Are The “Alt-Left” & Alt-Right &

“The Deep State” Going To Destroy

Our President And Country?

The 2017 Trump

Presidency - #15
September 18, 2017 – October 23, 2017

See How The Main Stream Media, The

Neocons, & the Deep State Are Trying To
Destroy The Trump Presidency
And United States of America
A
Arrttiicclleess C
Coom
mppiilleedd FFrroom
mT Thhee IInntteerrnneett iinn O
Orrddeerr B
Byy D
Daattee
BByy FFrreedd JJaam
meess

1
 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
September 2017
FIRST EDITION
0987654321
2
 CONTENTS
Trump’s Claim There Were Long Gas Lines In North Korea Has Residents Puzzled XXX
REPORT: General Kelly Blocking Trump From Negative Reports On DACA XXX
Trump Slams The UN In His First UN Appearance XXX
Mo Mana, Mo Problems: Mueller Reportedly Plans To Indict Manafort XXX
Is Trump Drowning Out Other News? XXX
Here’s Everything We Know So Far About The Trump Dossier XXX
Third Figure Named In Fake ‘Trump Dossier’ Files Slander Suit XXX
War With North Korea Starts To Look Inevitable XXX
NAACP Sues Trump For Ending DACA XXX
BOMBSHELL: Feds Wiretapped Paul Manafort Before And After The Election XXX

3
4
5
6
7
8
 Trump’s Claim There Were Long
Gas Lines In North Korea Has Residents Puzzled
By Anna Fifield
September 18 At 3:49 AM
People gather to watch footage of the launch of a Hwasong-12 rocket,
beside a billboard advertising North Korea’s Pyeonghwa Motors, in
Pyongyang on Sept. 16. (AFP/Getty Images)
TOKYO — In his latest Twitter outburst against North
Korea, President Trump said that “long gas lines [are]
forming in North Korea,” adding an exclamatory “Too
bad!” (In the same tweet, he bestowed a new nickname on
Kim Jong Un: “Rocket Man.”)
But where is the president getting this information about
gas lines from?
Residents in the North Korean capital are scratching their
heads. Although there are reports of price increases,
they’ve seen no queues at the few service stations in
Pyongyang, a capital of some 2 million that has more cars
than it used to but is still far from congested.
“We are not aware of any long queues at
the gas stations,” said one foreign resident
of Pyongyang. “At least, I haven’t noticed
anything. I asked a few Koreans and they
haven’t seen anything either.”
9
Another said there had been no obvious change since the
last sanctions resolution was passed by the U.N. Security
Council.
“Traffic on Friday was as heavy here as
I’ve seen it. Normal on Saturday. Quieter
on Sunday.”
In other words, the same as every week.
South Korea's President Moon Jae-in and President Trump agreed to
exert stronger pressure through sanctions on North Korea Sept. 17.
(Reuters)
In its effort to punish Kim Jong Un for his continued
defiance — repeated missile launches, a huge nuclear
test — the United States has been leading a push to cut off
oil to the isolated state. Its efforts to impose a complete oil
embargo on North Korea failed, with China and Russia
threatening to use their veto powers to block such a
resolution.
Instead, the new sanctions measures passed last week cap
North Korea’s imports of crude oil at the level they have
been over the past year and limit refined petroleum imports
— including gasoline, diesel and heavy fuel oil — to 2
million barrels a year.
North Korea receives about 4.5 million barrels of refined
petroleum products a year and 4 million barrels of crude.
The new sanctions will cut oil exports to North Korea by
about 30 percent, the United States mission to the United
Nations said. Fifty-five percent of that cut would be in
refined products, it said, and the sanctions limit North
Korea’s ability to import substitutes.
But analysts say there is plenty of wiggle room for China
to continue supplying oil to North Korea if it wants to —
just as a “livelihood exception” for coal exports previously
did.
While supporting the sanctions in principle, China has a
patchy record when it comes to implementation, and
implementation depends almost entirely on China. About
90 percent of North Korea’s trade goes through China.
The sanctions are unlikely to have a significant impact on
North Korea’s military or nuclear weapons and missile
programs, said David von Hippel and Peter Hayes of the
Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability.
“These military sectors will have priority
access to refined fuels, including likely fuel
caches of significant volume that have
already been stockpiled and provide a
substantial buffer against the sanctions,”
they wrote in a recent note. “Primarily,
these sanctions will affect the civilian
population.”
North Korea was constantly looking for — and finding —
ways around the sanctions, making the state more resilient
to existing and future sanctions, von Hippel and Hayes
wrote.
That means the sanctions will have little effect on the
desired goal now — reversing North Korea’s missile and
nuclear programs — and could diminish the leverage that
the international community has over North Korea in the
.
10
future. For example, when it needs to persuade North
Korea to come back to denuclearization talks, the analysts
said.
While there are no obvious signs of gas lines forming —
no surprise in a country where there is almost no private
car ownership — there has been evidence of an increase in
prices.
Gasoline prices started to rise in certain parts of the
country, apparently in anticipation of shortages, after
North Korea’s sixth nuclear test, conducted Sept. 3.
In Pyongyang, one kilogram (2.2 pounds) of gasoline —
that’s how it’s measured in North Korea — rose from
18,000 to 23,000 North Korean won ($20 to $25.56)
during the first week of September, the Daily NK website
reported, citing individuals in the capital. Diesel prices had
also risen, it reported.
There have been blips like this several times this year, but
analysts say they have seen no other signs of stress in the
economy — such as rising rice prices or sudden exchange
rate fluctuations.
There have been some limitations on filling jerrycans, but
this appeared to be a measure to stop reselling and had
been in place for some time, one Pyongyang resident said.
Others said it will take time to see whether there is any
effect from the sanctions — and certainly longer than the
week it took before Trump claimed an impact.
 REPORT: General Kelly Blocking
Trump From Negative Reports On DACA
By Cristina Laila
Monday, September 18, 2017
Social media was set ablaze after House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer
released a statement following their ‘working dinner’ with
President Trump Thursday night claiming they reportedly
struck a deal shielding DACA recipients from deportation.
The two leading Democrats left the
White House and released the following
statement.
— No border wall— And amnesty for
DREAMERs
That would break two Trump campaign
promises right there.
White House Spox immediately refuted
the statement.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders sent
out a tweet after Pelosi and Schumer issued a statement.
She said, “While DACA and border security were both
discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to.”
Since Thursday night there has been much confusion on
Trump’s next move regarding DACA. His tweets sound
more like Marco Rubio’s as he softens from his original
anti-amnesty stance, angering his core base.
11
Steve Bannon is no longer in the White House and
Trump’s top advisers Jared and Ivanka, General Kelly, and
Globalist Gary Cohn have shown to be sympathetic to
“Dreamers.”
A new report by Axios is claiming General Kelly is
shielding President Trump from any negative reports on
his DACA stance. Staffers can no longer walk into the
Oval Office and hand Trump a Breitbart article or a
printout of tweets showing how angry his supporters are
over amnesty.
The only way staffers can meet with President Trump is
through General Kelly which means they have to submit
an official, documented, request to meet with him.
Axios reports:
He (Trump) reads his morning news clips
and briefing materials, which are managed
by Staff Secretary Rob Porter, under the
guidance of Kelly. And during the day it’s
not possible for a staff member to sneak a
story onto Trump’s desk that might rile him
up and turn him in a wildly different
direction in an instant.
Staff who oppose the moderate immigration turn no longer
have unfettered access to Trump, and nor do allies on the
outside who, in the first six months of the administration,
used to send text messages to Trump’s bodyguard Keith
Schiller, and often receive a snappy callback from the
president. Kelly now has real control over the most
important input: the flow of human and paper advice into
the Oval Office. For a man as obsessed about his self
image as Trump, a new flow of inputs can make the world
of difference.
 Trump Slams The UN
In His First UN Appearance
By Mark Moore
September 18, 2017 | 11:30am
President Trump used his inaugural address at the United
Nations on Monday to criticize the world body for not
living up to its “potential” because of bureaucracy and
urged member nations to reject “business as usual” and
take “bold stands.”
“In recent years, the United Nations has not
reached its full potential because of
bureaucracy and mismanagement, ” Trump
said at the 72-year-old organization during
a meeting on reforms.
Despite a ballooning budget and a doubling of staff since
2000, Trump said,
“We are not seeing the results in line with
this investment” and encouraged UN
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to
focus more on people than bureaucracy.
“We seek a United Nations that regains the
trust of people from around the world,” the
president said in his tightly scripted five-
minute address. “In order to achieve this,
the UN must hold every level of
management accountable, protect whistle-
blowers and focus on results rather than on
process.”
“We encourage all member states to look
at ways to take bold stands at the United
.
12
Nations with an eye toward changing
business as usual and not being beholden
to ways of the past, which were not
working,” he said, pledging the US would
be a full partner in the reform efforts.
Trump, who will address the General Assembly on
Tuesday, also said none of the 193 member nations should
shoulder a
“disproportionate share of the burden —
militarily or financially.”
And he called for creating “clearly defined goals and
metrics for evaluating the success” of the UN’s
peacekeeping mission around the globe.
With the changes, Trump said,
“I am confident that if we work together and
champion truly bold reforms, the United
Nations will emerge as a stronger, more
effective, more just and greater force for
peace and harmony in the world.”
In his address, Guterres said what keeps him up at night is
the
“bureaucracy … fragmented structures,
Byzantine procedures and endless red
tape” of the UN.
“I even sometimes ask myself whether
there was a conspiracy to make our rules
exactly what they need for us not to be
effective,” he said.
Later Monday, Trump was expected to meet with Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and French President
Emmanuel Macron.
 Mo Mana, Mo Problems:
Mueller Reportedly Plans To Indict Manafort
Kevin Daley - Supreme Court Reporter
8:57 PM 09/18/2017
FILE PHOTO - U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald
Trump's campaign chair and convention manager Paul Manafort
appears at a press conference at the Republican Convention in
Cleveland, U.S., July 19, 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team reportedly advised
former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort that they
plan to indict him after a July raid of his home in
Alexandria, Va.
The New York Times reports that prosecutors and
investigators under Mueller’s command warned Manafort
that they plan to bring an indictment against him to a grand
jury. The report is sourced to two individuals close to the
investigation. Though The Times is not specific as to the
nature of the charges, Manafort is under investigation for
possible violations of tax laws and failure to abide by
disclosure requirements relating to his lobbying work for
Kremlin-aligned governments in eastern Europe.
The development is not unexpected, even within the
sprawling network of former Trump aides and outside
.
13
advisors. Several sources close to the president, including
veterans of the campaign, told The Daily Caller early in
September that they expect Manafort will be indicted for
financial crimes like money-laundering or tax evasion.
Mueller has aggressively pursued Manafort and his
associates in recent months, issuing subpoenas compelling
testimony from spokesman Jason Maloni and Melissa
Laurenza, formerly Manafort’s personal counsel. Though
much of Laurenza’s work for Manafort is protected by
attorney-client privilege, Mueller hopes to leverage several
exceptions to the confidentiality duty to learn more about
her work for the former Trump aide. He has also
subpoenaed the heads of two D.C. lobbying shops who
worked with Manafort in the past.
The subpoenas are somewhat unusual, as prosecutors
usually question potential witnesses in informal settings
prior to empaneling a grand jury. The flurry of subpoenas
could be something of a blitz on Trump associates, in
hopes of bludgeoning relevant witnesses into cooperation
with the investigation. Investigators have even met with
Manafort’s son-in-law Jeffrey Yohai, in hopes of turning
him against his embattled father-in-law. The Times notes
the tactic is typical of investigations of organized crime
syndicates.
The report comes on the same day CNN learned that
federal investigators obtained a FISA court order
authorizing surveillance of Manafort’s communications
between 2014 and 2016.
 Is Trump Drowning Out Other News?
The President Has An Unusual Ability To Draw Attention To Himself,
But News Coverage Is Finite, And Other Issues May Be
Getting Less Attention As A Result.
Seth Masket
Sep 18, 2017

tweets and incendiary statements most other presidents

simply never made. Yet newspapers aren't getting bigger
and 24-hour news channels can't add additional hours to
their days. Are other stories losing out?

To test this in an admittedly very limited way, I examined

news coverage of police shootings over the past three
years. To measure coverage, I looked at the number of
monthly news stories in the New York Times containing the
words "police shooting."* I compared these with the actual
numbers of officer-involved shootings, as compiled by the
Washington Post's "Fatal Force" archive.

President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media after he

returned to the White House from Florida on September 14th, 2017.
(Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Presidents, of course, are always going to receive

substantial news coverage. Given their power and potential
influence on the American political system and the world,
this level of coverage seems largely warranted.

But that coverage comes at a cost. The president is hardly

the only important political actor. Congress gets far less
attention, even if it is the body actually developing most of
the national policies that will affect Americans. State and
local governments get paltry coverage in comparison,
although the work they do has the most direct effect on our
daily lives.
Meanwhile, coverage of particular issues will vary greatly
based on judgments by writers and editors about what
people are interested in and what's currently important.
Food safety is obviously important, for example, and it
will get its share of media attention. But a war or a natural
disaster or even a celebrity feud could temporarily drown
out coverage of food safety, even if an important problem
remains unresolved.
This seems particularly relevant in the Donald Trump era.
Even by presidential standards, Trump is unusually
successful in drawing media coverage. He gets coverage
for the usual things presidents do—foreign travel,
addresses and rallies, bill signings, etc.—but also for
The orange line above shows the number of officer-
involved shootings each month since January of 2015.
Notably, this line holds remarkably constant over time,
averaging a little over 80 shootings per month. The blue
line shows the number of New York Times stories about
police shootings each month. This measure jumps around a
bit, and it's far from a perfect measure. (The spike in July
of 2016 is driven largely by a sniper attack on police
officers in Dallas that left five officers dead, rather than
officers shooting civilians.) Nonetheless, we do see a drop
in coverage of police shootings in 2017.
This trend is a bit more stark in the below bar graphs,
which simply looks at the average number of stories per
month and the average number of of shootings per month
across all three years.

14
 Now, there are plausible causes for this trend other than
Trump's attention-grabbing behavior. It's possible the issue
just isn't as salient now because it's seen as an ongoing
matter rather than a new one. It's possible the issue drew
more attention in the recent past because Barack Obama,
as an African American, was expected to do more to
address the issue of police killings of black citizens.
Nonetheless, the trend is consistent with the idea that more
coverage of Trump leads to less coverage of everything
else.

A concern expressed repeatedly by observers of the Trump

presidency is that most of the crises he has faced have been
of his own making. How will he behave once he faces a
challenge of office that he didn't create? In fact, he's been
facing challenges all along. The killing of unarmed
civilians by police officers remains a serious crisis, as does
Importantly, the subject of the story itself—officer
North Korea, opioid abuse, climate change, flooding, and
involved shootings—has remained pretty constant over
other matters. To the extent Trump has an approach to
time. Coverage of that story has dropped significantly
dealing with such crises, it seems to be to draw attention
during Trump's presidency, however.
away from them.

15
 Here’s Everything We Know
So Far About The Trump Dossier
Chuck Ross - Reporter
9:57 AM 09/18/2017

Clinton. Trump Jr. and the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitkaya,

claim that the information regarded the Magnitsky Act, a
sanctions law opposed by the Russian government.

Veselnitskaya was working alongside Fusion GPS last year

to undercut the Magnitsky Act. There has been some
speculation that the Trump Tower meeting is vaguely
described in the dossier.

The uncorroborated dossier of opposition research about
Donald Trump has become a key document in the
investigation over whether the Trump campaign colluded
with the Russian government during the presidential
campaign last year.
Democrats have insisted that many claims made in the
dossier, written by former British spy Christopher Steele,
have been proven accurate. Republican lawmakers say
otherwise, leading to a standoff between the two sides over
the 35-page document, published by BuzzFeed News on
Jan. 10.
Here is what we know about the salacious document.
Jan. 2010: Steele’s London-based intelligence firm, Orbis
Business Intelligence, first hires opposition research firm
Fusion GPS to work on an undisclosed project. Steele
made this revelation in May 2017 in a court filing in
London, where he is being sued by a Russian tech
executive named in the dossier.
Sept. 2015: An anti-Trump Republican donor reportedly
hires Fusion GPS to begin investigating Trump’s past. The
donor has yet to be identified.
June 17: Sergei Millian, an alleged source in the dossier,
meets in St. Petersburg, Russia with Oleg Deripaska, an
ally of Vladimir Putin’s and a former client of then-Trump
campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Millian, the head of the
Russian-American Chamber of Commerce, has been
identified as “Source D” and “Source E” in different
memos in the dossier.
June 20: Steele writes the first memo of the dossier.
Citing various sources, the memo contains a series of
salacious claims about Trump. One source says that the
Russian government has been “cultivating and supporting”
Trump for at least five years. Other sources, including one
said to be Millian, claim that Kremlin operatives have
videos of Trump engaging in explicit acts with prostitutes
in a Moscow hotel room. The sources also claim that the
Trump campaign is engaged in an elaborate information
exchange with the Russian government to help influence
the election.
Some of the information is about Hillary Clinton, the
sources told Steele.

June 2016: As Trump ascends to the GOP nomination, the

Republican donor leaves the Trump research project.
Fusion GPS soon finds an unidentified Democratic ally of
Hillary Clinton’s to take over the investigation. Fusion
then hires Steele, a former MI6 agent with extensive
experience in Moscow.

June 9: Members of the Trump campaign team meet at

Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer and Russian-
American lobbyist who have some connection to Fusion
GPS. Donald Trump Jr. accepted the meeting after a friend
offered to provide negative information about Hillary
16
Former British spy Christopher Steele. (Youtube screen grab)
July 5: Steele provides his first dossier memo to an FBI
contact, The New York Times reported back in April. The
newspaper also reported that the information did not make
its way to FBI agents investigating the Trump team until
several weeks after Steele provided it.
July 19: Steele writes a dossier memo alleging that former
Trump campaign adviser Carter Page is coordinating with
the Russian government. Page, an unpaid campaign
volunteer, had traveled to Moscow in early July to give a
commencement speech at a Moscow university.
The dossier alleges that Page met secretly with Rosneft
CEO and Putin ally Igor Sechin as well as a Russian
government official named Igor Diveykin to discuss lifting
sanctions.
Steele wrote in a subsequent memo that Page was being
directed by Manafort to serve as the backchannel to the
Russians. Page has vehemently denied all of the
allegations in what he calls the “dodgy dossier.”
Carter Page speaking in Moscow, July 7, 2016. (Youtube screen grab)
July 19-26: In an undated memo, Steele first mentions the
hacks of Democratic National Committee emails, which
WikiLeaks published on July 22.
July 26: A Wall Street Journal reporter contacts Page to
ask him questions about the allegations made in the
dossier. Page revealed this outreach in a lawsuit he filed
against Yahoo! News last week. The contact establishes
that someone with knowledge of the dossier — either
Steele or Fusion GPS — was quickly disseminating the
information to reporters. Fusion GPS’ partners are all
former Wall Street Journal journalists.
July: Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist and outspoken
Trump critic, is contacted by an investigative reporter
about some of the claims made in the dossier. Wilson
disclosed this to The New York Times in January, just after
the dossier was published by BuzzFeed News.
Late July: The FBI opens its counterintelligence
investigation into possible collusion between the Trump
campaign and Russian operatives. Former FBI Director
James Comey disclosed this during a House Intelligence
Committee hearing held this March.
17
Summer 2016: Steele, who has done work in the past for
the FBI, meets with agents in Rome to relay information
he compiled during the Trump investigation.
Fusion GPS and Steele also meet with reporters at various
news outlet — The New Yorker, Yahoo! News, The New
York Times, CNN, and The Washington Post — to discuss
the dossier. According to Steele’s recent court filings,
Fusion GPS arranged the meetings, which were held off-
the-record.
September: FBI officials apply for and obtain a Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to conduct
surveillance on Page, who had by that point left his
advisory role on the Trump campaign. It has been reported
that the dossier was cited in the application for the warrant.
A 2013 attempt by Russian spies to recruit Page was also a
factor in seeking and obtaining the warrant. Page has said
that the recruitment attempt was unsuccessful and that he
cooperated with the FBI in that investigation.
Republican lawmakers have recently questioned how
much the FBI relied on the dossier to obtain the warrant
against Page.
Sept. 23: Yahoo! News reporter Michael Isikoff publishes
an article detailing some of the allegations made about
Page in the dossier. It was not known at the time that the
information came from the Steele dossier. Isikoff refers to
his source as a “Western intelligence source.” Isikoff did
not disclose that his source was working in private
intelligence and for Fusion GPS.
October: Steele and Fusion GPS meet again with
reporters. Steele also meets with FBI agents and is
reportedly offered $50,000 to continue investigating
Trump. The Washington Post reported earlier this year that
the payment was never made, though it is unclear why.
Congressional Republicans have questioned why the FBI
sought to pay Steele for what they call a politically-
motivated document.
Oct. 7: WikiLeaks publishes the first tranche of emails
stolen from the Gmail account of Clinton campaign
chairman John Podesta.
Oct. 31: Mother Jones reporter David Corn publishes the
first article that directly quotes Steele and provides details
of the Fusion GPS research project. Steele and Fusion
GPS are not identified by name in the article, though Corn
directly quotes from the dossier.
Steele told Corn that the FBI responded to his findings
with “shock and horror.”
Mid-November: During a national security forum, an
associate of Steele’s, Sir Andrew Wood, informs Arizona
Sen. John McCain and one of his associates, David
Kramer, of the dossier. The trio arrange for McCain to
obtain a copy of the document. Kramer flies to London to
meet with Steele on Nov. 28 and obtains a copy of the
dossier.
David Kramer (Youtube screen grab)
Dec. 9: McCain, now in possession of the Steele
document, meets with then-FBI Director James Comey
and provides him a copy of the dossier.
Dec. 13: Steele writes the final memo of the dossier. In it,
he cites an unidentified source who claims that Russian
tech executive Aleksej Gubarev had used computer viruses
to hack into the Democratic National Committee’s emails.
Steele emailed an encrypted copy of the final memo to
Fusion GPS with instructions to provide it to Kramer.
Jan. 6, 2017: Comey briefs then-President-Elect Trump on
some of the allegations made in the dossier.
Jan. 10: CNN reports the Comey briefing, prompting
BuzzFeed News to publish the full 35-page dossier. It is
still not entirely clear how BuzzFeed obtained the dossier,
though Fusion GPS has suggested in recent court filings
that the firm was in contact with the news outlet.
Jan. 11: Trump denies the allegations in the dossier,
saying that they are “fake news” concocted by “sick
people.”
Feb. 3: Russian tech executive Aleksej Gubarev files suit
against BuzzFeed News for publishing the dossier, names
him in the Dec. 13 memo. Steele alleges in the memo that
Gubarev’s companies used computer viruses and malware
to hack the DNC’s email systems. BuzzFeed apologizes to
Gubarev and redacts his name in the dossier.
Gubarev later sues Steele in London.
March 24: Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, the
chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, begins
.
18
focusing on Fusion GPS’ role in the dossier and in its pro-
Kremlin lobbying effort to undercut the Magnitsky Act.
The Senator sends a letter to the opposition research firm
asking it to identify its political clients and to reveal details
of its contracts with Steele.
Fusion GPS would later deny most of the committee’s
requests, citing attorney-client privilege and confidentiality
agreements.
April 3: Steele files a declaration in a London court in
response to Gubarev’s lawsuit acknowledging that the
Dec. 13 memo contains unverified information.
May 9: Trump fires FBI Director James Comey.
May 17: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein
appoints former FBI Director Robert Mueller to serve as
special counsel in the Russia investigation.
May 18: Steele files another declaration in the Gubarev
lawsuit laying out details of his interactions with Fusion
GPS, journalists, and McCain. Steele insists that he did not
provide copies of the dossier to any news outlets.
Aug. 22: After months of negotiations, Fusion GPS co-
founder Glenn Simpson is interviewed by the Senate
Judiciary Committee for 10 hours. Simpson says in a
statement after the interview that he did not reveal the
identities of his clients. He also says he stands by the
dossier.
ABC News reports that Fusion GPS was paid around $1
million by Republicans and more later by Clinton’s allies
to investigate Trump. The network also reported that
Steele had provided the FBI with the identities of his
dossier sources.
Aug. 24: Republicans on the House Intelligence
Committee issue subpoenas for Attorney General Jeff
Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray for
information about whether U.S. officials vetted the dossier.
South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy, a member of the
committee, says he wants to know how much investigators
have relied on the dossier to kickstart the collusion
investigation. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Gowdy
Wonders If Democrats Are ‘Fearful’ Trump Dossier Is
‘A Piece Of Fiction’)
Sept 6: Fusion GPS is deposed in the Gubarev lawsuit.
Sept. 14: Page, the former Trump campaign adviser, files
a lawsuit against Yahoo! News’ parent company over the
Michael Isikoff article.
 Third Figure Named In Fake
‘Trump Dossier’ Files Slander Suit
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 18, 2017
It’s about time responsible parties that helped create the
phony “Trump-Russia collusion” narrative were held to
account
(National Sentinel) Political Justice: A third figure who
was identified in a now-infamous but wholly discredited
“dossier” on Team Trump financed by Democrats and
Democratic operatives is filing a slander suit.
As the Washington Times reports, Carter Page, a former
low-level Trump campaign associate acting as his own
lawyer, filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in
Manhattan against Yahoo News and HuffPost (formerly
The Huffington Post) through owner Oath Inc.
The Times reported further:
Mr. Page, an energy investor who does
business in Russia and lived in Moscow for
a time, charges that the two news outlets
libeled him by repeating dossier
accusations that he met two Kremlin
figures in July 2016 and tried to negotiate
an end to U.S. sanctions.
The false charges, he says, brought him
“irreparable damage” and subjected him to
voicemail death threats. He seeks $75,000
in damages.
Previously, a Russian tech entrepreneur
and Russian bank owners filed defamation
lawsuits against news outlets that posted
the dossier.
Since the discredited dossier was produced and published,
Page has steadfastly denied ever having such a meeting,
even providing his denial to FBI agents (it’s a crime to lie
to an FBI agent, by the way).
19
More from the Times:
Glenn R. Simpson, a former Wall Street
Journal reporter turned liberal opposition
researcher, circulated the dossier during
the campaign to a number of news sites.
Financed by a Hillary Clinton backer, the
document was produced in sequential
memos by former British spy Christopher
Steele, who relied principally on paid
Kremlin sources.
By September last year, the first significant
dossier-based article appeared in Yahoo
News by Michael Isikoff, who has produced
a number of Washington scoops over
several decades. The story told of Mr.
Carter’s supposed illicit meetings in
Moscow, where he had traveled that
summer to give a public speech to a
university.
Yahoo News did not quote the dossier as
its source, but instead cited intelligence
sources. The actual source was the
Democratic-paid Mr. Steele, who briefed a
number a liberal media sites at the behest
of Mr. Simpson and his Fusion GPS
intelligence firm.
The Yahoo story set off a firestorm.
HuffPost published follow-up articles. The
Clinton campaign issued press releases on
how Mr. Carter was part of Trump-Russia
collusion. The Clinton camp attacked Mr.
Carter on TV and radio.
This needs to happen. It’s about time responsible parties
that helped create the phony “Trump-Russia collusion”
narrative were held to account.
Now, someone needs to find a way to make the politically
motivated “special prosecutor” investigation led by Robert
Mueller go away.
This story is just more proof the whole thing is bogus.
 War With North Korea Starts To Look Inevitable
Pyongyang’s And Washington’s Miscalculation
And Misconception Could Lead To
The Worst Outcomes.
Gordon G. Chang
09.18.17 3:26 AM ET
Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast
“We have pretty much exhausted all the
things that we could do at the Security
Council at this point,” said Nikki Haley on
CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday,
referring to North Korea. “We wanted to be
responsible and go through all diplomatic
means to get their attention first,” the U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations said. “If
that doesn’t work, General Mattis [Defense
Secretary James Mattis] will take care of it.”
The comments, no off-the-cuff remarks, mirrored her
words at a White House press briefing Friday, and
National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, standing next
to Haley at that briefing, was even more explicit. “I think
we ought to make clear what’s different about this
approach is, is that we’re out of time,” he noted, referring
to sanctions. “As Ambassador Haley said before, we’ve
been kicking the can down the road, and we’re out of
road.”
When senior Trump administration officials talk about the
end of diplomacy they raise the prospect of war. But have
all measures short of war been exhausted?
CNN’s Barbara Starr reported Saturday,
“North Korea’s latest ballistic missile test
has renewed discussion at the highest
levels of the Trump administration about
how military force could be used to stop
[North Korean Leader] Kim Jong Un’s
20
development of nuclear warheads and
ballistic missiles.”
The war talk is the result of exasperation by American
officials who see that their actions so far have not
convinced Kim, the North Korean supremo, to slow down
the testing of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons.
Take Haley’s CNN comment. Even as President Donald
Trump, a U.N. skeptic, prepares to address the United
Nations General Assembly, many Americans, viewing the
nine ineffective sets of sanctions on North Korea since
2006, say the Security Council itself is broken.
But the Security Council is not “broken.” It was never
designed to work in an era of disagreement among the five
veto-wielding permanent members.
What is not working is the United States. Unfortunately,
from administration to administration, American leaders
have failed to use all the elements of American power. If
China and Russia use their vetoes to frustrate efforts to
disarm North Korea—and they do—it is because the
United States has not been willing to coerce them into
acting responsibly.
With regard to Moscow, recent American policymakers
have been more worried about a weak Russia than a strong
one. Therefore, they have opted for mild sanctions on
Vladimir Putin’s dangerous behavior. Ronald Reagan, at a
time when the U.S. was far weaker than it is today and the
Soviet Union was far stronger than Russia is now, used
American economic might to end the Cold War. Putin
today is able to bedevil the U.S. at the Security Council
only because Americans are afraid of what happens if they
move to take him down.
At the same time, the U.S. has not stopped the People’s
Republic of China. Washington has allowed Chinese
banks, large and small, to launder money for the North
Koreans for decades. Americans reportedly have permitted
Chinese leaders to help Pyongyang transfer missiles to the
Iranians. The White House did nothing when enterprises
connected to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army sold
mobile launchers for the North’s intercontinental ballistic
missiles. The U.S. has not asked the Chinese, at least in
public, how North Korea’s most advanced missiles appear
to be derived from China’s Jl-1. And Washington acted as
if it did not matter when Chinese businesses allegedly sold
uranium hexafluoride, components, and equipment for the
Kim regime’s nuclear-weapons program.
No wonder the Chinese feel free to support their North
Korean allies. U.S. policymakers, they can see, have been
feckless. It is one thing for, say, Liechtenstein to fail to
convince Beijing to do the right thing. It is quite another
for the United States of America to fail to do so. American
policymakers have simply failed to coerce Beijing, failed
to leave it no choice but to join in the effort to disarm the
Kims.
What can the United States do to China? It can declare its
largest banks “primary money-laundering concerns” under
Section 311 of the Patriot Act, thereby denying them the
ability to transact business in the world’s dominant
currency. That would be essentially imposing a death
sentence on the Chinese banking system and possibly
China’s economy, perhaps the Communist Party itself.
Trump can also remind China’s leaders that U.S. Trade
Representative Robert Lighthizer in the middle of last
month formally initiated, pursuant to Section 301 of the
Trade Act of 1974, an investigation into Chinese
intellectual-property theft. A finding of such theft—
virtually assured—can lead to the imposition of high
across-the-board tariffs on Chinese goods.
And this month, the People’s Bank of China, the central
bank, appears to have driven the renminbi lower, an
indication central technocrats are once again
“manipulating” their currency as that is defined by U.S.
law. That gives Trump another point of leverage.
The Chinese economy, debt-fueled for years, is
particularly vulnerable, especially in the run-up to the
historic 19th Communist Party Congress, which begins
Oct. 18. General Secretary Xi Jinping, who seeks to grab
unprecedented power, cannot afford to see a major
disruption of relations with the United States at this
sensitive time.
The Trump administration, with the series of actions it
took in the last week of June, signaled it would move
against China for its support for North Korea. For instance,
the Treasury Department sawed off Bank of Dandong, a
small Chinese financial institution, from the global
economy due to its persistent money-laundering. The
Chinese, unfortunately, have continued their support for
the Norks at the Security Council.
.
21
So what should the United States do? It could just give up
efforts to disarm Pyongyang, as James Clapper, the former
director of national intelligence, suggested in widely
reported comments to CNN last month. There is an air of
defeatism in American policy circles these days.
The assumption among Clapper and others is that the U.S.
can deter the North Koreans indefinitely. Perhaps
Washington can do that and, at the same time, stop their
sale of nuclear-weapons technology to Iran and make sure
they do not begin merchandising thermonuclear devices to
established weapons customers, some of them terrorist
groups.
But perhaps deterrence is not possible. Kim Jong Un, who
surely knows what Clapper and others are saying, is
obviously defiant these days. And the core goal of the Kim
regime—the basis of its legitimacy—is taking over the
other Korea, the one governed from Seoul.
Kim, once confident about his nukes and the means to
deliver them, will almost surely attempt to use the threat of
war to break America’s 64-year-old mutual-defense treaty
with South Korea and get America’s 28,500 service
personnel off the peninsula. Once he accomplishes that, he
surely thinks he can intimidate the South into submission.
Kim has recently been talking about “final victory,” a
reference to taking over the South. An overconfident
despot could miscalculate and begin a chain of events
spiraling into war.
Although Americans are confident in their
“overwhelming” capabilities, as Trump’s comments at
Joint Base Andrews on Friday indicate, the North Koreans
probably do not view it that way. They have long
memories and they know they grabbed the Pueblo, an
unarmed U.S. Navy reconnaissance vessel, from
international waters in 1968 and held the crew for almost a
year, killing one sailor and even getting an apology from
the Johnson administration. They no doubt recall they
killed 31 Americans when, a year later, they shot down a
Navy EC-121. In 1976, they hacked to death two U.S.
Army officers in the Demilitarized Zone. In no case, did
North Korea pay a price. So Americans do not look
especially intimidating to the Kim family.
And although many Americans call Kim “irrational,”
would it be crazy for him to think, now, that Washington
will not stop him?
War, through miscalculation and misconception, is
beginning to look probable, if not inevitable.
 NAACP Sues Trump For Ending DACA
By Jason Devaney
Monday, 18 Sep 2017 05:12 PM
President Donald Trump (Ron Sachs/AP)
The NAACP announced Monday it filed a lawsuit against
President Donald Trump for his decision to end the
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said two weeks ago the
program will be phased out in March, which leaves
lawmakers in Washington, D.C., six months to come up
with legislation that would serve as a permanent
replacement to the 2012 executive order.
NAACP interim president and CEO Derrick Johnson said
in a press release his organization is standing up for the
thousands of "people of color" who would be affected by
the cancellation of the program.
.
22
"By establishing DACA, the United States made a promise
to protect its most vulnerable residents — young,
undocumented immigrants, who are overwhelmingly
people of color," Johnson said. "In exchange for providing
the government with extensive information about
themselves and their families, these young immigrants
received this country's assurance that they could build lives
for themselves in the United States without fear of
prosecution or deportation.
"Now, President Trump has reneged on that promise. By
rescinding DACA, President Trump puts hundreds of
thousands of lives and livelihoods at risk."
DACA allows people who illegally came to the United
States with their parents as children to stay under certain
conditions. Trump has urged Congress to pass an official
piece of legislation on the matter.
The NAACP claimed the Trump administration's decision
to end the program "violated the Due Process Clause of the
Fifth Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth
Amendment, the Administrative Procedure Act and the
Regulatory Flexibility Act."
 BOMBSHELL: Feds Wiretapped
Paul Manafort Before And After The Election
Chuck Ross - Reporter
7:32 PM 09/18/2017
The U.S. government wiretapped former Trump campaign
chairman Paul Manafort before and after the presidential
election, CNN is reporting.
According to the bombshell report, the surveillance, which
was granted under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, continued into early this year.
U.S. investigators first obtained a secret order to conduct
surveillance on Manafort after he became the subject of an
FBI investigation in 2014 because of his consulting work
for a Ukrainian political party.
The surveillance was ended at some point last year because
of a lack of evidence, one source told CNN, but
investigators obtained another warrant at some point
during the presidential campaign.
It is not clear exactly when the second surveillance warrant
was obtained, though it was after the now-infamous
meeting held at Trump Tower last June. Manafort attended
the meeting along with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner
and a group of Russians with alleged ties to the Russian
government.
.
23
Manafort was picked as Trump’s campaign chairman last
May. He lasted through August, when he was essentially
fired over revelations about his consulting work in
Ukraine.
According to CNN, the FBI became more interested in
Manafort during the fall after intercepting communications
between the longtime GOP lobbyist and Russian
operatives.
The wiretap on Manafort has yielded intelligence of
interest to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is
overseeing the investigation into Russian meddling in the
presidential campaign.
Mueller obtained a search warrant of Manafort’s Virginia
residence in late July. Federal agents also conducted a
search of a storage facility that belongs to Manafort,
according to CNN. The latter search appears to have been
carried out earlier this year, before Mueller took over the
Russia investigation.
It is unclear if the surveillance captured conversations
between Manafort and Trump. The two have reportedly
spoken since Trump took office.
 Coulter To Trump:
Forget DACA, 'First Step, Wall!'
Monday, 18 Sep 2017 07:08 PM
"In Trump We Trust" author Ann Coulter
doubled down on her declaration that
President Donald Trump should be
impeached over his defense of Dreamers,
saying "we're so sick of politicians lying to
us."
In an interview with Newsmax TV host Howie Carr on
Monday, Coulter declared
"Trumpism I trust in — it's not looking good
for Trump believing in Trumpism."
"If we're not getting the wall, obviously
[Vice President] Mike Pence would be
better," she said, echoing her controversial
tweet after Trump talked about the
Obama-era program to protect young
illegal immigrants with Democratic
leaders.
"It's not like we weren't aware of the
massive personal baggage of Donald
Trump and you know, the crudity, the
boorishness. I think the point of the
electorate was we don't care because what
was the theme? What did they chant at
every rally for 18 months? Build the wall!
.
24
"And he apparently, I mean I thought he
was a builder, but maybe we were wrong,
and he doesn't know how to build this. We
thought he understood the urgency of this,
but maybe we were wrong.
"He doesn't seem to understand that if
we're not getting a wall, may as well have
an attractive dignified Republican there
who will get better Supreme Court justices
under Pence."
Coulter said
"the wall is really crucial to the whole
enterprise and before we talk about who's
coming in and who's getting legalized and
whether there's a deal on what to do and
amnesty and blah blah blah blah blah —
No. First step, wall."
She railed
"we are so sick of having politicians — both
Democrat and Republican — lie to us."
"They keep promising, as candidate Trump
did, that they're going to care about
Americans and do something to make our
lives better, and then they get elected and
they focus single-mindedly on how to make
the lives better of people who broke into
our country, drive drunk, rape little girls,
commit gangland murders . . .
"This is a crisis in this country and
politicians absolutely 100 percent will not
deal with it."
 Watergate 2.0: Obama Regime Wiretapped
Trump Campaign Chair During And After Election
This is Watergate 2.0
Chris Menahan
Sep. 18, 2017

The Obama regime wiretapped opposition candidate Donald

Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort during and after the
2016 election, according to a report from CNN.

