Here’s what Trump tweeted, a blizzard of comments, an
attempt to win an appeal so his order will stand:
“A new radical Islamic terrorist has just
attacked in Louvre Museum in Paris.
Tourists were locked down. France on
edge again. GET SMART U.S.”
“We must keep ‘evil’ out of the country.”
“When a country is no longer able to say
who can, and who cannot , come in & out,
especially for reasons of safety &.security -
big trouble!”
“Interesting that certain Middle-Eastern
countries agree with the ban. They know if
certain people are allowed in it's death &
destruction!”
Note: He’s largely referring to racist Israeli and Saudi
policies, disgraceful ones the world community should
condemn.
“The opinion of this so-called judge, which
essentially takes law-enforcement away
from our country, is ridiculous and will be
overturned!”
.
256
“What is our country coming to when a
judge can halt a Homeland Security travel
ban and anyone, even with bad intentions,
can come into U.S.?”
“Because the ban was lifted by a judge,
many very bad and dangerous people may
be pouring into our country. A terrible
decision.”
“Why aren't the lawyers looking at and
using the Federal Court decision in Boston,
which is at conflict with ridiculous lift ban
decision?”
“The judge opens up our country to
potential terrorists and others that do not
have our best interests at heart. Bad
people are very happy!”
Whether hyperbole works to overturn the district court
ruling remains to be seen. Either way, his racist order can’t
be erased from the minds of affected people - millions of
decent human beings, not terrorists.
Muslims traveling to America or seeking asylum or
refugee status pose no national security threat. Claiming
otherwise vilifies people for their faith and national origin.
A Final Comment
Pre-dawn Sunday, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals
rejected the Justice Department’s request for an immediate
lifting of the lower court’s blocked travel ban, saying:
“Appellants’ request for an immediate
administrative stay pending full
consideration of the emergency motion for
a stay pending appeal is denied.”
The appeals court asked Washington state and Minnesota
to respond to its ruling on Sunday, the Justice Department
to submit a counter-response on Monday.
The waters remain muddied on what’s next. Legal battles
remain, perhaps joined by other states. If enough ally
against Trump’s order, it may be doomed.
 Pelosi Demands The FBI Find
"What Russians Have On Trump"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 5, 2017 1:10 PM

Despite US allies around the world
seeking partnerships with Russia (most
recently Japan's Abe),
it appears the Democrats simply cannot let go of the last
meme standing between their loss in the election and a
drastic reality check on the failure of identi5ty politics.
Hours after Trump's comments on Putin's killing ways,
Nancy Pelosi grandstanded on NBC's
'Meet The Press' that "I want to know
what the Russians have on Donald
Trump."
“I want to know what the Russians have
on Donald Trump. I think we have to
have an investigation by the FBI into his
financial, personal and political
connections to Russia and we want to
see his tax returns so we can have truth
in the relationship [with] Putin, whom he
admires,” Pelosi said on NBC’s “Meet the
Press.”

Following controversy over rehearsed questions and failed

responses during her 'townhall' event this week - sponsored
by CNN - it appears Nancy Pelosi was desperate to divert
attention from Berkeley's anti-free-speech riots back to
The Left's favored meme of the moment - Putin and
Trump.
Interestingly, the focus of Chuck Todd's
questioning was "how the Democrats
have lost touch with the rust belt" which
Elizabeth Warren suggests is true, but
as the clip makes clear, Pelosi had only
one talking point on her mind.

Pelosi made the same demand on Jan. 13 after a closed-

door briefing by U.S. intelligence officials about Russian
meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

257
Has Trump - Who Ran On An Anti-War Platform - Already
Sold Out To The Warmongers ... Or Is
He Just Playing For Leverage?
By George Washington
Feb 5, 2017 7:47 PM
Conservative Patrick Buchanan - who endorsed Trump for
president - writes:
High among the reasons that many
supported Trump was his understanding
that George W. Bush blundered horribly in
launching an unprovoked and unnecessary
war on Iraq.
***
Unlike the other candidates, Trump seemed to recognize
this.
Trump's anti-war, anti-interventionist
statements appealed to many Americans.
Indeed, quite a few Sanders supporters
switched to Trump (or stayed home on
election day) because of Trump's anti-war
promises ... and Clinton's record as a
warmonger.
Buchanan expresses disappointment that Trump is already
saber-rattling:
It was thought he would disengage us from
these wars, not rattle a saber at an Iran
that is three times the size of Iraq and has
as its primary weapons supplier and
partner Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
Former long-time Congressman Ron Paul notes that
Trump has already engaged in bombings in Yemen:
Andrew Spannaus notes:
The early Trump administration has sent
mixed signals regarding relations with
Russia. Trump’s initial comments indicated
that the U.S. would seek a diplomatic deal
to reduce tensions around Ukraine,
including by potentially recognizing the pro-
Russian referendum in Crimea, in
.
258
exchange for a broader deal with Russia
involving cooperation against terrorism or
nuclear arms reduction. However, Trump’s
United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley on
Thursday vowed to continue sanctions
against Russia until it surrendered Crimea.
Brandon Turbeville says,
"The new boss is now starting to look
extremely similar to the old boss."
Turbeville also points out that Trump appears to be
mucking about in Syria.
And since Trump took the helm, war with China is looking
increasingly likely.
So it's starting to look like - despite his promises of being
an anti-war non-interventionist - Trump will be a
warmonger.
I hope I'm wrong ... and that Trump is just playing the
unpredictable madman to gain negotiating leverage with
foreign powers.
Conservative Michael Rivero - a smart guy - notes:
I too am alarmed by Trump's rhetoric.
But there are two factors to consider.
The first is that Trump is still trying to win Senate
confirmation for his nominees, and Trump and the
Nominees may be saying what they know the Warmongers
in the Senate (like McCain and Graham) want to hear.
What Trump does after the confirmations will be telling.
Second, if you read Trump's book, "The Art of the Deal",
he writes that the opening bid in any negotiation should be
very aggressive, far beyond reasonable, then let the
counterparty negotiate back to what you actually wanted in
the first place. That tactic served him well in business and
he may well be using it here with Russia, China, and Iran.
 Trump Threatens To
Defund ‘Out Of Control’ California
By Sean Cockerham - Scockerham@Mcclatchydc.Com
February 5, 2017 7:16 PM
Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday delivered his State of the State
address, departing with the traditional practice of listing every issue
and restating every priority to focus on the “broader context of our
country and its challenges.” Bee Capitol Bureau The Sacramento Bee
WASHINGTON
President Donald Trump is threatening to withhold federal
funds from “out of control” California if the state declares
itself a sanctuary state.
“If we have to, we’ll defund,” Trump said in
an interview with Fox News host Bill
O’Reilly before the Super Bowl. “We give
tremendous amounts of money to
California, California in many ways is out of
control, as you know.”
Trump was responding to a question from O’Reilly about
efforts by Democratic state legislators to make California a
de-facto “sanctuary state” that would restrict state and
local law enforcement, including school police and
security departments, from using their resources to aid
federal authorities in immigration enforcement.
259
“I think it’s ridiculous. Sanctuary cities, as
you know, I’m very much opposed to
sanctuary cities. They breed crime, there’s
a lot of problems,” Trump said.
Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Francisco are sanctuary
cities and have said they will challenge in court any
attempt by Trump to withhold federal funds from them.
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said he doubted the 10th
amendment to the Constitution, which reserves power to
the states, would allow Trump to defund.
Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg has said he would
"join, if not lead, any effort to fight (the
sanctuary city threat) with litigation."
Trump told O’Reilly that he didn’t want to defund a state
or a city and would like to give them
“the money they need to properly operate.”
But the president added that
“if they’re going to have sanctuary cities,
we may have to do that. Certainly that
would be a weapon.”
Californa Gov. Jerry Brown pledged in his State of the
State address last month to defend everybody who has
come to the state
"for a better life and has contributed to the
well-being of our state."
“I recognize that under the Constitution,
federal law is supreme and that
Washington determines immigration policy.
But as a state we can and have had a role
to play. California has enacted several
protective measures for the undocumented:
the Trust Act, lawful driver's licenses, basic
employment rights and non-discriminatory
access to higher education,” Brown said in
his State of the State. “We may be called
upon to defend those laws and defend
them we will.”
 Trump Can Ban ANY & ALL
'Refugees' With Diseases
By Patricia Doyle Phd
2-5-2017
Hello Jeff... I found this looking for CDC Laws that would keep
immigrants and refugees out of the US due to infectious
diseases.
The President CAN issue EOs on the list of diseases as well.
Leprosy, TB etc How come the US is not using the list below i.e.
TB, Diphtheria Leprosy etc We know that refugees with TB,
Leprosy, Diphtheria, STDs have all been allowed in. Even Viral
Hemorrhagic Fevers have been allowed in and some brought into
the US by the CDC planes. Trump needs to close this door to
infected refugees and illegals.
Patty
Three Categories
Any of the following diseases: active tuberculosis,
infectious syphilis, gonorrhea, infectious leprosy,
chancroid, lymphogranuloma venereum, granuloma
inguinale, and HIV infection. (HIV infection will be
removed on January 4, 2010)
Quarantinable diseases designated by any Presidential
Executive Order. The current list of diseases includes
cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague,
smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fevers, severe
acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and influenza caused
by novel or re-emergent influenza (pandemic flu).
General Questions and Answers
Final Rule Removing HIV Infection from U.S.
Immigration Screening
Immigrants and refugees must undergo a medical exam as
part of the immigration process for entry into the United
States. The exam includes screening for any illness defined
as a communicable disease of public health significance.
All of these diseases can be easily spread between people.
Those immigrants and refugees found to have these
diseases may not enter the United States.
The screening process, along with this list of diseases
which can prevent entry into the United States, are
outlined in federal regulations written by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). If new diseases
emerge or as more is learned about diseases already on this
list, regulatory changes can be made to alter the disease
list.
260
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and
CDC are removing HIV infection from the list of diseases
that keep non-U.S. citizens from entering the United
States. General information about the change is provided
below:
What was the process for removing HIV from the list and
when will the change take effect?
HHS published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
on July 2, 2009 explaining the proposed changes in the
Federal Register and seeking public comment on those
changes. The proposed rule was based on the science that
HIV is not spread through casual contact. A public
comment period was open until August 17, 2009. These
public comments were considered in making the final
policy decision. After the comment period closed, CDC
carefully reviewed over 20,000 public comments. Most
comments supported the rule as proposed.
The final rule was published on November 2, 2009 in the
Federal Register. After the 60-day waiting period required
by federal guidelines, the final rule will go into effect on
January 4, 2010.
Before the effective date of January 4, 2010, what changes
will take place for non-U.S. citizens with HIV infection
who wish to enter the United States?
Until the final rule is in effect on January 4, 2010, non-
U.S. citizens who have HIV cannot come to the United
States unless granted a waiver by the Department of
Homeland Security. Also, all those applying for an
immigrant visa will have to be tested for HIV infection
during the immigrant medical exam until January 4, 2010.
Under the new rule, effective on January 4, 2010, HIV
testing will no longer be required as part of the immigrant
medical exam. In addition, waivers will no longer be
needed for HIV infection.
What diseases prevent non-U.S. citizens from coming to
the United States?
Diseases that can prevent entry to the U.S. fall into three
categories:
Any of the following diseases: active
tuberculosis, infectious syphilis, gonorrhea,
infectious leprosy, chancroid,
 lymphogranuloma venereum, granuloma
inguinale, and HIV infection. (HIV infection
will be removed on January 4, 2010)
Quarantinable diseases designated by
any Presidential Executive Order. The
current list of diseases includes cholera,
diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague,
smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic
fevers, severe acute respiratory syndrome
(SARS), and influenza caused by novel or
re-emergent influenza (pandemic flu).
Diseases reportable as a public health
emergency of international concern to the
World Health Organization under the
International Health Regulations of 2005.
These diseases currently include: polio,
smallpox, SARS, pandemic flu and other
public health emergencies of international
concern.
HIV infection will be removed as a communicable disease
of public health significance effective January 4, 2010. At
that time, HIV infection will not be used to keep people
from entering the United States.
Who is affected by the rule change?
Those who are not U.S. citizens will no longer be denied
entry to the United States based on their HIV status. This
would include: immigrants (including those in the United
States applying for change of status to lawful permanent
resident), refugees, and those seeking asylum. This also
includes temporary visitors for school, work or pleasure.
Why did CDC remove HIV infection from the list of
diseases that can prevent non-U.S. citizens from entering
the United States?
When the regulation preventing non-U.S. citizens from
entering the country was created in 1987, far less was
known about how HIV infection is spread and what puts
people at risk for HIV. Health experts now know that HIV
is not spread through casual contact like hugging or
shaking hands. Nor is HIV spread through the air, food or
water. In the United States, HIV infection is passed
between adults almost solely through unprotected sex with
someone who has HIV or by sharing needles or syringes
used by someone with HIV. Removing HIV infection from
the list of illnesses that prevent entry to the United States is
based on this improved knowledge of the risk of spreading
the disease.
Will the rule change increase the risk that average
Americans will contract HIV?
.
261
Allowing non-U.S. citizens with HIV infection into the
United States will not pose a risk to the public’s health
through casual contact. HIV infection is preventable and is
not spread through casual contact or day-to-day activities.
It is mainly spread through behaviors which involve the
exchange of bodily fluids during sex or sharing of needles.
HIV is not a new virus in the United States. Currently, it’s
estimated that more than 1 million Americans are living
with HIV. It is important to remember that any risk posed
by people with HIV is not a result of their nationality. The
risk of spreading HIV is only increased when a person
engages in specific behaviors, such as having unprotected
sex or sharing needles.
Why are HHS and CDC removing only HIV infection
when other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) are still
on the list of diseases that prevent entry?
Legislation passed in July 2008 removed language from
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to HIV.
This original text had mandated that HIV infection be on
the list of diseases that can keep people from coming to the
United States. The decision to remove HIV infection from
the regulations is because of this change in law and the
science of how HIV is spread. In the United States, HIV
infection is passed between adults almost solely through
unprotected sex with someone who has HIV or by sharing
needles or syringes used by someone with HIV. HIV is not
spread through casual contact.
CDC continues to review the list of diseases in the
regulations. If CDC seeks to remove other STDs in the
future, it will do so through the federal rulemaking
process.
Why does the law require 60 days before the final rule can
go into effect?
The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
requires a 60-day waiting period for any rule that has a
major economic impact. An economic analysis has shown
that this rule will have a major national economic impact.
Thus, this rule meets the OMB guidelines for the 60-day
waiting period.
The 60-day waiting period will begin on November 2,
2009. Thus, the final rule will go into effect on January 4,
2010.
Where can I find out more about the new rule?
For more information about the new rule, or to view the
rule in its entirety, please visit the Final Rule Removing
HIV Infection from U.S. Immigration Screening page.
For more information on HIV, please see
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv.
 News Pooper Scooper:
When Fake News Is Just Dog Doo
Author: Phil Butler
05.02.2017
Vladimir Putin has armies of admirers, and armies of
detractors too. Predictably, every time one of his detractors
slips on a banana peeling, the Daily Beast fake news
evangelists foam at the mouth at another chance at fetching
the propaganda stick for their handlers. In an age of
nakedly aggressive media, I see no need to call the
“Beast’s” idiocy by any other name. This time another
Putin hating, ousted oligarch loving dissident names
Vladimir Kara-Murza is supposedly Putin’s target.
Michael Weiss, a Daily Beast editor and lap dog for Putin
hating Russian oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky is yapping
and wagging his tail again from the latest morsel he’s
pooped onto the media landscape. “Has Putin Poisoned
Another Opponent?” – it’s another monotonous foray
into utter nonsense for the moronic Beast reader to smell.
Sorry, this guy is just that aggravating and just that
transparent. I honest to God hope he tries to punch me in
the nose if we ever meet. This is how badly he and others
have soiled journalism the last few years. The fact
Vladimir Kara-Murza is a coordinator for Khodorkovsky’s
nongovernmental organization, Open Russia, which Weiss
also evangelizes for, is reason enough for Putin to be the
arch villain again. Oh boy.
For those of your detecting a familiar stench, it should not
surprise you that Senior democratic U.S. lawmakers just
expressed their support for the activist (and by association
his Russian mob boss), should come as no surprise. Having
urged the new administration of President Donald Trump
to smell this “doo doo” too, the message is as obvious as a
sticky-smelly-brown-gob on the bottom of your shoe.
Weiss even evokes a magical tweet from loser Hillary
Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine.
262
The true colors of Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Putin’s opposition
has now become crystal clear, or should I say dog poop
evident? The Clinton’s shutting down the Clinton Global
Initiative was not publicized by the Daily Beast, even
though it signaled the gravy train (dog food pun intended)
for Bill and Hillary had ended. No, Weiss and the Daily
Beast did not make as big deal out of Senator John McCain
passing a fake dossier on Donald Trump to the FBI. No,
the Daily Beast, CNN, and the other wicked media children
out there keep on keeping on, for nobody responsible has
slapped them down. The world of decent human beings is
sick and tired of “Putin probably” did this or that, and they
grow even sicker of things being “Trump’s fault”, when he
only just now took office. I won’t get into Kaine’s backers
and left wing cabal connections, it’s enough for most he
was picked by Hillary for a running mate. Let me just cut
to the chase. The Daily Beast is on the side, owned by,
runs with the globalists who have the world in the mess it
is currently mired in.
Look at Weiss’ headlines:
“Tulsi Gabbard’s Fascist Escorts to
Syria”;
“AD FOR HIMSELF Donald Trump
Celebrates Himself, Proclaims His
Inaugural Day a National One of
‘Patriotic Devotion”;
“U.S. Spies Warn Trump and GOP:
Russia Could Get You Next”;
Russia’s Long History With Honey
Traps—They Didn’t Start With Donald
Trump” –
and the list goes on and on and on and on without a whiff
of proof and only the telltale smell of a killer’s propaganda
pully to show (Mikhail Khodorkovsky allegedly ordered
enemies murdered as Yukos Oil king).
A disciple of the self-proclaimed socialist, Marxist and
an anti-totalitarian journalistic zealot Christopher
Hitchens, Weiss envisions himself as some sort of British
intellectual from the radical left. But Weiss is nothing
more than an opportunist like Hitchens was, an
unscrupulous man who targets political celebrity and easy
targets to get his fame and his paycheck. His benefactor
the Kremlin’s leading critic-in-exile Khodorkovsky was
described by Britain’s Lord John Browne as basically
“spooky-scary”. As for Weiss, James Carden profiled him
perfectly with:
“Given his past association with the Henry
Jackson Society, in his work as an errand-
boy for Christopher Hitchens and the
Khodorkovsky family, and as a high profile
editor/contributor at the Daily Beast and
CNN, Weiss has established himself as the
leading neocon propagandist of his
generation.”
The Daily Beast, CNN, Newsweek, most people don’t
understand fully just how dangerous these media portals
and the psychopaths representing them are. An article by
Richard Silverstein with the lead;
“How Daily Beast Editor, Michael Weiss Helped Send
Iranian-American to Torture Chambers of Evin
Prison” portrays Weiss and his rabies stricken pack are
like. A final point of focus here is best illustrated in Weiss’
.
263
condemnation of the brave Congresswoman Tulsi
Gabbard’s trip to Syria recently, attempting to besmirch
her by virtue of her guides in Syria. Weiss barks like an
investigative journalist, in order to discredit Gabbard. This
is in stark contrast to Weiss’ 2013 doggy style co-
authoring of a The Atlantic piece with Elizabeth O’Bagy
that advocated regime change in Syria. What Weiss never
told anybody was that O’Bagy was a paid consultant for an
NGO working to provide military weapons to the Syrian
rebels and overthrow Assad, the Syrian Emergency Task
Force (SETF).
Finally, the Silverstein story suggesting that Radio Free
Liberty once sponsored Khodorkovsky’s online magazine
The Interpreter is only slightly surprising. Weiss is the
typist behind that anti-Putin pro-globalist rag, but what is
surprising at the moment is that President Trump has not
withdrawn funding for the Cold War dinosaur Refl.org.
Maybe he will read this story after I Tweet him? Of
passionate idealists, I know many including myself. But
the gulf the separates well intentioned and opinionated
journalists and these stray curs getting people killed is
wide indeed. I think it’s time for a media dog catcher to
round them up, or at least hand out a pooper-scooper to the
public.
 Trump Is Legally, By Law, Permitted To Ban & Boot
Illegal Aliens On Mental & Physical Health Grounds
By Patricia Doyle PhD
2-5-2017
Hello Jeff
Donald Trump is within his legal rights to use
communicable disease law to keep refugees with infectious
diseases like TB, Diphtheria, Whooping Cough etc out of
the US.
Chagas is a death sentence and was not locally acquired in
the US until the influx of illegals from Central and South
America and Mexico.
It is time to get out the pen and write up an EO (also the
right of the President of the US) to use certain diseases to
keep infected immigrants and refugees out of the US.
The laws already exist on the books and certain new
diseases and old deadly diseases like Chagas should be
added.
Time to get serious on immigration and the danger to the
public health of the people of the US.
Once again…
I hope Trump will implement health related grounds for
inadmissibility to the US. This includes not only
communicable diseases but also mental health conditions
that make an immigrant a danger to themselves or others
as well as a history of drug abuse or addiction.
I would hope they include a propensity to rape as a related
grounds for inadmissibility to the US.
Please check out the website below for more information
on health related grounds of inadmissibility to the US as
well as physical or mental grounds of inadmissibility to the
US.
Donald Trump should also use this information as means
of stopping all immigration until we can determine the
people who are allowed into the US are of no danger to
America.
I do not believe those from a society that tolerates rape and
practices rape frequently are going to make a good future
American…ever. I also think any refugee or immigrants
to the US who iareaccused of rape or convicted of rape
should be (castrated) and deported immediately.
264
For more information
http://www.eb5investors.com/blog/health-related-grounds-
inadmissibility-united-states
https://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/exams/medi
cal-examination-faqs.html#5
How Health Issues Can Make You Inadmissible to the
U.S.
While a common cold won't stop you from being admitted
to the U.S. with a visa or green card, more serious
communicable diseases might, as well as disorders that
might cause you to harm yourself or others.
Anyone applying to visit or reside in U.S., whether on a
temporary visa or a permanent green card, must prove that
he or she does not present a health risk to the general
public. These requirements are known as health-related
grounds of inadmissibility.
You might not be allowed to enter or remain in the United
States if you:
 have a communicable disease of public health
significance
 lack required vaccinations
 have or have had a physical or mental disorder that
causes you to engage in behavior that might be
harmful to yourself or others, or
 have a history of drug abuse or addiction.
Even if you have never been diagnosed with an alcohol- or
drug-related health issue, a record of alcohol- or drug-
related arrests (a DUI, for instance) or criminal offenses
can result in your being found inadmissible on health
grounds.
There are waivers available for all health-related grounds
of inadmissibility except drug abuse and addiction.
How Your Health-Related Inadmissibility Will Be
Discovered
Health-related inadmissibility issues are typically
discovered when immigration officials review either your
answers to questions about your health in your visa or
green card application forms, the results of your
immigration medical examination (required for every
immigrant—that is, permanent resident—visa or green
card, and for some temporary visitors), criminal and court
records you submit with your application, and any other
documents or information you provide at interviews and
inspections.
You will need to answer questions regarding your health
on almost any application you might submit, whether it’s
for a temporary (nonimmigrant) or an immigrant visa. The
questions you see on the forms asking about your history
of communicable disease, substance abuse, and physical
and mental disorders all pertain to your potential
inadmissibility on health-grounds.
What to Expect During the Medical Examination
In an immigration medical examination, the physician will
most likely review your medical record, vaccinations,
chest x-rays, and laboratory results, and perform a physical
examination. If you are applying from outside the U.S. to
enter and reside permanently, you must undergo a medical
examination by a physician certified by the Department of
State. If you are already residing in the United States and
applying for permanent residency (adjustment of status),
you will need to attend a medical examination by a
physician certified by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services (USCIS).
The physician will prepare a report summarizing his or her
medical findings for the immigration authorities.
Communicable Disease Ground of Inadmissibility
The list of communicable diseases that bar people from
entering the United States, which is kept by the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC), continues to grow.
The list includes a number of quarantinable diseases (such
as cholera, plague, smallpox, and yellow fever), as well as
leprosy, tuberculosis, and pandemic flu. Recently HIV and
other sexually transmitted diseases (such as chancroid and
gonorrhea) were removed from this list.
The physician conducting your medical examination (if
any) will ask you about certain diseases depending on what
countries you’ve lived in or traveled to. The physician will
also examine your medical history, blood test, and chest x-
rays for traces of communicable diseases.
Physical or Mental Disorder Ground of Inadmissibility
Having a physical or mental disorder that creates behavior
harmful to property, safety, or public welfare can make
you inadmissible. Harmful behavior is defined as
psychological or physical injury to the applicant or another
person (such as a suicide attempt or pedophilia), a threat to
health or safety (such as driving while intoxicated or
265
threatening to kill someone), or damage to major property.
Mental illness alone without any harmful behavior will not
make you inadmissible.
Even if you no longer have a harmful disorder, you may
still be inadmissible if the disorder is likely to reoccur.
And even if you have no prior diagnosis or record of any
disorders, a history of crimes such as assaults and domestic
violence involving alcohol and drugs could result in a
referral for a mental examination and ultimately a finding
of inadmissibility.
A record of alcohol-related offenses, or any other evidence
of alcohol abuse, like driving while under the influence,
may lead to a referral to a physician to determine whether
you have and alcohol-related mental or physical disorder
causes harmful behavior. Anything more than a single
drunk driving arrest or conviction may result in a referral
to a physician.
Drug Abuse and Addiction
Related Ads
A history of drug abuse or addiction will bar you from
entering the U.S. on health grounds. Drug abuse is broadly
defined to mean anything beyond mere experimenting. In
general, experimenting is considered just one use.
Anything beyond one non-medical use of a controlled
substance will be considered drug abuse. Normally, the
physician giving the medical examination will administer a
drug test only upon deciding that it is necessary in the
individual person’s case.
If you have any drug- or alcohol-related arrests or
convictions on your record, consult with an immigration
attorney before applying for a U.S. visa or residency.
These items on your record may also make you
inadmissible on criminal or controlled substance
trafficking grounds.
Vaccinations and Inadmissibility
Applicants for green cards or immigrant visas (but not
temporary visas) are required to have vaccinations against
a number of diseases, including influenza, measles,
mumps, and rubella. (See the USCIS Web page on
“Vaccination Requirements” for the full list.) The
influenza vaccine will be required only if you are entering
the United State during flu season, generally between
October and March of each year.
Bring your vaccination records to your immigration
medical examination: If you show the physician the proof
of your past vaccinations, you can avoid getting them
again, and paying for them! The physician will determine
which vaccines are appropriate for your age.
Internationally adopted children under the age of ten are
not required to have vaccinations before they enter the
United States. However, they will be required to have their
vaccinations completed within 30 days of arrival.
Vaccinations that are against your religious beliefs will not
be required.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-health-
issues-can-make-you-inadmissible-the-us.html
PS Jeff...
I hope Donald Trump will implement health-related
grounds for inadmissibility to the US. This includes not
only communicable diseases but also mental health
conditions that make an immigrant a danger to themselves
or others as well as a history of drug abuse or addiction.
266
I would hope they include a propensity to rape as a related
grounds for inadmissibility to the US.
Please check out the website below for more information
on health related grounds of inadmissibility to the US as
well as physical or mental grounds of inadmissibility to the
US.
Donald Trump should also use this information as means
of stopping all immigration until we can determine the
people who are allowed into the US are of no danger to
America.
I do not believe that a society who tolerates rape and
practices rape frequently is going to make a good future
American. I also think any refugee or immigrant to the US
who is accused of rape or convicted of rape should be
deported immediately.
 Supreme Court To Make
Landmark Ruling On ‘Voiding The Election’
By Baxter Dmitry
Posted On February 5, 2017

The plaintiffs believe the election must be held all over

again, in the interests of fairness.

Describing the court case as a

“legal and peaceful way to solve our

problem“, the letter also states “we need to
connect with big name celebrities ASAP.”
A lawsuit filed to rule the election result
null and void and declare President
Trump an illegitimate president has
made it all the way to the Supreme
Court.
The ‘Void The Election’ case, as it is known
in legal circles, was filed by three
Massachusetts women, Diane Blumstein,
Nancy Goodman, and Donna Soodalter-
Toman, and has been heard by a Supreme
Court Justice. It is now on the docket and
awaiting response by the defendants.
While the suit is being presented as a However opponents of the suit claim that it is an attempt to
miraculous, grassroots push by the three
women against all odds, it actually “create a civil war.“
represents the latest attempt by the elite to
overturn the result of the election and “Do you want civil war?” a Twitter user
suggests the Democratic party and Hillary asked. “This is how you create a civil war.”
Clinton have still not accepted the loss.
The Supreme Court case is the latest attempt by the elite to
“We decided to file suit to nullify the
overturn the result of a free and fair election. They waged
election and we consulted with
a six-week campaign behind the scenes attempting to
constitutional lawyers, cyber security folks,
the CIA,” the group stated in a letter. “They convince Republican electors not to vote for Donald
told us that yes the Russians hacked the Trump and confirm him as President. That failed –
embarrassingly – after Hillary Clinton actually lost more
elections but we would not be able to
formulate a plan and get and a writ to court. electors than Donald Trump, and the most by any
We did. We were told the federal district presidential candidate in over a century.
court would not hear it. They did.“
Then outgoing President Obama and DHS Chief Jeh
“They not only heart it, they…expedited our Johnson tried to seize control of the election system in
path. We were told we could not get it to America by illegally federalizing it, attempting to give
the Supreme Court. We did. We were told themselves the legal right to overturn the result. That also
we could not get it heard by a Justice. We failed.
did. Twice.”
“Against all odds and the predictions of Massive, Soros funded protests heaved across the nation,
many, our case #16-907, awaits the attempting to portray Trump as an illegitimate president.
Supreme Court’s hearing.“ And mainstream media has worked overtime attempting to
267
smear the President in any way possible, even with fake Now we have the Supreme Court case, the last dangerous
news – most notably the unverified dossier published by roll of the dice for the elite who have refused to change
BuzzFeed and instantly jumped on by CNN in a desperate their platform and would love to hold new elections and
attempt to destabilize the new administration. resurrect their mascot Clinton.

268
 President Trump Shuts Down
Anti-Putin Hysteria With One Simple Question
Trump Realizes It's Time For America To Get Off Its (Very) High Horse
Richard Brandt
Sun, Feb 5, 2017
Just say no to anti-Russia hysteria
It was a familiar scene: Bill O’Reilly pressing his guest to
make a saber-rattling statement against Russia. Good for
ratings, good for Raytheon!
But Bill's guest was President Trump, and Donald didn't
want to play along.
In an interview which will be aired before the Super Bowl
on Sunday, Trump shut down O'Reilly's unique brand of
self-righteousness with one simple question:
"You think our country is so innocent?"
After Trump reaffirmed his respect for Putin as a leader,
Bill pressed him further: "But Putin is a killer."
Trump's response:
“There are a lot of killers. We have a lot
of killers,” Trump said. “Well, you think
our country is so innocent?”
Trump added that he thinks the United States is “better”
getting along with Russia than not.
269
“If Russia helps us in the fight against
ISIS, which is a major fight, and Islamic
terrorism all around the world, major
fight. That’s a good thing,” Trump said.
A few thoughts:
1. We can already imagine your comments: "But Trump
just called Putin a killer!" Not really. Instead he simply
parried the question: What makes Putin so exceptional
in the eyes of self-righteous dingbats such as O'Reilly?
Trump understands that Putin is not an anomaly
among world leaders. In other words: If you label Putin
a "killer", what would you call Obama? One of these
leaders had an actual kill list. And it wasn't Putin.
2. Trump's statement is meaningful because it challenges
America to dismount from its high horse, instead of
lecturing from the perch of its blood-soaked saddle.
3. What Trump is saying to Bill (and to the rest of
America) is that we are entering a new era of true
pragmatism. Gone are the days of self-righteous
moralizing and chest-thumping idealism. Russia plays
a critical role in ensuring global security and stability.
Let's acknowledge this and work with the Russians,
instead of calling them names. We're not in
kindergarten.
4. Trump just illustrated the difference between Making
America Great Again and decades of delusional
American Exceptionalism.
It's undoubtedly a good sign when the
President of the United States refuses to
bash a foreign leader, and instead asks
his country to look inward.
More of this, please.
 10 Magazine Covers That Expose
The Liberal Left’s Propaganda Movement
Alex Christoforou
February 5, 2017

Yesterday The Duran published a piece on German
magazine, Der Spiegel’s cover showing Trump as some
sort of crazed ISIS style Jihadi.
It’s obvious that the cover went too far when displaying its
hate for President Trump, but the cover’s purpose, and
ultimate goal, is shared among many neo-liberal left and
neocon right publications…
The Der Spiegel cover is in fact a sign of the hysteria and
hyperbole that has developed around the person of Donald
Trump. If things are not yet quite as bad as they have been
with the Western media’s coverage of Putin, it shows that
they are heading in the same direction.
Der Spiegel is one of many magazine covers (listed below)
that are openly calling for the removal of President Trump.

to remove Trump from the Office of The recent events in UC Berkeley over
POTUS. the weekend show that their message is
To compare even indirectly and in a cartoon cover Donald resonating with a very violent and
Trump’s ‘travel ban’ Executive Order with the murderous destructive liberal left contingent.
barbarism of ISIS and of other Jihadis is not merely
ridiculous; it is also deeply offensive.

Der Spiegel is one of many establishment media magazines calling for "Resistance" against President Donald Trump
270
 Bloomberg Businessweek
This was Bloomberg’s way of commenting on Trump’s executive orders.

271
 Mother Jones
Left-wing Mother Jones tears a strip off Trump with the call to action: “Rise Up”.

272
 The New Yorker
The Statue of Liberty’s extinguished flame smolders promotes fear and doom.

273
 The Atlantic
The image of what a Trump presidency looks like, with the tagline “How to Build an Autocracy.”

274
 The Economist
Are they sending a message to the anarchists on the left?

275
 Time
Stephen Bannon of Breitbart News, in a Machiavellian stare.

276
 Harper’s
“A Resister’s Guide” to the Trump Presidency. Not subtle at all.

277
 Newsweek
A call to California, the Golden State, to resist the Trump administration.

278
 The Advocate
The LGBT magazine says it’s “time to panic.” For what reason? Trump supports LGBT rights.

279
 Kremlin Says It Wants Apology
From Fox News Over Putin Comments
Reuters
February 6, 2017

MOSCOW (Reuters) - The Kremlin said on Monday it

wanted an apology from Fox News over what it said were
"unacceptable" comments one of the channel's presenters
made about Russian President Vladimir Putin in an
interview with U.S. counterpart Donald Trump.

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly described Putin as "a killer" in

the interview with Trump as he tried to press the U.S.
president to explain more fully why he respected his
Russian counterpart. O'Reilly did not say who he thought
Putin had killed.

"We consider such words from the Fox TV

company to be unacceptable and insulting,
and honestly speaking, we would prefer to
get an apology from such a respected TV
company," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry
Peskov told reporters on a conference call.

Fox News and O'Reilly did not immediately respond to a

Reuters request for comment.

Trump's views on Putin are closely scrutinized in the

United States where U.S. intelligence agencies have
accused Moscow of having sponsored computer hacking to
help Trump win office, and critics say he is too
complimentary about the Russian leader.

Trump, when commenting on the allegations against Putin

in the same interview, questioned how "innocent" the
United States itself was, saying it had made a lot of its own
mistakes. That irritated some Congressional Republicans
who said there was no comparison between how Russian
and U.S. politicians behaved.
Putin, in his 17th year of dominating the Russian political
landscape, is accused by some Kremlin critics of ordering
280
the killing of opponents. Putin and the Kremlin have agent Alexander Litvinenko in London, Trump said he saw
repeatedly rejected those allegations as politically- no evidence the Russian president was guilty.
motivated and false.
"First of all, he says he didn't do it. Many
Trump, who has said he wants to try to mend battered people say it wasn't him. So who knows
U.S.-Russia ties and hopes he can get along with Putin, who did it?" Trump said.
was asked a question about some of those allegations by
Fox Business before he won the White House. (Reporting by Maria Tsvetkova/Andrew Osborn; Editing
by Ralph Boulton)
In January last year, after a British judge ruled that Putin
had "probably" authorized the murder of former KGB
.

281
 Trump Administration To Get To The Bottom Of Who
Leaked Transcripts Of His Private Phone Calls –
And What Should Happen Next
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 06, 2017
It is obvious by now that the Washington bureaucracy that
President Donald Trump and his team inherited from
former President Obama is basically an opposition party,
replete with faceless individuals who have pledged to
undermine him at every opportunity.
That became obvious when transcripts of phone
conversations Trump had with certain world leaders were
leaked to the Democratic Party’s propaganda wing, the
establishment media.
In the first case, a transcript of Trump’s conversation with
the Mexican president, Eduardo Peta Nieto, was leaked,
but was done in such a way as to clearly misrepresent the
context. As noted by The Associated Press, Trump
allegedly threatened U.S. military intervention into Mexico
in order to take care of “bad hombres” if that country
couldn’t do it. It wasn’t clear who Trump meant when he
referred to bad hombres, but you can take your guess – it’s
likely to mean the drug cartels, the human smugglers, or
both. (RELATED: Find out how they’re fooling us today
at Hoax.news)
But then the AP went on to note that Mexican officials
denied there was ever any seriousness to Trump’s “threat,”
and in fact, they reported just the opposite:
Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexico’s
presidential office, denied the tone of the
conversation was hostile or humiliating,
saying it was respectful.
“It is absolutely false that the president of
the United States threatened to send
troops to Mexico,” Sanchez said in an
282
interview with Radio Formula on
Wednesday night.
The transcript of another call with Australian Prime
Minister Malcolm Turnbull had discussions ending
abruptly after Trump discovered that Obama had made a
lousy deal with the land Down Under to take at least some
of the many Muslim refugees they were detaining from
Indonesia and elsewhere (Australians of all political stripes
have seen what is happening in the U.S. and Europe and
want no part of the problems attributed to the mass
migration of Muslims from the Middle East).
In any event, after these two incidents, the president wants
the leaks tracked down. As Sean Spicer, White House
spokesman, in a transcript obtained by Reuters, told Fox
News,
“The president takes these leaks very
seriously.”
“That’s troubling and I think the president
has asked the team to look into this
because those are very serious
implications,” he said, adding that calls
were “candid” but respectful, and that even
the two governments were refuting some of
what’s been reported.
As The National Sentinel noted in reporting on the leaks:
Okay, so it’s obvious that there are
elements within our government that are
hostile to the current administration. …
These kinds of attempts at sabotaging the
Trump presidency will not go away, and in
fact, you should probably count on them
getting even more intense as our billionaire
president seeks to fulfill his campaign
pledge to “drain the swamp.” The swamp’s
inhabitants – in the Congress, in the
bureaucracy and in the donor class – are
not going to simply go away quietly.
The only way to prevent further sabotage in the future is to
dramatically reduce the amount of bureaucracy – as in, get
rid of many of the careerists who are dead-set against this
president primarily for the reason that he wants to
eliminate their jobs. (RELATED: Trump is dedicated to
cutting red tape and bureaucracy – learn more at
BigGovernment.news)
Beyond that, careerist bureaucrats – particularly in the
State Department, which is inhabited by Left-wing Ivy
League foreign policy types who have a very liberal
worldview and a certain way of doing things – simply do
not share Trump’s “America first” vision. And they
.
283
certainly don’t appreciate the manner in which he gets
things done. They, like the rest of the political and media
establishment, have never seen or met or had to deal with
any U.S. president like Trump, and probably never will
again.
That aside, their job is to serve the American people by
serving the president, who was duly elected. In the
meantime, Trump is likely to keep some staffers extremely
busy hunting down those who leaked the intimate details
of his government. These won’t be the last leaks.
 Apple, Google, Uber Join Fight
Against Trump Travel Ban
By AP
6 Feb 2017
SEATTLE (AP) — Dozens of tech companies, including
behemoths like Apple, Google, and Facebook, are siding
with Washington state and Minnesota as they fight
President Donald Trump’s ban on refugees and travelers
from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering
the United States.
The companies filed briefs late Sunday with a federal
appellate court saying the Trump executive order hurts
their businesses.
In their court filing with the San Francisco-based 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals, a total of 97 companies said
Trump’s travel ban
“hinders the ability of American companies
to attract great talent; increases costs
imposed on business; makes it more
difficult for American firms to compete in
the international marketplace.”
The travel ban would prompt businesses to build
operations outside the United States, said the companies.
The long list of enterprises looking to join the fight against
.
284
Trump are among the country’s biggest, most high-profile
businesses like Uber, eBay and Netflix.
The businesses are looking to help Washington and
Minnesota as they sue Trump. The states have said the ban
harmed residents and effectively mandated discrimination.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this weekend denied
the administration’s request to immediately set aside a
Seattle judge’s ruling that put a hold on the ban
nationwide.
Trump’s order applied to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya,
Somalia and Yemen — countries the administration said
raise terrorism concerns. The order sparked nationwide
airport protests and caused confusion for many foreigners
trying to reach the United States.
Trump has said he’s trying to protect Americans. The
government says the president has the authority to decide
who can enter the country.
However the companies, in their court filing, said Trump’s
executive order would destroy the entrepreneurial spirit
that fuels American businesses.
Immigrants make many of the nation’s greatest
discoveries, and create some of the country’s most
innovative and iconic companies,” the court filing said.
“The experience and energy of people who
come to our country to seek a better life for
themselves and their children_to pursue
the ‘American Dream’_are woven
throughout the social, political, and
economic fabric of the nation.”
 Trump Seeking “State Of Emergency”
To Limit Rights Of All Americans
Not A Brain Among Them, Simple As That
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
February 6, 2017
The “Muslim Ban” carried a covert agenda, to move
forward the attack on constitutional guarantees put in place
after 9/11 by targeting “legal residents” as a steppingstone
to very real martial law.
The war here has always been domestic, hardly against the
violent “alt-right” bombers and school shooters and the
occasional rogue Muslim, usually brought into the US by
the CIA or controlled by another agency. Think “Fort
Hood” where a Bush transition team psychiatrist went on a
shooting spree or the Gabby Giffords shooter, part of a US
Army “pre-enlistment conditioning experiment.”
This isn’t “fake new,” but documented fact, suppressed but
documented.
No, the real goal here is simple, use the
legal loophole of America’s airport
“black sites” to strip rights from legal
residents who enjoy nearly full
constitutional protections, and set a
precedent for a permanent “State of
Emergency” that limits rights of all
Americans.
Truth is such a rare commodity, I should start selling it.
Giving it away degrades it, or so I am told.
The entire ban thing is a scam. Every effort, by the real
best minds in the world, to attribute some intellectual
ability, simple brain power or even economic acumen to
Trump and those around him, have turned up nothing.
285
These are simply idiots, Mattis perhaps the worst of all
and g-d help us, he runs the DOD. We begin.
Bannon aimed the ban at American permanent residents
who were traveling outside the United States only. There
are few refugees in the pipeline and permanent residents
who are within the US have well established, backed by
many powerful legal decisions, the right to stay forever
and full legal protections including due process.
Trump lied.
Bush created and Obama allowed out of cowardice the
Department of Homeland Security to establish, illegally
according to the ACLU, a “virtual concentration camp”
zone at America’s airports where no laws exist at all
including right to counsel, cruel and unusual punishment,
search and seizure or protections to the press.
The DHS picked me up and began rifling through my
cloud based email and documents, based on me being a
member of the press, in order to find sources for leaks on
US government biological and chemical warfare programs
in Georgia, not the state. This is typical, the DHS recently
put a former prime minister of Norway into detention
because he had visited Iran, as a Prime Minister of
Norway, a NATO country mind you. Yes, they were crazy
under Obama and are now worse.
As was reported today in the Washington Post, the DHS, at
their airport “black sites,” and they very much that, these
are nasty places, have seized passports and other
documents from permanent legal US residents and
destroyed them.
Nobody has this right except that the DHS has become a
law upon itself and the American people had, until now,
simply allowed laws and justice, based on the 9/11
incident and its aftermath, and to be truthful, the real
disaster was the rigged 2000 election. 9/11 was a “given,”
a New Pearl Harbor planned as early as 1997, to forward
the neocon and Israeli agenda of permanent war in the
Middle East as cover for world organized crime, but I
digress.
Trump is the neocon and Israeli agenda and we await the
next carefully staged outrage, particularly after the court
smackdown Trump received after trying to erase the
constitution without slaughtering a few thousand
Americans first. He should have paid attention to last
time. Now back to the seized and destroyed documents:
Now the court demands they be replaced, no we aren’t
kidding. Green cards, visas, passports were physically
seized or “submitted” based on days of no food, no sleep
and continual threats and physical intimidation.
In every American airport that accepts overseas flights, the
DHS detains and interrogates American citizens, the
majority of whom are on lists because a prime DHS
contractor uses off the shelf social media collection
software and their names came up discussing politics or
criticizing the government.
Go read that one again, this is exactly where Customs and
Immigration, part of DHS, gets their terror lists, gleaned
from Facebook posts, Google searches and comment
boards.
As a defense contractor partnering with firms in Canada,
Egypt and Qatar, I was given copies of this “classified”
software. It is garbage and I was embarrassed to be
involved with it. Egypt wanted to use it to round up the
remaining Muslim Brotherhood folks, software really
written to single out potential buyers for Ford F150 trucks.
This is the same crap, and there are no special algorithms
applied, that the CIA and DHS use to create their “enemies
lists” that include the names of what we are told include
over 8 million Americans, singled out for “extreme
vetting” and surveillance of their electronic existence by
the NSA.
I think the number is closer to 25 million.
Let’s go back to the main subject for a second. The court
understood what was going on, but the press seems to be
either blind, bought off or stupid. Trump’s entire program
and Bannon is the real Trump and is even dumber. Karl
Rove is a bright guy, twisted and morally corrupt but not
stupid. Bannon is not Rove, this is an empty hat.
I have never seen so many people who look close to death
in my life, with the exception of Betsy DeVos, the East
Grand Rapids “Stepford Wife.” The entire administration
sits at some level of dementia with Trump well past
Reagan in that department.
Has he commented on the Bowling Green Massacre yet?
Inquiring minds want to know.
.
286
The issue isn’t so much the nations on the list but the fact
that Trump said he was willing to extend the list to
Paksitan (India?), Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well, perhaps
even China. Other administration hacks, as a form of
humor, have suggested Australia be added.
The US is competing for top level technology people from
around the world to support not only economic growth
here but our defense industry. We work on DARPA
projects that are dependent on technologies where the US
is way behind. Iran leads in physics over the US and we
have long recruited their folks, now blocked, to support
important energy programs for the US Navy among other
agencies and organizations.
It goes much further but suffice it to say that the US has a
huge, $8bn I know of personally, black budget to recruit
and employ top technology workers from banned or
“under threat of ban” nations for “in the pipeline”
technologies to keep our defenses credible.
Tech is out there that blinds our satellites, can bring down
our planes, disable our ships, track our submarines and
hack any part of any of those systems and is not
continually used simply because it would be an act of war
and the US is being “kicked to the curb” anyway by its
crazy politics and shabby economy.
It is bad enough that most of our military programs are
patched together Carter era technology. Our satellites
can’t spot 12,000 ISIS fuel trucks in a row that can be seen
with a $30 spotting scope from the surface of Mars.
The US can no longer track nuclear material even at its
own ports, much less being peddled around the world.
The only reason the Trump “State of Emergency” and
habeas corpus challenge failed, which may also be
considered “martial law,” is that defense and tech
industries were never consulted as to impact and threw
their considerable power and cash against what was a
poorly considered power grab.
Quite frankly, congress, now crippled by having so many
paid off by Sheldon Adelson and Betsy DeVos, will never
be able to get the truth. What is needed is for Bannon to
be called in and questioned as to what he was thinking and
if he was advised to do this.
It is vital for the survival of the US for whoever was
responsible for trying to push through a stealth martial law
executive order to be found and dealt with.
If it was Bannon himself, remedies need to be found,
isolating his influence and removing Trump and Pence
from any governing and command functions.
 Trump Implodes
As Constitutional Crisis Explodes
By Allen L Roland, Phd
February 6, 2017
“Help me, Steve, I’m in Over My Head and Losing my Mandate
President Trump and top advisor Steve
Bannon confer as Trump’s credibility
rightfully crumbles and the Trump
circus faces inevitable an foreclosure.
“Democracy is the art and science
of running the circus from the
monkey cage.” H. L. Mencken
Stop wishful thinking ~ we are in the midst
of a right wing coup. The principle architect
is Steve Bannon and Trump is his willing
disciple. As I said last week, it will most
certainly get worse ~ chaos is Bannon’s
aim and out of it will come a right wing
order and the courts will attempt to give
them their legal cover. It’s been in the
planning stage for some time and it comes
as no surprise but is already resulting in
massive public revolt and protest. The
United States is perilously close to war with
the principle target being Iran as well as the
growing possibility of a false flag attack. LA
Times cartoonist David Horsey fully
captures the frightening reality of a
mentally unstable President coming face to
face with not only his crumbling credibility
but his rapidly eroding base: Allen L
Roland, PhD
The Ultimate Reality Show – President-Elect Donald
Trump Is Now Prime Time
“On some great and glorious day the plain
folks of the land will reach their heart’s
desire at last, and the White House will be
287
adorned by a downright moron.” H.L.
Mencken
The petulant president with his consigliere
I originally posted this column in May, 2016 and posited
that America had achieved the pinnacle of H.L.Mencken’s
famous quote about the eventual election of a moron with
the disputed election of George W Bush but that was just a
rung above the growing possibility of a President Trump.
Donald Trump represents the last desperate hope of an
American electorate who have been seemingly left out of
the political process and have lost respect for our Republic
~ so in their powerless dilemma, many have turned to a
billionaire huckster who will gleefully voice their fears and
concerns while creating a grade D political reality show
which sadly has become American politics ~
and he is now our President as well as
creating chaos along with his bizarre
right wing inner circle.
***
“Here is something to keep you awake
at night: Your future, and the future of
the world, now rests in the hands of a
tiny team of zealots and opportunistic
hacks in the White House who prefer to
rule the country by edict and
“alternative facts” while ignoring the
 courts, leaving Congress out of the
loop, purging seasoned officials from
the government and targeting the
independent media. Yes, there was an
election, but this feels more like a coup”
~ David Horsey, LA Times

We are living in dangerous times but we

are now a part of Trump’s ultimate right
wing reality show ~ which demands our
rightfully concerned voices or we will
suffer the same fate as Germany in the
1930’s.
“Every man of humane convictions must
decide on the protest that best suits his
convictions, but we must all protest.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.
And now, we have Trump’s National Security Advisor
Michael Flynn’s accusation that Iran’s recent ballistic
missile test violated a UN resolution, which is not backed
by any evidence, and Press Secretary Spicer’s allegation of
an Iranian attack on a U.S. ship which is also a complete
fabrication – Paul Jay interviews Ben Norton
.

288
 Trump Says Mexican President 'Has Got A Problem' With
Cartels, Slams California 'Sanctuary State' Push
Foxnews.Com
Published February 06, 2017
President Donald Trump told Fox News' Bill O'Reilly in an
exclusive interview broadcast Monday that Mexican
President Enrique Pena Nieto "has got a problem" with
drug cartels in his country and could need U.S. assistance.
Trump was responding to reports that he told Pena Nieto in
a phone call last week that the U.S. would send troops to
Mexico to tackle the drug gangs, which the president said
were
"poisoning the youth of our country and ...
countries all over the world."
The president told O'Reilly that the Mexican leader was "a
very good man" and claimed that the two had "a very good
relationship."
"I did talk to him about it. I want to help him
with it," the president said. "We’ve got to
stop drugs from coming into our country
and if he can’t handle it –and maybe they
can or maybe they can’t or maybe he
needs help."
Trump has repeatedly vowed to construct a massive wall
along the southern border, a vow he repeated to O'Reilly.
He also said that he would revisit the North American Free
Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada, a pact he
repeatedly criticized on the campaign trail.
"I’m going to put another F in the name
NAFTA," Trump said. "Because right now
it’s free trade and I’m going to have it ‘fair
trade’ also, because it’s not fair. We’re
losing $60 billion a year in trade deficits
with Mexico. Can’t do that."
The president also criticized a push by California
lawmakers to make the Golden State a so-called "sanctuary
.
289
state" that would prohibit local law enforcement from
cooperating with immigration authorities.
"I think it's ridiculous," Trump said. "I will
tell you that sanctuary cities are – they’ve
got a lot of problems and there’s
tremendous crime. A lot of people agree
with me, this was a campaign issue.
"We will certainly not stand for sanctuary
even cities, let alone states."
Trump also said that California
"in many ways is out of control ... from an
economic standpoint ... People are leaving
California [and] going to Texas and other
places that are run in a different manner,
but we’ll see what happens."
The president also discussed his relationship with his
precessor in the Oval Office, Barack Obama.
"I don’t know if he’ll admit this, but he likes
me," Trump said of Obama. "I can feel it.
That’s what I do in life, it’s called ... like, I
understand."
Trump acknowledged that he and Obama had been
"vicious" to each other during last year's election
campaign.
"We said horrible things about each other,
and then we hop into the car [on
Inauguration Day] and we drive down
Pennsylvania Avenue together and we
don’t even talk about it," the president said.
"Politics is amazing."
 Evidence Suggests Trump
Lost Popular Vote Due To Fraud
By Jerome R. Corsi -
02.06.2017 @4:15 PM EST
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Those opposing
vigorous and truthful examination of
voter fraud in the United States
are advancing a narrative asserting
there is “no proof of voter fraud” in
recent years.
This past weekend, Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell, R-KY, said on CNN’s “State of the Nation”
program that he does not want to spend federal funds to
investigate President Trump’s claims of massive voter
fraud in the 2016 presidential election because
“there’s no evidence that [election fraud]
occurred in such a significant number that it
could have changed the presidential
election.”
While McConnell may be right, there is evidence that
would suggest voter fraud prevented Trump from winning
the popular vote, as well as the electoral vote.
Democratic Party operatives and their supporters in the
Democratic Party-sympathetic main stream media
originally crafted and advanced this meme in a transparent
effort to ward off all responsible efforts to enact the type of
Voter ID laws that would largely rule out or dramatically
reduce the possibility of systematic Democratic Party voter
fraud.
Today, while no American can board an airplane today
without showing TSA employees a valid government-
issued ID, the far-left screams “voter suppression” and
brings lawyers affiliated with the Democratic Party to
court to litigate every time efforts are made to pass voter
ID laws.
290
A truthful examination provides ample evidence President
Trump is right in asserting Democratic Party fraud
accounts for between 3 to 5 million illegal votes to be cast,
enough to cost him the popular vote.
In the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton with 65,853,625 votes
won the popular vote by some three million over Donald
Trump, who got 62,985,105 votes. The three million vote
margin needed to have swung the popular vote victory to
Trump could have been obtained had Democratic Party
fraud amounted to only 2.5 percent of the total votes cast.
While the Washington Post, in an article published on Dec.
1, 2016, claimed that there were just four documented
cases of voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election, the
newspaper restricted its “proof” to only those cases in
which someone was caught and faced possible criminal
prosecution after being caught voting twice, voting
illegally as a non-citizen or a criminal felon or voting for
someone already deceased.
The available voter fraud evidence suggests voter fraud in
precincts controlled by the Democrats around the country
could easily top 2.5 percent of the total votes cast,
provided we do not restrict, as the Washington Post did,
the “evidence of voter fraud” to cases where fraudulent
voters are caught.
The issue of voter fraud, properly stated, involves the type
of systematic Democratic Party fraud that eludes detection
precisely because Democratic Party politicians and
election officials take active steps to encourage illegal
voting that they have no intention of reporting,
investigating or prosecuting.
Truthfully, we need look no further than the 2016
Michigan recount demanded by Green Party candidate Jill
Stein find clear evidence of systematic Democratic Party
voting fraud.
2016 Michigan recount finds voter fraud in Detroit
In the Michigan recount, instead of swinging the election
to Clinton, the recount found evidence of massive voter
fraud in Wayne County, pointing to Democratic Party
voter fraud in Detroit, where Michigan’s largest city in
Michigan’s largest county had voted overwhelmingly for
Clinton, as noted by Roger Stone in his recent book,
Making of the President 2016, on pages 296-298.
Stone reported voting machines in more than one-third of
all Detroit precincts registered more votes that the number
of people recorded having voted.
Overall, state records showed 10.6 percent of the precincts
in the state’s 22 counties could not be recounted because
Michigan state law bars recounts for unbroken precincts or
precincts submitting ballot boxes with broken seals.
The Detroit news reported the problems were the worst in
Detroit where officials could not recount votes in 392
precincts, or nearly 60 percent of the total, with two-thirds
of these precincts having too many votes.
The newspaper further noted Hillary Clinton
overwhelmingly prevailed in Democratic-controlled
Detroit, while Republican President-elect Donald Trump
won Michigan by only 10,704 votes, or by 47.5 percent to
47.3 percent.
The voting fraud found in Detroit as a result of the 2016
Michigan recount suggests recounts in the Democratic-
controlled precincts in other rust-belt cities, including,
Chicago, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, as well
Newark, New Jersey, bear rigorous recount investigations
to see if similar patterns of Democratic Party voting fraud
can be validated.
A study published by the Pew Center on the States in
February 2012, entitled “Inaccurate, Costly, and
Inefficient: Evidence That America’s Voter
Registration System Needs an Upgraded,” documented
that approximately 24 million – one of every eight – voter
registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are
significantly inaccurate, with more than 1.8 million
deceased individuals listed as voters, and approximately
2.75 million people with registrations in more than one
state.”
While the Pew Center on the States does not prove that
voter fraud caused someone to vote for all the deceased on
voter registration rolls, or that a large proportion of those
registered in more than one state voted in more than one
state, the 2016 presidential election provides evidence
Democrats in various states have exploited registration
problems that could be solved with a Voter ID system at
the center of rigorous enforcement of voting laws
throughout the United States.
The lack of rigor in U.S. voting registration rolls is
unlikely to be rectified as long as the Democratic Party
resists every and all efforts to enact for voting the type of
Voter ID laws that the TSA demands for those seeking to
board commercial aircraft in the United States.
291
Non-citizens and felons vote
In 2016, an investigation in Virginia by the public Interest
Legal Foundation, PILF, and the Virginia Voter’s
Alliance, VVA, showed that in a small sample of the eight
Virginia counties responding to the investigators’ public
inspection requests, 1046 illegal aliens were found
registered to vote.
“The problem is most certainly
exponentially worse because we have no
data regarding aliens on the registration
rolls for the other 125 Virginia localities,”
the Virginia investigators concluded. “Even
in this small sample, when the voting
history of this small sample of alien
registrants is examined, nearly 200 verified
ballots were cast before they were
removed from the rolls. Each one of them
is likely a felony.”
In 2016, Virginia’s Democratic Governor Terry
McAuliffe, a long-time Clinton associate, cleared 13,000
Virginia felons to vote in the presidential election, after the
State’s Supreme Court struck down his earlier “sweeping
order” automatically restoring many felons’ voting rights
in a move that would have provided clearance for some
206,000 Virginia felons to vote, despite their criminal
records as murders, rapists, sex offenders, kidnappers,
child abusers, arsonists, drug traffickers, and other
dangerous criminals, as noted by Breitbart in an article
published on Aug. 22, 1016.
In April 2015, McAuliffe vetoed House Bill 1315, a state
law that would have required jury commissioners to retain
individuals not qualified to serve as jurors for reasons that
would also disqualify them from voting, including finding
out that a prospective juror was not a citizen of the United
States.
In August 2011, the Fairfax County Electoral Board
notified the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern
District of Virginia in Alexandria, as well as the Public
Integrity Section of the Criminal Division of the Justice
Department in Washington, of possible voter fraud by non-
citizens.
An Electoral Board study conducted in conjunction with
the Virginia Division of Motor Vehicles discovered that
278 registered voters, when they got their drivers licenses,
admitted they were not U.S. citizens. Almost half of them,
117, were subsequently found to have registered to vote
and to have voted in Virginia.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation studied a case where
86 non-citizens registered to vote in Philadelphia since
2013, with almost half (46) known to have voted in at least
one recent election, asked for their names to be removed
from voter registrations.
Research indicated Philadelphia makes no effort to
proactively remove from voter registration rolls non-
citizens or incarcerated felons that are ineligible to vote
under Pennsylvania law.
“Election fraud, whether it’s phony voter
registrations illegal absentee ballots, shady
recounts or old-fashioned ballot-box
stuffing, can be found in every part of the
United States, although it is probably
spreading because of the ever-so-tight
divisions that have polarized the country
and created so many close elections
lately,” concluded journalist John Fund in
his 2004 book entitled “Stealing Elections.”
Project Veritas documents Democratic Party voter
fraud
In my 2012 book examining the 2012 presidential
elections entitled “What Went Wrong?” I found a series
of undercover voters taken by James O’Keefe and his
Project Veritas were particularly damaging to Democrats
claiming there is no proof of voter fraud.
O’Keefe’s videos showed Democratic Party campaign
workers and volunteers being willing to advise voters how
to commit voter fraud, including how to register and vote
292
in more than one state. The videos also demonstrate how
difficult it is to get your name removed from the voter
registration rolls after you have moved, and how easy it is
to get an absentee ballot to vote in a second state, even if
the second state is registered in a different name than the
person’s current legal name.
One video demonstrated states like North Carolina that do
not require voter ID how easy it was for illegal immigrants
non-citizens to vote, or for persons to vote after showing
up at a voting poll after stealing the identity of registered
voters who are dead. Also exposed by O’Keefe’s
undercover video cameras were students voting for Obama
in the state where they were attending college, as well as
voting by absentee ballot in their home state.
A clear point of O’Keefe’s videos is that early voting
statutes provide ample time to explore and implement
voter fraud statutes. O’Keefe exposed judges and state
voting officials who imposed lax voter registration
processes because the favored the type of “open election”
procedures favored by Democrats who charge voter ID
laws are racist by-nature, supported and enacted by
Republicans who want to suppress the votes of African-
Americans and Hispanics.
O’Keefe’s videos caught salaried employees of the DNC
working for the Obama campaign in Organizing for
America offices advising undercover Project Veritas
reporters on how to vote twice, including in more than one
state – clearly demonstrating the Democratic Party and the
Obama campaign were engaging in voter fraud in 2012.
 Trump Says White House Leaks
Coming From Obama Admin Holdovers
Kerry Picket - Reporter
10:30 AM 02/06/2017
President Donald Trump looks on following a swearing-in ceremony
for Defense Secretary James Mattis at the Pentagon in Washington,
January 27, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria
President Donald Trump pointed the finger at Obama
administration holdovers at the White House and National
Security Council for leaking information about private
phone conversations he had with leaders of Australia and
Mexico.
.
293
“It’s a disgrace that they leaked because
it’s very much against our country,” Trump
told Fox News Sunday, accusing “Obama
people” in civil service positions for the
leaks. “It’s a very dangerous thing for this
country,” he added noting that these
individuals were still being sought out and
replaced.
Trump described the media stories of what seemed to be
contentious interactions between him and the two foreign
leaders as misreported, and contended that he actually had
“positive” conversations with both men.
Leaks relating to the new White House have gone to
mainstream media outlets that Trump has blasted in the
past for treating him unfairly including: the New York
Times, The Washington Post, NBC and the Associated
Press.
 China Protests To US
Over New Iran Sanctions
Mon Feb 6, 2017 10:19AM

The new US sanctions list includes two Chinese

companies and three Chinese people. Those on the list
cannot access the US financial system or deal with
American companies.

They are subject to secondary sanctions, meaning foreign

companies and individuals are prohibited from dealing
with them or risk being blacklisted by the United States.

China has close economic and diplomatic ties with Tehran.

National flags of U.S. and China wave in front of an international
hotel in Beijing February 4, 2010. (Photo by Reuters)
China says it has protested to the US for
putting Chinese companies and
individuals on a new sanctions list
targeting Iran.
Executives of two Chinese companies included on the list
said they had only exported "normal" goods to Iran and
didn't consider they had done anything wrong. Lu said
such sanctions, particularly when they harmed the interests
of a third party, were "not helpful" in promoting mutual
trust.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said on Monday

Beijing had "lodged representations" with Washington
after Trump's administration imposed sanctions on 25
people and entities on Friday for trade with Iran.

"We have consistently opposed any

unilateral sanctions," Lu told a regular
press briefing in Beijing.

Unilateral US sanctions in the past have infuriated China.

Last March, Beijing was outraged after the US government
China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang
punished China’s largest telecom equipment maker ZTE
Corps for alleged violations of sanctions on Iran.
China has said it is "seriously concerned" about President
Donald Trump's recent hawkish rhetoric on Beijing.
China's Foreign Ministry expressed anger
Experts say the new administration’s moves are set to
at the action, saying it is “opposed to the
further strain relations between China and the US.
US citing domestic laws to place sanctions
on Chinese enterprises."
.

294
 ‘We Are Not Killers,’
Republican Bigwigs Rage Against Trump
Mon Feb 6, 2017 9:50AM

“When has a Democratic political activists

[sic] been poisoned by the GOP, or vice
versa? We are not the same as Putin,” he
said in a tweet.

Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska also voiced his

disagreement with Trump in a similar manner, describing
the Russian head of state as an “enemy of political
dissent.”

US Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (left), President Representative Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice
Donald Trump (center), and Senator Marco Rubio President Dick Cheney, also weighed in on the issue by
calling Trump’s comments "deeply troubling and wrong."
US President Donald Trump has come
under fire from Republican figures for
defending Russian President Vladimir
Putin and acknowledging that there are
“a lot of killers" in the US government.

Trump stirred a controversy on Sunday, when he said

during an interview with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly that
Putin deserved “respect” for fighting the Daesh (ISIL)
terrorist group.

“But he is a killer,” O’Reilly interjected, only

to be shut down by Trump’s response:
“We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you
think our country’s so innocent?”
The Super Bowl interview set off a series of attacks
against Putin by Republican figures, with Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell calling him a “thug.”
“The Russians annexed Crimea, invaded
Ukraine and messed around in our
elections. No, I don’t think there’s any
equivalency between the way the Russians
conduct themselves and the way the
United States does,” he told CNN.
Russian President Vladimir Putin (Photo by AFP)
US Vice President Mike Pence tried to calm down the
tensions later in the day, telling NBC that Trump did not
mean to create a “moral equivalency” and was rather
criticizing Washington’s previous actions.
“What you’re hearing there is a
determination by the president of the
United States to not let semantics or the
arguments of the past get in the way of
exploring the ability to work together with
Russia and with President Putin in the days
ahead,” he said.

Meanwhile, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who ran an Putin and Trump talked over the phone in late January,
unsuccessful presidential bid against Trump, accused Putin discussing a wide range of issues, including the situation in
of poisoning his opponents. the Middle East, Palestine, and Iran’s historic nuclear deal.