From CNN:
Washington (CNN) - US investigators
wiretapped former Trump campaign
chairman Paul Manafort under secret
court orders before and after the
election, sources tell CNN, an
extraordinary step involving a high-ranking
campaign official now at the center of the
Russia meddling probe.
The government snooping continued
into early this year, including a period
when Manafort was known to talk to
President Donald Trump.
Some of the intelligence collected
includes communications that sparked
concerns among investigators that
Manafort had encouraged the Russians
to help with the campaign, according to CNN continues:
three sources familiar with the
investigation. Two of these sources, Special counsel Robert Mueller's team,
however, cautioned that the evidence is which is leading the investigation into
not conclusive. Russia's involvement in the election, has
been provided details of these
Shocker. communications.
It's been over a year at this point chasing Russian A secret order authorized by the court that handles the
phantoms. This was nothing but an excuse for the Obama Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) began after
regime to spy on their political opposition. Manafort became the subject of an FBI investigation that
Trump's tweets were right: began in 2014. It centered on work done by a group of
Washington consulting firms for Ukraine's former ruling
party, the sources told CNN.

25
 The surveillance was discontinued at William Binney said, the US government is
some point last year for lack of spying on everyone, everywhere.
evidence, according to one of the sources.
Now, we appear to have confirmation the Obama regime
The FBI then restarted the surveillance went full-Nixon and spied on Trump's campaign chairman
after obtaining a new FISA warrant that Paul Manafort and campaign associate Carter Page during
extended at least into early this year. the election.
Sources say the second warrant was Why isn't DOJ head Jeff Sessions looking into this?
part of the FBI's efforts to investigate
ties between Trump campaign
associates and suspected Russian
operatives. Such warrants require the
approval of top Justice Department and
FBI officials, and the FBI must provide the
court with information showing suspicion
that the subject of the warrant may be
acting as an agent of a foreign power.
It is unclear when the new warrant started. The FBI
interest deepened last fall because of intercepted
communications between Manafort and suspected Russian Why aren't the House and Senate intelligence committees
operatives, and among the Russians themselves, that looking into this?
reignited their interest in Manafort, the sources told CNN.
As part of the FISA warrant, CNN has learned that earlier
this year, the FBI conducted a search of a storage facility
belonging to Manafort. It's not known what they found.
The conversations between Manafort
and Trump continued after the President
took office, long after the FBI
investigation into Manafort was publicly
known, the sources told CNN. They went
on until lawyers for the President and
Manafort insisted that they stop, according
to the sources.
It's unclear whether Trump himself was Is it because they've been compromised by the deep state?
picked up on the surveillance.
They've been probing this Russia scam for a year with no
evidence of any wrongdoing, yet here there's massive
Yeah, sure. Spying on Trump and his campaign was the evidence of a criminal conspiracy and they won't lift a
goal. goddamn finger.

[...]The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Republican Devin Nunes of California was the only
Trump's own "wires" were tapped. representative on the House Intelligence Committee
willing to look into this scam and he was forced to recuse
While Manafort has a residence in himself shortly thereafter.
Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI
surveillance of him took place there.
Manafort has a home as well in Alexandria, Virginia. FBI
agents raided the Alexandria residence in July.
The FBI also eavesdropped on Carter
Page, a campaign associate that then
candidate Trump once identified as a
national security adviser.
Page's ties to Russia, including an attempt by Russian spies
to cultivate him, prompted the FBI to obtain a FISA court
warrant in 2014.
Turns out the "crazy conspiracy theorists"
were right again. As NSA whistleblower
26
 NYT: Manafort Told He Will Be Indicted
By Jason Devaney
Monday, 18 Sep 2017 07:53 PM
Paul Manafort (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Robert Mueller, the former FBI director leading the
Department of Justice's Russia probe, is reportedly gearing
up for an indictment of Paul Manafort in the case.
The New York Times reported that after the FBI
conducted a pre-dawn raid at Manafort's Virginia home in
July, Mueller's prosecutors told the former chairman of
President Donald Trump's campaign that he will be
indicted.
Mueller's team is looking at whether Trump's campaign
colluded with Russia. Related to that are investigations
involving Manafort and allegations that he violated tax
laws and laundered money, and a probe examining former
national security adviser Michael Flynn's ties to Russia.
27
The Times noted that people close to Manafort and Flynn
have testified in front of grand juries regarding what they
know.
The July raid at Manafort's home involved FBI agents
using lock-picking tools to open his door instead of
knocking — which means, as the Times reported, the FBI
might have been concerned that Manafort would attempt to
destroy evidence if he knew federal authorities were
knocking on his door.
CNN reported, meanwhile, that federal investigators
secretly wiretapped Manafort before and after last
November's presidential election. The network noted that
the FBI obtained a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(FISA) warrant last year to conduct surveillance on
Manafort. This surveillance occurred after a previous
investigation into Manafort was stopped because of a lack
of evidence.
The new warrant continued into early 2017, CNN noted.
That FISA order led to authorities searching a storage unit
Manafort was using this year.
What's not clear is whether any of Manafort's
conversations with Trump were captured by the
surveillance.
There are several ongoing Russia investigations in
Congress as lawmakers try themselves to determine
whether anything illegal occurred regarding the Trump
campaign and Russia.
 Exclusive: US Government Wiretapped
Former Trump Campaign Chairman
By Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz And Pamela Brown, CNN
Updated 7:15 AM ET, Tue September 19, 2017
Washington (CNN)US investigators wiretapped former
Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret
court orders before and after the election, sources tell
CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking
campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling
probe.
The government snooping continued into early this year,
including a period when Manafort was known to talk to
President Donald Trump.
Some of the intelligence collected includes
communications that sparked concerns among
investigators that Manafort had encouraged the Russians to
help with the campaign, according to three sources familiar
with the investigation. Two of these sources, however,
cautioned that the evidence is not conclusive.
Special counsel Robert Mueller's team, which is leading
the investigation into Russia's involvement in the election,
has been provided details of these communications.
A secret order authorized by the court that handles the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) began after
Manafort became the subject of an FBI investigation that
began in 2014. It centered on work done by a group of
Washington consulting firms for Ukraine's former ruling
party, the sources told CNN.
The surveillance was discontinued at some point last year
for lack of evidence, according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a
new FISA warrant that extended at least into early this
year.
28
Sources say the second warrant was part of the FBI's
efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign
associates and suspected Russian operatives. Such
warrants require the approval of top Justice Department
and FBI officials, and the FBI must provide the court with
information showing suspicion that the subject of the
warrant may be acting as an agent of a foreign power.
It is unclear when the new warrant started. The FBI
interest deepened last fall because of intercepted
communications between Manafort and suspected Russian
operatives, and among the Russians themselves, that
reignited their interest in Manafort, the sources told CNN.
As part of the FISA warrant, CNN has learned that earlier
this year, the FBI conducted a search of a storage facility
belonging to Manafort. It's not known what they found.
The conversations between Manafort and Trump continued
after the President took office, long after the FBI
investigation into Manafort was publicly known, the
sources told CNN. They went on until lawyers for the
President and Manafort insisted that they stop, according
to the sources.
It's unclear whether Trump himself was picked up on the
surveillance.
The White House declined to comment for this story. A
spokesperson for Manafort didn't comment for this story.
Manafort previously has denied that he ever "knowingly"
communicated with Russian intelligence operatives during
the election and also has denied participating in any
Russian efforts to "undermine the interests of the United
States."
The FBI wasn't listening in June 2016, the sources said,
when Donald Trump Jr. led a meeting that included
Manafort, then campaign chairman, and Jared Kushner, the
President's son-in-law, with a Russian lawyer who had
promised negative information on Hillary Clinton.
That gap could prove crucial as prosecutors and
investigators under Mueller work to determine whether
there's evidence of a crime in myriad connections that have
come to light between suspected Russian government
operatives and associates of Trump.
Origins of the FBI's interest in Manafort
The FBI interest in Manafort dates back at least to 2014,
partly as an outgrowth of a US investigation of Viktor
Yanukovych, the former Ukrainian president whose pro-
Russian regime was ousted amid street protests.
Yanukovych's Party of Regions was accused of corruption,
and Ukrainian authorities claimed he squirreled millions of
dollars out of the country.
Investigators have spent years probing any possible role
played by Manafort's firm and other US consultants,
including the Podesta Group and Mercury LLC, that
worked with the former Ukraine regime. The basis for the
case hinged on the failure by the US firms to register under
the US Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law that the
Justice Department only rarely uses to bring charges.
All three firms earlier this year filed retroactive
registrations with the Justice Department.
It hasn't proved easy to make a case.
Last year, Justice Department prosecutors concluded that
there wasn't enough evidence to bring charges against
Manafort or anyone of the other US subjects in the probe,
according to sources briefed on the investigation.
The FBI and Justice Department have to periodically seek
renewed FISA authorization to continue their surveillance.
As Manafort took the reins as Trump campaign chairman
in May, the FBI surveillance technicians were no longer
listening. The fact he was part of the campaign didn't play
a role in the discontinued monitoring, sources told CNN. It
was the lack of evidence relating to the Ukraine
investigation that prompted the FBI to pull back.
29
Renewed surveillance
Manafort was ousted from the campaign in August. By
then the FBI had noticed what counterintelligence agents
thought was a series of odd connections between Trump
associates and Russia. The CIA also had developed
information, including from human intelligence sources,
that they believed showed Russian President Vladimir
Putin had ordered his intelligence services to conduct a
broad operation to meddle with the US election, according
to current and former US officials.
The FBI surveillance teams, under a new FISA warrant,
began monitoring Manafort again, sources tell CNN.
The court that oversees government snooping under FISA
operates in secret, the surveillance so intrusive that the
existence of the warrants only rarely become public.
For that reason, speculation has run rampant about whether
Manafort or others associated with Trump were under
surveillance. The President himself fueled the speculation
when in March he used his Twitter account to accuse
former President Barack Obama of having his "wires
tapped" in Trump Tower.
The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that
Trump's own "wires" were tapped.
While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's
unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.
Manafort has a home as well in Alexandria, Virginia. FBI
agents raided the Alexandria residence in July.
The FBI also eavesdropped on Carter Page, a campaign
associate that then candidate Trump once identified as a
national security adviser. Page's ties to Russia, including
an attempt by Russian spies to cultivate him, prompted the
FBI to obtain a FISA court warrant in 2014.
 CNN Makes Chris Cillizza Look Foolish
On 'Trump Flat-Out Lied' Claim
By P.J. Gladnick
September 19, 2017 7:21 AM EDT
There's something about Donald Trump that really causes
CNN's Chris Cillizza to lunge into foolishness. What
makes his latest act of foolishness so funny is that it is his
own CNN that is making a fool out of him.
On September 5 Cillizza boldly claimed that Donald
Trump just flat-out lied about Trump Tower
wiretapping. Well, fast forward just 13 very unlucky days
forward and on September 18 CNN broke the big story that
US government wiretapped former Trump campaign
chairman.
First let us travel back in time to when Cillizza set himself
up as an absolute fool by claiming Trump lied about
wiretapping:
On a sleepy Saturday morning back in
March, Donald Trump dropped this
bombshell on the political world:
"Terrible! Just found out that Obama had
my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just
before the victory. Nothing found. This is
McCarthyism!"
Turns out, he was lying.
Really Chris? Just 13 days after you wrote this claim, your
own CNN contradicted you.
To sum up:
The current President of the United
States flat-out lied about the then-sitting
president issuing a wiretap of his
campaign headquarters.
30
It's easy to gloss over this. After all, from almost the
moment Trump tweeted out the allegation, there was a
very strong sense that it wasn't true. Comey's
congressional testimony, coupled with Clapper's assertions
–
and the fact that not a single person in a
position to know said the wiretap was
even a possibility
-- made clear that the burden of proof was on Trump. And,
as the months passed and neither Trump nor his White
House offered up even a shred of proof of his claim, it
became increasingly hard to believe there was any there
there on this.
Perhaps they were waiting for a certain fool to hilariously
end up with egg on his face.
...if Trump is allowed to cavalierly make
false assertions like Obama wiretapped
Trump Tower, then facts lose all
meaning.
And the fool known as Chris Cillizza lost all his credibility
as we shall see in the following September 18 CNN report
that contradicts him.
US investigators wiretapped former
Trump campaign chairman Paul
Manafort under secret court orders
before and after the election, sources
tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a
high-ranking campaign official now at the
center of the Russia meddling probe.
The government snooping continued into early this year,
including a period when Manafort was known to talk to
President Donald Trump.
...The surveillance was discontinued at
some point last year for lack of evidence,
according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a
new FISA warrant that extended at least into early this
year.
Sources say the second warrant was part of the FBI's
efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign
associates and suspected Russian operatives.
Such warrants require the approval of
top Justice Department and FBI
officials, and the FBI must provide the
court with information showing suspicion
.
31
that the subject of the warrant may be
acting as an agent of a foreign power.
...The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that
Trump's own "wires" were tapped.
While Manafort has a residence in
Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI
surveillance of him took place there.
Hmmm... Since Manafort lived in Trump Tower and the
Trump presidential campaign headquarters where he also
worked was located there as well, the chances that Trump
Tower was not wiretapped aren't good. So will Chris
Cillizza publicly eat crow when he next appears on CNN
or will he attempt to make an even greater fool of himself
by twisting himself into a pretzel to laughably try to
explain his way out of his claim about President Donald
Trump lying about wiretapping?
 Trump Issues Stark Threats
To North Korea And Iran At UN
By AFP
19 Sep 2017
United Nations (United States) (AFP) – President Donald
Trump warned Tuesday that the United States is ready to
“totally destroy” North Korea and vowed to confront
Iran’s “murderous regime” over its weapons program.
In his first address to leaders gathered at the United
Nations General Assembly, Trump warned North Korea
not to pursue its nuclear missile program in his starkest
language yet, deriding its young leader Kim Jong-Un with
the nickname “Rocket Man” and threatening to end his
country.
“The United States has great strength and
patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or
its allies, we will have no choice but to
totally destroy North Korea.
“Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for
himself and for his regime,” he said. “The
United States is ready, willing and able, but
hopefully this will not be necessary.”
32
As to Iran, Trump appeared to pave the way towards
tearing up the nuclear deal signed in 2015 between six
world powers and Iran.
Trump said the accord had failed to rein in the regime’s
subversive role in Middle East conflicts, and sent a clear
signal that he intends to declare Tehran in breach of the
deal when he reports to Congress next month.
“We cannot let a murderous regime
continue these destabilizing activities while
building dangerous missiles and we cannot
abide by an agreement if it provides cover
for the eventual construction of a nuclear
program,” Trump told the assembly.
“Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to
the United States, and I don’t think you’ve
heard the last of it,” he said.
“Believe me. It is time for the entire world to
join us in demanding that Iran’s
government end its pursuit of death and
destruction.”
Many of the assembly’s members, including US allies and
Iran deal signatories France and Britain, favor retaining the
accord — under which Iran surrendered much of its
enriched nuclear fuel and exposed its nuclear sites to
international monitors.
But some of Trump’s closest advisors fear the agreement
leaves Iran too close to the threshold of being able to
quickly develop a nuclear weapon when restrictive clauses
in the deal begin to expire in 2025.
 BOOM: James Woods Mocks CNN’s Trump
Wiretap Coverage With 3 Headlines From 6 Months
By Sam J.
Posted At 10:34 Am On September 19, 2017

For months we’ve been saying CNN’s reporting around How absolutely pathetic; it’s almost as if CNN has been
Trump has been grossly biased, but it’s not until you see it reporting (wait for it) FAKE NEWS.
in black and white that it really hits home.

Take for example these three CNN headlines from the past
six months:

See, told you.

Clearly even this tweet is racist, psh.

This may well be their new official name or at least a new

slogan.
James has been known to call CNN #CNNSewerofLies …
we can absolutely see why.

33
 Evergreen.

34
 Trump VINDICATION: Report Says
Obama Admin DID ‘Wiretap’ Campaign
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 19, 2017
Trump should pick up the phone and dial his attorney
general; special counsel probes can go both ways
(National Sentinel) Political Conspiracy: When President
Donald J. Trump claimed in a tweet in March that the
Obama administration “wiretapped” his campaign, he was
widely mocked and ridiculed — which, even by then, had
become standard operating procedure for most of
Washington’s political and media establishment.
Turns out, though, that the president — once again — is
being vindicated.
A report from CNN claims that onetime Trump campaign
official Paul Manafort was “wiretapped” under a secret
court order last year, allegedly as part of a probe into
“Russian collusion.”
What’s even more alarming — and outrageous — is that
the secret electronic surveillance continued into this year,
and likely included occasions when Manafort was actually
talking to the president.
CNN noted further:
Some of the intelligence collected includes
communications that sparked concerns
35
among investigators that Manafort had
encouraged the Russians to help with the
campaign, according to three sources
familiar with the investigation. Two of these
sources, however, cautioned that the
evidence is not conclusive.
[…]
The surveillance was discontinued at some
point last year for lack of evidence,
according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance
after obtaining a new FISA warrant that
extended at least into early this year.
Sources say the second warrant was part
of the FBI’s efforts to investigate ties
between Trump campaign associates and
suspected Russian operatives. Such
warrants require the approval of
top Justice Department and FBI
officials, and the FBI must provide the
court with information showing suspicion
that the subject of the warrant may be
acting as an agent of a foreign power.
It is unclear when the new warrant started.
So it’s clear now that not only was Trump correct, after
he became president he found out that his Justice
Department (which, you may recall, at the time still
included FBI Director James Comey) was still spying on
members of his campaign, despite the fact that, for
years, no evidence of any wrongdoing had been found.
And still hasn’t been found, if we’re to
believe two of the sources who leaked this
information to CNN.
There is also this:
Comey, under oath, disputed Trump’s
“wiretapping” claims in sworn testimony to
Congress, which could now open him to
charges of perjury. Then again, lying to
Congress is against the law even if
you’re not under oath.
It is worth noting that Breitbart News editor Joel Pollak
had reported the day before Trump’s tweet that the Obama
administration
“sought, and eventually obtained,
authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump
campaign: continued monitoring the Trump
team even when no evidence of
wrongdoing was found.”
At the time both the president and the news site were
mocked as conspiracy theorists.
As for Manafort, The New York Times reports that he’s
under investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller’s
team for possible violations of tax laws, money-laundering
prohibitions and requirements to disclose foreign lobbying.
Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn is also
under investigation.
.
36
Regardless of how Mueller’s probe turns out, let us also
never forget that it was Comey’s strategy all along to get a
special prosecutor appointed to ‘investigate’ Team Trump
— under the guise of “Russian collusion,” though
Mueller’s probe has since extended way past that initial
mandate. The swamp is deep and wide.
Some House Republicans have called for probes into
possible collusion between Mueller, also a former FBI
director, and Comey. That definitely needs to happen. In
addition, Congress should also be prepping subpoenas for
former Obama administration officials involved in this
political debauchery.
And finally, the president should go on offense. He should
pick up the phone and dial his attorney general; special
counsel probes can go both ways.
 UN Speech: Trump Says 'Rocket Man' Kim Jong Un On
'Suicide Mission,' In Broadside At 'Rogue Regimes'
By Alex Pappas, Fox News
September 19, 2017
President Trump, in his first speech before the United
Nations, launched a rhetorical broadside Tuesday at “rogue
regimes” including North Korea, Iran and Syria – while
pointedly warning Kim Jong Un that the United States will
“totally destroy” his country if he does not turn back from
the nuclear weapons path.
“The scourge our planet today is a small
group of rogue regimes that violate every
principle on which the United Nations is
based,” Trump told the U.N. General
Assembly. “They respect neither their own
citizens, nor the sovereign rights of their
countries. If the righteous many do not
confront the wicked few, then evil will
triumph.”
Using his new nickname for North Korea’s dictator,
Trump said:
"Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for
himself and for his regime."
Trump said North Korea’s
“reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons and
ballistic missiles threatens the entire world
with unthinkable loss of human life.”
North Korea conducted its longest-ever test flight of a
ballistic missile Friday, sending an intermediate-range
weapon hurtling over U.S. ally Japan into the northern
37
Pacific Ocean in a launch that signals both defiance of its
rivals and a big technological advance.
“The United States has great strength and
patience,” the president told the U.N. “But if
it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we
will have no choice but to totally destroy
North Korea.”
Trump also singled out Iran, calling it
“another reckless regime, one that speaks
openly of mass murder, vowing death to
America, destruction to Israel and ruin for
many leaders and nations in this room.”
The president lambasted the Obama administration’s 2015
Iran nuclear deal, in which Iran agreed to curtail its nuclear
weapons program in exchange for the easing of economic
sanctions.
“The Iran deal was one of the worst and
most one sided transactions the United
States has ever entered into,” he said.
“Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to
the United States and I don’t think you’ve
heard the last of it, believe me.”
The president called for the de-escalation of the Syrian
conflict and a
“political solution that honors the will of the
Syrian people.”
“The actions of the criminal regime of
Bashar al-Assad, including the use of
chemical weapons, against his own
citizens, even innocent children, shock the
conscience of every decent person,” he
said.
Addressing Islamic extremism, Trump said the United
States has made “big gains” toward the lasting defeat of
the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.
 “We will stop radical Islamic terrorism
because we cannot allow it to tear up our
nation and indeed to tear up the entire
world,” Trump said. “We must deny the
terrorists safe haven, transit funding and
any form of support for the vile and sinister
ideology.”
As a candidate, Trump labeled the U.N. as weak and
incompetent, and suggested that the body did not act as a
friend of either the United States or Israel, but has since
softened his tone.
“Just as the founders as this body
intended, we must work together and
confront together those who threaten us
with chaos, turmoil and terror,” he said.
38
But Trump reiterated his “America first” foreign policy
pledge from the presidential campaign during his speech
on Tuesday.
“As president of the United States, I will
always put America first,” the president
said. “Just like you, as the leaders of your
countries, will always and should always,
put your countries first.”
He added:
“The United States will forever be a great
friend to the world and especially to its
allies. But we can no longer be taken
advantage of or enter into a one-sided deal
where the United States gets nothing in
return.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 Project Veritas’ O’Keefe Teases Biggest
Media Investigation Ever: ‘People Will Be Fired’
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 19, 2017

“In the coming weeks, you’re gonna see one of the biggest
investigations this organization has ever done”

(National Sentinel) Media: Noted undercover journalist

James O’Keefe, who has been investigating various
“mainstream” media outlets for more than a year and
recently exposed workers at CNN, now says his Project
Veritas organization is set to release what he teased as the
biggest investigation of media ever.

And, he says, Recently, O’Keefe’s organization exposed a number of

CNN producers and on-air talent who admitted that the
“people will be fired.” news organization’s incessant focus on the so-called
“Russian collusion” narrative involving the Trump
As reported by The Gateway Pundit, O’Keefe made his campaign was a hoax and being focused on mostly for
statements in a video announcement released Monday. His ratings.
investigation into the “holy grail” of media is something
that has been closely watched by allies and enemies alike. While it’s not yet known which organization is next on
O’Keefe’s hit list, he teased a bit further in response to a
“In the coming weeks, you’re gonna see tweet yesterday from President Donald J. Trump, who
one of the biggest investigations this said,
organization has ever done. It’s a
continuation of American Pravda series. It’s “How much longer will the failing NY Times,
aimed at the media. We’re going after their with its big losses and massive unfunded
holy grail. We have tripled our journalists in liability (and non-existent sources), remain
the field,” he said. in business?”
“They are not even here, they are out there
everyday. It’s gonna be big, it’s gonna be O’Keefe replied “Stay tuned..”
massive. If they think they can shut us
down with this crap [lawsuit] they’re sorely
mistaken. Because not only are people in
the media probably going to lose their jobs
and be exposed for what they are, but this
[lawsuit] is going to be exposed for what it
is. So stay tuned ladies and gentleman.
Fireworks are coming,” he said.
That pretty much answers the president’s question, we
think.

39
 Listening To The Donald At The UN
By The Saker
September 21, 2017

conflates handing out money to the Military Industrial

Complex with preparing for war. Frankly, this is good
news: let the Americans spend themselves into bankruptcy,
let them further neglect their military and let them continue
to believe that this kind of magical thinking will bring
them to victory.

[Sidebar: for the record, I have met and studied with plenty of
excellent, well-educated, honorable, courageous and patriotic
American officers and the kind of money-centered hubris I
describe above is in no way directed at them, if only because
they know even much better than I, how bad the situation really
is.
Late this morning, outraged emails
started pouring in. My correspondents
reported “getting sick” and having their There are plenty of highly-educated
“heart ache”. The cause of all that? officers in the US armed forces who
They had just watched Trump’s speech understand history and who know that
at the UN. I sighed and decided to watch money bring corruption, not victory. But
the full speech for myself. Yeah, it was they are mostly kept at ranks no higher
painful. than Colonel and you will often find
them in military teaching institutions
and academies. Having studied with
You can read the full (rush,not official) text here or watch
them and become good friends with
the video here. Most of it is so vapid that I won’t even
many of them, I feel sorry for them and I
bother posting the full thing. But there are a few interesting
know that if they had the means to stop
moments including those:
this insanity they would]