295
 Dem Rep Waters: Trump ‘Investigation’ Underway;
Evidence Not Required For Impeachment
By Pam Key
6 Feb 2017
Monday on CNN’s “Newsroom,” when asked about her
comments last week stating that her “greatest desire”
would be to impeach President Donald Trump, Rep.
Maxine Waters (D-CA) said investigations had “already
started” and that some of the investigation leads to the
“possibility of impeachment.”
Partial transcript as follows:
BALDWIN: You are making news today saying Donald
Trump’s actions are leading himself to possible
impeachment. Explain to me why you are going there two
weeks into his presidency.
WATERS: First of all, just let me say these are not
normal times. We have a president who is creating chaos
and division. So many questions about his conflict of
interest. Lies about whether or not he separated himself
from the businesses he claimed he would separate
himself from. Not showing his tax returns. Putting his arms
around Putin, defending Putin, working with the Kremlin. I
want to know, and a lot of people want to know was there
collusion between Putin and the Kremlin and this
president as they hacked our DNC and our DCCC and
some of us. We want to know how deep does that go.
BALDWIN: Congresswoman, what’s the evidence. forgive
me for jumping in, but what is the evidence that would
lead to impeachment here?
WATERS: That’s what I’m telling you. We have
investigations that have already started. There is an
.
296
investigation in the Senate Intelligence yes, in the House
you have investigations going on in several places in
several ways. This man is questionable. and what I’m
saying is, because we are suspicious, many of us about
who he is, where he came from, what his actions are and
all of his conflicts and this business of loving Putin and the
Kremlin so much, we have to find out more about him.
And some of that I think leads to the possibility of
impeachment. And I think that’s legitimate to say given
everything we know at this point.
BALDWIN: I understand on the investigation. But you
know, you do have to find evidence before using such a
huge word, such a tremendous word as the I word, the I in
impeachment.
WATERS: No, no, no. no, no, no. Let me tell you what
you are saying is this. You are saying that you don’t
ordinarily hear members of Congress who would do what
I’m doing, who began to talk about impeachment because
they would fear that perhaps they were not going to get
the information other people would think they are acting
too hastily.
BALDWIN: Two weeks, congresswoman. The man has
been in the Oval Office two weeks.
WATERS: It doesn’t matter how long it is. Do you know
anybody that said on television yesterday that and said
that Putin was a great leader. When he was asked about
him being a killer he said so what. There are other killers,
and said that there were killers in the United States. Don’t
you think that’s unusual?
 America’s Delusional —
Lightning Far More Likely To Kill You
Than Foreign Terrorists
Justin Gardner
February 6, 2017
Among the actions Trump has taken since inauguration
day, nothing has stirred more controversy than the travel
ban. This executive order, titled ‘Protecting the Nation
from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,’
blocked entry of citizens from seven Muslim-majority
nations, suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program,
and indefinitely suspended the entry of Syrian refugees.
As we reported earlier, the order excluded the countries
responsible for 93 percent of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil –
including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt – which also
happen to be countries where Trump has business ties.
From the start it appears that the travel ban – poorly
written and wide open to legal challenge – was based not
on actual data but ideology and emotion. Indeed, Trump’s
rise to power was fueled by aggression toward ‘outgroups’
such as immigrants, minorities or certain religious types,
which is a pillar of authoritarianism.
Even though there is no rational basis for Trump’s travel
ban, it is red meat for his followers and serves to increase
division and hatred, while throwing federal and state
governments into chaos. It’s also allowing Trump to
dangerously lash out at the “so-called judge” – a
Republican appointed by Bush – who temporarily lifted
the travel ban, whipping up anger against a fundamental
check against executive overreach.
The Trump team understands how easy it is to play on
fears about foreign terrorist attacks, and seem to be
immersed in it themselves (Flynn, Bannon, etc.). However,
like the baseless travel ban, Islamophobia is not grounded
in reality.
In fact, an American is more likely to be killed by a U.S.-
born attacker such as Dylann Roof, who murdered nine
people in an African-American church, or Robert Dear,
who killed three people at a Planned Parenthood clinic,
then they are to be killed by a foreign-born Jihadist-
inspired attacker.
297
Of course, none of these people, including U.S.-born Omar
Mateen who killed 49 people at an Orlando nightclub,
would have been affected by the travel ban.
The irrational fear over foreign terrorists killing Americans
is even more absurd when we consider five seemingly rare
types of accidents that are far more likely to kill —
Parachuting accidents, being buried
alive, lightning strikes, drowning while
taking a bath, and choking on food.
The enormous cost of enacting a travel ban – in terms of
the treasury, the plight of travelers, and the increased
hatred toward ‘others’ – is clearly not remotely worth the
purported safety it provides.
Despite the facts, “terrorist attack on nation” and “victim
of terrorism” are among the top five of Americans’
greatest fears. How did it come to this?
Quite simply, the media-political discourse is so skewed
from reality that it has managed to replace fact-based
interpretations of the world for most people. Emotion
drives the narrative and the profits of mainstream media
such as CNN and Fox News, which both benefit from
Islamophobia.
It goes back to a phenomenon called the availability
heuristic, first uncovered by psychologists in 1973, which
states:
“[A] person evaluates the frequency of
classes or the probability of events by
availability, i.e., by the ease with which
relevant instances come to mind. In
general, availability is correlated with
ecological frequency.”
This matters because more and more, people construct
their view of the world through the media they consume,
which constantly pushes fear about Muslims.
 “This is why Americans have also, since
the early 2000s, thought that the crime rate
was increasing, when in reality it was
decreasing — until violence in Chicago and
a handful of other cities started pushing it
up.
Scholars call the product of it-bleeds-it-leads news cycles
and violent entertainment Mean World Theory. Since the
average kid sees 8,000 dramatized murders by the time
they turn 12, they take the world to be more violent than it
actually is.
It’s the same case with Muslims, terrorism, and the
consequent Islamophobia. In an analysis of network and
cable news shows from 2008 and 2012, communications
scholars Travis Dixon and Charlotte Williams found that
Muslims were greatly overrepresented as terrorists;
they cite FBI stats finding that just 6
percent of terrorist acts in a separate
.
298
four-year period were committed by
Muslims, while 81 percent of terrorists
on TV news were portrayed as Muslim.”
Interfaith strife and interethnic conflict are far more
profitable than a real analysis showing that Muslims and
foreign terrorists actually pose an extremely small threat to
Americans. This not only benefits mainstream media but
also the military-industrial complex, which always needs a
bogeyman to justify outrageous levels of military spending
and interventions in the Middle East.
The Trump administration appears to be doubling down on
this dangerous, false narrative. Recent reports are that team
Trump intends to
“revamp and rename a U.S. government
program designed to counter all violent
ideologies so that it focuses solely on
Islamist extremism.”
 Donald J. Trump And The Deep State, Part 1
Peter Dale Scott
February 6, 2017
Photo credit: Adapted by WhoWhatWhy from geralt / Pixabay, US
Government / Wikimedia, Ipankonin / Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 3.0),
Geek3 / Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 3.0), MesserWoland / Wikimedia
(CC BY-SA 3.0), Unknown / Wikimedia and US Government /
Wikimedia.
When the uninitiated think of the “Deep State,” they tend
to imagine a group of men getting together in a room,
smoking cigars and plotting world domination. But the
Deep State is not one coordinated network of people
controlling the government from the shadows.
Instead, it refers to individuals and groups that have the
resources to shape the direction of the world to their
benefit and don’t hesitate to make use of them. At times,
the interests of different factions of the Deep State collide.
That often happens when the direction of the world is
rapidly changing, as is the case now after the election of
Donald Trump.
Nobody knows this better than Peter Dale Scott, the
foremost expert on the US Deep State. Below, you will find
a new introduction to the paperback version of The
American Deep State: Big Money, Big Oil, and the
Struggle for U.S. Democracy, Updated Edition (copyright
2017), (with permission of the publisher, Rowman &
Littlefield. All rights reserved). This is Part 1 of a two-part
series.
Peter Dale Scott is a former Canadian diplomat, Professor
of English at the University of California, Berkeley, co-
founder of the Peace and Conflict Studies program at
Berkeley, poet, and 2002 recipient of the Lannan Poetry
Award.
299
His political books include Deep Politics and the Death of
JFK (1993), The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the
Future of America (2007), The War Conspiracy: JFK,
9/11 and the Deep Politics of War (2008), American War
Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug
Connection, and the Road to Afghanistan (2010), The
American Deep State: Wall Street, Big Oil, and the
Attack on U.S. Democracy (2014) and Dallas ’63: The
First Deep State Revolt Against the White House (2015).
A complete bibliography can be found on his website at
http://www.peterdalescott.net.
***
On February 3, 2017, the Wall Street Journal reported
President Trump’s plans to pave the way for a broad
rollback of the recent financial reforms of Wall Street.[1]
Although no surprise, the news was in ironic contrast to
the rhetoric of his campaign, when he spent months
denouncing both Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton for their
links to Goldman Sachs, even when his campaign’s
Financial Chairman was a former Goldman Sachs banker,
Steve Mnuchin (now Trump’s Treasury Secretary).
Trump was hardly the first candidate to run against the
banking establishment while surreptitiously taking money
from big bankers. So did Hitler in 1933; so did Obama in
2008. (In Obama’s final campaign speech of 2008, he
attacked “the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street.”[2]
But it was revealed later that Wall Street bankers and
financial insiders, chiefly from Goldman Sachs, had raised
$42.2 million for Obama’s 2008 campaign, more than for
any previous candidate in history.)[3]
However, Trump’s connections to big money, both new
(often self-made) and old (mostly institutional) were not
only more blatant than usual; some were also possibly
more sinister. Trump’s campaign was probably the first
ever to be (as we shall see) scrutinized by the FBI for
“financial connections with Russian financial figures,” and
even with a Russian bank whose Washington influence
was attacked years ago, after it was allegedly investigated
in Russia for possible mafia connections.[4]
Trump’s appointment of the third former Goldman
executive to lead Treasury in the last four administrations,
after Robert Rubin (under Clinton) and Hank Paulson
(under Bush), has reinforced recent speculation about
Trump’s relationship to what is increasingly referred to as
the deep state. That is the topic of this essay.
But we must first see what is really meant by ‘the deep
state”.
What Is Meant by the Deep State?
Since 2007, when I first referred to a “deep state” in
America, the term has become a meme, and even the topic
of a cautious essay in The New York Times.[5] Recently it
has been enhanced by a new meme, “the ’deep state’
versus Trump,” a theme that promoted Donald Trump as a
genuine outsider, and entered the electoral campaign as
early as August 2016.[6]
Trump reinforced this notion when he expressed
opposition to America’s international defense alliances and
trade deals that both traditional parties had long supported,
as well as by his promise to “drain the Washington
swamp.” It was encouraged again post-election by
Trump’s longtime political advisor Roger Stone, formerly
of the Washington lobbying firm Black, Manafort, Stone,
and Kelly, once a major feature of that swamp.[7]
But those who saw the election as a contest between
outsider Trump and a “deep state” tended to give two
different meanings to this new term. On the one hand were
those who saw the deep state as “a conglomerate of
insiders” incorporating all those, outside and inside the
traditional state, who “run the country no matter who is in
the White House…and without the consent of voters.”[8]
On the other were those who, like Chris Hedges, limited
the “deep state” to those perverting constitutional
American politics from the margin of the Washington
Beltway — “the security and surveillance apparatus, the
war machine.”[9]
But both of these simplistic definitions, suitable for
campaign rhetoric, omit the commanding role played by
big money — what used to be referred to as Wall Street,
but now includes an increasingly powerful number of
maverick non-financial billionaires like the Koch brothers.
All serious studies of the deep state, including Mike
Lofgren’s The Deep State and Philip Giraldi’s Deep State
America as well as this book, acknowledge the importance
of big money.[10]
It is important to recognize moreover, that the current
division between “red” and “blue” America is
overshadowed by a corresponding division at the level of
big money, one that contributed greatly to the ugliness of
the 2016 campaign. In The American Deep State (p. 30), I
mention, albeit very briefly, the opposition of right-wing
oilmen and the John Birch Society “to the relative
internationalism of Wall Street.”[11] That opposition has
become more powerful, and better financed, than ever
before.
300
It has also evolved. As I noted in The American Deep
State, (p. 14), the deep state “is not a structure but a
system, as difficult to define, but also as real and powerful,
as a weather system.” A vigorous deep state, like America,
encompasses dynamic processes continuously generating
new forces within it like the Internet — just as a weather
system is not fixed but changes from day to day.
The Current Divisions in America and Its Wealth
Three days before the inauguration of Donald Trump,
“Frontline” on PBS began a two-part program, “Divided
States of America,” documenting how the polarization of
American public opinion has contributed to both
stagnation in Washington and widespread popular anger,
on both the left and the right, against the traditional two-
party system.
The Frontline show failed to address the major role played
by money in aggravating this public division. For example,
it followed many popular accounts in tracing the
emergence of the tax-revolt Tea Party to the apparently
spontaneous call on February 19, 2009, by CNBC reporter
Rick Santelli in Chicago, for a “tea party,” in response to
President Barack Obama’s expensive bailouts.[12]
However, this event (on the floor of the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange, a deep state institution) was not only
staged, it had been prepared for in advance. A domain
name, chicagoteaparty.org, had been registered for it in
2008, before Obama had even been elected.[13] Jane
Mayer has conclusively demonstrated the role in the
funding groups behind the Tea Party played by the
brothers Charles and David Koch, who in 2014 were two
of the ten richest people on earth, worth a combined $32
billion as owners of the largest private oil company in
America.[14] (Today their wealth is estimated at $84
billion.)
More important, as Mayer pointed out, the Tea Party was
not “a new strain” in American politics. The scale was
unusual, but history had shown that similar reactionary
forces had attacked virtually every Democratic president
since Franklin Roosevelt. Earlier business-funded right-
wing movements, from the Liberty League [of the 1930s]
to the John Birch Society to [Richard Mellon] Scaife’s
[anti-Clinton] Arkansas Project, all had cast Democratic
presidents as traitors, usurpers, and threats to the
Constitution. The undeniable element of racial resentment
that tinged many Tea Party rallies was also an old and
disgracefully enduring story in American politics.[15]
The Kochs’ lavish funding of the Tea Party, along with
anti-tax candidates and climate-change deniers, was only
one more phase in what I described in 1996 as an enduring
struggle between “America Firsters” and “New World
Order” globalists, pitting, through nearly all of this [20 th]
century, the industry-oriented (e.g. the National
Association of Manufacturers) against the financial-
oriented (e.g. the Council on Foreign Relations), two
different sources of wealth.[16]
A decade later Trump has revived the slogan of “America
First!”, and vowed to reconsider both NATO and
multilateral trade. Both factions are still there today; but,
as we shall see, both now have international connections.
American Politics and the Increase in Wealth Disparity
Mayer’s helpful overview overlooks the alarming increase
in wealth disparity since 1980 and especially in the last
decade. Ten years ago, when I published The Road to 9/11,
I noted that 225 billionaires owned as much as the bottom
fifty percent of people in the world, and I repeated Kevin
Phillips’ warning that
“As the twenty-first century gets underway,
the imbalance of wealth and democracy in
the United States is unsustainable….
Either democracy must be renewed, with
politics brought back to life, or wealth is
likely to cement a new and less democratic
regime— plutocracy by some other
name.”[17]
In 2010, only three years later, that indicator of disparity
had risen up the pyramid from 225 billionaires to 43; and
today the figure has shrunk still further to eight.[18]
Left to right: Larry Ellison, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and Bill
Gates. Photo credit: Oracle PR / Flickr (CC BY 2.0), National
Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution / Flickr CC
BY-NC 2.0), JD Lasica / Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0) and US Department
of the Treasury / Flickr.
As The New York Times reported in October 2015, just 158
families supplied half of the early money that had already
poured into the 2016 campaign, and 138 of these families
supported Republican candidates. Sixty-four of these 138
families made their fortunes in finance, mostly in hedge
funds, private equity or venture capital. A further
seventeen families were wealthy from energy, mostly oil
and gas. What both these two groups were seeking was
lower taxes and also deregulation: repeal of the Dodd-
301
Frank Act reforming Wall Street, and (according to the
Times) a lifting of the 40-year-old ban on export of US
oil.[19]
Many were also “tied to networks of ideological donors
who, on the left and the right alike, have sought to
fundamentally reshape their own political parties” — on
the one hand the twice-yearly anti-tax seminars hosted by
the Kochs, and on the other “the Democracy Alliance, a
network of liberal donors who have pushed Democrats to
move aggressively on climate change legislation and
progressive taxation.”[20]
Once again, a division in the American public was being
fomented and funded by an old division within Big Money
— roughly speaking, between those Trilateral Commission
progressives, many flourishing from the new technologies
of the global Internet, who wish the state to do more than
at present about problems like wealth disparity, racial
injustice and global warming, and those Heritage
Foundation conservatives, many from finance and oil, who
want it to do even less.
We see this ideological split even among the top eight US
super billionaires in 2016, four of whom (Bill Gates, Jeff
Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Larry Ellison) have made
their fortunes from the Internet and want the present US to
progress more or less along its recent course. Warren
Buffett (once number one, now number three) endorsed
Hillary Clinton early on, “while calling for increased taxes
on the country’s highest wage earners.”[21] Deeply
dissatisfied with the status quo were numbers seven and
eight, the Koch brothers, who “have fortunes largely
drawn from fossil fuels,” and have “poured money into
fighting solar.”[22]
Warren Buffett. Photo credit: Fortune Live Media / Flickr (CC BY-
NC-ND 2.0)
The Kochs assembled a donor network of fellow
mavericks, many of whom were distinguished by private
ownership of their businesses, and many (Jane Mayer
pointed out) “had serious past or ongoing legal
problems.”[23] In early 2015 their organization revealed
that it would spend $889 million leading up to the 2016
presidential contest. As USA Today reported, this
unprecedented sum, “unrivaled for an outside organization,
represents more than double the nearly $400 million the
Republican National Committee (RNC) raised and spent
during the 2012 presidential election cycle.”[24] This huge
organized flow of outside funds has contributed greatly to
the weakening of party discipline in Congress, especially
among Republicans.
Throughout the campaign, the Kochs and Trump (whose
chief backer was another maverick billionaire, Robert
Mercer) were apparently at arm’s length from each other.
Vanity Fair suggested in September that at that time the
Kochs were
“in direct opposition to the Mercers,” in a
“civil war that threatens to tear the party
apart” — even though, starting around
2011, the Mercers had been donating “at
least $1 million a year to the Koch
network.”[25]
Whatever the tensions, it was clear after the election that
Trump in his transition team had “surrounded himself with
people tied to the Kochs.”[26] Soon the Trump nominee
for Education Secretary was Betsy DeVos, another major
billionaire contributor to the Koch donor list. (Betsy’s
brother Erik Prince, famous as the founder and owner of
the notorious private army Blackwater, was quietly
advising the Trump transition team on matters related to
intelligence and defense.)[27]
And Trump’s CIA Director is Mike Pompeo, formerly a
Koch-sponsored congressman “who was so closely
entwined with the climate-change denying Koch brothers
that he was known as the ‘congressman from Koch.”[28]
(The new administration has reportedly instructed the
Environmental Protection Agency to remove the climate
change page from its website.)[29]
David Koch and Charles Koch Photo credit: Gage Skidmore / Flickr
(CC BY-SA 2.0) and Fortune Brainstorm TECH / Flickr (CC BY-
NC-ND 2.0).
Since his election, Trump has attacked the U.S.
intelligence agencies for leaking information, and reporters
302
as being among “the most dishonest human beings on
Earth.” But while attacking the Washington establishment,
he is clearly reflecting the dissident big money faction of
the deep state, no longer as marginal as it was in the era of
the John Birch Society and later Goldwater.[30]
As the campaign and pre-inaugural preparations
progressed, it became clearer that Trump, no stranger to
the world of big money, had brought the old big money
camp into his campaign, as well as the new. In January
2017 Trump nominated to be his SEC Chairman Jay
Clayton, a Sullivan & Cromwell partner who in the past
has represented Goldman Sachs and other big banks in
Wall street superdeals.[31]
Clayton is the fourth former Goldman-related Trump
nominee for the new administration, all of them chosen
under the eyes of Trump’s chief strategist, Stephen K.
Bannon, himself a former Goldman banker who moved on
to become a Tea Party coordinator and executive director
at the alt-right Breitbart News. (Bannon once promised to
build “an insurgent, center-right populist movement that is
virulently anti-establishment.”[32] It took only 10 days in
the White House to make it clear that Bannon had “rapidly
amassed power in the West Wing, eclipsing chief of staff
Reince Priebus.”) [33]
Undoubtedly Trump entered politics as a maverick real
estate investor and TV star, funding the early stages of his
campaign himself. But as his campaign grew, he came to
reach out more and more to Wall Street financing, notably
from Robert Mercer, the co-CEO of hedge fund
Renaissance Technologies,[34] Then Trump named as his
campaign’s Finance Chairman Steve Mnuchin, formerly of
Skull and Bones and Goldman Sachs.[35]
As many predicted, Mnuchin later became Trump’s
nominee for Treasury Secretary, which could make him
the third former Goldman executive to lead Treasury in the
last four administrations, after Robert Rubin and Hank
Paulson. In addition, Trump has named Gary Cohn, former
president of Goldman Sachs, as his chief economic advisor
and Director of the National Economic Council.[36]
In short, Trump did not challenge but preserved the status
of what Jeffrey Sachs has called the Wall Street-
Washington complex, which has steered the financial
system toward control by a few politically powerful Wall
Street firms, notably Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase,
Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and a handful of other
financial firms.[37]
Meanwhile, just as Trump expanded his financial base to
all elements of big money, so Wall Street, as it always
does, ensured it had good connections to both of the final
candidates. After Mnuchin joined the Trump campaign,
Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs
announced in October 2016 his support of Hillary
Clinton.[38]
All of this complexity calls for further reflection on the
nature of the deep state.
Photo credit: takomabibelot / Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
Turkey and the International Deep State
To survey the more serious accounts of the “deep state in
the United States,” it is useful to begin with their summary
in Wikipedia under this title: as a “state within a state,
which [authors] suspect exerts influence and control over
public policy, regardless of which political party controls
the country’s democratic institutions.”
Citing five different authors, (including myself) Wikipedia
expands this definition to include the military–industrial
complex, intelligence community, Wall Street, plutocrats,
“big oil,” the mainstream media, national security officials,
and Silicon Valley.[39]
All five authors see two essential components to the deep
state. On the one hand is big money. On the other are the
extra-constitutional Washington Beltway agencies like
CIA that Wall Street originally campaigned for and
staffed, along with the government-oriented industries that
these agencies and the Pentagon work with and outsource
to.[40]
Besides myself, Philip Giraldi and Mike Lofgren have also
recognized that “the term was actually coined in Turkey,
and is said to be a system composed of high-level elements
within the intelligence services, military, security,
judiciary, and organized crime.”[41] A more precise
definition is that of Hugh Roberts:
The notion of the deep state … originated in Turkey,
where it connoted not merely the secretive apparatuses of
the state such as the police and intelligence services but
above all the shady nexus between them, certain politicians
and organised crime.[42]
303
But I may be the only author showing the extent to which
the Turkish deep state, when first exposed in 1996, both
overlapped with the American deep state and revealed its
dark underside.
The Turkish term “deep State” (deren devlet) was coined
after the so-called Susurluk incident, a 1996 car crash
whose victims included the deputy chief of the Istanbul
Police Department, a Member of Parliament, and Abdullah
Çatlı, an international heroin trafficker and killer recruited
by the Turkish police for “special missions” and paid in
heroin while he was officially being sought by the Turkish
authorities for murder.[43]
We see in the Susurluk incident three features of the
Turkish deep state, unmentioned by Lofgren, that not only
resemble the American deep state but are actually a
significant component of it (and still of major importance
today).
The first is that it was partly international: Abdullah Çatlı
was part of a death squad chiefly recruited from the ranks
of the Turkish OHD (Ozel Harp Dairesi – Special Warfare
Department). The OHD had originally been set up with US
encouragement as the Turkish branch of NATO’s
Operation Gladio, a stay-behind force in the event of a
Warsaw Pact invasion. Diverted and renamed Counter-
Guerrilla to suppress the Kurdish resistance movement, the
OHD troops continued to be trained in the US and to use
US counterinsurgency manuals.[44]
Photo credit: Adapted by WhoWhatWhy from Minestrone /
Wikimedia, David Benbennick / Wikimedia and Abdullah Çatli /
Twitter.
The second is that the international deep state connection
revealed at Susurluk was partly criminal: the sanctioned
para-state activities with Çatlı were financed by billions of
dollars in profits from drug smuggling; just as the CIA in
Laos and elsewhere utilized a protected drug traffic to
finance its covert operations in Burma, Thailand, Laos, and
Afghanistan.[45] Çatlı, a convicted drug trafficker with a
special Turkish passport, was himself part of this post-
Gladio international network:
 Çatlı, according to Yalçın and Yurdakal,
visited Miami in 1982 in the company of a
known Gladio agent (and Italian neo-Nazi)
and was considered to be “under the
protection” of the CIA.[46]
(The Gladio agent was Stefano delle
Chiaie, who had his own connections to
state-sponsored terrorist activities in Italy,
to the World Anti-Communist League or
WACL, and more specifically to death
squads working for the Operation Condor
murder operation in Latin America,
sponsored by the right-wing dictatorships in
the region.[47] The CIA had its own
shadowy connections to all three, as well
as to Gladio.)
The third feature of the Susurluk event is that it was and
remains a largely inscrutable intelligence-related event, or
what in this book I call a “deep event,” like similar events
in the United States, such as the John F. Kennedy
assassination. Nearly all western accounts of the car crash
overlook the claim that it was not an accident but an
intended assassination.[48] Moreover the Turkish deep
state was later suspected in the Turkish coup attempt of
Ergenekon in 2007,[49] and its one-time parent, the US
deep state, in the failed military coup of July 2016.[50]
Both of these coup attempts reveal elements of what I
mean by deep events.
Not just in Turkey, but also in the United States, respected
authors have linked the deep state to what I call (pp. 98,
119) “structural deep events,” unsolved mysterious events
that affect the political system of the country.[51] As I
write, there have been a series of charges that, if
substantiated, would seem to link Trump not only to an
element of the American deep state, but also to an element
of the Russian deep state.

References
[1] Michael C. Bender and Damian Paletta, “Donald Trump Plans to hijacked by acts of voter fraud” — by Democrats (Ken Meyer, :Roger
Undo Dodd-Frank Law, Fiduciary Rule,” Wall Street Journal, February Stone Says There Will Be a ‘Bloodbath’ if Election is Stolen From
3, 2017, https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-moves-to-undo-dodd-frank- Trump,” Medaite.com, August 2, 2016,
law-1486101602. Cf. http://www.mediaite.com/online/roger-stone-says-there-will-be-a-
bloodbath-if-election-is-stolen-from-trump/. Their politics of division is
shared by Steve Bannon, who “is so dominated by a desire to wage war
[2] R.G. Ratcliffe, “Obama’s final campaign speech of 2008,” Houston
and vanquish his enemy that he cannot think clearly about damage
Chronicle, October 27, 2008,
wrought by his destructive, polarizing approach” (Conor Friedersdorf,
http://blog.chron.com/texaspolitics/2008/10/obamas-final-campaign-
“The Radical Anti-Conservatism of Stephen Bannon,” Atlantic, August
speech-of-2008/.
25, 2016, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/the-
radical-anti-conservatism-of-stephen-bannon/496796/).
[3] Eugene Kiely, “Obama, “White House ‘Full of Wall Street
Executives’?” Factcheck.org, March 1, 2012.
[8] Covel, “The Deep State V. Trump.” Cf. John W. Whitehead, “The
Deep State: The Unelected Shadow Government Is Here to Stay,”
[4] Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers, “Investigating Donald Trump, Rutherford Institute, November 10, 2015,
F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia,” New York Times, October 31, 2016, https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_com
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election- mentary/the_deep_state_the_unelected_shadow_government_is_here_to_
donald-trump.html (FBI); “Cheney Firm Won $3.8bn Contracts from stay: “The Deep State…is comprised of unelected government
Government,” Observer, July 21, 2002, bureaucrats, corporations, contractors, paper-pushers, and button-pushers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jul/21/globalisation.georgebush. who are actually calling the shots behind the scenes right now.”
See below.
[9] “Chris Hedges on How the ‘Deep State’ Will Influence the Trump
[5] Anand Giridharadas, “Examining Who Runs the United States,” New Presidency,” Truthdig, Jan 17, 2017,
York Times, September 15, 2015, http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/chris_hedges_the_deep_state_will
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/15/us/examining-who-runs-the-united- _influence_the_trump_presidency_20170117. In this camp are Glenn
states.html?_r=0. I believe the first to apply the Turkish term “deep state” Greenwald, who equates the “deep state” with “the intelligence
(derin deret) to U.S. politics was the Swedish writer Ola Tunander (Peter community,” and Eric Margolis, who equates it with “the massed national
Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11 [Berkeley: University of California Press, security apparatus” (Glenn Greenwald, “The Deep State Goes to War
2007], x, 244, 270, 384). with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer,”
The Intercept, January 11, 2017, https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/the-
deep-state-goes-to-war-with-president-elect-using-unverified-claims-as-
[6] Michael Covel, “The Deep State V. Trump,” Daily Reckoning,
dems-cheer/; Eric Margolis, “Trump Versus the Deep State,” The Unz
August 25, 2016, https://dailyreckoning.com/deep-state-v-trump/: Review, January 13, 2017, http://www.unz.com/emargolis/trump-versus-
“Donald Trump has the establishment scared out of their establishment the-deep-state/.
minds.”

[7] Ryan Lizza, “Roger Stone Versus the ‘Deep State’”, New Yorker,
January 20, 2017, http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/roger-
stone-versus-the-deep-state. Stone has been described as a “political
provocateur” who “helped choreograph the… riot which shut down the
Bush v. Gore recount in Miami-Dade County” (Jeffrey Toobin, “Bad Old
Days,” New Yorker, May 2. 2016,
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/02/the-political-
provocateur-roger-stone-talks-trump. During the campaign, Stone and
fellow provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart together promoted the
divisive notion “how the general election will almost certainly be
304
[10] Mike Lofgren, The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the
Rise of a Shadow Government (New York: Viking, 2016); Philip Giraldi,
“Deep State America,” The American Conservative, July 30, 2015,
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/deep-state-america/.
[11] Peter Dale Scott, The American Deep State (Lanham, MD: Rowman
& Littlefield, 2015), 30. I later wrote in Dallas ’63: “In The American
Deep State I devoted only a few lines to the oppositional faction of right-
wing Texas oilmen and the John Birch Society, opposed to the relative
internationalism of Wall Street. In this [book] we shall see that under
Kennedy their opposition was so deeply embedded that America was, for
a while, ruled by a dyadic deep state” (Peter Dale Scott, Dallas ’63: The
First Deep State Revolt Against the White House [New York: Open Road
Media, 2015], 191).
[12] “Divided States of America,” Part 1, Frontline, PBS, January 17,
2017. Cf. Jane Mayer, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the
Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right (New York: Doubleday,
2015), 165-68.
[13] Rick Ames and Yasha Levine, “Exposing The Rightwing PR
Machine: Is CNBC’s Rick Santelli Sucking Koch, The Exiled, February
27, 2009, http://exiledonline.com/exposing-the-familiar-rightwing-pr-
machine-is-cnbcs-rick-santelli-sucking-koch/; Chris Douglas, “The Tax
That Started the Tea Party,” FrumForum. September 3, 2010,
http://www.frumforum.com/the-tax-that-started-the-tea-party/. Cf. Peter
Dale Scott, “POEM: To the Tea-Party Patriots: A Berkeley Professor says
Hello!,” GlobalResearch, November 2, 2010,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/poem-to-the-tea-party-patriots-a-berkeley-
professor-says-hello/21727; reprinted in Peter Dale Scott, Tilting Point
(San Luis Obispo, CA : Word Palace Press, 2012), 42.
[14] Jane Mayer, “Covert Operations: The Billionaire Brothers Who Are
Waging a War Against Obama,” New Yorker, August 30, 2010,
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/08/30/covert-operations;
Mayer, Dark Money, 167-68, 193. In 2014 the Koch brothers were tied
for sixth place among the world’s wealthiest, with $40.7 billion each.
Combined, their net worth is $81.4 billion, which was higher than the
highest-ranking individual on the list — Microsoft founder Bill Gates, at
$77.8 billion (Louis Jacobson, “Harry Reid says Koch brothers are richest
family in the world,” Politifact, April 2, 2014,
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/apr/02/harry-
reid/harry-reid-says-koch-brothers-are-richest-family-w/). Chris Douglas
observes, “Until the Bush tax cuts, the estate tax stood at 55%. As a
result of the tax cuts initiated by the Bush administration, by 2010, it was
zero. Unless Congress acts, it will return full-force to 55% in 2011. To
understand the impact on the Koch family, consider that some reports
place the wealth of the Koch brothers at $36 billion dollars [in 2010; four
years later Forbes estimated it at $81 billion], their company second at
times only to Cargill as the largest privately held company in America.
To the Koch family, a 55% estate tax means they must contemplate a
corporate re-organization, the result of which would conceptually be to go
public and sell off 55% of their shares in order to pay the tax or, more
likely, that they would donate the majority of shares to a charitable
foundation. Either way, the estate tax at 55% would entail a
transformation of Koch Industries and a diversification of ownership,
with ramifications for the family’s long term control” (Chris Douglas,
“The Tax That Started the Tea Party”).
[15] Mayer, Dark Money, 167. Cf, Nella Van Dyke and David S. Meyer,
eds., Understanding the Tea Party Movement (Burlington, VT: Ashgate
Pub. Company, 2014), 100.
[16] Peter Dale Scott, “Bringing It All Together: The New Releases and
How They Help Us Converge on the Heart of the Case,” The Fourth
Decade, Vol. 4, #1, November, 1996; republished at
http://www.assassinationweb.com/scotte.htm. Of the eleven businessmen
at the 1958 founding meeting of the John Birch Society, many, including
the founder Robert Welch, were former members of the National
Association of Manufacturers (Terry Lautz, John Birch: A Life [New
York: Oxford University Press, 2016]. 225). One was William J. Grede,
who served as president of the National Association of Manufacturers in
1952. Still another was Fred Koch, father of Charles and David Koch
(Jeff Nesbit, Poison Tea: How Big Oil and Big Tobacco Invented the Tea
Party and Captured the GOP [New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2016],
30; Van Dyke and Meyer, Understanding the Tea Party Movement, 100).
Charles and David Koch also joined the John Birch Society.
[17] Kevin Phillips, Wealth and Democracy: A Political History of the
American Rich (New York: Broadway Books, 2002). 422; quoted in Peter
305
Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11 [Berkeley: University of California Press,
2007], 3, cf. 254.
[18] “World’s Eight Richest as Wealthy as Half Humanity, Oxfam Tells
Davos.” Reuters, January 16, 2016, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-
davos-meeting-inequality-idUSKBN150009.
[19] “From Fracking to Finance, a Torrent of Campaign Cash,” New York
Times, October 10, 2015,
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/us/politics/wealthy-families-
presidential-candidates.html#donors-list. Much of the petroleum wealth
was probably also aimed at preventing climate change regulations.
[20] “From Fracking to Finance, a Torrent of Campaign Cash,” New York
Times, October 10, 2015.
[21] Amy Chosick, “Warren Buffett Endorses Hillary Clinton and Calls
for Higher Taxes on Wealthy,” New York Times, December 16, 2015,
https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/16/warren-buffett-
endorses-hillary-clinton-and-calls-for-higher-taxes-on-wealthy/?_r=0.
[22] Sarah Jaffe, Necessary Trouble: Americans in Revolt (New York:
Nation Books, 2016), 265. None of the eight endorsed Trump, who
pointedly distanced himself from the Kochs during the campaign.
[23] Mayer, Dark Money, 17.
[24] Fredreka Schouten, “Koch brothers set $889 million budget for
2016, USA Today, January 27, 2015,
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/26/koch-brothers-
network-announces-889-million-budget-for-next-two-years/22363809/.
[25] Abigail Tracy, “The Brewing Billionaire Feud at the Heart of the
G.O.P.,” Vanity Fair, September 7, 2016,
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/robert-rebekah-mercer-charles-
david-koch-republican-party.
[26] Kenneth P. Vogel and Eliana Johnson, “Trump’s Koch
Administration,” Politico, November 28, 2016,
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-koch-brothers-231863
[27] Jeremy Scahill, “Notorious Mercenary Erik Prince Is Advising
Trump from the Shadows,” The Intercept, January 17 2017,
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/17/notorious-mercenary-erik-prince-is-
advising-trump-from-the-shadows/: “In July [2016], Prince told Trump’s
senior adviser and white supremacist Steve Bannon, at the time head of
Breitbart News, that the Trump administration should recreate a version
of the Phoenix Program, the CIA assassination ring that operated during
the Vietnam War, to fight ISIS.”
[28] Mayer, Dark Money, 15, 276.
[29] Valerie Volcovici, “Trunp Administration Tells EPA To Cut Climate
Page from Website: Sources,” Reuyers, January 25, 2017,
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN15906G?feedType=RSS&feed
Name=politicsNews.
[30] On page 5 of this book, I refer to a formerly “minority element in our
political economy [that now] finances and dominates both parties, and
indeed is now also financing threats to both parties from the right, as well
as dominating our international policy. As a result, liberal Republicans
are as scarce in the Republican Party today as Goldwater Republicans
were scarce in that party back in 1960.” Today I would no longer define
this element as “the military-industrial complex,” but the trend has
become even more clear.
[31] Matt Taibbi, ‘Trump Nominee Jay Clayton Will Be the Most
Conflicted SEC Chair Ever,’ Rolling Stone, January 5, 2017,
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/trump-pick-jay-clayton-to-
be-most-conflicted-sec-chair-ever-w459289. Clayton’s wife Gretchen is a
wealth management advisor at Goldman Sachs.
[32] Conor Friedersdorf, “The Radical Anti-Conservatism of Stephen
Bannon,” Atlantic, August 25, 2016.
[33] Josh Dawsey, Eliana Johnson and Annie Karni, “The man behind
Trump? Still Steve Bannon,” Politico, January 29, 2017,
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/donald-trump-steve-bannon-
234347.
[34] “How One Family’s Deep Pockets Helped Reshape Donald Trump’s
Campaign By Nicholas Confessore Aug. 18, 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/19/us/politics/robert-mercer-donald-
trump-donor.html?_r=0
[35] Bloomberg BusinessWeek, August 31, 2016,
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-08-31/steven-
mnuchin-businessweek When Mnuchin was Financial Chairman of the
Trump campaign, his counterpart at the RNC was Lew Eisenberg, his
father’s old partner at Goldman Sachs.
[36] Pam Martens and Russ Martens, “Here’s How Goldman Sachs
Became the Overlord of the Trump Administration,” Wall Street on
Parade, January 9, 2017, http://wallstreetonparade.com/2017/01/heres-
how-goldman-sachs-became-the-overlord-of-the-trump-administration/
[37] Jeffrey D. Sachs, The Price of Civilization: Reawakening American
Virtue and Prosperity (New York: Random House, 2011), 117.
[38] Zeke Faux, “Goldman CEO Blankfein ‘Supportive’ of Clinton for
Pragmatism,”
Bloomberg, October 22, 2016,
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-10-22/goldman-ceo-
blankfein-supportive-of-clinton-for-pragmatism.
[39] “Deep state in the United States,” Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state_in_the_United_States. The five
authors are Philip Giraldi, Bill Moyers, David Talbot, Mike Lofgren, and
myself.
[40] Scott, The American Deep State, 14-15, 30-35, etc.) The Pentagon,
unmentioned by Wikipedia, is hard to classify. Although the Department
of Defense is part of the official state and headed by a cabinet member, it
contains within it the NSA, which simultaneously reports to the Director
of National Intelligence. Other Pentagon agencies, such as DIA and
JSOC, also deserve to be classified with the deep state.
[41] Mike Lofgren, The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the
Rise of a Shadow Government (New York: Viking, 2016), 5. I see no
further references in Lofgren’s book to organized crime; his notion of the
deep state focuses primarily on the Beltway agencies.
[42] Hugh Roberts, The Hijackers.” London Review of Books, July 16,
2015, http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n14/hugh-roberts/the-hijackers, a review
of Jean-Pierre Filiu, From Deep State to Islamic State: The Arab
Counter-revolution and Its Jihadi Legacy (Oxford : Oxford University
Press, [2015]).
306
[43] Jean-Louis Briquet; Gilles Favarel-Garrigues; Roger Leverdier, eds.
Organized Crime and States: The Hidden Face of Politics (New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2010). 43-44; Peter Dale Scott, American War
Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road
to Afghanistan (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010),
19-20. Çatlı “is reckoned to have been one of the main perpetrators of
underground operations carried out by the Turkish branch of the Gladio
organisation and had played a key role in the bloody events of the period
1976-80 which paved the way for the military coup d’état of September
1980” (“Turkey’s pivotal role in the international drug trade, Le Monde
diplomatique, July 1998).
[44] Desmond Fernandes and Iskender Ozden, “United States and NATO
inspired ‘psychological warfare operations’ against the ‘Kurdish
communist threat’ in Turkey”. Variant. 12,
https://web.archive.org/web/20060614080445/http://www.variant.random
state.org/12texts/Fernandes.html; Daniele Ganser, NATO’s Secret
Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (New York:
Frank Cass, 2005), 241.
[45] Hakan Aslaneli and Zafer F. Yoruk, ‘Traffic Monster’ reveals state-
mafia relations”. Hürriyet, November 7, 1996; Scott, American War
Machine, 4-6, etc.
[46] Ryan Gingeras, Heroin, Organized Crime, and the Making of
Modern Turkey (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 228; citing
Soner Yalçın and Doğan Yurdakul, Reis: Gladio’num Türk Teriçisi
(Istanbul: Doğan Kitapeilik, 2007), 152-56.
[47] Scott, American War Machine, 20; cf.p.30: In Italy “Stefano delle
Chiaie was eventually accused of involvement in the Piazza Fontana and
Bologna bombings as well as the Borghese coup.” The Condor Operation
(about which I will say more) was responsible for the 1976 murder in
Washington of former Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier.
[48] HRFT Human Rights Foundation of Turkey Human Rights Report –
TİHV, en.tihv.org.tr/wp-
content/uploads/2015/…/Ra1998HumanRigthsReport.pdf, 39. In
addition, no one has yet fully explained why one of the fake passports
found in Çatlı’s possession was in the name “Mehmet Özbay”, an alias
used fifteen years earlier by Mehmet Ali Ağca, the Turk who in 1081
attempted to kill Pope John Paul II (Peter Dale Scott, American War
Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection, and the Road
to Afghanistan [Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010],
19; Ryan Gingeras, Heroin, Organized Crime, and the Making of Modern
Turkey [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014], 228.
[49] Dexter Filkins. “The Deep State,” The New Yorker, March 12, 2012,
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/03/12/the-deep-state:
“Prosecutors maintain that Ergenekon is the deep state itself—not merely
a cabal of reactionary officers within the military but a shadow
government that aims at making Turkish democracy permanently
unstable.”
[50] Tim Arango and Ceylan Yeginsu, “Turks Can Agree on One Thing:
U.S. Was Behind Failed Coup,” New York Times, August 2, 2016,
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/world/europe/turkey-coup-
erdogan-fethullah-gulen-united-states.html?_r=0.
[51] On page 47 I speak of “a deep event, by which I mean an event
predictably suppressed in the media and still not fully understandable.”
In Their Own Words: Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Leaders Say
They Want To Make America ‘Ungovernable’
Peter Hasson - Reporter, Associate Editor
9:23 PM 02/06/2017

protests that feature alarmist rhetoric and have a proclivity

to devolve into anarchic violence. Rioters smashed
storefront windows, assaulted innocent bystanders and
torched a limo all in the name of opposing Trump.

An ATT truck burns as protests riot in Oakland, California, U.S.

following the election of Republican Donald Trump as President of
the United States November 9, 2016. REUTERS/Noah Berger

Behind the mass protests, choreographed chants and acts

of violence, leaders of anti-Trump “resistance” efforts are
communicating the same simple but dark message: they
want to make America “ungovernable” for the president of
the United States.

These protesters say they will do whatever it takes to keep
Trump from enacting his agenda, and many of them have
shown a willingness to destroy public property, assault law
enforcement officers and inflict violence upon their fellow
citizens.
Inauguration Day provided a hint of what to expect from
the far left during Trump’s presidency: well-organized
.
Police and firefighters stand near a limousine which was set ablaze
during a protest against U.S. President Donald Trump on the
sidelines of the inauguration in Washington, D.C., U.S., on January
20, 2017. REUTERS/Adrees Latif
D.C.’s inauguration weekend violence was believed to be
mostly the work of a group calling themselves DisruptJ20,
which began planning to disrupt the inauguration and
destroy property weeks in advance.

307
 Rep. Maxine Waters: Trump
Must Be Impeached Because Putin Invaded Korea!
Written By Daniel Mcadams
Monday February 6, 2017

It is often not fully understood just how ignorant most US
Representatives are when it comes to the finer details of
foreign policy. Members get their news from an even
narrower pool of information than many Americans, who
are by and large abandoning the mainstream media. They
read the Washington Post or they rely on their staffers,
who read the Washington Post. Most Members enjoy being
considered experts in the issues upon which they are
voting, but the fact is they are very poorly informed.
However, there are gradations of moderately badly
informed to "whaaat??!?? Did she really say that???" badly
informed.
And the fact that he is wrapping his arms around Putin
while Putin is continuing to advance into Korea -- I think
that he is leading himself into that kind of position where
folks will begin to ask, what are we going to do? And the
answer is going to be, eventually, we've got to do
something about him. We cannot continue to have a
president who's acting in this manner. It's dangerous to the
United States of America.
Watching the video, the word "Aleppo" was thrown at her
from the press corps when she couldn't remember where
she was (falsely) accusing Putin of killing innocent women
and children.

Those are the murky waters we often navigate when we But what was a real attention-getter was
sample the wit and wisdom of Rep. Maxine Waters, a 13 her accusation that President Trump must
term Democrat from Los Angeles. be impeached because President Putin
invaded Korea. The conspiracy theorists
In a press conference last Friday, Rep. Waters did not angry about Hillary's loss have invented all
disappoint. Asked by the media why she called for the manner of bizarre explanations accusing
impeachment of President Trump when he has not yet been Putin of masterminding the Trump victory,
a month in office, Rep. Waters replied, but thus far no one has accused Putin of
invading Korea.
"I am not calling for the impeachment yet.
He's doing it himself." She meant "Crimea" you might say. Don't be so sure.
Members should be given a blank map whenever they talk
She continued: with presumed authority about anywhere abroad. They
should be forced to find the place they are about to start
Let me just say the statement I made was a talking about before the microphone is switched on. If they
statement in response to questions and can't, they shouldn't.
pleas that I am getting from many citizens
across this country. What are we going to Watch for yourself:
do? How can a president, who is acting in
the manner that he's acting, whether he's
talking about the travel ban, the way that
he's talking to Muslims, or whether he's
talking about his relationship to Putin, and
the Kremlin -- and knowing that they have
hacked our D-triple-C -- DNC, and
knowing that he is responsible for
supplying the bombs that killed innocent
children and families in, um – in, um– yeah,
in Aleppo.

308
 Is The Trump Administration Already Over?
Paul Craig Roberts
February 6, 2017
Hopes for the Trump administration are not burning
brightly. Trump’s military chief, Gen. Mattis, is turning
out to be true to his “mad dog” nickname. He has just
declared that Iran
“is the single biggest state sponsor of
terrorism in the world.”
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201702041050338034-
mattis-iran-terrorism/
He has declared Russia to be the number one threat to the
US.
He has threatened intervention in China’s territorial affairs.
I was wrong. I thought Gen. Mattis was a reasonable
choice as he rejects the efficacy of torture, and, according
to Trump, convinced Trump that “torture doesn’t work.”
Apparently Mattis cannot reach beyond this realization to
higher geo-political realizations. Trump needs to fire
Mattis who has placed the Pentagon in the way of normal
relations with Russia.
There is no evidence in the behavior of Iran, Russia, and
China to support Gen.Mattis’ views. His definition of
threat is the neoconservative one—a country capable of
resisting US hegemony. This is a convenient threat for the
military/security complex as it justifies an unlimited
budget in order to prevail over such “threats.” It is this
hegemonic impulse that is the source of terrorism.
If truth can be spoken, there are only two countries in the
world with hegemonic aspirations—Israel and the US—
and they are the sources of terrorism. Israel terrorizes
Palestinians and has done so for about 70 years. The US
terrorizes the rest of the world.
All known Muslim terrorists are creations of the US
government. Al Qaeda was created by the Carter
administration in order to confront the Soviet occupation
of Afghanistan with jihadism. ISIS was created by the
Obama/Hillary regime in order to overthrow Gaddafi in
Libya and then was sent by the Obama/Hillary regime to
overthrow Assad in Syria, as Trump’s national security
advisor, Gen. Flynn, former director of the Defense
Intelligence Agency revealed on TV. The Ukrainian neo-
nazis assaulting the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk
309
were also unleashed by the Obama/Hillary overthrow of
the democratically elected government of Ukraine. All
terror is associated with Washington and Israel.
The fact of Washington’s overthrow of Ukraine’s
government is incontestable; yet large numbers of
brainwashed Americans think Russia invaded Ukraine, just
as they believe the fake news that Iran is a terrorist state.
The last time Iran initiated a war of aggression was in the
last decade of the 18th century when Iran reconquered the
Caucasus and Georgia, which Iran soon lost to Russia.
Iran in our time has done no offense except to refuse to
submit to being a Washington vassal state.
Additionally, Iran, and Syria rescued by the Russians, are
the only states in the Muslim world that are not US puppet
states and mere vassals that are nothing in themselves, no
independent foreign policy, no independent economic
policy. Only Iran and Syria have independent policies.
Iran is a large country endowed with substantial energy
resources. Iran has a long history going back to ancient
times of independence and military prowess. Today Iran is
essential to Russia as a buffer to the US created jihadism
that neoconservatives plan to export to the Muslim areas of
the Russian Federation. Consequently, Iran is the most
inopportune of targets for Trump if he wishes to restore
normal, non-threatening relations with Russia. Yet his mad
dog Pentagon chief recklessly makes threatening
statements alleging Iran to be a “terrorist state.”
Do we see Israel’s hand at work in the threats against Iran?
Iran and Syria are the only countries in the Middle East
that are not American puppet states. Syria’s army has been
hardened by combat, which is what Syria’s army needs in
order to stand up to US-backed Israel. Both Syria and Iran
are in the way of Israel’s Zionist policy of Greater Israel—
from the Nile to the Euphrates. For the Zionists, Palestine
and Southern Lebanon are merely the beginning.
Israel has successfully used the corrupt British and now the
corrupt Americans to reestablish themselves on lands from
which God evicted them. This doesn’t speak well of the
intelligence and morality of the British and US
governments. But what does?
We are also hearing from Mattis and from Tillerson threats
to intervene in China’s sphere of influence. Trump’s
appointees appear to be unable to understand that there can
be no improvement in relations with Russia if the Trump
regime has Iran and China in its crosshairs.
Is there any prospect that the Trump administration can
develop geo-political awareness? Is the tough-talking
Trump administration tough enough to overthrow the
power that Zionist Israel exercises over US foreign policy
and the votes of the US Congress?
.
310
If not, more war is inevitable.
For twenty-four years—eight years of the criminal Clinton
regime, eight years of the criminal Bush regime, eight
years of the criminal Obama regime—the world has heard
threats from Washington that have resulted in the death
and destruction of millions of peoples and entire countries.
The Trump administration needs to present a different
Washington to the world.
 The House Should Start
Impeachment Against Trump Now
By Norman Solomon, Opinion Contributor
02/06/17 11:21 AM EST
Much of the public is eager for the impeachment of
President Trump. A poll last week found that 40 percent of
Americans already “support” impeaching him, and the
same survey — by highly regarded Public Policy Polling
— found that another 12 percent are “not sure.”
From the outset of his presidency, Trump has been
violating the U.S. Constitution in a way that we have not
seen before and should not tolerate. It’s time for members
of Congress to get the impeachment process underway.
The Constitution states that to start impeachment
proceedings, a document or “resolution calling for a
committee investigation of charges against the officer in
question” must be introduced in the House of
Representatives. Such a move would have been
appropriate from the moment that Trump became
president.
As documented in depth on the
ImpeachDonaldTrumpNow.org website — where more
than 600,000 people have already signed a petition for
impeachment — the president continues to violate two
“emoluments” clauses in the Constitution. One prohibits
any gifts or benefits from foreign governments, and the
other prohibits the same from the U.S. government or any
U.S. state.
To uphold the bedrock principle that no one should be
above the supreme law of the land, a resolute member of
the House must now take the lead in introducing a
resolution to get impeachment rolling. That process is
necessarily difficult — and essential.
Former White House counsel John Dean, who served
President Nixon from 1970 to 1973, told The Atlantic
magazine:
“I don’t think Richard Nixon even comes
close to the level of corruption we already
know about Trump.”
Since that interview with Dean three weeks ago, we’ve
been learning more about Trump’s unconstitutional
corruption as president. The case that Trump is in flagrant
311
violation of the Constitution gained added strength over
the weekend when The Associated Press reported:
“New documents confirm that President
Donald Trump retains a direct tie to his
business interests through a revocable
trust now being overseen by one of his
adult sons and a longtime executive of the
Trump Organization.”
What’s more, AP reported,
“Trump is the sole beneficiary of the
Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, which is
tied to his Social Security number as the
taxpayer identification number, according
to documents published online by the
investigative nonprofit ProPublica. And
Trump can revoke the trust, which was
amended three days before his
inauguration, at any time.”
Members of Congress should initiate an impeachment
process because of two clear provisions in the
Constitution.
The Foreign Emoluments Clause says:
“[N]o Person holding any Office of Profit or
Trust under [the United States], shall,
without the Consent of the Congress,
accept of any present, Emolument, Office,
or Title, of any kind whatever, from any
King, Prince, or foreign State.”
And the Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause (also
known as the Presidential Compensation Clause), which
cannot be waived by Congress, says:
“The President shall, at stated Times,
receive for his Services, a Compensation,
which shall neither be encreased nor
diminished during the Period for which he
shall have been elected, and he shall not
receive within that Period any other
 Emolument from the United States, or any
of them.”
In addition, a House committee’s impeachment probe
should also investigate whether President Trump is
violating the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge
Act of 2012 (STOCK Act). One of the few federal ethics
statutes that specifically include the president, the STOCK
Act — among other provisions — prohibits the president
from (1) using nonpublic information for private profit,
and from (2) intentionally influencing an employment
decision or practice of a private entity solely on the basis
of partisan political affiliation.
312
A crucial test for democracy is whether people in high
places can violate the law with impunity. For democracy in
the United States, the biggest danger is unchecked
presidential ability to violate the Constitution.
In a speech on the House floor last Thursday that spelled
out some of Trump’s extreme conflicts-of-interest, Rep.
Mark Pocan (D-WI) closed with a cogent reference to the
fact that Congress can
“even explore the power of impeachment.”
Let the exploration begin.
 White House Publishes List Of 78 Terror Attacks That The
Media 'Ignored' - Including Orlando, San Bernardino,
Bataclan And Nice Truck Attack
 Trump's Administration Compiled A List Of 'Underreported' Attacks Monday Night
 It Included Large Massacres In Orlando, Brussels, France And Istanbul
 The List Was Released After Trump Told Troops That Terror Attacks Are Happening 'All
Over Europe' But They're Not Being Covered By The 'Very, Very Dishonest Press'
 'There’s A Lot Of Instances Where I Don’t Think They’ve Gotten The Coverage It
Deserved,' Said White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer
 He Indicated That The President May Have Been Thinking Of Foiled' Attacks, In Addition
To Murderous Assaults
 Spicer Also Claimed The Press Was Unfairly Covering The President's Travel Ban -
Something Trump Brought Up Monday In A Tweet
 For The Full List Of The 78 Terror Attacks Named, Scroll To The Bottom
By Francesca Chambers, White House Correspondent For Dailymail.Com
And Cheyenne Roundtree For Dailymail.Com
Published: 18:10 EST, 6 February 2017 | Updated: 07:04 EST, 7 February 2017

The White House has released a list of 78 terror attacks Trump's claims that the media was 'very, very dishonest'
that the press had 'ignored' following President Donald on Monday night (pictured)
Trump's claims that the media was 'very, very dishonest'.

The attacks dated from September 2014 to December

2016, all of which the president believed were
'underreported' as he put the blame on the media Monday.

Trump's administration said the attacks in Orlando, San

Bernardino, Brussels, Nice and the Bataclan in Paris
'have not received the media attention they deserved' and
released the list on Monday night as proof.

Several members of the press have voiced their confusion

over the list, as a handful of instances named were the
subject of news coverage that lasted 'days on end'.
The report, several pages long and seemingly hastily
thrown together, is littered with spelling errors such as
'ATTAKER', 'ATTAKERS' and incorrectly spelling the
California city as 'San Bernadino'.
Trump's administration said the attacks in Orlando, San
Bernardino, Brussels, Nice and Paris 'have not received the
media attention they deserved'. Pulse nightclub was subject
to a mass shooting in June 2016 and left 49 people dead
and wounded 53

The White House has released a list of 78 terror attacks

that the press had 'ignored' following President Donald

313
Among the attacks named was the Nice, France, truck
massacre (pictured) which killed 84 civilians and injuring
more than 300 people on July 2016
One of the biggest terror attacks over the past two years
took place in France, with the Bataclan theatre attack in
Paris and the Nice truck massacre, both of which were on
the list.
The Orlando, Florida nightclub shooting was widely
covered in the news for being a terror attack and a hate
crime in June 2016. It left 49 people dead and wounded 53
more.
The mass shooting and attempted bombing in San
Bernardino, California was also included on the roster, the
December 2015 attack ended with 14 dead and 22
wounded.
The list of 78 occurrences of terror attacks were worldwide
and included who was the subject of the attack and named
the persons involved.
CNN reporter Jim Acosta said it was a 'head scratcher” as
his news organization was reportedly one of the first to see
the list after it was labeled 'fake news' by Trump in
December.
President Donald Trump claimed Monday that terror attacks are
happening 'all over Europe' but they're not being covered by the
'very, very dishonest press'
314
The Bataclan concert hall was attacked in Paris, France. In
the fatal attack 130 people lost their lives and many more
were injured on November 13, 2015
President Donald Trump claimed Monday that terror
attacks are happening 'all over Europe' but they're not
being covered by the 'very, very dishonest press.'
Before the list was published the president did not provide
any examples as he made the claim in front of troops
stationed at MacDill Air Force base in Tampa, Florida.
His press secretary, Sean Spicer, told reporters aboard Air
Force One, 'There’s a lot of instances where I don’t think
they’ve gotten the coverage it deserved.' He did not name
one, either.
'We’ll provide a list later,' he asserted, indicating in the
gaggle that the president may have been thinking of foiled'
attacks, in addition to murderous assaults.
On it's face, it wasn't obvious what attacks Trump was
referring to when he hit the media with the broadside at
MacDill.
His senior counselor, Kellyanne Conway, had accused the
press last week, on MSNBC, of ignoring a terrorism-driven
massacre that was found to never have occurred.
'President Obama had a six-month ban on
the Iraqi refugee program after two Iraqis
came here to this country, were radicalized,
and they were the masterminds behind the
Bowling Green massacre. Most people
don't know that because it didn't get
covered,' Conway said.
The White House official says she 'misspoke' and meant to
say 'terrorists.' Cosmo revealed Monday, however, that she
made the mistake in an interview with their magazine, too.
She claimed two Iraqi nationals were the 'masterminds
behind the Bowling Green massacre' in a Jan. 29
interview.
The refugees she was referring to were Iraqi, and they
were living in Bowling Green, Kentucky, when they were
arrested. They did not commit any acts of terror on
America soil. Instead, they were taken into custody for
trying to send weapons back to Iraq for use against
American soldiers.

The mass shooting and attempted bombing in San
Bernardino, California, killed 14 people in December
2015
Trump on Monday similarly claimed that there are terror
plots that are going unnoticed.
Speaking to U.S. Special Forces and U.S. Central
Command soldiers, he said, 'We're up against an enemy
that celebrates death and totally worships destruction.
You've seen that. ISIS is on a campaign of genocide,
committing atrocities across the world.
'Radical Islamic terrorists are determined to
strike our homeland as they did on 9/11, as
they did from Boston to Orlando to San
Bernardino, and all across Europe,' he
said. 'You've seen what happened in Paris
and Nice. All over Europe, it's happening.'
He at that point added:
'It's gotten to a point where it's not even
being reported. And in many cases the
very, very dishonest press doesn't want to
report it. They have their reasons, and you
understand that.'
The president moved on without calling attention to any
specific terrorist attack he believes the media is covering
315
up. Spicer insisted later that there are 'a lot of instances,'
however, that are being 'underreported.'
'I think the president's comments were very clear at the
time,' he told a reporter asking about the president's claim
that the media has its 'reasons' for burying terror-related
news.
Continuing, Spicer said, 'He felt members of the media
don’t always cover some of those events to the extent that
other events might get covered,' he explained. 'Protests will
get blown out of the water, and yet an attack or a foiled
attack doesn’t necessarily get the same coverage.'
The president's spokesman went on to claim that the press
was unfairly covering Trump's travel ban, something the
president had brought up earlier in a tweet.
'Any negative polls are fake news, just like
the CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election.
Sorry, people want border security and
extreme vetting,' Trump had said.
His senior counselor, Kellyanne Conway, had accused the
press last week of ignoring a terrorism-driven massacre
that was found to never have occurred. She told Fox she
'misspoke' and meant to say 'terrorists'
Spicer invoked Trump's gripe in his session with reporters
riding Air Force One later.
'I think sometimes the polls don’t reflect
what you see on the media,' he said. 'You
see a wide degree of support for the
president’s policies to protect this country,
to create jobs, to grow the economy. And
yet a lot of those stories and success that
he’s had – in a mere two and a half weeks
in office – aren’t exactly covered to the
degree to which they should be.'
A CNN/ORC poll released Friday showed that 53 percent
of Americans oppose the president's plan, which also
suspended America's refugee program for 120 days,
however.
Hours earlier a CBS News poll found 51 percent don't like from Reuters/Ipsos, Rasmussen Reports, Public Policy
Trump's approach. Polling and YouGov/Huffington Post.

The CNN and CBS polls surveyed Americans in phone The Rasmussen poll, which was limited to likely voters,
calls, as did a Gallup poll. All three showed majorities showed a 52-43 gap in Trump's favor.
opposing the policy.