“We will be spending almost $700 billion on America does more than speak for the
our military and defense. Our military will values expressed in the United Nations
soon be the strongest it has ever been” charter. Our citizens have paid the ultimate
price to defend our freedom and the
freedom of many nations represented in
This short sentence contains the key to unlock the reason
this great hall. America’s devotion is
behind the fact that while the US military is extremely
measured on the battlefields where our
good at killing people in large numbers, it is also
young men and women have fought and
extremely bad at winning wars. Like most Americans,
sacrificed alongside of our allies. From the
Trump is under the illusion that spending a lot of money
beaches of Europe to the deserts of the
“buys” you a better military. This is completely false, of
Middle East to the jungles of Asia, it is an
course. If spending money was the key to a competent
eternal credit to the American character
military force, the US armed forces would have already
that even after we and our allies emerge
conquered the entire planet many times over. In reality,
victorious from the bloodiest war in history,
they have not won anything meaningful since the war in
we did not seek territorial expansion or
the Pacific.
attempt to oppose and impose our way of
life on others.
Having surrounded himself with “Mad Dog” kind of
“experts” on warfare, Trump is now reusing that old The only question here is whom exactly Trump’s speech-
mantra about how money buys you victory and this is writers are aiming that nonsense at? Do they really think
something extremely important. This kind of magical that there is anybody out there who sincerely believes this?
thinking signals to the countries most threatened by the US
that the Americans are unable to engage in a basic “lessons
learned” kind of exercise, that history teaches them If the target audience are US middle schools then, yes,
nothing and that, just like all his predecessors, Trump okay. But does anybody believe that US middle school
40
students listen to UN speeches?! Okay, maybe senile folks
also believe that, I sure know a few who will swallow it up
and ask for more, but why speak to that audience from a
UN podium? Is it not embarrassing when such nonsense is
greeted in total silence instead of a standing ovation from
all the putatively grateful countries out there who are so
deeply grateful for all these altruistic and heroic sacrifices?
My only explanation for why this kind of nonsensical
drivel was included in this speech is that it has become part
of the ritual of typical American “patriotic liturgy”: big
hyperbolic sentences which mean nothing, which nobody
takes seriously or even listens to, but who have to be
included “because they have to”. This reminds me of the
obligatory Lenin quote in any and all Soviet speeches and
statements, they also were basically filtered out by any
thinking person, everybody knew that, but that’s how
things went on then. It is really sad, and scary, to see how
much the US of the 2017 looks like the Soviet Union of
the 1980s.
The United States has great strength and
patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or
its allies, we will have no choice but to
totally destroy North Korea.
Wow! Now that is a sentence which could only be written
by a person utterly unaware of the impact it will have on
the intended audience (in theory, all of mankind, this is the
UN, after all). Totally destroy North Korea. I wonder how
this will be received in South Korea and Japan. No, I don’t
mean by the puppet regimes in Seoul and Tokyo, but by
the people. Will they simply dismiss it as hot air or will
they be horrified? I bet for the former reaction. It is much
more psychologically comfortable to dismiss it all under
the heading “nah, that’s crazy shit, they don’t mean it and
they sure as hell ain’t gonna do it” rather than think for just
a few minutes about the implications and consequences of
such a threat. And let me be clear here: the United States
most definitely do have the means to totally destroy North
Korea. For one thing, they already did so during the
Korean war, and they can easily repeated that today. That
does not mean that they can win a war against the DPRK.
There is a huge difference between laying waste to a
country and winning a war against it (see Israel vs
Hezbollah). The only way to meaningfully win a war
against the DPRK is to invade it, and that the Americans
cannot do, not even close. In contrast, the DPRK probably
has the means to invade at least the northern part of South
Korea, including Seoul. At the very least, they can totally
destroy it. Along with much of Japan. I wonder if the US
decided to one day “protect” South Korea and Japan by
“totally destroying North Korea”, will they be totally
shocked when they realize that the South Koreans and the
Japanese will turn out not to be grateful for such a
“protection”?
41
Last month I announced a new strategy for
victory in the fight against this evil in
Afghanistan. From now on, our security
interests will dictate the length and scope
of military operation, not arbitrary
benchmarks and timetables set up by
politicians. I have also totally changed the
rules of engagement in our fight against the
Taliban and other terrorist groups.
What we see here is undeniable evidence that far from
being “real warriors” or “strategists” the military gang
around Trump (Mattis, McMaster, Kelly, etc.) are either
primitive grunts or folks who owe their rank to political
protection. Why do I say that? Because none of what
Trump describes as a “strategy for victory” is, in fact, a
strategy.
In fact, the US has not had anything remotely resembling a
strategy in Afghanistan for years already. If it wasn’t so
sad, it would be laughable, really. What we really see here
is the total absence of any strategy and, again, a total
reliance on magical thinking. Ask yourself a basic
question: have you ever heard from any Trump
administration or any US General anything which would
suggest to you that these guys have i) a clear goal in mind
ii) an understanding of what it would take to achieve this
goal and iii) a timeframe to achieve this goal and iv) an
exit strategy once this goal is achieved? No? Well, that is
not your fault, you did not miss anything. They really
don’t have it. The amazing reality is that they don’t have a
goal even defined. How one achieves “victory” when no
goal is even defined is anybody’s guess.
[Sidebar: without going into a lengthy discussion of Afghanistan, I
would say that the only chance to get anything done, any viable
result at all, is to negotiate a deal with all the parties that matter:
the various Afghan factions, of course, but also with the Taliban,
Pakistan, Iran and even Russia. Pakistan and Iran have a de-
facto veto power over any outcome for Afghanistan.
This may not be what the US would
want, but this is the reality. Denying
reality is just not a smart approach to
these issues, especially if “victory” is
the goal]
In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains
toward lasting defeat of ISIS. In fact, our
country has achieved more against ISIS in
the last eight months than it has in many,
many years combined. The actions of the
criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad,
including the use of chemical weapons
against his own citizens, even innocent
children, shock the conscience of every
decent person. No society could be safe if
banned chemical weapons are allowed to
spread. That is why the United States
 carried out a missile strike on the airbase
that launched the attack.
When I heard these words I felt embarrassed for Trump.
First, it is absolutely pathetic that Trump has to claim as
his success the victories with the Syrians, which the
Russians, the Iranians and Hezbollah have achieved
against the Wahabi-crazies of Daesh/al-Qaeda/al-
Nusra/etc, especially since the latter are a pure creation of
the US CIA!
The truth is that it was the Americans who created this
Wahabi monster and that they aided, protected, financed,
trained and armed it through all these years. The US also
viciously opposed all the countries which were serious
about fighting this Wahabi abomination. And now that a
tiny Russian contingent has achieved infinitely better
results that all the power of the mighty CENTCOM backed
by the Israeli and Saudi allies of the US in the region, The
Donald comes out and declares victory?! Pathetic is not
strong enough a word to describe this mind-bogglingly
counter-factual statement.
And then, just to make things worse, The Donald
*proudly* mentions the failed attack against a Syrian air
force base which had nothing to do with a false flag fake
chemical attack. Wow! For any other political leader
recalling such an event would be a burning embarrassment,
but for The Donald it is something he proudly mentions.
The hubris, ignorance and stupidity of it all leaves me in
total awe…
Next The Donald went on a long rant about how bad
Maduro and Venezuela were, which was terrible, but at
least predictable, but then he suddenly decided to share
this outright bizarre insight of his:
The problem in Venezuela is not that
socialism has been poorly implemented,
but that socialism has been faithfully
implemented. From the Soviet Union to
Cuba to Venezuela, wherever true
socialism or communism has been
adopted, it has delivered anguish and
devastation and failure.
Since when did Trump become an expert on political
science and world history anyway? Who does he think he
is lecturing? Yet another US middle school classroom?!
Does he not realize that a good number of the countries
represented at the UN consider themselves Socialist?!
Furthermore, while I don’t necessarily disagree with the
notion that Socialist and Communist ideas have often been
a disaster in the 20th century, Socialism in the 21st century
is an entirely different beast and the jury is still very much
out on this issue, especially when considering the social,
political, economic, ecological, psychological and even
42
spiritual disaster Capitalism is now proving to be for much
of the planet.
Being the President of a country as dysfunctional as the
US, Trump would be well-advised to tone down his
arrogant pontifications about Socialism and maybe even
open a book and read about it.
I won’t even bother discussing the comprehensively
counter-factual nonsense Trump has spewed about Iran
and Hezbollah, we all know who Trump’s puppet-masters
are nowadays so we know what to expect. Instead, I will
conclude with this pearl from The Donald:
In remembering the great victory that led to
this body’s founding, we must never forget
that those heroes who fought against evil,
also fought for the nations that they love.
Patriotism led the Poles to die to save
Poland, the French to fight for a free
France, and the Brits to stand strong for
Britain.
Echoing the nonsense he spoke while in Poland, Trump is
now clearly fully endorsing that fairytale that “The West”
(in which Trump now hilariously includes Poland!) has
defeated Hitler and saved the world. The truth is that the
Nazis were defeated by the Soviets and that all the efforts
of the Poles, French, Brits and even Americans were but a
minor (20% max) sideshow to the “real event” (Those who
still might believe in this nonsense can simply read this).
Yet again, that the Americans would feel the need to
appropriate for themselves somebody else’s victory is, yet
again, a clear sign of weakness. Do they expect the rest of
the planet to buy into this nonsense? Probably not. My
guess is that all they want is to send a clear messages to the
Comprador elites running most countries that this is the
“official ideology of the AngloZionist Empire” and if they
want to remain in power they better toe the line even if
nobody takes this stuff seriously. Yup, back to a 1980s
Soviet kind of attitude towards propaganda: nobody cares
what everybody else really thinks as long as everybody
continues to pretend to believe the official propaganda.
[Sidebar: When my wife and I watched this pathetic speech we
started laughing about the fact that Trump was so obscenely bad
that we (almost) begin to miss Obama. This is a standing joke in
our family because when Obama came to power we (almost)
began to miss Dubya. The reason why this is a joke is that when
Dubya came to power we decided that there is no way anybody
could possibly be worse than him. Oh boy were we wrong! Right
now I am still not at the point were I would be missing Obama
(that is asking for a lot from me!), but I will unapologetically admit
that I am missing Dubya. I do. I really do. Maybe not the people
around Dubya, he is the one who truly let the Neocon “crazies in
the basement” creep out and occupy the Situation Room, but at
least Dubya seemed to realize how utterly incompetent he was.
Furthermore, Dubya was a heck of a lot dumber than Obama (in
this context being stupid is a mitigating factor) and he sure did
not have the truly galactic arrogance of Trump (intelligence-wise
they are probably on par)].
In conclusion, what I take away from this speech is a sense
of relief for the rest of the planet and a sense of real worry
for the US. Ever since the Neocons overthrew Trump and
made him what is colloquially referred to as their “bitch”
the US foreign policy has come to a virtual standstill.
Sure, the Americans talk a lot, but at least they are doing
nothing. That paralysis, which is a direct consequence of
the internal infighting, is a blessing for the rest of the
planet because it allows everybody else to get things done.
43
Because, and make no mistake here, if the US cannot get
anything constructive done any more, they retain a huge
capability to disrupt, subvert, create chaos and the like.
But for as long as the US remains
paralyzed this destructive potential remains
mostly unused
(and no matter how bad things look
now, Hillary President would have
been infinitely worse!).
However, the US themselves are now the prime victim of a
decapitated Presidency and a vindictive and generally out
of control Neocon effort to prevent true American patriots
to “get their country back” (as they say) and finally
overthrow the regime in Washington DC. Step by step the
US is getting closer to a civil war and there is no hope in
sight, at least for the time being. It appears that for the
foreseeable future Trump will continue to focus his energy
on beating Obama for the status of “worst President in US
history” while the Neocons will continue to focus their
energy on trying to impeach Trump, and maybe even
trigger a civil war.
The rest of us living here are in for some very tough times
ahead. As they say in Florida when a hurricane comes
barreling down on you “hunker down!”
 Paper: Did Susan Rice Also
Spy On Trump Officials For Muslim Brotherhood?
By Cristina Laila
Tuesday, September 19, 2017

After several months of denials, a new
report out on Susan Rice says the
former top Obama administration
official revealed to House investigators
why she unmasked Trump officials. Rice
sought to understand more about a
meeting between UAE Crown Prince
Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan
and senior Trump aides that took place
late last year.
It appears Susan Rice may have killed two birds with one
stone. Rice may have been spying on a political opponent
AND spying on the UAE for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Daniel Greenfield is an investigative journalist and expert
on Islamic terrorism. He wrote an excellent piece in
FrontPage Mag titled ‘Did Susan Rice Spy on Trump
Officials for Muslim Brotherhood?‘
Greenfield’s leads in with a Watergate comparison.
Imagine if Watergate had been about the
White House spying on Democrats for
the KGB.
Greenfield brings up a valid point. Every time Obama is
caught spying, he says it’s for ‘national security’ so
anyone who goes against his spy network must be a
security threat. Obama used this tactic successfully with
the Iran nuclear deal.
Obama and his minions had used the NSA to spy on
Americans opposed to its policies. Including members of
Congress. They did this by conflating their own political
agenda with national security.
Since Obama’s spin was that the Iran Deal was good for
national security, opponents of it were a “national
security” threat.
Susan Rice’s excuse for unmasking Trump and his private
associates was that she sought to understand more about a
.
44
meeting between UAE Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed
bin Zayed al-Nahyan and senior Trump aides that took
place last year.
Greenfield argues:
The UAE has become best known for being
the first regional Muslim oil state to turn
against the Muslim Brotherhood and the
entire Arab Spring enterprise. It helped
mobilize opposition to the Qatari agenda.
The ultimate outcome of that effort was that
Egypt was stabilized under a non-Islamist
president and the Islamist takeover in Libya
is looking rather shaky. The Saudi coalition
against Qatar, the sugar daddies of
Hamas, Al Qaeda and the Muslim
Brotherhood, has its origins in that effort.
When Obama Inc. spied on members of Congress before, it
was to protect Iran. This time around, the gang that
couldn’t spy straight was trying to protect the Muslim
Brotherhood. The Iran Deal was never about stopping
Iran’s nuclear program. It certainly does not do that. Nor
was it ever meant to do it.
The arrangement that Susan Rice was protecting by spying
on top Trump officials was even older and dirtier. It goes
back to Obama’s Cairo speech and the resulting bloody
horrors of the Arab Spring.
Both times Obama Inc. was caught spying on American
officials to protect its dirty deal with Islam.
This scenario is very plausible as the criminal Obama
administration sought to kill two birds with one stone. Spy
on his political opponents while spying for his buddies in
the Muslim Brotherhood.
 Trump's "Fiery"
United Nations Speech: Full Transcript
By Tyler Durden
Sep 19, 2017 12:00 PM

In a speech that commentators have said "the likes of and hinted that he may not recertify the agreement when it
which have never been heard by a U.S. leader in the comes up for a mid-October deadline. “I don’t think
United Nations", President Trump did not disappoint you’ve heard the last of it."
expectations that his first appearance at the UN would be a
fiery, memorable affair, and while laying out his view for a On Venezuela, Trump said the collapsing situation there
"nationalist" basis to US foreign policy, focusing on state “completely unacceptable” and said the United States
sovereignty as the framework for the "great revival of cannot stand by and watch. He warned the United States
nations" and future international relations while vowing to was considering what further actions it can take. “We
"always put America first", Trump slammed “the scourge cannot stand by and watch."
of our planet which is a group of rogue regimes" listing
North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, while also taking shots at
Ultimately Trump reverted back to how he sees America's
Saudi Arabia and China.
role in the world order, saying the United States does not
seek to impose its will on other nations and will respect
In a forceful endorsement of nationalism around the world, other countries’ sovereignty.
Trump called for a
“I will defend America’s interests above all
"great reawakening of nations, for the else. But in fulfilling our obligations to other
revival of their spirits, their pride, their nations we also realize it’s in everyone’s
people and their patriotism." interest to seek a future where all nations
can be sovereign, prosperous and secure.”
Saying that "major portions of the world are in conflict and
some, in fact, are going to hell", Trump's most memorable
comment was that the United States will be forced to
“totally destroy” North Korea unless Pyongyang backs
down from its nuclear challenge, mocking North Korean
leader Kim Jong Un as a “rocket man” on a suicide
mission, a comment which was followed by loud
murmuring around the assembly.

"If it the US forced to defend itself or its

allies, we will have no choice but to totally
destroy North Korea. Rocket man is on a
suicide mission for himself and his regime"
adding that North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear
weapons and ballistic missiles “threatens
the entire world with unthinkable cost of
human life.”
In his first, 41-minute long appearance at this annual
gathering of world leaders, the president also took aim at
Iran’s nuclear ambitions and regional influence,
Venezuela’s collapsing democracy and the threat of
Islamist extremists, while also criticizing the Cuban
government.
On Iran, which he called an “economically depleted rogue
state that exports violence" Trump said the 2015 nuclear
deal negotiated by Barack Obama was an embarrassment
45
Selected speech highlights:
 "I will always put America first just like you, the leaders
of your countries, should put your countries first."
 "We meet at a time of immense promise and great
peril... It is up to us whether we will lift the world to new
heights or let it fall into a valley of disrepair."
 “The scourge of our planet is a group of rogue regimes"
 “Rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself
and his regime... The U.S. is ready, willing and able
to take military action, but “hopefully that won’t be
necessary”
 "If it the US forced to defend itself or its allies, we will
have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea"
  “It’s time for North Korea to realize that de-
nuclearization is its only acceptable future"
 "it’s outrageous that nations would support North Korea
and that rogue nation’s pursuit of missiles threatens the
whole world"
 "Problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been
poorly implemented, but that socialism has been
faithfully implemented."
 "Major portions of the world are in conflict and
some, in fact, are going to hell"
 "No nation should have to share a disproportionate
share of the burden, militarily or financially"
.
 “If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few,
then evil will triumph.”
 "The American people hope that one day soon the
United Nations can be a much more accountable and
effective advocate for human dignity and freedom
around the world."
 The “righteous many” must confront the “wicked few."
His full speech transcript starting on next page:

US President Donald Trump says he will ‘totally destroy’ North Korea if they continue their nuclear path. Picture: AFPSource:AFP

“No nation on Earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles,” Mr.
Trump said. “If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph.”

46
47
48
49
50
51
52
.

53
 BREAKING: Obama FBI Wiretapped
TRUMP Campaign Manager During 2016 Election
By Cristina Laila
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
The Obama FBI wiretapped President
Trump’s Campaign Manager During the
2016 Election.
Paul Manafort was wiretapped during
the 2016 election.
The Obama FBI used a secret court
order to wiretap Manafort.
President Trump said he was wiretapped after the election.
54
CNN reports:
US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign
chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before
and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary
step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the
center of the Russia meddling probe.
The government snooping continued into early this year,
including a period when Manafort was known to talk to
President Donald Trump.
Some of the intelligence collected includes
communications that sparked concerns among
investigators that Manafort had encouraged the Russians to
help with the campaign, according to three sources familiar
with the investigation. Two of these sources, however,
cautioned that the evidence is not conclusive.
According to this report, (FISA) began after Manafort
became the subject of an FBI investigation that began in
2014.
It centered on work done by a group of
Washington consulting firms for Ukraine’s
former ruling party, the sources told CNN.
The surveillance was then discontinued due to lack of
evidence.
 Former Pentagon Analyst Explains
Why Trump Fostering Hysteria Over North Korea
© AP Photo/ Ahn Young-Joon - Opinion
03:32 20.09.2017(Updated 12:32 20.09.2017)

reveals the driving and desperate concern

of the Pentagon and its economic
dependencies," she said.

The United States has repeatedly tried to use the United

States as a cover and justification for waging major wars
around the world over the past nearly 70 years,
Kwiatkowski recalled.

"When the US goes to war as it did

in Korea in 1950, Yugoslavia in 1991, Iraq
in 1990 and again in 2003, it was under the
Former Defense Department analyst Colonel Karen auspice or strong appearance of UN
Kwiatkowski says that Donald Trump and members of his support," she said.
administration have been deliberately fostering public
hysteria over North Korea.
Current US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki
Haley has tried to build up support for a similar war
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — President Donald Trump against North Korea this year, but so far she had largely
and members of his administration have been deliberately failed, Kwiatkowski observed.
fostering public hysteria over North Korea to drown
out voices opposed to any US military buildup, former
"Haley’s efforts at the UN have been
Defense Department and Air Force analyst Lieutenant
designed to garner such support this
Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski told Sputnik.
summer, and it appears she has been less
than fully successful, in part because taking
During a speech at the UN General Assembly in New a US fight to North Korea is very similar
York earlier in the day, Trump said the United States to declaring war against China and
would "totally destroy" North Korea if it was forced to. On Russia," she said.
Sunday, US Envoy to the UN Nikki Haley warned that the
United States had "plenty" of unilateral military options
The ploy had failed in part because Moscow and Beijing
to choose from to address Pyongyang’s missile tests.
had both grown in global stature and influence in recent
years, Kwiatkowski explained.
"The public hysteria being promoted by the
[Trump] administration… indicates to me
"The governments of both China and
that this is an attempt to entertain the US
Russia not only hold UN Security Council
population through fear, and shut down or
veto power, both have asserted themselves
limit public dissent," Kwiatkowski said
globally, financially and militarily in the
on Tuesday.
past decade," she said.
The Defense Department and its major contractors have
Also, US propaganda had not been successful so far
been alarmed at the American public’s growing opposition
in making the case for renewed war against North Korea
to massive spending and endless US military adventures
to the American people, Kwiatkowski added.
and interventions around the world, Kwiatkowski pointed
out. "The domestic propaganda battle by the
US Government and domestic war
"That we are speaking today of North
advocates has been largely ineffective, and
Korea and its destruction by the US military

55
 does not seem to be catching fire yet," she
said.
Efforts to play up the alleged North Korean threat to the
Pacific island of Guam, a US dependency had also failed,
Kwiatkowski noted.
"Even the potential of a North Korean
missile attack of US territory Guam, a
tourist location serving a largely Asian
clientele, was viewed by many residents
of Guam as not much more than a
schoolboy spat between two flamboyant
and prone-to-exaggeration politicians," she
said.
The Korean security crisis could be finally resolved if the
United Statres finally agreed sign a lasting, full peace
treaty with Pyongyang as it had failed to do since 1953,
Kwiatkowski stated.
"What needs to be done is to actually end
the Korean War by committing to the peace
treaty between the North and South that
the 1953 Armistice was supposed to foster.
The US government seems institutionally
unable to support such a peace treaty," she
said.
Washington did not want to sign such a peace treaty
because it would then no longer have the excuse
to continue to operate its massive military bases in South
Korea, Kwiatkowski commented.
"Of course, if a peace treaty were signed
between North and South Korea, the US
military bases in South Korea would no
longer be required. Any treaty would likely
require these US bases (Army, Navy, Air
.
56
Force and intelligence operations) to be
closed or shifted to South Korean military
control," she said.
All war-games scenarios on a new Korean War result
in greater global war with massive casualties and
environmental destruction, Kwiatkowski warned.
"Any hot war with North Korea results
in literally a billion people dead… [yet there
are no fundamental US interests in North
Korea than cannot be peacefully acquired
or accomplished with the help of China and
Russia," she said.
The Trump administration was seeking to intensify the
crisis or defuse it, Kwiatkowski remarked.
"Clearly, the US government is seeking
to intensify the crisis, not diffuse it," she
said.
US military needed the justification of continued and
worsening crises because the Pentagon faces very real and
very severe budget and influence reduction in coming
years, as US debt grows rapidly and the US economy
slows, Kwiatkowski concluded.
Last week, North Korea tested an intermediate ballistic
missile, which flew over Japan before falling into the
Pacific Ocean about 20 minutes after the launch.
The situation on the Korean Peninsula has escalated
in recent months due to Pyongyang's ballistic missile
launches and nuclear tests in violation of the UN Security
Council resolutions. The UN Security Council has
imposed sanctions on North Korea, which, however, have
failed to prevent Pyongyang from conducting new tests.
 O'Keefe Drops Part IV: 20-Year NYT
Veteran Exposes "Culture Of Anti-Trump Bias"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 19, 2017 11:31 AM

First it was Audience Strategy Editor, Nick Dudich, who Todd Gordon: “You’re right, 100%.
admitted to repeatedly promoting content that intentionally 100%.”
sought to, among other things, damage President Trump's
businesses as a means towards forcing his resignation.
Next came the NYT's senior Home Page Editor, Des Shoe,
who described Trump as an “oblivious idiot” and Pence
as “f***ing horrible” while admitting that her company's
perpetual bias and 'shocking' headlines were often nothing
more than click-bait designed to attract readers in a hyper-
competitive industry.
Now, James O'Keefe and the team at Project Veritas would
like for you to meet Todd Gordon, a 20-year veteran IT
consultant at the New York Times who says the "culture of
anti-Trump bias" has become so pervasive at the Times He continues to explain how a lack of real sourcing for the
that not a single person within the organization has a Russia story has resulted in a nonstop barrage of
positive opinion of the President. "heresay"...something we've noted numerous times over
PV Journalist: “Have you ever had the past year..
anybody in New York Times’ office Todd Gordon: “Right, it’s all been here-
come up to you and say, I actually enjoy say. Maybe he did this, maybe he did
Trump?” that. You’re right, 100%. They haven’t
Todd Gordon: “No, no, no.” been able to prove it.”

PV Journalist: “Really?” PV Journalist: “But 100%, that’s how I feel

Todd Gordon: “Not one person.”
PV Journalist: “Not one person?”
Todd Gordon: “Not one, not one. Everyone
hates him. They hate him like the plague
dude. I’m like, beautiful day, today. And
they’re like, as good as it could be, fuck
Trump. Everywhere I go, everywhere I go
they’re like as good as it could be, but
we’re fucked.”
Gordon goes on to say that without a voice of dissent, it is
impossible to believe that The Times can be impartial
towards Trump,
like Times…”
Todd Gordon: “You’re right.”
PV Journalist: “…has covered this, right?”
Todd Gordon: “Yeah, 100% you’re right.
It’s all heresay.”
PV Journalist: “You’re in the office all the
time, so you get to see it firsthand.”
Todd Gordon: “Yeah, heresay, it’s all
heresay. And they’re like grab that
heresay and let’s put it out there”
With that intro, here is "NYT Part IV" in its entirety:

“They unfairly, yes. I agree 100 percent.

They unfairly report on him.”
PV Journalist: “How can they report…”
Todd Gordon: “They can’t.”
PV Journalist: “Without being biased,
right?”

57
 Trump U.N. Speech Puts
World On Notice – AMERICA IS BACK
By DCwhispers
Posted On September 19, 2017

Wow. Wow. And WOW! POTUS Trump’s first speech to

the United Nations put the world on notice. After eight
long years of an American foreign policy predicated on No more half-measures and compromises on critical areas
apologizing for being America, Donald Trump let it be of right and wrong.
known America is no longer in the business of apologizing
for itself. WHAT A MOMENT.

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton described it as the

finest moment so far of the Trump presidency and the most
straightforward “put on notice” speech in the history of the
United Nations. POTUS Trump made clear all options will
be available to deal with North Korea. He was equally
strong on the terrorist rogue nation of Iran while blasting
the “embarrassment” that was the Obama-Iran nuke deal.

Trump then finished by decimating the entire premise of

socialism while pointing to the ongoing disaster unfolding
in Venezuela that literally has people starving in the
streets.
.

58
 Trump's America-First UN Speech
Was The Best Of His Presidency
Reaganesque
By Jordan Schachtel
Posted September 19, 2017 01:21 PM
President Donald Trump speaks during the 72nd session of the UN
General Assembly, September 19, 2017. Mary Altaffer | AP Images
President Trump delivered the most America-first speech
of his presidency in front of the United Nations Tuesday
morning in New York City. It was a no-holds-barred
address that shined a light on the threat posed by the
enemies to the free world, such as Iran, North Korea,
Syria, Venezuela, and the global “radical Islamic terror”
groups. Trump’s language adopted the “peace through
strength” philosophy popularized by former President
Ronald Reagan, and his promotion of American
exceptionalism is sure to fire up the base that elected him
president.
Trump took a 180-degree turn away from the Obama
administration’s soft posture and rhetoric on Iran and
radical Islam. He promised to hold accountable the
terrorist regime in Tehran and separated the Iranian people
from their fundamentalist rulers, demanding that the
regime “stop supporting terrorists” and “begin serving its
own people.”
59
He castigated the nuclear deal with Iran, which was
negotiated by the Obama administration along with the
P5+1 world powers. Trump said that the world would see
“very soon” America’s future position on the deal. He has
until October 15 to decide whether the U.S. will cancel its
involvement in the nuclear accord or remain in the deal for
another 90 days.
After taking a brief hiatus from identifying the threat that
is the global jihadist movement, President Trump again
warned of “the Islamic extremist” threat that continues to
menace the free world across the globe.
“We will stop radical Islamic terrorism,
because we cannot allow it to tear up our
nation and, indeed, to tear up the entire
world,” Trump declared.
“No nation on Earth has an interest in
seeing this band of criminals arm itself with
nuclear weapons and missiles,” Trump said
of the “depraved regime” in North Korea.
“Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for
himself and for his regime,” Trump added
of dictator Kim Jong Un, promising never to
settle for anything less than a de-
nuclearized Pyongyang.
Attacking the ideology of the Maduro regime in
Venezuela, the president stated:
“The problem in Venezuela is not that
socialism has been poorly implemented,
but that socialism has been faithfully
implemented.” He said that the U.S. would
not sit idly by while “the government of
Venezuela persists on its path to impose
authoritarian rule on the Venezuelan
people.”
Moving to Syria, Trump described the Assad dictatorship
that rules Damascus as a “criminal regime.” He went on to
discuss how Assad uses horrific methods in bombing his
own countrymen and is seemingly indiscriminate about
whether they are men, women, or even innocent children.
On Tuesday morning, Trump delivered a Reaganesque,
America-first speech that is sure to fire up conservatives
60
and his base of support. In front of their representatives, he
took direct shots at the rogue regimes of the world. Time
will tell whether President Trump can make good on the
best speech of his presidency with the needed policy
outcomes to follow through on his rhetoric.
 Trump Slams North Korean Leader
As ‘Rocket Man’ At UN As Experts Praise
‘Best Ever’ Speech
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 19, 2017
“There has never been a more
straightforward criticism of the
unacceptable behavior of other member
states”
(National Sentinel) Direct Diplomacy: President Donald
J. Trump’s first address to the United Nations General
Assembly isn’t likely to be soon forgotten, especially by
nations he singled out for bad behavior.
In addressing North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s ongoing
efforts to develop nuclear weapons, Trump made it clear
what a grave threat the U.S. considers the program to be to
itself and its allies. And characteristically, the president
couldn’t resist adding a touch of bombast.
“Rocket man is on a suicide mission for
himself and his regime,” Trump told the
gathered diplomats, referring to the
nickname he gave Kim recently beginning
with a tweet over the weekend.
Trump added that Pyongyang’s continued nuclear weapons
development “threatens the entire world with unthinkable
loss of human life,” the Washington Times reported.
“The United States has great strength and
patience,” Trump said. “But if it is forced to
defend itself or its allies, we will have no
choice but to totally destroy North Korea.”
“The United States is ready, willing and
able, but hopefully this will not be
necessary.”
61
Other experts and one former ranking UN official from the
United States praised Trump’s speech for its direct
approach and its plain-spoken truths.
“It’s safe to say, in the entire history of the
United Nations, there has never been a
more straightforward criticism of the
unacceptable behavior of other member
states,” former UN Ambassador John
Bolton said, praising Trump’s speech.
He noted that Trump threatened North Korea with “total
destruction” if Pyongyang fails to abandon its nuclear
weapons program — which it is unlikely to do.
Bolton also noted that Trump specifically called out the
Obama administration over its so-called ‘nuclear deal’
with Iran.
“[He] said, as he has said many times
before, it is one of the worst, most one-
sided deals in American history, an
embarrassment to the country, and we
haven’t heard the last of it,” Bolton said, as
reported by Fox News.
“I think these are about as clear an
indication as a president can make that
he’s not going to live with the kind of half-
measures and compromises that frankly for
25 years have marked American policy and
led us to the present desperate situation
where both these countries are on the
verge of getting deliverable nuclear
weapons,” he added.
“The world is more dangerous than any
time in my lifetime,” Sen. David Perdue, R-
Ga., a member of the Senate Armed
Services Committee, said. “President
Trump sent the message that all sovereign
nations must come together in a united
effort to counter North Korea’s reckless
behavior and the growing threats from
 Iran’s continued support of terrorist groups
and human rights abuses.”
Matt Brooks, executive director of the Republican Jewish
Coalition, also praised the president, while at the same
time taking his own swipe at the Obama administration.
“The president was strong in his
condemnation of Iran as a corrupt
.
62
dictatorship, economically depleted, a
destabilizing force in the Middle East, and a
chief exporter of violence and terror,” he
said, as reported by the Times. “Today’s
speech was a strong affirmation of
American leadership on the world stage,
something that has been missing during
the last eight years.”
 What Did John Kelly Think
Of Trump’s UN Speech? See For Yourself
By Susan Wright
Posted At 6:00 Pm On September 19, 2017

They say a picture is worth 1,000 words, in which case,

I’m so glad somebody thought to snap a couple of shots of
John Kelly during Trump’s speech to the United Nations
General Assembly.

Some may remember the viral picture of Trump’s chief of

staff when he made his third version statement after the
events of Charlottesville.

It was a true “Do not want” moment, apparently.

And while Republicans, in general, had positive things to

say about Trump’s speech, if body language means
anything, Kelly did not share their enthusiasm.

See for yourself.

It’s possible, but then you have to ask,
I suppose it is quite possible that General Kelly was
dealing with a really tenacious headache. “What gave him the headache?”

63
 CNN: Trump May Have Been
Part Of Manafort Wiretapping [VIDEO]
Amber Athey - Media Reporter
12:51 AM 09/19/2017
Screen Shot Pamela Brown and Don Lemon (CNN: Sep 18, 2017)
CNN correspondent Pamela Brown indicated Monday that
the federal government wiretapping of Paul Manafort may
have captured his conversations with Donald Trump.
A new report revealed today that Manafort’s
communications were under government surveillance both
before and after the 2016 presidential election.
64
Trump tweeted in March that phones in Trump Tower
were wiretapped by President Barack Obama, a claim that
was wholly denied by the Justice Department.
However, Brown explained why the new report could give
Trump’s claims some validation.
“What is possible, Don, is that [Trump] was
picked up on the Manafort surveillance and
we should note that Manafort does have a
residence in Trump Tower,” Brown
explained to CNN host Don Lemon, “but it
is not clear if the FBI did surveillance on
him there.”
The new revelations may give some credence to Trump’s
past claims of wiretapping.
WATCH:
 Manafort Calls On DOJ To Release His Intercepted Phone
Calls; Demands Investigation Of Leaks
By Tyler Durden
Sep 19, 2017 7:05 PM
Less than 24 hours after CNN triggered the latest outbreak
of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' by relaying
information from anonymous sources that Trump's former
campaign manager Paul Manfort has been under
surveillance by the FBI since 2014,
Manafort has fired back by calling on
the Department of Justice to release all
transcripts of his tapped phone calls so
that the American public "can come to
the same conclusion as the DOJ —
there is nothing there." Per the Daily
Caller:
Former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort is calling
on the Justice Department to release transcripts of any
intercepted communications he may have had with
foreigners.
Manafort, a longtime Republican political consultant, also
called on the Justice Department’s inspector general to
investigate the leak of details of secret surveillance
warrants obtained by U.S. investigators.
“Mr. Manafort requests that the
Department of Justice release any
intercepts involving him and any non-
Americans so interested parties can
come to the same conclusion as the
DOJ — there is nothing there,” Manafort
spokesman Jason Maloni said in a
statement.
Manafort's spokesman goes on to demand that the DOJ
launch an immediate investigation into who continues to
commit federal felonies with reckless abandon by leaking
details of confidential FISA warrants to the media.
Whether or not Manafort committed a crime — and he has
not been charged with anything — the leak of information
about FISA warrants is a federal crime, Maloni noted in
his statement.
“If true, it is a felony to reveal the
existence of a FISA warrant, regardless
of the fact that no charges ever
emerged,” Maloni said.
65
Information about FISA warrants is classified and tightly
held by government officials and the federal judges that
approve them. Unauthorized disclosures of FISA
information is also a felony.
At a House Intelligence Committee hearing in March,
then-FBI Director James Comey testified that the leak of
FISA information is punishable by up to 10 years in
prison.
In his statement,
Maloni called on the Justice
Department’s watchdog to
“immediately” open an investigation
into the leak and to “examine the
motivations behind the previous
Administration’s effort to surveil a
political opponent.”
Of course, this was all triggered by CNN's
'bombshell' story last night which revealed
that Manafort has been under an
ongoing wiretap, approved by the FISA
courts, going back to 2014 and tied to
his consulting arrangements with
Ukraine's former ruling party.
That said, the interesting part of CNN's
story came via the revelation that
"surveillance [of Manafort] was
discontinued at some point last year for
lack of evidence" but was then restarted
with a "new FISA warrant that extended
at least into early this year"...all of
which sounds an awful lot like the
 Obama administration using FISA suggested back in March, did intentionally spy on his
courts to spy on a political opponent. campaign using FISA warrants.

Here are the details as presented by CNN: Certainly these two tweets from CNN's Jake Tapper would
seem to be somewhat contradictory:
US investigators wiretapped former
Trump campaign chairman Paul Tapper's initial reaction from March
Manafort under secret court orders 2017 to Trump's claim that the Obama
before and after the election, sources tell administration wiretapped his
CNN, an extraordinary step involving a campaign:
high-ranking campaign official now at the
center of the Russia meddling probe.

The government snooping continued into early this year,

including a period when Manafort was known to talk to
President Donald Trump.

Some of the intelligence collected includes communi-

cations that sparked concerns among investigators that
Manafort had encouraged the Russians to help with the
campaign, according to three sources familiar with the
investigation. Two of these sources, however, cautioned Tapper's follow-up tweet from last night:
that the evidence is not conclusive.

Special counsel Robert Mueller's team, which is leading

the investigation into Russia's involvement in the election,
has been provided details of these communications.

A secret order authorized by the court

that handles the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA) began after
Manafort became the subject of an FBI
investigation that began in 2014. It
centered on work done by a group of
Washington consulting firms for
Ukraine's former ruling party, the
sources told CNN.
The surveillance was discontinued at
some point last year for lack of
evidence, according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance
after obtaining a new FISA warrant that
extended at least into early this year.

All of which has led many people to question throughout Oops.

the day whether the Obama administration, as Trump
.