But four online polls have found majorities or pluralities of

Americans support the president. Those include surveys

SCROLL DOWN FOR THE FULL LIST OF 78

316
This is the second page of the terror attack list the White House claims that the media had 'ignored'

317
This page of the report includes the Nice, France, massacre where at least 129 people were killed when a truck drove through a crowd

318
Some of the incidents on the list included attacks where no causalities happened

319
The dates of the attack are from September 2014 to December 2016

320
The most recent attack named was in Berlin where a terrorist drove a truck into a Christmas market

321

Top 12 Deadliest Terror Attacks Named
On White House's List
 Hasanah, Egypt: October 2015, 224 killed in downing
of a Russian airliner
 Paris, France: November 2015, At least 129 killed and
approximately 400 wounded in series of shootings and
IED attacks
 Istanbul, Turkey: June 2016, 45 killed and
approximately 240 wounded at Ataturk International
Airport
 4.Orlando, Florida, US: June 2016, 49 killed and 53
wounded in shooting at a nightclub
 Sousse, Tunisia: June 2015, 38 killed and 39 wounded
in shooting at a beach frequented by westerners
.
322
 Brussels, Belgium: March 2016, At least 31 killed and
270 wounded in coordinated bombings at Zaventem
Airport and on a subway train
 Dhaka, Bangladesh: July 2016, 22 killed, including one
American and 50 wounded after hours-long siege using
machetes and firearms at holy Artisan Bakery
 Tunis, Tunisia: March 2015, 21 tourists killed, including
16 westerners, and 55 wounded in shooting at the
Bardo Museum
 San Berandino, California, US: December 2015, 14
killed and 21 wounded in coordinated firearms attack
 Kabul, Afghanistan: June 2016, 14 killed in suicide
attack on a bus carrying Canadian Embassy guards
 Berlin, Germany: December 2016, 12 killed and 48
wounded by individual who drove truck into a crowded
market
 Istanbul, Turkey: January 2016, 12 German tourists
killed and 15 wounded in suicide bombing
 Klein: The Left’s Latest Desperate Tactic –
Smear Trump As ‘Mentally Ill’
By Aaron Klein
6 Feb 2017
Since President Donald Trump took
office on January 20, a trend has been
emerging in which news media outlets
have featured articles quoting health
care professionals questioning the
billionaire’s mental stability in a
seeming bid to delegitimize the
president.
And now some Democratic politicians – and at least one
Republican – are calling for Trump to be subjected to a
psychiatric examination to determine whether he is fit for
office. Some commentators have even suggested invoking
the 25th Amendment of the Constitution, which allows for
the commander-in-chief’s removal from office if the
“president is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office.”
This comes after the left’s multiple failed attempts to
overthrow Trump’s presidency, including the recount
efforts supported by Hillary Clinton; a doomed campaign
to get Trump’s electors to defect before the Electoral
College voted in December; and claims that Russian
“hacking” impacted the 2016 election.
The health care professionals quoted in recent weeks
attempting to diagnose Trump seem to be violating the so-
called Goldwater Rule, which was established by the
American Psychiatric Association after similar
unsupported attacks against Senator Barry Goldwater
323
during his 1964 presidential campaign, which was widely
considered a threat to the political establishment.
The APA’s Goldwater Rule forbids psychiatrists from
commenting on someone’s mental status unless they first
carry out an examination and the doctor is authorized by
the patient to speak to the public.
On Thursday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said
she would back a proposal suggested by Rep. Jason
Chaffetz (R-Utah) during a meeting with the Washington
Post’s editorial board to consider legislation requiring all
presidents to get medical and mental health examinations.
Chaffetz clarified that he wasn’t referring to Trump’s
rhetoric.
Post columnist Ruth Marcus related:
In a meeting last week with The
Washington Post editorial board, Utah
Republican Jason Chaffetz, chair of the
House Oversight Committee, said he was
weighing legislation to require presidents to
undergo an independent medical
examination, including mental health.
Chaffetz cautioned that he wasn’t “talking
about some of the rhetoric that’s flying
around” about Trump. Still, he said, “If
you’re going to have your hands on the
nuclear codes, you should probably know
what kind of mental state you’re in.”
Right on cue, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) tweeted last week
about whether Trump should get a mental health exam.
Last 24 hrs on Twitter, @realDonaldTrump
went on rant about "death & destruction,"
"FAKE NEWS," & "evil." Should he get
mental health exam?
— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) February 4, 2017
A group calling itself “Citizen Therapists Against
Trumpism” has been created, with a manifesto that
includes a litany of wild claims.
Last week, U.S. News and World Report ran a story titled,
“Temperament Tantrum: Some Say President Donald
Trump’s Personality Isn’t Just Flawed, It’s
Dangerous.”
The article quotes John D. Gartner, described as a
“practicing psychotherapist who taught
psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins
University Medical School,” claiming Trump
is “dangerously mentally ill and
temperamentally incapable of being
president.”
Gartner’s quotes have since been picked up by numerous
news media outlets in order to question Trump’s emotional
health.
The Independent newspaper featured a story that also
questioned Trump mental stability, titled, “’Malignant
narcisissm’: Donald Trump displays classic traits of mental
illness, claim psychologists.” The piece cited mental health
professionals commenting on Trump’s alleged narcissism.
The article partially drew from a New York Daily News
story published last week titled, “President Trump
Exhibits Classic Signs Of Mental Illness, Including
‘Malignant Narcissism,’ Shrinks Say.”
“Narcissism impairs his ability to see
reality,” Dr. Julie Futrell, a clinical
psychologist, told the newspaper while
pointing out that she never actually treated
Trump.
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman,
who has no medical degree, weighed in on
Trump’s health status, tweeting that the
president is “obviously mentally ill.”
An American first: a president who was obviously
mentally ill the moment he took office. Thanks, Comey
https://t.co/FuZbCy5DxQ
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) January
24, 2017
324
The campaign to question Trump’s mental health may
have an ultimate goal in mind.
Last Month, Will Rahn, political
correspondent and managing director of
politics for CBS News Digital wrote a
commentary piece at CBSNews.com titled,
“An Obscure Way To Oust An American
President.”
He pointed to the 25th Amendment as a way to declare a
president unfit for command:
Regardless of whether Trump is suffering
from some kind of mental ailment, the
Constitution does provide a manual for
what to do in case of presidential incapacity
in the form of the 25th Amendment. In
particular, a provision within Article 4 of the
amendment lays out how a president can
be forced to surrender his powers should
he be ruled unable to fulfill his duties.
Rahn conceded the procedure, which would require action
from the vice president, is highly unlikely:
There’s a lesson there for Mike Pence,
should he ever take a look at Article 4 and
start thinking it might be wise to ascend to
the presidency a little early: failing in that
effort would end his career, not to mention
the careers of the secretaries who sign up
to help him. That alone is a powerful
incentive to avoid using the law.
So while it’s plausible that this president could be removed
from office for reasons of mental illness, it’s still
exceptionally unlikely he would. And, in any event, Mr.
Trump would have to get a whole lot weirder than he’s
been already before anyone could start seriously thinking
about Article 4.
Last week, Breitbart News reported Rosa Brooks, a former
Obama administration official, outlined four ways to “get
rid” of Trump, including declaring him mentally unfit for
command or carrying out a military coup.
 Fact Check: No Arrests From 7 Nations
In Travel Ban? Judge In Seattle Was Wrong
By ERIC TUCKER - The Associated Press
Originally Published February 6, 2017 At 11:15 Am Updated February 6, 2017 At 11:41 Am
This still image taken from United States Courts shows Judge James
Robart listening to a case at Seattle Courthouse on March 12, 2013 in
Seattle. Robart placed a nationwide hold on President Donald
Trump’s executive order, banning travel to the United States by
migrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, Friday, Feb. 3,
2017. (United States Courts via AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge who halted
President Donald Trump’s travel ban was wrong in stating
that no one from the seven countries targeted in Trump’s
order has been arrested for extremism in the United States
since the 2001 terrorist attacks.
Just last October, an Iraqi refugee living in Texas pleaded
guilty to attempting to provide support to the Islamic State
group, accused of taking tactical training and wanting to
blow himself up in an act of martyrdom. In November, a
Somali refugee injured 11 in a car-and-knife attack at Ohio
State University, and he surely would have been arrested
had he not been killed by an officer.
The judge, James Robart, was correct in his larger point
that the deadliest and most high-profile terrorist attacks on
U.S. soil since 9/11 — like the Boston Marathon
bombings and the shootings in Orlando, Florida, and
San Bernardino, California — were committed either by
U.S. citizens or by people from countries other than the
seven majority-Muslim nations named in Trump’s order.
.
325
But he went a step too far at a hearing in Seattle on Friday.
He asked a Justice Department lawyer how many arrests of
foreign nationals from the countries have occurred since
9/11. When the lawyer said she didn’t know, Robart
answered his own question:
“Let me tell, you, the answer to that is
none, as best I can tell. You’re here
arguing on behalf of someone that says we
have to protect the United States from
these individuals coming from these
countries and there’s no support for that.”
Charles Kurzman, a sociology professor at the University
of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, says his research shows no
Americans have been killed in the U.S. at the hands of
people from the seven countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen — since Sept. 11. But
it’s not quite right to say no one from those nations has
been arrested or accused in an extremist-related plot while
living in the U.S.
In addition to the cases from last fall, for instance, two
men from Iraq were arrested in Kentucky in 2011 and
convicted on charges that they plotted to send money and
weapons to al-Qaida.
They were never accused, though, of plotting attacks on
the U.S. Last week, Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway
wrongly cited their case as a “Bowling Green massacre,”
which never happened.
All told, Kurzman said, 23 percent of Muslim Americans
involved with extremist plots since Sept. 11 had family
backgrounds from the seven countries.
 Nasty Truth About Budweiser’s Anti-Trump Ad Comes
Out… Get Their OWN History Totally Wrong
Independent Journal Review
February 6, 2017
The truth behind the Anheuser-Busch ad shown during
Super Bowl LI is not quite what the company would like
viewers to believe.
In fact, the story behind the ad, which tells the tale of
Adolphus Busch, was reportedly more fiction than truth.
In a pre-Super Bowl interview, William Knoedelseder,
author of “Bitter Brew: The Rise and Fall of Anheuser-
Busch and America’s Kings of Beer,” said what he
thought of the ad, and in doing do exposed a weakness of
the left — namely the urge to make a political point by
resorting to falsification.
“It’s got wonderful production values, it’s
very expensive and, I think, very effective
— and mostly fiction,” he told Slate.
Take a look at the ad:
Knoedelseder said the ad had some truth to it, such as the
fact that a man named Adolphus Busch did exist, he came
to New Orleans from Germany and he partnered
with Eberhard Anheuser.
326
The author then pointed out what didn’t appear to be true
about the story — at least from anything he’s ever read
about Busch’s journey.
For starters, Busch never traveled up a river on a raft with
a black man likened to a character in Mark Twain’s
“Huckleberry Finn.” Busch also didn’t arrive in America
poor; he was from a fairly wealthy family.
Finally, Busch probably didn’t face the kind of
discrimination depicted in the ad, either. Knoedelseder said
that it was highly unlikely that Busch encountered people
yelling at him when he arrived.
Lastly Knoedelseder said Busch didn’t come to the country
to become a brewer. He didn’t even like beer and preferred
wine.
Knoedelseder pointed out that despite the misleading ad,
Busch’s story is an inspiring one that the company uses to
play up its heritage.
It’s a shame that a company feels it must
lie or deceive to make a political point —
one that appears a jab at President Donald
Trump and his temporary ban on
immigration from certain locales. But from
fake news to fictional accounts of
immigrants, liberals will do just about
anything to trash Trump — even if it makes
them look silly.
H/T Independent Journal Review
 Trump Is Right:
Bushes, Clinton, Obama 'All Killers'
Mon Feb 6, 2017 7:29PM
Each of the last four former US
presidents -- George H. W. Bush, Bill
Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack
Obama -- has killed more people than
Russian President Vladimir Putin “has
ever been accused of by any remote
measure,” an American journalist and
political analyst says.
Don DeBar made the remarks in an interview with Press
TV on Monday while commenting on the American
mainstream media’s strong reaction after US President
Donald Trump refused to endorse Fox News presenter Bill
O'Reilly’s allegations against Putin.
In an interview with Trump on Sunday,
O'Reilly described the Russian leader as "a
killer."
Instead of agreeing with the host, President Trump said the
US government has "a lot of killers" and is not "so
innocent.”
After O’Reilly said he did not “know of any government
leaders that are killers,” Trump turned to the Iraq War.
“Take a look at what we’ve done too.
We’ve made a lot of mistakes,” he said.
“I’ve been against the war in Iraq from the
beginning.”
“A lot of mistakes,” he continued, “OK, but
a lot of people were killed. So a lot of killers
around, believe me.”
After this, the mainstream media unanimously launched
blistering attacks against Trump.
327
Russian President Vladimir Putin
DeBar said American media outlets are
“treating Trump as if he committed treason
this morning, as if this is some fantastic
idea.”
He said that President Obama has
“a body count in at least tens of thousands
if not hundreds of thousands, in Libya
alone tens of thousands, in Syria maybe a
million [were killed].”
“You have President Bush [who killed] at
least a million Iraqis. You have President
Clinton, with Madeleine Albright, with half a
million dead Iraqi children from the
sanctions.”
The journalist added that former President George H. W.
Bush was responsible for the countless deaths in Iraq
during the first Iraq war.
“All are walking free, no charges. Each of
them has killed more than Putin has ever
been accused of by any remote measure,”
he stated.
“And yet Trump’s statement is
controversial; not even controversial, it’s
being universally condemned. It is beyond
propaganda at this time. It’s like watching a
really bad cartoon on some really bad
LSD,” he concluded.
 Relentless NYT
War On Trump & Russia
By Stephen Lendman
2-6-2017
The self-styled newspaper of record is a
lying machine, a national disgrace - all
the news most important to report
suppressed, fake news substituting.
On February 7, The Times blasted what it called
“bromance” between Trump and Putin,
calling it “a source of puzzlement and alarm
in the West, (now) even more disturbing.”
Fact: Russia threatens no other nations, hasn’t attacked
any - in contrast to forever US imperial wars, responsible
for millions of casualties Times reports never explain.
Fact: Putin is a preeminent world leader, overwhelmingly
supported by Russians, a world peace and stability
champion - polar opposite a long line of warrior US
presidents, perhaps Trump the latest though it’s too soon to
know.
The Times criticized Trump’s comments aired Sunday on
Fox News, taking issue with US imperial policies, saying
“it’s better to get along with Russia than
not.”
It was refreshing to hear a US president level criticism
where it’s long overdue, even without elaboration, while
saying he’d like to get along with his Russian counterpart.
Not according to The Times, ludicrously saying:
“Asserting the moral and political
superiority of the United States over Russia
has not traditionally been a difficult
maneuver for American presidents.”
“But rather than endorsing American
exceptionalism, Mr. Trump seemed to
appreciate Mr. Putin’s brutality - which
includes bombing civilians in Syria and, his
accusers allege, responsibility for a trail of
dead political opponents and journalists at
home - and suggested America acts the
same way.”
Fact: As usual, The Times has things backwards. America
is a ruthless hegemon, waging war on humanity, unable to
claim moral superiority on most every geopolitical and
domestic issue.
328
Fact: It forces its political will on others, threatening all
sovereign independent nations with regime change - by
color revolutions, old-fashioned coups, state-sponsored
assassinations or aggressive wars.
Fact: Brutality describes the policies of a long line of US
warrior presidents. Putin is polar opposite, respecting the
rights of all nations and the Russian people - why he’s
overwhelmingly popular.
Fact: He bombs terrorists, not civilians in Syria. He
doesn’t eliminate political opponents, journalists or anyone
else at home or abroad. He supports rule of law principles.
US policies are polar opposite.
The Times:
“There’s no doubt that the United States
has made terrible mistakes, like invading
Iraq in 2003 and torturing terrorism
suspects after Sept. 11.”
Fact: The same imperial agenda before Washington’s
2003 war on Iraq targeted the country in 1990-91, the
former Yugoslavia throughout the 1990s, Somalia, and
Afghanistan, followed by endless wars on Libya, Syria,
Yemen, Donbass aiding Kiev putschists, and partnering
with Israeli wars on Palestine.
Fact: The Times supports all US wars of aggression. In the
run-up to Bush/Cheney’s war on Iraq, it ran daily front-
page feature stories - virtual Pentagon press releases,
manipulating public sentiment for war.
Fact: Endless US war still rages against Afghanistan since
beginning in October 2001 - a nation having nothing to do
with 9/11.
Fact: All US wars since WW II were and continue against
nations posing America no threat - unexplained by
America’s “newspaper of record,” supporting imperial
lawlessness instead of denouncing it.
The Times:
“American drone strikes against extremists
in Afghanistan and Pakistan…have
sometimes killed civilians.”
Fact: It’s virtually always. Few so-called high-value
targets are killed. Noncombatant civilians comprise the
vast majority of casualties.
Fact: US drone wars constitute naked aggression against
nations posing no threat to America - except what
Washington invents to justify the unjustifiable.
The Times:
“(N)o American president has done what
Mr. Putin has done in silencing nearly all
independent media, crushing dissent,
snuffing out Russia’s once-incipient
democracy, invading Ukraine, interfering in
the American election - apparently on Mr.
Trump’s behalf - and trying to destabilize
Europe.”
“At least in recent decades, American
presidents who took military action have
.
329
been driven by the desire to promote
freedom and democracy…”
Fact: All of the above is utter rubbish! America’s agenda
is all about achieving unchallenged global dominance by
brute force - endless wars waged to achieve its objectives,
democracy verboten at home and abroad, fundamental
freedoms fast disappearing.
The Times:
…”Trump has shown little support for
America’s traditional roles as a champion
of universal values like freedom of the
press and tolerance.”
Fact: American “values” threaten life on earth. If a way
isn’t found to stop its war on humanity, perhaps we’re all
doomed.
 Google Emerges As Financial Sponsor
Behind Tech Giants' Anti-Trump Crusade
By Tyler Durden
Feb 6, 2017 10:34 PM
Earlier today, we explained why billionaire Democrat, and
Clinton supporter, George Soros is the likely source of
funding behind the rapidly spreading - and costly - Trump
"Muslim Ban" lawsuits.
Moments ago, we found the other "source of funds"
missing link in the ongoing anti-Trump executive order
campaign. As Bloomberg reports, the company footing bill
for the legal brief signed by more than 120 mostly tech
companies that oppose President Donald Trump’s
executive order on immigration, is none other than the
Company which offered Hillary Clinton its "strategic plan"
to help Democrats win the election, and track voters, and
which hired former Clinton Foundation CEO, Eric
Braverman: Google (technically, its parent company
Alphabet).
Eventually, the funding - which should be a nominal
matter for most of the tech giants who are on a crusade to
keep cheap H1-B workers - may end up being distributed:
other companies have offered to fund a share of the fee,
Bloomberg writes, and Alphabet, which coordinated the
effort, plans to accept the offers. However, for now it's
only Alphabet who is paying Washington, D.C.-based law
firm Mayer Brown LLP to handle the friend-of-the-court
brief.
330
The rest of the story is familiar, as per our earlier report,
only instead of only 97 companies, the list has since grown
to 128.
The tech companies emphasized the economic and social
contribution made by immigrants in their arguments filed
Sunday in the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The
companies support a lawsuit by the states of Washington
and Minnesota seeking to stop Trump’s executive order.
Apple Inc., Airbnb Inc., Facebook Inc., Microsoft Corp.,
Tesla Inc. Intel Corp., Lyft Inc., Netflix Inc., Snap Inc. and
Uber Technologies Inc. are among the technology
companies that participated. Businesses beyond the tech
industry who signed on include Levi Strauss & Co. and
yogurt maker Chobani.
“Immigrants make many of the Nation’s
greatest discoveries, and create some of
the country’s most innovative and iconic
companies,” the brief states. “America has
long recognized the importance of
protecting ourselves against those who
would do us harm. But it has done so while
maintaining our fundamental commitment
to welcoming immigrants—through
increased background checks and other
controls on people seeking to enter our
country.”
So far Trump has been uncharacteristically quiet in his
interaction with the rebellious tech giants, whom he invted
one month ago to the Trump Tower as president-elect to
lay the ground rules for interaction. Frankly, it would be a
surprise, if he let the growing rumble of Silicon Valley
discontent continue without at least opining about it on
twitter at least once. For now, however, Trump is more
focused on making the choice for America clear: either
you are with my executive order, or if there is a terrorist
attack, blame the judicial system as he once again tweeted
just moments ago.
Furious California Leaders Slam "Cruel, Unconstitutional"
Trump Over Threat To Pull Federal Money
By Tyler Durden
Feb 6, 2017 10:13 PM
In a narrative more befitting of kindergarten, and certainly
not grown adults (politicans are exempt), one day after
from Trump warned he would defund California if the
state passed a bill to make itself a de facto
"sanctuary state", saying the state was "out
of control", furious state leaders have
responded that, drumroll, they are not "out
of control."
Hoping to make their case stron, state politicans pointed at
their balanced budget and high jobs numbers in the latest
dustup between the populist Republican and the
progressive state. Quoted by Reuters, the state's top
Democrats called Trump "cruel" and his proposals
unconstitutional, after the businessman-turned-politician
threatened to withhold federal funding from the most
populous U.S. state if lawmakers passed a bill protecting
undocumented immigrants. "President Trump's threat to
weaponize federal funding is not only unconstitutional but
emblematic of the cruelty he seeks to impose on our most
vulnerable communities," state Senate Pro Tem Kevin de
Leon, a Democrat from Los Angeles, said in a statement
on Monday.
The latest war of words between Trump and Democratic
leaders in California, where voters chose his opponent,
Hillary Clinton, two-to-one in November's election, began
Sunday, in an interview between Trump and Fox News
host Bill O'Reilly. During the interview, O'Reilly asked
Trump about a bill in the state legislature, authored by de
Leon, to ban law enforcement agencies in the state from
cooperating with immigration officials in most
circumstances. Cities who have enacted similar bans are
331
known as sanctuary cities, and de Leon's bill, if passed and
signed into law by Democratic Governor Jerry Brown,
would effectively extend such rules to the entire state.
“I think it’s ridiculous. Sanctuary cities, as
you know, I’m very much opposed to
sanctuary cities. They breed crime, there’s
a lot of problems,” Trump said.
“If we have to, we’ll defund,” Trump said in
an interview with Fox News host Bill
O’Reilly before the Super Bowl. “We give
tremendous amounts of money to
California, California in many ways is
out of control, as you know.”
Trump told O’Reilly that he didn’t want to defund a state
or a city and would like to give them “the money they need
to properly operate.”
But the president added that “if they’re
going to have sanctuary cities, we may
have to do that. Certainly that would be
a weapon.”
California's mostly democratic leadership was not amused.
State Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, an L.A.-area
Democrat, said the state has the most manufacturing jobs
in the nation, and produces a quarter of the country's food.
“If this is what Donald Trump thinks is ‘out
of control,’ I’d suggest other states should
be more like us," Rendon said.
Sunday's shot across the bow of Sacramento followed a
similar threat last weak, when Trump threatened to
withhold federal funding from the University of California
at Berkeley, where violent rioting led to the cancellation of
a speech by famous "alt-right" winger Milo Yiannopoulos.
Experts have said it would be difficult for the President to
withhold funds from either the university or the state.
Court rulings have limited the power of the president to
punish states by withholding funds, and most
appropriations come from the Congress and not the
executive branch. Then again, this is Trump we are talking
about, and while it may ultimately indeed prove
impossible, should this particular animosity between
Trump and the state continue, Trump will certainly try...
Ultimately, California's fate may be in its own hands,
and in its own territory.
As a reminder, a proposal for California to break away
from the United States has been submitted to the Secretary
of State's Office in the state capital. If it qualifies, it could
trigger a vote on whether the most populous US state
should become a separate nation. The group behind the
proposal, Yes California Independence Campaign, was
cleared on Thursday by Californian Secretary of State
Alex Padilla to begin the bid to collect some 600,000 voter
signatures required to put the ambitious plan on the ballot,
AP reported.
332
The initiative would ask voters to repeal
part of the state constitution that declares
California an “inseparable part of the
United States of America.” Being a US
state is “no longer serving California’s
best interests,” the movement claims.
“Not only is California forced to subsidize
this massive military budget with our taxes,
but Californians are sent off to fight in wars
that often do more to perpetuate terrorism
than to abate it. The only reason terrorists
might want to attack us is because we are
part of the United States and are guilty by
association. Not being a part of that country
will make California a less likely target of
retaliation by its enemies,” the campaign
argues, among other things.
“America already hates California, and
America votes on emotions,” Marcus
Evans, vice-president of Yes California told
to the Los Angeles Times. “I think we'd
have the votes today if we held it,” he
added.
Since California must submit the valid voter signatures by
July 25 to qualify for the November 2018 ballot, it is
shaping up to be an especially volatile summer.
 Where Were Protests Against
Other Presidents Who Said The Same Things?
Op-Ed By Catherine J. Frompovich
February 6, 2017
As someone who believes in fairness and facts, I think
there’s something that ought to be pointed out regarding
the intense agita that’s going on in the United States after
the Trump inauguration, and especially since President
Trump’s Presidential Executive Order (PEO) regarding
certain people coming into the USA.
I can’t go more deeply or further—I have to make this a
quick Op Ed, as I’m in the process of writing a
Respondent’s Brief to answer the electric utility PECO’s
Brief regarding the Administrative Law Court hearing I
had November 2 and 3, 2016 regarding my refusing an
AMI Smart Meter.
However, please take the time to watch, and thoughtfully
process, what Thomas Sotomayor says after the media
clips exposing President Bill Clinton’s and President
Barack Obama’s almost exact, if not more so, remarks
regarding immigration and protecting the homeland.
I’ve been hearing radio reports of people showing up at
psychologists offices with a new problem; it’s called
“Trump Trauma.”
333
One of the more important undertakings anyone can do to
ferret out the facts—“truth” as some would call it—is to
study all the PEOs former President Obama put into the
pipeline of unconstitutional actions,
if readers will pardon that assessment, and
yet NO ONE marched, protested or
organized when U.S. citizens’ rights and
wellbeing were encumbered or obstructed.
That’s something I really can’t get my mind around in
view of what’s going on about protesting against
preventing potential terrorists flocking into the country.
According to the Contact@GovtSlaves.Info website,
Some of the more damaging orders that
bare his [Obama’s] signature
are: Executive Order to Control the
Internet, Executive Order Accelerates
Mandatory HIV Testing For All
Citizens, Obama Signs Cybersecurity
Executive Order, Obama Executive Order
Pushes Us Closer To A North American
Union And A One World Economic
System, Obama’s Executive Actions on
‘Gun Violence Reduction,
while not a peep was heard from anyone; no one protested
in the streets; no university exams had to be postponed;
and everyone thought those PEOs were just ‘grand’! Is
there some disconnect on my part, or is there some ulterior
motive afoot to bring about a genuine civil war by those
who seem so intent upon domination? Are protesters
playing out a predetermined hand of behind-the-scene
string-pullers the controlled media wont’ discuss as real
news?
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a four-term-elected U.S.
President, issued 3,522 PEOs, and no ONE ever protested.
He was a Democratic Party president too!
There is a tremendous influx of people [1] due to
displacement from wars no one should be fighting or
experiencing, in my opinion. All refugees may not be who
they claim they are. Do U.S. protestors exercising their
rights now know what’s going on in Sweden [2], Germany
[3], France [4], the Netherlands, and other EU countries In my opinion, presidents stating that PEO powers are
[5] due to extremists – not peaceful people of the Muslim within the U.S. Constitution really don’t know what they
faith – who obviously want to harm those whom they refer are talking about, but press to possess the ultimate in one
to as Infidels and to dismantle or overtake their countries man autocratic rule, something really not within the U.S.
and cultures? How can we tell the difference? Good Constitution and our founding documents.
question!?
However, there is the U.S. Code of Laws
and in 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible
Aliens, it states,
Whenever the President finds that the
entry of any aliens or of any class of
aliens into the United States would be
detrimental to the interests of the United
States, he may by proclamation, and for
such period as he shall deem
necessary, suspend the entry of all
aliens or any class of aliens as
immigrants or nonimmigrants, or
Paris covered in rubbish as migrants live on the streets. Source [4] impose on the entry of aliens any
restrictions he may deem to be
That criminal activity, I believe, is what all U.S. citizens appropriate.
should be realizing is what the current PEO of so much
consternation is really about preventing, and yet not fully https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
understood by soft-hearted, well-meaning liberal
Americans, in my opinion. All the EU countries that
didn’t vet refugees more closely now are paying a In reality, President Trump is
tremendous social price. Do we want that in the USA? UPHOLDING the U.S. laws regarding
aliens even though many may not agree
with his findings.
Wikipedia has an interesting take on PEOs, which I think
readers ought to check out here. Personally, I’m on record,
Personally, I think civics classes and courses should be
and have written articles about, PEOs being “one man
mandated for all students at every grade level up to
rule,” which should be eliminated and deconstructed, as I
graduation so that we, as a country, can have well
really don’t see where in the U.S. Constitution “one man
informed activists, voters and citizens, not fly-by-the-seat-
rule” was given.
of-their-pants reactionaries who are manipulated by a
propagandizing press, in my opinion.
That was the very thing the Founding Fathers (and
Mothers, too) were intent on avoiding because of their
I hope this can help to bring some sense of reasoning as to
rebellion against King George III of England [6], whom
why there should be more and better tolerance among
they felt was a tyrant. Why would they ever have given
political parties and their constituents, specifically those
“one man rule” powers in the founding documents of the
who have lost what they thought was ‘due’ them, because
new republic they were fighting so desperately to create?
political tolerance has been the real American way.
That doesn’t make sense, does it?

References:
[1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/19/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/
[2] https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/sweden-77-6-percent-of-all-rapes-in-the-country-committed-by-muslim-males-
making-up-2-percent-of-population/
[3] https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/europes-muslim-rape-epidemic-cologne-is-every-day/
[4] http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/video-shows-scenes-from-the-apocalypse-with-paris-streets-covered-
in-rubbish-as-migrants-camp-out/news-story/660b5d6a84037244b0f91a2c4eb9ae31
[5] http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-list-of-european-countries-reporting-rape-crisis-from-migrants-is-rising-dangerously/
[6] http://www.history.com/topics/british-history/george-iii
.

334
 #Nullify2016: Rosie O’Donnell Pushing To Void Election
Results Due To Russian Hacking, Group Claims
Scotus Will Consider Writ This Month
PIPER MCGOWIN-thedailysheeple.com /
FEBRUARY 7, 2017

Saw this after Rosie O’Donnell, who called for both
martial law to stop the inauguration and for Donald Trump
to be involuntarily held for a psych eval, Tweeted it out to
her nearly one million fans (and even pinned the Tweet to
the top of her account).
It’s a Go Fund Me page set up to attempt to raise $35,000
to nullify the 2016 election results on the basis of Russian
hacking.
Supreme Court Justices had two readings
of our emergency motion but it was
unfortunately denied. Gratefully, Justice
Ginsburg has put our writ of mandamus on
the docket for response in February. We
await a response from the defendents at
this time.

It’s authors claim that Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg has

put their writ of mandamus on the docket for response this
month:

Our Writ of Mandamus stipulates that the 2016 “Election”

was illegitimate due to an invasion by a foreign nation, and
requests that the Justices of the Supreme Court enjoin, or
nullify the results.

This undertaking continues to grow in size and expense.

It’s a Go Fund Me page set up to attempt to raise $35,000 Should we be required to present to the Court; we will
to nullify the 2016 election results on the basis of Russian support the travel expenses of our brave plaintiffs on our
hacking. Writ.

It’s authors claim that Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg has
put their writ of mandamus on the docket for response this
month:
UPDATE January 29, 2017:
Where do We go From Here?
Our Primary concern is that allowing this corruption to
stand will corrode our precious Democracy beyond repair

335
and strip us of our most valuable rights as American
Citizens.
This declaration of the Election as Illegitimate has merits
on its’ own. It will provide leverage in demanding
improvements in our Voting Rights, Campaigns, and
Election Systems.
Our Ultimate goal would be the overturn of all decisions
and appointments stemming from illegitimate election
results.
We ask, now, for the nullification of the election.
We feel that a small disruption/conflict is worth the price
to pay to reclaim our Democracy and our Country!
I am grateful beyond measure, to each and every American
willing to step forward and speak up. GIVE what you can
afford, to stop this travesty of justice. You have a chance
to make history today!
Step forward today and say, “No more!”
Please help spread the word.
Be a part of this movement to re-establish the
AMERICAN PEOPLE as the director of our country and
not uber wealthy oligarchs who want to pillage the
illustrious wealth of our country, our natural resources, our
national parks with their oil and minerals, our military
strength, our funds such as Medicare/Medicaid/Social
Security and others, our tax base, and our people.
***
UPDATE Jan 11: We have filed in lower courts and this
writ of mandamus is now headed to the Supreme Court.
The writ has been written, is in end stage editing, headed
to Supreme Court printers and will be in the court
Thursday, Jan 12. At that time, as we have asked for an
emergency hearing, we are hopeful the justices will
generously honor us with a positive ruling. We requested
only that they permanently enjoin, or nullify, the results of
the 2016 election. It would be up to the legislative and
executive branches to fashion and conduct a NEW VOTE.
We do not anticipate the pain of a whole new election
season, primaries, etc. We just want to know that the vote
is fair and free of influence by hostile foreign actors. It is
the least we can expect of our democracy. If this is NOT
done, then any feigning of the involvement of citizens in
the election of our leaders has been exposed and our
democracy will fall. We know that when this has been
done in other countries, for the SAME reasons and the
SAME bad players, they have effected new elections in
the range of 4 months. Waiting 4 months to get a clean,
336
non-tainted election is the least we can expect of our
democracy.
***
It is more than clear that this election was tainted by not
only direct Russian obstruction with the intent to elect
Trump (and likely other Republicans) to office, likely with
their consent and knowledge, but also outstanding are
serious questions about legitimacy of voting machines. It is
not acceptable, not only for THIS election but for the
future of democracy itself, to let such a tainted election
stand.
There is legal precedent to set aside the results of an
election if the election was tainted by corruption. If the
courts found that this election was tainted by corruption, as
would seem likely given the FBI and CIA reports, this
entire election result could either be voided and a new
election slated, or Hillary Clinton could be named
President. In one legal case, a Republican candidate was
voided and a democrat put in office as a result of his
corruption. This is a legal path which can be followed to
right this terrible wrong. Whether the electors vote for
Trump or not, this legal path should be followed as the
Republican party, at its highest levels, have participated in
this Russian aided fraud on the American people. Whether
you are Democrat, Republican, Independent or a zebra,
every American should be aghast that our election process
was so tainted.
I am grateful, beyond measure, to each and every
American willing to step forward and speak up. GIVE
what you can afford and stop this travesty of justice.
History will tell this story and you have a chance to make
history today. Be a part of this movement to re-establish
the AMERICAN PEOPLE as the director of our country
and not uber wealthy oligarchs who want to pillage the
illustrious wealth of our country, our natural resources, our
national parks with their oil and minerals, our military
strength, our funds such as Medicare/Medicaid/Social
Security and others, our tax base, and our people.
Step forward today and say,
“No more!”
Help spread the word!
The whole thing brings up a lot of questions, the least of
which is if the group is only asking for $35,000, why
doesn’t Rosie just write them a check and be done with it?
So this is still a thing.
Remember this is exactly the talking point coming out of
the CIA a few months back, first with former CIA Bob
Baer on CNN saying,

“If the evidence is there, I don’t see any

other way than to vote again”:

Guess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens…

But can you imagine if the Supreme Court really did

nullify the 2016 election results and called for a revote
based on the still baseless claim that Russia hacked our
election, right now when the country is seemingly already
coming apart at its political seems only two weeks into
Trump’s presidency?
Here’s basically more of the same:
.

337
 Nullify 2016 Election,
Revote
Our democracy is threatened whenever we take it
for granted.
~Barack Obama
 We are receiving funds here to support the effort to
nullify the 2016 vote.
 As most sentient beings now know, 17 agencies of our
government have reported that the Russians interfered
with the 2016 vote. A democracy cannot stand without
a free and fair election. This election was clearly not
free and fair. If the American people can no longer
believe in the voting system, our democracy has
collapsed.
 We were told that we would not be able to formulate a
plan and get the writ to court... We did.
 We were told the Federal Courts would not hear our
Writ... They did.
 We were told we could not get it to the Supreme
Court... We did.
 We were told we could not get it heard by a Justice...
We did.
And our Writ and other motions are now on the SCOTUS
docket!
Our group is growing. The outcries to Nullify and Void
this Election and call for a REVOTE later in 2017 are
growing. Please join us!
YES WE CAN! But we need your support!
We collect funds for the following items:
 Preparation of lower court and SCOTUS documents.
 Attorney fees.
 Transportation and other costs associated with case.
 Miscellaneous fees associated with case, which are
substantial.
338
Here are the answers to some questions you might want to
know:
1. Who we are?: We are a group of concerned citizens who
were aghast and dismayed at the obvious and reported
theft of our election. 17 governmental agencies have
stated that the Russian government, with Putin guiding
them, purposefully attacked our country by successfully
attacking our election. There is ample evidence that
actual votes were changed including but not limited to:
 removal of hundreds of thousands of names from voter
rolls in specific precincts, resulting in less of those
votes being validated
 probable actual hacking of machines, as indicated by
evidence of a virus which could be used even if
machines not connected to the internet and is likely still
on our voting machines.
 a history of similar or same attacks on other countries
where citizens rose up and demanded a new vote
Additionally, evidence of Russian collusion with our
current administration is massive and obvious. A brief list
of only some of the problems include:
 Congressional statement that: The newly-released
declassified report from the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence provides evidence that confirms
Russian hacking and meddling in order to influence the
outcome of the 2016 electoral process. It includes hard
evidence from our nation’s top national security
agencies that Putin personally ordered an "influence
campaign" aimed at helping Donald Trump win the
election.
 11 prominent Russian figures related to this election
debacle killed in Russia, presumably by the Russian
government, since the election
 Documentation which reveals that not only does Mr.
Trump likely owe the Russian mob hundreds of millions
of dollars, but that the Russian government has
compromising information on him. Kompromat.
 Close, longstanding relationships between Trump, his
family, Putin’s family and girlfriend, and Russian
operatives dating back to the 1980’s.
 Open, public admissions by classified former FBI
operative that a segment of FBI was involved in what
 they referred to as a “counter coup” by placing Trump
in office.
 A $500 billion dollar oil deal between Exxon and Putin,
put on hold by Obama sanctions after Russian invasion
of Ukraine to obtain royalty-free use of Ukraine’s
pipeline, is set to be back on target after Trump
nominated the ex-CEO of Exxon and close Putin friend
to the Secretary of State position. He is poised to stop
the sanctions and pour massive wealth into Russia and
Putin’s bank accounts.
 The appearance of a bribe to unleash the sanctions in
the form of a massive, massive payout of 19% of a top
Russian oil company. The sale of 19.5% of this
company did occur just as the leaked documents
predicted. The ownership and transfer of these stocks
are mired in secrecy.
It is more than apparent our government has been attacked
by a hostile foreign entity. Free and fair elections are not
only the hallmark, but the foundation of our democracy. If
we do not set this right, our democracy is over.
2. What is my relationship to the parties these funds are
raised for?: This group of citizens, numbering in the
dozens, has supported the movement of one of several
cases filed around the United States, to the Supreme
Court to be heard. Some of us are plaintiffs (as I was in
one of the cases) and many of us are just volunteering
and working on this case. My personal role was to
guarantee payment of costs unless and until such funds
could be raised.
3. How will the funds will be spent and used in the future?:
Our initial fundraising efforts went towards court fees
which were substantial. Each filing cost hundreds of
dollars. Each printing of documents ranged from $100 to
$2700. And there were many. This account, at that time,
was fully vetted by the staff of GoFundMe for accuracy.
After initial costs were raised (as of this week) additional
monies will go to support both legal fees and travel
.
339
expenses for court hearings. Supreme Court attorney
James Bopp states a case in front of the Supreme Court
can run anywhere from $250,000 to in the millions in legal
fees alone. We feel strongly that to ask a single or small
group of attorneys to bear the cost of this is unreasonable
and has caused us great difficulty. Even if an attorney
firm will do this case pro bono, expenses alone could run
in the large 10’s of thousands of dollars. At this time, our
fund is no where near those figures. We do have
attorneys interested in taking the case. Finances are an
issue. We can continue the case pro se [meaning, filing
as a citizen without attorney], but obviously legal
assistance would be critical.
4. Who will be receiving the funds raised by this campaign?
Funds received here, minus fees and taxes, will be used
entirely for the above stated purpose. Right now, fees are
paying off the debt we have incurred. After that debt is
paid off, they will go, as indicated above, to legal costs,
expenses and travel.
5. How you intend to get the funds to those in need?: Right
now, I have personally sustained the entire cost of this
project, putting me in debt. I did it gladly, with the hope
that others feel the same as we do. Obviously, this faith in
the human spirit and the citizens of this country is being
realized.
We are heartened by the thousands and thousands of
people who are standing up for our country in any way
they can. We are moved by the donations of $5 and $10
from people who love our country but can scarcely afford
it. We know, deeply, how much this means to us all. Keep
educating people that a revote is "Legally Possible,
Morally Mandated". This is a way to solve our growing
problems in a legal, moral, and peaceful manner.
Thank you from our hearts, to yours...
 'Failing' New York Times
Is "Disturbed" At Trump-Putin "Bromance"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 7, 2017 8:30 AM

'The Editorial Board' of the so-called 'failing' New York
Times has returned fire in the ongoing battle with
President Trump and The White House. In an op-ed, the
newspaper's editors proclaimed that
"Trump seemed to appreciate Mr.
Putin’s brutality" and that the president
"suggested America acts the same
way... showing little support for
America’s traditional roles as a
champion of universal values."
The New York Times begins...
There’s no doubt that the United States has made
terrible mistakes, like invading Iraq in 2003 and torturing
terrorism suspects after Sept. 11... American drone strikes
against extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, for
instance, have sometimes killed civilians.
But quickly returns to 'values' shifting away from 'facts'...
Since taking office, Mr. Trump has
shown little support for America’s
traditional roles as a champion of
universal values like freedom of the
press and tolerance.

The bromance between President
Trump and President Vladimir Putin of
Russia, long a source of puzzlement
and alarm in the West, has gotten even
more disturbing.
Following Trump's reply to Bill O’Reilly when the Fox
News host asserted that Putin is “a killer.”
In fact, as he has worked to cut Mr. Putin slack, Mr.
Trump has bashed allies and laid the groundwork for an
aggressive campaign that could lead to conflict with Iran,
which the Pentagon has ranked behind Russia as a threat.
And then starts a whole new narrative - that President
Trump will be responsible for the renewed carnage that
looms in Ukraine...

"There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of Mr. Trump’s obsequiousness toward the
killers. What, you think our country is so Russian leader and his administration’s
innocent?" confusing policy is emboldening both
sides in Ukraine. Last week, the conflict
And ths lit the fuse under NYTimes editors... between the Ukrainian military and
Russian-backed separatists reignited.
Asserting the moral and political
superiority of the United States over This perhaps explains President Trump's raging tweet this
Russia has not traditionally been a morning...
difficult maneuver for American
presidents. But rather than endorsing
American exceptionalism, Mr. Trump
seemed to appreciate Mr. Putin’s brutality
— which includes bombing civilians in Syria
and, his accusers allege, responsibility for
a trail of dead political opponents and
journalists at home — and suggested
America acts the same way.

They briefly admit that Trump is right about America not

being perfect...

340
 AP Fact Check On Travel Ban-Halting Judge Is
Incomplete, Watered-Down
By Tom Blumer
February 7, 2017 | 11:53 PM EST
Given its usual tendencies, I suppose we should be grateful
that the Associated Press deigned to fact-check federal
judge James Robart at all.
The AP's Eric Tucker reported on Monday that the
Western Washington District Court judge's claim — that
no arrests of foreign nationals have occurred since 9/11
from the seven countries which had been subject to
President Trump's temporary travel ban before the judge
halted it — was "wrong." So far, so good. But Tucker later
seriously watered down that evaluation to "not quite right,"
and he never genuinely quantified how incredibly wrong
Robart really was.
The AP reporter also decided that his fact check would be
a good opportunity to take a swipe at Trump adviser
Kellyanne Conway over an error she had acknowledged
three days earlier.
Here are key paragraphs from Tucker's report, with the
bolded items identifying the contradictions:
AP FACT CHECK: No arrests from 7
nations in travel ban? Nope
The federal judge who halted President
Donald Trump's travel ban was wrong in
stating that no one from the seven
countries targeted in Trump's order has
been arrested for extremism in the
United States since the 2001 terrorist
attacks.
Just last October, an Iraqi refugee living in Texas pleaded
guilty to attempting to provide support to the Islamic State
341
group, accused of taking tactical training and wanting to
blow himself up in an act of martyrdom. In November, a
Somali refugee injured 11 in a car-and-knife attack at Ohio
State University, and he surely would have been arrested
had he not been killed by an officer.
... (Judge James Robart) asked a Justice Department
lawyer how many arrests of foreign nationals from the
countries have occurred since 9/11. When the lawyer said
she didn't know, Robart answered his own question: "Let
me tell, you, the answer to that is none, as best I can tell.
You're here arguing on behalf of someone that says we
have to protect the United States from these individuals
coming from these countries and there's no support for
that."
Charles Kurzman, a sociology professor at the University
of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, says his research shows no
Americans have been killed in the U.S. at the hands of
people from the seven countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen — since Sept. 11.
But it's not quite right to say no one
from those nations has been arrested or
accused in an extremist-related plot
while living in the U.S.
On Monday, Byron York at the Washington Examiner,
detailed just how "not quite right" Robart's contention was:
Judge James Robart, of the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of
Washington State, believes there is no
basis for President Trump's executive order
temporarily suspending non-American
entry from seven terrorism-plagued
countries.
... In that brief moment, Robart declared there is "no
support" for Trump's decision. And with that, the judge
from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington State ordered a nationwide — actually
worldwide — halt to enforcement of the president's
executive order.
Now, it turns out Robart might not know as much as he let
on.
 Last summer, the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration and the
National Interest analyzed public
sources of information, seeking to learn
more about people convicted of terror-
related offenses. The Justice
Department provided the subcommittee
with a list of 580 people who were
convicted — not just arrested, but tried
and convicted — of terror-related offenses
between Sept. 11, 2001 and Dec. 31, 2014.
The subcommittee investigated further
and found that at least 380 of the 580
were foreign-born and that an additional
129 were of unknown origin. Of the 380,
there were representatives — at least 60
— from all of the countries on the
Trump executive order list. And with 129
unknowns, there might be more, as well.
In addition, since the Senate list was
compiled, there have been others
involved in terrorism in the United States
from the seven countries.
The bottom line is, Robart's confident
assertion to Bennett was wrong.
I would say "quite wrong," which goes far beyond
Tucker's contention that Robart was "not quite right."
What York described as "Robart's confident assertion"
clearly drove his arguably illegal decision to halt Trump's
temporary travel ban. (The government's lawyer
342
persuasively argued that "it's the president that gets to
make the determinations ... And the court doesn't have
authority to look behind those determinations.")
The AP's Tucker, while acknowledging in
his opening sentence that Robart was
wrong, should have stopped there,
because even one is more than none. But
he then grievously erred in later describing
Robart as "not quite right." With 60 and
possibly more exceptions, Robart — and
Tucker — could not be more wrong.
The AP reporter also thought it would be a good time to go
after Kellyanne Conway for a mistake she had admitted
three days earlier:
... two men from Iraq were arrested in
Kentucky in 2011 and convicted on
charges that they plotted to send money
and weapons to al-Qaida.
They were never accused, though, of
plotting attacks on the U.S. Last week,
Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway
wrongly cited their case as a "Bowling
Green massacre," which never
happened.
Though Conway admitted her error on Friday (also "last
week"), Tucker, in typical establishment press treatment of
people on the center-right, refused to acknowledge the
existence of that admission three days later.
 Devos Confirmed As Education Secretary After Pence
Casts First Ever VP Tiebreaking Vote
By Tyler Durden
Feb 7, 2017 12:35 PM

As previewed earlier, in a vote that many had expected — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) February
would end up deadlocked 50/50 in the Senate, moments 7, 2017
ago the confirmation vote for Trump's Education Secretary
The broken tie by @VP Pence to confirm
candidate Besty DeVos was indeed tied in the Senate after
@BetsyDeVos marks the 1st time a VP has
two Republicans - Collins and Murkowski voted against -
broken a tie for a cabinet nom in the history
which then prompted Vice President Mike Pence to cast of the Senate.
the first ever tie-breaking vote for a cabinet nominee in
Senate history, in the process confirming DeVos as — Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) February
America's new Secretary of Education. 7, 2017

BREAKING: Vice President Mike Pence Prior to the vote, Chuck Schumer made a failed 11th-hour
casts the tie-breaking vote to confirm Betsy plea Tuesday morning for a third Republican to buck
DeVos as education secretary DeVos and sink her nomination.
https://t.co/cMTPTl9Qpv
— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) February “It’s the Republican side demanding a vote
7, 2017 for an unqualified candidate,” the Senate’s
top Democrat said. “I hope against hope
that another Republican will have the
The last time a VP broke a tie in the Senate was 2008, courage … [to] join us.”
when then-Vice President Dick Cheney voted on a tax
adjustment plan.
Schumer suggested Republicans are privately saying they
wish Trump picked someone else, calling DeVos a
And Pence is on the Senate floor, “negative trifecta.”
preparing to break the 50-50 tie.
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) February Democrats forced a rare all-night session to try to rally
7, 2017 public support behind their opposition to DeVos’s
BREAKING: Senate CONFIRMS nomination, including protesting outside of the Capitol
@BetsyDeVos to be Pres Trump's Sec of with progressive groups. In retrospect it was all for
Education, 51-50, after @VP Pence came nothing.
to Capitol to break the 50-50 tie.
And another piece of historical trivia: DeVos just got the
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) February
most “no” votes of any education secretary in history.
7, 2017
As expected, @BetsyDeVos was confirmed Betsy DeVos just got the most “no” votes of
51-50, with @VP Pence breaking the tie. any education secretary in history
GOP 'NO' VOTES: https://t.co/Ls7a7GB5KW
pic.twitter.com/nb8wfaKwK5
Collins
Murkowski — Kevin Schaul (@kevinschaul) February
7, 2017
DEM 'YES' VOTES:
None.

343
 Trump Is Stronger Than National Polls Suggest
By David M. Drucker (@Davidmdrucker)
2/7/17 12:06 AM
President Trump is still popular in core Republican
strongholds, even though he has suffered a dip in the
national public opinion polls.
Trump's approval rating is 45 percent, an underwater mark
previously unseen for a president this early in his first
term. But Trump's image and his policies are holding up
just fine among voters in Republican districts and states
key to the president's ability to drive his agenda through
Congress, and his party's success in 2018.
"The bad news for you and your colleagues
is that writing about the national numbers in
this environment is a useless exercise,"
said David Carney, a veteran Republican
operative in New Hampshire who has
advised presidential candidates. "People
are arguing over Super Bowl ads, the
country is divided."
While his national numbers aren't good, Trump is much
stronger in the states that could decide the outcome of the
midterm elections, according to Republican operatives
who have reviewed polling produced since New Year's
Day. For now, that suggests Democrats are less likely to
benefit from the president's struggles nationally than has
been the case in past election cycles.
Like Trump's loss of the national popular vote, Republican
operatives say the president's high disapproval numbers are
being driven by dissatisfaction with his leadership in
progressive, high-population metro centers, like Chicago,
Los Angeles, and New York.
The midterm elections, however, are going to be fought on
Senate battlegrounds that include red states like Missouri
344
and West Virginia and swing states like Ohio,
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — all won by Trump.
Missouri is a perfect example. Trump won the state
handily in November and lifted Republicans down ticket.
And yet, it's there that vulnerable senators like Claire
McCaskill, a Democrat running in a red state, need to find
a way to win if Democrats are to have a shot at putting a
check on the president in the midterm.
It won't be easy for McCaskill. A survey of 863 likely
Missouri voters conducted Thursday and Friday pegged
Trump's job performance at 47 percent approve/43 percent
disapprove — better than the national average. His
controversial executive order "related to immigration"
polled higher, at 50 percent approve/41 percent
disapprove.
The poll, by the GOP firm Remington Research,
headquartered in Kansas City, Mo., had a margin of error
of 3.85 percentage points. When the survey is broken
down by major media markets, it's even more revealing,
and offers an example of what is happening nationally.
Trump's approval rating in Missouri is weakest in
Columbia (19 percent), home of the University of
Missouri, and weaker in the states' two liberal-leaning,
major metropolitan regions — Kansas City and St. Louis
— than it is in the rest of the state, which is solidly
Republican.
Across the state, support for Trump's executive order
pertaining to immigration from seven predominantly
Muslim countries was higher among likely voters than
support for president personally.
In Columbia, approval for the executive order was 23
percent, 4 points higher than the college town rated
Trump's job performance. In Kansas City, the action
received a 45 percent approval, 3 points above the
president's job approval, and in St. Louis, the order faired 1
point better. The margins were similar in the state's other
main media markets.
"He is a disaster for sure. Funny thing is,
back home, it's just not that way," a
Republican insider from Missouri said,
 comparing the perception of Trump
nationally versus states like his.
Michael Meyers, a Republican strategist who has
conducted some initial polling across multiple states, said
he has seen the same phenomenon elsewhere. He declined
to elaborate because the survey data is proprietary.
But Meyers, referring to Republican voters generally, not
just Trump's loyal base, said there are no signs of erosion
of support for the president among GOP voters.
Meanwhile, liberals are as mad at him as ever, while
skeptical independents are in a wait-and-see mode.
345
In other words, Trump isn't any worse off today,
politically, than he was on Election Day.
"Generally Obama enjoyed higher ratings
on anything touching on him personally, but
support for his specific policies, often
lagged in comparison," Meyers said.
"Trump is the opposite. Some people may
not approve of him personally, but they are
showing stronger support for his proposals
and policy ideas."
Cotton And Trump Plot Crackdown On Legal Immigration
The Push Could Trigger A Fight Between The Business
And Populist Wings Of The GOP
By Seung Min Kim
02/07/17 05:04 AM EST - Updated 02/07/17 10:43 AM EST
Overlooked in Donald Trump’s campaign crusade against
illegal immigration was his vow to crack down on legal
immigration, too.
Now, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), a reliable Trump ally, is
taking steps to execute that part of the president’s
immigration vision — and it could provoke a showdown
between two competing ends of the GOP: the working-
class populists led by Trump and the establishment
Chamber of Commerce wing.
The outspoken, 39-year-old Cotton has written the first in
what may be a series of bills to revamp the nation’s
immigration system. Cotton will start off with legislation
being unveiled Tuesday that will dramatically slash the
number of immigrants who can obtain green cards and
other visas every year.
The conservative rising star is poised to step into the role
being vacated in the chamber by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-
Ala.), who has long preached the economic virtues of
restricting legal immigration in favor of U.S. citizens — a
view disputed by business-friendly Republicans who have
pushed for a more expansionist immigration policy.
Sessions is set to be confirmed as attorney general this
week.
"Donald Trump was the only one who saw
that most Americans don’t like our current
immigration system,” Cotton said in an
interview with POLITICO on Monday. “This
is just the area of politics where I think
leaders and elites are most disconnected
from the people. Not just Republicans but
in both parties, in business, in the media, in
the academy, culture and so forth."
346
The Arkansas senator has already spoken with Trump and
key White House officials about his immigration
proposals, and says the administration has been receptive.
And Cotton dismisses research that shows the economic
boon of immigrants, including low-skilled workers, by
paraphrasing George Orwell:
“Only an intellectual could believe
something so stupid.”
Cotton’s new legislation, being formally proposed Tuesday
with Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) and detailed exclusively
with POLITICO in advance of its release, swings an axe at
the nation’s green-card system by eliminating several
avenues for U.S. citizens and permanent residents to
sponsor family members for green cards.
Right now, U.S. citizens and permanent residents can
sponsor a variety of family members, including spouses,
parents, siblings and married adult children. Cotton and
Perdue’s plan would allow only spouses and unmarried
minor children to get green cards, although they would
permit visas for aging adult parents whose American
children are their caretakers — a population Cotton
expects will be modest.
The bill also dumps the diversity visa lottery, which allots
about 50,000 visas per year for citizens of countries that
traditionally have low rates of immigration to the United
States. And it would limit refugees to 50,000 annually —
in line with levels outlined in Trump’s controversial
executive order.
"Sen. Cotton and I are taking action to fix
the shortcomings in our legal immigration
system," Perdue said. "Returning to our
historically normal levels of legal
immigration will help improve the quality of
American jobs and wages."
All told, the number of legal immigrants allowed into the
United States under the bill — named the Reforming
American Immigration for Strong Employment (RAISE)
Act — would plummet by 40 percent in the first year and
by 50 percent over a decade, according to analysis by
Cotton’s aides.
Advocates of reduced immigration are delighted.
"With the introduction of this bill, Sen.
Cotton has made it clear that he's stepping
not necessarily into the shoes, but onto the
platform where Sessions' shoes have
been," said Roy Beck, the president of
NumbersUSA, which calls for less
immigration. "This is beyond anything that
Sen. Sessions ever did."
Cotton says his legislation is the first step in revamping the
current immigration system from one based on family ties
toward a more skills-oriented one, a move that
Republicans generally support. But the intraparty collision
comes with Cotton’s push to tighten the number of low-
skilled foreign workers into the country.
“For too long, our immigration policy has
skewed toward the interests of the wealthy
and powerful: Employers get cheaper
labor, and professionals get cheaper
personal services like housekeeping,”
Cotton wrote in a December New York
Times op-ed. “We now need an
immigration policy that focuses less on the
most powerful and more on everyone else.”
His arguments, however, run counter to research that show
immigrants are a net boon to the economy, from the high-
skilled foreigners coveted by the tech industry to
employees who work at hotels, restaurants and in
agriculture. The so-called Gang of Eight bill passed by the
Senate in 2013 crafted a new “W” visa program that would
allow up to 200,000 low-skilled guest workers in the
country per year.
“Economists overwhelmingly think that
immigration is good for the economy.
That’s not just true at the high-skilled, but
low-skilled level,” said Jeremy Robbins, the
executive director of the Partnership for a
New American Economy, the pro-reform
group led by former New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg.
Robbins, who regularly meets with GOP lawmakers,
added:
“There is overwhelming support in
Congress for the idea of immigration as an
economic driver, including in the
Republican conference.”
But arguments from the other end of the Republican Party
are rising in potency, particularly with Trump in the White
House, which has put out a flurry of executive actions in
.
347
his first two weeks in office. The Trump administration is
also entertaining new orders to curb legal immigration
programs such as the H-1B visa prized by the tech
industry.
Cotton didn’t address employment-based green cards or
related visas in his latest measure, noting that the laws
governing those issues are more complicated and “touch
more entrenched interests.” He also declined to say
directly whether he is open to expanding the pool of
85,000 H-1B visas allotted per year.
“There are obviously abuses of the H-1B
visa program. I think those abuses need to
be addressed before we even consider
expanding the program,” Cotton said. “That
said, if the evidence demonstrates that say,
software companies need PhDs with
computer science degrees and they’re
going to pay them a wage that’s in the top
1, top 5, top 10 percent of local wages, I’m
open to that kind of evidence.”
Mark Krikorian, whose Center for Immigration Studies
supports restricting the number of immigrants here, says
Cotton has been a rarity among Republicans in that he
consistently raised issues surrounding legal immigration in
addition to the more oft-discussed debate over illegal
immigration.
“He’s relatively young, he’s a rock star
among lots of conservatives, combat
veteran, the whole thing,” Krikorian said.
“And so for him to be the one to carry the
standard of immigration reduction really
does give it legitimacy.”
The prospects of a full-blown immigration debate such as
the one that consumed Congress four years ago appear
unlikely, for now. But Cotton said if Trump calls on
lawmakers to advance immigration legislation, such as a
security and enforcement bill, that could be an opportunity
to put forward his plan.
Cotton’s allies extend beyond the White House, to the
Justice Department — where Sessions will be able to wield
significant power over immigration in his new job.
“There’s only one Jeff Sessions. He’s not
replaceable,” Cotton said during the
POLITICO interview. “But Sen. Sessions
correctly realized that most Americans
want immigration levels at most, to stay the
same, and more likely, to decrease
because it does have a negative impact on
jobs and wages.”
Travel-Ban Judge Makes Decision Based On Whopping Lie
One Mainstream-Media Outlet Exposes Serious Gaffe
Leo Hohmann
Updated: 02/07/2017 At 10:04 PM
The judge who granted an injunction against President
Donald Trump’s temporary ban on travel from seven
Muslim-majority countries based his decision on a
blatantly inaccurate premise.
Judge James Robart, a federal district judge in Seattle,
stated that no one from the seven countries on Trump’s list
– Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Libya –
has been arrested on terrorism charges since the Sept. 11,
2001, attack on America.
His comment, made in open court on Friday, went
unchallenged in the establishment media all weekend and
into Monday, while WND reported it was inaccurate and
gave a partial list of terror incidents that have been plotted
or carried out by Somali and Iraqi immigrants since 9/11.
Where is Politifact? Where is Snopes? Where are all the
other media fact-checkers to correct the mistaken judge?
“Judge Robart no doubt knows the
mainstream media is a propaganda arm for
the left’s globalist agenda, and so no one
would report the falsity of his statement
except ‘discredited’ or ‘right-wing’ news
outlets,” said Robert Spencer, an Islam
expert who blogs for the David Horowitz
Freedom Center at JihadWatch.org.
Finally, on Monday afternoon, the Associated Press came
out with a fact-check on Robart’s comment, debunking it
as patently false.
“WASHINGTON — The federal judge who
halted President Donald Trump’s travel ban
was wrong in stating that no one from the
348
seven countries targeted in Trump’s order
has been arrested for extremism in the
United States since the 2001 terrorist
attacks.
Just last October, an Iraqi refugee living in
Texas pleaded guilty to attempting to
provide support to the Islamic State group,
accused of taking tactical training and
wanting to blow himself up in an act of
martyrdom. In November, a Somali refugee
injured 11 in a car-and-knife attack at Ohio
State University, and he surely would have
been arrested had he not been killed by an
officer.”
CNN, the New York Times and the major TV networks
were silent on the legitimacy of an exchange Friday in
federal court between Robart and Justice Department
lawyer Michelle Bennett, who was tasked with defending
Trump’s executive order.
Robart grilled Bennett, asking if citizens of the seven
countries named in the order had been arrested for plots in
the U.S. since 9/11. Bennett said she didn’t know.
“The answer to that is none, best I can tell,”
Robart said. “You’re here arguing on behalf
of someone that says we have to protect
the United States from these individuals
coming from these countries, and there’s
no support for that.”
Congress gives the president wide latitude in foreign
affairs, which includes granting visas, Bennett reminded
the judge.
But the judge answered:
“I’m also asked to look and determine if the
executive order is rationally based. And
rationally based, to some extent, means I
have to find it grounded in fact instead of
fiction.”
As it turns out, Robart was the one basing his decision on a
fiction.
Trump’s order bars citizens of the seven countries from
entering the U.S. for 90 days, all refugees for 120 days and
indefinitely halts refugees from Syria.
Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, halted the
enforcement of Trump’s order nationwide pending
appeals. The case has been appealed to the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals, and is expected to make a fast track to
the Supreme Court.
Robart, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general
of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the
order, said the states
“have met their burden of demonstrating
that they face immediate and irreparable
injury as a result of the signing and
implementation of the Executive Order.”
He said the order adversely affects residents of the two
states in areas of education, employment, education and
freedom to travel. Dozens of corporations such as
Microsoft, Expedia, Apple, Google, E-Bay, Amazon,
Starbucks and others claim to be suffering damages by the
executive order.
The essence of their claims is that they are
suffering economically, which may be the
case since these companies benefit from
hiring cheap immigrant labor from Muslim
countries.
Almost every president since the advent of modern air
travel has implemented bans on travel from various nations
for various reasons. President Obama enacted a six-month
ban on refugees from Iraq in 2011 after it was revealed that
two Iraqi Muslims resettled in Bowling Green, Kentucky,
were sending weapons and cash to al-Qaida in Iraq. They
were arrested, tried, convicted and are serving time,
unbeknownst to Judge Robart.
President Jimmy Carter implemented a travel ban on
citizens from Iran after the Shah was deposed and students
seized the U.S. Embassy in 1979.
Dozens of Somali refugees have been involved in terror
plots, including more than 40 of which left the country to
join ISIS, al-Shabab or al-Qaida, the FBI has confirmed.
Andrew Luger, the U.S. attorney for Minnesota, even
admitted in April 2015 that “We have a terror recruitment
problem in Minnesota” involving the Somali refugee
community in that state. His comment came at a press
conference after six Somali refugees were charged with
trying to leave the country to board flights to Turkey, from
where they planned to hop across the border to Syria and
join ISIS.
349
The problem got so bad in Minnesota with Somali refugees
and their sons being recruited by ISIS that the federal
government under Barack Obama approved grants for a
pilot program that emphasized teaching Somali youth how
not to succumb to the terrorist recruiters by getting
involved in soccer or the arts.
As WND pointed out in a story Sunday and the AP
acknowledged Monday, Somali refugees also carried out
knife attacks against civilians at a mall in St. Cloud,
Minnesota, on Sept. 17, injuring 10, and at Ohio State
University on Nov. 28, injuring 11.
So Robart either has a short memory, does not read the
news, or was deliberately whitewashing the facts in an
attempt to strike down Trump’s executive order.
Pamela Geller, editor in chief of the Geller Report and
president of American Freedom Defense Initiative, said
Robart’s decision, if upheld, smacks directly at the
sovereignty of the United States and strips the president of
his constitutional authority to protect the nation.
“The media doesn’t care about the truth. It
only cares about demonizing Trump. To
report Robarts’ lie would interfere with their
quest to destroy Trump, Trump’s ban, and
the dawn of a new, glorious era in Trump
America,” Geller told WND. “The travel ban
is legal: it is clearly set out in American law
that the president has the right and
responsibility to bar people from entering
the country for national security reasons.”
She said it is indicative of how “traitorous the left has
become that they are so angry and rioting about this.
“And the judges who have blocked the ban
are no better. Even those appointed by
G.W. Bush represent the failed
establishment that is trying desperately to
hold on to its power, continue to further the
cause of globalist socialist internationalism,
and keep the U.S. from defending itself.”
Limbaugh: Robart issued political, not legal opinion
Rush Limbaugh, on his show Monday, said Robart
“is not a conservative,” that he was
appointed by George W. Bush likely as part
of a game of “horse trading” with Sen. Patty
Murray of Washington state.
Robart once praised Black Lives Matter in a lawsuit
against police in Seattle.
Limbaugh said Robart did not even attempt to decide the
case based on legal principles, choosing instead to base his
opinion on an assumption about Trump’s motive for
implementing a “Muslim ban.”
Limbaugh said:
“When you get right down, this judge does
not have the legal power to do what he did,
because he is interpreting Trump’s state of
mind. If you read the judicial opinion that
orders the temporary stay from the judge,
this Judge Robart guy in Seattle, he
doesn’t even address the law of this! He
just addresses typical left-wing touchy-feely
things and then presumes to understand
the president’s state of mind, and he
presumes to understand the president’s
prejudices and biases.”
Even constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz — who
doesn’t agree with Trump on the temporary travel ban —
said in an op-ed for the Toronto Globe and Mail that
Trump could have ignored Robart’s decision.
“Trump could have just told the guy to go
pound sand, but Dershowitz even said that
the president has too much respect for the
legal system to openly defy a judge like
this, that they’re gonna go through the
process of trying to get this stay of his
executive order overturned so that it can be
re-implemented. It’s not about banning
Muslims,” Limbaugh said. “It’s about vetting
terrorists. It’s not about religion. This is the
thing that… See, the left has been allowed
to frame this and characterize this via the
protesters and the rioters working in
consort with the media.”
Trump supporters are thinking they’ve accomplished a
great thing but the protesters and media were a step ahead,
Limbaugh said.
“…these people begin protesting within
minutes of this executive order. They fill up
LAX, they fill up JFK, they make it look like
the whole country’s fit to be tied at this and
then they mischaracterized it as a ban on
Muslims and a bigoted religious ban, and
they say America’s never had a religious
test,” Limbaugh said. “Which we have, by
the way, just not the way you think or the
way it sounds. But we’ve always asked
.
350
refugees their religion when they claim
they’re fleeing religious persecution.”
Obama effectively banned Christians from Syria
In fact, President Obama, in league with the United
Nations, applied his own religious test on refugees flowing
out of Syria. Almost none of the refugees who were
Christian or Yazidi were allowed into the United States. A
total of 56 Syrians or 0.5 percent of the more than 17,000
Syrian refugees allowed into the U.S. were Christian while
more than 98 percent were Sunni Muslim. Christians make
up 10 percent of the Syrian population and were among the
most persecuted and vulnerable of all Syrians as they were
being hunted down and killed by ISIS and other Sunni
rebel groups fighting the Assad regime.
A group of foreign policy advisers to former Democrat
presidents, including Madeleine Albright, John Kerry,
Susan Rice, Leon Panetta and other top aides to ex-
president Barack Obama filed a brief with the Ninth
Circuit urging the court to uphold Robart’s block of the
president’s executive order.
“We view the Order as one that ultimately
undermines the national security of the
United States, rather than making us
safer,” they argued.
“Reinstating the Executive Order would
wreak havoc on innocent lives and deeply
held American values.”
Bernie Sanders, the socialist senator from Vermont who
ran for president in the Democratic primary, put out a
tweet Monday that he also hopes the courts strike down
Trump’s temporary ban:
“It is extraordinary how little Donald Trump
knows about immigration, or cares about
the Constitution, rule of law or separation of
powers.”
America is on the same suicidal path as Europe but is it too
late for Donald Trump to fix the problem? Get all the facts
in Leo Hohmann’s brand-new investigative book “Stealth
Invasion: Muslim Conquest Through Immigration and
Resettlement Jihad.”
 Madonna - “I’ve Given A Lot Of Thought
To Blowing Up The White House”
By Frosty Wooldridge
2-7-2017
During the Obama inauguration eight years ago, not one
conservative, Republican, Libertarian, Democrat or
independent violently demonstrated in the streets, burned
cars, yelled obscenities or smashed windows.
U.S. Senators and Congressional House members praised
the new African-Kenyan-American president as a new day
for racial peace in America.
During the Trump inauguration, last month, millions
demonstrated against his presidency before it began.
Demonstrators fought police, burned cars, smashed
windows, yelled obscenities and threatened violence
toward the new president.
Singer Madonna screamed her invectives,
“I’ve given a lot of thought to blowing up the
White House.”
Actress Ashley Judd yelled,
“I’m a nasty woman and I say Trump’s a
Hitler with a toupee!”
Congressman John Lewis (D-GA), said,
“I don’t look at Trump as a legitimate
president.”
Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) said,
“This man is questionable. And because
we have suspicions -- many of us -- about
who he is, where he came from, what his
actions are, and all of his conflicts ... we
have to find out more about him and some
of that leads to the possibility of
impeachment."
At first, I thought she spoke about how Barack Obama
slipped into the White House without anyone knowing his
true identity, (which, by the way, we still don’t know), but
instead, she railed against Trump.
A group of students threatened to “moon” the entrance of
Trump Towers in protest to the new president’s election.
Actress Sarah Silverman said,
“We need a violent coup!”
351
One lady held a placard,
“If Trump’s not Hitler, I am a moron!”
Actress Meryl Streep, much beloved lady of America,
spoke against Trump at the Golden Globes while ignoring
the fact that four African-American teens beat, cut and
violated a Caucasian mentally disabled boy for five hours
while they featured it on Facebook—that very same day.
Social media created a hash-tag, “He’s not
my president” that received 180,000 likes
within hours.
In the bastion of free speech, University of California at
Berkley, last weekend, students threw steel racks through
windows while starting fires in the streets because they
refused to hear the speech of a conservative speaker.
In other words, they violently opposed our 1 st Amendment
rights to free speech. That kind of behavior occurs in
dictatorships.
This week, I personally saw a video where Senator
Schumer (D-NY) stood in front of an audience to lead a
chant,
“Dump Trump, Dump Trump, Dump
Trump.”
Have you ever heard of a Banana Republic?
This kind of violent anti-American behavior reminds me
that none of the name callers, demonstrators or hoodlums
marching through our streets understands that we live in a
Constitutional Republic. The person with the most
Electoral College votes wins. Even with the potential for
millions of illegal alien votes in her favor, Hillary Clinton
lost.
Writer John Porter from Arkansas said,
“I have been for quite some time honestly
trying to understand why, and to make
some sense of the terrible, senseless and
sometimes tragic display of people in their
destructive pillaging, looting, burning of
automobiles and destruction of other
property, including businesses and college
campus structures, and of course
physically attacking other fellow Americans
 in various cities all across this nation. I'm
sure some of the participants are
apparent crazed individuals still smarting
and upset over the results of our
presidential election. But it has now
become apparent and recognized by most
that a great number of these people are
masked and/or hooded thugs, paid
professional demonstrators, being financed
by George Soros and other groups for the
purpose of disrupting, not only the agenda
of our new president, but more importantly
and dangerously so, the very system of
government we have in this country.”
Fellow American, I can tell you this: I have traveled
through countries that lack the rule of law. I witnessed
human misery that few Americans understand. I’ve
watched human misery on a level that tears at my heart,
years later. I’ve seen where brutal dictators and ruling
class despots kill citizens without blinking an eye. In Saudi
Arabia and that region, they ‘honor kill’ 20,000 women
annually via Islamic law. They kill gays for being gay.
They cut little girls. They chop peoples’ heads off and
stone women to death for being a woman.
To all the women who marched in favor of Muslim
immigration last week in light of Trump’s ban to secure
our safety: if they understood that those same Muslims, if
they gained a majority in our country, would subject them
to Sharia Law, which means they would all be stoned to
.
352
death or decapitated for exercising free speech. Muslim
men don’t tolerate any kind of a voice by any woman.
As America Continues Endless Immigration, We All
Face A Rough Ride
As fragmented and fractured as we stand today, each year,
we import 1.5 million legal and illegal immigrants without
pause. That continued act of Congress dooms us to this:
“Diversity within a nation destroys unity and
leads to civil wars,” said social scientist
Garret Hardin. “Immigration, a benefit
during the youth of a nation, can act as a
disease in its mature state. Too much
internal diversity in large nations has led to
violence and disintegration. We are now in
the process of destabilizing our own
country. The magic words of destabilizers
are ‘diversity’ and ‘multiculturalism’.
President Trump presents a springboard (excuse) for all the
demonstrators. In reality, the majority of Americans voted
for him to protect them from Islamic terror, drugs coming
up from the Mexico and enforcing our borders by stopping
all illegal immigration. He needs to rescind the 1965
Immigration Reform Act along with his other Executive
Orders in order to save us from multicultural chaos and
total breakdown of our nation.
##
 Soros Teams Up With Attorneys
Challenging Trump Immigration Order
© AP Photo/ Manuel Balce Ceneta - US
00:26 07.02.2017(Updated 03:10 07.02.2017)
Organizations funded by billionaire
financier George Soros have teamed up
with Democratic attorneys general to file
over a dozen lawsuits against the
administration of US President Donald
Trump, for the latter’s use of an
executive order to temporarily halt
immigration from seven predominantly-
Muslim countries.
Soros’s Open Society Foundations, a pro-open borders and
pro-globalization advocacy organization, has also financed
several non-profit organizations that are filing lawsuits
against the controversial order.
“Leading the way in these lawsuits
in several states is the American Civil
Liberties Union, which has gotten at least
$35.5 million from the Open Society
Foundations, according to the Capital
Research Center, a Washington think tank
that investigates nonprofits,” Lifezette
reported.
The billionaire also handed $4.6 million to the National
Immigration Law Center and $621,000 to the Urban
Justice Center, which also has an organization called the
International Refugee Assistance Project, that have joined
the lawsuits. Other groups involved in the recent litigation
that have received money from Soros include the
American Immigration Council and the National Lawyers
Guild.
“It shouldn't surprise anyone that pressure
groups funded by George Soros are
353
litigating to keep US ports-of-entry wide
open to terrorists and other people who
hate America," claimed Matthew Vadum,
senior vice president of the Capital
Research Center, a Washington think tank
that investigates nonprofits. "Soros has
said he wants to bring America down.
Flooding the country with Muslim aliens
who won't assimilate is one way to do that."
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and 15
other state attorneys general have filed a joint statement
condemning the Trump immigration order, calling it
“unconstitutional and unamerican.”
Schneiderman was featured in a photo with the
controversial billionaire’s son, Alex Soros, that he
uploaded to Instagram in August 2016. “Great to meet
with #newyork attorney general @ericschneiderman who
recognized that @realdonaldtrump was a fraud way
before many and has courageously taken him on!” the
caption read.
As Sputnik previously reported, billionaire financier
George Soros has provided funding to at least 56 ‘partner’
organizations, including the National Resource Defense
Council and women’s health network Planned Parenthood,
who are allied with the recent Women’s March on DC.
MoveOn.org, an organization that has consistently
organized and called for protests, is also financed
by Soros.
“Make no mistake that the events you’re
seeing transpire nationwide are being
orchestrated in part by a billionaire political
elite class that is looking to subvert the will
of the American people by attempting
to foment a new American revolution.
Soros’ formula has been duplicated
in numerous nations, and it looks as if he
now has the US in his sights as the next
target,” the Free Thought Project wrote
of the financial kingpin’s activities
in November 2016.
 John Kerry & Madeleine Albright Among Ex-National
Security Officials Against Trump’s Travel Ban
Published Time: 7 Feb, 2017 03:10Edited Time: 7 Feb, 2017 21:17
Former Secretaries of State John Kerry and Madeleine
Albright are among the 10 former national security and
foreign policy officials who have signed declarations in
support of the federal lawsuit against the Trump
administration’s executive order on immigration.
On Monday, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson
responded to the Trump administration's appeal of his
restraining order blocking the president's travel ban, saying
that overturning the restraining order would cause "chaos."
In addition to Ferguson’s response, 10 former national
security and foreign policy officials from both parties,
including Kerry and Albright, filed a six-page joint
declaration in support of the restraining order.
Their declaration calls the executive order
“ill-conceived, poorly implemented and ill-
explained,” and says it “offends our nation’s
laws and values.”
“We all agree that the United States faces
real threats from terrorist networks and
must take all prudent and effective steps to
combat them, including the appropriate
vetting of travelers to the United States,”
the declaration reads.
“We all are nevertheless unaware of any
specific threat that would justify the travel
ban established by the Executive Order
issued on January 27, 2017. We view the
Order as one that ultimately undermines
the national security of the United States,
rather than making us safer.”
354
Along with the declaration, 16 attorneys general also filed
a 23-page amicus brief in support of the lawsuit from
Washington and Minnesota, declaring the executive order
"inflicts significant harm on American
business, innovation, and growth.”
Attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Delaware,
the District of Columbia, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia said
that the executive order would cause harm to their states’
tax revenues, medical institutions, educational institutions,
and would violate the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment, which prohibits the government from
favoring one religion over another.
The declaration also warns that lifting the restraining order
would cause similar chaos to the protests that erupted in
airports after the executive order was first signed.
“State Attorneys General are on the front
lines of protecting our people from
dangerous and hastily-implemented federal
policy. I’ve been clear: President Trump’s
executive order is unconstitutional,
unlawful, and fundamentally un-American –
and we won’t stand by while it undermines
our states’ families, economies, and
institutions,” New York Attorney General
Eric Schneiderman said on his website.
 Another 31 major technology companies, including Tesla,
SpaceX and Adobe Systems Incorporated, have added their
names to a legal brief filed by 97 companies, which
declares the executive order

“is inflicting substantial harm on US

companies,” according to Forbes.
"Immigrants are leading entrepreneurs,"
the brief reads. "Some of these businesses
are large. Immigrants or their children
founded more than 200 of the companies
on the Fortune 500 list... Collectively, these
“From filing our own federal lawsuit last companies generate annual revenue of
week, to partnering with fellow Attorneys $4.2 trillion, and employ millions of
General on this amicus brief today, we will Americans."
use every tool at our disposal to fight
President Trump’s discriminatory order and
The federal appeals court has scheduled a hearing on the
help ensure the rule of law prevails."
executive order for Tuesday at 3pm local time.

355
 Over 15 State Attorney Generals
File Amicus Brief Against Trump Travel Ban
© AP Photo/ Brennan Linsley - US
01:24 07.02.2017(Updated 01:28 07.02.2017)

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — A group of 16 US Attorneys

General have filed a friend of the court brief, or amicus
brief, in opposition to President Donald Trump’s executive
order temporarily blocking travellers from seven Muslim-
majority countries from entering the United States,
Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said in a
statement.

"This filing is about keeping our

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh
Shapiro said that a group of 16 US
Attorneys General have filed a friend of
the court brief, or amicus brief, in
opposition to President Donald Trump’s
executive order temporarily blocking
travellers from seven Muslim-majority
countries from entering the United
States.
.
communities safe, protecting our economy,
and upholding the rule of law," Shapiro
wrote in the statement on Monday.
"Pennsylvania was founded on the promise
of liberty and we’re proud to help lead this
effort in support of Washington state’s
lawsuit."

356
 60 Minutes Coverup Piece On
Muslim Parasites Living High On The Backs
Of Taxpayers While Americans Suffer
By Frosty Wooldridge
2-7-2017
Sunday, January 29, 2017, “60 Minutes” featured Bill
Whittaker reporting on a Syrian Muslim family landing in
America to start a new life. The family, part of a 12,000-
member family of refugees imported into America in 2016,
enjoys unending welfare afforded by American taxpayers.
We’re talking millions upon millions of dollars spent to fly
them over here, feeding them, housing them, educating
them, giving them transportation, giving them medical
care, paying for their utilities and more---with no end in
sight as to welfare paid for by your tax dollars.
While their “puff” piece attempted to show our
compassion, it failed to report on the enormous cost to
American taxpayers in the decades to come: their birth
rates, their chain-migrated relatives and their living on
American welfare to the tune of billions.
All of that without reporting that American citizens taking
a back seat to immigrants’ needs.
In fact, “60 Minutes” didn’t report on the horrific costs of
saving those refugee families when our American families
suffer much greater. Take these realities into
consideration:
America features 1.5 million homeless
citizens languishing in this country 24/7.
They inhabit cardboard huts in the alleys of
every major city in America. They stand on
street corners begging for money and food.
They face alcohol and drug addiction. They
face psychological displacement. In my city
of Denver, 10,000 homeless sleep on
steam grates nightly to stay warm or cuddle
under the loading docks. It’s sickening to
see them on nights when the temperatures
drop to -10 degrees F.
www.FeedingAmerica.org states:
 13.1 million children lived in food-insecure households
in 2016.
 Twenty percent or more of the child population in 30
states and D.C. lived in food-insecure households in
2016, according to the most recent data available.
357
Mississippi (27%) and New Mexico (27%) had the
highest rates of children in households without
consistent access to food.
 In 2016, the top five states with the highest rate of
food-insecure children under 18 were Mississippi, New
Mexico, Arizona, Alabama, and Arkansas.
A whopping 48 million Americans subsist on food stamps
and other welfare because they cannot obtain jobs. Every
refugee that arrives displaces an American from a job.
Every refugee that arrives costs Americans hard money out
of their pockets with no return, whatsoever.
A mind numbing 60,000 to 100,000 military veterans lack
jobs, lack homes and lack medical care in the United
States. What about the needs of our country, our vets and
our citizens?
One out of four African-Americans lacks a job at a living
wage. Along with that, three out of four African-American
children arrive out of wedlock and live with single mothers
on welfare and entrenched in poverty. Why not “save” our
citizens rather than refugees?
How about the fact that our country stands eyeball deep in
$20 trillion of debt? How do you get your arms around the
fact that Congress tries to save the refugees when it can’t
save itself? We pay over $40 million monthly in interest of
the national debt because Congress can’t and won’t act
responsibly.
Do you realize that 13,000,000 (million) American
children live below the poverty level with no hope of
escaping the inner city projects? Is it too unreasonable to
apply those moneys being spent for refugees to go for our
own children?
Understand this fact: the citizens of the third world birth
80,000,000 (million) more babies into the world annually,
net gain, without end. They refuse to be responsible for
their birth rates, but they don’t mind migrating to first
world countries to save themselves. Where do we flee once
we’re overwhelmed with population?
Today, Chicago stands as a killing zone for African-
Americans with murders every day of the year and into the
hundreds annually. Maybe we should take care of our
citizens with jobs, housing, education and hope.
Why must we save the rest of the world while our own
citizens suffer as much or greater than refugees?
While our cities face horrific infrastructure breakdown and
our nation faces sociological breakdown and cultural
displacement from endless immigration, at what point do
we apply the brakes on immigration?
Now? Or 100,000,000 (million) more refugee immigrants
by 2050? Reality check: the United Nations discovered
that 100,000,000 (million) people of the world would love
to immigrate to America tomorrow if they enjoyed a visa
and plane ticket. Can we save the world?
Not a chance! Why are we taking in all those immigrants
when we can’t take care of our own citizens’ needs? Give
me one reason that could stand the test of common sense
for accepting and paying millions and billions for refugees.
Our taxpayer dollars already pay out $113,000,000,000.00
.
358
(billion) annually for immigrants. (Source:
www.TheSocialContract.com) When does that stop when
you see our $20 trillion debt price tag?
At some point soon, we must stop all immigration. We
can’t afford it and we’re deeply in debt. It’s fracturing and
fragmenting our country into ethnic group chaos, cultural
suicide and environmental degradation. We can’t keep
doing this to ourselves.
Write 60 Minutes and invite them to do a segment on
American citizens being destroyed by endless refugee
immigration both legal and illegal as they swarm into our
country: start with 9/11, Boston Marathon, Orlando, White
Cloud, Garland, Ohio State, San Bernardino, Ft.
Lauderdale, Dearborn, Miami, honor killings and more yet
to come.
Email them: 60M@cbsnews.com
###
 US Sheriffs Offering Trump
Full Backing of Immigration Policies
© Flickr/ Chris Yarzab - US
22:53 07.02.2017

"The sheriffs thanked the President

for what they described as ‘unprecedented
support for law enforcement,’ and offered
their full backing of his border security and
immigration policies," Spicer stated.

The sheriffs presented Trump with a letter on behalf of the

National Sheriff's Association, which commended the
president for taking significant steps to enhance public
safety, Spicer added.
US county sheriffs announced their support for Donald Trump's
executive actions on immigration and border security.
During the meeting, Trump reaffirmed his commitment
to work closely with police departments across the United
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — US county sheriffs
States and assured them his administration would make
announced in a meeting with President Donald Trump
every effort to stop crime as well as strengthen the bond
their support for his executive actions on immigration and
between local, state and federal security agencies, Spicer
border security, White House press secretary Sean Spicer
concluded.
said in a press briefing on Tuesday.

.
359
 55% Of Europeans Agree With Trump:
"Muslim Immigration Should Be Banned"
By Tyler Durden
Feb 7, 2017 11:58 AM
President Donald Trump’s executive order to ban citizens
of seven Muslim-majority states from entering the US for
90 days, and temporarily freeze all refugee arrivals
(including Syrians indefinitely), has been interpreted
widely as an attempt to curtail the inward migration of
Muslims, which Trump and his supporters argue pose a
threat to national security. It has also been challenged
legally, and today a showdown between the DOJ and a San
Francisco Court of Appeals is scheduled for 6pm, at which
point the Trump order may be formally rejected, forcing
Trump to engage the Supreme Court.
While the Trump order has unleashed a firestorm of legal
retaliation in the US, Trump’s policy has also generated a
backlash among some of Europe’s leaders. Angela
Merkel’s spokesman said the chancellor had ‘explained’
the Geneva Convention to the president in a phone call
discussing the order, while London Mayor Sadiq Khan
argued that the invitation to the president for a state visit to
Britain in 2017 should be withdrawn until the ban is
rescinded. Meanwhile, leaders of Europe’s populist parties,
including Geert Wilders, Nigel Farage and Matteo Salvini,
have heaped praise on Trump.
And while the political elite's positions are clear, a more
relevant question is where does the public in European
countries stand on the specific issue of Muslim
immigration.
Surprisingly, there is evidence to suggest that both Trump
and Europe's right-wing parties reflect an underlying
reservoir of majority public support.
360
According to a new Chatham House survey of more than
10,000 people from 10 European states, we now know
what people think about migration from mainly Muslim
countries, and as Chatham House notes,
"the results are striking and sobering."
They suggest that public opposition to
any further migration from
predominantly Muslim states is by no
means confined to Trump’s electorate in
the US but is fairly widespread.
In the survey, carried out prior President Trump’s
executive order was announced, respondents were given
the following statement:
‘All further migration from mainly
Muslim countries should be stopped’.
They were then asked to what extent did they agree or
disagree with this statement.
Overall, across all 10 of the European
countries an average of 55% agreed that
all further migration from mainly Muslim
countries should be stopped, 25%
neither agreed nor disagreed and 20%
disagreed.
Furthermore, majorities in all but two of the ten states
agreed, ranging from 71% in Poland, 65% in Austria, 53%
in Germany and 51% in Italy to 47% in the United
Kingdom and 41% in Spain. In no country did the
percentage that disagreed surpass 32%. In short, more than
half of Europeans agree with Donald Trump.
Some further details:
Public opposition to further migration
from Muslim states is especially intense
in Austria, Poland, Hungary, France and
Belgium,
despite these countries having very different sized resident
Muslim populations. In each of these countries, at least
38% of the sample ‘strongly agreed’ with the statement.
With the exception of Poland, these countries have either
been at the centre of the refugee crisis or experienced
terrorist attacks in recent years. It is also worth noting that
in most of these states the radical right is, to varying
degrees, entrenched as a political force and is looking to
mobilize this angst over Islam into the ballot box, either at
elections in 2017 or longer term.
The polls also reveal how, across Europe, opposition to
Muslim immigration is especially intense among retired,
older age cohorts while those aged below 30 are notably
less opposed. There is also a clear education divide. Of
those with secondary level qualifications, 59% opposed
further Muslim immigration. By contrast, less than half of
all degree holders supported further migration curbs.
Support is also fractured by where one lives. Of those
living in rural, less populated areas, 58% are opposed to
further Muslim immigration. Whereas among those based
in cities and metropolitan areas just over half agree with
361
the statement and around a quarter are less supportive of a
ban. Opposition is also more prominent among ‘left
behind’ voters, with nearly two-thirds of those who feel
they don’t have control over their own lives supporting the
statement. Similarly, 65% of those Europeans who are
dissatisfied with their life oppose further migration from
Muslim countries. There is also some evidence that public
opposition crosses political boundaries, with three-quarters
of those who self-classify themselves as on the right of the
political spectrum and more than a third of those on the left
supporting a halt.
These results echo other similar surveys exploring attitudes
to Islam in Europe. In a Pew survey of 10 European
countries in 2016, majorities of the public had an
unfavorable view of Muslims living in their country in five
countries: Hungary (72%), Italy (69%), Poland (66%),
Greece (65%), and Spain (50%), although those numbers
were lower in the UK (28%), Germany (29%) and France
(29%).
There was also a widespread perception
in many countries that the arrival of
refugees would increase the likelihood
of terrorism, with a median of 59%
across ten European countries holding
this view. This mirrors some attitudes in
the US.
Study details: the Chatham House Europe Programme,
with Kantar Public, surveyed nationally representative
samples of the population aged 18 or over in Austria,
Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy,
Poland, Spain and the UK. Fieldwork was carried out
online using quota sampling (age, gender and region)
between 12 December 2016 and 11 January 2017. The
total number of respondents was 10,195 (c. 1,000 per
country).?
 UC Berkeley Riots Organizer
Has No Regrets, Plans More Violent Actions
The Hard-Left Are Going To War
By Alex Thomas -
02.07.2017 @7:04 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — An organizer of the mass riots at UC

Berkeley over a planned speech by Milo Yiannopoulos has
revealed that she has no regrets for the violence and that
groups like hers are planning more riots in the near future.

Yvette Felarca, an organizer with the group “By Any

Means Necessary” recently spoke to KTVU about the
mass riots and her response was not only shocking but also
a clear indication that more violent riots are soon to come.

Felarca started the interview out by completely lying

about Yiannopoulos with the same nonsense the left
always uses before laughably going on to say that Milo
himself was there to launch attacks against Muslims and
immigrants.
She then made clear that the groups goal was to shut Milo
down and they were ready to use literally any means
necessary to achieve that goal.
“It was a mass protest, it was a militant
protest and everyone was there to shut him
down,” Felarca said. “And so whatever it
was going to take to do that, we were all
there with a united cause and were
stunningly successful.”
Questioned why protesters weren’t peaceful, Felarca
declared,
“I think the left has been far too timid for too
long, we need to make sure we have more
mass protests, more militant protests.”
Felarca then goes on to reveal that the violent UC Berkeley
riots will be the blueprint for protest against Trump going
forward. In other words, violent actions across the country
are being planned while the media continues to whip up
artificial anger at the president.
.
Felarca’s comments also destroy the disinformation being
pushed by the likes of CNN and Salon who have both
provided a platform for leftist professor Robert Reich to
spread laughable conspiracy theories about the riots being
started by “right-wingers.”
“In the very definition of fake news, CNN
recently aired laughably false comments by
UC Berkeley professor and former
Democratic Secretary of Labor Robert
Reich about the violent riots on the liberal
campus,” Intellihub News reported Friday.
“Reich, already a widely known anti-Trump
operative, went straight down the rabbit
hole of absurdity by claiming that “right-
wingers” were actually behind the riots that
specifically targeted Breitbart editor Milo
Yiannopoulos.”
Since then Salon has also republished Reich’s original
blog post on the topic while completely ignoring the public
comments detailed above.
Stay tuned folks as we may be in for a wild ride as the
hard-left moves towards open violence against all things
Trump.

362
 Anti-Donald Trump: War Propaganda
By Thierry Meyssan
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Our previous articles concerning President Trump have
caused some fierce reactions from our readers. Some of
them have been wondering about the naïvety apparently
displayed by Thierry Meyssan despite the warnings issued
by the international Press and the accumulation of negative
signals. Here is his response, well-reasoned as always.
Two weeks after his investiture, the Altantist Press
continues with its work of disinformation and agitation
against the new President of the United States of America.
Trump and his new collaborators are multiplying
declarations and gestures which are apparently
contradictory, so that it is difficult to understand what is
going on in Washington.
3.
Donald Trump, 51sr President of the United States
The anti-Trump campaign
The bad faith of the Atlantist Press can be verified for each
of these four main themes.
4.
1. Concerning the beginning of the dismantling of Obamacare
(20 January), we are obliged to report that, contrary to what
is being announced in the Atlantist Press, the
underprivileged classes who should have benefited from
this system have avoided it en masse. This form of «social
security» turned out to be too expensive and too directive to
attract them. Only the private companies who manage this
system have been truly satisfied by it.
2. Concerning the prolongation of the Wall at the Mexican
border (23 to 25 January), there is nothing xenophobic
about it - the Secure Fence Act was signed by President
George W. Bush, who began its construction. The work
was continued by President Barack Obama with the
363
support of the Mexican government of the time. Beyond the
fashionable rhetoric about «walls» and «bridges»,
reinforced border systems only work when the authorities of
both sides agree to make them operational. They always
fail when one of the parties opposes them. The interest of
the United States is to control the entry of migrants, while
the interest of Mexico is to prevent the import of weapons.
None of that has changed. However, with the application of
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),
transnational companies have delocalised, from the United
States to Mexico, not only non-qualified jobs (in conformity
with the Marxist rule of «the tendency of the rate of profit to
fall (TRPF)», but also qualified jobs which are performed by
under-paid workers («social dumping»). The appearance of
these jobs has provoked a strong rural exodus,
destructuring Mexican society, on the model of what
happened in 19th century Europe. The transnational
companies then lowered wages, plunging part of the
Mexican population into poverty – which now only dreams
of being correctly paid in the United States itself. Since
Donald Trump has announced that he intends to remove
the US signature from the NAFTA agreement, things should
return to normal in the years to come, and satisfy both
Mexico and the United States [1].
Concerning the abortion issue (23 January), President
Trump has forbidden the payment of federal subsidies to
specialised associations which receive funds from abroad.
By doing so, he has warned those specific associations that
they must choose between their social objective to help
women in distress or being paid by George Soros to
demonstrate against him – as was the case on 21 January.
This decree therefore has nothing to do with abortion, but
with the prevention of a «colour revolution».
Concerning the anti-immigration decrees (25 to 27
January), Donald Trump announced that he was going to
apply the law - inherited from the Obama era – in other
words, to expel the 11 million illegal foreigners. He has
suspended federal aid to those cities which announced that
they would refuse to apply the law – where will we get our
cleaning ladies if we have to declare them? He specified
that among these illegal immigrants, he would begin by
expelling the 800,000 criminals who have been the object
of criminal proceedings, in the United States, Mexico or
elswhere. Besides this, in order to prevent the arrival of
terrorists, he has suspended all the authorisations for
immigration to the United States, and has placed a three-
month ban on people from countries where it is impossible
to verify their identity and their situation. He did not draw up
 the list of such countries himself, but referred to a previous
text from President Obama. For example, here in Syria,
there is no longer a US embassy or Consulate. From the
point of view of the administrative police, it is therefore
logical to put Syrians on this list. But this can only concern
a minimal number of people. In 2015, only 145 Syrians
managed to obtain the US «green card». Aware of the
numerous special cases which might arise, the Presidential
decree allows all liberty to the State Department and
Homeland Security to issue dispensations. The fact that the
application of these decrees was sabotaged by civil
servants opposed to President Trump, who applied them
with brutality, does not make the President either a racist or
an Islamophobe.
The campaign led by the Atlantist Press against Donald
Trump is therefore unfounded. To pretend that he has
opened a war against Muslims, and to evoke publicly his
possible destitution, even his assassination, is no longer
simply bad faith – it’s war propaganda.
Donald Trump’s objective
Donald Trump was the first personality in the world to
contest the official version of the attacks of 9/11, on
television that very day. After having noted that the
engineers who built the Twin Towers were now working
for him, he declared on New York’s Channel 9 that it was
impossible that Boeings could have burst through the steel
structures of the towers. He continued by stating that it was
also impossible that Boeings could have caused the towers
to collapse. He concluded by affirming that there had to be
other factors of which we were as yet unaware.
From that day on, Donald Trump has never ceased to resist
the people who had committed those crimes. During his
inaugural speech, he emphasised that this was not a
passage of power between two administrations, but a
restitution of power to United States citizens, who had
been deprives of it [for sixteen years] [2].
364
During his electoral campaign, once again during the
transitional period, and again since he took office, he has
repeated that the imperial system of these last years has
never benefited US citizens, but only a small clique of
which Mrs. Clinton is the emblematic figure. He declared
that the United States would no longer attempt to be the
«first», but the «best». His slogans are - « Make America
great again» and «America first»
This 180° political turn has shaken a system which has
been implemented over the last 16 years, and has its roots
in the Cold War, which, in 1947, only the United States
wanted. This system has gangrened numerous international
institutions, such as NATO (Jens Stoltenberg and General
Curtis Scaparrotti), the European Union (Federica
Mogherini), and the United Nations (Jeffrey Feltman) [3].
If Donald Trump is to reach his objective, it will take
years.
Towards a peaceful dismantling of the United States
Empire
In two weeks, many things have begun, often in the
greatest discretion. The booming declarations of President
Trump and his team deliberately spread confusion and
enabled him to ensure that the nominations of his
collaborators were confirmed by a partially hostile
Congress.
We must understand that it’s a fight to the death between
two systems that has just begun in Washington. Let’s leave
the Atlantist Press to comment on the often contradictory
and incoherent statements by this one or that, and look at
the facts on their own.
Before anything else, Donald Trump made sure that he had
control over the security apparatus. His first three
nominations (National Security Advisor Michael Flynn,
Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Homeland Security
Secretary John Kelly) are three Generals who have
contested the «continuity of government» since 2003 [4].
Next, he reformed the National Security Council to
exclude the inter-army Chief of Staff and the director of
the CIA [5]
Even though the latter decree will probably be revised, it
still has not been. Let us note in passing that we announced
the intention of Donald Trump and General Flynn to
eliminate the post of Director of National Intelligence [6].
However, this post has been maintained and Dan Coats has
been nominated for it. It transpires that talk of its
suppression was a tactic to demonstrate that the presence
of the Director of National Intelligence in the Council was
enough to justify the exclusion of the Director of the CIA.
The substitution of the word «best» for «first» leads to the
engagement of partnerships with Russia and China, rather
than a tentative to crush them.
In order to hobble this policy, the friends of Mrs. Clinton
and Mrs. Nuland have relaunched the war against the
Donbass. The important losses they have experienced
since the beginning of the conflict have led the Ukrainian
army to withdraw and put paramilitary Nazi militia in the
front line. The combats have inflicted heavy civilian
casualties on the inhabitants of the new popular Republic.
Simultaneously, in the Near East, they have managed to
deliver tanks to the Syrian Kurds, as planned by the
Obama administration.
In order to resolve the Ukrainian conflict, Donald Trump is
looking for a way to help to eject President Petro
Porochenko. He therefore received at the White House the
head of the opposition, Ioulia Tymochenko, even before he
accepted a phone call from President Porochenko.
In Syria and Iraq, Donald Trump has already begun
operations in common with Russia, even thought his
spokesperson denies it. The Russian Minister for Defence,
who had imprudently revealed it, has ceased to say
anything on the subject.
Concerning Beijing, President Trump has put an end to US
participation in the Trans-Pacific Treaty (TPP) - a treaty
which had been conceived in order to inhibit China.
During the period of transition, he received the second
richest man in China, Jack Ma (the businessman who
confirmed - «No-one has stolen your jobs, you spend too
much on war»). We know that their discussions touched on
the possible adhesion of Washington to the Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). If this were to be
the case, the United States would agree to cooperate with
China rather than hindering it. They would participate in
the construction of two Silk Roads, which would make the
wars in Donbass and Syria pointless.
Finally, the clean-up of international institutions has also
begun. The new ambassador to the UNO, Nikki Haley, has
requested an audit of the 16 «peace-keeping» missions.
She has made it known that she intends to put an end to
those which seem to be inefficient. From the point of view
of the United Nations Charter, all such missions will be
audited without exception. Indeed, the founders of the
Organisation had not foreseen this type of military
deployment (today, more than 100,000 men and women).
The UNO was created to avert or resolve conflicts between
states (never intra-state conflict). When two parties
conclude a cease-fire, the Organisation may deploy
observers in order to verify the respect of the agreement.
But on the contrary, these «peace-keeping» operations are
aimed at enforcing the respect of a solution imposed by the
Security Council and refused by one of the two parties
involved in the conflict - in reality, it is the continuation of
colonialism.
In practice, the presence of these forces only makes the
conflict last longer, while their absence changes nothing.
So the troops of the United Nations Interim Force
(UNIFIL) deployed at the Israëlo-Lebanese border, but
only on Lebanese territory, do not prevent either Israëli
military operations or military operations by the Lebanese
Resistance, as we have already seen many times. They
serve only to spy on the Lebanese on behalf of the Israëlis,
thus prolonging the conflict. In the same way, the troops of
the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, or
UNDOF, deployed at the demarcation line in the Golan
have been chased away by Al-Qaïda, without that
changing anything at all in the Israëlo-Syrian conflict.
Putting an end to this system means returning to the spirit
and the letter of the Charter, renouncing colonial
privileges, and pacifying the world.

In matters of finance, President Trump has begun the Behind the media controversy, the street demonstrations,
dismantling of the Dodd-Frank law which attempted to and the confrontation between politicians, President Trump
resolve the crisis of 2008 by averting the brutal collapse of is holding his course.
the major banks («too big to fail»). Although this law has
some positive aspects (it’s 2,300 pages long), it establishes Translation
a guardianship of the Treasury over the banks, which Pete Kimberley
obviously hinders their development. Donald Trump is
also apparently preparing to restore the distinction between
deposit banks and investment banks (Glass-Steagall Act).

[1] “Behind the bipartisan wall”, by Manlio Dinucci, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Il Manifesto (Italy) , Voltaire Network, 28 January
2017.
[2] “Donald Trump Inauguration Speech”, by Donald Trump, Voltaire Network, 21 January 2017.
[3] “Germany and the UNO against Syria”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Al-Watan (Syria) , Voltaire Network, 28
January 2016.
[4] “Trump – enough of 9/11!”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network, 24 January 2017.
[5] “Donald Trump winds up “the” organization of US imperialism].]”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Voltaire
Network, 31 January 2017.
[6] “General Flynn’s Proposals to Reform Intelligence”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Anoosha Boralessa, Contralínea (Mexico) ,
Voltaire Network, 1 December 2016.
.

365
 Nigel Farage:
The European Parliament Is Terrified Of Trump
Nigel Farage Defends President Trump's Travel Order During
Speech At European Parliament
By VNN
February 7, 2017

said the European Union is “terrified” of what the new

leader of the free world may do.

Farage, who made an impassioned speech on the floor of

the European Parliament in Brussels in support of Trump’s
travel ban order, said that some of his fellow
parliamentarians are using that issue as a wedge because of
Trump’s position on the EU itself.

“The real reason is this new American administration does

not respect supernational organizations like the EU; they
believe in nation-states.
Nigel Farage, a member of the European Parliament
from England and a supporter of President Trump,
.

366
 Trump Administration Apparently
Heading For War As Iran Dumps U.S. Dollar,
Brandon Turbeville - Activist Post
February 7, 2017

setting its sights on the next piece of the geopolitical

puzzle before the ultimate goal of Russia and world
hegemony is to be recognized.

While many were hoping against all odds that a Trump

administration would live up to some of its campaign
rhetoric and begin to back away from imperialistic foreign
adventures, it seems those hopes are being dashed by the
day as Trump and his team are giving every indication that
they are moving toward war with Iran. Flynn stated,

Recent Iranian actions, including a

Even on the campaign trail, Trump expressed irrational
provocative ballistic missile launch and an
anti-Iran sentiment suggesting that the Iran nuclear deal
attack against a Saudi naval vessel
signed with the Obama administration was “terrible” and
conducted by Iran-supported Houthi
that the United States was essentially forced to pay Iran
militants, underscore what should have
not to build a bomb. Of course, this rhetoric was nothing
been clear to the international community
but fantasy since the only loser in the deal was the
all along about Iran's destabilizing behavior
Iranians, who were never in violation of any international
across the Middle East.
provisions against nuclear proliferation, did not have a
nuclear weapon, a nuclear weapons program, or even the
The recent ballistic missile launch is also in
ability to create one. In reality, Iran never should have had
defiance of UN Security Council Resolution
to sign any deal with the world’s self-appointed guard dog.
2231, which calls upon Iran "not to
Still, Trump represented the release of Iran’s frozen assets
undertake any activity related to ballistic
as extortion (against the United States no less). For those
missiles designed to be capable of
who are unaware, the money that was allegedly “paid” to
delivering nuclear weapons, including
Iran was actually Iranian money the United States had
launches using such ballistic missile
frozen in the past as a result of prior fits of war hysteria.
technology."
This anti-Iran policy came to the forefront a week ago These are just the latest of a series of
when National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, rabid incidents in the past six months in which
anti-Iran warmonger, gave a surprise performance of Houthi forces that Iran has trained and
typical Western war froth in front of the cameras about the armed have struck Emirati and Saudi
“emboldened” Iran and the danger it presents to America vessels, and threatened U.S. and allied
and its allies. He also suggested that Iran has not been vessels transiting the Red Sea. In these
“thankful” to the United States for apparently not invading and other similar activities, Iran continues
them as it has done to Iran’s neighbors and allies over the to threaten U.S. friends and allies in the
past sixteen years. region. Iran continues to threaten U.S.
friends and allies in the region.
Flynn stated that the United States is officially “putting The Obama Administration failed to
Iran on notice.” Thus, it seems that the United States is respond adequately to Tehran's malign
367
 actions—including weapons transfers,
support for terrorism, and other violations
of international norms. The Trump
Administration condemns such actions by
Iran that undermine security, prosperity,
and stability throughout and beyond the
Middle East and place American lives at
risk.
President Trump has severely criticized the
various agreements reached between Iran
and the Obama Administration, as well as
the United Nations - as being weak and
ineffective.
Instead of being thankful to the United
States for these agreements, Iran is now
feeling emboldened.
As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice.
Flynn cited only two justifications for his threat, neither of
which are logical or anything but unproven allegations.
First, Flynn attributed an alleged attempted missile attack
on U.S. Naval ships parked off the coast of Yemen
supposedly committed by Houthi Rebels. Second, Flynn
argues that a recent ballistic missile test conducted by Iran
violates the P5+1 and United Nations backed nuclear deal.
Flynn claimed that Iran has recently become
“emboldened” because the Obama
administration, the same administration
which forced Iran to decimate their nuclear
power program at the barrel of a gun, was
“weak and ineffective.”
“In these and other similar activities, Iran
continues to threaten US friends and allies
in the region,” Flynn stated.
Translation: Iran’s existence and refusal to knuckle
under to foreign dictates represents a threat to the impunity
of Saudi Arabia and Israel.
In regards to Flynn’s statements, it is important to note that
the Iranophobic warmonger leaves out a number of points.
First, Flynn lays the blame of Houthi missile attacks at the
feet of Iran because, according to him, Iran somehow
controls the Houthis or, at the very least, supports them.
While it would be naïve to believe that the Houthis are
receiving no support from outside forces, the fact is that
there is absolutely no evidence that Iran is doing so.
Indeed, the alleged missile attacks themselves are highly
questionable, with some believing that they were actually a
false flag on the part of the United States in order to justify
a bombing campaign in Yemen on a flimsy basis of self-
defense. This basis is flimsy because the United States
does, after all, have its ships right off the coast of Yemen
and it is supporting the Saudi war of aggression.
368
Second, if the Iranians are now guilty because of unproven
claims of support for Houthi rebels who are themselves
only acting in self-defense against a brutal and horrific
Saudi campaign of terror, murder, and starvation against
the people of Yemen, then the United States is officially
complicit in the beheading of young children, rape, torture,
starvation, and cannibalism as a result of their support for
“moderate” terrorists in Syria. Of course, the latter
statement is actually true since it is the United States who
funds, trains, supplies, and directs the terrorist proxies in
Syria to this day.
Not only that, even if the Houthis did fire on American
boats, it must be remembered that the United States is
aiding the country who is invading theirs and thus makes
itself a reasonable military target when stationed so close
to Yemeni shores.
Still, one must pay attention to the logic: “We supported a
country in a war of aggression against a rag tag group of
rebels and those rebels attempted (possibly) to fight back.
Therefore, we must threaten a third party whom we cannot
even prove supports the rebels.”
In regards to the ballistic missile test, the new aggression is
being based upon tests conducted by Iran over the
weekend on a medium-range ballistic missile.
Yet, for all the brow-beating of the United States since the
Iranian nuclear deal was signed, the United Nations
Security Council Resolution 2231 does not prohibit Iran
from testing a missile or a ballistic missile. There is a
provision which “calls on” Iran not to undertake any
activity that relates to ballistic missiles but “calling on”
and “prohibiting” are two different things. As Daniel
McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute writes,
“There are no specific provisions in the
nuclear deal that explicitly prevent Iran
from testing a missile.”
Who Is Michael Flynn?
Flynn has been so anti-Iran in the past that his subordinates
were both confused and alarmed. In 2012, after the
Benghazi attack, Flynn began demanding that those under
his command at the Defense Intelligence Agency
immediately produce evidence that Iran was behind the
attack. If that kind of frantic framing of false intelligence
sounds familiar, that’s because it is. Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld ordered a similar intelligence agency
initiative in the wake of 9/11 in order to blame Iraqi leader
Saddam Hussein.
Flynn was even fired from the DIA in 2014 for being too
anti-Iran even for the Obama administration, a truly
amazing feat in its own right.
 “Adding together President Trump's call to
the Saudi king, where they discussed Iran's
"destabilizing" actions, and a pre-emptive
war authorization bill languishing in the US
House, the current danger of a US strike on
Iran is just an accident -- or a false flag –
away,” writes McAdams.
Flynn was head of the DIA at the time when the now
famous memo was produced explaining the fact that Saudi
Arabia, Turkey, and other Gulf States as well as the United
States were supporting terrorism in Syria and Iraq and that
Russia, Syria, and Iran were fighting it. The memo also
described the plan and support for creating a “salafist
principality” in the east of Syria and West of Iraq, the
precise location where ISIS created its caliphate. For this
reason, Flynn cannot claim ignorance as to whom is
actually supporting terrorism and who is fighting it.
The Path To Persia
The plan for a Western or a Western/Israeli attack on Iran,
along with the theatre of alleged US-Israeli tensions
leading up to a strike and outright war, has been in the
works for some time. For instance, in 2009, the Brookings
Institution, a major banking, corporate, and military-
industrial firm, released a report entitled “Which Path To
Persia? Options For A New American Strategy For
Iran,” in which the authors mapped out a plan which
leaves no doubt as to the ultimate desire from the Western
financier, corporate, and governing classes.
The plan involves the description of a number of ways the
Western oligarchy would be able to destroy Iran including
outright military invasion and occupation. However, the
report attempts to outline a number of methods that might
possibly be implemented before direct military invasion
would be necessary. The plan included attempting to
foment destabilization inside Iran via the color revolution
apparatus, violent unrest, proxy terrorism, and “limited
airstrikes” conducted by the US, Israel or both.
Interestingly enough, the report states that any action taken
against Iran must be done after the idea that Iran has
rejected a fair and generous offer by the West has been
disseminated throughout the general public. The report
reads,
…any military operation against Iran will likely be very
unpopular around the world and require the proper
international context— both to ensure the logistical
support the operation would require and to minimize the
blowback from it. The best way to minimize international
opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or
covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread
conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a
superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined
to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong
reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances,
369
the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as
taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the
international community would conclude that the Iranians
“brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.
Ironically, it is admitted by the authors of the report that
the Iranians are not governed by lunatics intent on nuking
the world but by entirely rational players. Still, they move
forward with a number of options for attacking Iran. It
should thus be obvious to anyone reading this report that
the US, NATO, and Israel are uninterested in peace with
Iran and are entirely focused on war and Iranian
destruction.
“The so-called "Iran deal," introduced
during the administration of US President
Barack Obama, represents precisely this
"superb offer," with Flynn's accusations
serving as the "turn down" ahead of the
"sorrowful" war and attempted regime
change the US had always planned to
target Tehran with,” writes Tony Cartalucci
of Land Destroyer Report.
The report continues to discuss the citations that could be
used for an attack on Iran, clearly stating its intentions to
create a plan to goad a non-threatening nation into war. It
states,
The truth is that these all would be challenging cases to
make. For that reason, it would be far more preferable if
the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as
justification for the airstrikes before launching them.
Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the
more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the
United States would be. Of course, it would be very
difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a
provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this
game, which would then undermine it. (One method that
would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet
up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran
would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could
then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian
aggression.)
The question of the Israeli role in the possible attack
against Iran is also mentioned by Brookings. In fact, in the
chapter entitled, “Allowing or Encouraging An Israeli
Military Strike,” Brookings not only outlines a potential
strategy but essentially admits that the US-Israeli tension
being hyped in the Western media is nothing more than a
farce. It says,
..the most salient advantage this option has over that of an
American air campaign is the possibility that Israel alone
would be blamed for the attack. If this proves true, then the
United States might not have to deal with Iranian
retaliation or the diplomatic backlash that would
accompany an American military operation against Iran. It
could allow Washington to have its cake (delay Iran’s
acquisition of a nuclear weapon) and eat it, too (avoid
undermining many other U.S. regional diplomatic
initiatives).
Why Iran?
There are a number of reasons why the United States and
the NATO imperial army would like to see Iran destroyed
over the coming years. Geopolitical reasons are, of course,
front and center.
On one level, the Israeli connection stands as one obvious
reason the United States has maintained an anti-Iran
posture for nearly two decades. Iran not only stands as a
regional opponent to the whims and aims of the Israeli
settler state, but it also bankrolls and supports one of the
greatest forces of opposition to Israel directly due to its
close proximity and the militia’s military prowess. Indeed,
Israel was humiliated by Hezbollah in front of the world in
2006. Thus, if Iran is destroyed, Hezbollah goes with it and
two of Israel’s biggest and most effective opponents
disappear from the game board.
The United States also sees Iran as an opponent due to
Iran’s resistance to the Anglo-American insistence on
global hegemony of its “western” system of financial and
corporate overseers in a plantation owned by a world
oligarchy. Iran stands in opposition to the Western system
because it refuses to engage in a system private central
banking as well as corporate and private financier
domination of its society and culture. Maintaining its own
national bank has long been a source of irritation for Wall
Street and City of London vampires eager to sink their
fangs into the blood supply of every nation on earth. In
addition, Iran has recently announced that it will be
dropping the U.S. dollar for some other currency or basket
of currencies beginning March 21, a sure sign that a
Western war of aggression is most definitely on the
horizon.
Iran also remains a close Russian ally and the last domino
that needs to fall before the great Anglo-American army
can march forward directly into Russia and break the
largest country in the world into “manageable” parts.[1]
Once Iran is destroyed, Russia will be largely isolated and
left to face the NATO alliance which has been slowly
surrounding Russia over the last two decades.
Conclusion
So far, the Iranian response has been marked by unwise
mirror bans of American travelers, an entrenchment and
[1] Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 1997. Pp. 202.
370
reassertion of national sovereignty, and a much more
serious announcement that Iran will dump the U.S. dollar.
While Iran would have been much better suited to respond
to the Trump travel ban in the same way the Russians
responded to Obama’s idiotic expulsion of Russian
diplomats, it seems American sabre rattling will do nothing
now but encourage Iran’s population to possibly look
toward more “hardliners” in terms of elected government.
By hardliners, we mean politicians who campaign on an
Anti-American platform and who take a more stern
approach to foreign affairs. After all, those who have
argued that the United States can be reasoned with are
slowly being proven wrong. The question then becomes
whether or not the collision course the United States wants
to set out on becomes a path Iran unwittingly follows.
The Trump Administration’s false labeling of Iran as the
biggest sponsor of terrorism, ignoring the fact that Iran is
one of the most important players in the fight against ISIS
and Sunni Islamic extremism in the Middle East as well as
the fact that American ally Saudi Arabia is perhaps the
biggest purveyor of terrorism in the world, tells everyone
what we need to know going forward – the plan to destroy
Iran is marching forward without a hitch in another
example of seamless transition.
Lastly, for the Trump apologists, we would ask “Does the
possibility that Trump has no control over his own military
and foreign policy seem like a more palatable option?” At
this point, having a President opposed to war is largely
meaningless if he cannot do anything to stop it. Of course,
Trump’s rhetoric throughout the political campaign was
clearly anti-Iranian of the fanatical variety so the
possibility that Trump is actually anti-war, at least in terms
of Iran, is extremely unlikely. In fact, it is so unlikely as to
no longer warrant consideration.
That being said, we must immediately begin to mobilize to
oppose the Trump administration war posturing towards
Iran and do whatever we can to prevent the current
situation from shifting towards an actual physical war.
Whatever positive elements of the Trump administration
there may be must be prevailed upon to stop this madness.
At the same time, we must be prepared to demonstrate,
oppose, strike, and otherwise refuse to participate in
anymore imperialistic wars should that agenda actually
take shape. Aside from the obvious moral issues of
bombing and destroying a nation of innocent people for a
geopolitical agenda, war with Iran is a step toward war
with Russia and World War Three and, at the very least,
another vast waste of American treasure and the lives of
military service personnel. It must be stopped at all costs.
 Trump Was Right:
CBS Admits They Did Not Cover
24% Of 78 Listed Islamist Terror Attacks
The Trump White House On Monday Released A List Of 78
Terror Attacks The Press Did Not Adequately Cover.
Jim Hoft
Feb 7th, 2017 9:45 Pm

The Trump White House was right.

CBS News admitted they did not cover 24% of the terrorist
attacks – at all.

CBS inadvertently just proved the Trump administration’s

accusations of media bias.

CBS News reported:

The White House prefaced its Monday

evening release with a statement saying
TRUMP WAS RIGHT=> CBS Admits
that, since the Islamic State of Iraq and
They Did Not Cover 24% of 78 Listed Syria (ISIS) declared its caliphate in 2014,
Islamist Terror Attacks
“There has been a major attack targeting
Jim Hoft Feb 7th, 2017 9:45 pm the West executed or inspired by the group
more than once every two weeks.”
The Trump White House on Monday released a list of 78 “Most have not received the media
terror attacks the press did not adequately cover. attention they deserved,” the White House
added, although many of the attacks were
The media covered several of the attacks but typically covered by the media.
downplayed the Islamic factor in the deadly attacks.
CBS News covered, in some cases heavily but at least to
some extent, more than 74 percent of the attacks on the
list.

371
 Trump’s Accidental Truth
Will Take Him Down
By John Eskow
February 8, 2017
“Do you know why they hate Americans everywhere?”
Lenny Bruce used to cheerfully riddle his audiences,
drawing on his years as a Navy gunner’s mate in occupied
Europe during World War II; “because we fucked their
mothers for candy bars, Jim.” (Note the deft jazz-noir
usage of “Jim” as a kind of early “dude” equivalent—but,
more specifically, a kind of “slow-on-the-uptake dude.” As
in: “what the hell else would you expect,” Jim?)
This portrait of America as a stubbly, amoral GI slithering
through the ruins of older civilizations, trading cigarettes
and Hershey Bars and nylons for sex—and ripping
everyone off on the exchange rate—is one that would still
be immediately recognized by people all over the globe.
Just switch “mothers” to “sovreignty” and “candy bars” to
“military-industrial profiteering,” and they’d recognize us
anywhere—the Dope-For-Guns Dealer, the One Who Rigs
the Game, the Napalm Capitalist. The more countries you
visit, the more you realize that’s how the world sees us.
But not Americans themselves: we’ve convinced ourselves
that we’re exactly the opposite!
“America is taken advantage of by every nation on earth,
virtually,” said Donald Trump, but he was only codifying,
in his trademarked nitwit way, a series of messages
drummed into us for years from all corners of the media,
and from politicians of every stripe: we’re just too darn
bighearted for our own darn good! This is Uncle Sam as a
big palooka, a barefoot, brawny L’il Abner, innocent to big
city ways, who’s constantly preyed on by greasy hustlers
who con him out of his Friday pay and funnel it all into
social justice programs for African lesbians.
And so America expects to be coddled and cooed-to and
petted all day long, to be tongue-bathed and baby-
powdered dry by the rest of the world. We demand to be
adored, not only because we’re exceptionally
exceptional—if we do say so ourselves!– but because
we’re also just so—what’s that word again?—so…kind!
America scrimps and sacrifices and works its fingers to the
bone and wears patched-up hand-me-down trousers, just so
we can nobly give all our savings away to tiny, shabby rat-
infested Eastern European countries with names we can’t
pronounce. Worse yet, once our hard-earned billions–still
moist with the sweat of our foreheads– are parachuted
down onto foreign soil, they are immediately converted
372
into millions of bonds stamped Good For One Free
Abortion On Demand. But come next payday, whaddaya
think that big lunk, America, goes and does? Yep! He
falls for the same old badger game! What a goofball!
Well, not under Trump! “Those days are over, folks,” he
assures us, wallowing in the lie; but then two days later—
his defenses weakened by sleeplessness and too much
vanilla ice cream– he accidentally drops a truth-bomb that
horrifies Jake Tapper and Brent Scowcroft alike: “what,
you think we’re so innocent,” he says, RE Putin’s murders,
“you think we don’t have killers?”
How revealing that the gatekeepers of the American
narrative are attacking Trump for his offhand truth, not his
perpetuation of the L’il Abner lie. Brent Scowcroft knows
better than most of us just how plentiful—and how
vicious—our hired killers are; all the more important to
shout down the very idea that we employ them (and train
them and reward them, and have done so for my entire
lifespan.)
Yes, Trump has violated even the Democratic Party
version of the Too-Kind Narrative–which, coming from
the Democrats–is almost too limp and colorless to even
remember: Hillary Clinton’s teeth-grindingly-bad mantra
that—oh Christ, the mind can barely spit it back up:
“America is great because America is
good.”
America is great, because America is good.
Linger for a moment on that hideous sanctimony, that
language of death, every dreary syllable etched in
nothingness; marvel at the exact, focus-group-tested
amounts of piety, flag-pride and tactical dramatic voice-
hush (a favorite technique of Reagan’s, later much
advanced by Barack Obama); millions of dollars of PR
research, compressed into one tiny but superpowerful
nugget of horseshit.
America is great because–
Why don’t you take that line on the road, Ms. Clinton, and
see how it plays in other parts of the world?
Tell it, for example, to Ezekechial, the driver/janitor/pastor
from Congo. He can describe for you the Great America’s
stunning display of its Goodness back in 1964, when the
CIA kidnapped and brutally murdered Patrice Lumumba,
part of a nonstop rape-and-robbery crime spree that
America has perpetrated on Africa since well before JFK.
“–because America is good.”
Tell it to any Southeast Asian lived through the Viet Nam
War.
373
Tell it to the victims of the Clinton-sponsored coup in
Honduras.
Maybe it’s poetic justice: when Trump goes down, it won’t
be for a lie; it’ll be for one of his rare but intolerable truths:
that we ain’t no L’il Abner. Of course, what Lenny Bruce
proclaimed with shame, Donald Trump sees as a good
trade, or what he might call a “win-win:”
We fucked their mothers for candy-bars,
Jim…”
 Trump Offers To “Destroy Career” Of Texas State Senator
At Meeting With National Sheriffs’ Assoc.
By: News Editors
Date: February 08, 2017

threw directly under the bus saying that he didn’t take the
president’s offer to destroy the senator literally.

“He was just being emphatic that he did

not agree with that senator’s position,”
Eavenson said, adding of the senator in
question, “I’m not into assassinating his
character.”

Earlier today President Trump met with the National

Sheriff’s Association at the White House. The visit was
supposed to be just another friendly meet and greet,

but it took a slightly awkward turn when

President Trump offered to “destroy the
career” of a Texas state senator who is
allegedly promoting a piece of
legislation that would benefit Mexican
drug cartels.

During the meeting, Rockwall County, Texas, Sheriff

Harold Eavenson told President Trump about a piece of
asset forfeiture legislation he believes would aid Mexican
drug cartels…here’s the full conversation:

Eavenson: “There’s a state senator in

Texas that was talking about legislation
to require conviction before we could
receive that forfeiture money.”
Trump: “Do you believe that?”
Eavenson: “And I told him that the cartel
would build a monument to him in
Mexico if he could get that legislation
passed.”
Trump: “Who is that state senator? I
want to hear his name. We’ll destroy his
career…”
And here is the conversation caught on tape:
“He was making a point about how much
he opposed that kind of philosophy,” the
sheriff said. “I appreciated what the
president said. I can assure you that he is
on our side.”
Eavenson will become president of the
National Sheriff’s Association in June. He
has been active in the Sheriff’s Association
of Texas.
As the Dallas Morning News also pointed out, only two
Texas state senators have introduced asset forfeiture
legislations this year, Republican Konni Burton and
Democrat Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa.

Reached later by The Dallas Morning News, Eavenson Two Texas senators have offered
declined to identify the lawmaker that he inadvertently legislation this year to require
conviction before someone’s assets
374
 could be seized. Sen. Konni Burton, a Never a dull moment in the Trump White House…
Republican who often pushes civil-liberties
legislation to protect personal information
and property, was a fierce critic of Trump
during the campaign. She and Sen. Juan
“Chuy” Hinojosa, a McAllen Democrat,
have formed an unlikely team pushing this
asset forfeiture legislation.
Hinojosa said he didn’t believe he was
the target of Eavenson’s comments. But
he said he wasn’t concerned about
Trump’s promise to wreak havoc on a
senator’s career.
“I don’t know the sheriff,” Hinojosa said.
“Quite frankly, I don’t pay much
attention to what Trump says anymore.”

Several other senators have also supported this change in

the past, including two civil-libertarian Republicans: Bob
Hall, whose district includes Rockwall County and Don
Huffines of Dallas. Aides to Burton, Hall and Huffines
could not immediately be reached for comment.
.

375
 Piers Morgan: Biased Media
Need to Show Trump ‘More Respect’
By Kyle Drennen
February 8, 2017 | 4:42 PM EST
During an appearance on Fox News Monday night, former
CNN host Piers Morgan offered a stunning rebuke to the
media, calling out them out for being “in the tank of
Hillary Clinton” during the 2016 campaign and openly
hostile to President Trump after “their candidate didn’t
win.” He then demanded that press show the commander-
in-chief “more respect.”
Morgan, a self-avowed liberal, declared:
“...Donald Trump's main beef with the
media, which is that it’s a two-way
street, this question of respect and
honesty. And he has felt for quite some
time, I think, that a lot of people in the
mainstream media, for want of a better
phrase, are absolutely determined to
bring him down. And I think he’s got a
point, I think some of them absolutely
are.”
The DailyMail.com editor-at-large added:
“And they were in the tank for Hillary
Clinton, their candidate didn't win, and
now they are utterly determined to bring
the Trump presidency crashing down.”
After host Tucker Carlson pointed to evidence of collusion
between CNN and the Democratic Party throughout the
2016 presidential campaign, Morgan conceded:
“I think the vast majority of people that work
at CNN, particularly the anchors, do have
great integrity....But I definitely think there
376
were people lower down the food chain
perhaps who didn't have such scruples and
who were absolutely, I think, determined
that Trump wouldn’t win.”
He reminded viewers that early on
“CNN and all the other networks were
racing to give him [Trump] as much air time
as they could possibly give him. This, of
course, fueled the monster.” “And then
when the moment came when they
thought, ‘Oh, God, hang on, he might
actually win,’ then rather like Dr.
Frankenstein, they thought, ‘We’ve got to
kill him off,’” Morgan added.
Singling out the New York Times for its particularly slanted
coverage of the race, Morgan scolded the “supposed paper
of record”:
“And I noticed in the last few months of
that campaign it got more and more
virulent. You know, papers like The New
York Times, frankly, I thought were a
complete disgrace. They weren't even
pretending to be anything but in the
tank for Hillary Clinton. And I found that,
as a journalist, pretty obscene to watch
actually.”
He pointed out the publication’s blatant hypocrisy in
complaining about the President criticizing their reporting:
“So for The New York Times and others
now to be saying, ‘Oh, poor us,’ you know,
‘We’re the innocent parties here, Donald
Trump is annihilating the media and
breaking down the First Amendment and
so on.’ It's pretty rich, I think, given the way
that they themselves conducted
themselves as the supposed paper of
record.”
Morgan concluded:
 “So I think that there is fault on both
sides here. I think that it is dangerous
and toxic, and I think that the media
have got to start showing President
Trump a bit more respect. And he, in
turn, and his White House operation, have
got to show the media a bit more respect.
And they’ve all got to move on.”
Here is a transcript of the February 6 exchange:
9:00 PM ET
TUCKER CARLSON: With each passing day, the war
between the press and the President grows more intense.
Today, the president tweeted this,
“The failing NEW YORK TIMES writes total
fiction concerning me. They have gotten it
wrong for two years, and now are making
up stories & sources!” Then this morning
he tweeted this, “Any negative polls are
fake news, just like the CNN, ABC, NBC
polls in the election. Sorry, people want
border security and extreme vetting.”
Well, one media outlet with a particularly antagonistic
relationship toward the President is CNN, the Cable News
Network, which labeled Trump – which Trump, rather –
labeled fake news more than once. Piers Morgan is editor-
at-large with DailyMail.com. He is the former face of
CNN. And by the way, he won Celebrity Apprentice back
when a certain future president was its host. He joins us
now from L.A. Piers Morgan, thanks for joining us.
PIERS MORGAN: Pleasure. That just
shows what good judgment he has, right?
CARLSON: Yes. And I always forget that,
but what a cool thing to have on your CV.
So I remember well when you were the
face of CNN. I watched your show a lot. I
didn’t always agree with you but I always
thought you were straightforward. If you
thought something, you just kind of put it
out there and said it. So you left three
years ago, since then, thanks to WikiLeaks,
we’ve learned a lot of detail about CNN
colluding with the Democratic Party during
this election. Were you shocked by it?
MORGAN: I was a bit, yeah. I mean, I don't
know how directly involved CNN were, but I
do know that when you look at what
happened with Donna Brazile and some of
the other characters involved, it stank,
frankly. And you know, it brought to light, I
think, Donald Trump's main beef with the
media, which is that it’s a two-way street,
377
this question of respect and honesty. And
he has felt for quite some time, I think, that
a lot of people in the mainstream media, for
want of a better phrase, are absolutely
determined to bring him down. And I think
he’s got a point, I think some of them
absolutely are. And they were in the tank
for Hillary Clinton, their candidate didn't
win, and now they are utterly determined to
bring the Trump presidency crashing down.
So you have a war between the media and
the White House, the like of which I’ve
certainly never seen before. And it's pretty
dangerous all around.
CARLSON: So I think there’s a difference,
though, between having a perspective and
stating it clearly – as you do, as I try to –
and in a subterranean way that’s cloaked
from public view coordinating with a
political party. So we learn on WikiLeaks
the Donna Brazile story, as you know,
where she got the debate questions ahead
of time. We also found out that the DNC
research director was consulted by CNN
for questions to ask Ted Cruz. A Clinton
staffer implied that the politics producer at
CNN was, quote, “a friend and an ally.” And
then you have the chief political analyst at
CNN emailing John Podesta and saying,
quote, “You are a TV star, I've been in
GOP hell.” I mean, it really seems like there
is a special connection between CNN – not
just all media, but CNN – and that party.
Did you notice that when you worked
there?
MORGAN: Well, to be honest and to be fair
to CNN, I spent four years there, I think the
vast majority of people that work at CNN,
particularly the anchors, do have great
integrity and I don't think they want to be
party to any of this kind of stuff. But I
definitely think there were people lower
down the food chain perhaps who didn't
have such scruples and who were
absolutely, I think, determined that Trump
wouldn’t win.
And bear in mind the history of this. From the moment that
Donald Trump decided to run, you know, he was, for about
four or five months, the only gig in town. CNN and all the
other networks were racing to give him as much air time as
they could possibly give him. This, of course, fueled the
monster. And then when the moment came when they
thought,
“Oh, God, hang on, he might actually win,”
then rather like Dr. Frankenstein, they
thought, “We’ve got to kill him off.” But by
then, Trump, the nominee, was gone. He
was off and racing around America and he
became unstoppable.
And I noticed in the last few months of that campaign it
got more and more virulent. You know, papers like The
New York Times, frankly, I thought were a complete
disgrace. They weren't even pretending to be anything but
in the tank for Hillary Clinton. And I found that, as a
journalist, pretty obscene to watch actually. So for The
New York Times and others now to be saying,
“Oh, poor us,” you know, “We’re the
innocent parties here, Donald Trump is
annihilating the media and breaking down
the First Amendment and so on.”
It's pretty rich, I think, given the way that they themselves
conducted themselves as the supposed paper of record.
So I think that there is fault on both sides here. I think that
it is dangerous and toxic, and I think that the media have
got to start showing President Trump a bit more respect.
And he, in turn, and his White House operation, have got
to show the media a bit more respect. And they’ve all got
to move on.
378
CARLSON: Well, it’s certainly within
bounds, I think, for news organizations to
call out politicians on statements that are
false. And I think Trump has made a few
and I don't have any problem with reporters
saying, “Whoa, wait a second, prove what
you say.” But it’s the orientation that shocks
me. It does seem like a lot of journalists
see their role not as to report the news, but
as to affect the outcome of an election. Has
that changed in the decades you’ve been in
the business?
MORGAN: Yeah, look, I mean, in Britain for
example, we have a very free press and
you have papers which are very obviously
partisan to political parties, be on the left
and the right. And it's pretty balanced down
the middle, there are as many left-wing
papers in Britain as there are right-wing. In
America, what I don't like, is this pretense
from papers like The New York Times that
somehow that they are completely beyond
any reproach when it comes to their
coverage. That they are completely neutral.
They’re not neutral.
I remember in the middle of the campaign, picking up a
New York Times and reading it from cover to cover. There
were 11 different stories and letters and comment op-ed
pieces about Donald Trump in that one edition of The New
York Times. Every single one of them was hostile to
Trump, including four out of four letters. Now, come on!
That is not a coincidence.
(...)
 "In 26 Years, I've Never Seen Anything Like This" White
House Leaks Reportedly Reveal Trump Team Turmoil
By Tyler Durden
Feb 8, 2017 5:09 PM
Trump’s volatile behavior has created an environment ripe
for leaks from his executive agencies and even within his
White House, according to The Huffington Post. And
while leaks typically involve staffers sabotaging each other
to improve their own standing or trying to scuttle policy
ideas they find genuinely problematic, Trump’s 2-week-
old administration has a third category: leaks from White
House and agency officials alarmed by the president’s
conduct.
For Americans who based their
impression of Trump on the competent
and decisive tycoon he portrayed on his
“Apprentice” TV reality shows, the
portrait from these and many other
tidbits emerging from his administration
may seem a shock: an impulsive,
sometimes petty chief executive more
concerned with the adulation of the nation
than the details of his own policies ? and
quick to assign blame when things do not
go his way.
“I’ve been in this town for 26 years. I
have never seen anything like this,” said
Eliot Cohen, a senior State Department
official under President George W. Bush
and a member of his National Security
Council. “I genuinely do not think this is a
mentally healthy president.”
There is the matter of Trump’s briefing materials, for
example. The commander in chief doesn’t like to read long
memos, a White House aide who asked to remain unnamed
told The Huffington Post. So preferably they must be no
more than a single page. They must have bullet points but
not more than nine per page.
Small things can provide him great joy
or generate intense irritation. Trump told
The New York Times that he’s fascinated
with the phone system inside the White
House. At the same time, he’s registered
a complaint about the hand towels
aboard Air Force One, the White House
aide said, because they are not soft
enough.
379
He’s been particularly obsessed with the performance of
his aides on cable television.
Notably, HuffPo admits...
Information about Trump’s personal
interactions and the inner workings of his
administration has come to HuffPost from
individuals in executive agencies and in the
White House itself. They spoke on
condition of anonymity for fear of losing
their jobs.
While some of the leaks are based on opposition to his
policies – the travel ban on all refugees and on visitors
from seven predominantly Muslim nations, for instance –
many appear motivated by a belief that Trump’s words,
deeds and tweets pose a genuine threat.
The New York Times, meanwhile,
painted a portrait of a brooding
commander in chief, wandering the
White House alone in a bathrobe at
night, watching too much cable
television and venting his frustrations
through angry tweets.
“I think it’s a cry for help,” said Elizabeth
Rosenberg, a counterterrorism expert at
the Treasury Department under Obama.
She said many staffers still working in the national security
agencies under Trump see what’s happening and are
driven by a simple motive:
“Incredulity, and the need to share it.”
However, Daily Caller's Kerry Picket reports that
President Donald Trump pointed the
finger at Obama administration
holdovers at the White House and
National Security Council for leaking
information about private phone
conversations he had with leaders of
Australia and Mexico.
 “It’s a disgrace that they leaked because
it’s very much against our country,”
Trump told Fox News Sunday, accusing
“Obama people” in civil service
positions for the leaks.
“It’s a very dangerous thing for this
country,” he added noting that these
individuals were still being sought out and
replaced.
Trump described the media stories of what seemed to be
contentious interactions between him and the two foreign
leaders as misreported, and contended that he actually had
“positive” conversations with both men.
.
380
Leaks relating to the new White House
have gone to mainstream media outlets
that Trump has blasted in the past for
treating him unfairly including: the New
York Times, The Washington Post, NBC
and the Associated Press.
Ron Kaufman, who worked in George H.W. Bush’s White
House in the late 1980s and early 1990s, argued that the
Trump administration’s leaks are par for the course for a
young administration.
“There’s always leaks,” Kaufman said.
“Every president in history has said the
press hates me and there’s too many
leaks.”
 America-Hating Alt-Left Admits They Want To Make
Country “Ungovernable” To Disrupt Trump
And Create Anarchy
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 08, 2017
You’d have to be living in a cave to not have noticed that
since Donald J. Trump began his campaign for the
presidency, the angry Alt-Left has done everything in its
power to halt his juggernaut.
While he was dismissed by seasoned political pundits, the
mainstream media, and the establishment ruling class all
the way – even after he steamrollered 16 other qualified
contenders to win the Republican presidential nomination
– he and his supporters were nevertheless harangued
throughout his ultimately successful campaign.
Now that he’s president, things haven’t changed much
with the Alt-Left. In fact, their anger and consternation
have only grown: They’ve committed to perpetually
protest just about every decision Trump makes, as well as
every part of his political agenda. And they’ve got help
from the Democratic Party, which has been hijacked by
Left-wing fanatics like George Soros. (RELATED: Find
out what the billionaire Leftist puppeteer is doing to
destroy liberty today at Soros.news)
But why? What’s the goal? And don’t these people
ultimately have to accept the reality that their candidate,
Hillary Clinton, was so flawed and uninspiring that she
was beaten by a political neophyte who had a better sense
of what the country really wants and needs?
Well, now we know the answer to that question, and it
comes to us from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.
381
As reported by The Daily Caller:
Behind the mass protests, choreographed
chants and acts of violence, leaders of anti-
Trump “resistance” efforts are
communicating the same simple but dark
message: they want to make America
“ungovernable” for the president of the
United States.
These protesters say they will do whatever
it takes to keep Trump from enacting his
agenda, and many of them have shown a
willingness to destroy public property,
assault law enforcement officers and inflict
violence upon their fellow citizens.
Americans got a glimpse of what this strategy is all about
on January 20, Inauguration Day: While President Obama
was permitted a protest-free inauguration twice, Alt-Left
domestic terrorists led protests of Trump’s inauguration in
the nation’s capital, thuggishly committing violence
against his supporters, burning a limousine, and smashing
some storefront windows.
Things have not calmed much since then, but even before
those acts of violence occurred, a group known as
“DisruptJ20” – in the weeks before the
inauguration – urged anti-Trump factions:
“Join us in refusing to normalize Trump’s
presidency, smashing his facade of
legitimacy.”
The group openly advocates for violence, disguising it by
calling for “direct action” tactics, described by the
organization as “collective action to make social change
without giving power over to an authority or middle
person.” (RELATED: Follow more insanity from the
radical left at Libtards.news)
In other words, the group is pushing anarchy.
“We don’t ask permission or put our faith in
electoral politics, instead, we use our
bodies to stop the smooth operation of the
 system we oppose,” the group’s website
says, referencing the efforts of Black Lives
Matter’s to shut down highways as one way
to disrupt. Further, the organization is clear
that it seeks to be “an ungovernable force
this winter.”
Another web site, Ungovernable 2017, which is filled with
vile and false characterizations about Trump and the
United States in general, pledges,
“As we resist, we will create new governing
institutions, new economic relationships,
and new ways of being human.”
There are splinter factions springing up as well. A tweet
dated Feb. 1 from “Occupy Oakland” features a picture of
“protestors” carrying banners reading, “This is War,” and
“Become Ungovernable.”
382
“We won this night. We will control the
streets. We will liberate the land. We will
fight fascists. We will dismantle the state.
This is war,” the tweet says. (RELATED:
Keep up with our widening political
discourse and divide at CivilWar.news)
Without question our country is more divided today than at
any time since the Civil War. An entire political party –
the Democratic Party – exists to do the bidding of real
fascists, communists, and socialists. Traditional America,
rooted in constitutional republicanism, is being assaulted.
Patriots will be needed to win the day at some point, but
the coming conflict must be blamed on the Alt-Left
provocateurs who are using phony narratives and outright
lies as a reason to create anarchy.
 D.C. Whispers Report On Republican Delay Of Trump
Agenda Confirmed In Real Time
By DCwhisper
Posted On February 8, 2017
48-hours earlier, D.C. Whispers went live with the
following headline:
Ryan Works With Pelosi & Schumer To Stall Trump
Economic Recovery
Some (foolishly) doubted the story’s legitimacy. Today,
Drudge went with this related headline:
REPUBLICANS FEAR FOR SAFETY
OBAMACARE PROTESTS GROW
The Drudge story links to a just-published Politico
Article outlining how fearful Republicans have become
over the “repeal of Obamacare” backlash:
“…Also discussed at the closed-door
conference meeting was how to engage
Democratic constituents to ensure they feel
they’re being heard. After Reichert (R-
Wash.) spoke about the security side,
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) stood up to
talk about how to engage constituents in a
“congenial” manner.
…The presentation was particularly
important, those in attendance said,
because it’s not just the most politically
vulnerable, moderate members being
targeted by protesters. Conservatives have
also seen Democratic activists show up at
events, including one recently hosted by
Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.), who ousted former
Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Many of these
lawmakers in safe districts have never
dealt with such severe blowback.”
And here is the D.C. Whispers report which included very
pertinent information on the very same subject made
public 48-hours before the Politico piece:
“…The first evidence of this tactical delay
on the part of Ryan to ensure nothing
AS getting done remains the D.C. status-quo,
is to declare almost all
attention/energy/focus will be on dealing
with “fixing” Obamacare.
Pay attention to the wording. Watch “repeal
and replace” become secondary to “fixing.”
Ryan intends to initiate a patch-work
approach that will take up a great deal
of legislative time, receive significant
media attention, but in the end, get little
actually accomplished by of way of
“repeal and replace.” In the meantime,
the delay in such critical components of the
Trump economic recover plan – namely
sweeping tax reform, will be further
delayed.
In effect, Paul Ryan and his cadre of
Establishment Republicans will do to
Trump what they rarely appeared willing to
do against Barack Obama – namely use
the power of the legislature to contain a
president’s agenda.”
DEVELOPING…
383
 Trump Savages Sen. Blumenthal
For Lying About Fighting In The Vietnam War
Published: February 9, 2017
President Donald Trump shredded Sen. Richard
Blumenthal in a series of tweets Thursday morning, after
Blumenthal leaked details of a private conversation with
Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.
The first 6:57 a.m. EST tweet reads:
“Sen.Richard Blumenthal, who never
fought in Vietnam when he said for years
he had (major lie), now misrepresents what
Judge Gorsuch told him?”
The second, sent at 8:19 a.m. EST, reads:
“Chris Cuomo, in his interview with Sen.
Blumenthal, never asked him about his
long-term lie about his brave “service” in
Vietnam. FAKE NEWS!”
.
384
Blumenthal’s office made headlines late Wednesday night
when they revealed Judge Neil Gorsuch called Trump’s
recent attacks on the judiciary “disheartening and
demoralizing” in a private meeting with Blumenthal that
day. Though Gorsuch initially told Blumenthal he did not
want his comments to go public, his spokesman, Ron
Bonjean, later confirmed his statements to Blumenthal.
Trump struck back, drudging up Blumenthal’s past
improprieties about the Vietnam War.
Blumenthal — then Connecticut’s attorney general — lied
on more than one occasion about fighting in the Vietnam
War. He served stateside in the Marine Corps Reserve
during the war, not actually in Vietnam.
He apologized in an e-mail statement in May 2010:
“At times when I have sought to honor
veterans, I have not been as clear or
precise as I should have been about my
service in the Marine Corps Reserves,” he
wrote. “I have firmly and clearly expressed
regret and taken responsibility for my
words. I have made mistakes and I am
sorry. I truly regret offending anyone.”
The president signed an executive order Jan. 27 that
suspended immigration from seven Middle Eastern
countries that either sponsor terrorism or harbor terrorist.
The order indefinitely suspended entrance for Syrian
refugees.
Trump nominated Gorsuch to replace late Justice Antonin
Scalia Jan. 31.
 Tom Perez Apologizes For Telling The Truth,
Showing Why Democrats’ Flaws Urgently Need Attention
Glenn Greenwald
February 9 2017

and the agenda of endless war, led by

millionaires and funded by oligarchs to
do the least amount possible for
ordinary, powerless citizens while still
keeping their votes.