66
 More Thoughts On Trump’s UN
Declaration Of War Against Iran And North Korea
Paul Craig Roberts
September 19, 2017
Trump’s UN speech makes it clear that Trump’s
presidency, in terms of his campaign promise to remove
Washington from the “policeman of the world” role, exit
the Middle East, and repair the damaged relations with
Russia, is over. The CIA and the military/security complex
are in full control of the US government. Trump has
accepted his captivity and his assigned role as the enforcer
of Washington’s hegemony over every other country.
Washington uber alles is the only foreign policy that
Washington pursues.
At the UN Trump actually threatened to wipe North Korea
off of the face of the earth. He added to this threat threats
against Venezuela and Iran. He demonized these countries
as “rogue states,” but it is Washington that is playing that
role. Washington has destroyed in whole or part eight
countries in the young 21st century and has 3 to 5 more in
its crosshairs. (http://stephenlendman.org/2017/09/trump-
threatens-venezuela/)
One question is: why did not the UN audience shout
Trump down, a man standing before them telling obvious
lies? The answer, of course, is money. The US taxpayers
pay roughly one-quarter of the UN’s annual budget,
leaving the other 130+ countries a light load. Washington
is succeeding in driving the world to Armageddon, because
the world’s leaders prefer money to truth, to justice, to
survival. The UN diplomats see in their cooperation with
Washington the opportunity to make money by sharing in
the West’s exploitation of their own countries.
Washington, absorbed in its effort to destroy Syria, left it
to its Saudi Arabian puppet to destroy Yemen. The Saudi
autocracy, a major sponsor with the US of terrorism, has
done a good job, thanks to US supplying the weapons and
to the US refueling the Saudi attack airplanes. This totally
gratuitous war has helped to maximize the profits of the
American military/security complex, a collection of evil
never before present on the face of the earth. UNICEF
reports that one million Yemeni children will be the
victims of “American compassion” of which Trump
bragged in the CIA’s UN speech.
One wonders if the Russians and Chinese are so absorbed
in getting rich like America’s One Percent that they are
67
unaware that they are on the list of countries to be
eliminated for not accepting Washington’s hegemony.
Really, where was the Russian government when
Washington overthrew the Ukranian government? It was at
a sports event. And I call Americans insouciant. Where
was the Russian government? How could it have not
known?
To be frank. The point is this. Unless Russia and China can
take out the US, the US will take out Russia and China.
The only question is who strikes first. The only way to
avoid this is for Russia and China to surrender and accept
Washington’s hegemony. This is the firm undeviating path
on which the neoconservatives, the CIA, and the
military/security complex have set the United States. The
entire point of North Korea is US nuclear missiles on
China’s border. The entire point of Iran is US nuclear
missiles on Russia’s border.
As far as I can ascertain, hardly anyone is aware that
Armageddon is just around the corner. There is no protest
from the Western presstitutes, a collection of whores. In
the US the only protests are against ancient “civil war”
statues, which the ignorant rabble say are symbols of black
slavery. There is no peace movement and no peace
marches. In London the transgendered and the radical
feminists are protesting one another, engaging in fist fights
in Hyde Park.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4891484/Fists-
fly-politically-correct-rally.html
No one seems to have any awareness.
In US online propaganda websites such as Americans for
Limited Government—funded by who? serving who?—
endorse Trump’s destabilizing UN speech as a non-threat
to world peace:
“President Trump has provided a cogent
and inspiring defense of America and the
American constitutional system of
governance to the world not as imposition
but an example to be followed, while at the
same time respecting the sovereignty of
other nations. However, the President also
made it clear to those nations that threaten
humanity with nuclear destruction [which
Washington has done to N. Korea and Iran]
that the United States will not be held
hostage, and continuing down their current
paths guarantees their annihilation. While
many will focus on Trump’s threat to North
Korea and Iran, the real focus of his
speech is that it is a call to all nations to
embrace their own sovereignty without
threatening world peace.”
I have never in my long life read such a misrepresentation
of a speech. The United States has become the complete
propaganda state. No truth ever emerges.
It is only the US government, which is not a government
of the people, that has ever threatened another country
with total destruction as Trump did to North Korea in the
CIA’s UN speech.
This is a first. It trumps Adolf Hitler. The US has become
the 4th Reich. It is doubtful that the world will survive the
foreign policy of the United States of America.

68
 ‘Shameless, Ignorant, New Hitler’:
Iran & Venezuela Fire Back After
Trump Criticism At UN
Published Time: 20 Sep, 2017 01:09 Edited Time: 20 Sep, 2017 07:54

“one of the worst and most one-sided

transactions the United States has ever
entered into.”

Zarif, who personally signed the document that restricts

Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for a loosening of
international sanctions, said the JCPOA was

“non-negotiable,” despite the US leader

promising, “You’ve not heard the last of it.”
US President Donald Trump addresses the 72nd Annual UN General
Assembly in New York on September 19, 2017. © Jewel Samad / AFP

Two of the most prominent targets of Donald Trump’s

maiden UN speech, Iran and Venezuela, have responded to
the US president’s condemnations with some of their own,
arguing that Washington continues to be a destabilizing
influence.

“Trump’s shameless and ignorant remarks,

in which he ignored Iran’s fight against
terrorism, display his lack of knowledge
and unawareness,” said Iranian Foreign
Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, according
to the official Fars news agency.
Trump called Iran a
Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif © Brendan
McDermid / Reuters
‘Trump threatened Venezuela with death’
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has condemned
what he called

“depleted rogue state whose chief exports "aggression from the new Hitler of
are violence, bloodshed, and chaos,” international politics, Mr. Donald Trump,
saying that it funds “terrorists that kill against the people of Venezuela."
innocent Muslims and attack their peaceful
Arab and Israeli neighbors” and uses its oil
Trump, who dedicated several minutes of his speech to the
wealth to “shore up Bashar al-Assad's
South American country, said that
dictatorship, fuel Yemen's civil war, and
undermine peace throughout the entire
Middle East.” “the socialist dictatorship of Nicolás Maduro
has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on
In turn, Zarif accused Washington of supporting the good people of that country,” and
warned that in addition to sanctions,
Washington was “prepared to take further
“tyrannical regimes” in the region, and “the action if the government of Venezuela
criminal Zionist state.” persists on its path to impose authoritarian
rule on the Venezuelan people.”
Trump also called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
"Nobody threatens Venezuela and nobody
(JCPOA) concluded in 2015 by Tehran and leading world
owns Venezuela," Maduro said in a speech
powers as
69
 in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital.
"Donald Trump today threatened the
president of the Bolivarian Republican of
Venezuela with death."

Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro © Miraflores Palace / Reuters

70
 'Tensions To Rise' After Trump's North Korea Comments
Analysts Say US President's Fiery Language Against North Korea
And Its Leader Distances The Prospect Of Negotiations
Al Jazeera News
September 20, 2017
Trump addresses the 72nd United Nations General Assembly in New
York [Eduardo Munoz/Reuters]
US President Donald Trump's highly-combative remarks
against North Korea and its leader at the United Nations
will only harden Pyongyang's resolve to continue
developing its nuclear programme, analysts have warned.
Using what was described as "unprecedented" language,
Trump made his debut address at the UN General
Assembly (UNGA) on Tuesday.
In a wide-ranging 45-minute speech, the most anticipated
foreign policy address of his tenure, Trump vowed that the
US would "totally destroy" North Korea if it is forced to
defend itself or its allies.
He also mocked Kim Jong-un, North Korea's leader,
saying:
"Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for
himself and for his regime. The United
States is ready, willing and able, but
hopefully, this will not be necessary."
The sharp escalation in rhetoric came weeks after Trump
warned that North Korea would be met with "fire and fury
like the world had never seen" if it continues expanding its
nuclear programme.
"I expected him to talk tough and strong -
but I did not expect him to talk quite that
tough and quite that strongly," said Donald
71
Kirk, a journalist and author of several
books on Korea.
He said Trump's remarks made the prospect of
negotiations extremely unlikely.
"North Koreans are not going to back down
- if anything they are going to increase the
tempo of their programme," Kirk told Al
Jazeera from South Korea's capital, Seoul.
"I think we can forget about North Korea
saying, 'let's go to negotiations.'"
Kirk also said he expected that Trump's fiery approach
would not be adopted by other leaders who are otherwise
highly critical of North Korea's actions.
"We are in for some quite interesting
questions here, and a lot of it is not going
to be favourable to Trump," he said. "I get
the general impression that tensions will
increase and the line is drawn ever
deeper."
'Neoconservative line'
Mark Farha, assistant professor of international relations at
the Doha Institute, said that Trump had - once again -
embraced an interventionist foreign policy.
"He did so gradually in the speech; in the
beginning, he began in a more conciliatory
manner, and towards the end, he adopted
squarely a neoconservative line of regime
change and war in fact," Farha told Al
Jazeera.
"He is trying to square the circle, because
... if you had a poll [in the US] 75 percent of
people would be against escalation against
Iran and North Korea, but here is Trump
harking back to the neoconservatives."
'Steps towards undermining Iran'
In his speech, Trump also attacked Iran, accusing it of
being a "rogue state and a murderous regime". He said the
US could not abide by an agreement if it provided cover
for the construction of a nuclear programme.
Sultan Barakat, director at the Center for Conflict and
Humanitarian Studies at the Doha Institute, also said that
Trump's rhetoric had raised the stakes.
"North Korea now has the script and the
excuse to why they need the [nuclear]
programme," he told Al Jazeera. "If they
haven't got one they need to work very
quickly to develop one if they have that
direct threat."
Barakat noted, however, that Trump's comments about Iran
were more worrisome.
"With the current circumstances and the
alliances he is building with Saudi Arabia,
.
72
Israel and other nations, I fear there is
more chance of him taking some further
steps towards undermining Iran than North
Korea," said.
Trump has to certify in mid-October whether he believes
Iran is abiding by a historic seven-nation agreement signed
in 2015.
Al Jazeera's James Bays, reporting from the UN
headquarters in New York, said Trump's comments on Iran
were nothing new, as he has made it clear time and again
that he is against the pact.
"Yet, saying it in this setting, in front of
world leaders, and calling the deal the
worst and most one-sided transaction in
US history and an embarrassment to the
US, I think that really makes it hard now for
Trump not to de-certify the deal and pull
out of it - and that's just what all the other
players in the international community don't
want," he said.
 BREAKING: Three Liberal Lawmakers Cuffed,
Arrested Outside Of Trump Tower (Video)
By Cristina Laila
Wednesday, September 20, 2017

New York – Three Democrat

Congressmen were arrested outside of
Trump Tower on Tuesday after
protesting President Trump’s
immigration policies.

Via Fox News: Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva, Illinois Rep.

Luis Gutiérrez and New York Rep. Adriano Espaillat were
taken into custody by police, according to Grijalva’s
campaign Twitter account and a Gutiérrez aide.

Rep. Gutierrez arrested by NYPD:

Here’s video of Rep. Grijalva.

The Democrat Congressmen were part of a group

According to a Gutierrez aide’s Twitter account, “Update: protesting the President Trump’s decision to end the
Raúl was taken into custody in front of Trump Tower for DACA program which shields illegal aliens from
civil disobedience along with Rep. Gutierrez and Rep. deportation who entered the country as children brought
Espaillat.” here by their parents illegally.

Here is video of Rep. Espaillat being arrested today in This isn’t the first time Gutierrez has been arrested. He is
New York City. often handcuffed and or arrested while protesting.

73
 The View: Trump’s ‘Rocket Man’
Was A ‘Phallic’ Symbol?
By Kristine Marsh
September 20, 2017 2:35 PM EDT
In the realm of bizarre, wacky and just plain stupid things
said on ABC’s The View, this has to up there as one of the
strangest statements made on this show recently. While
discussing President Trump’s address to the United
Nations September 19, the hosts took pause to wonder if
Trump had a “strategy” in calling Kim Jong-un “Rocket
Man” because it was a “phallic” symbol.
Co-host Sara Haines first brought up the theory with a
smirk:
I stick by my theory that ‘rocket man’ might be a smart
move.
If you think of Putin, and you think of
Kim Jong-un, and you think of Donald
Trump, they love these phallic
references, to masculine dominance.
At that, fellow hosts Joy Behar and Sunny Hostin
interrupted.
“Is ‘rocket man’ phallic?” Hostin asked with
a puzzled expression on her face.
Behar snarked, “Well rocket, hello!” to
which the audience laughed.
“It shoots, shoots,” Haines added, pointing
upwards. “I could see that,” Hostin
remarked, as the audience continued to
laugh.
.
74
“You didn’t see my hand go up like this?
You didn’t know what I was talking about?”
Whoopi joked to Hostin.
“I think all the men in the room know
what I mean when you refer to someone
as ‘rocket man.’ I'm not convinced
there's not a psychology here of it takes
one to know one,” Haines added.
Behar then gushed, “Who needs it? This
is why you need women running the
world,” as the audience roared in cheers.
After some more mocking, Whoopi tried to get the
conversation on a more serious note before cutting to
commercial break.
“It’s just one of those things,” she said. “I
prefer diplomacy,” she added to audience
applause.
Behar jumped in to exclaim, “He's the great
dealmaker? ‘He’s going to make a great
deal.’ Threatening your opponent is not
making a deal!”
“This certainly did not lead” to making us
“safer” Whoopi added, before going to
commercial.
After making some really naive remarks on the U.S.’s
history with North Korea yesterday, perhaps The View
hosts should leave these serious discussions to more
seasoned professionals and stick to the penis jokes.
 Trump Trolls Emmys As
Awards Show Ratings Tank
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 20, 2017

Several entertainers took pot shots at Trump for gags, but That made the president’s day, apparently, as evidenced by
it appears that, once again, the president is having the last this tweet:
laugh

“I was saddened to see how bad the

ratings were on the Emmys last night – the
worst ever. Smartest people of them all are
(National Sentinel) Entertainment: President Donald J.
the ‘DEPLORABLES,'” he wrote, borrowing
Trump was the subject of much hatred and intolerance
Hillary Clinton’s description of Trump
from Left-wing entertainment types at the Emmy Awards
supporters.
show this past weekend, but he used the occasion to take a
jab at the show’s historic low ratings.
The Emmys, which aired on CBS, got only 11.38 million
viewers, matching the all-time low set by the 2016 awards
Hosted by liberal late-night ‘entertainer’ Stephen Colbert,
hosted by Jimmy Kimmel. For comparison’s sake, last
the program was chock full of insults, taunts, and alleged
year’s Super Bowl 51 ranked among the top five in
‘jokes’ all at Trump’s expense. But most Americans must
viewers, drawing 111.3 million people.
have known that was coming because they stayed away in
droves. The show’s ratings were the worst they’ve ever
been. Several entertainers took pot shots at Trump for gags, but
it appears that, once again, the president is having the last
laugh.
.

75
 Predictable: Nets Trot Out Dems
To Blast Trump’s ‘Dangerous’ U.N. Speech
By Kyle Drennen
September 20, 2017 1:44 PM EDT
Following President Trump’s forceful speech to the United
Nations on Tuesday, Wednesday’s network morning
shows all rushed to find Democrats like Hillary Clinton
and Leon Panetta to blast the address as “dangerous,” “out
of place” and a push to “threaten war.”
“People are still talking about that
combative address taking aim at North
Korea and Iran,” correspondent Peter
Alexander proclaimed on NBC’s Today.
He further hyped:
“That controversial speech filled with
fresh fire and fury....a fierce 40-minute
speech full of blunt, bleak
assessments.”
Trying to bolster his sensationalism, Alexander turned to
Trump’s former 2016 Democratic opponent:
“Hillary Clinton weighing in late
Tuesday on Colbert.” A soundbite ran of
Clinton predictably condemning the
speech: “I thought it was very dark,
dangerous, not the kind of message that
the leader of the greatest nation in the
world should be delivering.”
On ABC’s Good Morning America, Chief White House
Correspondent Jon Karl touted:
“Well, President Trump’s grave threat to
North Korea is getting some blowback here
at home from his critics.
76
One prominent Democratic senator is
accusing the President of isolating the
United States and using the U.N. as a
backdrop to threaten war.”
“Trump’s 42-minute speech at times drew
audible gasps and murmurs from the
crowd. His warning to North Korean
dictator Kim Jong-un unlike anything the
General Assembly has ever heard from an
American president,” Karl declared.
Correspondent Margaret Brennan fretted on CBS This
Morning:
“President Trump’s whirlwind week of
diplomacy brought some very
undiplomatic language.” “It’s really out of
place when you’re talking to the world
leaders in the United Nations,”
Barack Obama’s former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta
remarked in a clip moments later. He warned: “Any
miscalculation, any provocative act could suddenly send us
into a war.”
Like NBC, Brennan highlighted: “Last night on Colbert,
former rival Hillary Clinton said Mr. Trump’s tone
was beneath the office of the presidency.” The same
video played of Clinton denouncing Trump’s U.N. speech
as “dark” and “dangerous.” The reporter noted:
“The President responded this morning on
Twitter, calling Clinton “crooked” and
accusing her of allowing North Korea to
build nukes.”
The liberal media always follow the same pattern: A
Republican says something they don’t like and they
eagerly seize on Democrats bashing the GOP.
The biased reporting across all three networks was brought
to viewers by Honda, StateFarm, and Tide.
Here are excerpts of the September 20 coverage:
Today
7:14 AM ET
(...)
PETER ALEXANDER: President Trump sitting down today for
back to back to back meetings with the leaders of Britain, the
Palestinian Authority, Egypt, and Jordan. The focus here today is
heavily on the combative remarks that he delivered yesterday.
Even as he prepares to focus on radical Islamic terrorism, as he
describes it, today, people are still talking about that combative
address taking aim at North Korea and Iran.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Trump’s “Rocket Man” Warning;
World Reaction to President’s Fiery U.N. Address]
Overnight, President Trump calling his U.N. debut a success,
tweeting, “Met with leaders of many nations who agree with much
(or all) of what I stated in my speech!” That controversial speech
filled with fresh fire and fury, delivering a dire warning to North
Korea.
DONALD TRUMP: The United States has great strength and
patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or it’s allies, we will
have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.
ALEXANDER: Deriding it’s erratic dictator Kim Jong-un, who’s
country left a lone diplomat in the room.
TRUMP: Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for
his regime.
ALEXANDER: That “rocket man” reference, a top Trump aide
tells NBC News, a last minute add by the President himself,
tacked on to a fierce 40-minute speech full of blunt, bleak
assessments.
TRUMP: Major portions of the world are in conflict and some, in
fact, are going to hell.
ALEXANDER: The reactions in the hall from the President’s
Chief of Staff drawing attention on social media. Hillary Clinton
weighing in late Tuesday on Colbert.
77
HILLARY CLINTON: I thought it was very dark, dangerous, not
the kind of message that the leader of the greatest nation in the
world should be delivering. And not call him “rocket man,” the old
Elton John song.
(...)
Good Morning America
7:11 AM ET
(...)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, President Trump’s grave
threat to North Korea is getting some blowback here at home
from his critics. One prominent Democratic senator is accusing
the President of isolating the United States and using the U.N. as
a backdrop to threaten war.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: World Reacts to Trump’s U.N.
Address; President Threatens to “Totally Destroy” North Korea]
TRUMP: Let’s give this as a toast to the potential, the great, great
potential of the United Nations.
KARL: With a raised glass and upbeat toast, President Trump
welcomed world to his hometown Tuesday. But his U.N. speech
is generating headlines about the prospects of war with North
Korea.
TRUMP: The United States has great strength and patience, but
if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice
but to totally destroy North Korea.
KARL: Trump’s 42-minute speech at times drew audible gasps
and murmurs from the crowd. His warning to North Korean
dictator Kim Jong-un unlike anything the General Assembly has
ever heard from an American president.
TRUMP: Rocket man is on a suicide mission for himself and for
his regime.
KARL: The North Korean delegation had front-row seats, but
boycotted the speech. Some of the Iranian diplomats stayed to
listen as Trump hammered their leaders for funding terror. And
he lashed out at the nuclear agreement President Obama and
America’s closest allies in Europe brokered with Iran.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Trump Lashes Out in U.N. Address;
Calls Iran Nuclear Deal “An Embarrassment”]
TRUMP: That deal is an embarrassment to the United States and
I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it, believe me.
(...)
CBS This Morning
7:10 AM ET
(...)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, this morning, President Trump is
expected to hold meetings with the king of Jordan as well as the
presidents of Egypt and the Palestinian Authority to discuss
Mideast and combating terrorism. He’s also going to have a one-
on-one with U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May, who will tell the
President she opposes his plan to try to renegotiate the Iran
nuclear deal.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: A Defiant Debut; President Threatens
NK & Slams Iran in First UN Address]
DONALD TRUMP: Major portions of the world are in conflict, and
some, in fact, are going to hell.
BRENNAN: President Trump’s whirlwind week of diplomacy
brought some very undiplomatic language.
78
TRUMP: The United States has great strength and patience, but
if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice
but to totally destroy North Korea. Rocket man is on a suicide
mention for himself and for his regime.
BRENNAN: Before President Trump took the podium, North
Korea’s U.N. Ambassador left the room in protest.
LEON PANETTA: It’s really out of place when you’re talking to
the world leaders in the United Nations.
BRENNAN: Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.
PANETTA: Any miscalculation, any provocative act could
suddenly send us into a war.
BRENNAN: While the President talked tough, he stopped short of
mentioning North Korea’s number one trading partner by name,
China, but hinted there may be consequences for any country
that supplies the regime. Mr. Trump also had harsh words for
Iran.
TRUMP: The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship
behind the false guise of a democracy.
BRENNAN: President Trump criticized the international deal to
freeze Iran’s nuclear program, which he is considering
withdrawing from.
TRUMP: That deal is an embarrassment to the United States and
I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it.
BRENNAN: Last night on Colbert, former rival Hillary Clinton said
Mr. Trump’s tone was beneath the office of the presidency.
HILLARY CLINTON: I thought it was very dark, dangerous, not
the kind of message that the leader of the greatest nation in the
world should be delivering.
BRENNAN: The President responded this morning on Twitter,
calling Clinton “crooked” and accusing her of allowing North
Korea to build nukes.
(...)
 Why Is Obama Getting A Pass From
The Media Over Comey’s Surveillance Of
Trump Campaign?
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 20, 2017
It’s a shame that the legacy media of today isn’t as curious
about what Obama knew and when he might have known
it
(National Sentinel) Executive Branch Scandal: What did
the president know, and when did he know it?
That infamous question was asked by Sen. Howard Baker
during the Watergate hearings more than 40 years ago. But
in the wake of new information that indeed, Team Trump
was “wire tapped” by James Comey’s FBI — who
answered to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who
answered to President Obama — the question is
particularly relevant again today.
Because, as The Wall Street Journal notes, the so-called
“mainstream media” media isn’t asking the question. In
fact, members of the MSM seem far more interested in
how President Donald J. Trump described the Obama
administration surveillance than the surveillance itself.
The facts, we now know, are thus: Not only was the
Obama administration actively surveilling members of an
opposing presidential campaign for months — before and
after Trump won the Nov. 8 election — but in order to
even get such surveillance (of American citizens)
authorized, the decision to proceed would have only
come from the top tiers of the Executive Branch.
And who sits at the very top of that branch? The president.
Obama.
79
WSJ notes:
One would presumably only approve such
an order if the request presented by the
executive branch was highly compelling
and likely to produce evidence that the
subject of the wiretap was in fact working
with Russia to disrupt U.S. elections.
Roughly a year later, as the public still
waits for such evidence, this column
wonders how this judge is feeling now,
especially now that CNN has reported that
at least two of its three sources believe the
resulting evidence is inconclusive.
One would also presume—or at least
hope—that seeking to wiretap associates
of the leader of the political opposition is
not an everyday occurrence in any
administration. At the very least, it seems
highly unlikely that such a decision would
be made by a mid-level official. CNN notes,
“Such warrants require the approval of top
Justice Department and FBI officials, and
the FBI must provide the court with
information showing suspicion that the
subject of the warrant may be acting as an
agent of a foreign power.”
It seems reasonable for the public to know
exactly which officials made this decision
and who else they consulted or informed of
their surveillance plans. Was the President
briefed on the details of this investigation?
And as for the information showing
suspicion, where did the FBI come up with
that?
Last fall, the WSJ’s Kim Strassel wrote that it seemed at
least plausible that Comey’s FBI was behind the bogus
Trump “dossier” — which has been widely denounced as
fraudulent, proven to be bogus, but nevertheless used as
justification, in large part, for the FBI’s Team Trump
investigation and, to another degree, the authorization of
Comey friend and former Obama FBI Director Robert
Mueller [and let’s never forget that #nevertrumper Sen. Trump’s actual March tweet — that Obama had his “wires
John McCain made sure Comey’s FBI had a copy of that tapped” — has still not been proven, per se. But
dossier — which has since been tied to Democrats]. the context in which the president made the accusation
certainly is accurate. And given all the players, the level of
Regarding the appointment of Mueller, as we wrote deceit, the known politicization of the intelligence
yesterday: community and Department of Justice by Obama, it is not
a far stretch of the imagination to believe that Trump’s
predecessor was in on this from the beginning.
Regardless of how Mueller’s probe turns
out, let us also never forget that it
was Comey’s strategy all along to get a It’s a shame that the legacy media of today isn’t as curious
special prosecutor appointed to about what Obama knew and when he might have known
‘investigate’ Team Trump — under it as a U.S. senator was four decades ago when another
the guise of “Russian collusion,” though president was involved in scandal.
Mueller’s probe has since extended way
past that initial mandate. The swamp is The question is just as relevant today as it was when
deep and wide. Howard Baker asked it regarding Nixon in 1973.
“Oddly,” the WSJ continued, “even though
CNN is the source of this week’s news, the
media outlet seems less interested in
President Obama’s knowledge of the
surveillance activities that occurred on his
watch and against his political adversaries
than in how President Trump has described
them. CNN’s scoop doesn’t even mention
Mr. Obama except in the context of Mr.
Trump’s accusations of wiretapping against
the former president that appeared on
Twitter in March.”

80
Morning Joe Hosts 'Totally Agree' With Madeleine Albright
Claiming Trump's U.N. Speech 'Weakened America'
By Chris Reeves
September 20, 2017 3:33 PM EDT
On Wednesday’s Morning Joe, the guests and hosts
actually had a moderately balanced (particularly by
MSNBC standards) discussion running for much of the
broadcast with respect to evaluating Trump’s address to
the United Nations General Assembly yesterday.
However, in a segment with former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright, hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika
Brzezinski facilitated her unleashing a series of ridiculous
assertions about Trump’s speech completely unchecked by
basic reality.
Brzezinski began by asking Secretary Albright what her
gut feeling was about President Trump’s speech:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Your take on
President Trump's address before the U.N.
General Assembly? What's your gut?
MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well, my gut is:
I'm glad he went and that he actually spoke
some positive things about the United
Nations. I think it was actually two
speeches: One in which somebody had
written about the history of the U.N. and the
importance of it, and the other written in a
way to be much more nationalistic.
This isn’t a terrible interpretation of the speech. It certainly
did have a mix of ‘America First’ messaging combined
with appeals to work with other countries multilaterally to
deal with North Korea. However, the former Secretary
couldn’t help but push the conversation onto pretty
tenuous ground:
I think kind of going up and talking about ‘America First’
in that location and then having listened to many speeches
81
there, the tone of it was really bad, I think. And in so many
ways,
I think we all want to make sure that
America is strong, but I think his speech
weakened America. And I think with
something that is going to make it very
hard for us to carry on a lot of
diplomatic work that we have to.
What precisely should Trump have said in response to
continuous and unrelenting threats from Kim Jong-un’s
regime to annihilate America? Albright didn’t explain.
Instead, she went on to complain about Trump not
emphasizing multilateralism enough and being too harsh in
his tone, ending with quite a whopper of a charge:
And, you know, mostly you don't go to the
U.N. to give a domestic speech. And I think
that he was doing that, red meat, in so
many ways, but it will hurt, ultimately. And
in terms of the multilateral-, I know people
don't like the world ‘multilateralism,’ it has
too many syllables and ends in an ‘-ism,’
but mostly it is about partnerships and
sharing the burden and I think that then he
has to do that kind of work. And then,
I do think the language, generally, that
he used was so harsh that I think it -- in
some ways, it strengthened Kim Jong-
un, made him the center of attention.
This was quite a stunning argument, as it appeared that
Secretary Albright was saying that Kim Jong-un
threatening to nuke and otherwise incinerate millions of
South Koreans and Americans wasn't what made him the
center of attention, but rather Trump using too many mean
words (for a fuller picture of North Korea’s nuclear
diplomacy over the years, see this).
Instead of standing up for America and its right to at least
talk about self-defense against a rogue, mass-murdering,
criminally-evil regime, Brzezinski simply agreed with
Albright:
“Yep. I totally agree with that.”
See the full segment transcript below:
7:23 AM EST
(...)
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Your take on President Trump's address
before the U.N. General Assembly? What's your gut?
MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Well, my gut is: I'm glad he went and
that he actually spoke some positive things about the United
Nations. I think it was actually two speeches: One in which
somebody had written about the history of the U.N. and the
importance of it, and the other written in a way to be much more
nationalistic. I think kind of going up and talking about ‘America
First’ in that location and then having listened to many speeches
there, the tone of it was really bad, I think. And in so many ways,
I think we all want to make sure that America is strong, but I think
his speech weakened America. And I think with something that is
going to make it very hard for us to carry on a lot of diplomatic
work that we have to. But I'm gonna try to be positive-
BRZEZINSKI: Right.
82
ALBRIGHT: -and see that the fact that he recognizes the
importance of some multilateral action and the history of the
U.N., because the U.N.’s important, and part of it is going to be
now as to whether they fund the U.N. We, by not paying or
funding, it’s very hard to get reform if, in fact, you don't support
the funding of it. So those are the aspects of it.
SCARBOROUGH: We talk around the table often about how
maybe a slight move to the middle by Donald Trump is always
met with a harsh tweet where he throws red meat to his base.
Did you get a sense yesterday that, the two speeches he gave,
one may have been sort of a tip of the hat to the United Nations
and an understanding of the realities that have set in on him over
the past eight months, but another part of the speech might have
been for domestic consumption, for his base, saying: Yes, yes,
I'm at the United Nations, but my friends, don't worry. I'm gonna
say ‘national sovereignty’ a thousand times. So you can take that
back to your Republican club meetings and let ‘em know
Donald’s still with you.
ALBRIGHT: I think you're absolutely right. And, you know, mostly
you don't go to the U.N. to give a domestic speech. And I think
that he was doing that, red meat, in so many ways, but it will hurt,
ultimately. And in terms of the multilateral-, I know people don't
like the world ‘multilateralism,’ it has too many syllables and ends
in an ‘-ism,’ but mostly it is about partnerships and sharing the
burden and I think that then he has to do that kind of work. And
then, I do think the language, generally, that he used was so
harsh that I think it -- in some ways, it strengthened Kim Jong Un,
made him the center of attention.
BRZEZINSKI: Yep. I totally agree with that.
(...)
 ‘Genocidal’ Trump Blasted For
Threatening To Kill 25 Million North Koreans
Written By Jon Queally
September 20, 2017 At 9:21 Am

was nothing short of a complete failure of

American leadership. Instead of focusing
on efforts to peacefully resolve the crisis
surrounding its nuclear program, Trump
threatened to “totally destroy North Korea.”

“Reminder,” says one critic of
president’s speech to UN General
Assembly: “threatening to kill 25 million
North Koreans because you don’t like
their leader is threatening to commit
genocide.”
(COMMONDREAMS) — For what he said — and also
for what he refused to mention — President Donald Trump
was lampooned by progressive critics as he delivered his
first ever speech to the United Nations General Assembly
in New York City on Tuesday morning.
While castigating Iran and Venezuela as failed and
destabilizing regimes and threatening to “totally destroy
North Korea” if he thinks necessary, Trump acknowledged
nothing about the misery sowed by U.S. foreign policy
around the world.
It’s time for this charade to end: We need to stop this slow
roll toward a catastrophic war, and work towards defusing
the North Korean crisis diplomatically. Trump’s U.N.
speech represents yet another reckless escalation in the
ongoing tit-for-tat between North Korea and the United
States that does nothing but edge us closer to nuclear war.
“The choice is clear,” the groups
concluded, “either we let Trump’s
incompetence and bellicosity drive us into a
destructive conflict potentially more
devastating than the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan combined, or we can focus our
efforts on negotiation. The United States
and its allies and partners must
immediately move toward easing tensions
on the Korean peninsula diplomatically,
and work toward ending this conflict
peacefully. The fate of the region and the
world depend on it.”
On social media, the president’s critics were swift with
their appraisals and condemnation:

For many critics, Trump’s war-mongering and

bellicosity—though a bone to his domestic right-wing
base—are enormously counter-productive in terms of
reducing global threats and geopolitical tensions.
As Vox reporter Matt Yglesias put it,

“If you want to know why [North Korea]

wants a nuclear deterrent, just read
Trump’s speech.”

In a joint statement following Trump’s speech,

MoveOn.org, CREDO Action, and Win Without War
blasted the remarks:

Donald Trump’s first speech to the United

Nations General Assembly today – and in
particular, his remarks about North Korea –
83
.

84
 Two Out of Three Networks
Ignore 41st Dow Record Under Trump
By Aly Nielsen
September 20, 2017 4:17 PM EDT
Stocks continued a record-setting rise, with the Dow Jones
Industrial Average closing at its 41st record high since
President Donald Trump’s election.
As the records piled up, the liberal broadcasts networks
often ignored or downplayed stock market gains. That was
true again on Sept. 19, when ABC World News with David
Muir and NBC Nightly News omitted the new high from
their programs. CBS Evening News brought up the rising
stock market, but didn’t specific cite the day’s record.
The Dow closed at 22,370.8 that day, according to
Business Insider. It was also the seventh straight record
close in a row, with new closing highs on Sept. 12, 13,14,
15, and 18 as well.
None of the broadcast network evening news shows
mentioned that streak on Sept. 19. The omission was the
latest example in the networks’ trend of downplaying the
stock market rally since Trump’s election in November
2016. The networks also censored 25 of the first 31 records
set under Trump.
Evening News interim anchor Anthony Mason mentioned
the stock market in an interview with former New York
City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He asked Bloomberg’s
85
opinion of Trump’s UN speech which happened the same
day. Neither Bloomberg nor Mason cited the day’s Dow
record.
“One of the first things the president said in
his speech today, which he often says, is
that the stock market is at a record high,”
Mason began.
“It’s up today?” Bloomberg interjected.
What is that a reflection of?” Mason asked.
“I have absolutely no idea. I cannot for the
life of me understand why the market
keeps going up,” Bloomberg replied.
While Bloomberg was baffled at the steady record-setting,
MarketWatch gave a reason. It attributed the rising
markets to “stealth” factors including tax reform optimism
and “cheering because higher taxes and new regulations
are not on the horizon.”
Fox Business Network anchor Maria Bartiromo said on
FNC’s America’s Newsroom Aug. 1, the current market
rise was likely due to better than expected profits and
corporate earnings.
 "We Are At War" - Morgan Freeman Is
The Face Of The New "Committee To Investigate Russia"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 20, 2017 12:25 PM
Imagine this movie-script: a former KGB spy, angry at the
collapse of his motherland, plots a course for revenge...
narrates the ominous sounding voice of Morgan Freeman.
The hysteria continues, and this time Hollywood has been
enlisted. No this is not The Onion, but yet another serious
committee for serious people. Meet the "Committee to
Investigate Russia" which launched on Tuesday and
immediately garnered broad coverage in pop-culture and
entertainment news sites for its release of a short Morgan
Freeman narrated video which aims to "tell us the truth"
about Russian meddling in the US election.
“We have been attacked,” Freeman says in
his familiarly reassuring voice while gazing
into the camera. “We are at war.”
Not only did the video burn up social media on Tuesday,
but the founders of the lobbying group behind the
production, barely one day old, were given substantial air
time on cable news from CNN to MSNBC. Of course, it
helps that actor, director, and lifelong Democrat Rob
Reiner is behind it - he's teamed up with neocons David
Frum, Max Boot, and national security insiders like James
Clapper.
Similar to other recently launched 'Russiagate' campaigns
and organizations we've profiled, the initiative is enjoying
fawning mainstream media coverage from the very
start. And apparently the historical irony is completely
lost on Hollywood, a town which itself fell victim to the
original McCarthyite witch hunt and its celebrity
'blacklist'.
86
Meanwhile, it appears the "Committee to Investigate
Russia" is designed to appeal especially to the popular
masses and consumers of pop media and celebrity culture
magazines. For example, the following gushing roll out
coverage from entertainment news site PopSugar reads like
the "famed" Max Boot himself is on a hollywoodesque
mission to save the world from an 'EVIL' cabal bent on
total world domination:
The group's advisory board is a who's who
of the most outspoken individuals in
America today: former Director of National
Intelligence James Clapper, award-winning
actor and director Rob Reiner, former
George W. Bush aide and
current Atlantic editor David Frum, AEI
scholar Norm Ornstein, famed military
historian Max Boot, and popular
conservative pundit Charlie Sykes.
And their mission? To educate the
public on the threat that we face from
Russia and to serve as a central location
for updates, news, and information on all
things related to the issue.
But like most commentary on the so-called 'Russian
connection' there is one important caveat which
appropriately skeptical readers will be sure to notice:
While we still don't have definitive
answers on much of what elapsed during
the lead-up to the election — or, frankly,
have a plan for what we can do to prevent
this sort of thing going forward — what we
do have is an issue that individuals on both
sides of the aisle are desperate to get to
the bottom of.
This of course translates to "well we know there's a lot of
smoke and no answers, umm... evidence" - but hey,
Morgan Freeman's noble and venerable wisdom-from-the-
heavens-sounding voice will make it all true. Reiner told
the Daily Beast that Morgan Freeman was chosen as
spokesman due to the “weight and gravitas” of his voice.
Reiner further explained the purpose as, “We’re trying to
break through and explain to people why this is important
and that there is a serious problem here that people don’t eventually corrected its mistake, but not
seem to really grasp.” before Russian media expert Alexey
Kovalev called them out, highlighting the
While the public has been assured the committee is stacked rather obvious dangers of taking on
with bipartisan experts, it would help if there were any “Russia” without Russian expertise.
actual... Russian experts. As one Al Jazeera
journalist who covers Russian affairs pointed out, the
advisory board is made up of the following "experts" (in
their respective order):

 a neocon blogger
 a perjurer
 wonk with no Russia background
 the director of When Harry Met Sally
 right-wing talk radio guy

In spite of all the immediate positive media coverage

the Committee to Investigate Russia ran into some
embarrassing problems the moment its website went
live. Actual Russian experts identified a glaring error. As with Hamilton68 before it, this new project will likely
According to the independent Russian language news site become a go-to source of information for mainstream
Meduza: media which similarly lacks in real expertise. Apparently
the two-minute Morgan Freeman video is now being
roundly mocked in Russian state media, presumably for its
The committee even ran into trouble when
ultra-simplistic reading of the fall of the Soviet Union and
trying to identify General Valery
Putin's rise to power (Morgan Freeman assures us it was
Gerasimov, the author of an alleged hybrid
all about "revenge"). Perhaps one of many lessons here is
military doctrine that some analysts treat as
this: you'd better divert some funds toward consulting real
the blueprint for Russia's “information
Russian experts and journalists before hiring a big-
warfare” against enemies like the U.S. and
moneyed celebrity to "educate" the masses.
Ukraine. When the committee first
launched its website, it accidentally posted
a photo of Gerasimov's predecessor,
General Nikolay Makarov. The group
.