What drove Bernie Sanders’s remarkably potent challenge

to Hillary Clinton was the extreme animosity of huge
numbers of Democrats — led by its youngest voters — to
The more alarmed one is by the Trump
the values, practices, and corporatist loyalties of the
administration, the more one should focus
party’s establishment. Unlike the 2008 Democratic
on how to fix the systemic, fundamental
primary war — which was far more vicious and nasty but
sickness of the Democratic Party. That
devoid of any real ideological conflict — the 2016
Hillary Clinton won the meaningless
primary was grounded in important and substantive
popular vote on her way to losing to Donald
disputes about what the Democratic Party should be, what
Trump, and that the singular charisma of
principles should guide it, and, most important of all,
Barack Obama kept him popular,
whose interests it should serve.
have enabled many to ignore just how
broken and failed the Democrats are as a
national political force. That’s why those disputes have not disappeared with the
inauguration of Trump, nor should they. It matters a great
deal, perhaps more than anything else, who leads the
An endless array of stunning statistics can be marshaled to
resistance to Trump and what the nature of that opposition
demonstrate the extent of that collapse. But perhaps the
is. Everyone knows the popular cliché that insanity means
most compelling piece of evidence is that even one of the
doing the same thing over and over and expecting different
U.S. media’s most stalwart Democratic loyalists, writing in
outcomes; it illustrates why Democrats cannot continue as
an outlet that is as much of a reliable party organ as the
is and expect anything other than ongoing impotence and
DNC itself, has acknowledged the severity of the
failure. The party’s steadfast refusal to change course even
destruction.
in symbolic ways —
“The Obama years have created a
We hereby elevate by acclimation Chuck
Democratic Party that’s essentially a
“Wall Street” Schumer and re-install Nancy
smoking pile of rubble,” wrote Vox’s
“I’m a multimillionaire and we are
Matthew Yglesias after the 2016 debacle,
capitalists” Pelosi — bodes very poorly for
adding that “the story of the 21st-century
its future success.
Democratic Party looks to be
overwhelmingly the story of failure.”
In sum, demanding that one refrain from critiquing the
Democratic Party in order to exclusively denounce Trump
A failed, collapsed party cannot form an effective
over and over is akin to demanding that one single-
resistance. Trump did not become president and the
mindedly denounce cancer without worrying about who
Republicans do not dominate virtually all levels of
the treating doctor is or what type of research is being
government because there is some sort of massive surge in
conducted to cure it. Trump happened because the
enthusiasm for right-wing extremism. Quite the contrary:
Democrats failed. And he and similar (or worse)
phenomena will continue to happen until they are fixed.
This all happened because the
Democrats are perceived — with good
The obvious determination of Democratic establishment
reason — to be out of touch, artificial,
leaders to follow the same failed and dreary course
talking points-spouting automatons
explains why the race for DNC chair has become so
who serve Wall Street, Silicon Valley,
385
heated. In reality, that position is little more than a
functionary role — mostly focused on fundraising and
building the party apparatus at the state level — but
whoever occupies it does serve as a leading public face of
the party.
For the last five years, the face of the DNC was the living,
breathing embodiment of everything awful about the party:
the sleazy, corrupt corporatist, and centrist hawk Debbie
Wasserman Schultz, who — as a result of WikiLeaks’
publication of DNC emails — had to resign in disgrace
after she got caught engaging in sustained cheating in
order to ensure that Hillary Clinton would be the party’s
nominee.
But her disgrace was short-lived:
Upon resigning, she was quickly rewarded
for her corruption by being named to a high
position with the Clinton campaign, as well
as having the D.C. establishment
Democrats, led by Joe Biden and Clinton
herself, support her in vanquishing a
Sanders-supported primary challenger for
her seat in Congress. As a result of the
support from the party establishment (as
well as massive funding from corporate and
banking interests), she defeated that
challenger, Tim Canova, and the nation
rejoiced as she returned for her seventh
term in Congress.
Wasserman Schultz was replaced as DNC chair on an
interim basis by longtime party operative Donna Brazile,
who was quickly engulfed by her own scandal when she
got caught secretly passing CNN debate questions to the
Clinton campaign, then repeatedly lying about it by
386
denying it and insinuating the emails were forged by the
Russians. For that misconduct, CNN fired her, as anchor
Jake Tapper denounced her cheating as “horrifying” and
CNN said it made the network “completely
uncomfortable.”
But Brazile continues to this day to run the DNC. Think
about that: Her behavior was so unethical, dishonest, and
corrupt that Jeff Zucker-led CNN denounced it and
publicly disassociated itself from her. But the DNC seems
perfectly comfortable having her continue to lead the party
until the next chair is chosen.
Perhaps worse than the serial cheating itself was that it was
all in service of coronating a candidate who — as many of
us tried to warn at the time — all empirical data showed
was the most vulnerable to lose to Donald Trump. So the
very same people who bear the blame for Trump’s
presidency — by cheating to elevate the candidate most
likely to lose to him — continue to dominate the
Democratic Party. To describe the situation is to
demonstrate the urgency of debating and fixing it, rather
than ignoring it in the name of talking only about Trump.
Early on in the race for DNC chair, Keith Ellison — the
first American Muslim ever elected to the U.S. Congress
and an early Sanders supporter who resides on the left
wing of the party — emerged as a clear favorite. He racked
up endorsements not only from progressives like
Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Jesse Jackson but also
party stalwarts such as Walter Mondale, John Lewis, and
even Schumer himself, who seems to recognize that
throwing a few symbolic crumbs to the Sanders wing of
the party is strategically wise in light of the enduring
bitterness many of them harbor toward the DNC’s operative. And, most importantly of all, he will change
behavior and the party’s centrist, neoliberal, pro-war nothing of substance: ensuring that the same policies,
policies. rhetoric, and factions that have prevailed continue to do so,
all while protecting the power base of the same people
But then panic erupted among the Democratic who have run the party into the ground.
establishment. It began when Israeli-American billionaire
Haim Saban — the largest single funder of both the
Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign — smeared
Ellison as “an anti-Semite and anti-Israel individual” and
said his election “would be a disaster for the relationship
between the Jewish community and the Democratic Party.”
In the minds of D.C. mavens, you can’t have someone as
chair of the DNC who is disliked by billionaire funders.
That is the Democratic Party.

Two recent incidents vividly highlight why Tom Perez so

Photo: AP
The knives were then out for Ellison, as operatives began
dumping controversial college-age comments about Louis
Farrakhan and Israel into the media. The New York Times
began running articles with headlines such as “Jewish
Groups and Unions Grow Uneasy With Keith Ellison” — a
strange headline given that Ellison has been endorsed by
multiple unions, including the AFL-CIO, the United
Steelworkers, UNITE HERE, and the International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, among others. Even
unpaid parking tickets from the 1990s made an appearance
thanks to Democratic slime artists.
perfectly embodies the Democratic Party status quo. The
first occurred two weeks ago, when my colleague Zaid
Jilani attended an event where Perez was speaking and
politely but repeatedly asked him about Israeli human
rights abuses — which had been in the news that week
because of new demolitions by the IDF of Palestinian
homes, and because Perez had been asked about his views
on boycotting Israel as a way of stopping its decadeslong
occupation.
With the domination of the Democratic Party by Saban and
others looming, just watch how this profile in courage who
wants to lead the Democratic Party responded to being
asked about his opinions on this matter:

The assault on Ellison’s candidacy was formalized when

the Obama White House recruited and promised to back
one of its loyalists, Labor Secretary Tom Perez. As he did
with his endorsement of Wasserman Schultz, Biden made
the establishment’s support for Perez official by publicly
endorsing him last week.

Perez is a pleasant liberal and loyal party stalwart: Before

the first primary vote was cast, he endorsed Clinton over
Sanders and became one of her most outspoken surrogates.
Despite claiming to be devoted to American workers, he
was a loyal supporter of TPP even after Clinton was forced
into insincere opposition.

It’s not hard to see why the Obama and Clinton circles
want him to run the party instead of Ellison. He’s
acceptable to big donors. He has proven himself loyal to
the party establishment’s agenda. He is a reliable party
387
An even more illustrative episode occurred late
Wednesday. Perez was in Kansas campaigning for votes
from county leaders and was asked about the need for the
party to retain the support of the Sanders contingent. Perez
unexpectedly blurted out a truth that party functionaries to
this day steadfastly bury and deny even in the face of
the mountain of evidence proving it. This is what Perez
said:
We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie
supporters that the process was rigged and it was. And
you’ve got to be honest about it. That’s why we need a
chair who is transparent.
That’s quite an admission from the party establishment’s
own candidate:
“The process was rigged.” And he
commendably acknowledged how
important it is to admit this — “to be honest
about it” — because “we need a chair who
is transparent.”
But Perez’s commitment to “transparency” and “being
honest” had a very short life-span. After his admission
predictably caused controversy — with furious Clinton
supporters protesting the truth — Perez demonstrated the
same leadership qualities that were so evident when Zaid
Jilani asked him about Israeli human rights abuses.
He quickly slinked onto Twitter with a series of tweets to
retract what he said, claim that he “misspoke” (does
anyone know what that word means?), apologize for it, and
proclaim Hillary Clinton the fair and rightful winner:
388
To ensure there was no mistaking his loyalty oath, he made
that last tweet his pinned tweet, ensuring it would sit at the
top of his Twitter page. (He also included a couple of
scripted, empty banalities about the importance of
transparency, objectivity, and “fighting like hell.”)
So in Tom Perez’s conduct, one sees the mentality
and posture that has shaped the Democratic Party: a
defense of jobs-killing free trade agreements that big
corporate funders love; an inability to speak plainly,
without desperately clinging to focus-group, talking-points
scripts; a petrified fear of addressing controversial issues
even (especially) when they involve severe human rights
violations by allies; a religious-like commitment never to
offend rich donors; and a limitless willingness to publicly
abase oneself in pursuit of power by submitting to an
apology ritual for having told the truth.
That is the template that has driven the Democratic Party
into a ditch so deep and disastrous that even Vox
acknowledges it without euphemisms. That is the template
that has alienated voters across the country at all levels of
elected office and that enabled the Donald Trump
presidency. And it is the template that Democratic Party
establishment leaders are more determined than ever to
protect and further entrench by ensuring that yet another
detached, lifeless functionary who embodies it becomes
the next face of the party.
One can spend all of one’s time and energy denouncing
Donald Trump. But until the systemic causes that gave rise
to him are addressed and resolved, those denunciations
will do little other than generate social media benefits and
flattering applause from those already devoted to opposing
him. Focusing on and attempting to counter the
fundamental flaws of the Democratic Party is not a
distraction from #TheResistance; it is a central priority, a
prerequisite for any kind of success.
 Activist Leftist Court Rules
Against Trump Travel Ban, Ignores Actual Law
Appeals Court Rules Against Ban Aimed At Keeping Country Safe
By Staff Writer -
02.09.2017 @7:30 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — A federal appeals court has ruled that
the United States will remain wide open to incoming
refugees after rejecting a move by the Trump
administration to reinstate the controversial travel ban.
In an unsurprising move considering the courts open leftist
leanings, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a
lower court’s stay of President Trump’s travel ban
targeting seven countries would remain in place.
For his part, Trump immediately Tweeted his plan to take
this issue to the Supreme Court due to his belief that our
national security is directly at stake.
We now find ourselves in a country where judges are now
directly ruling against the actual law in favor of how they
“feel” about certain political issues. Make no mistake, this
travel ban is 100% legal under U.S. law.
Most observers believed from the start that this extreme
left appeals court would rule against Trump, especially
.
389
when you consider the fact that one of the three judges on
the panel has been publicly supported by leftist
organizations in the past.
“Judge Michelle T. Friedland, who is on the
three-judge panel that will rule on President
Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at
stopping terrorists from traveling to the
United States, won the ACLU of Southern
California’s LGBT Award in 2009,
according to the Democratic Sen. Patrick
Leahy of Vermont,” reported CNSNews.
Additionally, the ruling by the appeals court appears to
have been helped along by tech giants Facebook, Google,
and Microsoft who filed court papers in favor of ruling
against the ban.
“The panel’s ruling in favor of immigrants is
a victory not only for Washington and
Minnesota — the states that sued — but for
Facebook Inc., Google Inc. and Microsoft
Corp., which said in court papers that the
measure would hinder their global
businesses,” reported Bloomberg.
The establishment media, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and
now the courts are all working directly against both White
House and Trump’s public war on globalism.
 Interview With Jim Rogers:
Macro Outlook In The Trump Era
Interview By Erik Townsend
February 9, 2017
Please note this was transcribed to best of the ability of the
transcriber and may have minor errors. Please refer to the
podcast itself to clarify anything.
Erik: Joining me next is a man who needs no introduction,
investing legend, Jim Rogers. Jim when you appeared on
this program one year ago, Macro Voices was brand new.
We had no name, no reputation and no following yet
despite having no regular audience following at that time,
that one interview remains our most popular show ever with
more than half again as many listener downloads as our
next most popular interview with fund manager Hugh
Hendry much more recently. So congratulations on your
top billing status and I have no doubt that you'll set a new
record today.
Jim: Eric I think I should hang up now, while I’m ahead, are
you kidding. With a record like that and an introduction like
that I want to stop while I'm ahead.
Erik: Well before we let you go let's start with equity markets
then because when we spoke a year ago you and I were
both very concerned about markets being overvalued. You
went out of your way to say that you didn't know whether it
would happen in 2016 or 2017or 2018 but you felt that
significant downside was ahead for the markets eventually.
And if I look back just six months ago a lot of industry
luminaries, whether we think about guys like Ray Dalio,
Stan Druckenmiller, Carl Icahn, these guys were all casting
bearish views for a lot of the same reasons that you and I
were.
Then Donald Trump was elected president and suddenly all
of these guys turned super bullish. Ray Dalio seems to be
backing away from that enthusiasm in the last week or two
but the fact remains that some super talented people all
turned bullish, super bullish after the election. Forgive me
Jim, I'm just not seeing the logic to this are you?
Jim: Well yes and no. Mr. Trump said he's going to do some
wonderful things. He's going to cut taxes which is always
great for any society, any country. He said he's going to
rebuild the infrastructure which America desperately needs
and is good for America. He says he's going to bring home
the three trillion dollars, U.S. dollars which American
companies have overseas.
390
All of these things are wonderful, wonderful things and if he
can do it Eric, wow things are going to be great.
But Mr. Trump has also said he's going to have trade war
with China, Mexico, Japan, Korea a few other people that
he has named. He swore that on his first day in office he
would impose 45% tariffs against China. He's been there
three weeks, two or three weeks and he hasn't done it yet
but he still got it in his head I'm sure or maybe he's just
another politician like all the rest of them. He says one thing
and he doesn't mean it at all but he does have at least three
people in high levels in his group who are very, very keen to
have trade wars with China and other people.
If he does that Eric, it's all over. I mean history is very clear
that trade wars always lead to problems, often to disaster,
sometimes even to real war, a shooting war. So I don't
know, I'm not sure Mr. Trump knows. He said so many
things and many of the things are contradictory. Now if he's
not going to have trade wars with various people then
chances are for a while happy days are here.
Erik: When we spoke last year, you anticipated even more
strength for the U.S. dollar and as is usually the case the
market has proven you right. But you were careful to say
that it's not because the true fundamentals were bullish but
rather – you went out of your way to emphasize – that
people would continue to buy dollars because they didn't
know what else to do. And you thought that it could even
turn into a bubble.
So how have your views evolved a year later. Do you still
think the dollar has much higher to go and if so how much
higher from here?
Jim: I still own the dollar, the dollar fortunately is having a
correction now. You know all bull markets need corrections.
Corrections are good. I haven't sold any. I may have even
bought more for all I know I still see the same thing that
whatever happens in the world there is going to be some
turmoil somewhere along the line we're already seeing it in
some places. The Euro’s still having its own version of
turmoil. It’s going to have a lot more this year.
So the dollar is going to be “a safe haven.” As we discussed
last year Erik, it is not a safe haven but it is perceived as a
safe haven and in fact for some countries it is a safe haven
compared to say the Euro or other currencies.
So I still own the dollar. The fundamentals have only gotten
worse but the fundamentals have gotten worse everywhere
except maybe Russia. So I still own the U.S. dollar.
Erik: Some people have suggested that the strength in the
U.S. dollar could cause so many problems for emerging
markets that we might eventually see something - let's call it
like a Plaza Accord version 2.0 – where governments
around the world conspire to intentionally weaken the dollar
to prevent or contain those adverse effects.
Do you think that that's a possibility? Do you see that
coming and is that something far out on the horizon or
something that could happen soon, how do you see that?
Jim: I've been around long enough to know that anything is
possible no matter how weird it may sound in fact it weirder
it sounds the more like it's probably going to happen. I doubt
if it’s going to be a Plaza Accord this time around it's more
likely that the dollar is going to go higher and higher on its
own volition for some of the reasons we discussed. It will get
too high so it will cause serious credit problems for some
people, a lot of people borrowed a lot of dollars. It will also
make many American companies less competitive.
So it's going to go too high, may turn into a bubble, at which
point I hope I'm smart enough to sell it because at some
point the market forces are going to cause the dollar to
come back down because people are going to realize, oh
my gosh, this is causing a lot of turmoil, economic problems
in the world and it's damaging the American economy. At
that point the smart guys will get out. I hope I'm one of
them.
Erik: You said last year that you were long dollars and could
easily see a bubble forming. But you went on to say that
you could not imagine still owning dollars in ten years’ time.
So now we're down to nine years. Do you still see that this
has to come to an end? Do you see any sign posts or any
anything on the horizon that would tell us – you mentioned
just a moment ago that you hope you're one of the guys
who’s smart enough to get out in time – what signals would
you be looking for to tell you when the time is that the dollar
rally has played out and the blow off top is in or whatever it
may be and it's time to get on the other side of the trade?
Jim: If it turns into a bubble, all bubbles look the same no
matter what country, what period of history, what assets,
now everybody's screaming to buy, they’re screaming that
it's different this time, you don't understand, you old man,
you just cannot understand why everybody needs to under
own dollars. So the signs will always be there.
Signs along the way will be some of the things I mentioned.
You'll start seeing bankruptcies by companies or countries
that are over extended in U.S. dollars and since the dollar is
going higher they cannot repay their debts. You will see
American companies and American balance of trade getting
worse because of the high dollar.
391
The signs will be pretty clear, they're pretty simple signs
they've been around for hundreds of years, thousands of
years. I just hope I'm smart enough to recognize them and
have the insight to interpret them properly.
Erik: We also spoke last year about the 35 year bond bull
market. You emphasized that you didn't know for sure how
long it could go on but you said that it was certain to end
sooner or later. In the year since we've spoken quite a few
industry luminaries have come out and declared that the 35
year secular bull market in bonds is over.
Jeff Gundlach made that call to his credit almost on the very
day that remain so far at least the bottom in yields in the top
and price. Bill Gross has said that if we saw a 10 year
treasury move over 2.6% a yield that would be the signal in
his mind that says a secular bear market is underway. Ray
Dalio has said that the credit cycle is played out.
What you said last year was that you were short junk bonds
but you thought at that point – a year ago – it was too early
to make a short call on treasuries. What's your take now? Is
it time to go short U.S. treasuries or is it still wait and see?
Jim: Well all those guys are smarter than I am so I don't
know. I any way am not short bonds at the moment
certainly it would have been a good trade last summer as
you pointed out that the bonds made a high, interest rates
made a low, long term rates made a low. They have rallied
since.
But for my money right now as we speak in February of
2017 everybody is bullish on long term U.S. government
bonds. I've been around long enough Eric to know that when
everybody is on the same side of the boat, I better run to the
other side.
So I am not shorting government bonds. I am shorting junk
bonds still if and when the mood changes and people are
less skeptical and bonds go down and everybody starts
saying, oh, bonds cheated me, she lied to me, they lied
then I might be ready to short bonds again because we're
certainly in the process of making a top. When that top
comes, I don't know, I'm smart, I'm a very, very, very bad
market timer as you know I'm a very, very bad short term
trader. So you should ask those other guys to get your
timing.
Erik: Let's come back to the junk bonds. You and I were
both short junk last we spoke a year ago. I'm still holding
that position today it sounds like you are too and it was quite
profitable actually for a few months after we spoke but since
then we've given back some profits.
Is there room to think that maybe we stayed in the trade too
long or is this just a pullback? It’s hard for me, obviously the
recovery in energy prices has helped junk bonds but I can't
believe this is over yet. How do you see it?
Jim: Well I happen to agree with you a 100%. The very fact
that I'm still short junk bonds it means that the timing is
wrong. I know when interest rates start going up again
permanently when the bull market really does come to an
end and the interest rates, government bonds, interest rates
are going to go very, very high Erik, very high if I told you
how high you would probably hang up now and not listen to
me anymore. But in 1981 interest rates – short term interest
rates in America – were over 20%, bonds were yielding
over – long term bonds – was yielding over 15%.
We've had these long, long bull and bear markets in bonds
in the United States and we probably will again. So when
interest rates go higher the junk bonds are going to get
destroyed both by interest rates and by credit defaults
because many of them are in fact junk, the companies are
not great creditors and they're going to pay the price.
Erik: I want to come back to that whole point of interest
rates going much higher. I couldn't agree more with you in
terms of fundamentals that they should move higher. But I
can't help but say, “hey wait a minute in 1981 the U.S. was
nowhere close to 20 trillion dollars of national debt” and now
that we are it seems to me if you were to go back to
historically normal interest rates, even a 6% 10 year yield
never mind 20%, how could that happen without
bankrupting the government because it can't service its debt
and what I'm trying to get my head around is if it can't
happen, does that mean that the interest rates can't go
higher or does it mean they do go higher and the
government can't service its debt and it leads to a major
fiscal crisis.
Do you think that when we get to the point where the natural
market forces want to push interest rates higher that
governments will somehow contain them in order to keep
their debts serviceable or do you think it means that
governments are headed towards defaults and bankruptcy
when we get to the point where interest rates return to their
historical norms?
Jim: I'm sorry, why do you think governments cannot go
bankrupt? It's happened throughout history. The norm is for
governments to go bankrupt over in the extended periods of
time including the countries which are on top.
After the First World War a hundred years ago U.K. was the
richest most powerful country in the world there was no
number two, well I can remember when the U.K. went
bankrupt two generations later, three generations later
could not sell long term debt I.M.F. had to bail them out.
You're not old enough to remember when the French were
like that or the Spanish or the Dutch, everybody has been on
top – well not everybody – but many people have been on
top one time or another they've all gone bankrupt. Why do
you think people cannot go bankrupt?
Erik: Oh, I don't think they can't go bankrupt. I guess what I
don't see is, there's no I.M.F. to bail out the U.S. The U.S. is
392
big enough that there is no entity to bail it out. So the bailout
doesn't happen something else happens and if the
something else is a U.S. sovereign bond crisis I mean holy
cow Jim U.S. treasury bonds are pretty much the safe haven
asset in the central bank reserve assets of the entire globe.
So if you have a crisis in unserviceable U.S. debt where the
U.S. government cannot pay its bills and that means that
U.S. treasuries no longer have that safe haven value what
happens at that point?
Jim: Well Eric I suggest that you do a little more research
although I don't think you need to because you’re very
knowledgeable but if you do a lot of research and become
knowledgeable about what's going on in the world you're
going to get very, very worried and if you get very, very
worried you're going to - I hope – get prepared because
we're going to have the worst economic problems we've
had in your lifetime or my lifetime and when that happens a
lot of people are going to disappear.
In 2008 Bear Stearns disappeared, Bear Stearns had been
around over 90 years. Lehman Brothers disappeared.
Lehman Brothers had been around over 150 years. A long,
long time, a long glorious history they’ve been through
wars, depression, civil war they've been through everything
and yet they disappear.
So the next time around it's going to be worse than anything
we've seen and a lot of institutions, people, companies even
countries, certainly governments and maybe even countries
are going to disappear. I hope you get very worried.
Erik: I am very worried Jim and it leads into my next
question because you are such an astute student of history
and you understand longer term trends and I look at-- of
course Donald Trump has been elected president of the
United States, the U.K. has voted to exit the European
Union, there are movements underway which could lead to
referenda in several other European countries that could
lead to more countries abandoning the E.U.
So as a history student Jim, what is this global rise in
populism and rejection of government authority around the
world telling us, it almost feels like we're headed down the
road to revolution and things are about to come unglued am
I exaggerating to think it's that bad?
Jim: Well let's just talk about some of the things that‘s going
to happen in a next couple of years and then I think we can
draw further conclusions. They're going to be more
movements in Europe for instance for countries to split up
and for countries to leave the E.U.
You mentioned France before, there are people in France
who want to split the country and people in Italy, Spain,
Belgium who want to split those countries. They are now
going to be encouraged by the fact that Brexit was
successful. The Scots are going to have another election
about the possibility of leaving the U.K.
Whether these things happen or not Erik I don't know yet, I
have views but who cares, but we're certainly going to have
the ongoing turmoil that these movements are alive and well
and will be very active and vocal and visible for a while.
Now let's presume for a moment that some of them are
successful, well if the European Union starts breaking up or
the Euro starts breaking up, that's going to throw a spanner
in a lot of people's works because nobody's really sort of
planned on that.
Most of the bonds, the Euro bonds, none of them, very few
of them now have any provision for what happens if there is
no Euro. I mean Italy owns several billion dollars’ worth of
bonds. Suppose Italy pulls out of the Euro and they
suddenly say OK we're going to pay you back in Lira, well
that's going to confuse a lot of people and cause a lot more
turmoil.
You have the same sorts of movements in Asia not nearly
as powerful or as vocal yet but you have the same sorts-- in
the United States there's a movement now for California to
withdraw from the U.S. and by the way in the U.S. a lot of
people would like to see California leave the U.S. So it may
work both ways.
So when you start having bear markets as you I’m sure well
know one bad thing happens and another bad thing
happens and these things snowball just like in bull markets
good news comes out then more good news comes out the
next thing you know you're five or six or seven years into a
bull market.
Well bear markets do the same thing and so we have a lot of
bad news on the horizon. I haven't even gotten to war. I
haven't even gotten to trade war or anything like that but you
know things do go wrong.
Erik: Well that was my next question is we spoke a year ago
about a topic that most people don't feel comfortable talking
about but I think you and I recognize that it's probably the
most important question there is, which is history teaches
us that when economic conditions are like they are now
usually it leads to war either a trade war or a shooting war
and you were outspoken last year in saying that when you
have an economic superpower of yesteryear that starts to
become stagnant or even begins to decline and you
suggested that the U.S. had certainly started to become
stagnant if not an actual decline that that has almost always
lead to war.
You went on to observe that it's easy to stir people up by
blaming foreigners for all of our woes. Now those probably
sounded like crazy words to a lot of people last year but look
at where we are now a year later we have an immigration
ban against seven countries that seems to be heating up as
one of the most contentious and heated both legal and
political battles in U.S. history.
393
So where do we stand in this big picture Jim, are we actually
headed towards war or does it start as a trade war or does
it actually begin as a shooting war? What issues in advance
are on your radar screen in terms of important signposts
that will tell us where this whole situation is headed?
Jim: Well as we've discussed before, whenever things are
bad and things are going wrong people look for somebody
to blame. They always throughout history wherever we are,
whichever country we're discussing the first people blamed
are always the foreigners. They have different colour skin,
different languages, different religions, different food, they
smell bad, their food smells bad I cannot tell you how many
times I've heard people talk about how, “oh those people,
their food smells bad and they smell bad too.”
So it's very easy it's always happened that way to blame the
foreigners for better or for worse it seems it is happening as
you point out in the U.S. again but it's also happening in
other places in Germany, France, Italy many places they're
blaming the foreigners already again it's even happening in
Singapore to some extent where I live nothing like in Europe
at the moment.
And as you rile up against the foreigners most countries
historically have closed off one way or the other they close
their borders, they close their economies and when you
close the economy it leads to economic problems and
sometimes eventually if you get into real serious trade wars
it leads to bankruptcy and even worse.
It's rare and I don't think ever in history that one country has
started a trade war and the other country says, “oh well
that's too bad but we're not going to do anything we're just
going to sit here and let you hit us again and again and
again.” No the other countries retaliate that’s the way
human beings are.
So if country X. starts a trade war then country Y. hits back
and then country X. hit's back and country Y. hits back and
the next thing you know countries C and D and E are
involved as well and everybody's suffering and then as
economies get worse more and more things happen more
and more discrimination more and more blame and then
eventually bullets start flying.
So no I don't like at all what I see happening. There are
many analogies to previous periods in history before the
First World War and this sort of thing started happening
certainly before the Second World War this sort of thing
started happening. It's been common throughout history.
And these wars when they start they usually-- in 1914
nobody, nobody could conceive of war and then the next
thing you knew, there was war and everybody said don't
worry it'll be over by Christmas, well six months later
everybody was saying, how did we get into this war? How
do we get out of this war? It's absurd. It's ludicrous etc.
And that's been the case for most wars, if you go back and
look, some bureaucrat throws his weight around the next
thing you know another bureaucrat throws his weight around
and the next thing you know 20 year old kids are shooting
at each other instead of drinking beer together and
everybody is suffering.
So no, am I worrier? I'm very worried and I know enough
history to know that these things have often led to real war.
Certainly you know we just had a president who won the
Nobel Peace prize of all things, well he started more wars
probably than most presidents in American history. America
seems to have a penchant for war and they seem to like to
get involved.
Erik: Well that certainly is true on a related note to that let's
talk for a minute about U.S. Russian relationships. The
Democrats would have us believe that Donald Trump did not
win the election but actually evil Russian agents hacked to
the election and undermined American democracy
effectively throwing the election to Donald Trump.
Nancy Pelosi even demanded just this past week that the
F.B.I. should launch a major investigation to figure out what
information the Russians are holding on Donald Trump in
order to blackmail him into bowing to their wishes.
President Trump on the other hand continues to reiterate
that he has no ties to Russia, no business deals in Russia,
no personal relationship with the Russian government, never
talked to Putin, doesn't know Putin and so on and so forth.
And he's been particularly outspoken in saying that getting
along with Russia is a good thing not a bad thing. That
America should strive to get along with Russia. That he
hopes to get along with Putin even though he says that he
doesn't know him. President Trump has suggested that it’s
the Democrats who are trying to start World War three with
all of their anti-Russian rhetoric and accusations.
Now you're the history and world affairs guru Jim, are the
Russians really the bad guys here or are they being
scapegoated in order to facilitate an American political
rhetoric campaign against the president?
Jim: Well I do know that during the last administration, Mr.
Obama's administration as you probably remember we
started, we tried to pull of an illegal crew in Ukraine, we got
caught at it, what's her name, Victoria Nuland, whatever the
woman’ name the State Department they have there
several pieces of evidence where we know she tried to
instigate an illegal coup then of course the Russians
outsmarted us and so the State Department started blaming
it on the Russians and the hype against the Russians has
gotten bigger and bigger ever since after we started-- or
tried to start, tried to instigate the illegal coup Crimea and
Ukraine.
So yes we are certainly at fault to some extent and obviously
you then, when you're caught you've got to keep the
394
rhetoric up and keep throwing more and more accusations
and so the State Department has done that.
I know that before the illegal coup Obama, Bush everybody
was trying to be friends with the Russians rightly so, cold
war had ended long ago, the Russians wanted to be friends
with America. We didn’t need NATO anymore. Who needed
the Cold War etc. all the money we were spending on some
of these arms manufactures and soldiers so until the illegal
coup took place we were all trying to be great friends you
remember George Bush said I looked him in the eye and
he's a man I can admire and work with etc.
So now of course the Democrats especially since they lost
the election are trying to blame it on the Russians. It's
unfathomable to me how the Russians could have
determined the outcome of the elections. Maybe they
planted a story a two but so what? It's inconceivable to me
that the Russians could influence much less determine the
election.
I think if we start having investigations of the illegal voting
I'm afraid we're going to find more for the Democrats than
for the Republicans places big cities in America won't name
names but so far the few investigations that have taken
place we find that the voting irregularities are in big cities
which are Democratic strongholds.
Erik: Let's move on to precious metals next last year you
said you owned gold and you weren't selling it. But you
were also quick to say that you weren't buying any more
either. You thought that better buying opportunities might
still lie ahead and you were holding off until they
materialized. What's the update on your outlook for precious
metals in the months and years ahead?
Jim: Same way, I still own it. I'm not buying anymore. If gold
more or less went up or went down, I suspect gold today is
where it was back then, maybe a little higher, maybe a little
lower. I'm still sitting and watching. I want to own more gold.
I want to own more silver but I want to own it at a lower
price which I expect.
Now Erik I repeat I’m the single worst market timer in the
world. So gold may not go down ever again. If it does, I
hope I'm smart enough to buy more if it doesn't, I own some.
Erik: Well I'll repeat what I said one year ago which is, I
don't believe you're the world's worst market timer. I think
you're actually a little bit better than that as evidenced by
your 4200% and seven years track record when you were
running your fund. But let's move on from there.
Jim: Just a little bit, that was a long time ago and second of
all it was ten years it wasn’t seven years but it doesn't
matter. I mean it's not that important. It was a long time ago.
Erik: OK well I still will add a little bit more credence than
you take credit for to your abilities in the markets. Let's
move on to another topic that you mentioned last time which
is you described the desire of governments to outlaw cash
because that of course allows governments much more
control over the financial system. They can impose negative
interest rates do all sorts of other things and control
everyone's finance.
Needless to say, those were very prescient words so many
government officials and academics have come out in the
last year particularly from Harvard University, Ken Rogoff a
professor there, calling for an outright ban on cash in favour
of purely electronic currency systems. The European Union
has already floated proposed new regulations that would
limit cash transactions.
Jim where's all of this headed and what's in store for
markets as governments continue to wage war against
cash?
Jim: Governments are always looking out for themselves
first and it's the same old thing you know Eric this has been
going on for hundreds of years. The Indians recently did the
same thing they withdrew 86% percent of the currency in
circulation and they have now made it illegal to spend more
than, I think it's about $4000 in any cash transaction. In
France you cannot use more than, I think it's a €1000.
Many countries are already doing this. Some states in the
U.S. you cannot make cash transactions above a certain
amount. Governments love it. Then they can control you. If
you want to go and buy a cup of coffee they know how
many you drink, where you buy them etc. if they can all put
it into electronic formats and they will the world is all going
electronic. My children will probably never go to a bank
when they're adults, maybe never go to a post office maybe
even never to a doctor or rarely to a doctor when they're
adults.
So the Internet and the computers changing everything that
we know, money can certainly be easily converted to
computers not today because there are still, some people
who don't have computers and the system is not ready it but
it can be done and when it's done the governments are
going to be very, very happy they going to say they're doing
it for our own good Eric, this is not them, this is for our
good. That they're doing this, but it’s coming and it's going
to be a whole different world in which we live. Probably we
are not going to have as many freedoms as we have now
even though we are already losing our freedoms at a
significant pace.
Erik: Well and I'm curious on your perspective on that
because what fascinates me, I agree with you completely,
we are losing our freedoms at a very rapid pace. If I
imagined human beings in a free society and a society that
celebrates freedom, losing those freedoms I would envision
a lot of people under tyranny whining and complaining and
groaning about how horrible it was that the tyrants, their
overlords were controlling them.
395
But we seem to have people cheering in the streets for this
Jim. It seems like most people are duped into believing that
this loss of freedom is a good thing. The government’s
fighting terrorism and we're going to be safer as a result of
forfeiting our freedoms.
What does history teach us, is this part of a cycle, is there a
reason that people are reacting this way because certainly
in other times in history people have been willing to die in
order to avoid losing their freedoms but they're almost
cheering the government on in taking freedoms away now.
What's going on here?
Jim: Well history shows that people always would like a little
more safety and a willing to “give up some things for more
safety and security.” Benjamin Franklin said well anybody
who would give up some freedoms for security is going to
wind up with neither security nor freedom and they deserve
to lose both and of course that's the way it is.
I’m not the first to realize that people who are rising to
become dictators start taking away freedoms first in
Germany they took away the guns, they wouldn’t let people
have guns in Germany and lots of places have done that or
things like that.
In America now you and I probably remember when we
were kids, you had to have a search warrant, now they can
just break your door down if they have what they consider
enough good reasons, they don't even have to go to the
court and get a search warrant anymore.
So it's already happening and if you said to somebody that
you know they could break your door down they say they’re
not going to break my door down I’m not a terrorist or a drug
dealer, well that's how it all starts people say it's OK but then
the next thing you know they're breaking your door down
too.
So it's already happening do I like it? No I don't like it but I'm
not the first-- what was his name Goebbels the German
who said if you say something to people enough times they
believe it no matter how absurd it is and you and I have
certainly seen it in the news in America you say something
enough times people believe it and it becomes politically
correct and then you can’t even say something that's not
politically correct in America any more.
Erik: Jim you have achieved some utterly amazing things in
your life when most people think about going for a ride on a
motorbike they're imagining a trip around town. You literally
rode your motorcycle around the entire planet while being
followed by a film crew and of course that story was
chronicled in your first book Investment Biker.
When you decided to take your new wife for a drive in the
countryside you had a custom Mercedes built and you took
a trip through 116 countries that story of course forming the
basis for your second book Adventure Capitalist.
 Jim if I'm correct you're going to be turning 75 this October
that's three quarters of a century on this planet is there
anything left that you haven't done that you still want to do?
Is there any goal that you have and what have been the
most rewarding and interesting experiences in your life?
Jim: Right now Erik I am having a wonderful adventure. I’ve
got two little kids. I never wanted children when I was-- all
my life and advised people not to have children, I explained
that children were a horrible waste of time, money, energy. I
was never going to be so foolish as top ruin my life by
having children like all those saps who had children.
Well I was totally wrong Eric. I had my first child when I was
60 my second when I was 65 and it is absolutely
extraordinary, these two little girls. I hope that everybody
listening at this who has not had children goes home today
and starts working on having children. Take a day off if you
have to, you probably shouldn’t take a day off these days
these are difficult times but go home for lunch have a lunch
hour with children, you cannot believe how much fun and
what a great adventure it is.
Now I think in my case it's probably better that I had children
later. If I'd had them when I was 20 or 30 or 40 or
something it would have been a disaster for me for the
mother for the children. But everybody has to figure that out
and do it at their own time but this is the most wonderful
adventure that I’ve had so far.
So you ask what I'm doing next, what I'm doing next is these
two little girls right now and when they get older I want to
take them to some more adventures but they’re too young
right now.
Erik: Well I must say it has been exciting for me having
heard your story, following your work, reading your books
over the years. I remember hearing those first stories of your
decision to have children and your desire that they grow up
in an environment where they could learn to speak fluent
Mandarin and so forth.
Watching your daughter's YouTube channel and seeing her
interview you in perfect fluent Mandarin. It's fascinating to
watch the realization of your goals and I would note that her
Chinese is a lot better than your Chinese is Jim and mine as
well.
.
396
Jim: My Chinese is non-existent but when I show videos or
when I put them on the stage in front of Chinese audiences
they always gasp, I mean they just gasp out loud because
they're so shocked at how good the Mandarin that my little
girls speak is.
So that goal, I moved to Asia to make sure my children
spoke good Mandarin and know Asia that part has worked.
It will not make them successful Erik, just because you
speak English and Mandarin will not make you successful
but if they're working in a Chinese restaurant at least they're
going to be the maître D. instead of the dishwasher. So
hopefully they will have some kind of future.
Erik: That sounds really exciting. I can't wait to hear about
what adventures you take them on. But before we close
your latest book is called Street Smarts. Please tell our
listeners what that book is about and what they can expect
to learn from reading it?
Jim: Well my agent and my publisher came to me and said,
why don’t you do a book on how you got from Alabama
today you are in Asia with two girls, two little children
speaking Mandarin how did all this happen there must be a
good story you’ve written a few stories about things. Why
don't you put it all together and I said nobody would care,
nobody would be interested but to make a long story short I
did it many people tell me it's the best book that I've done
so far, I certainly enjoyed it, it puts a lot of things together.
I’m certainly glad that I did it so that my children will know if
nothing else in the future it's a memoir if you will. I’m a little
embarrassed to use that term about anything with me but
yes it's a memoir.
Erik: Well I certainly enjoyed reading it and I can't wait to
read the next book about the adventures that you take your
daughters on.
So Jim thanks again for another fantastic interview. We
really appreciate it and Patrick Ceresna and I will be back
as Macro Voices continues right here at macrovoices.com.
[End of interview]
 The Reason The Elite Hate Trump So Much Is Because He
Is Opposed To The One World Agenda Of The Globalists
By Michael Snyder
February 9th, 2017
Have you ever wondered why the elite hate Donald Trump
so much? There have certainly been many politicians
throughout the years that have been disliked, but with
Trump there is a hatred that is so intense that it almost
seems tangible at times. During the campaign, they went to
extraordinary lengths to destroy him, but it didn’t work.
And now that he is president, the attacks against him have
been absolutely relentless. So why is there so much
animosity toward Trump? Is it just because he is not a
member of their club?
The truth, of course, is that it runs much deeper than that.
Ultimately, the elite hate Trump because he is opposed to
their demonic one world agenda. Many among the elite are
referred to as “globalists” because their eventual goal is to
unite the whole world under a single planetary system.
These globalists truly believe that they know better than all
the rest of us, and they want to impose their way of doing
things on every man, woman and child on the entire planet.
So they get really angry when Donald Trump talks of
“building a wall” or establishing a travel ban from certain
countries because they eventually want a world without
any borders at all.
And they get really angry when Donald Trump says that he
wants to pull the United States out of international trade
397
deals, because the elite were using those international trade
deals to slowly integrate all nations into a single one world
economy.
And they really don’t like when Donald
Trump criticizes Islam, because Islam is
going to be a key component of the one
world religion that they plan to
establish.
For quite a while the globalists were on a roll, but recently
they have experienced some tremendous setbacks.
Britain’s vote to leave the EU and the election of Donald
Trump were not supposed to happen, and this has left
many globalists searching for answers. In fact, just today I
came across a New York Times article entitled “Besieged
Globalists Ponder What Went Wrong“…
Until recently, you didn’t hear people being referred to as
“globalist” very often. But in a time of rising nationalism,
those who see the upside of globalism have become a
distinct — and often embattled — tribe.
Last week, the globalists had a big family reunion in New
York. The gathering was focused on the United Nations
General Assembly, but a growing array of side conferences
and summits and dinners also attracted concerned
internationalists of every stripe: humanitarians, leaders of
nongovernmental organizations, donors, investors, app
peddlers, celebrities.
As you can see, even the New York Times uses the term
“globalists” to describe these elitists.
At one time you would have been considered a
“conspiracy theorist” is you spoke of “globalists”, but at
this point the elite are not even trying to put up a facade
any longer.
And of course Donald Trump made opposition to
globalism one of the central themes of his campaign, and it
really struck a chord all across America. As Dr. Jim
Garlow noted in an article that went viral just before the
election, Trump’s opposition to globalism was one of the
key things that set him apart from Hillary Clinton…
 Trump opposes globalism. Hillary thrives
on it. Globalism is far more than
“geographical” or “eliminating national
borders and boundaries.” It is spiritual and
demonic at its core. Few—very few—
understand this. This is quite likely one of
the main reasons why Trump is hated. Do
your homework on this one. Think
“principalities and powers.” Serious.
Extremely serious.
The reason why the threat of globalism is so serious is
because if a single global system is ever established there
will be no escape from it.
Just think about it – where could you go to escape a
government that literally rules the entire world?
These globalists are completely convinced that if they
could just get control of everyone and everything that they
could establish some sort of environmentally-friendly
socialist utopia where war and poverty are eradicated. But
in order to do that, they would need to be in a position to
micro-manage the lives of every single person on the
planet.
In their minds it would not be tyranny, but for those of us
that love freedom that is precisely what it would be.
The globalists want a one world government, a one world
economy and a one world religion. Those of us that are
Christians know that the Bible speaks of a time when this
will happen, but even many that are not Christians are
deeply concerned about what the globalists are pushing
for. Just consider the words of George Mason University
Law School Professor Jeremy Rabkin…
George Mason University Law School Professor and
author of the 2004 book The Case for Sovereignty: Why
The World Should Welcome American Independence
Jeremy Rabkin argues that globalism fundamentally stands
at odds with democratic forms of government.
In a Tuesday CP interview, Rabkin, a Jew,
expressed his distaste for Donald Trump.
But on globalism, he said, “beyond that it is
not democratic, there’s something about it
that is a little creepy, a little uncanny.”
.
398
“It’s basically saying ‘We are going to
organize the world in a way that
establishes an artificial consensus.’ It’s
not enough to say it’s undemocratic. It’s
threatening; it’s almost demonic. It is a
world organized independently of
people’s fundamental religious
convictions,” Rabkin said.
I think that when Rabkin chose the word “demonic” that
he was right on point.
The global elite have already had a tremendous amount of
success in promoting values, systems and laws that are
“anti-Christian” around the globe.
The globalists control the mainstream media, they control
Hollywood, they control our education system and they
control most of our politicians.
They thought that they were almost ready to move into the
final stages of their agenda, but then Donald Trump
happened.
For the moment, the momentum toward a one world
system has been stopped cold.
But that doesn’t mean that the globalists will stop trying.
Just because Trump won the election does not mean that
they are going to roll over and die.
The elite are going to use all of the resources at their
disposal to try to destroy Trump, even if that means
creating a tremendous amount of chaos.
If you study the globalists, you will quickly discover that
one of their favorite tactics is to create order out of chaos.
So in the months ahead I think that it is quite likely that we
may see quite a bit of chaos as the globalists attempt to get
their program back on track.
But if we understand what they are doing, we will be able
to see through their games. So let’s keep shining a light on
these globalists, because they always prefer to operate in
the darkness.
 'Poor Fact-Checking, Flat-Out Fabrication'
Leads To Daily Mail Ban By Wikipedia
© Photo: Pixabay - Europe
17:08 09.02.2017(Updated 17:24 09.02.2017)
One of Britain's biggest selling tabloid newspapers has
been banned as a "reliable source" by editors of online
encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
The Daily Mail in London, edited by Paul Dacre, and its
online publication, MailOnline is "generally unreliable,
and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited,
especially when other more reliable sources exist,"
according to a summary discussion posted by Wikipedia.
"As a result, the Daily Mail should not be
used for determining notability, nor should
it be used as a source in articles," the
decision on the site also read.
David Cameron did nothing good in 6
years. He couldn't even complete the only
good idea he has which was to get Paul
Dacre sacked.
— Krishan (@krishan_dave) January 31,
2017
It's removal as a "reliable source" from Wikipedia is due
to its "poor fact-checking, sensationalism, and flat-out
fabrication."
There you have it, @DailyMailUK,
@DailyMail & @DailyMailAU, Wikipedia
has banned you, citing "sensationalism and
flat-out fabrication”.
— Ed Hunter (@EdwardJWHunter)
February 8, 2017
399
If sensationalism is what you're going for,
you're doing it right Daily Mail.
#sticktothefacts #othersources #KUWTK
pic.twitter.com/6IztmRmE2x
— Amy Lowther (@Aimsa_1985) October
14, 2015
Many social media users, especially on Twitter, are
enjoying the opportunity to either stick the boot in or mock
the tabloid newspaper following the announcement
by Wikipedia. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair's spin
doctor, Alastair Campbell is no exception.
Now that Wikipedia has rightly acted
on Daily Mail being a lying rag
@British_Airways pls stop pushing it
down people's throats? #unbritish
— Alastair Campbell (@campbellclaret)
February 9, 2017
Online paper Huffington Post UK has published examples
that led to the decision to remove the tabloid from the open
source website.
@RogueDailyMail
Hope noone tells him that it's on the
Internet. Wouldn't want him destroying that
😂 pic.twitter.com/rksvWsgR3C
— Craig J Parker (@sparxinleeds)
February 9, 2017
In one instance, the Mail Online published the wrong
verdict in the case of Amanda Knox, declaring her
as guilty, despite the fact that she was found not guilty.
The fake verdict was live on the website for 90 seconds
and carried quotes suggesting Knox "looked stunned"
by the verdict.
Footballer Paul Pogba was forced to issue a statement
on Twitter after the Daily Mail website published a fake
article in which he "describes life at Manchester United."
Pogba had never agreed to such an interview.
 Thanks for Man of the Match guys, look "Essentially it's a community decision and a
forward to keep doing it! @ManUtd #MUFC decision which the English Wikipedia editor
community has taken and actually this was
— Paul Pogba (@paulpogba) November 6,
first discussed as an issue back in 2015,"
2016 Lucy Crompton-Reid, chief executive
of Wikimedia UK said.
Actor George Clooney issued a statement in 2014, after the
"It is the community that's come to a
tabloid suggested "religious tensions" existed between him
consensus decision that the Daily Mail can't
and his wife Amal Clooney's mother.
be used as a reliable source on Wikipedia.
That will affect some 12,000 links,
"The Daily Mail has printed a completely but obviously they won't be changed
fabricated story about my fiancee's mother overnight," she added.
opposing our marriage for religious
reasons, none of the story is factually true,"
The ban means editors of the online encyclopedia will be
Clooney wrote in USA Today.
asked to find alternative sources when the Wikipedia entry
relates to the newspaper or one of its writers.

Wikipedia is fighting fake news with a

policy of verifiability. #FactsMatter
pic.twitter.com/3I0PNghvrW
— Wikipedia (@Wikipedia) January 21,
2017

Turning to Wikipedia as a source for this story, the latest

entry on the online encyclopedia for the Daily Mail says
the tabloid:

"has been accused of racism, and printing

© AP Photo/ Charles Sykes - Amal and George Clooney arrive at The sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories
Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute benefit gala. of science and medical research."

Wikimedia UK, which trains Wikipedia editors, told The

Huffington Post UK that it was a "community decision"
to ban the Mail.
.

400
 Globalists Cornered As President Trump Exposes Their
Lies, Corruption And False Narratives
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 10, 2017
The primary reason why you’re seeing so much seething,
open hatred of all things related to President Donald J.
Trump is because he truly does represent the interests of
the American people, first and foremost.
And frankly, the ruling class globalist elite – those folks
who claim to have your best interests at heart – don’t. If
they do, why are they trying to destroy our economy with
over-regulation and the outsourcing of millions of our jobs
under the false notion of “free trade?”
As reported by Life Site, a newly produced video perfectly
frames the context for which Trump is so reviled by the
globalist Left. “Nothing else can explain the massive US
and international howling and vicious, non-spontaneous,
‘spontaneous’ demonstrations that have been taking place
in many cities and nations,” the website noted.
The video is below:
401
Essentially, President Trump is hated because he wants to
put America – and Americans – first again, after a
generation of U.S. leaders slowly but steadily
handing our sovereignty, our greatness and our future to a
small cadre of Alt-Left globalists.
Juxtaposed with Trump’s tremendous and America-centric
inauguration speech in the video, are statements by U.S.
and world leaders, talking about the need for a “New
World Order” which would not necessarily be led by the
U.S. and which started, following the first Gulf War, with
President George H. W. Bush – Navy fighter pilot during
World War II, oil millionaire at age 40, congressman,
RNC chairman, envoy to China, CIA director, vice
president and our 41st president.
In a post-Gulf War speech televised to the American
people, Bush also talked about establishing a “rule of law”
that all nations would adhere to, administered by “a
credible United Nations” vested with “peacekeeping”
power (a euphemism for military force). (RELATED: Find
out how globalism affects American security at
NationalSecurity.news)
In that speech, Bush laid out the new globalist vision, in
which the United States he fought for at age 18 would be a
partner, and its people little more than a means of
financing their own destruction.
Globalism, by its very nature, is the redistribution of
wealth – nothing more and nothing less. It is the taking of
assets from certain people, certain nations, and giving it to
other people in other lands who, in turn, will spend money
on the goods, products and services owned and controlled
by the globalists.
In his inauguration speech, Trump talked about the damage
globalization has done to America and Americans, fueled
by endless wars, unfair trade deals and constant expansion
of the leviathan state:
For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign
industry at the expense of American
industry, subsidized the armies of other
countries, while allowing for the very sad
 depletion of our military. We’ve defended
other nations’ borders while refusing to
defend our own. And spent trillions and
trillions of dollars overseas while America’s
infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and
decay. We’ve made other countries rich
while the wealth, strength and confidence
of our country has dissipated over the
horizon. One by one, the factories
shuddered and left our shores, with not
even a thought about the millions and
millions of American workers that were left
behind. The wealth of our middle class has
been ripped from their homes and then
redistributed all across the world, but that is
the past, and now we are looking only to
the future.
Trump has a completely different vision for America, and
it’s a vision for all Americans, not just certain economic
groups and certain demographics:
We are assembled here today issuing a
new decree to be heard in every city, in
every foreign capital, and in every hall of
power, from this day forward, a new vision
will govern our land, from this day
forward, it’s going to be only America
first. America first. Every decision on
trade, on taxes, on immigration, on
foreign affairs will be made to benefit
American workers and American
families. We must protect our borders from
the ravages of other countries making our
products, stealing our companies, and
destroying our jobs. [Emphasis added]
The globalists don’t want that; they want a global
government they can control. They don’t want empowered
individuals like our founding fathers did; they want sheep
.
402
they can lead and dominate. They want to take away every
level of self-governance and replace it with top-down,
iron-fisted authoritarian rule where dissent is not permitted
and interdependence among nations is entrenched.
Trump wants to empower ordinary Americans again. It’s
obvious that he has faith in the ingenuity and
entrepreneurial spirit that he himself employed to become
a billionaire. He is a believer in opportunity because he
knows that opportunities drive societies to progress, and
progress drives further ingenuity. (RELATED: Keep up
with the globalist plan to split America at CivilWar.news)
The video ties together several concepts and constructs of
the new world order:
 Population control
 How the issue of “climate change” is being used to
destroy capitalism and implement population control
policies (which a UN official recently admitted was true)
 The so-called “mainstream media” is nothing short of a
propaganda tool for the NWO crowd
 Replace American-style freedoms and constitutional
government with Marxism/Communism (because those
two political ideologies require near-complete reliance
by the masses on government)
 Replace Christianity and other religions with secular
love of the state
The election of Trump was just what America and the
world needed to stop the Alt-Left globalists in their tracks.
But as we have seen with the perpetual protests and
endless challenges to Trump’s lawful authority, the
globalists control many levers of power. And they aren’t
simply going to give up all the progress they have made.
Backing Trump is not simply a political decision anymore.
If you value your freedom and America’s future, you’ll do
it so save yourself and your progeny from a meager
existence in a globalist hell.
 Trump On New Immigration Policy Announcement:
‘You’ll See Something Next Week’
"The Constitution Isn’t Just For Citizens Anymore ..."
By Charles Campbell
February 10, 2017 At 12:48pm

President Donald Trump is making plans to circumvent the

9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling which put an
indefinite suspension on an executive order temporarily
halting immigration from seven terror-linked countries.

During a joint press conference with Japanese Prime

Minister Shinzo Abe, the president said his administration
will “be doing something very rapidly” in the name of
providing security for the country.
“You’ll see something next week,” Trump
said.
Reports coming from the White House indicate the
president is drafting a new executive order. However,
Trump has made it clear he will continue to fight
Thursday’s Appeals Court ruling and is confident in an
eventual victory.
“We will continue to go through the court
process, and I have no doubt that we will
win that particular case,” Trump said.
The 9th Circuit Court ruled unanimously Thursday in its
decision to suspend the executive order.
“We hold that the government has not
shown a likelihood of success on the merits
of its appeal, nor has it shown that failure to
enter a stay would cause irreparable injury,
and we therefore deny its emergency
motion for a stay,” the court said.
Trump responded to the announcement, as expected, via
Twitter.
.
Conservative columnist and lawyer Ben Shapiro argued
the ruling was an act of judicial tyranny by the 9th Circuit
and could possibly be overturned in the Supreme Court. In
an article written Thursday, Shapiro listed the multiple
weak points in the judiciary’s ruling.
“Perhaps the craziest element of the ruling:
The statement that everyone from lawful
permanent residents to aliens with a visa
traveling abroad has due process rights.
The court even says that illegal aliens have
due process rights. The Constitution isn’t
just for citizens anymore – which begs the
question as to why anyone would bother
applying for citizenship,” Shapiro wrote.
Other flaws with the decision according to Shapiro were
the court refusing to strike down portions of the executive
order and looking for Trump’s motive instead of
interpreting the actual text of the law.
One of the major criticisms of the executive order was that
it focused primarily on Muslims. In fact, the media dubbed
it a “Muslim ban.” But, Trump has maintained the move
was about keeping terrorists out of out the country.
“This is not about religion,” he said after
signing the order. “This is about terror and
keeping our country safe. There are over
40 different countries worldwide that are
majority Muslim that are not affected by this
order.”

403
 ‘See You In Court':
Trump’s Travel Ban Put On Hold By
The 9th Circuit Court
Article By Connor Sephton From News.Sky.Com
Date: February 10, 2017

In their judgment, the appeals court said the US Justice

A US appeals court has upheld the suspension of President
Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban.
The unanimous ruling, by a panel of three judges in San
Francisco, will likely pave the way for a showdown in the
Supreme Court.
However, the appeals court justices expressed doubt that
Mr. Trump’s government would be successful if it
launched another appeal.
In off-camera remarks to reporters at the White House, the
President insisted he was confident that his administration
would eventually win the case “very easily”.
Mr. Trump branded the decision as
“political” – and moments after the ruling,
he tweeted: “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE
SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT
STAKE!”
Washington Governor Jay Inslee, who represents one of
the states which took on the government, replied:
Department had not offered “any evidence” of national
security concerns which had justified banning migrants,
visitors and refugees from seven Muslim-majority
countries.
The judges concluded that the government had provided
no evidence that any citizen from Iraq, Iran, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Syria had perpetrated an
attack on American soil.
In addition, no evidence was offered which explained the
urgent need for his executive order to take effect
immediately.
Lawyers from Washington state and Minnesota – which
mounted the legal challenge against Mr. Trump – had
offered compelling evidence that even a temporary
reinstatement of the travel ban would cause harm, and
raised serious allegations of religious discrimination.
The ruling means migrants, visitors and refugees from the
affected countries can continue to travel to the US if they
have valid visas or green cards – something which Mr.
Trump had attempted to stop with his executive order.

“Mr. President, we just saw you in court,

and we beat you.”

The US Justice Department was more measured in its

response than Mr. Trump – and a spokeswoman said it was
“considering its options”.

404
In its arguments, the Justice Department had insisted that
the President had the constitutional power to restrict entry
to the US – and that the courts should not attempt to
second-guess his determination that such measures were
needed to prevent acts of domestic terrorism.
The judges said:
“On the one hand, the public has a
powerful interest in national security and in
the ability of an elected president to enact
policies. And on the other, the public also
has an interest in free flow of travel, in
avoiding separation of families, and in
freedom from discrimination.”
405
Mr. Trump’s executive order had been temporarily
suspended nationwide by Judge James Robart in Seattle
last week.
Following that ruling, the President branded Mr. Robart’s
ruling as “ridiculous” – and described him as a “so-called
judge”.
Sky’s US Correspondent Hannah Thomas-Peter said: “As
Donald Trump’s tweet indicates, he is likely to be utterly
furious about this ruling.
“It will embarrass a man who ran on a
promise to act quickly and decisively on
matters of ‘national security’.
“It will sting even more that he has been
thwarted by his country’s court system –
full of the kind of grey-haired establishment
figures he railed against during his
insurgent campaign.
“Donald Trump is at his most unpredictable
when angry or backed in to a corner – and
now, he is both these things.”
 How The Trump Regime Was
Manufactured By A War Inside The Deep State
Source: Nafeez Ahmed
Published: February 10, 2017
A special report published by INSURGE
INTELLIGENCE, a crowdfunded
investigative journalism project for people
and planet. Support us to keep digging
where others fear to tread.
At first glance, this isn’t obvious. Among his first actions
upon taking office, Trump vetoed the Trans Pacific
Partnership, the controversial free trade agreement which
critics rightly said would lead to US job losses while
giving transnational corporations massive power over
national state policies on health, education and other
issues.
Trump further plans to ditch the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and US,
which would have diluted key state regulations on the
activities of transnational corporates on issues like food
safety, the environment and banking; and to renegotiate
NAFTA, potentially heightening tensions with Canada.
Trump appears to be in conflict with the bulk of the US
intelligence community, and is actively seeking to
restructure the government to minimize checks and
balances, and thus consolidate his executive power.
His chief strategist, Steve Bannon, has completely
restructured the National Security Council under unilateral
presidential authority. While Bannon and his Chief of Staff
Richard ‘Reince’ Priebus now have permanent seats on the
NSC’s Principals’ Committee, the Director of National
Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
are barred from meetings except when requested for their
406
expertise. The Secretary of Energy and US ambassador to
the UN have been expelled entirely.
Trump’s White House has purged almost the entire senior
staff of the State Department, and tested the loyalty of the
Department of Homeland Security with its new ‘Muslim
ban’ order.
So what is going on? One approach to framing the Trump
movement comes from Jordan Greenhall, who sees it as a
conservative (“Red Religion”) Insurgency against the
liberal (“Blue Church”) Globalist establishment (the “Deep
State”). Greenhall suggests, essentially, that Trump is
leading a nationalist coup against corporate neoliberal
globalization using new tactics of “collective intelligence”
by which to outsmart and outspeed his liberal
establishment opponents.
But at best this is an extremely partial picture.
In reality, Trump has ushered in something far more
dangerous:
The Trump regime is not operating
outside the Deep State, but mobilizing
elements within it to dominate and
strengthen it for a new mission.
The Trump regime is not acting to
overturn the establishment, but to
consolidate it against a perceived crisis
of a wider transnational Deep System.
The Trump regime is not a conservative
insurgency against the liberal
establishment, but an act of ideologically
constructing the current crisis as a
conservative-liberal battleground, led by
a particularly radicalized white nationalist
faction of a global predatory elite.
The act is a direct product of a global systemic crisis, but is
a short-sighted and ill-conceived reaction, pre-occupied
with surface symptoms of that crisis. Unfortunately, those
hoping to resist the Trump reaction also fail to understand
the system dynamics of the crisis.
All this can only be understood when we look at the big
picture. That means the following: we must look a little
more closely at the individuals inside Trump’s
administration, the wider social and institutional networks
they represent, and what emerges from their being
interlocked in government; we must contextualize this
against two factors, the escalation of global systemic crisis,
and the Trump regime’s ideological framing(s) of that
crisis (both for themselves, and for public consumption);
we must connect this with the impact on the transnational
Deep System, and how that links up with the US Deep
State; and we must then explore what this all means in
terms of the scope of actions likely to be deployed by the
Trump regime to pursue its discernable goals.
This investigation will allow us to establish a ground state
on which to build a meaningful strategy of response that
accounts for the full systemic complexity of our Trumpian
moment.
So the first step to diagnosing our Trumpian moment is to
see who is leading it. We’ll begin by looking at a cross-
section of some of Trump’s most prominent nominations
and appointments.
If all Trump’s appointees are confirmed, his administration
will be among the most business-heavy, corporate-friendly
government in American history.
Five of the 15 people nominated by Trump as Cabinet
secretaries have no public sector experience, and have
spent their entire careers in the corporate sector.
“That would be more business people with
no public-sector experience than have ever
served in the Cabinet at any one time,”,
concludes Pew Research Center.
Betsy DeVos has been nominated for Education Secretary.
She’s a billionaire married to the Amway conglomerate.
Andrew Puzder has been nominated as Labor Secretary.
He’s a billionaire CEO of fastfood chain owner CKE
Restaurants.
407
Trump’s nominee for Commerce Secretary is Wall Street
veteran Wilbur Ross. He’s a billionaire financier who
invests in buying and selling companies in distressed
industries, and who made his early fortune as a fund
manager at the Rothschild Group.
Steven Mnuchin, Trump’s Treasury Secretary, is a former
partner at the global investment bank Goldman Sachs, a
hedge fund manager and, until his nomination, a board
member of the Fortune 500 financial holding company,
CIT Group. He’s also a member of the Yale University
secret society, Skull and Bones.
Vincent Viola is Trump’s nominee for Army Secretary.
He’s a billionaire, former chairman of the New York
Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), and current chairman of
Virtu Financial, a high-frequency trading firm.
Linda McMahon is Trump’s Small Business
Administrator. She’s a co-founder and former CEO of
WWE, which is now valued at around $1.5 billion, and
married to billionaire WWE promoter Vincent McMahon.
Gary Cohn is Trump’s chief economic advisor and
Director of the White House National Economic Council.
He just left his previous post as president and chief
operating officer at Goldman Sachs for the job.
Anthony Scaramucci has served as a senior advisor to
Trump on the executive committee of the Presidential
Transition Team. Previously he was founding co-managing
partner of global investment firm SkyBridge Capital. Like
Steve Bannon, he also began his career at Goldman Sachs.
Walter ‘Jay’ Clayton is Trump’s nominee for the
Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC), the financial
industry’s top regulatory watchdog. Yet Clayton himself is
a Wall Street lawyer who has worked on deals for major
banks, such as Barclays Capital’s acquisition of Lehman
Brothers’ assets, the sale of Bear Stearns to JP Morgan
Chase, and the US Treasury’s capital investment in
Goldman Sachs. In the same capacity, he has campaigned
to reduce restrictions on foreign public companies, and
sought lax enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices
Act. His wife, Gretchen Butler, works for Goldman Sachs
as a private wealth advisor.
Trump’s crack team of money monsters is clearly not
planning on acting in the interests of American workers —
 they will instead do what they know best: use the
considerable power of the American state to break down as
many regulatory constraints on global banking finance as
possible, with a special view to privilege US banks and
corporations.

Source: Earth Island Journal via Chris van Es www.chrisvanes.com
Trump’s administration has not just been bought by Wall
Street. It’s been bought by the oil, gas and coal industries.
Rex Tillerson is Trump’s Secretary of State, and former
chairman and CEO of giant oil and gas conglomerate
ExxonMobil. As the world’s largest oil major of all,
ExxonMobil is the de facto king of fossil fuel interests.
Tillerson has close business ties with Russian president
Vladimir Putin, and has previously headed up the joint US-
Russian oil company Exxon Neftegas.
Tillerson is a friend of Igor Sechin, who heads up the
military security services faction of the Kremlin known as
‘Siloviki’. ExxonMobil also had intimate ties with Saudi
Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates under
Tillerson. In any case, Trump has richly rewarded
Tillerson for services rendered — 91% of the $1.8 million
donated to federal candidates by ExxonMobil’s PAC under
Tillerson for this election cycle, went to Republicans.
It’s well-known that ExxonMobil has funded climate
denialism to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. What’s
less well-known is that in the 1970s, ExxonMobil’s own
scientific research fully validated the scientific reality of
climate change. Yet company executives made a self-
serving business-decision to suppress these findings, and
fund efforts to discredit climate science.
Rick Perry, the former governor of Texas, is Trump’s
Secretary of Energy. Perry holds board directorships at
Energy Transfer Partners LP and Sunoco Logistics
Partners LP, which jointly developed the Dakota Access
Pipeline project. The CEO of Energy Transfer Partners,
Kelcy Warren, donated $5 million to a super-PAC
supportive of Perry. More generally, his two presidential
campaigns received over $2.6 million from the oil and gas
industry.
Scott Pruitt, former Attorney General in Oklahoma, is the
new head of the Environment Protection Agency. Pruitt
has a track record of launching federal lawsuits to weaken
and overturn EPA regulations not just on carbon
emissions, but on all sorts of basic environmental rules on
air and water pollution. The New York Times reports that
he and other Republican attorney generals have forged an
“unprecedented, secretive alliance” with the oil industry.
408
Congressman Ryan Zinke is Trump’s nominee for
Secretary of the Interior. During Senate confirmation
hearings, he refused to admit the accuracy of the scientific
consensus on human activity being the dominant cause of
climate change. Zinke has supported clean energy
measures in the past, but in May 2016, he sponsored a bill
for a time limit on Obama’s moratorium on federal coal
leasing. He routinely voted against environmental
protection measures, supporting fossil fuel use, seeking to
minimize public and state involvement in managing public
lands, while opposing protections for endangered species.
Zinke’s philosophy is basically ‘drill, baby, drill’. That’s
why he’s taken over $300,000 in campaign donations from
oil and gas companies that want to accelerate drilling
across public lands.
Mike Catanzaro is Trump’s nominee for Special Assistant
for Energy and the Environment. He is also a climate-
denying lobbyist for the oil and gas industry, working for
Koch Industries, America’s Natural Gas Alliance
(ANGA), Halliburton, Noble Energy, Hess Corporation,
and many others. Early on in his career, he was Deputy
Policy Director of the 2004 Bush-Cheney presidential
campaign.
The fossil fuel freaks want to burn all the oil, gas and coal
they can, at any cost — and they are willing to dismantle
whatever environmental protections stand in their way.
It would be mistaken to assume that Trump’s conflicts
with the US intelligence community mean he is necessarily
at odds with the military-industrial complex. On the
contrary, his defense appointees and advisors are
embedded across the military-industrial complex. Trump’s
education secretary, DeVos, is the sister of Erik Prince, the
notorious founder of disgraced private security firm
Blackwater, now known as Academi, which was outed for
slaughtering 17 Iraqi civilians.
A source in Trump’s transition team confirms that Erik
Prince has advised Trump’s team on intelligence and
security issues. Prince now runs another security firm,
Frontier Services Group. He supports Trump’s proposal
for the US military to grab Iraq’s oil and recommends the
escalated deployment of private defense contractors across
the Middle East and North Africa, such as in Libya, to
crackdown on refugees.
General ‘Mad Dog’ James Mattis is Trump’s Secretary of
Defense. He was also, until his resignation due to his
political appointment, on the board of directors of General
Dynamics, the fifth largest private defense contractor in
the world. Mattis is also on the board of Theranos, a
biotechnology company known for its questionable
automated fingerstick blood test technology.
Lieutenant-General Mike Flynn is Trump’s National
Security Advisor. He is a former head of the Pentagon’s
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under Obama, and a
longstanding military intelligence and special operations
insider. Previously, he was director of intelligence for the
Joint Special Operations Command; director of
intelligence for the US Central Command; commander of
the Joint Functional Component Command for
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance; chair of the
Military Intelligence Board; and Assistant Director of
National Intelligence. Flynn also runs Flynn Intel Group, a
private intelligence consulting firm.
Flynn has just co-authored a book with Michael Ledeen,
The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War
Against Radical Islam and its Allies. Ledeen is a leading
neoconservative defense consultant and former Reagan
administration appointee who was involved in the Iran–
Contra affair as a consultant of then US National Security
Advisor, Robert McFarlane. Currently a Freedom Scholar
at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD),
he was a staunch advocate of the 2003 invasion of Iraq (he
was directly involved with the Yellowcake forgeries
attempting to fabricate a weapons of mass destruction
threat to justify the war) and has campaigned for military
interventions in Syria, Iran and beyond. Ledeen’s
aggressive foreign policy vision was deeply influential in
the formation of the Bush administration’s foreign policy
strategy.
It’s worth noting how low Ledeen stoops with his political
philosophy. In his 2000 book, Tocqueville on American
Character, Ledeen argues that in some situations, “[i]n
order to achieve the most noble accomplishments, the
leader may have to ‘enter into evil.’” (p. 90) He even
argues that this is sanctioned by the Christian God: “Since
it is the highest good, the defense of the country is one of
those extreme situations in which a leader is justified in
committing evil.” (p. 117)
That sort of thinking has led him to endorse the
‘cauldronization’ of the Middle East. In 2002, he wrote in
support of invading Iraq that: “One can only hope that we
409
turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please. If ever
there were a region that richly deserved being
cauldronized, it is the Middle East today.”
General John F. Kelly is Trump’s Secretary of Homeland
Security. He is a retired United States Marine Corps
general who previously served under Obama as
commander of the US Southern Command, responsible for
American military operations in Central America, South
America and the Caribbean. Before that Kelly was the
commanding general of the Multi-National Force-West in
Iraq, and the commander of Marine Forces Reserve and
Marine Forces North. Kelly is also a vice chairman at the
Spectrum Group, a defense contractor lobbying firm; and
on the board of directors of two other private Pentagon
contractors, Michael Baker International and Sallyport
Global.
James Woolsey, the former CIA director and
neoconservative stalwart — a former Vice President at
NSA-contractor Booz Allen Hamilton and among Michael
Ledeen’s bosses at the Foundation for Defense of
Democracies — was an early Trump supporter, and a senior
advisor to Trump on his transition team. He dropped out
over reservations with Trump’s plans to restructure the
intelligence community.
Lieutenant General Joseph Keith Kellogg is Chief of Staff
and Executive Secretary of Trump’s White House National
Security Council. the US military’s top information
technology official during the Bush administration’s
invasion of Iraq in 2003.
He went on to become chief operating officer for the
Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, the
mechanism for the US occupation of Iraq, from November
2003 to March 2004 — the period widely recognized as
being particularly corrupt and inept.
In between, Kellogg had joined the board of directors of
US government IT contractor, GTSI Corp, where he
returned as an independent director after his Iraq stint from
2004 until 2013 — when the firm changed its name to
‘UNICOM Government Inc.’ in an attempt to distance
itself from earlier revelations of misconduct.
Kellogg later joined the Advisory Board of US defense
contractor Raytheon’s Trusted Computer Solutions Inc.,
and the Strategic Advisory Board of RedXDefence, a US
military contractor part-owned by Regina Dugan, former
director of the Pentagon’s Defense and Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
In 2012, Wired magazine outed RedXDefense for creating
completely rubbish bomb detection technology under a
multi-million dollar DARPA contract during Dugan’s
tenure. Despite its flaws, the tech was purchased widely by
the US military, and numerous allied militaries around the
world.
Mike Pompeo is the icing on the cake. As Trump’s CIA
director, this Republican Congressman has no obvious
experience relevant to running a national intelligence
agency, except perhaps for one thing: as Jane Mayer writes
in her book Dark Money: The Hidden History of the
Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right
(Doubleday 2015), Pompeo is
“so closely entwined with the climate-
change denying Koch brothers that he was
known as the ‘congressman from Koch.’”
The Koch brothers, who made their fortune investing in
fossil fuels, now have a direct line to America’s premiere
national intelligence agency. Now that’s what you call a
coup.
Virulent white nationalism is another fundamental defining feature
of the Trump regime.
Steve Bannon was founding executive chair of Breitbart
News, “the platform of the alt-right” according to Bannon
himself. Breitbart is widely known for its publication of
“racist, sexist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic material.”
Bannon himself is also a prolific film producer, and has
made or contributed to a range of xenophobic films.
Before his rise to media mogul status, though, Bannon
spent a brief time as acting director of the Biosphere 2
experiment, an effort to create a self-sufficient ‘closed
system’ environment survivable by a small group of
people from 1993 to 1995. At the time, Bannon appeared
to share and strongly support the concerns of the Biosphere
410
2 scientists about the danger of climate change driven by,
in his own words, “the effect of greenhouse gases on
humans, plants and animals.” He later underwent an
Exxon-like about-turn, illustrated by Breitbart’s rampant
opposition to the idea that the burning of fossil fuels by
human civilization is intensifying climate change.
In 2007, Bannon produced a proposal for a new
documentary, ‘Destroying The Great Satan: The Rise
Of Islamic Facism [Sic] In America’, which accused
various media outlets, “Universities and the Left”, the
“American Jewish Community”, the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU), the CIA, the FBI, the State
Department, and the White House as being “enablers” of a
covert mission to establish an “Islamic Republic in the
United States.”
Bannon consulted on the proposal with Steven Emerson of
the Investigative Project on Terrorism. In 2015, Emerson
was described as a “complete idiot” by then Prime
Minister David Cameron for claiming falsely on Fox News
that Britain is full of Muslim “no go zones” (like the entire
city of Birmingham), and that London is run amok by
Muslim religious police who beat and wound people who
refuse to dress according to a Muslim dress code.
Bannon’s list of interviewees for the proposed film is like
a Who’s Who of far-right bigotry. Two of the most well
known names included Walid Phares, who advised Trump
on his national security team during the presidential
campaign, and Robert Spencer. Both are connected to the
Washington DC-based Center for Security Policy (CSP), a
far-right think tank run by former Reagan defense official
Frank Gaffney, where they appear regularly as guests on
CSP’s ‘Secure Freedom’ radio podcast run by Gaffney.
Phares is also a senior fellow at the Foundation for the
Defense of Democracy.
Frank Gaffney’s CSP commissioned the original flawed
opinion poll that was cited by Trump to justify his
‘Muslim ban’ when he first announced it in late 2015. So
it’s clearly no coincidence that Kellyanne Conway, the
pollster who carried out the flawed poll, is now Counselor
to the President.
Gaffney thus has a significant degree of ideological
influence on the Trump regime. He has appeared at least
34 times on Bannon’s Breitbart radio program. His work
has also been cited in speeches by Michael Flynn, Trump’s
national security advisor.
Alarmingly, Gaffney has disturbing connections to full-
blown neo-Nazi groups across Europe, such as the Danish
People’s Party (DPP) and the Vlaams Belang (VB) in
Belgium.
But he simultaneously has close ties to the US military-
industrial complex. In 2013, CSP tax records showed that
the CSP had received funding from six of America’s
biggest aerospace and defense contractors, namely Boeing
($25,000); General Dynamics ($15,000); Lockheed Martin
($15,000); Northrup Grumman ($5,000); Raytheon
($20,000); and General Electric ($5,000). The CSP has a
particularly close relationship with Boeing, the second
largest defense contractor in the world, which still provides
Gaffney’s group with “general support.”
Michael Reilly, who has been Director of Federal Budget
and Program Analysis at Boeing since 2010, was
previously Gaffney’s Vice President for Operations at the
CSP.
These incestuous ties with the US private defense sector
comprise one prime reason that fully 22 officers or
advisors of Gaffney’s CSP ended up having appointments
in the George W. Bush administration.
Senator Jeff Sessions is Trump’s Attorney General.
Gaffney’s CSP awarded Sessions the annual ‘Keeper of
the Flame’ award in 2015. Sessions has previously
expressed sympathies for the Ku Klux Klan. He has
closely associated with far-right anti-immigrant
organizations founded by John Tanton, a driving force in
America’s white nationalist movements. In 1993, Tanton
declared:
“… for European-American society and
culture to persist requires a European-
American majority, and a clear one at that.”
Yet Trump’s new Attorney General is known for
frequently quoting from Tanton’s groups, showing up at
their press conferences, and has even received recognition
and campaign contributions from them.
The John Tanton connection opens up a can of worms.
Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s Counsellor, is also connected
to Tanton. Her polling firm was previously contracted by
Tanton’s anti-immigration platform Federation for
American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
Numerous other officials involved in the Trump team —
 Lou Barletta, Kris Kobach and Julie Kirchner — have
direct organizational ties to Tanton’s FAIR.
411
But this connects senior Trump officials to a grim history
of neo-Nazi agitation in the US. Tanton received large
sums of early money for FAIR from the Pioneer Fund, a
pro-Nazi grant-giving organization which funded
eugenics — the discredited ‘science’ of ‘racial hygiene’.
Tanton’s various anti-immigrant platforms received money
from the Pioneer Fund as late as 2002. According to a
study in the Albany Law Review, the Pioneer Fund had
direct ties to Nazi scientists, and its founding directors
were Nazi sympathizers. One of them had even travelled to
Germany in 1935 to attend a Nazi population conference.
Stephen Miller is a senior policy advisor to Trump. He
previously worked as communications director for Jeff
Sessions in his senator’s office, and crafted the strategy to
defeat a bipartisan immigration reform bill in 2013. During
his university days, he worked closely with the neo-Nazi
leader Richard Spencer, who coined the term “alternative
Right” as a new way of capturing a movement about white
racial identity.
Miller denies having worked closely with Spencer when
they were at university together as members of the Duke
Conservative Union. According to Spencer, Miller helped
him with fundraising and promotion for an on-campus
debate on immigration policy in 2007. The event featured
Peter Brimelow, who runs the white nationalist website
Vdare.com, which regularly publishes articles by neo-
Nazis. Miller’s relationship with Spencer at this time has
been confirmed by email correspondence between Spencer
and Brimelow.
It’s perhaps worth noting that the inspiration for Tanton’s
neo-Nazi sympathies were, ostensibly, environmental
concerns. In a recent article he admits,
“my initial interest in curtailing immigration
was motivated by a longstanding concern
for the environment.”
From 1971 to 1975, Tanton was chair of the National
Population Committee of one of America’s oldest
environmental organizations, the Sierra Club. His theory
was that immigration drives unsustainable population
growth, which then drains resources and harms the
environment. The environmental crisis, from Tanton’s
point of view, is a population problem — specifically, a
problem of too many people. Part of dealing with that
means cracking down on immigration — this, ironically, in
a nation founded on immigration.
This insidious proto-Nazi ideology now appears to have an
operating influence on the White House through Tanton’s
ideological surrogates, many of whom are connected to
Gaffney and his acolytes in the Trump regime.

The unifying ideology that lends coherence to these
intersecting networks of influence comes from a variety of
people, but the following stand out in particular.
Michael Anton is a little-known but powerful figure in the
Trump administration, now a senior director of strategic
communications in the White House National Security
Council. He launched his career as a speechwriter and
press secretary for New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, before
joining Bush’s White House in 2001 as a communications
aide for the National Security Council. He went on to
become a speechwriter for media mogul Rupert Murdoch
at News Corp, then moved into the financial sector, firstly
as director of communications for Citigroup, then as a
managing director at the BlackRock investment firm.
Anton has played a major role in attempting to cajole and
convince conservatives, through various anonymous
writings in conservative publications and behind-the-
scenes networking, of the necessity of voting Trump to
head off the crisis of conservative decline amidst the
apocalyptic failures of liberalism.
Rupert Murdoch has a direct line to the Trump White
House through Michael Anton, but it’s one the News Corp
owner has gone to pains to build personally. Murdoch and
his wife Jerry Hall were hosted for dinner by Trump at his
golf course in Scotland in June 2016. Later Murdoch was
seen visiting Trump Tower in November 2016. Murdoch is
set to have significant influence on Trump, who reportedly
asked the Fox News owner to recommend his top preferred
candidates to chair the Federal Communications
Commission.
412
The Murdoch connection has other alarming ramifications.
Since 2010, Murdoch has been an equity-holding board
member of the American energy firm, Genie Oil & Gas.
He had teamed up with Lord Jacob Rothschild, chairman
of Rothschild Investment Trust (RIT) Capital Partners, to
buy a 5.5% stake in the corporation then worth $11
million.
Murdoch and Rothschild also serve on Genie’s strategic
advisory board. Joining them on the board are Larry
Summers, former Director of President Obama’s National
Economic Council; former Trump senior advisor James
Woolsey; Dick Cheney, former Vice-President under
George W. Bush; and Bill Richardson, former Secretary of
Energy under Clinton and Governor of New Mexico.
Genie Oil & Gas has two main subsidiaries. One of them,
Afek Oil & Gas, operates in Israel and is currently drilling
in the Golan Heights, which under international law is
recognized as Syrian territory. The Golan was captured by
Israel from Syria in 1967, and unilaterally annexed in 1981
with the introduction of Israeli law to the territory. The
other Genie subsidiary, American Shale Oil, is a joint
project with the French major Total SA, and operates in
Colorado’s Green River Formation.
Screenshot of Murdoch part-owned Genie subsidiary
On its website, the company offers an extraordinary
declaration regarding its rationale for focusing on
unconventional oil and gas resources:
“The peaking of world oil production
presents the US and the world with an
enormous challenge. Aggressive action
must be taken to avoid unprecedented
economic, social and political costs.”
This may well reveal much about the crisis-perceptions of
those who influence the Trump regime.
Trump’s administration has been further augmented by a
man with especially extensive ties to the US Deep State:
Henry Kissinger.
Since December 2016, Kissinger, the notorious former
Secretary of State convincingly accused of complicity in
war crimes by the late Christopher Hitchens — who has
played direct advisory roles in both the preceding Bush
and Obama administrations — has become Trump’s
unofficial foreign policy guru. Kissinger was a secret
national security consultant to President Bush, and under
Obama was directly involved in the US National Security
Council’s chain-of-command.
He now appears to be intimately involved in the evolution
of Trump’s foreign policies toward China and Russia. His
firm, Kissinger Associates, has for some years played a
central role in easing the passage of numerous US
corporations into lucrative Chinese investments.
National Security Council from 1970 to 1976. In that
capacity, she played a lead role in working on Kissinger’s
notorious and originally classified 1974 National Security
Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM200). The document
advocated that population growth in poorer countries was
the principal threat to US overseas security and other
interests, especially by endangering US access to “mineral
supplies”.

Trump’s peculiar brand of haphazard, unscripted and

chaotic political announcements may well have endeared
him to Kissinger, who has argued that “unpredictability” is
a hallmark of the greatest statesmen. Such leaders act
beyond the sort of “pre-vision of catastrophes” offered by
established experts recommending caution, instead
indulging in “perpetual creation, on a constant redefinition
of goals.” The greatest statesmen are able to both It appears that there are common themes among the
“maintain the perfection of order” and different groupings that comprise the Trump regime.
Among them are experiences and recognition of crisis:
“to have the strength to contemplate Rex Tillerson and Steve Bannon, for instance, come from
chaos”, where they can “find material for backgrounds acknowledging the reality of the planetary
fresh creation.” ecological crisis.

Kissinger’s critical role in developing Trump’s eastward
facing strategy was revealed by the German tabloid, Der
Bild, which obtained a document from the Trump
transition team. The document confirmed Kissinger’s role
as the key mastermind brought in to craft a way to rebuild
relationships with Russia. Kissinger’s plan would include
lifting US economic sanctions — paving the way for a
potentially lucrative partnership between American and
Russian oil and gas companies — and recognizing Russia’s
ownership of the Crimea.
Kissinger’s advice on China policy, however, is not yet
fully known. Writing in the South China Morning Post,
Pepe Escobar argues that Kissinger’s
record suggests that Trump will deploy “a
mix of ‘balance of power’ and ‘divide and
rule’. It will consist of seducing Russia
away from its strategic partner China;
keeping China constantly on a sort of red
alert; and targeting Islamic State while
continuing to harass Iran.”
Kissinger’s ‘unofficial’ advisory role in the Trump regime
is solidified through the direct influence of one of his
longtime acolytes.
K.T. McFarland, who is to work under Michael Flynn as
Trump’s Deputy National Security Adviser, was an aide to
Henry Kissinger during the Nixon administration on the
413
Energy interests linked to Murdoch believe in an imminent
social, economic and political crisis due to peak oil.
Most Trump teamsters see their task as saving the fossil
fuel industries from crises external to them, and now all
ostensibly tend to deny the gravity of the industry’s
environmental impacts.
All are worried about the profits of their friends in Wall
Street.
A large number of Trump team associates have ties to John
Tanton, whose proto-Nazi views are rooted in an eugenics-
inspired belief that the environmental crisis is due to too
many non-white people.
And now Trump’s national security team draws on the
parallel views of the old Nixon era Kissinger team
concerning the threat of overpopulated poor countries
undermining US access to the world’s food, energy and
raw materials resources — for which the solution could be
to ‘cauldronize’ countries of strategic interest.
These crisis-perceptions, however, are not grounded in
systemic insight: but are refracted through the narrow
lenses of self-serving power. The crises are relevant only
insofar that they represent a threat to their interests. But
most importantly, their ensuing beliefs about how to
respond to these crises end up being retracted through the
ideological framework of the conservative-liberal polarity.
Perhaps the most powerful takeaway from this
examination of who the Trump administration actually is,
is that the Trump regime is not external to the Deep
State. On the contrary, the people who hold senior posts in
his administration, both formal and otherwise, are key
nodes that represent whole layers of social and institutional
networks within and across the wider US Deep State.
If this is not immediately obvious, it’s because there is
much misunderstanding of what the Deep State actually is.
The Deep State is not simply ‘the intelligence community’.
When a more accurate understanding of the American
Deep State and its symbiotic embeddedness in a
transnational Deep System is adopted, the role of the
Trump faction can be properly discerned.
In his book, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK
(University of California Press, 1996), Professor Peter
Dale Scott coined the term deep politics to designate the
study of criminal and extra-legal practices linked to the
state. He defined a deep political system or process as one
in which institutional and non-institutional bodies, criminal
syndicates, politicians, judges, media, corporations and
leading government employees, resort to “decision-making
and enforcement procedures outside as well as inside those
sanctioned by law and society. What makes these
supplementary procedures ‘deep’ is the fact that they are
covert or suppressed, outside public awareness as well as
outside sanctioned political processes.”
Deep political analysis is therefore concerned with
revealing the tendency of the state to enter into activity
outside of the state’s own rule of law. From the viewpoint
of conventional political science, law enforcement and the
criminal underworld are opposed to each other, the former
struggling to gain control of the latter. But as Scott
observes:
“A deep political analysis notes that in
practice these efforts at control lead to the
use of criminal informants; and this
practice, continued over a long period of
time, turns informants into double agents
with status within the police as well as the
mob. The protection of informants and their
414
crimes encourages favours, payoffs, and
eventually systemic corruption. The
phenomenon of ‘organized crime’ arises:
entire criminal structures that come to be
tolerated by the police because of their
usefulness in informing on lesser
criminals.”
This can lead to a form of state-crime symbiosis, blurring
the defining parameters of which side controls the other.
From the outside, this appears as the emergence of an
invisible “deep” dimension to state activities tying it to
organized crime, when in reality what is happening is that
the state is inherently porous: its “deep” invisible side
connects it to all manner of private, extra-legal actors who
often seek to operate outside or in breach of the law — or to
influence or bend the law to serve their interests.
In his more recent opus, The American Deep State, (p.
14) Scott also acknowledges in this vein that the deep state
“is not a structure but a system, as difficult to define, but
also as real and powerful, as a weather system.”
As I’ve shown in my paper published in the anthology,
The Dual State (Routledge, 2016), one of the least
understood features of deep politics, then, is that the “deep
state” must inherently be inter-networked with a vast array
of non-state and often transnational influencers across
corporations, financial institutions, banks, and criminal
enterprises.
America’s historic role as the principal shaper of global
capitalism means that the globalization of capitalism
enabled the emergence and expansion of a US-dominated
transnational Deep System — within this global Deep
System, a US-dominated transnational financial elite has
become inherently entangled with criminal networks.
The expansion of global capitalism since 1945 was not an
automated process. On the contrary, it was a deeply violent
process led principally by the United States, Britain and
Western Europe. Throughout, the CIA and Wall Street
acted largely hand-in-hand. Globalization was tied directly
to military interventions in over 70 developing nations
designed to create the political conditions conducive to
markets that would be ‘open’ to western capital
penetration, and thus domination of local resources and
labour. The logic of ‘deep politics’ required that much of
this criminal political violence in foreign theatres be
suppressed from public consciousness, or otherwise
justified in different ways.
This was privately acknowledged by US State Department
planners working in partnership at the time with the
Council on Foreign Relations:
“If war aims are stated, which seem to be
concerned solely with Anglo-American
 imperialism, they will offer little to people in
the rest of the world… Such aims would
also strengthen the most reactionary
elements in the United States and the
British Empire. The interests of other
peoples should be stressed, not only those
of Europe, but also of Asia, Africa and Latin
America. This would have a better
propaganda effect.”
The number of people that died in the course of this
forcible integration of former colonies across Asia, Africa,
South America and the Middle East into the orbit of an
emerging US-UK dominated global economy, is
astonishing.
In his book, Unpeople (2004), British historian Mark
Curtis offers a detailed breakdown of the death toll at
approximately 10 million — a conservative under-estimate,
he qualifies. American economist Dr. JW Smith, in his
Economic Democracy (2005), argues that globalization
was:
“… responsible for violently killing 12 to 15
million people since WW II and causing the
death of hundreds of millions more as their
economies were destroyed or those
countries were denied the right to
restructure to care for their people… that is
the record of the Western imperial centers
of capital from 1945 to 1990.”
criminal enterprises, drug trading, smuggling, legal
businesses, and so on”, most of which is recycled into
Western economies through money laundering via
mainstream financial institutions:
“It is a vital element of the cash flow of
these economies.”
But the problem goes further. As the primary medium of
exchange for this criminal economy is the US dollar, the
latter’s role as the world reserve currency has cemented a
structural situation in which the economic power of the US
Treasury has become conditional on the economic
immunity of transnational criminal networks, who
systematically use US dollars for criminal transactions:
The greater the stock of dollars held abroad, the greater the
source of revenue for the US Treasury.
These examples illustrate how the US Deep State operates
as the chief regulator of a global Deep System, in which
seemingly legitimate international financial flows have
become increasingly enmeshed with transnational
organized crime, powerful corporate interests who control
the world’s fossil fuel and raw materials resources, and the
privatization of the military-industrial complex.

On the back of this deep, transnational political violence —

 which remains obscured in mainstream media and history
education — the US and UK erected a global financial
architecture to serve the interests of their most powerful
corporate and banking institutions, which hold
overwhelming sway over the political class.

State power was deployed to integrate the resources, raw

materials, fossil fuel energy reserves, and cheap labour
from these vast areas of the world into a global economy
dominated by transnational elite interests based largely in
the US, UK and Western Europe.

This, too, opened the way for new forms of criminalization

of state power. This can be illustrated with a powerful
example from terrorism finance expert Loretta Napoleoni,
who chaired the Club de Madrid’s terrorism financing
group.
She reports that financial deregulation pursued by
successive US governments paved the way for different
armed and terror groups to link up with each other and
with organized crime, generating an overall criminal
economy valued at about $1.5 trillion. This criminal
economy consists of “illegal capital flights, profits from
415
Trump fits into this system snugly. Among his draft
executive orders is one that would open the door for US
corporations to engage in secretive corrupt and criminal
practices to buy conflict minerals from the Congo — which
are widely used in electronic products like smartphones
and laptops.
From this broader perspective, it’s clear that far from
representing a force opposed to the Deep State, the Trump
regime represents an interlocking network of powerful
players across sectors which heavily intersect with the
Deep State: finance, energy, military intelligence, private
defense, white nationalist ‘alt-right’ media, and Deep State
policy intellectuals.
According to Scott, this reflects a deepening “old division
within Big Money — roughly speaking, between those
Trilateral Commission progressives, many flourishing
from the new technologies of the global Internet, who wish
the state to do more than at present about problems like
wealth disparity, racial injustice and global warming, and
those Heritage Foundation conservatives, many from
finance and oil, who want it to do even less.”
So rather than being a nationalist ‘insurgency’ against the
corporate globalist ‘Deep State’, the Trump regime
represents a white nationalist coup by a disgruntled cross-
Slide from lecture at Global Sustainability Institute, Anglia Ruskin University (Ahmed)
The Trump faction is correct that there is a crisis in US
power, but they fail to grasp the true nature of the crisis in
its global systemic context.
Each grouping within the Trump faction, and the elite
social and institutional networks they represent, has its
own narrow understanding of the crisis, framed from
within the ideological parameters of its own special
interests and class position.
Each grouping suffers serious epistemological limitations
which mean they are not only incapable of grasping the
systemic nature of the crisis and its impacts, but they hold
self-serving views about the crisis which tend to project
their insecurities onto all sorts of Others.
For instance, the ongoing failure to lift the US economy
into a meaningful recovery is framed by the Trump faction
as due to not putting ‘America first’ in trade relations.
Trump’s plan is to boost infrastructure investment to create
416
section within the Deep State itself. Rather than coming
into conflict with the Deep State, we are seeing a powerful
military-corporate nexus within the American Deep State
come to the fore. Trump, in this context, is a tool to re-
organize and restructure the Deep State in reaction to what
this faction believe to be an escalating crisis in the global
Deep System.
In short, the Deep State faction backing Trump is
embarking on what it believes is a unique and special
mission: to save the Deep State from a decline caused by
the failures of successive American administrations.
However, what they are actually doing is accelerating the
decline of the American Deep State and the disruption of
the global Deep System.
jobs at home, and to adopt more protectionist trade policies
to protect American industries and manufacturing.
The immediate reality here is that Trump’s money
monsters are keenly aware that conventional neoliberal
American economic and financial policies are no longer
working: Under Obama, for instance, the median
household income saw its first significant increase since
the 2007–8 recession in 2015, rising by 5.2%. In real
terms, though, little has changed. Median household
income is at $56,516 a year, which when adjusted for
inflation, is 2.4% less than what it was at the turn of the
millennium.
So while Obama managed to create over a million new
jobs, purchasing power for the working and middle classes
hasn’t increased — it’s actually decreased. Meanwhile,
although the poverty rate dropped by 1.2% in 2015, the
overall trend since the 2007 crash has seen the number of
poor Americans increase from 38 million to 43.1 million
people.
But this problem goes beyond Obama — it’s systemic.
Over the last century, the net value of the energy we are
able to extract from our fossil fuel resource base has
inexorably declined. The scientific concept used to
measure this value is Energy Return on Investment
(EROI), a calculation that compares the quantity of energy
one extracts from a resource, to the quantity of energy used
to enable the extraction.
There was a time in the US, around the 1930s, when the
EROI of oil was a monumental 100. This has steadily
decreased, with some fluctuation. By 1970, oil’s EROI had
dropped to 30. Over the last three decades alone, the EROI
of US oil has continued to plummet by more than half,
reaching around 10 or 11.
According to environmental scientist professor Charles
Hall of the State University of New York, who created the
EROI measure, global net energy decline is the most
fundamental cause of global economic malaise. Because
we need energy to produce and consume, we need more
energy to increase production and consumption, driving
economic growth. But if we’re getting less energy over
time, then we simply cannot increase economic growth.
And this is why there has been an unmistakeable
correlation between long-term global net energy decline,
and a long-term decline in the rate of global economic
growth. There is also an unmistakeable correlation
between that long-term decline, the rise in global
inequality, and the increase in global poverty.
The self-styled liberal faction of the Deep State has
convinced itself that capitalist growth helped halve global
poverty since the 1990s, but there’s reason to question that.
That success rate is calculated from the World Bank
poverty measure of $1.25 a day, a level of very extreme
poverty. But this poverty measure is too low.
While the numbers of people living in extreme poverty has
indeed halved, many of those people are still poor,
deprived of their basic needs. A more accurate measure of
poverty shows that the number of poor worldwide has
overall increased.
417
As the London-based development charity ActionAid
showed in a 2013 report, a more realistic poverty measure
lies between $5 and $10 a day. World Bank data shows
that since 1990, the number of people living under $10 a
day has increased by 25 percent, and the number of people
living under $5 a day has increased by 10 percent. Today,
4.3 billion people — nearly two-thirds of the global
population — live on less than $5 a day.
So really, poverty has worsened in the Age of Progress.
And now the unsustainability of this equation is coming
home to roost even in the centres of global growth, where
wealth is most concentrated.
As of mid-2016, the GDP of Europe has been stagnant for
over a decade, and the US has reached a GDP growth rate
of 1.1 percent, nearly the same as its population. This
means that the US has actually experienced no average
increase in “per capita wealth”, according to SUNY’s
Charles Hall.
To maintain this semblance of economic growth, we are
using ingenious debt mechanisms to finance new economic
activity. The expansion of global debt is now higher than
2007 pre-crash levels. We are escalating the risk of another
financial crisis in coming years, because the tepid growth
we’ve managed to squeeze out of the economy so far is
based on borrowing from an energetically and
environmentally unsustainable future.
And that growth-by-debt mechanism is also occurring
within the oil industry, which has amassed two trillion
dollars worth of debt that, in the context of the chronic oil
price slump, means the industry is not profitable enough to
generate the funds to ever repay its debt.
Both pro- and anti-Trump factions of the Deep State are in
denial of the fact that this escalating crisis is due,
fundamentally, to the global net energy decline of the
world’s fossil fuel resource base.
In a time of fundamental systemic crisis, the existing
bedrock of norms and values a group normally holds onto
maybe shaken to the core. This can lead a group to attempt
to reconstruct a new set of norms and values — but if the
group doesn’t understand the systemic crisis, the new
construct, if it diagnoses the crisis incorrectly, can end up
blaming the wrong issues, leading to Otherization.
 Donald Trump Has Signed More Executive
Actions In Two Weeks Than Any Other President
The Republican Has Signed Eight Orders And 12 Memoranda,
Rolling Back Progress On Minority Rights, Climate Change
And Financial Regulation
Rachael Revesz New York @Rachaelrevesz
February 10, 2017
If Mr. Trump continues at his present pace, he will sign
1,040 actions this year, which would be almost four times
as many as Mr. Obama signed throughout his entire time in
office.

Both orders and memoranda take immediate effect, the

only difference is that a memorandum should be published
in the Federal Register to have "general applicability and
legal effect". Neither need approval by Congress.

The President's 'power grabs' have outstripped all other Presidents

since Roosevelt Ron Sachs / Pool / Getty Images

Donald Trump has issued more executive orders and

presidential memoranda in his first two weeks than former
President Barack Obama - or any President since Franklin
Roosevelt.

The Republican has signed eight orders and 12 memoranda

so far, which signify one of the highest uses of power that
the President has. Mr. Obama signed one less - 19 - over
the same period. Mr. Trump's number was far higher than
George W Bush (4), or Bill Clinton (10) in the first two
weeks of office.
With each sweep of his pen and photo opportunity, Mr
Trump has moved to dismantle laws that Mr Obama
instated over his eight years in office.

Mr. Trump tweeted in July 2012 that Mr. Obama was Mr. Trump has worried critics that he is rolling back rights
flexing his Presidential muscle too much and too early on for women, LGBT members, people of colour and is
in his term. dismissing climate change.

"Why is Barack Obama constantly issuing
executive orders that are major power
grabs of authority?" he asked.
Ronald Reagan, who Mr. Trump has often modelled
himself on, did not sign any in the first two weeks in
office.
The Republican’s re-instating of the Mexico City Policy,
banning aid to foreign organisations that even talk about
abortion, his orders to build the Dakota Access and the
Keystone XL Pipelines, as well as his request to build the
wall along the border, are just three of the 20 orders. He
has also ordered a review of all the Obama-era regulations
on the financial and investment industry which were put in
place after the 2008 credit crisis.

418
The latest three orders, signed Thursday, outline the
mandate of the newly sworn-in Attorney General Jeff
Sessions, the longtime senator from Alabama who was
once deemed too racist to serve as a federal judge. They
include enforcing existing laws and creating new ones to
crack down on drug cartels, illegal immigration and violent
crime, as well as invest more power in the police.
His cabinet has been described as the wealthiest - a
collective worth of $81. billion - and the least educated in
modern American history. A total of 17 cabinet picks
alone have more wealth than a third of American
households. Mr. Trump’s campaign pledge to "drain the
swamp" of Washington DC compared to Mr Obama’s
cabinet, which was around $7.7 billion less rich than that
of successor’s.

One of the most controversial orders has currently been

blocked by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San
Francisco, and it may go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Signed 27 January, the order banned nearly all travellers
from seven Muslim-majority countries in the name of
fighting terrorism, yet nobody from these countries has
killed a single American in a terrorist attack on US soil
since 2001, according to a Cato Institute report. Mr. Trump It is also the least ethnically diverse since Ronald Reagan.
has sent out a series of angry tweets, including one all in
capital letters. The cabinet is 88 per cent white and 88 per cent male, and
the first cabinet since George H W Bush in 1989 to not
"SEE YOU IN COURT!" include any Hispanic members.

419
 McCarran-Walter Act Trump Stands
Solidly On Law To Ban Terrorists By Frosty Wooldridge
2-10-2017
In 1952, Congress passed the McCarran-Walter Act that
gives a sitting President the authority to restrict
immigration into the United States and removal of anyone
determined to be engaged in subversive activities. Carter
used it and Obama used it.
With the terror attacks within our country in the past year,
Trump needs to use it and expand it to Saudi Arabia,
Pakistan, Ethiopia and more. Those countries prove
hotbeds for Muslim terrorists training for their jihad
against America. Immigration via the refugee program
remains their ticket to killing our citizens.
Obama revised one of his Executive Orders to kick
Russian ‘diplomats’ out of the United States. McCarran-
Walter, co-authors of this act were both Democrats. Harry
Truman, also a Democrat, vetoed it but the Congress
overrode his veto. Truman was a Democrat but also a
‘Progressive’ in the same vein as today’s Progressives.
“In fact, Presidents Truman and Teddy Roosevelt
were considered founders of the Progressive
movement,” said George Phelps, former U.S.
Army officer. “Obama’s E.O. 13694 authorized
the imposition of sanctions on individuals and
entities determined to be responsible for or
complicit in malicious cyber-enabled activities
that result in enumerated harms that are
reasonably likely to result in, or have materially
contributed to, a significant threat to the national
security, foreign policy, or economic health or
financial stability of the United States.”
According to the law, President Trump maintains
complete authority to restrict entry of immigrants from
designated countries based on the McCarran—Walter Act
and Obama used an Executive Order to do the same thing
when he had the Russian diplomats removed from the US.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (Pub.L.
82414, 66 Stat. 163, enacted June 27, 1952), also known as
the McCarranWalter Act, restricted immigration into the
U.S. and is codified under Title 8 of the United States
Code (8 U.S.C. ch. 12). The Act governs primarily
immigration to and citizenship in the United States. It has
been in effect since December 24, 1952. Before this Act, a
variety of statutes governed immigration law but were not
organized within one body of text.
420
H.R. 5678 was named after its sponsors, Senator Pat
McCarran (D-Nevada), and Congressman Francis Walter
(D-Pennsylvania).
President Harry Truman, a Democrat, vetoed the Act
because he regarded the bill as "un-American" and
discriminatory. Truman's veto was overridden by a vote of
278 to 113 in the House and 57 to 26 in the Senate.
Speaking in the Senate on March 2, 1953, McCarran said:
“I believe that this nation is the last hope of
Western civilization and if this oasis of the world
shall be overrun, perverted, contaminated or
destroyed, then the last flickering light of
humanity will be extinguished. I take no issue
with those who would praise the contributions,
which have been made to our society by people
of many races, of varied creeds and colors. ...
However, we have in the United States today
hard-core, indigestible blocs which have not
become integrated into the American way of life,
but which, on the contrary are its deadly
enemies.
“Today, as never before, untold millions are
storming our gates for admission and those
gates are cracking under the strain. The solution
of the problems of Europe and Asia will not come
through a transplanting of those problems en
masse to the United States. ... I do not intend to
become prophetic, but if the enemies of this
legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces, or in
amending it beyond recognition, they will have
contributed more to promote this nation's
downfall than any other group since we achieved
our independence as a nation.”
The Act abolished racial restrictions found in United States
immigration and naturalization statutes going back to the
Naturalization Act of 1790. The 1952 Act retained a quota
system for nationalities and regions. Eventually, the Act
established a preference system, which determined which
ethnic groups were desirable immigrants and placed great
importance on labor qualifications.
The Act defined three types of immigrants: immigrants
with special skills or relatives of U.S. citizens who were
exempt from quotas and who were to be admitted without
restrictions; average immigrants whose numbers were not
supposed to exceed 270,000 per year; and refugees.
The Act allowed the government to deport immigrants or
naturalized citizens engaged in subversive activities and
also allowed the barring of suspected subversives from
entering the country. It was used to bar members and
former members and "fellow travelers" of the Communist
Party from entry into the United States, even those who
had not been associated with the party for decades.
This video showing Muslims marching in Chicago recently
that read, “Death to America”, shows you why Trump
needs to enforce this precious McCarran-Walter Act.
https://quantumliberty.wordpress.com/2017/02/04/chicago
-muslims-protest-in-massive-force/
It expanded the definition of the "United States" for
nationality purposes, which already included Puerto Rico
.
421
and the Virgin Islands, to add Guam. Persons born in these
territories on or after December 24, 1952 acquire U.S.
citizenship at birth on the same terms as persons born in
other parts of the United States.
A 1962 guideline explained procedures under the Act:
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952
requires an alien to apply for a petition for
naturalization. This form may be obtained from
any office of the Immigration and Naturalization
Service, a division of the Department of Justice,
or from any court authorized to naturalize aliens.
Today, more than ever, we need to keep Muslims out of
our country. That march in Chicago with the banner
“Death to America” indicates the trauma of our future as to
Muslim immigrants.
##
 Democrats Are Winless Against GOP And Trump, Despite
Their Bravado After The November Elections
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 10, 2017
Once Democrats got over their disbelief that a billionaire
real estate mogul and former reality TV host defeated
Hillary Clinton, a nominee they were certain would
decimate him in the general election, they vowed to rack
up victories against the GOP congressional majority and
President Donald J. Trump using various tactics and
political procedures.
But so far, Democrats have scored a big fat “zero” against
Republicans and Trump, and the future doesn’t look any
brighter for them, even after 2018.
As reported by The Washington Times, the closest
Democrats got to beating Trump and the Republicans was
in failing to confirm Trump’s nominee for Education
secretary, Betsy DeVos. A pair of Republican senators,
Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine,
who each received thousands in campaign funds from a
teachers union, defected from the 52-member GOP
majority and cast ballots against confirming DeVos. This
action left a 50-50 tie, which meant that Vice President
Mike Pence, as president of the Senate, had to act as the
tie-breaker. DeVos, who believes in school choice, was
confirmed after Pence cast his vote for her. (RELATED:
How’s the Trump administration doing? Find out at
Whitehouse.news)
But hey, Democrats sure have tried awfully hard. In recent
days Democrats rallied outside the U.S. Supreme Court
building in Washington, D.C., to protest Trump’s very
legal and constitutional order banning the issue of visas to
persons from seven failed or failing countries infested with
terrorist groups and activities. They have also thrown up
unprecedented stalling tactics to put off confirmation of
many of Trump’s Cabinet picks, “forcing record delays
and denying him his team,” the Times reported.
422
In the process, congressional Democrats – coupled with
the bought-and-paid-for “protestors” and domestic
terrorists who have clashed with police, destroyed public
and private property and injured Trump supporters – have
helped bolster the president’s approval ratings to near 54
percent, which is about 10 points higher than it was after
his inauguration.
Meanwhile, Republicans have managed to push through
their budget and the president’s nominees have been
confirmed thanks in large part to a lower threshold that
Democrats created in 2013 to assist in getting President
Barack Obama’s judicial appointments approved.
Still, top Democrats tried to put lipstick on the pig of their
defeat with the DeVos vote.
“It was history-making,” declared Sen. Tim
Kaine of Virginia, Clinton’s vice presidential
pick. “There never had to be a vice
president come break a tie to get a Cabinet
secretary in.”
Yes, and that’s because Republicans have never so
vehemently opposed Democratic presidential Cabinet
picks, purely for political reasons. When Republicans do
seek to deny, it’s obstructionism; when Democrats do, it’s
standing up for what’s right. Yet if most of the country
agreed with that assessment, Democrats would be in
power. (RELATED: Keep up with the conservative agenda
at Conservative.news)
“What we are showing is whether it is in
Congress or it is in peaceful protests, or
whether it is courts, lawsuits, whether it is
online, we are not going to just go away
quietly when somebody is hurting our
values and hurting our people and hurting
our country,” Kaine whined, never
mentioning how Cabinet picks are akin to
“hurting people” and “hurting the country.”
The Senate certainly does not have to consent to a
president’s Cabinet and federal court picks, but it’s been
customary for both parties to allow a president wide
latitude in naming whom he wants to serve with him.
Democrats now no longer respect that custom because they
lost so badly in 2012, 2014 and again in 2016.
House Democrats have fared no better in thwarting the
president or the GOP agenda, which, granted, has been
modest thus far. On Wednesday they kicked off a three-
day retreat in nearby Baltimore, Maryland where they will
chart their course moving forward. But already we’ve seen
the party latch on to the violent domestic terrorism taking
place around the country, and frankly, that’s not going to
do Democrats any favors moving forward.
.
423
That has not been lost on Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell of Kentucky, who told the Times that some
Democrats “are kind of embarrassed by the whole show.”
“At some point here, you’ve got to wonder
about dysfunction and fatigue beginning to
set in. And I predict that will happen
sometime in the near future and we’ll get
back to a more normal kind of operating
style,” he said.
Indeed.
 The New York Times Is Now
Lobbying FOR The Muslim Brotherhood
Establishment’s Favorite Paper Goes To Bat For Muslim Brotherhood
By Staff Writer -
02.10.2017 @4:51 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — The establishment paper that has spent
months attacking the very idea of America first is now
actively lobbying and promoting the Muslim Brotherhood
after President Trump indicated he may designate the
group as a terrorist organization.
In a bizarre piece by the Times editorial board, the paper
attacks the President for considering a terror designation
that the likes of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and UAE have
already done.
The newspaper claims that designating the Brotherhood as
terrorists,
“would be seen by many Muslims as
another attempt to vilify adherents of
Islam,”
before pushing yet more disinformation in claiming that
Trump and his advisers are promoting an “exaggerated”
vision of America under attack.
Such an order, now under consideration, would be seen by
many Muslims as another attempt to vilify adherents of
Islam. It appears to be part of a mission by the president
and his closest advisers to heighten fears by promoting a
dangerously exaggerated vision of an America under siege
by what they call radical Islam.
The struggle against extremism is complex, and solutions
must be tailored both to the facts and to an understanding
of the likely consequences. Since 1997, the secretary of
state has had the power to designate groups as foreign
terrorist organizations, thus subjecting them, as well as
people and businesses who deal with them, to sanctions,
like freezing their assets. President Barack Obama resisted
adding the Brotherhood to that list.
There are good reasons that the Brotherhood, with millions
of members, doesn’t merit the terrorist designation. Rather
than a single organization, it is a collection of groups and
movements that can vary widely from country to country.
While the Brotherhood calls for a society governed by
Islamic law, it renounced violence decades ago, has
supported elections and has become a political and social
424
organization. Its branches often have tenuous connections
to the original movement founded in Egypt in 1928.
So a newspaper that broadly attacks all Trump supporters
as the “alt-right” and possible racists wants Americans to
treat the Sharia promoting Muslim Brotherhood with
nuance? This is yet another clear example of the American
corporate media openly promoting the agenda of non-
Americans over actual citizens.
The Times also seemingly purposefully ignores the
documented goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in their
transparent lobbying for the group. The fact of the matter
is, the Brotherhood openly seeks to establish a worldwide
Islamic caliphate that would be based on Sharia Law.
Period, end of the story, that is their STATED goal.
As Breitbart’s Aaron Klein noted,
“While many Brotherhood wings reject the
use of violence as a strategic tactic,
preferring instead a sophisticated
gradualist strategy to achieve their aims,
the Brotherhood has spawned terrorist
organizations – most notably Hamas – that
adhere to its philosophy of a world order
based on Islam. The Brotherhood was also
a central player in the so-called Arab
Spring, revolutions punctuated by violence
across the Arab world.”
Klein also destroyed the disinformation being pushed by
the Times about the Muslim Brotherhood being a “political
organization” that democratically represents millions of
Muslims throughout the world.
“Addressing the Brotherhood’s support for
the electoral process and purportedly
becoming a political organization, an
extensive report on the Brotherhood by the
Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism
Information Center at Israel’s Center for
Special Studies explained the group’s use
of some tools of democracy to advance the
aim of achieving a world ruled by Sharia
 law, which is by definition anti-democratic,”
Klein continued.
To recap, the New York Times editorial board is now
openly lobbying the United States government to keep the
Muslim Brotherhood from being designated a terrorist
.
425
organization while at the same time spending most of each
day attacking all things Trump and any indication that
America is being put first.
Is the countries paper of record actually now Pro-Muslim
Brotherhood and Anti-America first?
 GOP Bill Would Gut EPA
By Timothy Cama
02/10/17 11:25 AM EST

“As a fiscal conservative, I believe

A House Republican is sponsoring legislation to do away
with large portions of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), including environmental justice and
greenhouse gas programs.
Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas) introduced the Wasteful
EPA Programs Elimination Act on Thursday, saying it
would save $7.5 billion annually. That would leave the
agency with a budget of less than $1 billion.
Major EPA climate change programs would be eliminated
under the measure.
The legislation would also close all of the EPA’s regional
offices, halt new regulations on ground-level ozone
pollution and require the agency to lease unused property.
.
Washington should be a good steward of
taxpayers’ dollars,” Johnson said in a
statement.
“Part of being a good steward includes
reining in unnecessary spending, holding
agencies accountable for ‘waste,’ and
getting rid of politicians’ ‘pet projects.’ For
example, American taxpayers shouldn’t
have to pay for the EPA’s many vacant and
underutilized properties that the EPA’s own
Inspector General identified as wasteful,”
he said.
The legislation is modeled after a report from the Heritage
Foundation, which identified the EPA programs as
wasteful.
Johnson introduced similar legislation in 2015, when it did
not get any formal congressional consideration.
The legislation differs from a bill introduced by Rep. Matt
Gaetz (R-Fla.) this month that would completely eliminate
the EPA.

426
 Ninth Circuit Court
Now Demands It Be Protected From Itself…
By Sundance
Posted On February 10, 2017

Oh, the winning… it’s often too funny. The Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals is now independently, on its own
impetus, requesting an internal vote on a full panel en banc
hearing to review its own decision.

Additionally, the full ninth are asking the Trump

administration to file an additional brief telling the court
why the three member original appeals ruling authority
was wrong. In essence, the smart judges know what
wasn’t considered, and are now looking for an out.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

Prior to expanding the conversation, allow us to set the

current stage with a few tweet optics:

Meanwhile, President Trump is saying he has no intentions

to challenge the crazy:

Wait, wha… huh? Yes, that’s the 9th circuit requesting its
own judicial membership ruling to be reviewed by the
entire larger 9th circuit appeals court panel. Ya think
maybe they recognize they just jumped head-first into
showcasing their own insufferable moonbattery…

427
It’s a classic representative example of
‘be careful what you wish for, because you
just might get it‘.
Currently, thanks to the ridiculous political judicial
opinion of the 9th Circuit, the entire professional left and
Democrat party are on display trying to block President
Trump from protecting the American people. As a direct
consequence they own any negative outcomes, including
any act of terrorism, that might happen in the next several
months.
Why would President Trump remove that political
liability? If he’s smart, and he’s proven he is way beyond
smart, he won’t.
Behind the scenes, and unrelated to the judicial ruling,
President Trump can use his cabinet team to construct
immigration and visa review policy that accomplishes the
security goal. The Attorney General (Sessions), DHS
(Kelly) and State Department (T-Rex) can execute
departmental policy objectives under existing legal
authority.
the Ninth Circuit and Judge Robarts decision will be
overturned and all of the protestation from the left will
have been for naught.
In the interim of the slow case proceeding, ANY instance
of violence and terrorism provides President Trump the
opportunity to use his bully pulpit -and Twitter- to hang
the occurrence, foreign or domestic, like a millstone
around the neck of Democrats up for elected office in
2018.
There is no downside on the domestic security agenda for
President Trump; however, the Democrats are fraught with
fear that something might just happen. Ultimately, THIS,
the politics behind the entire construct, is the reason for the
ninth circuit tonight asking for an en banc hearing of their
own judicial ruling.
Smile, you’re worth it.

President Trump never really needed the majority parts of

the executive order to carry out the security agenda.
However, using the XO provided a highly public approach
toward showing the American electorate he was fulfilling a
campaign security promise. Tightening the visa approval
process and executing “extreme vetting” doesn’t require
anything except a policy and procedural change.

If President Trump does nothing, the underlying …”Complicated business folks….

challenges to the Executive Order continue forward in the complicated business”…
courts, while he gets his SCOTUS pick -Gorsuch- on the
bench. If he so chooses, the DOJ can eventually bring the Oh boy, I just can’t wait for the Trump budget.
case to the Supreme Court, where almost everyone admits

428
 Did The Judges Lie: New Report Finds 72 Terrorists Came
From Countries Covered By Trump Ban
By Tyler Durden
Feb 11, 2017 11:29 PM
The federal judge who halted President
Donald Trump's travel ban was wrong in
stating that no one from the seven
countries targeted in Trump's order has
been arrested for extremism in the
United States since the 2001 terrorist
attacks. In fact, as a new report finds, 72
individuals from the seven 'mostly
Muslim countries' covered by President
Trump's "extreme vetting" executive
order have been convicted of terrorism
since 9/11.
As AP first reported, during a hearing in Seattle last week,
Judge Robartasked a Justice Department lawyer how many
arrests of foreign nationals from the countries have
occurred since 9/11. When the lawyer said she didn't
know, Robart answered his own question:
"Let me tell, you, the answer to that is
none, as best I can tell. You're here
arguing on behalf of someone that says
we have to protect the United States
from these individuals coming from
these countries and there's no support
for that."
And now, having denied President Trump's appeal,
claiming his policy "would cause irreparable injury,"
would cause irreparable injury, it seems the entire
premise of the seven "mostly muslim" nations' mostly-
peaceful, non-terrorist ways are in doubt as The Center for
Immigration Studies shows that...
A review of information compiled by a
Senate committee in 2016 reveals that
429
72 individuals from the seven countries
covered in President Trump's vetting
executive order have been convicted in
terror cases since the 9/11 attacks.
In June 2016 the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration
and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney
General Jeff Sessions, released a report on individuals
convicted in terror cases since 9/11. Using open sources
(because the Obama administration refused to provide
government records), the report found that 380 out of 580
people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-
born. The report is no longer available on the Senate
website, but a summary published by Fox News is
available here.
The Center has obtained a copy of
the information compiled by the
subcommittee.
The information compiled includes names of offenders,
dates of conviction, terror group affiliation, federal
criminal charges, sentence imposed, state of residence, and
immigration history.
The Center has extracted information on 72 individuals
named in the Senate report whose country of origin is one
of the seven terror-associated countries included in the
vetting executive order: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan,
Syria, and Yemen. The Senate researchers were not able to
obtain complete information on each convicted terrorist, so
it is possible that more of the convicted terrorists are from
these countries.
The United States has admitted
terrorists from all of the seven
dangerous countries:
 Somalia: 20
 Yemen: 19
 Iraq: 19
 Syria: 7
 Iran: 4
 Libya: 2
 Sudan: 1
 Total: 72
 According to the report, at least 17
individuals entered as refugees from
these terror-prone countries.
Three came in on student visas and one arrived on a
diplomatic visa.
At least 25 of these immigrants
eventually became citizens.
Ten were lawful permanent residents, and four were illegal
aliens.
These facts stand in stark contrast to the
assertions by the Ninth Circuit judges
who have blocked the president's order
on the basis that there is no evidence
showing a risk to the United States in
allowing aliens from these seven terror-
associated countries to come in.
430
Finally, we reminder readers that while Charles Kurzman,
a sociology professor at the University of North Carolina-
Chapel Hill, says his research shows no Americans have
been killed in the U.S. at the hands of people from the
seven countries - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan
and Yemen - since Sept. 11,
it's not quite right to say no one from
those nations has been arrested or
accused in an extremist-related plot
while living in the U.S.
23 percent of Muslim Americans
involved with extremist plots since Sept.
11 had family backgrounds from the
seven countries.
So Judge claims ZERO but in fact the number is 72...
Those darn 'alternative facts' are such trouble... or is it
racist, sexist, mysoginist, and bogoted when the liberal
judiciary is fact-checked?
 Report: Sears, KMart Remove Trump Line Of Home
Furnishings From Websites
By Katherine Rodriguez
11 Feb 2017
Sears and Kmart have stopped selling
products from the Trump Home line on
their websites, Business Insider reports.
Items from Trump Home, which is part of the Trump
Organization, were reportedly not available on both
websites and did not appear in a search of either website as
of Friday.
“As part of the company’s initiative to
optimize its online product assortment, we
constantly refine that assortment to focus
on our most profitable items,” a Sears
Holdings spokesperson told Business
Insider. “Amid that streamlining effort, 31
.
431
Trump Home items were among the items
removed online this week. Products from
the line are still offered online via third-
party Marketplace vendors.”
Sears sold 19 Trump Home items on their website and
Kmart sold 13 Trump Home items on their website as of
Tuesday, according to brand strategist Shannon Coulter,
who started the #GrabYourWallet Trump boycott.
Coulter has been tracking which retailers do business with
the Trump family on the Grab Your Wallet website since
October.
Coulter wrote on Twitter that the items were missing as of
Friday.
Brand new. On 2/7, Sears still had 19
Trump products. Note: it may still carry in
brick and mortar locations. Will see if stmt.
forthcoming. pic.twitter.com/HPvMSmcuXj
— Shannon Coulter (@shannoncoulter)
February 10, 2017
Neither Kmart nor Sears carried Trump Home in their
brick-and-mortar locations.
The report comes after Nordstrom dropped Ivanka
Trump’s merchandise and TJ Maxx pulled advertising for
her products.
 How Obama Is Scheming
To Sabotage Trump’s Presidency
By Paul Sperry
February 11, 2017 | 12:52pm
When former President Barack Obama said he was
“heartened” by anti-Trump protests, he was sending a
message of approval to his troops. Troops? Yes, Obama
has an army of agitators — numbering more than 30,000
— who will fight his Republican successor at every turn of
his historic presidency. And Obama will command them
from a bunker less than two miles from the White House.
In what’s shaping up to be a highly unusual post-
presidency, Obama isn’t just staying behind in
Washington. He’s working behind the scenes to set up
what will effectively be a shadow government to not only
protect his threatened legacy, but to sabotage the incoming
administration and its popular “America First” agenda.
He’s doing it through a network of leftist nonprofits led by
Organizing for Action. Normally you’d expect an
organization set up to support a politician and his agenda
to close up shop after that candidate leaves office, but not
Obama’s OFA. Rather, it’s gearing up for battle, with a
growing war chest and more than 250 offices across the
country.
Since Donald Trump’s election, this little-known but well-
funded protesting arm has beefed up staff and ramped up
recruitment of young liberal activists, declaring on its
website,
“We’re not backing down.”
Determined to salvage Obama’s legacy, it’s drawing battle
lines on immigration, ObamaCare, race relations and
climate change.
432
Obama is intimately involved in OFA operations and even
tweets from the group’s account. In fact, he gave marching
orders to OFA foot soldiers following Trump’s upset
victory.
“It is fine for everybody to feel stressed,
sad, discouraged,” he said in a conference
call from the White House. “But get over it.”
He demanded they “move forward to
protect what we’ve accomplished.”
“Now is the time for some organizing,” he said. “So don’t
mope.”
Far from sulking, OFA activists helped organize anti-
Trump marches across US cities, some of which turned
into riots. After Trump issued a temporary ban on
immigration from seven terror-prone Muslim nations, the
demonstrators jammed airports, chanting:
“No ban, no wall, sanctuary for all!”
Run by old Obama aides and campaign workers, federal
tax records show “nonpartisan” OFA marshals 32,525
volunteers nationwide. Registered as a 501(c)(4), it doesn’t
have to disclose its donors, but they’ve been generous.
OFA has raised more than $40 million in contributions and
grants since evolving from Obama’s campaign
organization Obama for America in 2013.
OFA, in IRS filings, says it trains young activists to
develop “organizing skills.” Armed with Obama’s 2012
campaign database, OFA plans to get out the vote for
Democratic candidates it’s grooming to win back Congress
and erect a wall of resistance to Trump at the other end of
Pennsylvania Avenue.
It will be aided in that effort by the Obama Foundation,
run by Obama’s former political director, and the National
Democratic Redistricting Committee, launched last month
by Obama pal Eric Holder to end what he and Obama call
GOP “gerrymandering” of congressional districts.
Obama will be overseeing it all from a shadow White
House located within two miles of Trump. It features a
mansion, which he’s fortifying with construction of a tall
brick perimeter, and a nearby taxpayer-funded office with
his own chief of staff and press secretary. Michelle Obama
will also open an office there, along with the Obama
Foundation.
Critical to the fight is rebuilding the ravaged Democratic
Party. Obama hopes to install his former civil rights chief
Tom Perez at the helm of the Democratic National
Committee.
Perez is running for the vacant DNC chairmanship,
vowing,
“It’s time to organize and fight . . . We must
stand up to protect President Obama’s
accomplishments,” while also promising,
“We’re going to build the strongest
.
433
grassroots organizing force this country
has ever seen.”
The 55-year-old Obama is not content to go quietly into
the night like other ex-presidents.
“You’re going to see me early next year,”
he told his OFA troops after the election,
“and we’re going to be in a position where
we can start cooking up all kinds of great
stuff.”
Added the ex-president:
“Point is, I’m still fired up and ready to go.”
 Why Couldn’t Paul Ryan
Be One Of The Good Guys?
By Pamela Williams
Published February 11, 2017 · Updated February 13, 2017
Remember when Paul Ryan set Trump up before he won
the Presidential election? He told him he would meet with
him at a gathering, but at the last minute he canceled,
humiliating Trump? Trump had made some unbecoming
comments which made many turn against him. However,
in the political arena, that does not usually turn
Presidential supporters against the candidate.
Ryan calls off plans to campaign with Trump; GOP-ers
rush to distance themselves.
It was a bad beginning for Trump, and it was his own fault,
but it also gave us a glimpse into the GOP and Paul Ryan’s
intentions against Trump. Then when Trump became
President Trump, Paul Ryan seemingly warmed up to him.
They were to work together on changing Obamacare and
putting Trump’s intentions into actions. However,
consider the following:
“…The first evidence of this tactical delay
on the part of Ryan to ensure nothing
getting done remains the D.C. status-quo,
is to declare almost all
attention/energy/focus will be on dealing
with “fixing” Obamacare.
Pay attention to the wording. Watch “repeal
and replace” become secondary to “fixing.”
Ryan intends to initiate a patch-work
approach that will take up a great deal
of legislative time, receive significant
media attention, but in the end, get little
actually accomplished by of way of
“repeal and replace.” In the meantime,
the delay in such critical components of the
Trump economic recover plan – namely
sweeping tax reform, will be further
delayed.
In effect, Paul Ryan and his cadre of
Establishment Republicans will do to
Trump what they rarely appeared willing to
do against Barack Obama – namely use
the power of the legislature to contain a
president’s agenda.”
It is something that is hard to face, because right now
President Trump needs the support of the GOP, and there
is no excuse he is not getting it.
434
Disregard the now-repeated claims by GOP lawmakers
regarding how “tough” it is to dismantle Obamacare.
Remember, they have been running on dismantling
Obamacare for YEARS. They have promised to do so.
They have raised campaign cash from small donors saying
they would do so. Since Obamacare became law,
Republicans have been demanding it be repealed and
replaced.
And yet, now these same Republicans are claiming to have
no plan, no idea on how to proceed with doing just that
after voters have given them all of Congress and the White
House to do so.
And it’s the same delay/it’s too hard/complicated tactic
these GOP elites intend to continue using for much of the
Trump agenda. If Donald Trump is to have any chance of
overcoming all of Washington D.C. and the media elite, he
needs YOU, the American people to afford him the chance
to do so. For if there is one thing the D.C. elite fear most,
it’s seeing their political careers sent packing.
Paul Ryan has entered into a secret
alliance between himself and other
Establishment Republicans in the
House as well as Nancy Pelosi and her
activist brigade of Democrats. This
alliance also extends to Senate Minority
Leader, Chuck Schumer, and a mix of
Senate Republicans and Democrats as
well.
The primary goal? Delay Donald
Trump’s agenda. See the economy
remain stagnant. Fill seats with
moderate (spineless) Republicans come
2018, and declare the Trump agenda
dead thereafter.
In the meantime, Trump’s White House continues to push
and prod some semblance of “get it done” from House and
Senate Republicans. Mr. Trump is attempting to keep the
negotiations going, while watching as a wave of anti-
Trump media continues, which in turn is weakening the
resolve of Republicans like Ryan who once again, think
the media is an accurate portrayal of overall public
sentiment. They have already forgotten that if that were
true, Trump would never have won a primary, would never
have won the GOP nomination, and would never have won But Trump also clearly means his promises on trade and
the presidency. immigration, too — which has other industries nervous.

As of this moment, the single greatest impediment to the
America-first agenda voters across the nation chose in the
form of Donald Trump is not Nancy Pelosi, or Chuck
Schumer. It’s Republican Speaker of the House, Paul
Ryan.
Bad news: Congress is putting tax cuts on the back burner
for now — a big risk.
House Speaker Paul Ryan says lawmakers will focus first
on replacing .?.?. er, “repairing” ObamaCare and on
President Trump’s infrastructure plans, and only take up
tax bills sometime in the spring.
The absence of any big supply-siders in the president’s
economic team is further cause for concern, as is the way
the White House has taken to talking about “tax relief”
rather than “tax reform.” The hunger for some details —
will the cuts be retroactive to Jan. 1? — adds to the
uncertainty, which is always bad for business.
In conclusion, please realize President Trump is being set
up by his own people. We have to continue to speak about
this to everyone.

That means Trump won’t be able to sign anything until

before the fall — at the earliest, if no other delays pop up.

Yes, the president’s early moves on deregulation and

energy should boost growth, and a few industries are
salivating at the thought of big infrastructure spending.