87
 The White House Is Secretly
Planning For Confrontation With Iran: Report
Written By Darius Shahtahmasebi
September 20, 2017 At 12:04 Pm
(ANTIMEDIA) — As Donald Trump takes to the U.N.
General Assembly to demonize Iran yet again, the Trump
administration is also considering a more aggressive
strategy towards Iran behind closed doors, sources
have told Reuters.
According to six current and former U.S. officials, the U.S.
will be looking at more hostile responses to Iran’s forces,
its proxy armies in Iraq and Syria, and its support for
militant groups.
According to the sources, the current proposal was drafted
by Defense Secretary Jim “Mad Dog” Mattis, Secretary of
State Rex Tillerson, national security advisor General H.R.
McMaster, and several other top officials before it was
presented to President Trump at a National Security
Council meeting on September 9.
The proposal will ultimately be made public before the end
of September, two of the sources said. The sources
requested anonymity because the draft proposal had not
yet been finalized.
“I would call it a broad strategy for the
range of Iranian malign activities: financial
materials, support for terror, destabilization
in the region, especially Syria and Iraq and
Yemen,” said a senior administration
official, as quoted by Reuters.
Without giving specific details, sources said the current
draft proposal seeks to do the following: (1) target cyber
espionage and nuclear proliferation; (2) provide for more
aggressive U.S. interceptions of Iranian arms shipments
heading to places such as Yemen and Gaza (even though
U.N. experts confirmed earlier this year that they could
find no evidence of a large-scale Iranian weapons supply
88
line to Yemen); (3) react more aggressively in Bahrain
(presumably, to prop up the government in the face of
Shia-led unrest) as the country’s Sunni Muslim monarchy
has been suppressing its majority Shia population, a move
that continues to anger Iran; and most importantly (4)
allow U.S. naval forces to react more forcefully when
harassed by armed speedboats operated by Iran’s Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Funnily enough, many of the encounters taking place
between U.S. ships and Iranian ships are arguably within
Iranian waters. Who is harassing who, exactly?
According to Reuters’ sources, this proposal will not
include an escalation of U.S. military activity in Syria and
Iraq. However, anyone who has been paying close
attention to the current conflict in Syria and Iraq knows the
U.S. will have to take concrete military action if it intends
to meaningfully oppose Iranian-backed forces in the two
countries. Despite this, Reuters’ sources said Mattis and
McMaster have not allowed U.S. military generals on the
ground to act forcefully against the Iranian-allied militia
inside Syria, including Hezbollah and the IRGC.
According to Reuters, one of the officials even said
Iranian-backed groups had been “very helpful” in
recapturing territories from ISIS since it declared its
caliphate in 2014.
In that context, does the Trump administration’s distaste
for Iran make any sense, given Iran is enemy number one
for ISIS and its proxies are some of the most effective
fighting forces against the terror group?
Regarding the fate of the nuclear accord signed in 2015,
Donald Trump recently said:
“You’ll see what I’m going to be doing very
shortly in October…But I will say this, the
Iran deal is one of the worst deals I’ve ever
seen, certainly at a minimum, the spirit of
the deal is just atrociously kept. But the
Iran deal is not a fair deal to this country.
It’s a deal that should have never ever
been made. And you’ll see what we’re
doing in a couple of weeks.”
 Ann Coulter 'If We Aren't Getting A Wall,
We May As Well Have An Attractive,
Dignified Republican In There'
By Mandy Mayfield
Sep 20, 2017, 6:26 PM

Democrats reported they had a deal with the White House

to pass legislation protecting immigrants to came to
America illegally as children, and said they wouldn't
accept funding for the border wall as part of that deal.

Coulter added that Pence would pick "better" Supreme

Court justices and that people wouldn't have to worry
about Nikki Haley becoming a justice if he were president.

The conservative commentator has also said she wants

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., to "primary Trump in 2020."
Ann Coulter said Wednesday that she would prefer Vice
President Mike Pence over President Trump because
Trump is failing to build his promised wall on the U.S.-
Mexico border.

"If we are not getting a wall, we might as

well have a, you know, attractive, dignified
Republican there, Coulter said on
Newsmax TV.

Coulter is the author of In Trump We Trust but she has

turned on Trump in the last few weeks, and said Pence is
now a "better option." Coulter railed against Trump after
.

89
Trump Fixing Immigration With Wall-Plus-Door Approach
By Bruce Abramson And Jeff Ballabon
Wednesday, 20 Sep 2017 05:21 PM
What does it mean to Make America Great Again? That’s
a seemingly simple question with no simple answer, but an
important part of it is certainly fixing our broken systems.
Our immigration system is among the most broken. The
United States no longer controls its own borders, does too
little to vet those who enter the country, and less to track
them once they arrive. Criminal gangs smuggle people into
the U.S., treat them as virtual slaves, then set them “free”
to require assistance, drag down wages, or engage in
crime. Cities and states attempting to nullify federal
immigration law seem more and more like the
segregationist Southern Democrats who fought the federal
push for civil rights.
Nor do we ask the questions that made America a great
nation of great immigrants: Are we attracting the best
people? Are we embracing those who embrace the
American ideals of freedom and free enterprise? Are we
helping those who dream of becoming Americans? Do we
teach them English, civics, and American history? Are we
availing ourselves of the useful skills, diverse wisdom, and
productive passions they import from around the world?
President Trump campaigned against a corrupt and
counterproductive immigration system that has long
answered “no” to each of those questions. His illustrative
imagery made the abstract concrete: a “wall” with a “big
beautiful door” in the middle.
Anti-immigrant activists and the anti-Trump press talked
up the wall while ignoring the door. The wall served their
narrative of xenophobia and isolationism; the door did not.
Those who took Trump’s metaphors literally, rather than
seriously, now insist that anything short of a Mexican-
funded physical wall running the length of our southern
border is a betrayal. They say the same about anything
other than a mass deportation of every single person in the
country illegally.
Much of Trump’s support base, however, has always been
smart enough to take the president very seriously rather
than literally. They understand that Trump is exactly who
he claimed to be: a dealmaker. When you back a
dealmaker, you understand the difference between an
opening offer and a closing deal. And you don’t get upset
when your president deals with the other party. After all,
that’s what you hired him to do.
90
America needs a functioning immigration system — not a
construction project. A system that lets us keep
undesirables out — a Wall — while inviting desirables in
— a Door. An improved physical barrier — already
underway — is but one of many important steps towards
that goal.
Those who take the president literally rather than seriously
should reconsider what it means to have a world-class
dealmaker in the White House. What if President Trump
always embraced the Door as much as the Wall? What if
he understood both sides of the immigration debate; that a
secure America is a generous America, but that security
must come first?
The folks romanticized as “Dreamers” pose the ultimate
conflict of American values. They entered the country
illegally, as minors, frequently as small children in care of
their illegally-entering parents. As a nation of laws,
America should not reward that illegality. As a
compassionate people, Americans should embrace these
child arrivals. Where is the national interest capable of
resolving this dilemma? Maybe it’s the solution that
President Trump has been touting for two years: Wall +
Door.
Who should we invite through that door first? It’s not hard
to see the case for Dreamers. They may be the most
carefully vetted group of non-citizens in history. They
already think of themselves as Americans. They have
shown the ability to excel in the American system, in many
cases while contributing to it in significant ways. They
have shown that they can face hardship without resorting
to crime, and without developing a strong sense of
entitlement. Notwithstanding the exceptions that exist in
every group, the Dreamers are disproportionately the new
Americans we most desire — and need.
Combatants tend to hear what they want to hear. It served
some of Trump’s most voluble supporters and most
vehement antagonists to paint his Wall as evidence of a
one-dimensional ideologue. Rather than marking a
betrayal, however, President Trump’s willingness to work
with Democrats seems to reinforce another central theme
of his campaign: he can “fix it” where others have failed.
That’s a commitment on which large swaths of the
president’s support base have always focused. Frustrated
with Washington’s status quo, it may even have been the
central reason for their support.
The need to fix immigration has been clear for decades. It Strength plus compassion. Security plus legalization. Wall
seems that President Trump is trying to nudge plus Door. It’s a combination that could indeed Make
Congressional leaders towards a common-sense deal America Great Again.
capable of generating broad bipartisan support:
dramatically increased border security coupled with an
embrace of those whom we have already vetted carefully.

91
 Cali Gov Jerry Brown Denounces POTUS To The World,
Tells UN, ‘America Is Not Run By Donald Trump’
Frieda Powers
September 20, 2017
Just one day after California Governor Jerry Brown
compared supporters of President Trump to cave dwellers,
he told the United Nations the U.S. is not run by Trump.
Speaking at a UN roundtable event on Tuesday, the
Democrat vowed to fight climate change despite Trump’s
stand on the issue.
“America is not run by Donald Trump. Even
California is not run by Jerry Brown,” he
said. “We are a country of diverse power
centers and mobilizing those power centers
that are not controlled by the president is
still a very worthwhile goal and very
powerful.”
92
Brown argued that “real power” lies with mayors,
governors, presidents and company CEO’s, not just with
the commander-in-chief of the nation.
“We are not a top-down, one center of
power dictating to everybody else,” he said.
Brown has been defying Trump and criticizing his decision
to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate
agreement, The president has called climate change a hoax
and argued that the international accord is bad for U.S.
businesses.
Brown, who has been working to recruit local governments
to join him planned several climate-change events this
week and speaking at one in New York City on Monday,
he mocked the president’s supporters, Politico reported.
“They’re both kind of very similar,” he said.
“You should check out the derivation of
‘Trump-ite’ and ‘troglodyte,’ because they
both refer to people who dwell in deep,
dark caves.”
Brown expounded on reaching the goals of the United
Nations at the event Tuesday, as he continued to trash the
president.
“It would be great if the president would join
the movement. He’s not there yet,” he said.
“He believes this whole thing that we’re
talking about, what all the scientists are
publishing thousands of papers, is all a
hoax. And it’s a hoax invented in China. He
believes that.”
Brown may have found a sympathetic audience in New
York but on Twitter, there were plenty cave dwellers
siding solidly with the president.
 House IT Worker At Center Of
Scandal Allegedly Abused Three Muslim Women
Luke Rosiak - Investigative Reporter
8:17 PM 09/20/2017
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) attends a discussion about
LGBT rights at the Pride Center on May 26, 2017 in Wilton Manors,
Florida. The discussion centered around the Equality Act, a bill that
hopes to amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to guarantee protections
to LGBT individuals. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Multiple women in relationships with Imran Awan, the
indicted former IT aide for Rep. Debbie Wasserman
Schultz, have recently called Virginia law enforcement and
alleged being abused by him, police reports obtained under
Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act show.
Officers found one of the women bloodied and she told
them she “just wanted to leave,” while the second said she
felt like a “slave,” according to Fairfax County Police
reports obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation
Investigative Group. A third woman claimed she was
being kept “in captivity.”
The third woman is Awan’s stepmother, Samina Gilani,
who said in court documents that Awan invoked his
authority as a congressional employee to intimidate
immigrant women, in part by telling them he had the
power to have people kidnapped.
All but two of the nearly two dozen Democratic women
Awan worked for in the House declined to comment on the
police reports.
Wasserman Schultz, the former Democratic National
Committee chairwoman, refused to fire Awan for months
after his Feb. 2, 2017 banishment from the House
computer network due to his being a suspect in a criminal
investigation by the FBI and U.S. Capitol Police into a
major cybersecurity breach.
Wasserman Schultz said that “as a mother, a Jew, and a
member of Congress,” she wanted to defend his rights, a
sentiment echoed by Rep. Marcia Fudge, an Ohio
Democrat. Rep. Gregory Meeks, a New York Democrat.
93
Wasserman Schultz also claimed allegations against Awan
might stem from Islamophobia. All three women are
Muslim.
Awan’s attorney, Chris Gowen, a former aide to Bill and
Hillary Clinton, has blasted journalists covering the
investigation. The press “should be reminded that Imran
Awan is a husband and a father, not a political pawn,”
Gowen said.
Awan’s attorneys declined to comment to TheDCNF on
the police reports.
Neither of the other two women who complained are
married to Awan, though both were apparently in
relationships with him. Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, worked as
an IT aide for dozens of members of Congress, including
Wasserman Schultz. The two women who called the police
both lived in the same Alexandria, Va., complex but in
different apartments for which Imran paid.
A crying Salam Chaudry called police in
December 2015 to the Manitoba Apartment
complex for a “domestic dispute,”
according to a Fairfax County police report.
The investigating officer wrote that
“Imran Awan was not supposed to live
there and [Chaudry] wanted him to leave …
It appeared that the two people were in a
romantic relationship. Ms. Salam had a
[redacted] that she said happened when
she was doing dishes. Ms. Salam said she
just wanted to leave and go to a shelter as
she has no money. Ms. Salam has two
children that were both at the residence
both under the age of 8.”
The officer wrote that he
“asked Ms. Salam why she was crying and
calling police. Ms. Salam insisted nothing
happened but that she wanted to leave. I
went and spoke to Mr. Awan who quickly
advised that he wanted to speak with a
lawyer.”
 “I asked him about the small amount of
dried blood that appeared to be on his left
hand,” the officer wrote. “He stated that it
was from when his ‘roommate’ was getting
the phone from him … After he left, I
stayed and spoke with Ms. Salam about
getting a protective order.”
Samara Siddique told authorities in a July 18, 2016 police
report that “her boyfriend treat her bad and keep her there
like a slave … [she] wants him out of her life. Ms.
Siddique wanted info on how to obtain a restraining order
against him.” The July 18 incident was the third time in
less than a year police had responded to altercations
between Siddique and Awan, once finding “small cut[s] on
stomach and arm.”
 8/22/2017 Wasserman Schultz expresses concern for
Imran’s feelings, saying he is being “persecuted” and
invoking his children
Gilani claimed Siddique is Awan’s second wife by
Pakistani law, but that he had taken her copy of the
marriage license away from her in order to render her
helpless. Polygamy is illegal in the U.S.
Here is how the 17 female members of Congress who once
employed Awan responded when TheDCNF provided
copies of the police reports to their offices Monday.

The stepmother, Gilani, said on page 22 of this court

document that after she had called the police, “Imran
Awan showed up and threatened me for calling the police.
Mr. Shahid Imran Awan threatened that he is very
powerful and if I ever call the police [he] will do harm to
me and my family members back in Pakistan and one of
my cousins here in Baltimore.”

She continued: “Imran Awan did admit to me that my

phone is tapped and there are devices installed in my house
to listen my all conversations … Imran Awan introduces
himself as someone from US Congress or someone from
federal agencies … Imran Awan manages to have police
mobile based on his position in US congress or Federal
Agencies to escort him during his visit to Pakistan.”

Separately, Gilani told TheDCNF that Imran “captivated

me in house for a long time.” She accused him of storing
ill-gotten money in his father’s name, and said that as she
mourned the father’s death, Imran was focused on getting
her to sign papers giving him rights to that money.

TIMELINE

 10/16/2015 Sumaira Siddique calls police to Manitoba

Drive; they observe “cut on stomach and arm”
 11/16/2015 Telephone threats (Imran Awan/Sumaira
Siddique)
 12/07/2015 Arrest warrant served on unknown person
at Lachine Lane apartment
 12/27/2015 Salam Chaudry calls police to Manitoba
Drive; they find dried blood on her
 7/18/2016 Sumaira Siddique calls police to Lachine
Lane and tells them Imran “treat her bad and keep her
there like a slave”
 11/18/2016 Imran stops paying rent on Sumaira’s
apartment, leaving her to be evicted
 1/05/2017 Samina Gilani calls the police on her
stepchildren
 2/2/2017 They are banned from the Congressional Daily Caller intern Ritchie Colon-Peri contributed
network after Capitol Police discover a secret server reporting.
94
 Imran Awan: A Continuing DCNF Investigative Group Series
 Court docs  Dems Tying Themselves Into Knots To Ignore Criminal
 'Like a Slave': Three Muslim Women, At Least One Of Probe
Them Bloodied, Called Police on Imran  'You'd Like Him:' Associates Describe 'Cunning,'
 Had Secret Server, Caught Falsifying Evidence To Charismatic Con Artist
Cover It Up  In Personal Lives, Evidence Of Massive Cons
 Imran Still Has Copy Of House Laptop DWS Said Has  House Dems Hired A Fired McDonald's Worker As
Sensitive Leg-Branch Info Email Administrator
 DWS Laptop Found at 3AM In Phone Booth With  DWS Admits To Violating Network Security, Blames
Letter To Prosecutors House
 Awan Asks Judge To Remove GPS, Citing Possible  Wasserman Schultz Threatened Police Chief For
Emergency With Kids--Who Are In Pakistan Gathering Evidence
 Has Secret, Still-Active House Account--  Suspect Has Fled To Pakistan, Relative Says
123@mail.house.gov--Linked To Intelligence  House IT Aides Fear Suspects In Hill Breach Are
Specialist Blackmailing Members
 DWS 'Islamophobia' Claim Prompts Angered  Read the Court Docs Detailing Their Greed,
Witnesses To Go Public Ruthlessness
 Rep. Yvette Clarke Quietly Signed Away $120,000 In  Paul Ryan: Capitol Police Getting 'Assistance' On
Missing Equipment Criminal Investigation
 Imran, Hina Indicted For Conspiracy Against U.S.  Brothers Could Read Every Email Of Dozens Of
 DWS Now Says Laptop She Sought To Keep From Congressmen
Police Was Awan's, Not Hers  ...Also Had Access To DNC Emails
 Liquidating $1.8M In Real Estate When Arrested,  ...Allegedly Kept Stepmom In 'Captivity' To Access
Some Still Pending Offshore Cash
 DWS Seemingly Planned To Pay Suspect Even While  ...Received $4 Million From Dem Reps
He Lived In Pakistan  ...Owed Money To Hezbollah-Connected Fugitive
 Lawyer Is Longtime Clinton Associate  ...Secretly Took $100K In Iraqi Money
 Arrested At Airport After Wiring $300k To Pakistan  Brothers Had Massive Debts, Years Of Suspicious
 FBI Seized Smashed Hard Drives From Home Activity
 Ex-DNC Head 'Negotiating' With Police Over Letting  House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs Committee
Them See Evidence Members IT Compromised

95
 Trump Administration Considering
Even Lower Refugee Limits
Wednesday, 20 Sep 2017 07:35 PM
President Donald Trump is considering a further reduction
in the number of refugees allowed into the United States as
the administration works to re-shape American
immigration policy, officials said Wednesday.
Trump, who has already slashed refugee admissions once
since taking office, is now weighing limiting even further
the number of refugees allowed into the country in the next
fiscal year.
But as is often the case with the Trump administration,
Cabinet officials are divided as they weigh the costs and
potential security risks associated with the program.
The Department of Homeland Security has been pushing
for a reduction beyond the 50,000 mark set by Trump
earlier this year as part of his travel ban executive orders
— a number that is already the lowest in modern American
history. In a proposal submitted late last week, the
department called for a reduction to 40,000 refugees in the
next fiscal year, citing concerns about its workload and
ability to adequately vet those seeking entry.
The State Department, which oversees the program, has
formally recommended that the number be kept at 50,000,
according to Trump administration officials who spoke on
condition of anonymity in order to discuss internal
deliberations. Agencies had been given until the close of
business Wednesday to submit formal recommendations
for consideration.
State Department officials would have been inclined to set
their recommendation higher, several of the people said,
but were taking their cues from the president's executive
order and felt that 50,000 was the highest number that
would be palatable to him.
Trump has until Oct. 1, the start of the new fiscal year, to
determine how many refugees to admit under the Refugee
Act of 1980. Trump is expected to consider the issue over
the weekend, after he finishes up at the U.N. General
Assembly in New York, one White House official said.
The U.S. welcomed 84,995 refugees in fiscal year 2016,
and former President Barack Obama had wanted to raise
that number to 110,000 in 2017.
96
Trump has made limiting immigration the centerpiece of
his agenda. He temporarily banned visitors from a handful
of Muslim-majority nations, has revoked an Obama-era
executive action protecting young immigrants from
deportation and insists he'll build a wall along the southern
border.
During his campaign, Trump pledged to "stop the massive
inflow of refugees" and warned that terrorists were
smuggling themselves into naive countries by posing as
refugees fleeing war-torn Syria.
"Thousands of refugees are being admitted
with no way to screen them and are
instantly made eligible for welfare and free
health care, even as our own veterans, our
great, great veterans, die while they're
waiting online for medical care that they
desperately need," Trump said last
October.
Instead, Trump has advocated keeping refugees closer to
their homes.
In a speech to the United Nations on Tuesday, Trump
thanked Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon for taking in
hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Syrian
conflict, and described the United States as a
"compassionate nation" that has spent "billions and billions
of dollars in helping to support this effort."
"We seek an approach to refugee
resettlement that is designed to help these
horribly treated people, and which enables
their eventual return to their home
countries to be part of the rebuilding
process," he said, arguing that, for the cost
of resettling one refugee in the United
States, the U.S. can assist more than 10
migrants in their home regions.
Advocates say that misses the point.
"I think that these comments show a basic
misunderstanding of the refugee crisis,"
said Jen Smyers, who helps run the
immigration and refugee program at
 Church World Service, one of nine
organizations that work to resettle refugees
in the U.S. She said the safe re-integration
of refugees into their home countries is
always the preferred outcome, followed by
integration in a nearby country that shares
a refugee's language and culture.
Resettlement is a last resort when those
options are impossible.
Refugees already face an extensive backlog and waiting
periods that can take years. Smyers said that after Trump's
executive order, she had to tell refugees in the pipeline
they'd be waiting even longer.
"It's devastating for refugees who are
overseas," she said.
Stacie Blake, of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and
Immigrants, said the proposed cutbacks were especially
.
97
concerning given the migrant crises affecting so many
parts of the word, including the Rohingya Muslim refugees
fleeing Myanmar. She said Trump's move could prompt
other nations to "back out" as well.
White House spokeswoman Kelly Love said in a statement
that the administration's approach to refugee resettlement
"is unwavering" and would be "guided by the safety and
security of the American people, the protection of U.S.
taxpayers, and the application of U.S. resources in a
manner that stretches our dollars to help the most people."
DHS spokesman David Lapan said that in setting the
admissions ceiling, the agency would take into account the
"workload capacity of all program partners, including the
vetting agencies" as well as national security interests.
Simon Henshaw, the top State Department official for
refugees, said the decision was ultimately Trump's.
 Trump’s Peace Agenda - Total War
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
9-20-2017
He talks peace while waging endless wars of aggression on
multiple countries, raping and destroying them, threatening
new ones against North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.
Russia and China are on Washington’s target list, the last
obstacles to remove to achieve unchallenged global
dominance - doomsday scenario risked if either country is
attacked. Nuclear armageddon could follow.
Permanent war is America’s longstanding policy. No
nation in world history matches its threat to humanity, its
survival uncertain if US rampaging isn’t stopped.
On September 18, Foreign Policy magazine reported “US
bombs are falling in record numbers” in Syria, Iraq,
Afghanistan and Yemen.
In Syria and Iraq, terror-bombing in August alone
exceeded any previous month since US warplanes attacked
both countries in 2014, on the phony pretext of combating
ISIS, proof Washington wants endless war, not resolution
in all active theaters.
In Afghanistan, US terror-bombing is greater than any time
since 2012. After 16 years of endless war, the objective is
keep waging it, not winning.
The war was lost years ago, when Washington had
100,000 combat troops there, supplemented by terror-
bombing. Now around 11,000 are deployed to the country,
three or four thousand more coming, maybe additional
numbers ahead.
.
98
Nearly 550,000 US forces couldn’t defeat the Vietnamese,
wanting their country back. Nor will America defeat
Taliban fighters, no matter its troop strength on the ground.
Another 16 years of war won’t change things.
In Yemen, US terror-bombing increased greatly over 2016,
mass destruction and civilian massacres increased this year
in all US war theaters.
Trump delegated warmaking to hawkish generals. It shows
in their indifference to human life, civilians mostly
harmed, defenseless men, women and children.
Is North Korea next to be struck? Will Trump risk nuclear
war on the Korean peninsula, embroiling the region if
launched, China likely intervening to protect its security,
Russia perhaps as well?
Is Iran high on Trump’s target list? Will he risk ballistic
missiles striking Israel and US regional forces? If
requested, Russia would likely intervene the way it came
to Syria’s aid combating US-supported terrorists.
China warned it won’t remain neutral if Washington
attacks the DPRK, a threat the Trump administration
understands well.
Chances for East/West clashes are ominously real, risking
greater ones, possible global war if America’s rogue
agenda continues unchecked.
 Third Trump Critic Gets
Rewarded With State Dept Job
Alex Pfeiffer - White House Correspondent
6:36 PM 09/20/2017
The State Department’s director of policy planning, Brian
Hook, who disparaged Trump’s stances during the
campaign, is bringing on a fellow Trump critic to work at
State, The Daily Caller has learned.
David Feith, a former Wall Street Journal editorial page
writer, is joining the State Department’s office of policy
planning to advise Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Asia
policy, a department official told TheDC Wednesday. Like
Hook, who founded a foreign policy group that organized
an anti-Trump letter in the campaign, Feith was not a fan
of Trump during the election. (RELATED: Read More
About Hook Here)
“This person wants to be president,”
Feith tweeted with a link to an
interview transcript of Trump and the
Washington Post editorial board where
Trump rambled during a conversation
about using nuclear weapons. The former
Wall Street Journal writer and son of Iraq
War-backer Doug Feith
also commented on a viral photo of Trump
peeking at his wife Melania voting, and
wrote, “Well she’s an immigrant.”
.
99
The former Wall Street Journal writer has been living in
Hong Kong and writes mainly about Asian policy.
“The new president rails against ‘globalism’
and promises a vague, unsentimental and
transactional policy of ‘America First,'”
Feith wrote in an article hoping the U.S. and Japan will
have a good relationship.
Feith is now at least the third State Department employee
hired in 2017 to have a history of attacking Trump.
Besides Hook and Feith, there is spokesman R.C.
Hammond, who asked Twitter followers in February 2016
if Trump as a GOP nominee means: “revolution,”
“Armageddon,” or “headed for Canada.”
A Politico report in June cited several officials saying that
Hook has an immense amount of power over American
foreign policy. Hook, who runs the State Department’s
internal think tank, told Politico in May 2016,
“Even if you say you support him as the
nominee, you go down the list of [Trump’s]
positions and you see you disagree on
every one.”
 Madeleine Albright: Trump 'Weakened America' At UN
By Theodore Bunker
Wednesday, 20 Sep 2017 12:55 PM
President Donald Trump "weakened America" in his first
speech to the United Nations, former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright said Wednesday.
"Having listened to many speeches there,
the tone of it was really bad, I think," she
said on MSNBC, though she praised his
going to the UN and his remarks about the
organization's history.
"I think we all want to make sure that
America's strong, but I think his speech
weakened America and I think it was
something that is going to make it very
.
100
hard for us to carry on a lot of diplomatic
work that we have to."
Trump singled out North Korea, Iran and Syria in his
remarks as "rogue regimes," and threatened to "totally
destroy" North Korea if it continues to develop nuclear
weapons.
"The scourge on our planet today is a small
group of rogue regimes that violate every
principle on which the United Nations is
based," Trump said Tuesday. "They
respect neither their own citizens, nor the
sovereign rights of their countries. If the
righteous many do not confront the wicked
few, then evil will triumph."
She added that Trump included too much "red meat" for
his supporters, and criticized his references to North
Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
"I do think the language, generally, that he
used was so harsh, that I think it in some
ways it strengthened Kim Jong Un, made
him the center of attention," Albright said.
 Unmasked: Trump Doctrine
Vows Carnage For New Axis Of Evil
North Korea, Iran, Venezuela Are Targets In "Compassionate" America's
War On The "Wicked Few." It's Almost As Though Washington
Felt Its Hegemony Threatened
By Pepe Escobar
September 20, 2017 4:14 PM (UTC+8)
Paul Delaroche, Napoléon à Fontainebleau, 1840. With
other global powers increasingly at odds with US foreign
policy under Donald Trump, the nation's hegemony on the
world stage may soon face its own crisis point. Photo:
Wikimedia Commons
This was no “deeply philosophical address”. And hardly a
show of “principled realism” – as spun by the White
House. President Trump at the UN was “American
carnage,” to borrow a phrase previously deployed by his
nativist speechwriter Stephen Miller.
One should allow the enormity of what just happened to
sink in, slowly. The president of the United States, facing
the bloated bureaucracy that passes for the “international
community,” threatened to “wipe off the map” the whole
of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (25 million
people). And may however many millions of South
Koreans who perish as collateral damage be damned.
Multiple attempts have been made to connect Trump’s
threats to the madman theory cooked up by “Tricky
Dicky” Nixon in cahoots with Henry Kissinger, according
to which the USSR must always be under the impression
the then-US president was crazy enough to, literally, go
nuclear. But the DPRK will not be much impressed with
this madman remix.
101
That leaves, on the table, a way more terrifying upgrade of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Trump repeatedly invoked
Truman in his speech). Frantic gaming will now be in
effect in both Moscow and Beijing: Russia and China have
their own stability / connectivity strategy under
development to contain Pyongyang.
The Trump Doctrine has finally been enounced and a new
axis of evil delineated. The winners are North Korea, Iran
and Venezuela. Syria under Assad is a sort of mini-evil,
and so is Cuba. Crucially, Ukraine and the South China
Sea only got a fleeting mention from Trump, with no blunt
accusations against Russia and China. That may reflect at
least some degree of realpolitik; without “RC” – the
Russia-China strategic partnership at the heart of the
BRICS bloc and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
(SCO) – there’s no possible solution to the Korean
Peninsula stand-off.
In this epic battle of the “righteous many” against the
“wicked few,” with the US described as a “compassionate
nation” that wants “harmony and friendship, not conflict
and strife,” it’s a bit of a stretch to have Islamic State –
portrayed as being not remotely as “evil” as North Korea
or Iran – get only a few paragraphs.
The art of unraveling a deal
According to the Trump Doctrine, Iran is “an economically
depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence,
bloodshed and chaos,” a “murderous regime” profiting
from a nuclear deal that is “an embarrassment to the
United States.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad
Zarif tweeted: “Trump’s ignorant hate speech belongs in
medieval times – not the 21st century UN – unworthy of a
reply.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov once
again stressed full support for the nuclear deal ahead of a
P5+1 ministers’ meeting scheduled for Wednesday, when
Zarif was due to be seated at the same table as US
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Under review:
compliance with the deal. Tillerson is the only one who
wants a renegotiation.
Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani has, in fact, developed
an unassailable argument on the nuclear negotiations. He
says the deal – which the P5+1 and the IAEA all agree is
working – could be used as a model elsewhere. German
chancellor Angela Merkel concurs. But, Rouhani says, if
the US suddenly decides to unilaterally pull out, how could
the North Koreans possibly be convinced it’s worth their
while to sit down to negotiate anything with the
Americans?
What the Trump Doctrine is aiming at is, in fact, a
favourite old neo-con play, reverting back to the dynamics
of the Dick Cheney-driven Washington-Tehran Cold War
years.
This script runs as follows: Iran must be isolated (by the
West, only now that won’t fly with the Europeans); Iran is
“destabilizing” the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, the
ideological foundry of all strands of Salafi-jihadism, gets a
free pass); and Iran, because it’s developing ballistic that
could – allegedly – carry nuclear warheads, is the new
North Korea.
That lays the groundwork for Trump to decertify the deal
on October 15. Such a dangerous geopolitical outcome
would then pit Washington, Tel Aviv, Riyadh and Abu
Dhabi against Tehran, Moscow and Beijing, with
European capitals non-aligned. That’s hardly compatible
with a “compassionate nation” which wants “harmony and
friendship, not conflict and strife.”
Afghanistan comes to South America
The Trump Doctrine, as enounced, privileges the absolute
sovereignty of the nation-state. But then there are those
pesky “rogue regimes” which must be, well, regime-
changed. Enter Venezuela, now on “the brink of total
collapse,” and run by a “dictator”; thus, America “cannot
stand by and watch.”
No standing by, indeed. On Monday, Trump had dinner in
New York with the presidents of Colombia, Peru and
Brazil (the last indicted by the country’s Attorney General
as the leader of a criminal organization and enjoying an
inverted Kim dynasty rating of 95% unpopularity). On the
menu: regime change in Venezuela.
102
Venezuelan “dictator” Maduro happens to be supported by
Moscow and, most crucially, Beijing, which buys oil and
has invested widely in infrastructure in the country with
Brazilian construction giant Odebrecht crippled by the Car
Wash investigation.
The stakes in Venezuela are extremely high. In early
November, Brazilian and American forces will be
deployed in a joint military exercise in the Amazon
rainforest, at the Tri-Border between Peru, Brazil and
Colombia. Call it a rehearsal for regime change in
Venezuela. South America could well turn into the new
Afghanistan, a consequence that flows from Trump’s
assertion that “major portions of the world are in conflict
and some, in fact, are going to hell.”
For all the lofty spin about “sovereignty”, the new axis of
evil is all about, once again, regime change.
Russia-China aim to defuse the nuclear stand-off, then
seduce North Korea into sharing in the interpenetration of
the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Eurasia
Economic Union (EAEU), via a new Trans-Korea Railway
and investments in DPRK ports. The name of the game is
Eurasian integration.
Iran is a key node of BRI. It’s also a future full member of
the SCO, it’s connected – via the North-South Transport
Corridor – with India and Russia, and is a possible future
supplier of natural gas to Europe. The name of the game,
once again, is Eurasian integration.
Venezuela, meanwhile, holds the largest unexplored oil
reserves on the planet, and is targeted by Beijing as a sort
of advanced BRI node in South America.
The Trump Doctrine introduces a new set of problems for
Russia-China. Putin and Xi do dream of reenacting a
balance of power similar to that of the Concert of Europe,
which lasted from 1815 (after Napoleon’s defeat) until the
brink of World War I in 1914. That’s when Britain,
Austria, Russia and Prussia decided that no European
nation should be able to emulate the hegemony of France
under Napoleon. In sitting as judge and executioner,
Trump’s “compassionate” America certainly seems intent
on echoing such hegemony.
 The Morgan Freeman Psy-Op
Proves How Desperate The 'Deep State' Has Become
By Andrew Korybko,
September 20th, 2017
Morgan Freeman's latest publicly stunt permanently
stained his legacy after the famous actor decided to join
the fake news industry by passing off a blockbuster script
as a true story.
Morgan Freeman declared in his latest two-minute video
that "We have been attacked. We are at war", but he's
wrong in saying that Americans have been victimized
by Russia, but should have rather told the truth that they're
under attack by their own government. To channel
Freeman, "Imagine this movie script", albeit modified
to reflect real-life events instead of conspiratorial ones:
A globalist power cabal made up of the
permanent military, intelligence, and
diplomatic bureaucracies (the "deep
state"), in conjunction with the Democratic
Party, "Cultural Marxist" professors, the
Mainstream Media, and Hollywood have
attacked American democracy using non-
stop infowar operations against their own
fellow citizens to spread propaganda and
false information aimed at convincing
people that the Republican candidate and
future President of the United States is
really a Russian puppet.
A few years ago this might have sounded just as ridiculous
as the narrative that Freeman read off in front of the
cameras, but the difference is that this actually happened
whereas his story still remains the realm of fiction. The
conspiracy theory that Russia somehow swayed the 2016
election has no basis in reality, and it's very condescending
to the millions of average Americans in the Midwest who
swayed the election for Trump to even infer that these
103
patriotic citizens were under the influence of a foreign
intelligence operation at the time.
Midwesterners didn't tip the election for Trump because
President Putin, the FSB, RT, or Sputnik told them to —
which they didn't — but because they had enough of the
old order of business in the US and were desperately
craving a change, any change, to improve the all-around
deteriorating conditions that have come to define their
lives. Trump promised law and order, jobs and strong
borders, and a no-nonsense approach to American
domestic politics, the complete opposite of Hillary's
platform and exactly what Midwesterners wanted to hear.
Even without the DNC leaks, many of those folks would
never have countenanced voting for Hillary due to her
husband's toxic legacy and that of his party. Moreover,
these voters didn't need proof of Hillary and the
Democrats' corruption because they had suspected it all
along, though the amplification of their crimes by the
global media vindicated them for what The Establishment
had falsely claimed for years was just another tinfoil hat
"conspiracy theory".
Now about actual conspiracy facts, many people could
never have thought that their own government would turn
against them and attack America's sacred political system,
its electoral democracy, through the incessant
demonization of Donald Trump and the plethora of fake
news that they disseminated about him. When Trump
claimed that his campaign was under surveillance by the
Obama Administration, he was dismissed as a crackpot,
but it's since emerged just the other day that former
National Security Advisor Susan Rice did in fact authorize
the spying of Trump's former campaign manager Paul
Manafort.
On top of that, the never-ending assertions that Trump is
in cahoots with the Russian government or somehow
under the nefarious influence of shadowy Kremlin agents
are regularly debunked by listening to the President and his
Administration constantly talk about "Russian aggression"
and watching them use this pretext to make hostile moves
against Moscow. These actions strongly refute the claims
of a secret Trump-Russian connection and most Americans
understand that, but the "deep state" and their cohorts
in the "Cultural Marxist" corners of academia, the
Mainstream Media, Hollywood, and the masked mob of
"Antifa" rioters believe that the population is just too
stupid to see this and could therefore be easily misled
into believing their fake news narrative that Putin's proxy
is in control of the White House.
The whole point behind this massive infowar operation
against the minds of the American public is to delegitimize
Trump's election in a last-ditch bid to give the Democrats a
chance to win back Congress during next year's midterm
elections. It's also designed to influence the President's
domestic and foreign policy decision making, and it
actually has succeeded to a degree in that respect if one
holds the view that Trump truly believed what he said
on the campaign trail but was later pressured by the "deep
state" to take a decidedly neo-conservative stance
towards International Affairs after he entered into office.
Regardless, what's important to focus on in this context are
the American people themselves, who largely dismiss the
conspiratorial, never-proven, and constantly debunked
accusations that Morgan Freeman shamelessly told the
American public with a straight face.
There's a popular saying that one shouldn't "shoot the
messenger", but that doesn't mean that the said messenger
is above criticism. Morgan Freeman is a beloved
household name who's universally praised for his excellent
acting skills and the unforgettable memories that he's
imbued his audiences with, but politics isn't his element,
and no matter how much the "Committee to Investigate
Russia' pleads that it's "non-partisan", former National
Intelligence Director James Clapper's open involvement
in the project proves that it's linked to the same anti-Trump
"deep state" that's been undermining American democracy
for over the past two years. Morgan Freeman should have
known better than to lend his acting talent to pretending
that a movie script is a real-life story, and that's why so
many people are disappointed in him on a deep, personal
level.
104
The irony of it all is that Morgan Freeman could have
actually done a lot of good if he had the courage to say the
truth. Instead of imploring Trump to sit down in front
of the American people, elaborate on Hillary's "Russia Did
It!" conspiracy theory, and then "legitimize" it through a
full-blown nationwide anti-Russian witch hunt stretching
from the Office of the Presidency all the way down to the
paupers in the inner city, he himself could have sat
down in front of the American people just as he did in his
two-minute psy-op video and calmly explain the actual
real-life "deep state" conspiracy against Trump and the
American people. He didn't do that, so there's no use
in speculating about "coulda, shoulda, woulda", but for the
sake of cracking a smile and thinking about what might
have been, it sure would have been powerful if he
channeled his blockbuster script but adapted it to actual
events by saying:
"My fellow Americans, during this
past election, we came under attack by our
own government. I've called on the patriotic
members of Congress and our intelligence
community to use every resource available
to conduct a thorough investigation
to determine exactly how this happened.
Our citizens are demanding accountability.
For 241 years our democracy has been
imperfect but nevertheless something
to aspire to, and we owe it to the brave
people who have fought and died to protect
this great nation and save democracy. And
we owe it to our future generations
to continue the fight."
But then again, Hollywood by its very nature is fake and
deceptive, so it might be too much to ever hope for an
American movie icon to stand up and say those brave
words that were imagined above, though that doesn't mean
that they wouldn't have resonated with tens of millions
of dyed-in-the-wool patriotic Americans who are sick and
tired of the "deep state's" manipulative mind games.
 Democratic Mega Donor
Launches Trump Impeachment Campaign
Fri Oct 20, 2017 05:58PM

The former hedge-fund manager is funding the

impeachment campaign, according to its website.

In his letter, Steyer called on all 50 governors and 2,000

city mayors countrywide to publically oppose Trump. The
letter was obtained by The Hill.

Billionaire investor and Democratic

backer Tom Steyer has launched a
national campaign to impeach US
Republican President Donald Trump,
saying he has brought the United States
“to the brink of nuclear war.”

Billionaire American investor Tom Steyer

Steyer started the "Need to Impeach" initiative on Friday
with an advertisement calling on Americans to pressure
their members of Congress to vote the president out of A majority vote in the US House of Representatives is
office. necessary to impeach a president, which would lead to a
trial in the Senate, where a two-thirds majority is essential
for conviction.
The billionaire environmentalist who endorsed Trump’s
Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, in the 2016 race, has
sent letters to congressmen and governors around the
country urging them to take action against the "dangerous"
president.

"He's brought us to the brink of nuclear

war, obstructed justice at the FBI, and in
direct violation of the Constitution, he's
taken money from foreign governments
and threatened to shut down news
organizations that report the truth," Steyer
said in the campaign video.
PressTV-Is Trump going to be impeached? Trump will not be
"If that isn't the case for impeaching and impeached because he is doing the bidding of the actual ruling class
removing a dangerous president, then what of the United States, American writer and political analyst Daniel
Patrick Welch says.
has our government become?" he added.
A majority of American voters believe Trump is not "fit to
Steyer said that
serve as president" of the United States, according to a
recent poll.
“this president represents a clear and
present danger, who's mentally unstable
and armed with nuclear weapons.”
105
Another recent poll has found most Americans disapprove Critics say that Trump’s divisive rhetoric and policies
of Trump’s leadership and see him as a divisive figure who against immigrants and minorities before and after his
has not fulfilled his campaign promise to positively change election have emboldened far-right groups and promoted
the US government. hate crimes across the country.

Trump has been widely criticized for his response to the

deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia,
after he said "both sides" were to blame for the violence.
.

106
 Lawyer Looks To Disbar Former
FBI Chief Comey For Lying Under Oath
By Joshua Philipp, The Epoch Times
October 20, 2017 12:56 Am Last Updated: October 20, 2017 12:35 Pm
Former FBI Director James Comey testifies before the Senate
Intelligence Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol
Hill in Washington on June 8, 2017. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty
Images))
Lawyer Ty Clevenger recently filed a grievance with the
New York bar accusing former FBI Director James Comey
of lying to Congress and potentially destroying evidence in
the investigations into former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton.
The grievance states that Comey
“gave materially false testimony to
Congress,”
and violated several of the New York Rules of
Professional Conduct, according to an Oct. 18 report from
The Washington Times. It also requests renewed
grievances against former Attorney General Loretta Lynch,
based on Comey’s claim that she pressured him to
downplay the Clinton investigation.
The Epoch Times reported on Sept. 1 that Comey may
have lied under oath by drafting his letter to drop charges
of Clinton before the FBI interviewed her or other key
witnesses.
According to an Aug. 31 press release from the Senate
judiciary committee,
“Comey began drafting a statement to
announce the conclusion of the Clinton
email investigation in April or May of 2016,
before the FBI interviewed up to 17 key
witnesses including former Secretary
Clinton and several of her closest aides.”
107
The FBI recently confirmed that Comey began drafting his
statement regarding Clinton prior to interviewing her by
releasing his drafts. While they are almost entirely
redacted, they show Comey wrote them on May 2, 2016.
The FBI interviewed Clinton two months later on July 2,
2016.
The claim in the judiciary committee press release
contradicts Comey’s testimony before the committee on
Sept. 28, where he stated he made his decision to not
recommend charges for Clinton only “after” interviewing
her. Comey had added,
“All I can do is tell you again, the decision
was made after that, because I didn’t know
what was going to happen during that
interview.”
During an Oct. 18 hearing before the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Attorney General Jeff Sessions commented on
the seriousness of Comey’s actions when he was asked
about why the Trump administration fired Comey as FBI
director.
“I don’t think it’s been fully understood the
significance of the error that Mr. Comey
made on the Clinton matter,” Sessions
said, noting that it was the first time in his
experience he had ever heard of a major
case where “the Department of Justice
prosecutors were involved in an
investigation, that the investigative agency
announces the closure of the investigation.”
Sessions said that when Comey testified around that time,
 “He said he thought he did the right thing Trump added,
and would do it again.” Sessions also said
Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein “As it has turned out, James Comey lied
referred to the handling of the Clinton and leaked and totally protected Hillary
investigation as “a usurpation of the Clinton. He was the best thing that ever
position of the Department of Justice, the happened to her!”
Attorney General’s position, and that
particularly we were concerned that he
reaffirmed that he would do it again.”

President Donald Trump also weighed in on the issue, and

stated in a series of tweets on Oct. 18,

“Wow, FBI confirms report that James

Comey drafted letter exonerating Crooked
Hillary Clinton long before investigation
was complete. Many people not
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters
interviewed, including Clinton herself.
on Oct. 18, according to a transcript, that
Comey stated under oath that he didn’t do
this-obviously a fix? Where is Justice
Dept?” “the White House hasn’t and won’t offer a
legal opinion on Comey’s conduct. But, in
fact, to the contrary, the White House has
actually deferred, as it should, any and all
legal questions regarding Director Comey
to the Department of Justice. That’s the
appropriate venue for those things to be
dealt with.”

108
 James Clapper Says He Was
Unaware Of Manafort Wiretap Order [VIDEO]
Chuck Ross - Reporter
12:16 AM 09/21/2017

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper

said on Wednesday that he was unaware of a secret Asked by Todd if he would have been aware of a FISA
wiretap order issued against former Trump campaign order issued for someone affiliated with the Trump
chairman Paul Manafort last year. campaign, Clapper said “absolutely.”

“Did you know about a FISA warrant
against Paul Manafort at the time?” CNN’s
Don Lemon asked Clapper in an interview
Wednesday night.
“I did not,” Clapper replied.
The Obama administration official was asked about his
knowledge of the warrant, issued last year under the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), because of
his denial back in March that the Obama administration
obtained any FISA warrants on the Trump campaign.
Clapper unequivocally denied that a wiretap order was
granted.
Clapper came under heavy criticism this week after CNN
reported that U.S. investigators obtained a surveillance
warrant against Manafort at some point before the election
in November. The surveillance continued through this
year.
The report was interpreted by some as a vindication of
Trump’s claim back in March.

The question came up at the time because President Trump Clapper did not speculate in his interview with Lemon why
had published a tweet accusing President Obama of he was kept out of the loop about the Manafort wiretap.
wiretapping Trump Tower.
WATCH:
In a March 5 interview on “Meet the Press,” Clapper said
that he would have been aware of a FISA warrant on a
member of the Trump campaign, even one granted to the
FBI. And asked if such a warrant had been obtained,
Clapper directly denied it.

“There was no such wire tap activity

mounted against the President-elect at the
time or as a candidate or against his
campaign,” Clapper told “Meet the Press”
host Chuck Todd.

109
 Washpost Columnist:
Trump Has Beaten The Liberal Media
By Jeffrey Lord
October 21, 2017 4:00 PM EDT
Interesting.
The Washington Post’s Philip Bump (full disclosure my
former CNN colleague) is one of the first -- or maybe so
far the only -- journalist at a mainstream media outlet to
get what is seriously disquieting news for the
mainstreamers. Here’s Phil’s headline:
Trump’s already largely won his war
against the media
Phil begins his story this way:
The choice that President Trump asks
America to make is a simple one and one
that he’s demanded since he jumped into
the presidential race. Who are you going to
believe, he asks: An industry of people
whose jobs depend on presenting factually
accurate information about what’s
happening in the world — or me?
And from the outset, we’ve seen how his supporters
answer that question. They believe him.
Well, okay. Phil has something here but right off the bat he
illustrates exactly -- and I do mean exactly -- the media’s
problem.
Notice the way he describes the media? Like this:
“An industry of people whose jobs
depend on presenting factually accurate
information about what’s happening in
the world…”
110
Not to put too fine a point on this, but the exact reason for
the media’s problem is precisely because millions of
Americans believe the mainstream media (that would
include, ahem, Phil’s own Washington Post) is not
reporting
“factually accurate information about what’s
happening in the world..”
To the contrary, in two back-to-back presidencies -- the
first of a far-left liberal Democratic Party president and the
second of a populist/conservative Republican Party
president -- the flat-out ideological bias of the mainstream
media coverage was and is vividly in play. Which in turn
has provided Trump with the easy pickings of low-hanging
media bias fruit.
Examples of how liberal media bias works are, thankfully,
well out there. It is the main focus 24/7 right here at
NewsBusters and the Media Research Center to faithfully
record those never-ending examples of liberal bias for the
record, producing a figurative warehouse filled to the
figurative roof of how this bias works.
Here’s but one example from the 2012 presidential
election. The core of the story revolves around the then-
famous leaked videotape of candidate Romney speaking at
a supposedly closed meeting of donors. Romney, as
reported here in the Post is captured on video and
“tells a private audience of campaign
donors that Obama backers will vote for the
president ‘no matter what.’ Romney said
that they account for ’47 percent’ of voters
and he does not ‘worry about those
people.’”
The video surfaced at the far-left Mother Jones site.
Breitbart's Derek Hunter headlined his piece:
Textbook Example of Media Bias at the
New York Times
And among other things he wrote this:
 The New York Times was quick to report
on the edited Mother Jones “secret” video
of Mitt Romney speaking at a fundraiser
back in May, and they were quick to do so
in a straightforward way. Their original
story has been wiped from their website
and replaced with one dripping with left-
wing spin to the point you’d think it was a
press release from the Obama campaign.
Unfortunately for the Times, there are a lot of websites that
republish their work the minute it’s posted. That means it
lives forever, even after they’ve killed it.
Hunter goes on to illustrate exactly how the Times played
the bias game with this story using several examples.
Writes Hunter by way of examples:
The original piece contains this paragraph:
Romney told reporters Monday night that
his remarks were “not elegantly stated” and
were “spoken off the cuff.” But he says
Obama’s approach is “attractive to people
who are not paying taxes.”
In the new piece that paragraph reads like this:
Mr. Romney addressed the video,
somewhat awkwardly, at a fund-raiser
Monday night in Costa Mesa, Calif.,
summoning reporters with a few moments’
notice to walk through the Segerstrom
Center for the Arts, which was filled with
guests sipping drinks at tables elegantly
draped in blue cloths.
See the game? The original version is Phil Bump’s belief
on display - it is a “just the facts” report of what Romney
said after the tape surfaced. But the re-written later
version?
As Hunter noted “the second one adds
commentary designed to paint a picture of
bumbling with “somewhat awkwardly” and
of elitism with “guests sipping drinks at
tables elegantly draped in blue cloths.”
Hunter provides two versions of another paragraph to
illustrate.
The original, first version, went like this:
Jim Messina, Obama’s campaign manager,
said in a statement Monday evening that it
was “shocking” that Romney would “go
111
behind closed doors” to describe nearly
half of the country in such terms.
Another “just the facts” report. Then came the later
version. That one read:
Mr. Romney, who has been under fire for
releasing only two years of his tax returns,
was quickly attacked by the Obama
campaign. Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s
campaign manager, said in a statement
Monday evening that it was ‘shocking’ that
Mr. Romney would ‘go behind closed
doors’ to describe nearly half of the country
in such terms.
As Hunter would point out, suddenly the issue of
Romney’s tax returns are injected into a story that had
nothing to do with his tax returns. Hunter also correctly
notes: “The only people ‘firing’ at Romney for his tax
returns are on the payroll of the Obama campaign and
‘journalists’ who write things like this that read as if
they’re padding their resume for a position in a second
term.”
Bingo.
One could go on and on and on here and fill the Internet
with these kind of examples, many of them which can be
found right here in the NewsBusters archive. The important
thing is to understand that none of this is new and in fact
has been building for decades and decades. All the way
back in 1952 then-Senator Richard Nixon, the vice-
presidential running mate of GOP nominee Dwight
Eisenhower, was astonished at the then-liberal New York
Post’s deliberate misrepresentation of a fund Nixon had to
finance his political travels instead of sticking taxpayers
with the tab. There was nothing “secret” about this fund,
yet the Post headlined “SECRET NIXON FUND”.
The story that accompanied the headline was, Nixon
recalled later, “a clever example of the half-truth.”
Unmentioned as this story was whipped up into a scandal
frenzy was that Ike’s opponent, Illinois Governor Adlai
Stevenson, had a fund of his own for the same purpose.
Back there in 2014 I had the opportunity (writing in The
American Spectator) to raise the question with Donald
Trump of how to handle this kind of media bias if he ran
for president. There was considerable feeling among the
GOP base, as I well knew, that GOP presidential
candidates like Romney and McCain and others never took
the media head on. What would Donald Trump do if he
were the GOP nominee, I asked? Here’s what he said - and
it foreshadows exactly what now-President Trump has
done as both candidate and sitting president:
 The press is extremely dishonest. Much of
it. Some of it I have great respect for, and
they’re great people and honorable people.
But there’s a large segment of the press
that’s more dishonest than anybody I’ve
seen in business or anywhere else. And
the one thing you have to do is you have to
inform the public. The public has to know
about the dishonesty of the press because
these are really bad people and they don’t
tell the truth and have no intention of telling
the truth. And I know who they are and I
would expose them 100 percent. And I will
be doing that. I mean, as I go down the
line, I enjoy exposing people for being
frauds and, you know, I would be definitely
doing that. I think it’s important to know.
Because a lot of the public, they think, oh,
they read it in the newspaper, and
therefore it must be true. Well many of the
things you read in the newspaper are
absolutely false and really disgustingly
false.
So here we are a full three years later. The President has
done exactly what he told me he would do. He never
flinches. Over and over in one medium or another and
sometimes all at once he presses home his case that
“The press is extremely dishonest. Much of
it…. And the one thing you have to do is
you have to inform the public. The public
has to know about the dishonesty of the
press because these are really bad people
and they don’t tell the truth and have no
intention of telling the truth. And I know
who they are and I would expose them 100
percent. And I will be doing that.”
112
Now comes Phil Bump in The Washington Post to admit
that, well, yes, Trump approach to the media has had a
serious negative effect - on the media. He writes:
Among Trump supporters, Trump has
already won his war on the media. After
decades of declining public trust in the
media (which helped him win that war),
even many of those predisposed to dislike
Trump seem to agree with one of his
central arguments about the press: It acts
unfairly. (Five percent of Democrats and 6
percent of black respondents trust Trump
more than their favorite news outlet!)
As it were, Phil Bump is channeling the thoughts of
Donald Trump as expressed to me three years ago.
The question now is: What does this mean?
My thought is that this will have a very serious impact on
the course of the Trump White House. For eight years, the
Obama White House had the mainstream media in their
pocket. And when he left to be succeeded by Donald
Trump the liberal media lost their collective mind. I noted
back in February in this space, just the simple difference in
the way Time magazine treated Obama and Trump after
each was named Time’s “Person of the Year” in 2008 and
2016 respectively. The Obama coverage was almost
hagiography, the Trump coverage dark, almost sinister.
At this point, the media has thrown everything up to and
including the media version of the kitchen sink at Trump.
He has, as he said he would, fought back - on Twitter, on
television, at rallies and on and on. So now, to their
amazement, its the media - not the President - that is
losing. And they are beginning to realize it. The question
is…
Will they do anything about it?
 Presidential Bomb Threats At The UN
By John Laforge
September 21, 2017
Donald Trump denounced North Korea and its president
Kim Jong-un as “depraved” before the United Nations
Sept. 19, saying the nation “threatens the entire world with
unthinkable loss of life.” Of course, North Korea can
barely feed itself, and yet has to defend itself against an
onslaught of Western hostility, UN sanctions, and ongoing
US/South Korean war games which are rehearsals for an
invasion of the North. It tests rockets and bombs to be
sure, just as the US and its allies and adversaries do all
year round. It’s big business.
Trump’s claim that North Korea is threatening is
preposterous since it has no deliverable nuclear weapons at
all. Secretary of Defense James Mattis said last week that
North Korea is no danger to the United States. In June
2016, the Institute for Science and International Security
reported that Pyongyang may have between 13 and 21
warheads. The CIA, whose job it is to find hostile weapons
(even where they don’t exist) says Pyongyang has at most
about 21. US intelligence agencies’ combined estimates
are that while it may have miniaturized a nuclear warhead,
North Korea has no missile that can drop them on the
United States. The Federation of American Scientists is
more skeptical and estimates it has “potentially produce[d]
10-20 nuclear warheads.”
Like an 8th grade imbecile contradicting and humiliating
himself in nearly every sentence, Trump claimed in his
speech that North Korean President Kim Jong-un “is on a
suicide mission.” In April 2016 Trump had called Kim a
“smart cookie.” There is absolutely no evidence of Kim
being suicidal, in fact quite the opposite since the North’s
military missile and nuclear program are aimed at fending
off a repeat of the Korean War in which, according to US
Air Force General Curtis LeMay,
113
“we burned down every town in North
Korea.”
Trump went on to assert that “[I]f the United States is
forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice
but to totally destroy North Korea.” Here is Trump in a
nutshell: Condemning threats of “unthinkable loss of life”
in one sentence, then making precisely the same threat in
the next.
Perhaps Trump knows nothing about the Korean War, but
the idea that the United States might “have no choice” but
to totally destroy an entire country is not just a deliberate
lie and an outrage, it is intended to prepare the population
to get comfortable with bloodlust and preparation for
atrocities.
Governments always have a choice about whether to
commit mass murder and since North Korea has done
absolutely nothing against the United States or its allies,
Trump’s hate-filled spittle about total war is all the more
monstrous. Delivered before the world’s largest peace
group, Trump’s ghastly threat was a barbaric embrace of
genocidal violence. It was directed at teaching children to
embrace it as well. It was directed at teaching children to
embrace it as well.
Trump must have for a moment though that to “totally
destroy North Korea” is a “thinkable loss of life,” as
opposed to the “unthinkable” sort that he condemned. But
if he did, — and this is a big “if,” since Trump seems not
to think that words have any meaning, — then it is Trump
himself who is depraved. He must be ostracized,
stigmatized and shamed into resignation before he teaches
any more hatred.
Trump must have for a moment though that to “totally
destroy North Korea” is a “thinkable loss of life,” as
opposed to the “unthinkable” sort that he condemned. But
if he did, — and this is a big “if,” since Trump seems not
to think that words have any meaning, — then it is Trump
himself who is depraved. He must be ostracized,
stigmatized and shamed into resignation before he teaches
any more hatred.
The United States’ historical destruction of North Korea
and today’s threats of more should be considered in the
context of the living memory of its older generation.
Robert Neer’s 2013 book “Napalm” (Belknap Press of
Harvard Univ. Press), reports that Gen. LeMay, head of
21st Bomber Command, wrote,
“We killed off over a million civilian Koreans
and drove several million more from their
homes…”
Neer reports that more bombs were dropped on Korea than
in the whole of the Pacific theater during World War II —
635,000 tons, versus 503,000 tons.
“Pyongyang, a city of half a million people
before 1950, was said to have had only two
buildings left intact,” according to “Napalm.”
The United States’ historical destruction of North Korea
and today’s threats of more should be considered in the
context of the living memory of its older generation.
Robert Neer’s 2013 book “Napalm” (Belknap Press of
Harvard Univ. Press), reports that Gen. LeMay, head of
21st Bomber Command, wrote,
“We killed off over a million civilian Koreans
and drove several million more from their
homes…”
Neer reports that more bombs were dropped on Korea than
in the whole of the Pacific theater during World War II —
635,000 tons, versus 503,000 tons. “Pyongyang, a city of
half a million people before 1950, was said to have had
only two buildings left intact,” according to “Napalm.”
Howard Zinn’s groundbreaking “A People’s History of
the United States” says,
.
114
“Perhaps 2 million Koreans, North and
South, were killed in the Korean war, all in
the name of opposing ‘the rule of force.’”
Bruce Coming’s history “The Korean War” says,
“[O]f more than 4 million casualties … at
least 2 million were civilians. … Estimated
North Korean casualties numbered 2
million including about 1 million civilians…
An estimated 900,000 Chinese soldiers lost
their lives in combat.”
According to Neer in “Napalm,” Gen. Douglas MacArthur,
the former supreme commander, testified to Congress in
May 1951,
“The war in Korea has already almost
destroyed that nation of 20 million people. I
have never seen such devastation. I have
seen, I guess, as much blood and disaster
as any living man, and it just curdled my
stomach, the last time I was there. After I
looked at that wreckage and those
thousands of women and children … I
vomited.”
Trump used the word “sovereignty” 21 times in his speech.
The United States is devoted so convincingly to national
sovereignty that it has bankrolled military occupation and
shooting warfare inside Afghanistan and Iraq for a
combined total of 30 years running, and today is
simultaneously bombing and strafing five other sovereign
states in the region. Not a single UN Delegate was aware
of this hypocrisy last Tuesday, which explains the roaring
applause and cheers in the General Assembly during
Trump’s bomb threats.
 Kim Jon Un Says “Deranged”
Trump Will “Pay Dearly” For Comments At UN
Desire Thompson @Desire_Renee
September 21, 2017 - 9:41 Pm
CREDIT: YoutTube, Getty Images
North Korean leader Kim Jon Un has responded to
President Donald Trump’s bizarre UN speech, calling the
commander-in-chief “deranged” who will “pay dearly” for
his threats.
Associated Press reports Kim’s first-person statement
came by way of North Korea’s state-run news agency,
KCNA on Thursday (Sept. 21). The leader believed the
businessman disrespected the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea at the U.N. when he called Kim “rocket
man” and spoke of “destroying” the country.
115
“I am now thinking hard about what
response he could have expected when he
allowed such eccentric words to trip off his
tongue,” Kim said. “I will surely and
definitely tame the mentally deranged US
dotard (old person) with fire.” Kim says
Trump’s threats have only solidified his
decision to continue nuclear testing.
He added, he is “thinking hard” about his response and
that No. 45 “will face results beyond his expectation.”
His speech included several words of advice to Trump,
like a friendly reminder about respect.
“Trump has denied the existence of and
insulted me and my country in front of the
eyes of the world,” Kim said. “I’d like to
advise Trump to exercise prudence in
selecting words and to be considerate of
whom he speaks to when making a speech
in front of the world.”
Wednesday (Sept. 20) marked Trump’s first appearance at
the U.N. General Assembly in New York. Trump mocked
the Korean leader and stated the country would be
prepared to “destroy North Korea” if its “forced to defend
itself or its allies.”
When asked about Kim’s comments, CNN reports White
House press secretary Sarah Sanders replied “Not at this
time.”
North Korea has conducted 15 missile tests since February,
successfully firing 22. Recently, the country conducted
their most powerful nuclear test to date.
 Trump Signs Order Aiming To Cut Off
Funding For North Korean Missile Program
President Donald Trump Signs An Executive Order To Expand
His Authority To Target People And Institutions Doing Business
With North Korea. With The Action, He Aims To Reduce Funding Going
To The Dictatorship's Nuclear And Missile Programs.
Jacob Pramuk | @Jacobpramuk
Published 9:40 AM ET Thu, 21 Sept 2017

Tuesday, Trump told the U.N. General Assembly that the

U.S.

"will have no choice but to totally destroy

North Korea" if it is forced to defend itself or
its allies.
President Donald Trump speaking as he meets with South
Korean president Moon Jae-in during the U.N. General
Assembly in New York, September 21, 2017.

Last week, the U.N. Security Council unanimously passed

fresh measures to punish the communist dictatorship
President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive
economically, with the support of China and Russia.
order expanding his authority to target people and
Trump has repeatedly pressed China, North Korea's only
institutions that do business with North Korea.
major ally, to do more to force Pyongyang to abandon its
nuclear ambitions.
Through the measure, the president aims to cut off the
communist dictatorship's funding and deter its nuclear and
Trump on Thursday highlighted that China's central bank
missile ambitions amid a string of recent tests and
has told its banks to strictly implement U.N. sanctions. He
provocations.
thanked President Xi Jinping for what he called a "bold"
and "somewhat unexpected" move.
"North Korea's nuclear weapons and
missile development is a grave threat to
peace and security in our world and it is
unacceptable that others financially support
this criminal, rogue regime," Trump said
before a meeting with Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean
President Moon Jae-in. "Our new executive
order will cut off sources of revenue that
fund North Korea's efforts to develop the
deadliest weapons known to humankind.
The order enhances the Treasury
Kevin Lamarque | Reuters
Department's authorities to target any
individual or entity that conducts significant
trade in goods, services or technology with On Tuesday, he also commended Beijing for signing on to
North Korea." two recent sanctions packages enacted by the Security
Council. The U.S. sees China's commitment to sanctions
The isolated nation has tested ballistic missiles and an as crucial to forcing Pyongyang to end its nuclear and
apparent hydrogen bomb in recent weeks in the face of missile programs.
international economic sanctions and warnings. On

116
Trump appeared to try to quash speculation that he is
targeting China or other North Korean trading partners
with the action.
"I want to be clear — the order targets only
one country, and that country is North
Korea," he said.
The president again said that he seeks the "complete
denuclearization" of North Korea.
Trump had separate bilateral meetings scheduled with both
Moon and Abe on Thursday.
WATCH: Kim Jong Un says Trump 'deranged'

Trump said the order identifies industries including

textiles, fishing, information technology and
manufacturing, which the Treasury Department can target
with "strong sanctions." The president added that the order
includes "measures designed to disrupt" shipping and trade
networks to reduce North Korea's ability to avoid the
sanctions.

Earlier, national security advisor H.R. McMaster said

Trump would take more action to stop North Korea "short
of war." Trump's advisors have repeatedly said they prefer
to use diplomatic methods to curb North Korea's
aggression.