435
Chaffetz Accuses Paid Protesters Of Being "Shipped In" To
Cause Chaos At Republican Townhalls
By Tyler Durden
Feb 11, 2017 1:50 PM
On Thursday night, a Utah Town Hall meeting hosted by
the Republican Chair of the House Committee on
Oversight, Jason Chaffetz, came under attack from a mob
of angry protesters who disrupted the meeting, demanding
that he "do his job."
This was not the first time a republican town hall meeting
turned ugly after a swarm of liberal protesters caused
chaos: last week republican congressman Tom McClintock
was forced to get a police escort after a town hall in
California turned angry over Obamacare repeal. The
SacBee said that many of the protesting participants
"identified themselves as liberal Democrats
and progressives, while party registration in
McClintock’s district is solidly Republican."
So, overnight, Chaffetz shot back, and told KSL that the
raucous reception he received at Thursday evening's town
hall meeting was "bullying and an attempt at
intimidation" from a crowd opposed to President Donald
Trump's election. More importantly, the republican
accused paid interests (here the name of George Soros has
been heard frequently in recent months) of orchestrating
the rising protests and violence at Republican townhalls.
Chaffets said the crowd that filled the auditorium at
Brighton High School in Cottonwood Heights and spilled
over into a protest outside,
included people brought in from other
states to disrupt the meeting.
"Absolutely. I know there were," he said,
suggesting it was "more of a paid attempt
to bully and intimidate" than a reflection
of the feelings of his 3rd District
constituents.
436
"You could see it online a couple days
before, a concerted effort in part to just
cause chaos," the Utah Republican said
Friday. "Democrats are in disbelief that
they have nothing but flailing and
screaming to deal with this."
That such strong anti-Trump sentiment is coming from one
of the most Republican states in the country is surprising,
said Tim Hagle, a University of Iowa political science
professor and an active member of the GOP.
"The fact that it's happening in Utah as well
as a lot of places signals there are a lot of
people on the left who are still angry and
energized," Hagle said. "They're saying
they want to be heard."
That, or as Chaffets suggests, it is merely a repeat of the
well-organized protests in which a core group of paid,
professional activists was carted around the country to
various republican events, and used as an anchor to
generate tension and violence.
As KSL adds, the relentless jeering at his and other recent
congressional town halls around the country comes as
protests continue over Trump's policies. Those protests
include the women's marches held around the world that
drew thousands of demonstrators to the Utah Capitol on
the opening day of the 2017 Legislature last month. As
reported last month, an Ex-WSJ reporter found George
Soros had ties to more than 50 "Partners" of the Women’s
March, suggesting that the billionaire Clinton-supporter is
the mastermind behind this rising wave of protests.
Asked who would foot the bill to fill the audience with
outside agitators, Chaffetz said, "do some reporting" and
described how one participant made it a point to say he
was not being paid by a national Democratic organization.
***
Democrats, naturally, denied the allegation: Rep. Marie
Poulson, D-Cottonwood Heights, said she believed most of
the estimated 1,000 attendees inside the high school
auditorium — and at least that many who protested outside
— were Chaffetz's constituents.
"I've heard some of my colleagues (at
the Utah Legislature) say here today
that they had shipped in liberals to give
him a bad time," Poulson said. "I serve
that area and I listen to their frustrations."
She said when she invited her own constituents to attend a
legislative gathering held in Holladay on Thursday night,
many in the politically moderate area said they were going
to Chaffetz's town hall meeting instead.
"I had so many get back to me and say,
'We've been so upset by what Rep.
Chaffetz is doing. We want him to
investigate equally, with as much zeal as
he did in the past, with this current
administration,'" Poulson said.
Meanwhile, Don Peay of Utahns for Trump, who has
close ties to the Trump family, said he walked out of the
meeting that was punctuated by chants including "do your
job" "you work for us" and "vote him out."
"It was an angry mob of anarchists. It
wasn't just Trump. They hated everything,"
Peay said. "The behavior at the meeting
was a hundred times worse than anything
ever out of Trump's mouth."
Another longtime Trump supporter, Senate Majority
Leader Ralph Okerlund, R-Monroe, said "some of the
discontent is just a result of disappointment in the
election." But Okerlund said there's an edge to how that's
being expressed.
"This is taking it to a new level. All of
the demonstrations and some of the
.
437
vehemence that we have not seen
before," he said. "We're just seeing this
continued escalation of discontent by the
side that isn't in charge."
***
The focus of the town hall was on whether Chaffetz, as
chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform
Committee, would hold the president accountable.
Chaffetz said that was "ironic" since earlier Thursday he
had called for "disciplinary action" against a White House
counselor who apparently violated federal ethics rules by
urging people to buy Ivanka Trump merchandise in a TV
interview.
"I’ll never satisfy their desire to bring down
Donald Trump. I’ll never satisfy that. It will
never be good enough," he said, noting
that the president is exempt from conflict of
interest laws and his business interests
have long been widely known.
"People are asking me to use the power of
Congress to do a full-on fishing expedition
to investigate him personally on things that
are not required by law. I think my doing
that would be an abuse of power," Chaffetz
said. The congressman said while it's
"important that people have an opportunity
to voice their concerns, I think they should
be somewhat embarrassed by how a lot of
people handled themselves." Chaffetz said
he was trying to provide that opportunity by
holding the town hall meeting.
***
When asked if he will continue to make himself available
to voters, Chaffetz answered affirmatively but said he may
now avoid providing a venue "for these radicals to further
intimidate."
Meanwhile, if Chaffetz is right, and if the townhall
disruptors are a paid group of professional protesters
meant to disrupt republican events, look for more, similar
protests in the coming weeks, as hostilities and violence
rise, even if it is only to benefit a select group of - for the
time being - unconfrimed financial backers.
 Memorandum For The President – Warning On A Violent
American Spring, Eight Actions For Donald Trump To
Make America Great Again
Robert Steele
February 11, 2017
Robert David STEELE Vivas
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
WARNING: You have 30 days to settle the country. A
violent “American Spring” looms.
You are under attack on three fronts:
1. The Extreme Left & the controlled “fake news” MSM
2. US Neo-Conservatives led by Dick Cheney, funded by
foreigners
3. The Deep State of entrenched senior officials
combined with Senators and Representatives being
blackmailed and bribed to betray the Republic.
You are not under attack from Iran or Russia – all
your existential fights are right here.
There are four things you need to do immediately
in order to survive:
1. Switch out Preibus and Flynn — smart choices for
the transition, they are undermining you now, Tillerson
and Mattis probably agree they both need to go. You
need a loyal Chief of Staff who can manage
complexity, and a National Strategy Advisor with
balance.
2. Introduce the Electoral Reform Act of 2017 and
demand that it go through – this is the only way you will
survive the looming demise of the Republican Party;
the only way you legitimize your accidental 27%
presidency with a majority of the public; and the only
.
438
way you free Members from foreign and financial
community bribery and blackmail.
3. Create the non-profit educational Trump Channel
backed up by an Open Source Agency. Clear the
existing press area in the White House, turn that into
Trump Studios, and offer a daily fireside chat as well as
short daily briefs by your principals in turn on each
threat, each policy, each budget – bypass the fake
news media, educate the public, and use PollMole to
see what 200 million think on a Presidential
Dashboard.
4. Unleash the FBI, with NSA support, against the
Deep State. You may have already started this, the
Republican and Democratic Party pedophiles are the
Achilles heel. We can isolate 500 other embedded
traitors (financial, religious, ideological) in 90 days.
There are four things you can do to be the greatest
President in modern history.
1. Diversify your senior team – adding Cynthia
McKinney and Dennis Kucinich – and Ralph Nader and
Jesse Ventura in some capacity – will strangle the
extreme left and open up the middle. Take your
diversified team on the road – 50 states in 30 days.
2. Organize a Grand Strategy Summit, televised for
public consumption – the ultimate reality show. The last
one was done in 1953 by Ike Eisenhower. Address all
high level threats and all Cabinet policy domains in
context of achieving a balanced budget.
3. Organize a Revenue Summit, televised for public
consumption, in which you invite Dr. Edgar Feige of
Wisconsin to brief his idea of an Automated Payment
Transaction Tax that allows you to eliminate all other
taxes, especially income taxes. This fractional tax puts
the tiny burden where it should be: on Wall Street
instead of Main Street. Allow the public to scrutinize the
alternatives you have been considering. You will be a
hero.
4. Invite every citizen in debt to sign a Debt
Renunciation Pledge on a non-profit website,
authorizing you to negotiate, on their behalf, a
reduction of the three trillion dollars in student debt,
elderly medical debt, and small business and family
credit card debt. This will connect you to 150 million or
more citizens and empower you against Wall Street.
 Trump Not Pro-Russia, Says
Its Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman
By Stephen Lendman
2-12-2017
Profiles in courage are absent in Washington, especially on
geopolitical issues, notably on relations with Russia.
In January, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria
Zakharova said Trump is not pro-Russia. She distinguished
between Russophobe Hillary Clinton and Trump’s more
responsible comments, calling getting along with Russia a
good thing.
He clearly prioritized combating ISIS, and by inference
international terrorism.
“This gives certain hope, because it indeed
is a challenge, a threat that we all are
facing,” Zakhavova explained.
During a February 9 press briefing, she blasted US-
dominated NATO for “prefer(ring) to deal with virtual
(disconnected from reality) and nonexistent threats.”
Russia poses none, not now or earlier against any nation.
Western and Middle East supported terrorism is real, a
scourge vital to eliminate.
So far, Russia is the only world power actively combating
it.
“Obama made numerous statements on
fighting international terrorism,” said
Zakharova.
Instead he supported it while waging regional war.
Trump’s comments are well-known, his intentions yet to
unfold.
After three weeks in office, he’s yet to wage war on
terrorism as promised, except for a botched Yemeni raid,
massacring civilians, destroying a village, showing US
policies remain hostile to peace and stability. Continuing
drone attacks, largely killing civilians, indicate nothing
changed so far.
Zakhavova said Russia had no contacts with the State
Department. Putin and Trump spoke, not Tillerson and
Lavrov, a first step to initiating regular dialogue on mutual
interests.
439
“(T)he new administration has not
published its foreign policy concept,”
Zakharova explained. “I do not know
whether it has been formulated or not.”
“There is nothing in the public space, nor
have we received any details via diplomatic
channels.” It’s holding things up. It’s vital to
address this.
“The new administration should begin by
developing a global or, conversely, a
regional doctrine, a foreign policy concept,
a vision of its foreign policy - either regional
or general - and then the first diplomatic
contacts can begin and take place,” said
Zakhavova.
“Then we can start cooperating as is usual
diplomatic practice. Thus far, no contacts of
this kind have occurred.”
Even with a “new guy” in charge, how Tillerson described
himself to State Department personnel day one on the job,
he should have by now contacted his counterparts in key
countries like Russia and China.
Trump has been speaking with foreign leaders almost
daily, including Putin and China’s Xi Jinping.
US relations toward Russia are adversarial. Obama
plunged them to a new low in decades, including baseless
accusations of US election hacking, and piling on illegal
sanctions solely for political reasons.
Fence-mending won’t come easily or at all if Trump
doesn’t follow through responsibly on campaign rhetoric.
Russia is ready to work actively with Washington in areas
of mutual interest - no US overtures made so far.
Cooperative relations require someone promoting it “from
the other end,” Zakharova stressed.
Bipartisan relations are deplorable because of hostile
Obama policies. It’ll be a while before Trump’s intentions
are known.
 To Hell With "The First 100 Days"
By Jim Kirwan
2-12-2017
Now that “the stars” on the American Flag
are officially Stars of David, we need to
move forward with charges against Trump
for failing to sever his profit-related past,
which every president must cut all direct
ties to, once he takes the office of the
President of the United States; which was
something that Trump still refuses to do.
The case against Trump has been made
crystal-clear in his recent moves against
the people of this nation: When he
announced his unqualified support in favor
of going ahead with the illegal pipeline deal
in Dakota. Dozens Arrested at Standing
Rock as Veterans Vow to Block Completion
of Dakota Access Pipeline
9min 42sec VIDEO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1uofQTG9TA
What's missing in these two videos is that the oil in
question goes not to Americans but to foreign powers.
Veterans Stand Ground With Pipeline Protesters At
Standing Rock
5min Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rsAyaSdkJc
In Trumps' case there are several unexplored questions
about his supposed ability to govern over anything except
his own corporations. Most of this was clearly outlined in
the video below:
Trump is the Swamp:
440
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcd-yvudYSg
There are several major questions that did not manage to
come out in the campaign itself. The first is the fact that
while most people his age were drafted into Vietnam,
Trump was honing his corporate passions with an
education, to improve his abilities to make better deals
while the less fortunate in his class, went off to war and
death, because they did not have any way to avoid that
cataclysmic experience. I just happened to miss Vietnam,
as my active four year duty ended in 1961, but the
government still managed to steal four years of my life
where Trump missed all that: Since he's seven years my
junior he should have served.
Beyond that Trump-the-coward, has continued in the same
vein as every other president since JFK, because only
Carter saw combat, but his judgment was terrible when it
came to sending in helicopters without protection from the
sands in Iran. And Bush Sr. became “The WIMP” because
during WWII he bailed out of his two man Navy fighter-
bomber, leaving his navigator to die, so that he could
become a WWII military hero. He had to do that because
his daddy was a convicted war-criminal who was caught
supplying the Nazi's with money so the Wimp needed
something to make America forget his daddy, in order to
enter politics after the war, as someone of substance when
in fact the bastard father of George W Bush, was both a
criminal and a coward, but definitely he was never
anything that could or should have ever been looked up to.
Once the leadership of America lost the benefit of men that
had actually gone to war, and profited from the horror of
their assignments - the whole nation lost any real
perspective when it comes down to what must be done to
avoid the coming global-nightmare. Trump has been one
of the worst of the worst having completed the evil-circle
of giving the United States Away to the Azkenazi Jews of
Israel: Under the guise of selecting qualified people, when
in fact this was a coup on the global-stage and we must
stop it and TRUMP - before either of them goes any
further.
The blood-line ties to the Azkenazi-Jews has been clear
from the start, but too many people wanted to give him a
chance to show us his true colors well now that we've
begun to detect his real loyalties and because of that
Trump must be charged for what he's trying to do to the
United States.
Trump is not what he claims to be he's a coward
pretending to be a leader and what he's already done to the
government far outweighs any of the small stuff he's still
fooling around with—with no actual-reality at the end of
the day.
He needs to call the leadership of both of the dead political
parties into the White House and sit them down, in the
Oval Office. He needs to explain clearly that the law of the
land allows him to do what he is doing regarding who can
come into this place and who can be kept out: He needs to
follow that up by explaining, in the very simplest of terms,
because those fake leaders are seriously mentally
challenged - that both of their so-called parties are dead
now, and they won't be coming back. He needs to start
giving them the orders that we would give - if it were ours
to do in the first place. And by the way TRUMP needs to
obliterate the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals - because it
doesn't serve the United States it is a wholly owned
LBGTQ organization that only serves the enemies of the
United States, and no one else.
And as for that list of nations that needs to be kept out:
That should have Saudi-Arabia on top, along with Israel, if
his list of disapproved lawless-states is to be complete.
Of course I'm not holding my breath!
When the world had a problem with “global
piracy” The United States created
kirwanstudios@outlook.com
441
something called the United States Marine
Corp, went to Tripoli and massacred them.
Why has our new faux-leader not
suggested something similar to end the
Israeli created forces that have been
raising nothing but hell for the last 16
(some say 69) YEARS?
Instead Donald wants to give Israel total
control over Jerusalem, which has always
been a universal city, at least throughout
the modern age but now Israel wants it:
And Donald wants to please the cowardly
bastards that never fight their own fights
ever. Because every time they've tried to
do their own aggression's - they've had
their asses severely kicked, which is why
the US does all their fighting for them but
in the meantime we need to cut off all
funding to Israel, and let these impostors
pay for everything they want to do without
any more help from us.
Of Course: I won't be holding my breath on
these thoughts either, but one way or
another some of the above is going to have
to be begin to come true or there won't be
a world left to inhabit any longer - for
anyone to live in any more.
 The CIA Is Going After The Most Important
Man In The Trump Administration
Central Intelligence Agency STILL Targeting Key Trump Allies
By Alex Thomas -
02.12.2017 @5:26 PM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — In the months after the stunning
election of Donald Trump, the CIA, with help from other
intelligence services, waged a public battle against the
president-elect through the anonymous release of
disinformation to the establishment backed mainstream
media.
Now, almost a month into the Trump presidency, these
attacks are apparently continuing with the target being one
of the most important people in the entire Trump
Administration.
In yet another Friday night surprise, Politico reported that
the Central Intelligence Agency had denied a security
clearance for a top deputy of new national security adviser
Michael Flynn due to his outspoken criticism of the
secretive intelligence agency.
“A top deputy to national security adviser
Michael Flynn was rejected for a critical
security clearance, effectively ending his
tenure on the National Security Council and
escalating tensions between Flynn and the
intelligence community,” read the Politico
report.
“The move came as Flynn’s already tense
relationships with others in the Trump
administration and the intelligence
community were growing more fraught after
reports that Flynn had breached diplomatic
protocols in his conversations with the
Russian ambassador to the United States.”
The deputy, senior director for Africa Robin Townley, was
informed by the CIA that they had rejected his request for
the elite security clearance needed to work on the National
Security Council despite the fact that Townley is a former
Marine intelligence officer who has long maintained a top
secret-level clearance.
According to the Politico report, new CIA director Mike
Pompeo approved the rejection which was most likely in
.
442
retaliation for Townley’s skepticism of the intelligence
community as a whole.
“Both sources said the CIA did not offer
much explanation for why Townley’s
request for so-called “Sensitive
Compartmented Information” clearance
was rejected. But the sources said that
Flynn and his allies believe it was
motivated by Townley’s skepticism of the
intelligence community’s techniques —
sentiments shared by Flynn,” the Politico
report continued.
That’s right, the CIA is now directly attacking the very
ability for Michael Flynn to do his job as the national
security adviser, all because of his outspoken criticism of
intelligence agency tactics and disinformation pushed for
the benefit of the establishment.
While CIA attacks on Trump as a whole are obviously
important, this shocking new information is possibly the
worst yet, especially when you consider who Flynn is and
what he stands for within the Trump administration.
Flynn has a long history of directly targeting the so-called
“new world order” and is now seeing the repercussions for
his work attacking the globalist elite. Even more
important, Flynn has shown a key willingness to listen to
alternative media voices instead of simply pushing the
establishment narrative on each and every issue.
Consider this. Michael Flynn’s son has even tried to
expose PizzaGate and remains in contact with certain
people in the alternative media which is something the
CIA is obviously aware of.
Make no mistake, there is a war going on within the
government over the direction of this country and
President Trump seems to be surrounded by enemies on
every side. Now, those working against the country itself
are targeting one of the most important men next to the
new president.
 Top Trump Aide Says White House
Has 'Enormous Evidence' Of Voter Fraud
By Joseph Weber
Published February 12, 2017
President Trump’s assertions about widespread voter fraud
in the 2016 elections re-emerged this weekend, with a top
Trump adviser saying Sunday the White House has
provided “enormous evidence” to support claims while
still producing no evidence.
“The White House has provided enormous
evidence with respect to voter fraud, with
respect to people being registered in more
than one state,” White House policy adviser
Stephen Miller told ABC’s “This
Week,” amid calls for Trump to provide
evidence for his claim.
Trump has argued since November that voter fraud cost
him the popular vote, which he lost to Democratic
presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by several million
ballots. However, the White House has yet to provide
evidence, at least publicly, to support the argument.
“This morning, on this show, is not the
venue for me to lay out all the evidence,”
Miller said. “But I can tell you this: Voter
fraud is a serious problem in this country.”
The issues of voter and voter-registratration fraud came
into play again last week after a closed-door meeting with
senators and former New Hampshire GOP Sen. Kelly
Ayotte, who with Trump lost that state on Election Day.
Trump purportedly said in the meeting that thousands of
people were brought from Massachusetts to New
Hampshire to “illegally” vote.
Miller said Sunday that he has worked on election
campaigns in New Hampshire and that the situation is
443
widely known in the state’s political circles, though he did
not provide any hard-copy evidence.
“Go to New Hampshire. Talk to anybody
who has worked in politics there for a long
time,” he said. “Everybody is aware of the
problem.”
Trump’s claim about New Hampshire prompted a Federal
Election Commission official to urge the president to share
evidence supporting his allegation so it can be
investigated.
And Trump last week told Fox News that he’s going to
have Vice President Pence lead a commission to
investigate voter-registration fraud.
The president in recent weeks has gotten some support on
the issue from fellow Republicans who have said voter
fraud has occurred in their states.
However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-
Ky., has said he doesn’t want to spend federal money to
investigate the issue.
North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows told reporters at the
recent Republican retreat in Philadelphia that he’s aware of
instances of voter fraud in his congressional district but
was uncertain about the extent.
Miller said Sunday that Kansas Secretary of State Kris
Kobach has evidence of vote fraud in his state.
“I suggest you invite Kris Kobach onto your
show, and he can walk you through some
of the evidence,” Miller said.
And last week, a Mexican national was sentenced to eight
years in prison for voter fraud in Texas. The woman’s
lawyer suggested that people in that region believing
Trump's claims about election rigging led to the conviction
and harsh sentencing, calling it the “800-pound gorilla" in
the jury box.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 Could Reince Be On His Way Out As Chief Of Staff?
Alex Pfeiffer - Reporter
6:05 PM 02/12/2017
The opening weeks of the Trump administration have been
described as tumultuous by many, potentially leaving
White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus’ head on the
chopping block.
Chris Ruddy, founder of Newsmax Media and one of
President Trump’s friends, said Sunday on CNN that the
“White House is showing not the amount of
order that we need to see. I think there’s a
lot of weakness coming out of the chief of
staff.”
After his comments on CNN, Ruddy told The Washington
Post,
“I’ve gotten three text messages from
sitting Cabinet members praising my
appearance. They realize this whole
government depends on this chief of staff.”
The significance of Ruddy’s comments are compounded
by his tweet that he spoke at length with President Trump
at Mar-a-Lago Saturday night.
“It’s my view that Reince is the problem. I
think on paper Reince looked good as the
chief of staff — and Donald trusted him —
but it’s pretty clear the guy is in way over
his head,” Ruddy told The Post. “He’s not
knowledgeable of how federal agencies
.
444
work, how the communications operations
work. He botched this whole immigration
rollout. This should’ve been a win for
Donald, not two or three weeks of negative
publicity.”
The Newsmax founder and Trump confidante
subsequently seemed to back off his harsh criticism of
Priebus and tweeted,
“Reince just briefed me on new WH plans.
Impressive! CNN today my personal view.”
A potential replacement for Priebus is New Jersey Gov.
Chris Christie, who was one of the first key Republicans to
back Trump and previously headed the president’s
transition team before being forced out by Jared Kushner.
Like Ruddy, the New Jersey governor has called the roll
out of Trump’s travel ban botched and placed blame on the
president’s staff.
Christie appeared on CNN Sunday and wouldn’t deny that
he recently spoke to Trump on the phone. The New Jersey
governor said that he would be open to joining the Trump
administration, although he “intends” to join the private
sector in a year after his term is over.
Roger Stone, a Trump confidante, told The Daily
Caller that he doesn’t think Christie will replace Priebus as
chief of staff. Christie is reportedly scheduled to have
lunch with Trump at the White House Tuesday.
 US Spies Withholding Intel From White House
Because They Know Russia Is Listening: Report
David Ferguson
12 Feb 2017 At 22:11 ET
Donald Trump on Phone (Twitter)
U.S. intelligence operatives are withholding sensitive
information from the White House for the first time in
history because they believe that Russia will find out
anything they tell Pres. Donald Trump and his aides.
The New York Observer — which is owned by Trump’s
son-in-law Jared Kushner — reported Sunday that the
intelligence community (IC) is “pushing back” against an
administration it believes is incompetent, dishonest, leaky
and “penetrated by the Kremlin.”
“Our Intelligence Community is so worried
by the unprecedented problems of the
Trump administration — not only do senior
officials possess troubling ties to the
Kremlin, there are nagging questions about
basic competence regarding Team Trump
— that it is beginning to withhold
intelligence from a White House which our
spies do not trust,” wrote former analyst for
the National Security Agency Jack R.
Schindler.
Not only has Trump gone out of his way to discredit the
nation’s spy agencies, his main national security guru,
Gen. Mike Flynn either appears to by lying about his
conversations with the Russian government about U.S.
sanctions or can’t remember breaking the law.
“Whether Flynn is monumentally stupid or
monumentally arrogant is the big question
that hangs over this increasingly strange
affair,” Schindler wrote.
445
One of Flynn’s top aides was denied a security clearance,
and although they have not made public exactly what
caused them to deny Rob Townley access to Sensitive
Compartmentalized Information, Schindler believes that it
is a sign that the IC is going to be taking a harder line with
the administration.
Most worrisome of all is the fact that — as one senior
Pentagon official told Schindler — our nation’s spies
believe that “the Kremlin has ears inside the SITROOM,”
otherwise known as the Situation Room, where the
nation’s most protected secrets are discussed.
“There’s not much the Russians don’t know
at this point,” the official said.
Schindler wrote,
“None of this has happened in Washington
before. A White House with unsettling links
to Moscow wasn’t something anybody in
the Pentagon or the Intelligence
Community even considered a possibility
until a few months ago. Until Team Trump
clarifies its strange relationship with the
Kremlin, and starts working on its
professional honesty, the IC will approach
the administration with caution and
concern.”
If Trump poisons his relationship with the IC, Schindler
warned, the situation becomes extremely risky because,
“President Trump is prone to creating
crises foreign and domestic with his
incautious tweets. In the event of a serious
international crisis of the sort which
eventually befalls almost every
administration, the White House will need
the best intelligence possible to prevent
war, possibly even nuclear war. It may not
get the information it needs in that hour of
crisis, and for that it has nobody to blame
but itself.”
 Comedian Tom Arnold Says Hillary
‘Begged’ Him To Release Trump’s Racist Rant Video
By Emily Saul
6:12 Am, February 13, 2017
Comedian Tom Arnold is claiming Hillary Clinton begged
him to release footage of President Trump using racial
slurs just days before the November election.
The 57-year-old alleged last year he had video of Trump
repeatedly saying the “n—–” and “every bad thing ever,
every offensive, racist thing ever,” but is now saying
Clinton called him just two days before Americans went to
the polls pleading for its release, the Telegraph reported.
“I had all the outtakes from Trump saying
the N-word on The Apprentice,” Arnold,
who was just voted off of Australia’s I’m A
Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here! says.
“[Clinton] called me two days before the
election and said ‘please release that.”
Arnold claims, alleging the Democratic
nominee said “The weight of the free world
is on your shoulders.”
.
446
“I’d love to be a hero, but I can’t hurt these
families,” he claims to have responded.
Arnold says he might still release the real with “their
permission,” though it remains unclear if he’s referencing
the targets of Trump’s vitriol or The Apprentice producers.
In an interview before going on the British sitcom, Arnold
told a radio host he didn’t want to release the hate speech
out of respect for those involved.
“Well now these people—two editors and
an associate producer—are scared to
death. They’re scared of his people, they’re
scared they’ll never work again,” he said on
Dori Monson’s radio show.
The American actor and comic, who starred alongside
Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 1994 classic True Lies, also
said he didn’t think releasing the racist rant “would work.”
“I don’t think people would care,” he said.
Trump still managed to cinch the electoral vote despite the
national outrage surrounding the October release of the
notorious “Grab her by the pussy” video.
 Sarah Silverman Mistakes
Construction Markings For Swastikas
By Daniel Nussbaum
13 Feb 2017
Comedian Sarah Silverman got an earful
from her social media followers on
Sunday after appearing to mistake a pair
of bright orange construction markings
for swastikas painted by neo-Nazis.
The 46-year-old comedian wrote that she was on her way
to get coffee when she noticed the markings on the
sidewalk.
Walking to get coffee saw these all
over a sidewalk in the town I'm in. Is
this an attempt at swastikas? Do neo
nazis not have google?
pic.twitter.com/A4ses1G3ru
— Sarah Silverman
(@SarahKSilverman) February 12,
2017
“Walking to get coffee saw these all over a
sidewalk in the town I’m in. Is this an
attempt at swastikas? Do neo nazis not
have google?” she wrote.
Of course, Silverman’s followers were quick to point out
that the markings were, in fact, innocuous markings used
in construction, often to designate a spot for which there is
a pipe or a wire underneath.
447
Others simply ridiculed the comedian for her post,
attributing other innocent, everyday situations to the work
of nefarious extremists.
.@SarahKSilverman Check it out. I even
spotted a couple of Nazis in broad daylight
testing some sort of abortion prevention
laser device pic.twitter.com/UNWng11R4L
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) February
13, 2017
.@SarahKSilverman just saw this
mysterious Nazi sign on the street. There's
even a "15MPH" under it — must be some
secret Nazi code.
pic.twitter.com/j6XWAuTxe0
— Harry Khachatrian (@Harry1T6)
February 13, 2017
@SarahKSilverman The KKK guys left their
hats down the street too.
pic.twitter.com/clipBPMnA7
— Eric Larson (@larsoneric50) February
13, 2017
After realizing her mistake, Silverman posted a series of
follow-up tweets in which she explained that she has
begun to see swastikas “in everything” due to the country’s
current political climate.
It's a construction marker. Innocent mistake
for a Jew that gets "burn in an oven!" at
least weekly on twitter. Still pretty close
though.. pic.twitter.com/8Gsuy3QkuE
— Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman)
February 13, 2017
To the excited-to-pounce, smelly
condescending cunts who say ima dummy
4 seeing swastikas in street markers:
— Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman)
February 13, 2017
I'm seeing swastikas in everything fratboys.
It started w Bannon's rise & festered when
trump decided not 2 mention Jews re the
Holocaust. https://t.co/rBqPZpAHHx
 — Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman) WAKE UP & JOIN THE RESISTANCE.
February 13, 2017 ONCE THE MILITARY IS W US
FASCISTS GET OVERTHROWN. MAD
The comedian — who was one of Vermont Sen. Bernie KING & HIS HANDLERS GO BYE
Sanders’s earliest and most vocal celebrity supporters BYE❤❤❤❤ https://t.co/Y2WZbL012A
before rallying behind eventual Democratic nominee — Sarah Silverman (@SarahKSilverman)
Hillary Clinton in the general election — has continued to February 2, 2017
speak out in opposition to President Donald Trump.
Shortly after the election, the comedian wrote on Twitter
Earlier this month, Silverman suggested that the U.S. that for many of Clinton’s supporters, the outcome of the
military could help Americans overthrow the Trump race felt like the Great Depression of the 1930s, only
administration. worse.

448
 'Swastikas' Uncovered By Sarah Silverman
Turn Out To Be Utility Markings
Chris Menahan - Informationliberation
Feb. 13, 2017

Twitter users mocked her in response:

Sarah Silverman appears to be losing her mind in the wake of Donald

Trump's election.

After calling for a military coup to overthrow Trump

earlier this month, on Sunday she mistook a couple of
utility markings on the sidewalk as "swastikas" drawn by
"neo nazis."

449
450
451
.

Andy Rector, Sarah Silverman & Conan O’brien

452
 CNN Never Learns, Publishes More
Fake News About Phony ‘Trump Dossier’
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017

briefed on the existence of the dossier prior

to Trump’s inauguration.
None of the newly learned information
relates to the salacious allegations in
the dossier. Rather it relates to
conversations between foreign
nationals. The dossier details about a
dozen conversations between senior
Russian officials and other Russian
individuals. Sources would not confirm
which specific conversations were
intercepted or the content of those
CNN went from the leader in cable news to near the discussions due to the classified nature of
bottom of the heap in a span of about 25 years, thanks to US intelligence collection programs.
the fact that the network can’t seem to let go of its far-Left
political partisanship. Even after repeatedly being outed as That supposedly “confirms” some conversations…between
the Fake News Network during the recent presidential some people…at some locations….mentioned in the
campaign and after Donald J. Trump won an electoral dossier. (RELATED: Keep current with the latest in fake
landslide, CNN continues its race to the bottom and, news coverage at NewsFakes.com)
eventually, complete irrelevance.
Oh, well then. Stop the presses!
On Friday the network published what amounted to a
nothingburger: There’s more of nothing:

A supposed follow-up to the now legendary — CNN has not confirmed whether any
“Trump dossier” that was found to be content relates to then-candidate
complete garbage when it was published in Trump.
full last month by Buzzfeed, then followed
— US intelligence officials emphasize the
up by CNN. [For the record, a Russian
conversations were solely between
cyber-firm named in the dossier has filed a
foreign nationals, including those in or
defamation suit against Buzzfeed and the
tied to the Russian government,
former ‘British intelligence agent’ that CNN
intercepted during routine intelligence
has placed so much trust in because it’s
gathering.
complete BS.)
— Officials who spoke to CNN cautioned
Per the breathless CNN report: they still have not reached any
judgment on whether the Russian
government has any compromising
For the first time, US investigators say they
information about the President.
have corroborated some of the
communications detailed in a 35-page — Officials did not comment on or
dossier compiled by a former British confirm any alleged conversations or
intelligence agent, multiple current and meetings between Russian officials and
former US law enforcement and US citizens, including associates of
intelligence officials tell CNN. As CNN first then-candidate Trump.
reported, then-President-elect Donald
Trump and President Barack Obama were

453
 — One of the officials stressed to CNN No one could verify any of it. And
they have not corroborated “the more apparently, they still can’t. But now,
salacious things” alleged in the dossier. suddenly, we’re supposed to believe
that….something, somewhere, said by
Nothing. And nothing. And….nothing. someone…might be true, even if it has
nothing at all to do with the president of the
CNN reached out to White House Press Secretary Sean United States. (RELATED: What are ‘they’
lying about today? Find out at
Spicer for a comment, and he had exactly the right
Disinfo.news)
response:

No, not that gross “salacious” sexual stuff about Trump.

“We continue to be disgusted by CNN’s
Or the prior claims that he has longstanding ties to Russia
fake news reporting.”
and its president, Vladimir Putin. None of that stuff.
He called back later to add:
So what’s the point of publishing this non-story? To
advance the agenda of the globalist, establishment Left and
“This is more fake news. It is about time to plant another seed in the minds of the sheep who still
CNN focused on the success the President watch CNN and the other dying outlets that will parrot the
has had bringing back jobs, protecting the disproven narrative: President Trump is a Russian stooge.
nation, and strengthening relationships with
Japan and other nations. The President
Because some U.S. intelligence people
won the election because of his vision and
who have no proof whatsoever of
message for the nation.”
anything and who are obviously not big
fans of the president think so. Or would like
Understand this “dossier” was floating around for months it to be true, which is just as good.
in establishment media and political circles. At the same
time, U.S. intelligence agencies were looking into its
There is a reason why the Trump administration is
contents.
boycotting CNN – and it’s CNN’s fault for reporting this
kind of fake news garbage.
.

454
 Mainstream Media Propagandists
Blindly Circulating More Trump Fake News,
This Time About The President’s Father
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
The fools who pass themselves off as journalists in the
establishment media have such a knee-jerk hatred for
President Donald Trump they’ll publish anything that even
remotely appears to substantiate their pre-conceived
biases.
So upset that a plain-spoken and sometimes gruff
billionaire businessman and reality TV host was able to
soundly defeat Queen Hillary in a face-to-face election,
hacks at the Washington Post leapt on an unsubstantiated
claim by a previously unknown organization that Moscow
distributed anti-Clinton propaganda to 200 websites, who
then published the “fake news.” Why? Because there had
to be some reason Trump won other than the fact that
Clinton was just a horrible, uninspiring candidate. So the
Post published the claim without even checking it out.
Come to find out, the claim was completely bogus, and the
Post was forced to publish a sort-of, kind-of retraction.
Oops. (RELATED: We keep the mainstream media honest
at MediaFactWatch.com)
Because Trump was revealed once to have said some
inappropriate sexual things about women, Buzzfeed and
CNN were just certain that an “intelligence dossier”
containing some nasty, salacious things Trump allegedly
did – that the Russians knew about – both published stories
about the dossier (Buzzfeed published the entire document
and is now facing a defamation lawsuit), again without
verifying a single word that was in it. Never mind that the
“dossier” had been floating around establishment media
and U.S. intelligence circles for months, without a single
455
claim made in the document having been verified. It
sounded like something Trump would do, so these idiots
went with it.
Now, because we all know Trump is an overt racist, it
must run in the family, right? That’s the preconception
that allowed another group of “journalists” to be duped
into running with stories claiming that, in the late 1960s,
Fred Trump, the president’s father, plotted a run for mayor
of New York City and made racist TV ads that he
allegedly planned to run.
Except that they were fake – good ones, but fake
nonetheless.
As reported by the Washington Examiner, the fakes were
mentioned in an essay written by longtime Clinton
operative Sidney Blumenthal and published by the London
Review of Books:
In 1969, Fred Trump plotted to run for
mayor of New York … He made two test
television commercials. One of them, called
‘Dope Man’, featured a drug-addled black
youth wandering the streets. ‘With four
more years of John Lindsay,’ the narrator
intoned, ‘he will be coming to your
neighbourhood soon.’ The ad flashed to the
anxious faces of two well-dressed white
women. ‘Vote for Fred Trump. He’s for us.’
The other commercial, ‘Real New Yorkers’, showed
scenes of ‘real’ people from across the city, all of them
white. Fred Trump, the narrator said, ‘is a real New Yorker
too.’ In the end he didn’t run, but his campaign themes
were bequeathed to his son.
Shortly after the essay appeared, the videos that he
discussed were shared mightily among establishment
reporters. In fact, the Washington Post’s fact-checker,
Glenn Kessler, was among the first to begin sharing them.
As you can see, he’s deleted the Twitter page in which he
first mentioned the bogus videos.
 Not only did Fred Trump never run for NYC
mayor, he also never had any test
videos/commercials made.
The Post finally figured that out. The paper said the ads
were created by a company called Historical Paroxysm,
which portrays “found footage from alternate
realities.” (RELATED: See how else they’re trying to fool
us at Hoax.news)
“In other words, they create archival-
looking footage mirroring alternate
histories,” the Post reported. The fake ads
were posted to Twitter and Vimeo in
October; they’ve since been taken down.
It should be obvious by now who the real media is and
who are the pretenders: The alternative media, like us, are
.
456
the only fact-based news organizations in operation these
days. The old-guard, Left-wing establishment media
continues to discredit itself with fake reports, fake news,
and fake data because it is inundated with Alt-Left hacks
posing as reporters and editors who believe their own false
narratives about our president. They made up their own
reality: Trump isn’t a racist, he isn’t a homophobe, he’s
not a misogynist, and he’s no bigot, but because these
idiots have convinced themselves Trump is all of these
things, they continue to get it wrong when it comes to
covering him and his presidency.
And that’s not going to change, by the way. Lying and
making things up about conservatives and Republicans is a
badge of honor for the Alt-Left and its Democratic Party.
Pathetic as that sounds, it’s true; how much would you
wager that Kessler won’t be fired, fined or punished in any
way by his employer, the Post, for his fact-checking
blunder?
 JOURNO-TERRORISM: New York Times Now Openly
Aiding And Abetting Muslim Brotherhood Terrorists
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
A good rule of thumb for the Trump
administration to use when determining
foreign policy is to oppose everything
that The New York Times says is a good
idea.
That’s because The Times’ editorial board, editors and
reporters don’t have Trump’s – or America’s – best
interests in mind.
As noted by Breitbart Jerusalem’s Aaron Klein, in recent
weeks The Times has been running editorials and stories
pushing the Trump administration not to place the Muslim
Brotherhood on the State Department’s list of terrorist
organizations.
But, as Klein notes, the group has a long, long history of
promoting Islamic rule and implementing it in any way
possible, including through the use of terrorism:
“The Muslim Brotherhood openly seeks
to establish a worldwide Islamic
caliphate based on Sharia law. While
many Brotherhood wings reject the use of
violence as a strategic tactic, preferring
instead a sophisticated gradualist strategy
to achieve their aims, the Brotherhood
has spawned terrorist organizations –
most notably Hamas – that adhere to its
philosophy of a world order based on
Islam. The Brotherhood was also a central
player in the so-called Arab Spring,
revolutions punctuated by violence across
the Arab world.” [Emphasis added]
457
This, just as new reports say that elite Hamas fighters are
joining the ranks of ISIS.
Indeed, as Klein notes, if the U.S. were to add the Muslim
Brotherhood to the list of terrorist or terrorism-sponsoring
organizations, it would join other Muslim countries that
have done the same thing, including Egypt, United Arab
Emirates and Saudi Arabia. (RELATED: The threats to
America are real – keep track of them at Terrorism.news)
But none of this matters to The Times, whose editorial
board today advocates for America’s enemies just like it
did in the 1930s, when it failed to believe that Hitler’s anti-
Semitism was real, and soft-pedaled his rise to power as “a
new moderation.”
Relying on the well-worn but monumentally incorrect
theory that if the West identifies and calls radical Islamic
terrorism by its name then that only inspires more
terrorism because it creates an atmosphere of “racism” in
the Middle East, The Times has warned against designating
the Brotherhood as a terrorist group.
The paper also claims that the designation
“appears to be part of a mission by the
president and his closest advisers to
heighten fears by promoting a dangerously
exaggerated vision of an America under
siege by what they call radical Islam.”
That’s an interesting characterization, given that The Times
actually published an “Explanatory Memorandum” this
week that was written by a member of the Muslim
Brotherhood in 1991, and involved “eliminating and
destroying the Western civilization from within,” with
emphasis on conducting operations within the United
States.
And still the pinheads at The Times advocate on behalf of
the Brotherhood. Are these people just stupid, or are they
traitors? You be the judge.
But it’s clear that The Times is no longer America’s “paper
of record,” because the election of Trump to the
presidency proved once again that the bulk of Americans
outside of California are patriotic and are craving a re-
institution of constitutional government, law, order and
border protection that would help prevent infiltration by
terrorist forces intent on doing us harm. (RELATED: Who
is trying to destroy our society today? Stay informed at
Collapse.news)
They have even said as much – and still a major American
newspaper refuses to acknowledge the danger. Rather, they
accuse our president and, by default, those of us who
support him, of allowing racism to motivate policy (the 90-
day travel ban, for instance, that has been allowed to
become a political football when it should not have been).
458
The goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is the replacement of
American democratic republicanism and constitutionalism
with authoritarian Sharia law, where women are
considered second-class citizens, gays/lesbians/
transgenders/etc. are jailed or killed, and there is a singular
religious belief and philosophy tolerated: Islam.
From a newspaper that allegedly champions the rights of
minorities, women and the persecuted, the very last thing
the journo-terrorists on the NYT editorial board should
support is a group that stands in opposition to those
principles.
 With Trump In The White House, Democrats’ Goal Is Now
To Make Government As Inefficient As Possible …
So Far, They’re Succeeding
By: Jayson Veley
Date: February 13, 2017
Just one day after Donald Trump got elected, Barack
Obama stood before the country and the world, and
declared that he would do everything he could to ensure a
peaceful and smooth transition of power.
“I had a chance to talk to President-Elect
Trump,” Obama explained at the press
conference. “I had a chance to invite him to
come to the White House tomorrow to talk
about making sure that there is a
successful transition between our
presidencies.” Obama went on to declare
that “peaceful transition of power is one of
the hallmarks of our democracy.”
But Obama wasn’t the only liberal claiming to believe in
the peaceful transition of power. House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi released an official statement the day after
the election, in which she stated that the “peaceful transfer
of power is the cornerstone of our democracy.” ABC’s
Jonathan Karl went on the air with George Stephanopoulos
and a handful of other liberals and said,
“The peaceful transition of power following
a democratic election is the ultimate
American tradition.”
Even Hillary Clinton herself, with her fake smile and her
truly bizarre wardrobe, got in front of cameras after her
devastating loss and referenced the Constitution.
“Our constitutional democracy enshrines
the peaceful transfer of power,” she
459
explained. “We don’t just respect that, we
cherish it.”
What a bunch of boloney.
In the three months since Donald Trump won the election,
democrats have done virtually everything in their power to
make his job difficult. Barack Obama and his
administration worked tirelessly to set him up for failure.
The liberals in the mainstream media have sabotaged him
at every available opportunity. Some even started calling
for his impeachment on Inauguration Day, before Trump
even had a chance to govern. The democrats never wanted
a peaceful transition of power; they want to make the
process, and government as a whole, as inefficient as
possible. (RELATED: Read about how Democrats are
admitting they want to make the country ungovernable for
Donald Trump).
In December of last year, Barack Obama unilaterally
destroyed the National Security Entry-Exit Registration
System, or NSEERS, which was a program that required
men from Middle Eastern countries to register with the
federal government upon arrival. Obama’s Department of
Homeland Security called the program “outdated” and
“obsolete.” Many believe, and for good reason, that
Obama did this with only a month left as president as a
way of throwing a wrench in Donald Trump’s immigration
agenda.
In another attempt to hold up the metaphorical middle
finger to Donald Trump, Obama also used language from
the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to implement
a ban on Arctic oil drilling. These areas on the offshore
United States are energy-rich areas that Donald Trump will
now not be able to tap into. Given the fact that presidents
rarely invoke the 1953 Act to implement law, it is hard to
view this as anything but the former president making life
harder for the new president.
When you look at the way democrats treated Trump’s
cabinet nominees, it is hard to believe that this is the same
party that once denounced congressional gridlock in the
Obama era. Betsy DeVos, Trump’s nominee for Secretary
of Education, didn’t receive a single democratic vote in the
senate. In a similar fashion, only one senate democrat
voted to confirm Jeff Sessions to the position of Attorney
General. Though he is not technically a nominee for
Donald Trump’s presidential cabinet, democrats are also
threatening to do everything in their power to sabotage the
nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
There are so many other examples – far left liberals taking
to the streets and lighting things on fire, leftist judges
460
shooting down Trump’s proposed travel ban even though
that the Executive Order is well within his authority,
liberal advocacy groups starting petitions to impeach the
president, etc. – that I don’t believe it’s much of a stretch
to say that the democrats have failed to carry out a
peaceful transition of power. It’s abundantly clear that
their objective all along has been to resist, sabotage and
obstruct. (RELATED: Read more about how the left is
trying to sabotage Donald Trump).
 Caught On Tape: Trump Crashes Mar-A-Lago Wedding
With Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
by Tyler Durden
Feb 13, 2017 8:51 PM

Trump's weekend golf getaway with Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe to Mar-A-Lago (a.k.a. "The Winter
White House") is getting increasingly bizarre by the
second. Earlier today we wrote about Richard DeAgazio,
a 72-year-old Palm Beach businessman,
Trump supporter, actor and Mar-A-Lago
member, who decided post selfies to
Facebook with the "Nuclear Football"
then proceeded to effectively live blog
Trump and Prime Minister Abe's
reaction to an international crisis
involving a North Korean missile launch
(see "Random Mar-A-Lago Guest Posts
Selfie With "Nuclear Football" Briefcase").
for which he noted they had "paid him a fortune." Per
CNN:
"I saw them out on the lawn today," Trump
said of the bride and groom Saturday, who
were standing nearby. "I said to the Prime
Minister of Japan, I said, 'C'mon Shinzo,
let's go over and say hello.' "
"They've been members of this club for
a long time," Trump said of the
newlyweds. "They've paid me a fortune."

But, in the midst of entertaining a foreign leader and

addressing an international crisis with a rogue state, Trump
apparently also found time to crash the wedding of
Vanessa Jane Falk (36) and Carl Henry Lindner IV (33) at
his signature resort. And, lest you think we're joking, here
is a picture of Trump with the happy couple:

Of course, with Democrats already calling for

impeachment proceedings over "conflicts of interest"
related to Trump's business interests, we just can't wait for
Nancy Pelosi's response to this one...

And, of course, the obligatory picture with the

bridesmaids...no doubt that kisses were given all around.

Unfortunately, the fun doesn't end there as the President

decided to deliver a personal toast to the bride and groom
at their reception. Everything started off just fine with the
customary congratulatory remarks but turned back to the
slightly bizarre when Trump decided to thank the couple of
being long-time members of Mar-A-Lago, a membership
.

461
 Trump Mulling Early White House
Staff Shakeup, Aides Say
Mon Feb 13, 2017 2:45PM

The president has also personally relayed his unhappiness

to Spicer about how the White House spokesman speaks
about some matters.

Meanwhile, others who have talked with Trump have

begun to wonder whether the president would keep his
chief of staff, Priebus.

Several campaign aides have drafted a list of possible

replacements for Priebus, who was the chairman of the
US President Donald Trump walks from Marine One on the South
Republican National Committee when Trump was running
Lawn of the White House as he returns from his weekend trip to for office.
Mar-a-Lago, on February 12, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
US President Donald Trump has grown
frustrated with how some of his senior
advisers are handling their duties,
leading to questions about whether he
is considering an early staff shakeup,
according to a report.

Trump has reportedly expressed displeasure with National

Security Adviser Michael Flynn over reports that he had
secret discussions with Russia’s ambassador about the
sanctions the outgoing administration of Barack Obama
imposed on Moscow late last year. US National Security Adviser Mike Flynn speaks during the daily
press briefing as Press Secretary Sean Spicer (L) looks on at the
White House in Washington, DC, on February 1, 2017. (Photo by
"He thinks he's a problem," one person AFP)
familiar with the president’s thinking told
Politico. "I would be worried if I was White House aides Kellyanne Conway and Rick Dearborn
General Flynn." and lobbyist David Urban are reportedly among those
being considered for the post.
Some White House aides have been encouraging Trump to
dismiss Flynn for not acknowledging that he spoke with
the Russian ambassador about the sanctions.

However, Flynn is not the only adviser or cabinet member

that Trump is concerned about.

The president has also complained about Press Secretary

Sean Spicer and Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, Politico
said, based on conversations with more than a dozen
people who have spoken to Trump or his top aides.

Trump, according to his aides, has asked specific questions US President Donald Trump and White House Chief of Staff Reince
Priebus (front) are seen in the Oval Office after the signing of an
from his friends and allies about how Spicer is handling executive order and a presidential memorandum in the White House
himself behind the podium. February 3, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

462
An issue where Trump feels his advisers have let him The president has complained about "how his people didn't
down the most is his controversial executive order banning give him good advice" and how he should have waited to
citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering sign the order instead of "rushing it like they wanted me
the United States. to."

463
 Memo To The Angry Leftists At Wapo:
You’ve Become America’s Newest Hate Group
And Trump Isn’t Going Anywhere
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
Oh, the predictions of angry Left-wing media sycophants
who have sold their souls to the Democratic Party, which –
thanks to successive electoral trouncings in the Age of
Obama – has become little more than a fractious, regional
entity.
It is apparent that the longer President Donald Trump is in
office, the more unhinged these people will become. Let’s
face it, they just can’t come to grips with the fact that their
candidate was so compromised, so thoroughly corrupt and
so incredibly uninspiring she was trounced in an electoral
landslide by a billionaire businessman and former reality
TV host. Delicious!
It’s that shame and utter embarrassment – remember, most
of these geniuses laughingly wrote Trump off early on and
predicted he would also lead to the demise of the
Republican Party – that drives their anger now. Frankly,
it’s quite comical to observe. (RELATED: Conservatism is
alive and well – discover the truth at Conservative.news)
The hate is especially pervasive at the discredited
establishment press, who outed themselves as fake news
factories during the recently concluded election cycle and
have only ratcheted up their anti-Trump hate since he took
office.
The Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker is emblematic of
the anguish-induced mental breakdown of the Left: A
recent piece of hers is so detached from reality that you
464
have to wonder if some alien entity from another planet
wrote it.
Salivating over the fiction that Trump will be out in two
years, maybe less, for alleged ethical, constitutional, and
psychological reasons, Parker, with a straight face, writes
that Americans will be so sick of Trump and Republicans
that, in 2018, voters will sweep Democrats back into
power in Congress, where they will summarily impeach
Trump if he’s still around.
There’s more. She actually takes Trump to task for
defending his daughter, Ivanka, from the company
Nordstrom, which in a fit of politically motivated rage, just
decided to drop her fashion line. The store chain is
certainly free to do that, but expecting a president father to
sit there and take it is absurd. Heck, when Obama wanted
to insert himself into an issue, he would make up children
to defend (“If I had a son, he’d look just like Trayvon”).
Parker also tried to use what was clearly a pre-planned
“protest” of a town hall meeting held by Rep. Jason
Chaffetz, R-Utah, to ‘prove’ there is widespread discontent
to Trump and his conservative/Republican agenda.
Understand that Chaffetz won his district by nearly 50
points, but now suddenly we’re supposed to believe there
is so much hate and discontent for him just two months
later, and over the repeal of Obamacare, of all things (a
new Harvard Kennedy School of Government poll
reaffirms most Americans do not like it and want it
repealed).
Given that Soros money has been
spread around to groups protesting
Republicans all over the country,
Parker’s reliance on these new town hall
protests as “evidence” of a
“groundswell of opposition” to the
president is comical.
Parker even tried to make the argument that Trump has
assaulted civil liberties, open government and religious
freedom. It was hard to hold back the laughter at this point.
She doesn’t seem to get it that enforcing immigration laws
is not a violation of “civil rights,” considering that people
who are in our country illegally don’t have the same rights
as Americans.
That she mentions “Trump” and “open
government” in the same sentence is a sick
joke after eight years of the least
transparent government in the history of
the country under Obama, as one of
Parker’s own colleagues at the Post has
even said.
And “religious freedom?” Please. Stop it. My sides are
aching. The anti-religious Left has waged war against
Christians in their own nation for decades, culminating in
recent months with attacks on governors like Mike Pence,
he of recent vice presidential fame, for signing legislation
guaranteeing religious freedom. Of course, Parker’s ham-
fisted attempt to paint the president as an enemy of
religious freedom is tied to his executive order banning
travel to the U.S. from seven failed or failing countries
even the Obama administration identified as being rife
with terrorists and terrorism. Hey Kathleen – that’s not a
Muslim ban Trump issued, else it would apply to all
“Muslim-dominated” countries, where 90 percent of the
rest of the Muslim population lives.
465
Don’t you feel dumb?
You should.
No, Trump’s disputed executive order is a ban on
potential terrorists even the Syrian president
acknowledges are real. Granted, not all Muslims are
terrorists,
but aside from the Soros-paid thugs
beating people up and burning private
property in the U.S.,
did you ever notice how nearly all terrorists are Muslims?
(RELATED: Stay up with all of the latest in domestic
unrest at Terrorism.news)
The angry Left, America’s newest hate group, will
continue kicking and screaming against Trump into further
irrelevance. The amazing thing is most of them aren’t even
smart enough to figure out why they keep losing elections
– to candidates like Trump.
Parker may be part of the cool kids club in sequestered
D.C., but it’s obvious she doesn’t have a clue about
Trump, his base of support, and why nobodies like her are
no longer relevant.
 Now “The Terminator” Supports Letting Terrorists Into
Our Country, Saying Trump’s Travel Ban
“Makes Us Look Stupid”
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
No one can question actor and former California Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger’s love for the United States. After
emigrating to the U.S. from Austria as a young man,
eventually becoming a citizen, he managed to amass a
fortune through hard work as a bodybuilder, then as a star
in Hollywood, and eventually found his way to the
governor’s mansion of the country’s most populous state
as a Republican.
But the current star of “Celebrity Apprentice,” which he
took over from Trump, is wrong in his characterization of
President Donald Trump’s executive order banning travel
to the U.S. from seven failed or failing countries
previously identified as harbingers of terrorism.
In an interview with the magazine Extra,
Schwarzenegger said Trumps executive
action in ordering the travel ban “makes us
look stupid,” The Hill reported.
Schwarzenegger – who at one time had some pretty solid
bonafides as a Republican but lost most of them during his
gubernatorial tenure in the country’s most Alt-Left state –
did not vote for Trump; he was a Kasich supporter
(another RINO). (RELATED: Find out what other
Hollywood and entertainment stars are up to at
CelebrityReputation.com)
“I know what he’s trying to accomplish —
his fear about people coming in from other
places, causing harm to the country,” he
466
said in late January. “There is another way
to going about it to do it the right way and
accomplish all of the goals. I think they
were hasty with it.”
“I think the real problem is that it was vetted
badly. If they would run this by the Justice
Department and Homeland Security and
had the lawyers really study and focus on it
and give it some time to do it the right way,”
Schwarzenegger added.
The Hill also claimed in its story that according to
“reports” Trump did not run his executive order by the
Justice Department or the Department of Homeland
Security.
Turns out that’s false. In a statement to the media Jan. 31,
White House spokesman Sean Spicer explicitly said the
order had been vetted by the Justice Department’s Office
of Legal Counsel.
As for DHS, it’s unclear why The Hill and the former
bodybuilding star think that agency has a role in
determining national security policy; if anything, it would
have been more appropriate to vet the order through the
State Department. DHS’ role is to enforce the order, not be
in on the process of approving it.
But the overall point is clear: Like so many others who
will never support Trump no matter what he does,
Schwarzenegger is letting his personal opinion of him get
in the way of logic and reason. Schwarzenegger – not a
stupid man – should know better; as the former chief
executive of the country’s biggest state, he knows there are
decisions that have to be made that are in the best interests
of the public, even if those decisions are unpopular to a
segment of the public.
That’s all Trump’s order sought to do – provide the
American people with better protection from potential acts
of terrorism, including Americans who don’t like him
much. Including The Terminator.
Political opposition and the ability to express it so
important to our founding fathers they ensured that the
Constitution’s very first amendment recognized both as
inalienable rights that no one – and no government,
especially – could or should take away. (RELATED: Find
out how much the Constitution still matters at
Conservative.news)
But opposing Trump just because is not a good reason; he
was lawfully elected president and, as president, he has
constitutional and statutory authority to issue the very
order he issued.
.
467
Opposing him just because is what makes us look stupid,
especially to enemies who are set to exploit irrational and
improper federal court orders that seek to tie the
president’s hands.
He might think he’s trying to play the role of moderate
mediator, but honestly, we can now add Arnold
Schwarzenegger to the list of groups and federal judges
aiding and abetting our terrorist enemies by their actions,
just because they don’t like the guy in the White House.
 To The ‘American’ Companies Dropping Trump
Merchandise, You Don’t Deserve Him As President
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
In recent days President Donald Trump did what any self-
respecting and loving father would do: He defended his
daughter, Ivanka, after high-end retailer Nordstrom
decided to stop carrying her product line, out of nothing
but pure spite for her father.
“My daughter Ivanka has been treated so
unfairly by Nordstrom,” Trump tweeted, as
reported by Business Insider. “She is a
great person — always pushing me to do
the right thing! Terrible!”
White House spokesman Sean Spicer laid
it out plainly – Nordstrom’s decision was a
“direct attack on his policies and [Ivanka’s]
name.”
“Each year we cut about 10% [of brands
carried] and refresh our assortment with
about the same amount,” a Nordstrom
representative lied in a statement to
Business Insider. “In this case, based on
the brand’s performance we’ve decided not
to buy it for this season.”
It was just the latest in a string of retailer attacks on Ivanka
and her father; in the days after the announcement,
retailers Neiman Marcus and Belk’s also stopped carrying
the Ivanka line, citing the same lame excuse.
Now, dying retailers Sears and K-Mart have also decided
to stop selling Trump Home, which is part of the Trump
Organization, Breitbart News reported.
468
“As part of the company’s initiative to
optimize its online product assortment, we
constantly refine that assortment to focus
on our most profitable items,” a Sears
Holdings spokesperson said
“Amid that streamlining effort, 31 Trump
Home items were among the items
removed online this week. Products from
the line are still offered online via third-
party Marketplace vendors.”
If we’re to believe that, suddenly, popular Trump branded
items are now unpopular – because, the inference is, the
president is supposedly so unpopular (according to fake
polls that oversample Democrats) – then we have
swampland in Arizona to sell you. (RELATED: Stay
current with the president and his plans and policies at
Trump.news)
The fact is, this president – if he’s allowed to implement
his policies and he’s not blocked by angry Left-wing haters
– will become the greatest thing for businesses since
Reagan economic revolution in the 1980s.
Unlike his two-time presidential loser rival, Hillary
Clinton, Trump actually has a lot of business experience
and knows what needs to be done to make it easier for
businesses to survive and thrive.
In fact, Americans trusted him much more than Clinton to
not only bring back jobs but also to reduce the regulatory
regime emanating from Washington’s vast bureaucracy
that prevents businesses from expanding, taxes them
heavily, and imposes inane rules that cost jobs while
reducing profit margins.
For months during the campaign, Trump promised to
“drain the swamp” in D.C. – the corruption, the crony
capitalism, and all of the back-room deal-making that has
enriched lobbyists and key corporate interests while
leaving Mainstreet America in the dust. But that pledge
also included dismantling as much of the byzantine
bureaucracy as possible: Cutting through red tape so that
businesses can grow and projects can be completed on
time and under budget. (RELATED: Trump’s agenda is
pro-growth and free-market oriented – stay informed at
Conservative.news)
And for his efforts, Trump is getting shunned by some of
the very businesses and corporations he’s trying to help?
What kind of sense does make?
None, of course, because Left-wing liberal thought makes
no sense. It’s baseless, hypocritical, empty, and devoid of
reality. Only jerks would make a political statement
against the one person who could help them thrive again.
These fools are alienating more than half the country with
their childish gestures, and in the age of the online
.
469
shopping experience, you’d think brick-and-mortar
retailers would leave politics at the curb and try to appeal
to as many consumers as possible.
The CEOs of these retailers don’t deserve a president like
Donald Trump. They deserve someone like President
Obama, whose big-government policies and “regulations
first” approach to government have put dozens of retailers
behind the financial eight ball. Remember Obamacare, you
idiots?
Media Drives Flynn Through Trump’s Cabinet Like Wedge
Media Attempts To Brand National Security Adviser As Russian Cutout
By Shepard Ambellas -
02.13.2017 @12:05 PM EST
(left to right) National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, and Gen.
Joseph F. Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, await
the arrival of the President while Air Force One taxis in at MacDill,
AFB, FL, Feb. 6, 2017. President Trump is visiting with senior
military leaders to discuss Central Command and Special Operations
Command current operations. (DoD photo by D. Myles
Cullen/Released)
WASHINGTON D.C. (INTELLIHUB) — U.S. National
Security Adviser Michael Flynn has been under the
corporate media microscope since Feb. 9 when it was
revealed by the Washington Post that the former general
may have spoken with Russian Ambassador Sergey
Kislyak about the specific issue of “sanctions” in the latter
part of Donald Trump’s run up to the presidency.
“Flynn’s communications with Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were
interpreted by some senior U.S. officials as
an inappropriate and potentially illegal
.
470
signal to the Kremlin that it could expect a
reprieve from sanctions that were being
imposed by the Obama administration in
late December to punish Russia for its
alleged interference in the 2016 election,”
WaPo reported — which later spawned a
subsequent shitstorm throughout the
media.
During an interview, last Wednesday Flynn directly denied
allegations and specifically said “no” on two occasions
when he was asked if he had ever spoken to Kislyak about
sanctions.
Then on Thursday, the media capitalized on Flynn’s back
peddle when a spokesman for Flynn said that Flynn
“had no recollection of discussing
sanctions, he couldn’t be certain that the
topic never came up.”
As a precaution, both the Trump Admin and the F.B.I. are
further examining Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak.
which could be causing unwanted static within the Trump
Administration also leaving Flynn ‘treading on thin ice.’
All of this could be creating unwanted static within the
Administration, possibly leaving Flynn ‘treading on thin
ice.’
The sanctions on Russia currently remain in place.
 Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Goes Bonkers On Camera, Again. (VIDEO)
By: The Voice Of Reason
Date: February 13, 2017
Being no stranger to public meltdowns, fan favorite
Congresswoman Maxine Waters has a long history of
demonstrating that she lacks a filter that is capable of
processing whatever it is that takes place between her ears
before it comes out of her mouth, and this week was no
different. On more than one occasion, Waters made a
complete fool of herself, and thankfully her outbursts were
caught on camera.
In the article below, The Gateway Pundit provides a
transcript, and 38 seconds of video that captured
Congresswoman Waters in what has become one of her
signature rants on camera. Based on what can be
deciphered from her rant, President Trump certainly isn’t
very high on the Congresswoman’s list of esteemed
colleagues within the Washington beltway, however she
seems to have a very difficult time articulating her issues
with the President in anything resembling a coherent, or
factually accurate manner.
In the video provided by Gateway Pundit, Congresswoman
Waters shows her total lack of understanding with regard
to how the impeachment process works before a national
audience. Apparently she believes a president can be
impeached based on lack of popularity. Perhaps if she had
ever read the Constitution she swore to uphold she would
have known that the list of offenses a president can be
impeached for can be found in Article II, Section 4 of the
Constitution.
471
In the first video, Right Wing News video revisits some of
Maxine Waters prior public gaffs, and then explains how
the impeachment process works under the U.S.
Constitution. Once you understand what is required, and
how the process works, it only makes anyone calling for
President Trump’s impeachment sound ridiculous.
Gateway Pundit Reports:
Maxine Waters Goes Crazy Again On
MSNBC
Democratic Congresswoman is doubling
down on comments she made on Monday
where she called for President Trump’s
impeachment and also claimed that
Vladimir Putin had invaded Korea.
Appearing on MSNBC on Tuesday, Waters
made outrageous and offensive comments
about President Trump.
Transcript from her rant on MSNBC:
This is the most outrageous and ridiculous
President that this country has ever had.
He cannot be depended on for anything
that he says and so for them to try to
pretend that somehow what I’m saying is
outrageous and I’ve been reined in and all
of that, there’s no truth to that. As a matter
of fact, all that Nancy Pelosi said was that
she was not ready to talk about
impeachment, I’m ready to talk about it
because I do believe that he has shown us
enough and defined himself in ways that
we have to be suspicious and concerned
about him and we’ve got to dig deeper.
Sorry, Maxine. You can’t impeach a president because
you don’t like him. It doesn’t work that way.
 Wapo Fact Check:
Letting A Few Terrorists Into The
Country Is No Big Deal
Rachel Stoltzfoos - Reporter
2:06 PM 02/13/2017
A Washington Post “fact check” of a Trump administration
statement turned into a bizarre defense of foreign-
born terrorists Monday.
The White House is using a list of 72 immigrants
arrested on terror-related charges in the U.S. since 9/11 to
defend Trump’s immigration ban. All 72 are from the
seven countries covered by the ban, and 33 of them were
convicted of serious terror crimes. Hoping to downplay
and discredit these findings, WaPo fact checker Michelle
Ye Hee Lee ends up defending the convicts, and making
the dubious assertion that letting a few terrorists into the
country just isn’t a big deal.
She defends an Iranian immigrant convicted of trafficking
heroin into the country on behalf of Hezbollah, noting he
did not actually plan a terror attack on U.S. soil, as though
anything short of detonating a bomb constitutes a star
resident.
“In one 2013 case, Siavosh Henareh, was
sentenced to prison for conspiring to import
heroin into the United States,” she wrote.
“Henareh was one of three defendants
charged in connection to trafficking of
drugs and weapons on behalf of
Hezbollah.”
Oh yeah, and his two friends were trafficking weapons for
the terror group as well. Nothing to see here.
Another guy is written off as non-threatening by Ye Hee
Lee, because he and his friends wired $200,000 to a group
they thought was Hezbollah, but was actually an under-
cover agent. Because they only thought they were sending
money to terrorists, but no real terrorists were involved,
she puts them in the non-threatening category.
“It’s important to note that being convicted
of material support [to terrorists] is not
always evidence that the person was
.
472
planning a terrorist attack or terrorism-
related activities,” she advises.
Ye He Lee also mischaracterizes the source of the list,
attributing it entirely to the Center for Immigration
Studies, when in fact the list originates from a Senate
committee on immigration, which compiled it last year
based on open-source documents. (RELATED: At Least
15 ‘Citizen Terrorists’ Also Legal Immigrants)
Brushing aside the 33 immigrants convicted on terror
charges ranging from material support to terrorists abroad,
to gruesome plots planned in the U.S., to possession of
explosives or missiles, Ye Hee Lee claims the White
House doesn’t have enough evidence to justify its claim
that immigrants from these countries pose a potential terror
threat.
“Miller cited this research to say that
several dozen people from the seven
countries identified in the executive order
were involved in ‘all different kinds of
terroristic activity,'” she writes, referring to
senior policy adviser Stephen Miller. “But
upon closer examination of the cases on
the list, it becomes clear that his statement
went too far. In fact, this is pretty thin gruel
on which to make sweeping claims about
the alleged threat posed to the United
States by these seven countries, especially
because the allegations often did not
concern alleged terrorist acts in the United
States.”
Whether or not allowing 30 plus would-be terrorists into
the country constitutes “thin gruel” for the White House
policy argument is obviously a matter of opinion.
Nevertheless, Ye Hee Lee rates the use of the figure as
“mostly false,” apparently because not all 72 people on the
list fit into the category of terrorist as defined by The
Washington Post.
 CIA Publicly Honors Massive
Terrorist State — Proving Whose Side They’re On
By Claire Bernish -The Free Thought Project
February 13, 2017
In a move that would make Orwell spin in his grave, the
CIA presented to the heir to the throne in Saudi Arabia —
one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism on the planet — an
award for ‘counter-terrorism.’
Central Intelligence Agency Director Mike Pompeo
traveled to Saudi Arabia to award Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Nayef the George Tenet Medal in
recognition of his
“excellent intelligence performance, in the
domain of counter-terrorism and his
unbound contribution to realise world
security and peace.”
In a statement paraphrased by Arab News,
“the crown prince said the award
represents international recognition of the
Kingdom’s anti terrorism efforts under the
directives of King Salman.”
The irony of any Saudi winning an award for combating
terrorism is staggering — particularly given revelations
found last year in emails leaked by Wikileaks showing the
U.S. political establishment has been well aware Saudi
Arabia funds and supports the Islamic State.
“While this military/para-military operation
is moving forward, we need to use our
diplomatic and more traditional intelligence
assets to bring pressure on the
governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia,
which are providing clandestine financial
and logistic support to ISIL and other
473
radical Sunni groups in the region,” Hillary
Clinton wrote to John Podesta in an email
dated August 17, 2014.
“This effort will be enhanced by the
stepped up commitment in the [Kurdish
Regional Government]. The Qataris and
Saudis will be put in a position of balancing
policy between their ongoing competition to
dominate the Sunni world and the
consequences of serious U.S. pressure.”
Perhaps bin Nayef couldn’t have been better poised to win
this award from the CIA, given its namesake’s role in the
U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq — two failed
military endeavors undertaken due to fabricated and false
claims. Tenet served
According to Al Jazeera,
“Bin Nayef, 57, has been interior minister
since 2012 and has years of experience in
intelligence work.”
“He oversaw a crackdown on al-Qaeda, a
group that killed security officers and
foreigners in the kingdom between 2003
and 2007.”
Bin Nayef vowed Saudi Arabia would continue to fight
terrorism, and noted the Kingdom has thwarted a number
of terrorist attacks, even against ally nations — though he
didn’t elaborate on the nature of these alleged attacks.
“We are surrounded by areas of conflict,
and we were the first affected by terrorism
from various sources, but we are equipped
to combat terror in any place and under
any circumstances,” the crown prince
claimed.
“The Kingdom has been keen to combat
terrorism based on its conviction that
terrorism has no identity and no religion,
and from its belief that the terrorists are
committing these acts stemming from their
deviant ideologies and evil thought,” bin
Nayef asserted. “All negative religious,
political and social ideologies that use
religion as a tool throughout human history,
 do not reflect the absolute truth about
religion.”
While his statement certainly sounds legitimate, for the
crown prince to dismiss Saudi Arabia’s support for the
world’s enemy number one, Islamic State terrorists — not
to mention the Kingdom’s horrendous human rights
record, thanks to Wahhabist Islam — is the epitome of
hypocrisy.
Hypocritical, but not surprising — and certainly far from
shocking on the part of the of the CIA.
If the United States government were actually fighting the
terrorism it claims to be, Saudi Arabia should not have
received a dime of support in funds or arms once its ties to
the Islamic State became common knowledge among the
political powers-that-be. Of course, Washington already
ignores the exacting human rights abuses the Saudis
commit against their own people under a twisted
amalgamation of monarchy, government, and religion.
Nevertheless, the pantomiming continues — the U.S.
pretends to fight terrorism while arming and funding
terrorists, and the Saudis do the same — each turning blind
eyes to the other’s indiscretion and hypocrisy.
474
As bin Nayef stated,
“Combating terrorism requires a joint
international effort at all levels; financially,
intellectually, militarily and through the
media. This should be coordinated and
conducted in accordance with the UN’s
covenants and laws including particularly
the principle of sovereign equality.”
Riyadh had grown somewhat disillusioned with the
administration of former President Barack Obama, which
appeared hesitant to engage in the Syrian civil war.
Relations chilled further upon a highly-criticized
international deal to lift sanctions on Iran, which agreed
not to pursue nuclear weapons — a deal Pompeo has
denounced.
All hypocrisy on terrorism apparently aside, Bin Nayef
seemed optimistic about the future shared goals of the two
nations, saying,
“Our relationship with the United States is
historical and will continue to succeed.”
 NSC Staffers Purge Social Media
Of Anti-Trump Posts, Fearing Reprisals
Saagar Enjeti - Reporter
9:51 AM 02/13/2017
National Security Council (NSC) career staffers are
purging their social media accounts of any past anti-Trump
sentiments, the New York Times reports.
The purge comes amid increased suspicion among NSC
political appointees that career officials are leaking key
details of the Trump administration’s possible courses of
action. These White House political appointees reportedly
call these leaks the “insider threat” and are considering
monitoring the phone calls and emails of career staffers.
The White House was reportedly incensed by leaks within
the NSC of plans by Secretary of Defense James Mattis to
have U.S. sailors board an Iranian ship in international
waters to search for contraband headed to Houthi rebels in
Yemen. Mattis set aside the operation after the plans
leaked.
Political appointees on the NSC, like White House Chief
Strategist Steve Bannon, have instead resorted to drafting
plans with little paper trail.
475
“They ran all of these executive orders
outside of the normal construct,” one
official told Foreign Policy in late January.
The effort reflects a deep distrust of career
NSC officials, and others within the
bureaucracy, who the White House fears
will leak plans to the media.
The NSC also experienced an exodus of career officials
prior to President Donald Trump’s inauguration, with
many officials saying they did not want to work for him.
“Career people are looking get out and go
back to their agencies and pressure is
being put on them to get them to stay,” a
U.S. official told The Guardian in
December.
 Trump Replaces Flynn With Boss
Of Super Secret Surveillance Contractor
Kurt Nimmo
February 13, 2017
Mike Flynn’s out. He resigned as Trump’s advisor this
evening after a chorus of calls for him to step down for an
alleged relationship with the Russians. This fits the
narrative used by Democrats since the election: Putin and
the Russians influenced the vote somehow, although
nobody can tell us how exactly. Trump and his supporters
are in league with them, according to the narrative.
Flynn will be replaced by retired Gen. Keith Kellogg.
Kellogg has an interesting history. In addition to his
disastrous mismanagement of the Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq, Kellogg was president of Abraxas, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Cubic Corporation. Cubic
provides diversified systems and services to the
transportation and defense markets worldwide, according
to MarketWatch.
In 2006, The LA Times reported on Abraxas:
In the burgeoning field of intelligence
contractors, an especially aggressive
upstart is Abraxas Corp., a privately held
company that has assembled a deep roster
of CIA veterans to handle a wide range of
clandestine assignments — including
secret work for an elite team of
overseas case officers.
The company was founded by a group of former high-
ranking agency employees, led by Richard “Hollis” Helms,
a longtime overseas officer in the Middle East and onetime
head of the CIA’s European division, and Richard Calder,
who was the agency’s deputy director for administration.
Abraxas is right down the street from the CIA.
The company occupies an unmarked, third-floor office
suite in McLean, Va., two miles from CIA headquarters. It
has mainly specialized in providing veteran operatives and
reports officers for positions in overseas stations and at
CIA headquarters.
Abraxas is responsible for TrapWire, a tech company that
develops a homonymous predictive software system
designed to find patterns indicative of terrorist attacks.
.
476
The secretive project was discovered through a WikiLeaks
disclosure in 2012 after emails were hacked from Strafor,
often described as a shadow version of the CIA.
TrapWire uses a series of surveillance cameras around the
country and also abroad to detect “suspicious behavior.”
The system is reportedly located in every high-value target
in New York City.
The system is sold to local law enforcement. From RT:
PrivacySos reports that a website
maintained by the US Homeland Security
Department’s Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) includes
TrapWire as a product for sale to law
enforcement agencies and first responders.
It’s there that the background and
operational concept of the system are
described in detail and direct curious
customers to AbraxasCorp.com for more
information. When a link to the URL is
clicked, the banner at the top of the
developer’s homepage described Abraxas
as “A Cubic Company.” On the FEMA
page, the product information is detailed as
provided directly by Abraxas Applications.
Sounds pretty much like a CIA front organization
operation.
If Kellogg replaces Flynn, we can undoubtedly expect an
expansion of the surveillance state and its associated
industries.
In late 2015, Trump said in an interview he tends “to err on
the side of security” and restoring parts of the Patriot Act
that have been amended would “be fine.”
Trump’s CIA director, Mike Pompeo, introduced
legislation to block the USA FREEDOM Act in 2015. The
act enacted on June 2, 2015 restored in modified form
several provisions of the Patriot Act, which had expired.
 Corporate America Setting Up
"War Rooms" To Prep For Potential Trump Tweets
By Tyler Durden
Feb 13, 2017 10:30 PM

Since November 8th, several public companies have

unsuspectingly fallen into the cross hairs of Trump tweets
sending their stocks gyrating violently while adding or
erasing millions of dollars worth of market cap in a matter
of seconds. Here is just a small sample:

As we pointed out back in January, Toyota's shares, along

with the Mexican Peso, tumbled on Trump's threat to
impose a "big border tax" on their Corolla imports as the
unprepared and shocked company frantically drafted a
response.

As Mr. Trump posted his message, Toyota’s chief

communications officer, Scott Vazin, was packing his
suitcase and preparing to leave his hotel room in Las
Vegas, where he had been holding meetings around a trade
show organized by the Consumer Technology Association.
Mr. Vazin’s phone began to buzz as he faced a deluge of
text messages and calls from his communications staff and
reporters.

Once the tweet was sent, Mr. Vazin called Messrs. Lentz
and Nagata to discuss the statement he would craft, as
the company’s stock began to inch downward. The auto
maker posted its response on Twitter less than two hours
later.

“Toyota has been part of the cultural fabric

in the U.S. for nearly 60 years,” said its
statement, which bolded the name of the
Mexican city where its plant will be
located—Guanajuato, not Baja. The
company touted its “$21.9 billion direct
investment in the U.S.” and its number of
employees and facilities in the U.S. Mr.
Vazin said the company hasn’t been
477
 contacted by Mr. Trump since the
statement.
Now, according to the Wall Street Journal, Trump's
Twitter blasts, which often drive 'yuge' market reactions
and come without warning, are forcing companies across
the country to draft plans for “war rooms” to address a
surprise presidential tweet. Moreover, other companies
are actively exploring strategically placing ads on
MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” CNN and “The O’Reilly
Factor”—programs and networks from which Trump has
often appeared to draw inspiration for his tweets.
“Every business and association in
Washington is thinking about how they
would respond to a tweet from Donald
Trump,” said Alex Conant, a partner at the
communications firm Firehouse Strategies
and a longtime Republican strategist.
In one recent simulation to prepare for a
public attack by Mr. Trump, says consultant
Eric Dezenhall, top executives of a
science and technology company spent
an afternoon in a room responding to
various fallout scenarios, such as a
stock-price plunge, congressional
hearings or questions from investigative
reporters.
Mr. Dezenhall says the company that
rehearsed the drill is now looking for
something it can use as a potential
peace offering to the president in the
event of a critical tweet or other Trump
tirade, “an equivalent to ‘we’re no
longer building a plant in Mexico.’”
head off any criticism from the White House. The latest
example of such a move came from Intel's CEO, Brian
Krzanich, who recently visited the White House to tout a
$7BN investment in a facility in Chandler, Arizona which
was already announced under the Obama administration.
Other companies have taken more proactive steps.
Intel Corp. CEO Brian Krzanich last
week traveled to the White House to roll
out the company’s plans for a $7 billion
investment in a major manufacturing
plant in Arizona—plans that had been in
the works for several years.
Mr. Trump said following the announcement:
“We’re very happy.”
Other companies, including Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. and Amazon.com Inc., have
issued press releases touting U.S. job
creation numbers from previously
planned store openings and
expansions.
Some are also turning to “social-listening” tools to monitor
mentions of their products on social networks, analyze the
fallout from Trump tweets about other companies and
track what’s said on the accounts that Mr. Trump follows.
General Motors Co.—whose CEO Mary Barra has
frequently spoken with Mr. Trump—said last month it
would invest at least $1 billion across several U.S.
factories, days after the president accused it on Twitter of
moving Mexican-made vehicles across the border.

Lobbying shops are telling their clients to do a thorough

Guess we can add the cost of establishing these 'war
review of their business interests, especially as they relate
rooms' to the list of excuses as to why companies will
to federal contracts, so they can tell a story about how the
inevitably miss Q1 2017 earnings...at least they get to
firm invests domestically.
blame something other than the "weather" for once.

Still others companies have begun aggressively promoting

previously announced job creation numbers in an effort to
.

478
 Facebook Scrubs Videos Of
Comedian Calling For Trump’s Assassination
By Bre Payton
February 13, 2017
Comedian Eddie Griffin encouraged audience members
to assassinate President Trump during a standup comedy
routine in Dallas, Texas on Friday, but Facebook doesn’t
want you to know that.
Ben Ferguson, a radio show host who attended the show at
the American Airlines Center, told The Federalist that
Griffin made references to late President John F.
Kennedy’s assassination, saying:
“Ya’ll took out one president, you need to
take out another.”
“Ya’ll need to put Trump into a convertible
and take him out, or better yet, the driver
should take him out,” he continued.
Ferguson streamed portions of the show via Facebook
Live, but the social network removed the video containing
Griffin’s remarks within 24 hours. When Ferguson
.
479
attempted to access his Facebook account on his phone the
next morning, he had been signed out. When he logged
back into his account on his desktop, there was a notice
from Facebook that the video violated their community
standards.
Ferguson believes Facebook’s decision to remove the
video, which had at least 100,000 views, is censorship.
“It’s protecting the Left when they’re doing
something extreme,” he said.
He says he’s not the only one whose videos the social
network selectively deleted. Others reportedly complained
on Twitter that Facebook had purged their videos of
Griffin’s disturbing monologue.
Facebook has a history of biased treatment of conservative
media and topics that lean towards a conservative view of
the world. Last year, a group of employees who managed
the social network’s “trending topics” side bar revealed
they would routinely suppress conservative news or topics
of interest to conservatives. Facebook subsequently
eliminated the trending topics team after a storm of
criticism following that revelation.
The most frustrating part for Ferguson is that because he
recorded the video via Facebook Live, he has no hard copy
of Griffin’s rant saved. Two of Ferguson’s other videos of
the comedy show remain on his Facebook page.
 NOT Crazy: Trump Didn’t Get Punked By
China’s Leader, He May Have Just Avoided World War III
By: JD Heyes
Date: February 13, 2017
During his campaign, candidate Donald J. Trump talked
regularly about how China was taking advantage of the
U.S. over trade thanks in large part to “bad deals” made by
previous administrations.
In June of last year, during a campaign speech in
Pennsylvania, Trump vowed, as he would often do, to
punish China and renegotiate the bad trade deals that have
sapped the U.S. of much of its manufacturing prowess and
the employment that went with it.
After China was given membership into the World Trade
Organization in 2001, the Los Angeles Times reported, the
trade imbalance between two of the world’s biggest
economies really grew:
Chinese exports to the U.S. have soared
ever since, reaching a record $482 billion
last year. And by some economists’
estimates, Chinese imports have resulted
in a net loss of about 2 million domestic
jobs from 1999 to 2011.
Fast forward several months to early December, shortly
after he defeated two-time presidential loser Hillary
Clinton: Trump took a congratulatory phone call from
Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen, which broke decades of
protocol and greatly upset the Chinese. (RELATED:
Conservative foreign and domestic policy news updated
daily at Conservative.news)
480
Then, a few days later, Trump appeared to openly question
the United States’ long-standing “One China” policy – that
is, the U.S. only officially recognizes China as an
independent, sovereign nation and not Taiwan, which has
governed itself independently since the Communists
defeated the Nationalists in a long-running civil war that
finally ended in 1949.
As The Hill noted, “Jimmy Carter formally declared
Beijing the sole government of China in 1979, which
ended formal U.S. diplomatic relations with Taiwan.”
“Adhering to the ‘one China’ principle is the
political bedrock for the development US-
China relations. If it is comprised or
disrupted, the sound and steady growth of
the bilateral relationship, as well as bilateral
cooperation in major fields would be out of
question,” said an editorial in the Chinese
Global Times newspaper, as quoted by
CNN. Since all media is controlled by the
government, China’s communist leadership
often uses them as an organ to make
quasi-official statements.
With so many issues on the table and so much pent-up
tension with China left over from the Obama
administration, it appeared that Trump and Chinese
President Xi Jinping were on a collision course that could
wind up triggering the start of World War III. But then
something happened last week: Trump and Xi spoke over
the phone, and reports note that Trump has signed on to
the One China policy.
So, did our president get punked by the Chinese leader?
Did he get out-negotiated? Was he humiliated, as his
political enemies are claiming? Or did he just avoid
plunging the U.S. into a major shooting war with the
world’s most populous country and second-largest
economy?
I see it as the latter. As reported by The National Sentinel:
Dr. Steve Pieczenik, a long time covert
operations and regime change expert, in an
interview with Alex Jones, said he
believes China has many more internal
 problems than most people are aware. And
he does not believe Xi has a handle on the
country’s deeply embedded economic
problems.
In short, he thinks China is not as stable as it appears, and
that additional aggravation by the United States could push
the Chinese leader to the brink. (RELATED: Stay current
on the biggest threats to U.S. security at
NationalSecurity.news)
“Xi…really can’t handle the economy,
which is totally messed up,” Pieczenik said.
“There’s a huge outflow of cash that’s
going into the United States and
elsewhere. He has a major devaluation of
the yuan (China’s currency). He has
companies that are so corrupt that they’re
making up numbers for the bonds that
they’re selling in the trillions of dollars. And
he has political unrest.”
.
481
So U.S. foreign policy, he says, should focus on helping Xi
“stabilize his government before he thinks
that an external war can help him out.”
It appears that Trump has taken that path in patching up
the rocky start with his Chinese counterpart. And isn’t that
a much better path?
For all of Trump’s detractors who portray him as some
out-of-control lunatic with his fingers on the nuclear
trigger, our president may have just made the best
decision he could have in order to avoid ratcheting up
tensions in the short term. Even though Taiwan is
obviously an independent nation (and deserves to be
recognized as such), the last thing Trump wants is to leave
the Chinese president with little choice but to lash out
militarily in an effort to detract from his country’s internal
problems while at the same time rallying his people.
How’s that for not being the crazed, egomaniacal
caricature he’s made out to be?
 Media Panic As White House Lets Lesser Known Outlets
Ask Questions… NYT ‘Reprimands’ Reporter
For Calling Melania ‘Hooker’
By IWB
Published February 13, 2017 · Updated February 14, 2017
The mainstream media isn’t liking the new set up at the
White House: Lesser name news outlets are being called
on during press briefings, rather than the old, established
bellwethers.
During his press conference with Canadian Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau, President Donald Trump called on two
news outlets: WJLA a local ABC news affiliate, and the
Daily Caller. Both failed to ask him about the fate of his
national security adviser Gen. Michael Flynn, who has
been marred in a controversy that he spoke to Russian
authorities before Mr. Trump took office.
And the mainstream media immediately pounced – saying
Mr. Trump was picking favorites in order to avoid
questioning on Mr. Flynn.
“By handpicking reporters, Trump manages
to get through a news conference without
being asked about Flynn,” New York Times
reporter Peter Baker lamented on Twitter –
failing to mention that all U.S. presidents
handpick reporters.
Bloomberg’s Angela Greiling Keane helped him clarify.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/13/mains
tream-media-whines-trump-calls-less-establish/
New York Times Reporter Reprimanded for “Hooker”
Comment About Melania Trump
The comment became public knowledge on Monday after
supermodel Emily Ratajkowski stated that she heard what
was said and was outraged over it.
A New York Times reporter has been reprimanded by the
paper for a comment made about first lady Melania
Trump.
The reporter made the comment on Sunday during a New
York Fashion Week event. The newspaper did not identify
the name of the staffer.
482
“At a party last night, a Times reporter who
does not cover Washington or politics,
referred to an unfounded rumor regarding
Melania Trump,” the newspaper said in a
statement. “The comment was not intended
to be public, but it was nonetheless
completely inappropriate and should not
have occurred. Editors have talked to the
reporter in question about the lapse.”
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/new-york-times-
reporter-reprimanded-hooker-comment-melania-trump-
975599
Archbishop says it’s amazing ‘how hostile
press is’ to Trump
Philadelphia Archbishop Charles J. Chaput told a radio
talk show host Monday that he believes fewer than 25
percent of those working in the “mainstream … elite”
media have religious faith, and expressed surprise at what
he termed was media hostility to President Trump.
“It’s just amazing to me how hostile the
press is to everything the president does,”
Chaput told the California-based Hugh
Hewitt, a Catholic conservative.
“I don’t want to be partisan in my
comments here, but it seems to me if we
are really serious about our common
responsibilities, we support the president,”
Chaput said, “whether we accept
everything he stands for or not, and wish
him success rather than trying to
undermine him.
“The elite, of course, kind of pooh-pooh
religious faith … very deliberately,” Chaput
said. “It is important to us not to desire to
be a part of that with the elite, to the point
that we give up our faith.”
He did not offer any data to support his contention that http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Chaput-says-amazing-
news media are markedly less religious than the general how-hostile-media-are-to-Trump.html
public — an idea Hewitt proposed to him.

483
 Keith Kellogg: 5 Fast Facts You Need To Know
By Brendan Morrow
Published 12:20 Am EST, February 14, 2017
Updated 12:41 Am EST, February 14, 2017
General Keith Kellogg meets with Donald Trump at Trump Tower.
(Getty)
Keith Kellogg has been named acting national security
advisor following the resignation of Michael Flynn.
Flynn resigned on Monday amid reports that he had
spoken with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about Russia
sanctions, despite Flynn repeatedly claiming that he never
did so. Kellogg is serving in the interim until a new adviser
is named, although he’s also reportedly on the shortlist to
be Flynn’s permanent replacement. Up until
today, Kellogg’s position was as executive secretary of the
National Security Council.
Here’s what you need to know about Keith Kellogg.
1. He Is a Retired U.S. Army General Officer
484
Like Michael Flynn, Keith Kellogg served in the U.S.
Army prior to being appointed to Donald Trump’s
National Security Council.
Kellogg served in the 101st Airborne Division during the
Vietnam War, and he commanded the 82nd Airborne
Division starting in 1996.
“We could not have picked a better person
to command this great division today than
Keith Kellogg,” Lieutenant General Jack
Keane said when Kellogg was given this
command. “He’s a great soldier, a leader of
uncommon good judgment, a proven
combat veteran and has earned the
reputation of being one of the Army’s
premier trainers.”
Kellogg later rose to the rank of lieutenant general. He told
The Fay Observer in 1997 that
“Since I was a little kid all I ever wanted to
do was be in the military. When I was a
tyke. I don’t know why. I happened to pick
up on it and always want to do it.”
2. He Served as Chief Operating Officer for the Coalition
Provisional Authority in Iraq
After the invasion of Iraq, Keith Kellogg served as chief
operating officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority,
the transitional government of Iraq established in March
2003 and dissolved in June 2004.
Kellogg also worked as chief of staff to L. Paul Bremer III,
leader of the Coalition Provisional Authority who was
appointed by President George W. Bush in May 2003.
In 2003, Kellogg told The Los Angeles Times that his job
at the CPA was to ensure discipline and speed throughout
the organization.
“I’m the guy who’s supposed to make the
trains run on time,” he said.
In addition, Kellogg formerly served as the director of
command, control, and communications for the Joint
Chiefs of Staff for the Pentagon, where he worked on
“network centric warfare,” according to The Nation.
Kellogg’s involvement in the Iraq war stands in contrast to
President Donald Trump’s repeated statements that the war
was an unmitigated disaster.
3. He Worked as the Executive Vice President for CACI
International, a Pentagon Contractor
In 2005, Keith Kellogg began working as the executive
vice president of CACI International, a Pentagon
contractor. According to The Nation, his hiring came eight
months after the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib was first
reported; several of the interrogators involved in this
scandal were CACI International employees.
“CACI has demonstrated outstanding
commitment to national priorities, and the
company is vigilant in its steadfast
dedication to clients who protect the
nation,” Kellogg said in a statement at the
time of his hiring. “This is the type of
environment in which I have served
throughout my career, and in which I want
to continue serving. I look forward to
485
working with the talented CACI
professionals in this arena.”
Kellogg has worked for a number of intelligence
contractors, including Analex Corp. and Abraxas, the latter
of which Wikileaks revealed in 2010 was the source of
software used by the U.S. government for surveillance.
Kellogg also worked for Oracle Corporation, where he ran
the homeland security solutions division.
“When I decided to leave the military, I
realized that the skills I acquired there were
transferable to the commercial world both
in leadership and the information
technology field,” Kellogg told The
Washington Post.
4. His Wife, Paige, Is Also a Former U.S. Army Officer
Keith Kellogg’s wife Paige Cook is a former Fort Bragg
paratrooper and a veteran of the 1983 Grenada invasion,
according to the Fay Observer.
Keith and Paige have three children: 32-year-old Bryan,
30-year-old Meaghan, and 26-year-old Tyler, according to
The Washington Post. They reside in Arlington, Virginia.
Kellogg said in a 2016 interview with CNN that his
daughter-in-law is currently going through the immigration
process.
As Kellogg explained in a 1997 article for the Fay
Observer, he and his pregnant wife were busy raising their
two children when he got the call that his 82nd Airborne
Division would be going to Saudi Arabia in response to
Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
“[Paige] said, ‘This is serious stuff. You get
on an airplane. You don’t worry about me,'”
Kellogg said.
Kellogg went on to say that he didn’t see his family again
for another eight months, when Iraq was driven out of
Kuwait.
5. He Was Added to Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy months, Kellogg frequently appeared on cable news to talk
Team in March 2016 about Donald Trump’s campaign promises.

In August 2016, for instance, Kellogg appeared on CNN to

discuss Donald Trump’s immigration speech and his call
for “extreme vetting.”

“I think we need a very robust way of

looking at people coming into the country,”
Kellogg said. “You know, immigration is
tough…It’s a tough process, but I think we
need to carry it even further. When you talk
about ideological tests that adds to it, as
well.”

Keith Kellogg became one of Donald Trump’s national He also said that Donald Trump has the temperament to be
security advisors in March 2016. In the subsequent commander-in-chief and that he is a “change candidate.”

486
 Poof! Flynn Is Gone
Just As Fast As He Came, He Has Gone
By Lexi Morgan -
02.14.2017 @12:19 AM EST

WASHINGTON D.C. (INTELLIHUB) — President
Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser Michael
Flynn resigned Monday night just after the Justice
Department advised White House officials that Flynn
could easily be blackmailed by the Russians after
exposing his vulnerability to them over the phone.
Flynn’s replacement will be Ret. Army Gen. Keith
Kellogg, 72, who has already been abruptly appointed by
the Trump Administration as the National Security Adviser
(acting).

487

The media drove a wedge through the Admin. over the
weekend after Flynn was alleged to have spoken with a
Russian Ambassador about the “sanctions” near the end of
Trump’s presidential run and was subsequently
investigated through F.B.I. recordings, which so far have
turned up no crime.
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Gen. Raymond A.
“Tony” Thomas, U.S. Special Operations Command Commander, at
MacDill, AFB, FL, Feb. 6, 2017. Flynn is in MacDill to join the
President who’s visiting senior military leaders and service members
of Central Command and Special Operations Command. (DoD photo
by D. Myles Cullen/Released)
All of this is causing static and is likely part of a much
larger master plan to derail the current regime.
Trump refused to comment on the matter.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer let the press
know that he was “evaluating the situation” and that Vice
President Mike Pence received an apology over the phone
from a departing Flynn.
Although some press reported Monday that Flynn would
continue his duties in the Administration, Intellihub took
special care to let the readers know that Flynn’s job was in
peril over the friction.
Flynn left a resignation letter which listed why he
resigned. In the letter, Flynn wrote that
488
“because of the fast pace of events” he
managed to “brief the Vice President-elect
and others with incomplete information”
pertaining to phone conversations Russian
Ambassador.
Flynn made it clear that he was
“honored to serve President Trump […] our
nation and the American people” and said
that the Trump “team will go down in
history as one of the greatest presidencies
[…].”
Now some within the government, like Connecticut Rep.
Chris Murphy feel the Trump-Russia “story” needs to be
investigated and are already parroting the old ‘Russian
narrative.’
Rep. Chris Murphy tweeted Monday:
CBS News got a little aggressive with the White House in
the following excerpt, reporting:
Rep. John Conyers, Jr., D-Mich., the
ranking member on the House Judiciary
Committee, and Rep. Elijah E. Cummings,
D-Md, Ranking Member on the House
Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, issued a joint statement saying
they were “shocked and dismayed” to learn
that law enforcement officials had warned
White House counsel Don McGahn that
Flynn had given false information to the
public about his communications with
Russian officials, but the White House
“apparently did nothing about it — neither
to clarify the truth to the American public or
to stop General Flynn from being an
ongoing national security concern.”
Trump’s personal stance on the issue is currently
unknown.
489
 Trump Responds To Flynn Resignation:
"The Real Story" Here Are The Illegal Leaks
By Tyler Durden
Feb 14, 2017 9:47 AM
Donald Trump's anticipated, if so far unofficial, reaction to
the Flynn resignation hit moments ago when the president
tweeted in response to the brewing scandal that
"The real story here is why are there so
many illegal leaks coming out of
Washington? Will these leaks be
happening as I deal on N. Korea etc?"
The White House announced Flynn's resignation Monday
night, the culmination of weeks of controversy
surrounding alleged communications with Russia. Flynn
had initially denied speaking with Russia’s U.S.
ambassador during the transition about sanctions levied by
President Obama, but admitted this week that he may have
done so and "inadvertently" told Vice President Mike
Pence and others otherwise.
However, as we noted earlier, that will hardly placate
Trump's enemies who will demand to know how and if,
indeed, the White House was warned by the DOJ of
potential Russian ties for a month, and how long did
Trump plan to keep Flynn on board.
Also, attention will focus on whether Flynn acting on his
own when he discussed the Russian sanctions with the
ambassador, and whether he was authorized to have the
490
conversation, which will then shift the spotlight to Trump's
own allegations of close ties with the Kremlin.
Furthermore, Trump now faces backlash within the GOP
as well, with John McCain saying moments ago that Gen.
Flynn's resignation
"is a troubling indication of the dysfunction
of the current national security apparatus."
Finally, earlier on Tuesday, Wikileaks blamed a
“destabilization campaign” by the media and Democrats
for national security adviser Michael Flynn's resignation.
“Trump's National Security Advisor Michael
Flynn resigns after destabilization
campaign by US spies, Democrats, press,”
the organization tweeted, including a
screenshot of the press release from the
White House announcing the President
Trump accepted Flynn’s resignation.
As also reported earlier, Russia responded to the Flynn
resgination, calling it an "internal matter", while some
Russian politicans were quoted as accusing the US of
"paranoia”.
 Deep State Leak Campaign Brings
Down National Security Advisor Michael Flynn
Dan Wright
14 Feb 2017
Former General Michael Flynn. U.S. Navy photo by Mass
Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jess Lewis/Released
After one of the most blatant leak campaigns by national
security officials in recent memory, former General
Michael Flynn resigned from office as national security
advisor Monday evening. The official reason for the
resignation was giving “incomplete information” to the
vice president and others about a call between himself and
the Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey
Kislyak in December.
Today, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said
President Trump lost confidence in Flynn related to his
memory and honesty, particularly in reference to what
Flynn told the vice president. Spicer also said a legal
review was performed by the White House Counsel’s
Office which found no legal issues with Flynn’s conduct.
Spicer said the fundamental issue was trust.
According to The New York Times, the White House
reviewed a transcript of the call—retained from a
longstanding wire tape of Kislyak—and found it to be
“ambiguous enough that Mr. Trump could
have justified either firing or retaining Mr.
Flynn.”
So what led President Trump to go with firing? Probably
the torrent of stories smashing down on the White House
that were part of a clearly coordinated campaign that
reached crescendo on Sunday when stories from The New
York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street
Journal, and Politico hit within a 30-minute period.
All the stories claimed to be predicated on information
from national security officials and other insiders.
491
The Washington Post has been the biggest repository of
leaks and started the campaign when intelligence officials
told David Ignatius (and eventually other Washington
Post reporters) that Flynn had talked to Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about sanctions in a phone
call after the election, but before taking office.
This would be a completely benign event by any standard
outside the fevered dreams of partisans. Talking to an
ambassador about sanctions or any issue of foreign policy
is well within an incoming national security advisor’s
purview. The Logan Act, a law forbidding non-U.S.
officials from engaging in foreign policy, is a dead letter
and likely unconstitutional.
If the Logan Act were actually enforced, many U.S.
citizens, including members of Congress and former
presidents, would face indictment. Only one person has
ever been indicted under the act and no one has ever been
prosecuted since its enactment in 1799.
Adding to the circumstantial evidence were stories on
Monday by The Washington Post framing a conversation
between now-fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates,
intelligence officials James Clapper and John Brennan, and
President Donald Trump as a concern about Flynn being
compromised by Russia.
The theory of being compromised here is that because
Flynn denied he talked about sanctions, the Russians could
blackmail him into doing their bidding by exposing that he
had talked—in benign terms—about sanctions. If that
sounds like strained logic, that’s because it is.
While there is no doubt Flynn’s troubled relationship with
Vice President Pence was a factor, it is downright
irresponsible to not note that Flynn had many enemies
within the deep state, including those in a position to leak
information to the press to take him down.
That the Russian call is not a coincidence. Former
intelligence officers like John Schindler have claimed
(without evidence) that Flynn is a Kremlin agent. The New
York Times reported there was an investigation into
Flynn’s trip to Russia in 2015 by the Department of
Defense.
Some of the leaks almost certainly came from the CIA,
which has had a long running feud with Flynn that goes
back to the Obama Administration and Flynn’s time as
head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Flynn was
ultimately fired by President Obama, but not before DIA
created a now notorious 2012 memo that blamed the CIA
for the rise of ISIS.
The memo became a major point of conflict with Flynn,
who affirmed it, while former CIA Director Mike Morell
attempted to discredit it:
Director of the DIA at the time of the
memo’s drafting and former Senior
Intelligence Officer for the Joint Special
Operations Command (JSOC), Michael
Flynn, has repeatedly affirmed the
report’s accuracy in public statements.
But now, for the first time, a CIA
perspective has been offered: former CIA
Deputy Director Michael Morell recently
took to Politico to weigh in on controversy
surrounding the now declassified 2012
memo, which further warned that “the
Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI
are the major forces driving the insurgency
in Syria” and that “the West, Gulf countries,
and Turkey support the opposition.”
As Shadowproof discussed with former CIA officer John
Kiriakou recently, there is a raging power struggle going
on between the CIA and President Trump. Flynn was
certainly one of the CIA’s major targets, but hardly their
only one.

What is relevant and noteworthy is that Trump blinked.

Soon after it was written, the 2012 IIR
The deep state leaked information to the press and, instead
(Intelligence Information Report) landed on
of shrugging off the charges, he forced Flynn to resign. For
the desks of Congressional Intelligence
a man who came to power using the press as his chief foil,
Committee members, but more importantly
it’s a strange move and, for a press clearly at war with the
would be used to argue policy at the White
White House, a now proven method for undermining the
House—this according to the Defense
presidency.
Department’s chief of military intelligence at
the time the memo was produced.
.

492
 CIA Broke The Law
To Take Out Its Critic General Flynn
By Thomas Lifson
February 14, 2017

Make no mistake: we have just

witnessed an operation by members Not only is the crime underlying the "scandal" being
of the CIA to take out a high official of ignored, but the criminals are being hailed. On Morning
Joe's first hour today, the host, a former congressman (i.e.,
our own government.
a lawmaker) himself, called the leakers "heroes."
An agency widely believed to have brought down
This interference in domestic politics by the CIA should be
democratically elected governments overseas is now
regarded as a major threat to our democracy, but of course
practicing the same dark arts in domestic American
our Trump-hating domestic media are reveling in a major
politics. Almost certainly, its new head, Mike Pompeo,
point scored against the new president.
was not consulted.

David P. Goldman (aka Spengler), writing on PJ Media,

Senator Chuck Schumer, of all people, laid out on January
explains the level of hatred the CIA has for Flynn for
2 what was going to happen to the Trump administration if
daring to take on its spectacular failures:
it dared take on the deep state – the permanent bureaucracy
that has contempt for the will of the voters and feels
entitled to run the government for its own benefit:

New Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)

said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump is "being
really dumb" by taking on the intelligence community and
its assessments on Russia's cyber activities.

"Let me tell you, you take on the

intelligence community, they have six
ways from Sunday at getting back at
you," Schumer told MSNBC's Rachel
Maddow.
"So even for a practical, supposedly hard-
nosed businessman, he's being really
dumb to do this."
Or, as the old rueful saying has it, "you've got to go along
to get along." This means that we the people had better
acknowledge that the bureaucrats have turned into our
masters, and the old expression "public servant" is as
ironic as anything Orwell came up with. Schumer knows
this and likes it, because the deep state wants a bigger,
more powerful government, just as he does.
Note that the law was broken by
whoever leaked the transcripts to the
media.
493
… the CIA has gone out of its way to
sandbag Flynn at the National Security
Council. As Politico reports: "On Friday,
one of Flynn's closest deputies on the
NSC, senior director for Africa Robin
Townley, was informed that the Central
Intelligence Agency had rejected his
request for an elite security clearance
required for service on the NSC, according
to two people with direct knowledge of the
situation." Townley held precisely the same
security clearance at the Department of
Defense for seventeen years, yet he was
blackballed without explanation. At DoD,
Townley had a stellar reputation as a
Middle East and Africa expert, and the
 denial of his clearance is hard to explain
except as bureaucratic backstabbing.
... Gen. Flynn is the hardest of hardliners
with respect to Russia within the Trump
camp. In his 2016 book Field of Fight (co-
authored with PJ Media's Michael Ledeen),
Flynn warned of "an international alliance
of evil movements and countries that is
working to destroy us[.] ... The war is on.
We face a working coalition that extends
from North Korea and China to Russia,
Iran, Syria, Syria, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela
and Nicaragua." The unsubstantiated
allegation that he presides over a "leaky"
National Security Council tilting towards
Russia makes no sense. The only leaks of
which we know are politically motivated
reports coming from the intelligence
community designed to disrupt the normal
workings of a democratic government –
something that raises grave constitutional
issues.
Flynn is the one senior U.S. intelligence officer with the
guts to blow the whistle on a series of catastrophic
intelligence and operational failures. The available
facts point to the conclusion that elements of the
humiliated (and perhaps soon-to-be-unemployed)
intelligence community is trying to exact vengeance
against a principled and patriotic officer[.] ... The present
affair stinks like a dumpster full of dead rats.
Note that the suspicions eagerly being raised by the media
center on Trump being a pawn of Putin and Flynn secretly
pledging fealty or some such absurd subordination. In
other words, suspicions of treasonous behavior by the new
president are being cultivated in the general public. We
can expect the media to fan these flames at every
opportunity.
.
494
Spengler also explains why the Logan Act references are
insulting:
Senior officials speak to their counterparts
in other countries all the time, and for
obvious reasons do not want these
conversations to become public. The
intelligence community, though, was taping
Flynn's discussions, and the transcripts (of
whose existence we are told but whose
contents we have not seen) were used to
embarrass him.
This last point is critical. The entire "scandal" is based on
innuendo.
Flynn tripped over his own feet by misinforming Vice
President Pence on the nature of his call and allowing the
veep to issue a too sweeping denial of any discussion. If
Flynn had said in his conversation with the Russian
ambassador that we will discuss the sanctions after Trump
takes office, he might well have told Pence that they did
not discuss the sanctions. And the CIA leakers could have
used the appearance of the word "sanctions" in their
transcript to brand Pence a liar. We don't know, and for
some reason, nobody is gaining access to the actual
transcripts so that we may see the content. Perhaps the
congressional investigations to come will gain access. But
Flynn is now gone, and media memes have been firmly
planted in the public mind.
The Flynn Affair is a huge scandal, all
right. But the media are misdirecting
our attention toward the lesser
dimension while they studiously
ignore the real threat to our
democracy.
 Chaffetz Investigating Security
Protocols At Trump's Mar-A-Lago Resort
By Barnini Chakraborty
Published February 14, 2017
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz on
Tuesday sent a letter to the White House in response to
multiple reports that President Trump discussed sensitive
information about a North Korean missile test in a public
setting at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.
In a letter to White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus,
Chaffetz asks for answers on security protocols at Trump’s
property. The questions come after reports that Trump and
the Prime Minister of Japan discussed North Korea’s
launch of an intermediate-range ballistic missile in a public
dining room and within earshot of other diners and wait
staff.
Among other things, Chaffetz wants an explanation of the
vetting process of guests, employees and residents at the
Palm Springs property
“in order to ensure that they are not foreign
agents or spies on behalf of a foreign
government.”
He also wants to know what documents specifically were
reviewed “at the dinner table and other common areas” and
whether the documents were
.
495
“classified or otherwise sensitive, and if so,
what classification level and handling
caveats applied.”
On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer
reiterated to reporters at his daily press briefing that Trump
did not receive or review any classified material at the
dinner table.
That narrative has been challenged after pictures and
videos of Trump and Shinzo Abe – with their aides
holding up their cell phones while looking over documents
– were posted by fellow diners on their social media
accounts over the weekend. One Mar-a-Lago guest posted
a picture to his Facebook page with a man described as
being the holder of the “nuclear football.”
“While the President is always on duty, and
cannot dictate the timing of when he needs
to receive sensitive information about
urgent matters, we hope the White House
will cooperate in providing the Committee
with additional information,” Chaffetz wrote.
Chaffetz asked the White House to provide the Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform with the
information
“as soon as possible, but no later than
February 28, 2017.”
It’s the same day the White House has been asked to
respond to a potential ethics violation by Trump senior
adviser Kellyanne Conway. It’s also the day Trump is
scheduled to speak to members of Congress in a joint
address.
The oversight committee is the principal investigative
committee in the U.S. House of Representatives.
 Gee, Remember When Obama Literally Whispered Into
Russia’s Ear? (VIDEO)
By DCwhispers
Posted On February 14, 2017

Retired General Michael Flynn was fired this week by

President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence
after it was discovered Flynn did not fully explain a
previous conversation he had with a Russian diplomat in
which Flynn suggested relations between the U.S. and
Russia would likely improve after Trump became
president. The media and Democrats are calling this
undeniable proof of undo influence by Russia on American
foreign policy.

And yet, there was no such outrage for this moment when
then-President Barack Obama leaned into then-Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev, and whispered he would have
“more flexibility” to work with Russia after the 2012
Election. It was a message Medvedev promptly indicated
would be delivered to Putin.
.

496
 Anti-Trump
Campaign Claims First Victim
From Stephen Lendman
2-14-2017
Late Monday evening, National Security Advisor Michael
Flynn was sacked - ostensibly for discussing US sanctions
on Russia with its US ambassador Sergey Kislyak before
Trump’s inauguration, then providing Vice President
Pence with “incomplete information” about their
conversation.
Flynn was a scoundrel media target like various other
administration officials. Last month, he denied discussing
sanctions with Russia’s ambassador.
Acting Attorney General/Obama administration holdover
Sally Yates taped his conversation, information then
leaked to the media, indicating sanctions were discussed.
Trump fired her for failing to enforce his immigration
order.
The 1799 Logan Act, amended in 1994, prohibits
unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign
governments - considered an attempt to influence bilateral
relations.
The act remained unused since passage. No felony action
against Flynn is likely. Because the measure’s language is
so broad, legal experts suggest it’s unconstitutional.
Historically it’s been used more as a threat than
justification for prosecution.
Alleged Logan Act violations occurred in nearly all US
administrations. No prosecutions or convictions followed,
just one indictment in 1803, involving a Kentucky
newspaper article, arguing for forming a separate nation in
western America allied to France. No prosecution
followed.
In his resignation letter, Flynn said his omission was
unintentional, stating:
“In the course of my duties as the incoming
National Security Advisor, I held numerous
phone calls with foreign counterparts,
ministers, and ambassadors.”
“These calls were to facilitate a smooth
transition and begin to build the necessary
relationships between the President, his
advisors and foreign leaders. Such calls
are standard practice in any transition of
this magnitude.”
497
“Unfortunately, because of the fast pace of
events, I inadvertently briefed the Vice
President Elect and others with incomplete
information regarding my phone calls with
the Russian Ambassador. I have sincerely
apologized to the President and the Vice
President, and they have accepted my
apology.”
Flynn was targeted for not being anti-Russia. He believed
both countries should work together cooperatively to
resolve issues of mutual interest, especially in combating
terrorism.
He called the emergence of ISIS and al-Nusra the result of
calculated policy decisions, not happenstance. He
criticized Obama officials for bashing Russian anti-
terrorist operations in Syria.
Media scoundrels disgracefully portrayed him as a Russian
agent. He participated in an RT conference on the occasion
of its first ten years of international broadcasting, meeting
Vladimir Putin at the time.
Hostile Democrats want nonexistent Trump ties to Russia
and Putin investigated. Is America’s intelligence
community spying on its president, part of a longstanding
campaign to delegitimize him, now wanting him
undermined, perhaps ahead of wanting him impeached and
removed from office - a very disturbing state of affairs.
The Saker calls what’s going on an anti-Trump “color
revolution.” I’ve called it an attempted coup d’etat to
delegitimize and undermine him. Forcing Flynn out over a
telephone conversation doing no harm suggests Trump’s
betrayal, according to The Saker, “an act of abject
cowardice,” instead of supporting his national security
point man and going after Flynn’s accusers.
Has Trump surrendered to America’s neocon infested deep
state? Will he abandon efforts to improve relations with
Russia? Will he maintain hostility toward China, Iran,
Venezuela and other independent states?
Will he continue supporting terrorism instead of combating
it? Is America’s imperial agenda safe in his hands? Will he
still be targeted for removal anyway?
Like GW Bush and Obama, Pence is a pushover, an ideal It now appears dashed on the rocks of Flynn’s ouster. Dirty
frontman for dark interests running America, assuring business as usual won. Millions of long-abused Americans
disturbing continuity. lost.

Possible Trump administration change, under the best of Note: Trump named retired army general Joseph Kellogg,
circumstances, benefitting ordinary Americans was always Jr. as acting national security advisor. Reports indicate
wishful thinking. Admiral Robert Harwood will likely replace him.

498
 Did The CIA Just Stage A
Micro-Coup Against Trump Administration?
By Brandon Turbeville
February 14, 2017

relying on information from Flynn, initially said the

national security adviser had not discussed sanctions with
the Russian envoy, though Flynn later conceded the issue
may have come up.

Such conversations would breach diplomatic protocol and

In a surprising turn, it has been announced that National
Security Advisor Michael Flynn has resigned from his post
after allegations surrounding his “inappropriate” contact
with Russian officials and his subsequent admission of
providing “incomplete” information to the President and
Vice President regarding that contact. The resignation
takes place amide FBI investigations into Flynn’s phone
calls with the Russian ambassador and weeks after the
Justice Department sent a warning letter to the Trump
administration regarding the potential for Flynn to be
subject to blackmail if the allegations were true.
In addition, the U.S. Army was reportedly investigating
Flynn for his possible acceptance of Russian money during
trips made to Russia in the past.
Of the less hysterical reports, Yahoo News at least
attempted to refrain from channeling the ghost of Joe
McCarthy. For that reason, its article “Conway: Flynn
Resigned Because He’d Become ‘A Lighting Rod,’” can
be used as a sample of how corporate media outlets are
trying to portray the resignation, minus the hyperbole. It
reads,
National security adviser Michael Flynn has
resigned following reports he misled Vice
President Mike Pence about contacts with
a Russian diplomat, up-ending President
Donald Trump’s White House team less
than a month after his inauguration.
In a resignation letter, Flynn said he gave Pence and others
“incomplete information” about his calls with Russia’s
ambassador to the U.S. The vice president, apparently
499
possibly violate the Logan Act, a law aimed at keeping
private citizens from conducting U.S. diplomacy. The
Justice Department also had warned the White House late
last month that Flynn could be in a compromised position
because of contradictions between his public depictions of
the calls and what intelligence officials knew to be true
based on routine recordings of communications with
foreign officials who are in the U.S.
.....
A U.S. official told The Associated Press that Flynn was in
frequent contact with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on the
day the Obama administration slapped sanctions on Russia
for election-related hacking, as well as at other times
during the transition.
An administration official and two people with knowledge
of the situation confirmed the Justice Department warnings
on condition of anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss the matter publicly. It was unclear
when Trump and Pence learned about the Justice
Department outreach.
The Washington Post was the first to report the
communication between former acting attorney general
Sally Yates, a holdover from the Obama administration,
and the Trump White House. The Post also first reported
last week that Flynn had indeed spoken about sanctions
with the Russian ambassador.
Flynn’s Crime
Flynn’s resignation and the allegations made against him
fit right in with the narrative being promoted by the
Western corporate media, the Democratic Party, Soros-
Republicans, and the faux NGO community; i.e. that the
Russians are influencing American elections and now
American policy via secret connections with the Trump
administration and Trump supporters via the
preponderance of Russian propaganda on American
television. Such an exercise in abject delusional hysteria,
however, would make Joe McCarthy scratch his head in
disbelief. At least, in McCarthy’s case, there actually were
some Communists lurking about.
In 2017, there has yet to be a single shred of evidence that
the Russians hacked or influenced anything to do with the
American elections or American policy, foreign or
domestic. Regardless, the corporate media piranhas have a
new carcass to chew on in their race to remind Americans
of the big Russian bogeyman, drum up support for war in
the Middle East and Ukraine as well as Russia itself, and
to curtail virtually all rights and free speech under the
guise of “national security” and Russophobia.
But what did Flynn actually do that was so wrong? His
discussion with the Russian ambassador was nothing close
to a scandal. He did nothing that would be interpreted as
undercutting the Obama Administration’s aggression nor
did he even say that Obama’s sanctions would be removed
once Trump was in office. In fact, all he did was state that
the Russians should not overreact to America’s current
state of aggression because a new administration was soon
to take over. A hint? Yes. A violation of the law or a
scandalous act? Hardly.
Even the hawkish and McCarthyistic New York Times had
to admit that, at worst, Flynn’s statements could be
interpreted either way. “Still,” wrote the New York Times,
“current and former administration officials
familiar with the call said the transcript was
ambiguous enough that Mr. Trump could
have justified either firing or retaining Mr.
Flynn.”
The New York Times then goes on to argue that Trump
himself was more concerned with Flynn’s actions
becoming a focal point of controversy than actual risks to
national security or any real lawbreaking or perhaps that he
was more angry that Flynn lied to Vice President Pence
regarding the nature of the call and the statements made in
it. But it doesn’t seem like Donald Trump to be overly
concerned with controversy. It’s simply not in his
character. After all, his entire campaign was built on
controversy. So why is Flynn really out?
To be clear, Michael Flynn should have long ago been
fired from his position as National Security Advisor. His
radical obsession with Iran and his obvious crazed
determination to go to war with the Persian nation is
reason enough to ensure that he never gets near any
position that would allow him to influence the U.S.
government toward yet another imperialistic war of
aggression in the Middle East. However, merely
suggesting to Russia that, perhaps, when the new
administration takes over, the U.S. might not continue to
pursue a policy of World War Three is not necessarily
500
Watergate or even grounds for firing. Given the fact that
Trump had won the election and was merely waiting in the
wings, Flynn’s statements should be taken in the proper
context.
Even taking all the other accusations into consideration,
such as the dinner with Putin, Flynn’s alleged crimes pale
in comparison to what is considered business as usual in
Washington. After all, where was the outcry regarding
Hillary Clinton’s obvious and only thinly veiled financial
relationship with China and Saudi Arabia when she was
acting Secretary of State? If Clinton could maintain her
position within the State Department amid all the clear
evidence of her own scandals, then why is Flynn being
held to a much higher standard?
Indeed, American politicians have, for years, violated the
Logan Act by meeting with and actively planning policy at
such global confabs like the Bilderberg Meeting without
one word from the U.S. government or the mainstream
media.
So again, the question must be asked . . .
What Is Behind Michael Flynn’s Resignation?
Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee at the
Federation Council, Konstantin Kosachev’s reaction to
Flynn’s resignation is perhaps the most accurate and
simplified version of what is taking place in the U.S.
government command structure. Shortly after Flynn’s
resignation was announced, Kosachev posted a status on
Facebook stating that the decision for Flynn to resign upon
request was “not just paranoia but something even worse.”
Kosachev also wrote that
“either Trump hasn’t found the necessary
independence and he’s been driven into a
corner … or Russophobia has permeated
the new administration from top to bottom.”
First, it should be noted that Kosachev’s statement is the
statement of a Russian lawmaker and not the official
statement of the Russian government, i.e. the Kremlin.
However, Kosachev’s statement is illuminating to say the
least.
There are, indeed, four possibilities here, two of which are
mentioned by Kosachev.
The first possibility is that, simply put, we are witnessing
yet another seamless transition of power and that the same
anti-Russian, pro-imperialist policies will continue to be
implemented in a Trump administration just as they were
in the Obama administration, albeit in a “conservative,”
“Republican” version.
The second possibility is that, as Kosachev pointed out,
perhaps Donald Trump is finding out that he is nothing
more than a figurehead for a well-entrenched and well-
established Deep State and that he has no real control over
events. It is also quite possible that elements within the
Deep State, amply represented in Trump’s cabinet, are
taking the reins and steering the wagon in another
direction, independent of anything Trump has to say. This,
of course, is assuming that Trump is actually working for
the benefit of the American people, a highly implausible
assumption to say the least but still worth considering
since it has happened several times in the past.
A third possibility is that we are simply witnessing a new
act in a carefully scripted theatre; partly designed to further
the agenda of anti-Russian pro-war sentiment under Neo-
Con/Republican cover and partly designed to reinforce the
anti-Russian narrative being peddled mostly by the Left
until there is a clear synthesis of delusion that Russia is the
natural enemy of the United States and a threat to our way
of life.
Lastly, there is the possibility that we are witnessing an
intelligence community micro-coup against the Trump
administration, eliminating Michael Flynn as the first shot
over the bow. Whatever the nature of Trump in this
scenario, there is the very real possibility that there are two
factions in the American government and that an internal
civil war is taking place.
Admittedly, we could also be seeing a mixture of any
number of these possibilities taking shape before our eyes.
Who Replaces Flynn? Who Replaces The
Replacement?
At the moment, it appears that Flynn will be replaced with
retired Gen. Keith Kellogg. Kurt Nimmo of Another Day
In The Empire, summarizes Kellogg’s history which is
questionable to say the least. In his article, “Trump
Replaces Flynn With Boss Of Super Secret Surveillance
Contractor,” Nimmo writes,
Kellogg has an interesting history. In
addition to his disastrous mismanagement
of the Coalition Provisional Authority in
Iraq, Kellogg was president of Abraxas, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Cubic
Corporation. Cubic provides diversified
systems and services to the transportation
and defense markets worldwide, according
to MarketWatch.
In 2006, The LA Times reported on Abraxas:
In the burgeoning field of intelligence
contractors, an especially aggressive
upstart is Abraxas Corp., a privately held
501
company that has assembled a deep roster
of CIA veterans to handle a wide range of
clandestine assignments — including
secret work for an elite team of
overseas case officers.
The company was founded by a group of
former high-ranking agency employees, led
by Richard “Hollis” Helms, a longtime
overseas officer in the Middle East and
onetime head of the CIA’s European
division, and Richard Calder, who was the
agency’s deputy director for administration.
Abraxas is right down the street from the CIA.
The company occupies an unmarked, third-
floor office suite in McLean, Va., two miles
from CIA headquarters. It has mainly
specialized in providing veteran operatives
and reports officers for positions in
overseas stations and at CIA headquarters.
Abraxas is responsible for TrapWire, a tech company that
develops a homonymous predictive software system
designed to find patterns indicative of terrorist attacks.
The secretive project was discovered through a WikiLeaks
disclosure in 2012 after emails were hacked from Strafor,
often described as a shadow version of the CIA.
TrapWire uses a series of surveillance cameras around the
country and also abroad to detect “suspicious behavior.”
The system is reportedly located in every high-value target
in New York City.
The system is sold to local law enforcement. From RT:
PrivacySos reports that a website
maintained by the US Homeland Security
Department’s Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) includes
TrapWire as a product for sale to law
enforcement agencies and first responders.
It’s there that the background and
operational concept of the system are
described in detail and direct curious
customers to AbraxasCorp.com for more
information. When a link to the URL is
clicked, the banner at the top of the
developer’s homepage described Abraxas
as “A Cubic Company.” On the FEMA
page, the product information is detailed as
provided directly by Abraxas Applications.
Sounds pretty much like a CIA front organization
operation.
If Kellogg replaces Flynn, we can undoubtedly expect an
expansion of the surveillance state and its associated
industries.
In late 2015, Trump said in an interview he tends “to err on
the side of security” and restoring parts of the Patriot Act
that have been amended would “be fine.”
Trump’s CIA director, Mike Pompeo, introduced
legislation to block the USA FREEDOM Act in 2015. The
act enacted on June 2, 2015 restored in modified form
several provisions of the Patriot Act, which had expired.
What is even more frightening, however, is the fact that,
according to a “senior administration official” quoted by
the Associated Press, Trump is also considering former
disgraced General and CIA Director, David Petraeus for
the post. Petraeus is a man of an intelligence pedigree of
epic proportions, despite having been burned by a Mata
Hari type operation. Petraeus is an eager warmonger with
roots so deep in the intelligence community, a Petraeus
appointment would no doubt please the Deep State.
The Method of The Controversy – Intelligence
Community Behind The Resignation Controversy
While virtually every mainstream outlet is joining in the
hysteria regarding Flynn’s resignation, a fact that is, in and
of itself, reason enough to suggest a coordinated campaign,
it is also important to note that the “leaks” of the
conversation was originally printed in the Washington
Post, an outlet that has long been known as a “leak outlet”
for the CIA. In fact, it was the acting Attorney General left
over from the Obama administration, Sally Q. Yates, who
issued the warning to the Trump administration regarding
Flynn’s statements and conversation with the Russian
ambassador.
Even more so, the attack on Flynn was initiated before
Trump ever took office. During the last days of the Obama
Administration, CIA Director John Brennan and James
Clapper, the Director of the Office of National
Intelligence, two individuals who were instrumental in
cocking up the ridiculous “Russian Election Hacking”
scandal and its evidence-bare reports were involved in
monitoring Flynn’s conversation and arguing that his
appointment would be a potential risk to national security
and the Trump administration. As the Washington Post
writes,
In the waning days of the Obama
administration, James R. Clapper Jr., who
was the director of national intelligence,
and John Brennan, the CIA director at the
time, shared Yates’s concerns and
concurred with her recommendation to
inform the Trump White House. They
feared that “Flynn had put himself in a
502
compromising position” and thought that
Pence had a right to know that he had
been misled, according to one of the
officials, who, like others, spoke on the
condition of anonymity to discuss
intelligence matters.
As former Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich pointed
out, it is important to remember that a phone call from the
incoming National Security Advisor to the President-elect
of the United States was “intercepted” by the intelligence
community and then given to the media for dissemination.
This is an incredibly important piece of the puzzle,
demonstrating that the entire affair is clearly part of an
intelligence operation.
“What’s at the core of this is an effort by
some in the intelligence community to
upend any positive relationship between
the U.S. and Russia,” Kucinich said.
“And I tell you there’s a marching band and
Chowder Society out there. There’s gold in
them there hills,” he said. “There are
people trying to separate the U.S. and
Russia so that this military industrial intel
axis can cash in,” Kucinich added.
Kucinich also stated
“There’s a game going on inside the
intelligence community where there are
those who want to separate the U.S. from
Russia in a way that would reignite the
Cold War.”
“What’s going on in the intelligence
community with this new President is
unprecedented. They’re making every
effort to upend him. Who know what the
truth is anymore?”
“There’s something very wrong here in the
intelligence community,” he said.
When asked what Donald Trump should do, Kucinich
answered,
“First of fall, he has to get a hold of his own
intelligence apparatus. You know? This
isn’t a joke. This is a serious matter. If he
doesn’t get control of where the
information’s coming from, he’ll never know
the truth, the American people won’t know
the truth and we can be set at war with
almost any country. Be very careful is my
warning this morning.
Watch the latest video at video.foxbusiness.com
Conclusion
At the end of the day, the resignation of Michael Flynn and
the controversy surrounding it is clearly the result of a
coordinated intelligence operation that determined, from
day one, to remove Flynn from his position. This much is
clear. The reason why, however, is much less obvious.
Flynn was and still is a dangerous rabid Neo-Con
warmonger and an obsessive anti-Iran fanatic. But having
the CIA oust a member of the President’s cabinet because
the organization finds him unpalatable is a new low for the
United States. The CIA has, ever since its creation,
functioned as the enforcement arm of the Deep State
within the U.S. government but rarely are its actions so
public.
When corruption becomes public and when even the
formalities of democracy begin to disappear, the situation
becomes incredibly dangerous. As social and domestic
tensions continue to boil and foreign relations with other
.
503
countries are at an all-time low, a power struggle within
the power structure is likely to carry many Americans
down the drain with it. If there is no power struggle,
however, and all of this is mere theater, there is
undoubtedly a reason that Americans are being allowed to
view a thinly veiled CIA ouster of a Presidentially-
appointed advisor. While we may not know the specifics
of the reason just yet, we do know that it will only further
the agenda of the Deep State and put every American
citizen at risk.
If there is a civil war in the power structure of the U.S.
government, it is imperative that Americans do not resort
to taking sides, especially against one another. It is time
the American people allow cooler heads to prevail and use
this incident as a wake-up call so that they realize just who
is in control of the direction of their country, i.e. the Deep
State. Americans must turn their sights away from each
other and toward those who are attempting to manipulate
them. The future of the United States literally depends on
their ability to do so.
 Trump, GOP Lawmakers Eye
'Illegal' Leaks In Wake Of Flynn Resignation
Published February 14, 2017
In the wake of Michael Flynn’s resignation as national
security adviser, President Trump and Republican allies on
Capitol Hill are turning their attention to the potentially
“illegal” leaks that revealed Flynn's politically fatal
discussions with a Russian diplomat and other sensitive
details from inside the administration.
Fox News first reported Monday night that House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif.,
wants the FBI to conduct an assessment of recent media
leaks.
The president, after accepting Flynn’s resignation
overnight, tweeted Tuesday morning that,
“The real story here is why are there so
many illegal leaks coming out of
Washington?”
Flynn echoed that point. Asked Tuesday morning whether
the leaks were targeted, coordinated and possibly a
violation of the law, Flynn told Fox News:
“Yes, yes and yes.”
Flynn resigned following reports that he had spoken with
the Russian ambassador about sanctions, after having
apparently given Vice President Pence “incomplete
information” on the issue. Pence, based on that
504
information, previously had claimed Flynn did not discuss
sanctions with the Russian official.
Such conversations would breach diplomatic protocol and
possibly violate the Logan Act, a law aimed at keeping
private citizens from conducting U.S. diplomacy. The
Justice Department also had warned the White House late
last month that Flynn could be in a compromised position
because of contradictions between his public depictions of
the calls and what intelligence officials knew to be true
based on routine recordings of communications with
foreign officials who are in the U.S.
Yet the leak itself is raising serious questions -- because
when the intelligence community captures phone calls of
an American inside the U.S., even if the discussion
involves a foreign national (in this case an ambassador),
steps must be taken to shield the American caller's
identity.
Recent leaks also have revealed reported details from
phone calls between Trump and the leaders of Australia
and Mexico and from the intelligence community
investigation into Russian interference in the U.S.
presidential campaign.
"If [the Flynn conversation] was picked up
inadvertently, then that would have had to
have been approved by someone in the
last administration to actually unmask his
name so that the FBI or intelligence
officials knew who it was on the other end
of the phone talking to the Russian
ambassador," Nunes told Fox News. "If, in
fact, the press reports are right, someone
made the decision to deliberately listen to
General Flynn's phone calls and that is, I
think, unprecedented, unwarranted and
flat-out wrong."
Nunes said he is going to
“be asking the FBI to do an assessment of
this to tell us what's going on here because
we cannot continue to have these leaks as
a government."
Senate homeland security committee Chairman Ron
Johnson, R-Wis., told Fox News that “somebody in the
nebulous intelligence community” would have had access
to the Flynn discussions.
“Who tapped the phones, who was
listening to it, who leaked it? I think those
are legitimate questions to ask,” he told
Fox News on Tuesday. “Leaks of this
nature are incredibly damaging to America
… and we need to look into it.”
A congressional source told Fox News they believe the
intelligence was known to a small circle of Obama
administration officials and appointees at the end of last
year, including some working within the intelligence
community -- and the leaks were targeted and coordinated
to undermine the administration.
House Democrats, meanwhile, want to know more about
the nature of Flynn’s contact with Russia.
505
"… Flynn's departure does not end
questions over his contacts with the
Russians, which have been alleged to have
begun well before December 29,” Rep.
Adam Schiff, D-Calif., top Democrat on the
House intelligence committee, said in a
statement. “These alleged contacts and
any others the Trump campaign may have
had with the Kremlin are the subject of the
House Intelligence Committee's ongoing
investigation. Moreover, the Trump
administration has yet to be forthcoming
about who was aware of Flynn's
conversations with the ambassador and
whether he was acting on the instructions
of the president or any other officials, or
with their knowledge."
 Deep State Shows They Control
National Security With Michael Flynn Resignation
The Deep State Has At Last Revealed Themselves To Be Even
Higher Than The U.S. National Security Advisor And The
President Of The United States...
By Rahul Manchanda, Esq.
February 13, 2017
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn Desperately
Attempts To Appease The Deep State With His “Putting
Iran On Notice,” But This Was Missing the Point Entirely
The Deep State does not ever want
peace with Russia, or a respite in their
interventionist wars overseas.
They have thus far lobbed “softballs” at President Donald
Trump, such as with their control over the Mainstream
Media’s relentless attacks on Donald Trump, his character,
his nominee choices, his vision, his America-first policies,
and other decisions that he has made.
The Deep State has also used their thoroughly corrupted
Judiciary at their disposal to thwart and sabotage Donald
Trump’s executive orders, with their corrupted judges
stockpiled in the federal, state and local courts for literally
the past at least 28 years all the way from President George
Herbert Walker Bush starting in 1988, to Bill Clinton, to
George W Bush, and then through Obama all the way until
2016.
The U.S. Congressional and Senatorial gridlock
established by the Deep State has also stood in Trump’s
way, but they were relatively easier to manage and move
around for the Great Deal Maker (and Twitter
communicator), Donald Trump.
506
However, now, with the latest revelation that General
Michael Flynn, an ardent promoter of peace with Russia
and the removal of sanctions, as well as non-intervention
in other trouble spots throughout the world, the Deep State
has literally pulled the proverbial “rabbit out of the hat,”
and have now fully revealed their hand – the question is –
who exactly made this happen, and who were their
handlers?
That person, whoever he is, has been revealed to be the
ultimate emissary and messenger of the much feared and
shadowy American Deep State, someone who could force
the resignation of one of the most powerful, sensitive, and
highest security clearance positions within the Executive
Branch of the United States.
Even former CIA Director James Clapper got a “free pass”
by this Deep State when he, under full oath, openly and
overtly LIED to the entire United States Congress and
Senate when he stated that NSA Surveillance was not
comprehensive and was not listening in on each and every
American citizen’s phone calls, emails, faxes, and other
communications, 24/7, 365 days a year.
This was a bald faced and abject lie, as revealed by
whistleblower Edward Snowden, and even worse, since it
was under oath in front of the entire U.S. Congress and
Senate, was complete and total PERJURY – this was not just
an impeachable offense, but one that can send you to jail
for a thousand years.
Yet James Clapper was allowed to walk, given a free pass
– why?
Because James Clapper was a total stooge and errand boy
for the American (and now Global) Deep State, and did
exactly what they told him to do, whenever they told him
to do it, even when his actions were antithetical to the
interests of the American people, or the rest of the people
of the world.
This was his reward for faithfully carrying the Deep
State’s water.
Now, with the forced resignation of General Michael
Flynn from his National Security Advisor position, the
message from the Deep State to President Donald Trump is
crystal clear:
The Deep State is fully in control, fully in
charge, and we can even casually throw
out your most important and sensitive
appointment in your cabinet and
administration to date – and so you
better do exactly what we tell you to do,
whenever we tell you to do it, and
exactly in the manner that we prescribe.
Only a few weeks ago, in what is now obvious in
hindsight, Michael Flynn in a fit of feverish desperation to
.
507
save his job, went off on a half-cocked rampage on live
national television when he stated “we are hereby putting
Iran on Notice!”
This was an obvious attempt to appease the most fringe
elements of the Israeli government – but someone within
the Deep State did not care about catering to the most
extreme Israelis – because the Deep State has other plans
for Israel, Iran, and the rest of the Middle East – possibly
World War 3 by and between purposefully created,
cultivated, and funded radical Islam and radical Zionism,
as predicted and described by 33rd Degree Freemason
Albert Pike in the late 1800s?
Well, now with the forced ejection of the rational and
reasonable peacemaker Michael Flynn, the prospect of
World War 3 has become that much closer.
508