117
 Trump’s Was One Of The
Most Bizarre UN Speeches In History
Wayne MADSEN
21.09.2017
The United Nations General Assembly’s annual plenary
session has heard a fair share of bizarre speeches by world
leaders in the 72-year history of the world organization.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s speech on September 19,
while intemperate and undiplomatic, was not the only
rancorous diatribe or the most peculiar oration ever heard
within the hall of nations.
Trump referred to Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
(DPRK) head of state Kim Jong Un as “rocket man” and a
person on a “suicide mission” who, along with his nation,
would be “totally destroyed” by the United States if the
North attacked the United States or its allies. Trump’s
comments resulted in stone-faced silence from the other
world leaders and diplomats gathered inside the General
Assembly. At one point in time during Trump’s speech, his
White House chief of staff, retired General John Kelly,
was seen burying his face into his hand. Although most of
Trump’s venom was directed against North Korea, he also
castigated Iran, Cuba, Syria, and Venezuela. The baring of
Trump’s fangs toward the five countries is in keeping with
the neo-conservative foreign policy drift of his
administration. Iranian President Hasan Rouhani, in New
York for the General Assembly session, succinctly
characterized Trump’s speech as “ignorant, absurd and
hateful rhetoric.”
The only world leader who beamed during Trump’s speech
was Trump’s ideological doppelganger, Israeli Prime
Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. The scandal-plagued Israeli
leader is no stranger to berating other countries before the
General Assembly. In 2012, Netanyahu displayed before
the General Assembly a cartoonish bomb with a lit fuse.
The “Bibi Bomb,” which was meant to convey false
118
intelligence on Iran’s alleged 90 percent nuclear weapons
uranium enrichment, became the target of jokes and
derision. Undeterred by his past use of the General
Assembly’s podium for cheap publicity stunts, in 2016,
Netanyahu publicly berated Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas, who had spoken just before him. Trump
and Netanyahu have made no secret of their disdain for the
UN. In Trump, Netanyahu has found a boorish comrade-
in-arms. It was also no coincidence that Trumps’ speech
was largely the product of his pro-Likud speechwriter, the
Jewish white supremacist Stephen Miller.
Trump, who has made no secret of his racial preference for
white Europeans, received no applause from an
overwhelming majority of the General Assembly
delegates, most of whom were from the non-white
countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East,
the Caribbean, and the South Pacific. The day following
Trump’s UN speech, he embarrassingly told a luncheon of
African leaders, “I have so many friends going to your
countries trying to get rich.” Those Trump “friends”
include expatriate billionaire oligarchs living in Israel,
Britain, and other countries who are viciously exploiting
Africa’s natural resources, including diamonds, gold,
platinum, oil, and rare earth minerals. Some of these
brigands who are robbing Africa blind are business
associates of Trump son-in-law Kushner and his family.
Trump also showed his total ignorance of Africa when
referring to a health crisis in the non-existent country of
“Nambia.” It was never made clear by Trump’s
unimpressive foreign policy team whether he meant
Zambia or Namibia, or possibly, Gambia.
In 2006, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez had many of
the General Assembly delegates laughing and applauding
as he referred to the speech that U.S. President George W.
Bush gave the day before. Chavez said, “The devil came
here yesterday, and it smells of sulfur still today, this table
that I am now standing in front of." Chavez continued,
“Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the
President of the United States, the gentleman to whom I
refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the
world... the American empire is doing all it can to
consolidate its system of domination. And we cannot allow
them to do that. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be
consolidated.” Chavez’s speech was immensely popular
among many of the General Assembly delegates from
nations that had suffered from dictates from Washington
over the years.
Trump’s speech made many Americans feel ashamed of
his administration. On the other hand, Chavez’s speech
was met with overwhelming support at home in
Venezuela, with many of Chavez’s fellow citizens saying
he made them proud to be Venezuelan.
In 2009, Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi gave a 100-
minute speech to the General Assembly, the Libyan head
of state’s only address before the UN. Qaddafi’s speech
was called “rambling” by the corporate media. However,
Qaddafi hit on many salient and historical points, including
the UN Security Council’s authorization of 65 wars since
its creation, whether swine flu had been created in a
biological warfare laboratory and if President John F.
Kennedy had been assassinated in a wide-ranging
conspiracy, and the illegality of the 1983 U.S. invasion of
Grenada. Qaddafi’s speech, although long, was met with
applause from the delegates from the developing world,
diplomats who longed to hear a world leader come down
hard on the imperialist and colonialist countries of Europe
and North America. Qaddafi, who wanted to stay in his
Bedouin tent while in New York, was forced to take it
down from the only property that would allow it – the lawn
of the Westchester, New York estate of Donald Trump.
County zoning officials eventually forced Qaddafi to
remove his tent from Trump’s property because
“temporary strictures” were banned by county ordinance.
When a leader like Chavez or Qaddafi or Cuban leader
Fidel Castro, who spoke in 1960 for four-and-a-half hours,
had something truthful and hard-hitting to tell the General
Assembly, most of the delegates listened attentively.
Trump, who had nothing meaningful to say, was received
more like a circus act by the General Assembly than a
serious world leader. Even Indian diplomat V.K. Krishna
Menon, who spoke to the General Assembly in 1957 for
almost eight hours on the subject of Kashmir, had more
important things to say than did Trump for 41 minutes.
The UN asks world leaders to speak for no longer than 15
minutes, however, few adhere to that rule.
In 1975, Ugandan “President-for-Life and Field Marshal
Idi Amin Dada spoke to the General Assembly in the
Ugandan tribal language of Luganda and not in English, a
.
119
language in which he was fluent. Since the UN had no
Luganda interpreter, Amin ordered his UN ambassador to
translate his speech into English, from which the UN
French, Russian, and Chinese interpreters had to hastily
provide instantaneous translation. At a side interview at the
UN, Amin likened British Prime Minister Edward Heath to
Adolf Hitler.
In 1970, the dictator of the Central African Republic,
General Jean-Bedel Bokassa, who later proclaimed himself
emperor and was accused of practicing cannibalism, told
the General Assembly that there was a “gap between a
super-industrialized world, ‘well fed’ and satisfied, and a
world where ‘hunger,’ sickness, ignorance, deprivation,
and wretchedness are the daily lot of hundreds of millions
of human beings.”
While some political analysts have likened Trump to the
bombastic former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi,
there is no comparison between Berlusconi’s UN speech in
2009 and Trump’s speech this year. Berlusconi sounded
like a seasoned statesman, compared to Trump.
Berlusconi, whose mad-cap public comments and
unconventional lifestyle fueled many jokes, urged the UN
to respect the roles of the G8 (which then included Russia),
the G20, and a reformed UN Security Council.
Trump’s odd speech will likely go down in history with
other weird moments in the history of the UN General
Assembly’s plenary session. They would include the
October 12, 1978 speech by Grenada’s Prime Minister Eric
Gairy, in which he spoke about the UN investigating areas
“sufficiently important and significant to merit our
constant articulation and review of them . . . the Bermuda
Triangle, unidentified flying objects, and extraterrestrial
phenomena.” The General Assembly would not be hearing
about extraterrestrials again until 1987, when none other
than President Ronald Reagan told the assembled
delegates: “Perhaps we need some outside universal threat
to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally
think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish
if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world.”
Keeping in mind that terrorists, cannibals, UFO
enthusiasts, and various ne’er-do-wells have addressed the
General Assembly, Trump was not the worst leader to
stand at the rostrum of the assembly hall. However, he
does hold a high rank among them.
 Jeff Sessions Is Not Serving Up
The Justice That Trump And The American
People Deserve On Comey,
Clinton, And Others
By JD Heyes
Thursday, September 21, 2017
Right off the bat I want say that I think, personally,
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a decent and honorable
man who is nothing like the person he has been made out
to be by malcontents, miscreants, psychopaths, and fools in
the Democratic Party and the Left.
But niceties aside, we have a republic to save.
I no longer believe that he’s capable of serving in his
current capacity as the second-highest ranking law
enforcement official in the country behind the president.
I’ll explain.
Long before Donald J. Trump won the November election
and was sworn in as our 45th president, evidence existed
that Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey,
former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and former
National Security Advisor Susan Rice were complicit in
crimes against the state as well as crimes against the
American people.
As noted by Gregg Jarrett, a Fox News legal analyst and
former defense attorney, Sessions has taken no actions
whatsoever to right the wrongs that are now so plainly
evident, just based on open source reporting, as to make
him seem unworthy, incompetent, or incapable of carrying
out his duties as head of the Department of Justice.
And frankly, if the American people cannot trust the
Department of Justice, there is nothing left to defend in
120
this republic, for the rule of law will have completely
broken down.
Consider these actions that Sessions has thus far — months
into his tenure — refused to address:
 As Jarrett notes, Sessions has resisted efforts to
produce documents that are relevant to the bogus,
discredited — and likely Democrat-and-FBI affiliated —
“Trump dossier” that have long been subpoenaed by
the House Intelligence Committee. (Related: CNN,
BuzzFeed Caught Running Fanfiction Erotica Message
Board Fantasies As “Intelligence Dossier” To Slander
Trump… “An Absolute Disgrace” Says President-
Elect.)
 He has yet to appoint a special counsel to reopen the
investigation into Clinton’s improper use of a personal,
unsecured email server over which reams of classified
information passed — all likely violations of the
Espionage Act.
 He has ignored Clinton’s obstruction of justice over her
deleting 33,000 emails that were under congressional
subpoena — emails that likely would show she was
engaged in “pay-for-play” using her role as secretary of
state to extract millions in donations from foreign
donors who assumed they’d be dealing with her in the
Oval Office instead of Trump.
 Sessions has to date taken no action against Rice for
her improper unmasking of American citizens tied to
the Trump campaign and who were under surveillance
by the Obama administration.
“Evidence continues to mount that the
incoming president was spied upon for
political reasons,” Jarrett writes. “Transition
officials were unmasked, perhaps illegally.
And in one case, the unmasking was
leaked to the media which is a crime. Yet
Sessions is twiddling his thumbs.”
Then, of course, there is the possibility that Comey has
also violated not just Justice Department and FBI rules, but
also may have perjured himself before Congress, which is
also a crime. He also appears to have stolen government
documents and then leaked them to the media (all with the
intent of having his friend and former FBI director, Robert
Mueller, appointed to investigate Team Trump).
“Jeff Sessions may have been a fine
senator, but he has proven to be a feckless
attorney general,” says Jarrett. “He should
resign. But before he does, he can attempt
to rectify the wreckage he has wrought by
initiating several necessary criminal
investigations and/or appointing a special
counsel to do so.”
Here is just one more example of the lawlessness:
 Under oath, Comey was asked by the House Judiciary
Committee whether he decided not to recommend
criminal charges against Clinton before or after he
interviewed her. He replied,
.
121
“After.”
And yet, a document has been uncovered by the Senate
Judiciary Committee revealing that two months before the
FBI interviewed Clinton and her top aides Comey drafted a
statement exonerating her.
“Absent some extraordinary explanation,”
Jarrett notes, “it appears that Comey’s
investigation of Clinton was nothing more
than a charade and that he may have even
lied under oath.”
There is more afoot here than just an effort to delegitimize
Trump. The Deep State wants to completely destroy him,
financially and otherwise, as a warning to any other
‘outsider’ who thinks he or she wants to be president. And
that warning, simply, is,
“Don’t.”
 Don’t Look Now, But Former DNI James Clapper May Be
Lying – Again – Over Team Trump Wiretap Order
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 21, 2017
You really can’t trust a damned thing this man says
(National Sentinel) Deep State: Former Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper, a known liar who has
given false testimony to Congress and should have been
charged for that crime, may be, um, bending the truth once
again regarding the well-established fact that the Obama
administration was “wire tapping” Team Trump.
As reported by The Daily Caller, in an interview
with CNN‘s Don Lemon last night, Clapper, now a
network contributor to the Fake News Network, was asked
whether he knew about the FISA warrant authorizing the
FBI and who knows who else to spy on members of the
Trump campaign.
“Did you know about a FISA warrant
against Paul Manafort at the time?” Lemon
asked.
“I did not,” Clapper replied.
Really, Jim? Because a couple of months back, you said
something completely different.
.
122
As The Daily Caller reminds all of us:
In a March 5 interview on “Meet the
Press,” Clapper said that he would have
been aware of a FISA warrant on a
member of the Trump campaign, even
one granted to the FBI. And asked if such a
warrant had been obtained, Clapper
directly denied it.
“There was no such wire tap activity
mounted against the President-elect at the
time or as a candidate or against his
campaign,” Clapper told “Meet the Press”
host Chuck Todd.
Asked by Todd if he would have been
aware of a FISA order issued for someone
affiliated with the Trump campaign,
Clapper said “absolutely.”
Clapper unequivocally denied that a
wiretap order was granted.
Which is it, Mr. Clapper? You knew and would know, or
you didn’t and couldn’t know? After all, you were
the director of national intelligence.
You don’t have to respond; we already know the answer.
Day by day, as Trump’s tenure in office grows, we are
reminded just how deep, wide, and disgustingly nasty the
Washington swamp we sent the president to drain really is.
 Maryland Democrat A Keynote Speaker
For Group Claiming Trump Is Mentally Unfit For Office
John Sextonposted
7:21 Pm On September 21, 2017

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland will be the keynote

speaker at an upcoming event organized by a group called
Duty to Warn. Duty to Warn has called for President
Trump’s removal from office under the 25th Amendment
on the grounds that he is not psychologically fit to serve.
From the Hill:

Raskin is expected to discuss legislation he

introduced earlier this year to establish an
Oversight Commission on Presidential
Capacity that can determine if the president
is incapacitated. His bill currently has 31
co-sponsors, all of whom are Democrats.

Under the Constitution’s 25th Amendment, the vice

president and a majority of Cabinet members, “or of such
other body as Congress may by law provide,” can jointly
declare that a president is unfit to serve. Raskin’s bill
would create an “other body” as permitted by the 25th
Amendment.
The group of mental health professionals plans to host
town halls across the nation on Oct. 14, including one in
Washington, D.C., where Raskin will be speaking.
Raskin has been suggesting for months that the 25th
Amendment provides a “way out” of the Trump
presidency.
We, the undersigned mental health
professionals (please state your degree),
believe in our professional judgment that
Donald Trump manifests a serious mental
illness that renders him psychologically
incapable of competently discharging the
duties of President of the United States.
And we respectfully request he be removed
from office, according to article 4 of the
25th amendment to the Constitution, which
states that the president will be replaced if
he is “unable to discharge the powers and
duties of his office.”

Duty to Warn apparently started as a petition at
Change.org started by a psychologist named John Gartner.
Gartner’s petition, which currently has 62,000 signatories
reads:
Gartner recently spoke to Rolling Stone magazine to
explain his approach:
Gartner’s argument is relatively simple.
Add paranoia, sadism and antisocial

123
 behavior to narcissistic personality disorder In a video posted on the group’s website, Gartner makes
and you have a new diagnosis: “malignant this connection to Hitler more explicit saying,
narcissism.” Trump, he says, is no
paranoid schizophrenic who walks the “In 1930s, a malignant narcissist rose to
streets claiming to be the Son of God – no power in part because people were silent,
one “so grossly ill” could be elected. including mental health community.” He
However, the president’s increasing adds, “We don’t want to make that mistake
tendency to obsess over persecution again.”
theories – and not just parrot meaningless
stupidities like the inaugural crowd story All of this seems pretty extreme to me but apparently, it’s
but seemingly believe them – shows that
not to “the resistance.” Rep. Raskin appeared on CNN in
he’s crossing a meaningful diagnostic line
July and emphasized repeatedly that his bill was not aimed
into psychotic delusions, common among
solely at President Trump. Perhaps now that he’s the
malignant narcissists.
keynote speaker for a group explicitly suggesting the
“We’re not talking about a gross psychotic president is a kind of return of Hitler, someone in the
disorder,” Gartner says. “We’re talking media could ask him if that’s going too far.
about a way in which people with severe
personality disorders can regress to what
they call transient psychotic states.” He
adds, “It’s a more subtle kind of psychosis,
but it goes over the boundary into
psychosis.”

The term malignant narcissist is said to have been invented

by Holocaust survivor Erich Fromm, who used it to
explain Hitler.

124
 Manafort Offered to Give
Russian Billionaire “Private Briefings” on 2016 Campaign
Written by Warren Mass
Thursday, 21 September 2017
Photo of Oleg Deripaska: AP Images
Former Trump presidential campaign manager Paul
Manafort sent an e-mail on July 7, 2016, intended for
Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska (shown),
offering to provide private briefings on the presidential
race. The e-mails were sent to an overseas intermediary
with a request to forward them to Deripaska. “If he needs
private briefings we can accommodate,” Manafort wrote in
the e-mail, portions of which were read to the Washington
Post, which broke this story. As we shall discuss later,
however, Special Counsel Robert Mueller does not seem to
be sufficiently objective to lead the investigation into
Manafort’s activities.
The Post reported that the e-mails are among tens of
thousands of documents that have been turned over to
congressional investigators and special counsel Robert
Mueller III’s team that is investigating whether members
of the Trump campaign cooperated with Russians they
suspect tried to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
However, notes the report, there is no evidence in the
documents showing that Deripaska received Manafort’s
offer or that any briefings took place. The Post also quoted
a spokeswoman for Deripaska who dismissed the e-mail
exchanges as scheming by “consultants in the notorious
‘beltway bandit’ industry.”
The New American reported in an August 9 article that
during the early morning hours of July 26, FBI agents
raided Manafort’s Alexandria, Virginia home.
The article reported:
125
The agents were executing a warrant
obtained by Special Counsel Robert
Mueller, as part of his probe into the
alleged interference by the Russian
government in last year’s presidential
campaign. Manafort has been under
investigation by the FBI since 2014 for his
work on behalf of the Party of Regions of
former Ukrainian President Viktor
Yanukovych, a close ally of the Russians.
The article noted that Mueller has put together an army of
16 lawyers in his probe, and has empaneled a grand jury
that can issue subpoenas for business and financial records.
The author of the article, Steve Byas, raised some
interesting points about Mueller’s investigation into
Manafort’s activities and how most of the media has
reported (or not reported) potential legal conflicts within
both the Trump and Clinton campaigns last year.
The article observed that the mainstream media rarely
paused in publishing insinuations that the Trump campaign
colluded with the Russian government in their alleged
“hacking” into Democratic e-mails. But they have said
little about similar violations committed by the Democrats.
Byas wrote:
For example, one e-mail released by
WikiLeaks in the files of John Podesta,
Clinton's campaign manager, provided
proof that Democrat Party leader Donna
Brazile was actually informing the Clinton
campaign as to what questions she would
be asked in the presidential debates with
Trump. According to the Roger Stone in his
book The Making of the President 2016,
Brazile told Podesta, “One of the questions
directed to HRC [Hillary Rodham Clinton]
tomorrow is from a woman with a rash.”
Brazile gave Podesta details to pass on to
Clinton: “Her family has lead poisoning and
she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do
as president to help the [people] of Flint
[Michigan].”
Byas asked:
“Can one imagine the media interest if it
was discovered that a Republican nominee
had been fed a question prior to a debate
on the Fox News Network?”
The article went on to say:
Mueller evidently believes that Manafort
used his connections with the Russians to
hack into the computers at the DNC and
the Clinton campaign to defeat her. With a
huge budget and staff, the backing of the
American media, the Democratic Party,
and even some Establishment
Republicans, it appears he has many
people who he hopes can find something
criminal to topple President Trump.
A troubling aspect of Mueller’s position in the driver’s seat
of the investigation into Manafort (which some enemies of
the Trump administration hope will result in a reprise of
the Watergate scandal that brought down the presidency of
Richard Nixon in the early 1970s) is that Mueller’s
credibility and objectivity to lead the investigation should
be questioned
An August 2 article posted by The New American, also by
Byas, drew from information released by Julian Assange at
WikiLeaks of a 2009 State Department cable to the
Russians. The cable was released by Assange on May 17,
the same day that Deputy Attorney General Rod
Rosenstein tapped Mueller as an “independent” counsel to
investigate any supposed Trump-Russian ties. The cable
indicated:
In 2009, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton directed
FBI Director Mueller to deliver a sample of Highly
Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia. The uranium had
reportedly been stolen. It seems particularly odd,
considering that the FBI is not under the supervision of the
State Department, and that the FBI director would
personally make the transfer. (Italics in original.)
As was further revealed by WikiLeaks, Clinton sent a
cable to John Beryle U.S. Ambassador to Russia John
Beryle; the U.S. ambassador to the Georgia Embassy; and
the U.S. ambassador to the Russian Embassy, on August
17, 2009. The cable read in part,
“Action Request: Embassy Moscow is
requested to alert at the highest
appropriate level the Russian Federation
that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver
the HEU sample once he arrives in
Moscow on September 21.”
126
Byas continued by observing:
While the revelation of a secret meeting
involving Robert Mueller in the delivery of
uranium to the Russians, by itself, does not
prove anything of a criminal or unethical
nature, it does raise questions that merit an
investigation. After all, when Mueller was
FBI director under the Obama
administration, he was trusted enough by
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to carry
out this mission. If it was a diplomatic
mission, why was the FBI director
involved? And if it was a law enforcement
mission, why was Clinton involved?
And is Mueller sufficiently objective to conduct an
impartial investigation of a Republican president?
To Byas’s questioning of Mueller’s objectivity we might
add our own question of his credibility, based on his
actions while still FBI director. As we noted in our article
of September 14:
When a Senate committee sent
investigators to question an FBI informant
who had been in association with two 9/11
hijackers, then-FBI director Robert Mueller
objected.
A team of investigators led by former FBI lawyer and
counterterrorism analyst Michael Jacobson went to San
Diego to investigate the connection between the Saudi
government and the activities of some of the hijackers in
that city. Jacobson and his team wanted to meet with an
FBI informant named Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been
in close association with two hijackers — Nawaf al-Hazmi
and Khalid al-Mihdhar, both of whom were on American
Airlines flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon. But
the investigators were unsuccessful in meeting with
Shaikh.
Journalist Andrew Cockburn wrote in an article for
Harper’s that provided an incredible explanation for the
failure of this investigation:
Understandably, the investigators had a lot
of questions for this man. Nevertheless,
Mueller adamantly refused their demands
to interview him, even when backed by a
congressional subpoena, and removed
Shaikh to an undisclosed location “for his
own safety.” Today, [former Florida
Governor and Senator Bob] Graham
believes that Mueller was acting under
orders from the [George W. Bush] White
House.
In an article posted by Antiwar.com on September 11,
Justin Raimondo posed the question:
“Was Mueller, possibly on orders from
President George W. Bush, colluding
with the Saudis to cover up their role?”
In view of Mueller’s role in taking part in a highly
suspicious delivery of uranium to the Russians and also
.
127
interfering with an investigation into Saudi involvement in
the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he hardly seems to be the
individual of unimpeachable character who should be
leading an investigation into Trump’s campaign manager.
As the old saying goes:
“People who live in glass houses shouldn't
throw stones.”
 Kim Jong Un Calls
President Trump ‘Dotard’ And ‘Frightened Dog’
By Phil Mccausland
Sep 22 2017, 7:52 Am ET

North Korea's leader called President Donald Trump "a
frightened dog" and a "gangster fond of playing with fire"
in an official statement released Thursday.
Kim Jong Un responded to Trump's United Nations speech
in a dispatch written in the first person. South Korea's
government said it was the first such direct address to the
world by any North Korean leader.
"Far from making remarks of any
persuasive power that can be viewed to be
helpful to defusing tension, he made
unprecedented rude nonsense one has
never heard from any of his predecessors,"
Kim said. "A frightened dog barks louder."
Hours later, North Korea's foreign minister reportedly said
his country may test a hydrogen bomb in the Pacific Ocean
to fulfill Kim's vow to take the "highest-level" action
against the United States.
"I will make the man holding the
prerogative of the supreme command in
the U.S. pay dearly for his speech calling
for totally destroying [North Korea]," he
added.
In his bellicose statement Thursday, Kim also repeatedly
referred to Trump as a "dotard" — an arcane term for a
senile or weak-minded elderly person.
"I will surely and definitely tame the
mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire,"
Kim said.
Trump announced on Thursday that he planned to sign an
executive order that would slap sanctions on individuals,
companies and financial institutions that do business with
what Trump characterized as "this criminal rogue regime."

Trump Sanctions North Korea, A Sign Diplomacy is Still on the

Table 1:58 He said his mission was North Korea's "complete
denuclearization."
North Korea's Kim Jong Un calls Trump 'mentally deranged US
dotard' 2:48
According to South Korea's Yonhap News, Pyongyang
may conduct a hydrogen bomb test in the Pacific as a
Trump hit back Friday morning on Twitter.
warning to the United States after Trump's latest speech.
"Kim Jong Un of North Korea, who is
"It could be the most powerful detonation of
obviously a madman who doesn't mind
an H-bomb in the Pacific," North Korea's
starving or killing his people, will be tested
Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho told reporters.
like never before!" he wrote.
"We have no idea about what actions could
be taken as it will be ordered by leader Kim
Trump, during his speech on the U.N. floor on Tuesday, Jong Un."
threatened to "totally destroy" North Korea if the United
States were "forced to defend itself."
Japan, the only country ever to suffer an atomic attack,
described that threat as "totally unacceptable."
Kim, whom Trump has recently started deriding as
"Rocket Man," said the threat had not fallen on deaf ears.
128
Earlier this month, the U.N. Security Council passed harsh
sanctions targeting Kim's nation, which has continued
missile tests and aims to expand its nuclear arsenal.
The sanctions ban 90 percent of North Korean exports and
were approved by Russia and China, who had previously
maintained closer ties to North Korea.
In his statement, Kim did not mention the sanctions.
.
129
France may skip 2018 Olympics in South Korea over
nuclear threat
The statement will further escalate the war of words
between Kim and Trump as the North moves closer to
perfecting a nuclear-tipped missile that could strike
America.
In recent months, the North has launched a pair of still-
developmental ICBMs it said were capable of striking the
continental United States and a pair of intermediate-range
missiles that soared over Japanese territory.
North Korea has previously embraced racist, sexist and
just plain rude statements about its enemies.
It repeatedly called one past South Korean leader "rat
faced." It has said that the South's first female president,
Park Geun-hye, was a "crafty prostitute" and suggested ex-
President Barack Obama was her pimp. It also called
Obama a "monkey."
 Lou Dobbs Goes Off On “Corrupt” Mueller Investigation:
“What Is Going On Here?!” (VIDEO)
By Cristina Laila
Friday, September 22, 2017

Fox News’ Lou Dobbs went off on the
corrupt federal government as he spoke
with president of Judicial Watch Tom
Fitton on Wednesday night about the
Mueller investigation.
Fitton called Mueller an unelected bureaucrat who doesn’t
answer to the American people.
“What can we do about it?!” Dobbs asked
frustrated.

Dobbs points out that there is no one to turn to in order to

put an end to this madness and went off on all of the
corrupt agencies in the federal government.

The only recourse would be for AG Sessions to unrecuse

himself, yet we all know that he’s not going to do this.

Dobbs closed by saying ‘the establishment’ which owns

the leadership of both political parties is using Mueller as a
tool to attack President Trump who threatens their power
structure.

Lou Dobbs began by discussing the cozy relationship

between Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy
Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, asking,

“What is going on here?”

Fitton answered by saying,

“Mueller is investigating himself in my view.

The firing of Comey led to his appointment.
Comey’s leaking of information led to his
appointment and Sessions recused himself
almost immediately…”
.

130
 Trump May Cite UN Resolution To
Decertify Iran Nuclear Deal – US Envoy To UN
Published Time: 22 Sep, 2017 02:31 Edited Time: 22 Sep, 2017 08:28

She said all of these issues, which were included in the UN

resolution, have been violated by the country and will be
taken into consideration when a decision on the matter is
made.

“Just because we did this nuclear deal, it

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley. © Stephanie
Keith / Reuters
As President Donald Trump’s deadline for certification of
the Iran nuclear deal approaches, US Ambassador to the
United Nations Nikki Haley says the president is looking
to a post-deal UN resolution to justify his decision.
Haley told reporters Thursday that Trump would take into
consideration a UN resolution that was originally intended
to support the Iran nuclear deal, when he decides whether
to recertify the agreement under US law.
UN Resolution 2231, written by the US delegation in
2015, sets forth the UN Security Council’s plan of action
to monitor Iran’s commitments to the nuclear deal, legally
known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
(JCPOA).
The resolution also condemns Iran for ballistic missile-
testing, weapons smuggling and support for terrorism,
among other acts, but at the same time, lays out a plan for
a complete lifting of sanctions. Iran, however, is not
considered to be legally bound by the resolution, and has
been compliant under the JCPOA, which focuses strictly
on uranium enrichment.
doesn't give them a pass on all the other
things that they're doing wrong," she said.
“The Iran deal and US law are two
separate things,” Haley added.
Under US law through a Congress-created mechanism, the
president is required to re-assess the JCPOA every 90
days, in context with the UN resolution and other factors,
in order to decide whether the nuclear deal is in the best
interests of the US.
October 15 is the president’s next deadline. If Trump
decides to decertify the deal, it will then go on to the US
Congress, which will make the decision on how the US
will move forward with the agreement.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson also
hinted at Trump’s upcoming decision, saying Iran is only
in “technical compliance” with the JCPOA.
Tillerson went on to say the president has been “quite
clear and articulate” about his concerns relating to the
JCPOA.

Haley wasted no time condemning Iran when asked if

there were ways to keep the US in the nuclear deal while
still addressing its concerns over Iran’s impact on “peace
and stability in the region.” The ambassador replied by
accusing Iran of failing to stop ballistic missile testing,
smuggling arms and supporting terrorism.

131
 Former Spy Chief James Clapper On CNN:
‘It’s Possible’ President Trump’s Voice Recorded In Paul
Manafort Wiretap (Video)
By Carter
Friday, September 22, 2017

The video begins with Lemon asking Clapper about the

stories floating around in the press, Clapper then reiterates
what he has said prior about the incident and says he
“cannot comment” on the FISA warrant.
Lemon then asks Clapper,
“Is it possible the President was picked up
in a conversation with Paul Manafort?”
Clapper replies: “It’s certainly conceivable .
. .”
Lemon: “Is it likely?”
Clapper: “Uh, I can’t say. I – uh – wouldn’t
wanna go there, but I will say, it’s
possible.”

Watch the video below:

Clapper consistently states that he “stands on” what he said
back on the 5th of March. Watch Clapper’s video from
March 5, 2017 below:

132
 North Korea: Trump Signs
New Order To Widen Sanctions
September 22, 2017
US President Donald Trump has signed a new order that
boosts sanctions against North Korea over its nuclear
weapons programme.
The US treasury has been authorised to target firms and
financial institutions conducting business with the North.
The president also said China's Central Bank had
instructed other Chinese banks to stop doing business with
Pyongyang.
It comes less than two weeks after the UN approved new
sanctions against the country over its latest nuclear test.
Tensions have risen in recent weeks over the North's
continued nuclear and ballistic missile tests, despite
pressure from world powers to stop.
 North Korea crisis in 300 words
 Can the world live with a nuclear North Korea?
 Sanctions won't stop us, warns N Korea
Announcing a new executive order on Thursday, President
Trump said the measures were designed to "cut off sources
of revenue that fund North Korea's efforts to develop the
deadliest weapons known to humankind".
He singled out the North's textiles, fishing, information
technology and manufacturing industries.
"For much too long North Korea has been
allowed to abuse the international financial
system to facilitate funding for its nuclear
weapons and missile programs," he said.
133
He stressed that the sanctions were targeting
"only one country, and that country is North
Korea".
His treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, later told
reporters:
"Foreign financial institutions are now on
notice that going forward they can choose
to do business with the United States or
with North Korea, but not both."
The US president had on Tuesday vowed to "totally
destroy" the North if it posed a threat to the US and its
allies, in his first address as US president to the UN
General Assembly.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un vowed to make Mr
Trump "pay dearly" for his speech.
In a statement on Friday, he branded Mr. Trump "mentally
deranged" and said the US president's remarks "have
convinced me, rather than frightening or stopping me, that
the path I chose is correct and that it is the one I have to
follow to the last".
Taking an indirect swipe at the US, Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov warned the UN that "military
hysteria" over the North's nuclear testing would lead to
"disaster".
China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi told Pyongyang not to
go in a "dangerous direction", and told the UN General
Assembly on Thursday that there should be no new nuclear
weapons on the Korean peninsula "whether it is in the
north or the south".
 What missiles does North Korea have?
 How do you defend against Pyongyang?
Meanwhile, South Korea's president, Moon Jae-in, met Mr
Trump on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly - an
annual event, bringing together leaders of the UN's 193
member states.
Earlier, Mr. Moon said his country did not want the North
to collapse, nor does it want an enforced reunification of
the peninsula.
But he said sanctions were necessary to bring Pyongyang
to the negotiating table and force it to give up its nuclear
weapons programme.
The latest UN sanctions - which came after the North's
nuclear test on 3 September - restrict oil imports and ban
textile exports, in an attempt to starve it of fuel and income
for its weapons programmes.
It is the ninth round of UN sanctions to hit North Korea
since 2006.
The US has been imposing sanctions on North Korea since
2008, freezing the assets of individuals and companies
134
linked to its nuclear programme, as well as banning the
exports of goods and services to the country.
In his comments on Thursday, President Trump praised
China, one of North Korea's closest trading partners,
saying:
"Their central bank has told their other
banks, that's a massive banking system, to
immediately stop doing business with North
Korea."
However, a spokesman for China's foreign ministry, Lu
Kang, later said that Mr Trump's comments were
inaccurate.
"They do not accord with the facts," he
said.
It is not clear if a misunderstanding has occurred in
relation to China's banks being ordered to immediately
cease doing business with Pyongyang or whether China's
central bank has agreed to a gradual withdrawal from the
market.
 Does China have any leverage?
 China banks fear North Korea sanctions
None of the latest sanctions are believed to include any
ban on oil imports to North Korea, which China continues
to resist.
Three days after the UN's punitive measures were
approved, Pyongyang fired off a second ballistic missile
over Japan - its furthest-reaching yet.
European Union officials have also revealed plans to
impose fresh sanctions against the country, but a decision
is unlikely to be taken until the middle of October.
Experts say North Korea has made surprisingly quick
progress in its development of long-range missiles and
nuclear weapons.
 Shock: White House Chief Of Staff “Voted For Hillary”,
Still Blocking Trump From Alternative Media
Alex Thomas
September 22, 2017
A top Republican adviser has revealed the shocking fact
that Trump White House Chief of Staff John Kelly was a
liberal who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.
Speaking to Fox Business Host Lou Dobbs, Republican
campaign consultant Ed Rollins shockingly claimed that,
according to his sources, Kelly supported the failed
Clinton campaign and may actually be a sort of deep state
operative in the White House to specifically take out the
Trump agenda.
“What I’ve heard from sources inside who
know Kelly, who is an honorable man and
was a good general, he didn’t vote for
Trump, he voted for Hillary.” Rollins said.
“So I don’t think he is basically is a Trump
supporter or ideologically a Trump
supporter.”
135
The revelation by Rollins came amid a discussion about
the now infamous photo showing Kelly “face palming”
during Trump’s speech at the United States, a sign that
many Trump supporters believed once again showed that
Kelly is not a person that is in favor of Trump’s America
First, anti-globalist world view.
Rollins then stated his belief that the president needs to
call a major meeting with his cabinet and straight up ask
them whether or not they actually support his agenda.
“The President needs to ask, in a private
meeting some day with his top advisers,
how many of you are really for me? How
many of you voted for me,” Rollins
declared.
“How many of you believe in what I believe
in? When I make a speech like this, how
many of you are 100% behind me? And if
you’re not, just leave.”
For his part, Kelly has long been the subject of reports
detailing his personal efforts to specifically block the flow
of alternative media information from ever reaching
Trump’s desk.
As investigator report and Naval intelligence officer Jack
Posobiec reported in August (three weeks before the
mainstream media), White House staffers were being
threatened for termination if they passed along articles
from websites such as Infowars and Breitbart.
“Multiple sources within the White House
have confirmed that Jana Toner, a member
of the Presidential Personnel Office, is
regularly heard publicly insulting prominent
pro-Trump media figures, including former
Breitbart Technology editor Milo
Yiannopoulos and Infowars founder Alex
Jones. Mrs. Toner has even told White
House interns that sharing content from Mr.
Yiannopoulos or Mr. Jones’ Infowars on
social media is grounds for dismissal,”
wrote Posobiec.
“Furthermore, two White House interns
recounted how other employees with the
Presidential Personnel Office, at the
 direction of Mrs. Toner, have also
threatened to blacklist them from the White
House internship program if they have
posted anything from Yiannopoulos, Jones,
or Infowars on their personal social media
accounts.”
.
136
To recap, John Kelly has specifically stopped the President
of the United States from reading the alternative media,
has made clear he is an enemy of the Trump anti-globalist
agenda, (if there is even one left) and has even been a part
of threatening to fire White House interns if they dare to
discuss anti-establishment news outlets.
How does this man still have a job?
 Showdown Looms Over Trump Dossier;
FBI Misses Third Deadline To Turn Over
Subpoenaed Documents
By Byron York
Sep 22, 2017, 4:21 PM
So far, the FBI and the Justice Department do not appear to be in the
mood to comply with the subpoena. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
A third deadline has now passed for the FBI and Justice
Department to give the House Intelligence Committee
subpoenaed documents related to the Trump dossier. And
for a third time, the bureau has not produced the material.
The dossier is a collection of what former FBI Director
James Comey called "salacious and unverified" allegations
of collusion between Russia and Trump campaign figures
in the 2016 campaign. The Russia allegations were
compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, who
was commissioned by the opposition research firm Fusion
GPS, which is thought to have been paid for the work by
wealthy supporters of Hillary Clinton. The FBI reportedly
considered taking over the dossier project in the fall of
2016, when the campaign was at its height, leading Senate
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley to say the
dossier matter raised "questions about the FBI's
independence from politics."
Both Grassley and the House Intelligence Committee have
been interested in learning if the FBI ever used the
"salacious and unverified" dossier as a basis for requesting
surveillance on anyone in the Trump circle. Those
questions only intensified this week with reports that the
FBI wiretapped Trump associate and former campaign
chairman Paul Manafort during the transition period.
Four weeks ago, on Aug. 24, the House Intelligence
Committee subpoenaed the FBI and Justice Department,
.
137
seeking all internal FBI reports "incorporating, relying on,
or referring to" information provided by Steele, his
sources, or Fusion GPS. The committee also asked for
documents on any FBI or Justice "efforts to corroborate,
validate, or evaluate" Steele's information. And the
subpoena sought any surveillance applications that
included any information or were based on any
information, provided by Steele.
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes originally
set a Sept. 1 deadline for production of the dossier
documents. The FBI did not comply. Nunes then extended
the deadline to Sept. 14. The FBI did not comply. Then
Nunes extended the deadline again, to Sept. 22. Now,
again, the FBI has not complied.
It is not unusual for deadlines to be extended. It is not
unusual for feet to be dragged. But at some point, there
will have to be a resolution to this standoff. A
congressional subpoena is not something a government
agency can ignore forever.
But it seems likely that the dispute will eventually rise to a
higher level. Nunes is a committee chairman, but he does
not speak for the entire House. In addition, he has been
weakened by Democratic accusations that he leaked
classified information — a matter that seems stuck in the
Ethics Committee. Given that, if Nunes is to prevail in the
subpoena affair, it seems likely he would have to have the
support of Speaker Paul Ryan. If the speaker stands behind
Nunes' efforts, the subpoena will have more weight and be
more difficult for the FBI and Justice to defy. If on the
other hand, Ryan does not stand behind the chairman, the
FBI and Justice might be emboldened to delay forever. (A
spokesman for Ryan did not immediately answer phone
and email inquiries.)
There's a lot at stake. Nunes is currently traveling in the
Middle East, so it is not clear what the next step will be, or
when it will happen. But so far, the FBI and the Justice
Department do not appear to be in the mood to comply
with the subpoena.
 Deep State Admits They’ve Finally
“Gotten A Grip On Trump” Liken Him To George W. Bush
The Neocon Of Neocons Went On MSNBC This Week To Announce That
The Deep State Has A "Grip On Trump" And He
Now Looks Like George W. Bush.
By Matt Agorist
September 22, 2017
It is official. The deep state has admitted that Trump is
now under their control and it is now business as usual —
just like it was under Bush and Obama — and just like it
would’ve been under Hillary.
For those who don’t remember, with the help of
mainstream media—from The New York Times to Fox
News—after 9/11, Americans were duped into accepting
endless war by George W. Bush thanks to a constant
bombardment of lies sold to the masses under the guise of
“protecting freedom.” All one needs to do to realize no
freedoms were protected by these wars, in which
thousands of Americans died and hundreds of thousands of
innocent civilians were slaughtered, is look around today.
With every action recorded, phone tapped, innocent family
surveilled, right stripped, and citizen killed by their
government, the term “Freedom” has become a mere
symbolic representation of the brittle shell of America left
behind after being gutted by unelected operatives in the
deep state hell bent on total control and perpetual war.
Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and other
neocons hailing from the notorious Project for the New
American Century (PNAC), co-founded
by neoconservative extraordinaire, William “Bill” Kristol,
had their agenda of military hegemony clearly laid out,
years before 9/11 which Bush would implement for them
perfectly.
138
After Obama promised to end the wars, he quickly fell in
line and started several more. And now, this very same
thing is happening with Trump.
The deep state neocon/neolib faction has become so
successful at shifting the narrative toward irrelevant
infighting that no one even notices when their candidate
gets into office and does a 180 on damn near every
promise they made — Trump included. Here are just two
powerful examples of Trump selling out to the deep state.
Saudi Arabia. Before Trump was elected, he admitted that
he knew Saudi Arabia funded 9/11. Now, as the world
finds this out, Trump gives them hundreds of billions in
weapons and calls them our allies.
Afghanistan. Before he was elected, Trump was
vehemently opposed to the quagmire in Afghanistan and
called it “stupid,” “wasteful,” and “dangerous.” Now, just
like his predecessors, he’s doubling down and send
thousands more troops into an unwinnable war in which
they will kill or be killed only to come home with PTSD or
worse.
Dare we say, “We told you so”?
While many had faith that Trump would keep his
promises, the fact is that all presidents are puppets and no
matter who is in office, the shadow government always
wins.
The deep state is so brazen, that the founder of PNAC
actually took to MSNBC this week to admit they’ve
finally gotten a grip on Trump.
After Trump made his UN speech, promising more war
and to annihilate the millions of citizens in North Korea if
they should make one wrong move, Bill Kristol himself
went on MSNBC to praise him for it.
Kristol said Trump “sounded a little like George W.
Bush to me” and that “for all of Donald Trump’s America
First talk and repudiation of the Bush-McCain-Romney
foreign policy,” it came across as “more standard,” even
with the “Trumpian aspects.”
Kristol openly admitted that yes, Trump ran on a non-
interventionist policy of peace and actually criticized Bush
and Obama for their senseless wars, but now he is just like
Bush. But it gets worse.
As to why Trump now sounds like Bush, according to
Kristol, it’s because the deep state has officially attached
their puppet strings.
“The people around Trump have gotten
more of a grip on Trump, I think, in
foreign policy, than I would have
expected… This is a more normal
speech by an American president than I
might have thought three, four months
ago,” said Kristol.
And just like that, on live TV, the neocon of neocons —
who is an unmistakable member and policy writer of the
deep state — said that Trump is now a puppet whose very
strings are pulled by the Swamp he promised to drain, yet
never did.
Yes, this is the same Bill Kristol who just two months ago
called Trump a Jackass.
139
It’s not just the neocons who’ve noticed Trump’s
transformation into a deep state neocon puppet either —
lots of us have — including former Congressman Ron
Paul.
“Who would’ve thought?” Paul noted before epically
explaining Trump’s hypocritical transition.
Trump bashed W. and the Iraq War
relentlessly during his campaign.
Now, the very same people who brought us
the Iraq nightmare are giddy with
excitement.
Neocons like John Bolton and Elliot
Abrams are so happy to see this new
Trump.
Today, the king of the warmongers Bill
Kristol says Trump “sounded a little like
George W. Bush to me”.
The people who have never been right,
and have done unimaginable damage to
the United States of America are gearing
up to take us back into the abyss.
Donald Trump is their new W.
Welcome to the deep state Donald Trump, we hope you
enjoy selling out your base.
 Russia "Creates Propaganda"
- By Translating Neocon Propaganda About Russia
All Kremlin Has To Do To Show How Awfully Russophobic The US
Establishment Is, Is Translate American Propaganda About Russia
The Saker
Fri, Sep 22, 2017

Western feelings in Russia (I estimate the total amount of

pro-Western people in Russia at somewhere in the range of
3%-5% max).

This time again, as soon as the so-called “Committee to

Investigate Russia” posted its video about being at war
with Russia, the main Russian TV channel “Russia 1”
translated and showed it during the prime time show “60
minutes”. So, just to share this with you – here is Morgan
Freeman dubbed in Russian.
Actor Morgan Freedman

Enjoy!
Quite a while ago I wrote an article entitled “Counter-
Propaganda, Russian style” in which I tried to show that
far from censoring the russophobic propaganda of the The Saker
AngloZionist Empire, the Russians try hard to give it as
much visibility in Russia as possible. The reason for that it PS: I truly marvel at the stupidity of the Neocons who, for
very simple: by showing the Empire’s propaganda the the petty vendetta against Trump, are willing to profoundly
Russian media provides incontrovertible evidence of the alienate the potentially most dangerous adversary of the
hatred the Empire has for Russia and for the Russian United States on the planet.
people. This very slick counter-propaganda technique has
very much contributed to the quasi-disappearance of pro-
.

140
 Grassley Gets Backlash From Mccain Camp After Asking
FBI If Trump's Campaign Was Warned About Russia
By Sara A. Carter
September 22, 2017 06:54 PM EDT
Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Charles Grassley (R-
IA) sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray this
week asking whether the bureau ever briefed, or warned
President Trump’s camp about any alleged attempts by the
Russian government or those connected with the Russians
to infiltrate the presidential campaign.
But the wording in Grassley's letter was also met with
backlash by Arizona Republican John McCain (R-AZ) and
some of his former staff who contend that during the 2008
campaign there was no warning from U.S. intelligence but
that those warning came earlier in 2005 and 2006,
according to sources who spoke to Circa.
Grassley wanted to know if the FBI warned Trump about
former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was
allegedly under investigation by the FBI since 2014 for his
lobbying work and extensive connections to Russian
oligarchs, as reported by Circa.
“After he was fired, [FBI Director James]
Comey acknowledged in public testimony
before the Senate Intelligence Committee
that President Trump had never been one
of the individuals under investigation,”
Grassley states in the letter. “Recent news
articles have claimed that Paul Manafort
was one of the campaign associates under
FBI investigation. This raises the question
of whether the FBI ever alerted Mr. Trump
to the FBI’s counter-intelligence concerns
regarding his campaign manager and
others associated with the campaign—so
that he could take defensive action to
prevent the campaign from being
infiltrated.”
141
The FBI told Circa the bureau does not comment on
ongoing inquiries from Congressional members.
“We have the letter but in keeping with our
usual practice any response would be
given directly to the member of Congress
who sent the inquiry,” said FBI
spokeswoman Carol Cratty.
Grassley asked Wray to respond to his inquiry by Oct. 4,
the letter states.
In June, Circa reported that a decade earlier McCain also
had run-ins with many of the same players that haunted the
Trump campaign:
Manafort, Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska
and former Russian Ambassador to the
United States Sergey Kislyak. Oleg
Deripaska, a Russian metals magnet, had
his visa blocked by the United States over
concerns within the intelligence community
about his ties to Moscow.
McCain met twice with Deripaska and the meetings were
arranged by Manafort and his lobbying firm partner Rick
Davis, who later would become McCain's campaign
manager, as reported by Circa in June.
McCain's office did not return Circa's request for
comment, but spokeswoman Julie Tarallo told CNN that
"Neither Senator McCain nor anyone on his
staff recalls receiving such warnings from
the intelligence community.”
However, John Weaver, a former top campaign adviser to
McCain, told Circa in June, that during his time with the
senator U.S. intelligence raised concerns to the Senator’s
staff about work that Manafort, and his then lobbying
partner Rick Davis, who would later become McCain’s
campaign manager, were doing overseas, as well as
McCain’s contacts with a Russian oligarch.
"We got two heads ups,” said Weaver, in
an earlier interview.
Still, Weaver, disputed parts of Grassley’s letter Friday
telling Circa that during the 2008 campaign they were “not
contacted or warned by anybody.” The warnings came
earlier, in 2005 and 2006, and to McCain’s Senate staff, as
Circa reported in June.
Tarallo told CNN that McCain
"had two interactions with Mr. Deripaska in
2006, and both were social occasions and
entirely incidental.”
In the letter, Grassley asked Wray to inform him
“If the FBI did provide a defensive briefing
or similar warning to the campaign, then
that would raise important questions about
how the Trump campaign responded. On
the other hand, if the FBI did not alert the
campaign, then that would raise serious
questions about what factors contributed to
its decision and why it appears to have
been handled differently in a very similar
circumstance involving a previous
campaign.”
"Then we got another warning about
Deripaska,” Weaver added. “Bush
administration was not happy. He was
persona non grata, banned I think from US
from getting visa in some dispute with the
FBI over some ties to bad guys."
Regarding Manafort and Davis, Weaver said he told the
Senator,
142
“to send Rick [Davis] packing. He agreed
initially. I told him don't let Rick cry in your
ear and take him back. He said he
wouldn't. But Rick cried in his ear and he
got to come back at some point.”
"Manafort was trying to get into the
campaign officially but I kept him out,”
Weaver said.
Weaver said that the difference between Trump and
Russian President Vladimir Putin versus McCain’s
situation is that the Arizona senator’s views on Russia and
Putin hardened during that time-period,
“and his already strong commitment to pro-
democracy movements in Eastern Europe
solidified as well.”
“My sense is that Davis and Manafort, who
were already doing pro-Putin work against
American national interests, were using
potential meetings with McCain --- who
didn't know this and neither did we until
after the fact -- as bait to secure more
rubles from the oligarchs,” said Weaver.
Weaver stated in June that “U.S.
intelligence raised concerns to McCain’s
staff about the Davis Manafort work.”
CNN revealed this week that the FBI also sought a FISA
warrant from the courts to wiretap Manafort in 2014,
which was then under former FBI Director James Comey.
The FBI's wiretap allegedly ended for lack of evidence.
But then in 2016, the FBI allegedly sought a second FISA
warrant to wiretap Manafort, which continued until early
this year, according to CNN.
 Donald Trump And The Depressing
Politicization Of Everything
One Reason The President Cannot Resist Commenting On Every Issue In
American Life Is That He Seemingly Cannot Stand The Actual Work
Of American Politics.
Derek Thompson
Sep 23, 2017

In response to Trump, LeBron James, the basketball

In a flurry of comments historically unsuited to any head
of state, yet hardly shocking for the current American
president, Donald Trump this weekend targeted the two
most popular sports in the country and elicited sharp
criticism from some of their most important figures.
superstar whose Cleveland Cavaliers are rivals of the
Warriors, called the president a “bum” on Twitter. The
basketball star also pointed out the fecklessness of
revoking an invitation after the other party has already
declined. (Trump’s you-can’t-fire-me-because-I-quit
instinct here recalls his earlier announcement to dissolve
several business advisory councils, only after one of them
had already disbanded.)

On Friday, Trump encouraged franchise owners in the

National Football League to fire players who protest
during the national anthem.

“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL

owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the
field right now, out. He’s fired,’” the
president said at an Alabama rally.
Trump’s comment provoked Roger Goodell, the typically
reticent commissioner of the NFL, to issue a strong
statement condemning the president’s divisive language.
The comment was particularly surprising, since most NFL
owners who elect the league commissioner are staunch
Republicans. Many of the most prominent owners donated
to the Trump campaign.
Trump was undeterred. On Saturday, he disinvited the
NBA champion Golden State Warriors from the White
House, in a tweet. This came after several players,
including star guard Stephen Curry, suggested that they
would skip the ceremonial visit.
143
What is the meaning of these seemingly frivolous
skirmishes with athletes and sports leagues? His true
motivations aren’t clear, but his behavior does fit a pattern.
As Adam Serwer wrote here, there is a clear racial element
to Trump’s pronouncements. When the NFL star Tom
Brady, a white player, skipped his championship team’s
White House visit, the president was silent. (Brady has
described Trump as a “good friend,” and at one point
displayed a “Make America Great Again” hat in his
locker.) When Warriors star Stephen Curry, a black man,
announced his intention to do the same, the president
called him out on Twitter and rescinded the team’s
invitation. In calling for NFL owners to fire protesting
players, the president encourages an overwhelmingly white
ownership group to disemploy members of
overwhelmingly black NFL players union. As Serwer
wrote, Trump’s instant criticism of Curry and black NFL
players stands in stark contrast to his infamous hesitation
to condemn white supremacists and neo-Nazis.
Another reason that the president cannot resist
commenting on every non-political issue in American life
is that he seemingly cannot stand the actual work of
American governance—a preference made salient at a
moment when lawmakers are busy trying to repeal the
signature legislative achievement of Trump’s predecessor.
Several Republican lawmakers said the president never
mastered the details of health-care policy. The president’s
recent NFL commentary suggests that national anthem
protests, on the other hand, are a debate he can engage
with.
As a candidate, Trump promised to take a firm leadership
role in changing American health care, tax policy,
infrastructure spending, drug abuse, and regional
inequality. But as president, Trump has given no national
address endorsing a specific health-care plan. He has given
no national address endorsing a specific tax-reform plan.
His administration has no clear plan to begin rebuilding
American infrastructure, no real urgency to address the
opioid crisis, and no outline to confront the economic
issues that supposedly buffeted his candidacy, like regional
inequality. Instead, the president has been more inclined to
144
reserve the precious power of his bully pulpit to target his
nemeses, by name, as in the case of Colin Kaepernick and
Stephen Curry.
It has been said that the age of Trump is the politicization
of everything. The claim is impossible to dispute,
especially one week after an Emmy’s ceremony that felt
like an extended presidential roast. But it’s important to
note that Trump is choosing to politicize sports and
entertainment, not only because he is inclined toward
controversy, but also because he is so demonstrably
uninterested in actual policy and the political process.
Nobody is forcing the president to morph into a sports-
radio commentator. It is merely the role that best suits the
skills that come most naturally to the former game-show
host. Consider the simple, uncontroversial fact that in his
ninth month in office, the U.S. president has a clearer
position on Stephen Curry’s White House clearance than
on any single detail of health care or tax reform. Trump is
so bored by the quotidian demands of his surprisingly
“complicated” job, which requires guiding policy through
a complex political process, that he uses his position to
instead harass Americans on the internet. Judging by the
attention his sports commentary received this weekend,
one can assume that Trump’s shock-jock-in-chief routine
will be a long-running show.
 Deep State Tries To Stall Clinton & Obama -Linked
Anti-Trump Dossier Investigation
By DCwhispers
Posted On September 23, 2017
High-ranking figures within the U.S. government were
actively working against the Donald Trump campaign for
POTUS. This effort took place over several months,
including illegal surveillance of private citizens as well as
widespread collusion with influential Establishment/Social
Media figures.
And now the Deep State is trying desperately to cover its
tracks.
Showdown Looms Over Trump Dossier;
FBI Misses Third Deadline To Turn Over
Subpoenaed Documents
A third deadline has now passed for the
FBI and Justice Department to give the
House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed
documents related to the Trump dossier.
And for a third time, the bureau has not
produced the material.
…The Russia allegations were compiled by
a former British spy, Christopher Steele,
who was commissioned by the opposition
research firm Fusion GPS, which is thought
to have been paid for the work by wealthy
supporters of Hillary Clinton. The FBI
reportedly considered taking over the
dossier project in the fall of 2016, when the
campaign was at its height, leading Senate
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck
Grassley to say the dossier matter raised
“questions about the FBI’s independence
from politics.”
145
…Both Grassley and the House
Intelligence Committee have been
interested in learning if the FBI ever used
the “salacious and unverified” dossier as a
basis for requesting surveillance on anyone
in the Trump circle. Those questions only
intensified this week with reports that the
FBI wiretapped Trump associate and
former campaign chairman Paul Manafort
during the transition period.
Four weeks ago, on Aug. 24, the House
Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the
FBI and Justice Department, seeking all
internal FBI reports “incorporating, relying
on, or referring to” information provided by
Steele, his sources, or Fusion GPS. The
committee also asked for documents on
any FBI or Justice “efforts to corroborate,
validate, or evaluate” Steele’s information.
And the subpoena sought any surveillance
applications that included any information
or were based on any information, provided
by Steele.
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin
Nunes originally set a Sept. 1 deadline for
production of the dossier documents. The
FBI did not comply. Nunes then extended
the deadline to Sept. 14. The FBI did not
comply. Then Nunes extended the deadline
again, to Sept. 22. Now, again, the FBI has
not complied.
————–
The reason for the delay is simple. The fabricated “Trump
dossier” represents a direct link between the anti-Trump
factions within the U.S. government, the Hillary Clinton
campaign, and the then-Obama White House. Some very
powerful forces want this evidence buried – forever.
The will of the voters was nearly supplanted by a small
group of powerful elites. Those elites have since retreated
back into the shadows and want nothing to do with the
light of truth shining upon them. The entirety of the false
Trump-Russia narrative has been little more than providing
cover for their criminal wrongdoing.
 How Obama Is Funding
The Anti-Trump Resistance
By Paul Sperry
September 23, 2017 | 11:27am
Wall Street might be shocked to learn it is helping bankroll
the anti-Trump “resistance” movement that’s aggressively
fighting policies it favors — including corporate tax cuts
and the repeal of Obama-era banking and health-care
regulations.
The Obama administration’s massive shakedown of Big
Banks over the mortgage crisis included unprecedented
back-door funding for dozens of Democratic activist
groups who were not even victims of the crisis.
At least three liberal nonprofit organizations the Justice
Department approved to receive funds from multibillion-
dollar mortgage settlements were instrumental in killing
the ObamaCare repeal bill and are now lobbying against
GOP tax reform, as well as efforts to rein in illegal
immigration.
An estimated $640 million has been diverted into what
critics say is an improper, if not unconstitutional, “slush
fund” fed from government settlements with JPMorgan
Chase and Co., Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp.,
according to congressional sources.
The payola is potentially earmarked for third-party interest
groups approved by the Justice Department and HUD
without requiring any proof of how the funds will be spent.
Many of the recipients so far are radical leftist
organizations who solicited the settlement cash from the
administration even though they were not parties to the
lawsuits, records show.
146
“During the Obama administration, groups
committed to ‘revolutionary social change’
sent proposals and met with high-level
HUD and Justice Department officials to try
to get their pieces of the settlement pie,”
Cause of Action Institute vice president
Julie Smith told The Post.
Some of the chosen beneficiaries are now actively
militating against the Trump administration and its
policies, including:
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA
The Hispanic-rights group strenuously protested the
Republican-led “skinny” repeal of the Affordable Care Act
after receiving at least $1.5 million from the Obama
regime’s bank settlement funds, congressional researchers
say.
The notoriously radical organization, which advocates on
behalf of illegal immigrants, argued the Trump proposal
would have a “harmful impact” on the Hispanic
community, including stripping potentially “8 million
Latinos” of medical coverage.
“The Latino community cannot afford a
repeal of the ACA,” La Raza warned its
members, while encouraging them to fight
the legislation in email alerts.
In July, the group held a large rally to protest the repeal
effort in Arizona — GOP Sen. John McCain’s home state.
The event is said to have influenced McCain’s decision to
cast the deciding vote to kill the proposal.
La Raza has a long and checkered history of promoting
illegal immigration and advocating for welfare benefits
and even driver’s licenses for undocumented Latino
immigrants. Currently, it’s lobbying (under a new and less
controversial name, UnidosUS) against what it calls “the
Trump administration’s senseless and Draconian anti-
immigrant policies,” fighting specifically GOP bills “to
fund [the] immoral border wall” with Mexico.
“President Trump has again chosen to
appease the bigots in his base,” La Raza
 asserted in a statement posted on its
website. “It’s time to translate injustice into
action.”
During last year’s presidential campaign, La Raza’s
Chicago branch was among the groups that deployed
thousands of protesters to the University of Illinois at
Chicago, forcing then-candidate Trump to cancel a
scheduled event there for safety reasons.
La Raza works closely with the Congressional Hispanic
Caucus and has teamed up with the anti-Trump resistance
group, Indivisible, which was co-founded by La Raza
alumnus Angel Padilla. Indivisible is working with La
Raza and its affiliates to make sure “any bill that punishes
sanctuary cities never goes to Trump’s desk to become
law.” They are encouraging activists to send postcards
with pre-printed messages on immigration and health care
to moderate GOP senators.
NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE
After receiving at least $1.2 million from the bank-
settlement slush fund, the African-American advocacy
group solicited its supporters to oppose efforts to repeal
ObamaCare by signing a letter to senators arguing
“African-Americans stand to be disproportionately
impacted.” It claimed more than 5 million black people
would lose coverage under repeal legislation.
NATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT
COALITION
Since hauling in at least $2.6 million in funds under
settlement in the Obama-era mortgage suits, the liberal
housing-rights group has slammed tax-reform proposals by
the Trump administration as unfair, while trying to block
efforts to privatize mortgage giants Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, claiming doing so would “deepen the racial
wealth gap.”
NCRC is also actively lobbying against regulatory repeal
of many provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act.
The Washington-based group boasts more than 600
member organizations who lobby lawmakers through list-
.
147
serves, mailings, sign-on letters and conference calls.
Though it’s assumed that funds distributed to such
“qualified organizations” will be used for housing
assistance, the bank-settlement agreements do not enforce
how the funds are spent.
“It stands to reason that some of the settlement funds have
helped bankroll the resistance” bent on stopping the Trump
agenda for America, Competitive Enterprise Institute
senior fellow John Berlau said.
It’s not clear how much money, in all, has been diverted
from settlement funds to these and other left-wing
organizations. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has ordered
a full audit of the funds while discontinuing the practice of
funneling Justice Department settlements to third-party
groups.
“Any settlement funds should go first to the
victims and then to the American people
[through the US Treasury] — not to
bankroll third-party special interest groups
or the political friends of whoever is in
power,” Sessions said in a recent
statement.
Still, The Post has learned that the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau continues to force financial institutions
it prosecutes to donate to third-party community
organizers. More, penalties in such cases are deposited into
the Bureau’s now-$170 million-plus Civil Penalty Fund,
which has, in turn, channeled almost $30 million to
“consumer advocacy” groups.
CFPB director Richard Cordray is an Obama holdover,
whose special five-year term doesn’t expire until 2018.
The Independent Community Bankers of America, a
national voice for more than 5,700 large and small banks,
said it opposes the government practice of providing back-
door funding to unrelated groups.
“ICBA believes the funds should go
towards affected victims,” a spokeswoman
for the banking trade association told The
Post.
 Clapper: Intelligence Community
‘Cast Doubt On The Legitimacy' Of Trump's Victory
By Josh Delk
09/23/17 10:50 AM EDT

that he thinks that implication concerns Trump more than

anything else.

"And I think that above all else is what

concerned him, and I think that transcends,
unfortunately, the real concern here, which
is Russian interference in the political
process, which by the way is going to
continue," Clapper said.

Trump has repeatedly dismissed reports of Russian

attempts to influence the election, referring to the
investigations into Russian meddling on Friday as a
"hoax," and accusing the media of biased coverage.
The former director of National Intelligence said that the
intelligence community's conclusion that Russians sought
to influence the 2016 election "cast doubt on the
legitimacy" of President Trump's victory.

"Our intelligence community assessment

did, I think, serve to cast doubt on the
legitimacy of his victory in the election,"
James Clapper said in a CNN interview on
Friday night.

Clapper oversaw the January report that concluded, in a

consensus between the CIA, NSA and FBI, that Russia Clapper said that when they briefed the president on the
carried out a deliberate and multifaceted attempt to report in January, Trump was
influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
"very solicitous, courteous, even
The report found convincing evidence that Russia had complimentary. And he did listen. Frankly,
specifically worked to aid Donald Trump in winning the the evidence that we provided in detail,
presidency. which of course we couldn't expose
publicly, was pretty overwhelming."
While the report did not find evidence that Russians had
actually influenced the results of the election, Clapper said
.

148
 Trump Trounces "Hypocrite" Mccain, Thinks Rand Paul
"May Find A Way" To Save Obamacare Repeal Bill
By Tyler Durden
Sep 23, 2017 4:00 PM

In a surprising demonstration of wit, President Donald

Trump told a crowd of rowdy Alabamians Friday night
that it would be amusingly “ironic” if Kentucky Senator
Rand Paul offered to vote for the Republicans’
floundering Graham-Cassidy health-care bill after
John McCain blindsided the administration by
withdrawing his support On Friday. The two senators,
Trump explained, do not get along. And by swooping in to
save the Republicans’ Obamacare repeal-and-replace effort
at the last second, Paul would be coronated a hero. The tweet was part of a series about the Graham Cassidy
bill, which was effectively killed on Friday when McCain
withdrew his support. In the series, Trump took shots at
McCain, and also Alaska Moderate Lisa Murkowski, who
opposes the bill. The third Republican “no” vote belongs
to Sen Susan Collins of Maine.

Trump began by bashing McCain for opposing repeal

After saying earlier this year that he is determined to win
Paul’s vote on health-care, the president appears to be
making good on his word, launching what appears to be a
personal charm offensive to try and win the support of one
of the most intransigent Republican senators. That
campaign continued Saturday morning, when the president
tweeted that he “might have” a way to finally win the
Kentucky senator’s vote.
and replace after campaigning on repealing Obamacare
during his most recent Senatorial bid. The president also
warned that McCain’s decision could elicit substantial
political backlash in his state as premiums
skyrocket…although, given his recent brush with brain
cancer, we doubt McCain is still motivated by these types
of political considerations…particularly after opposing a
bill sponsored by his close friend, South Carolina Sen.
Lindsey Graham.

In a plug for Graham Cassidy, Trump said adopting a

“I know Rand Paul and I think he may find a way to get system of large block grants to states would be “a good
there for the good of the Party!” thing to do.”

149
 The clock on those rules runs out at the end of the month,
effectively closing the Republicans’ window to pass a
repeal and replace bill – for now, at least.

Of course, on Friday, Paul reaffirmed his opposition to the

bill in a series of tweets on Friday, saying he "wouldn't be
bullied" into supporting it after Trump had admonished
him via twitter earlier in the week.

In a shot at Murkowski, Trump tweeted that Alaskans

would be angry after their premiums skyrocket 200%,
implying that they would express that anger by voting
against their senator. But “Lisa M” still has a chance to be
a hero by changing her mind and voting for the bill.

So, has Trump found a way to save the repeal and replace
effort by turning Paul? Maybe, maybe not. As the public is
well aware, Trump is fond of bluffing.

Of course, the math is simple:

Republicans have 52 seats and need 50
senators to support the bill, which
would require Vice President Pence to
break a tie, under the special budget
rules being used to avoid a Democratic
filibuster.
That sounds like a "hard pass" to us.

150
 Trump Bars Breitbart From Alabama
Rally As Feud With Bannon Escalates
By Tyler Durden
Sep 23, 2017 9:15 PM

Apparently, this is what Steve Bannon meant when he

swore he would never turn on his old boss during a series
of interviews he gave after leaving the West Wing.

The simmering feud between Breitbart

and President Donald Trump intensified
on Friday as the Trump communications
team barred a Breitbart reporter from
the press pool during a Trump rally in
Alabama, where the president was
campaigning for Luther Strange (aka
"Big L") - his pick to permanently fill the
Alabama senate seat vacated by
Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Trump announced his support for Strange weeks ago,

eliciting howls of outrage from Bannon and Breitbart, who
have accused Strange of being a “swamp creature” and
blasted him for his association with former Alabama Gov.
Robert Bentley, who resigned earlier this year following a
widely publicized sex scandal. Strange served as attorney
general of Alabama (Sessions’ old job) under Bentley, and
has been working with Trump for months after being
appointed by Bentley to temporarily fill Sessions' old seat.

But for better or worse, Strange is Trump's man - for now,

at least - and the president showered him with praise
during the rally. But while cycling through his greatest hits
(everything from the second amendment, to Hillary-
bashing, to his promised border wall), he found time to slip
in a subtle dig at Bannon, joking that he had "fired" certain
former staffers for disloyalty.

Bannon and Breitbart have consistently

supported Alabama Supreme Court Roy
Moore, who will face off against Strange
in Tuesday's crucial Republican runoff
primary.

Anyone who has closely followed the many staffing

changes at the White House will, of course, remember that
Bannon and the White House communications department
have offered conflicting accounts of the terms of his
A similar ambiguity exists surrounding the terms of
departure, with Bannon insisting that he left voluntarily,
while the communications staff have suggested that he was Bannon loyalist and former Breitbart employee Sebastian
fired. Gorka's departure, who, as luck would have it, appeared on
Fox Business just minutes before Trump took the stage to
slam the president over his support for Strange.
151
In a brief segment, Gorka criticized Strange for his
association with Bentley and claimed that Moore was the
true “MAGA” candidate.
***
Of course, when Bannon – who is back running Breitbart –
promised that he wouldn’t use the website as a cudgel
against Trump, he did so with the caveat that Breitbart
would hold the administration accountable should it
abandon the nationalist, populist agenda that Trump
promised the American people during the campaign.
To wit, Breitbart has become
increasingly frustrated with Trump’s
perceived abdication of his nationalist
agenda by sending more troops to
Afghanistan (after promising to bring troops
home) and, more intolerably, his decision
to allow DACA to be preserved in law by
striking a deal with “Chuck and Nancy.”
And now it’s decided to turn its guns on Trump, publishing
now fewer than hald a dozen anti-Strange or anti-Trump
headlines during the Trump rally last night.
152
And now, Axios is reporting that Steve
Bannon has been confirmed to headline
a Roy Moore rally in Alabama Sunday
night, alongside Phil Robertson of the
popular show “Duck Dynasty.”
Axios, which noted that Strange is also the pick of
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a perennial Bannon
foe, explained that “for Bannon to make a rare public
appearance in such close proximity to Trump shows how
invested he is in the race specifically, and attacking
McConnell more generally.” But in attacking McConnell,
in this instance, he is also striking at Trump.
In keeping with his promise to always support Trump
against the establishment forces that Bannon says are
trying to co-opt the Trump presidency, Axios reported that
the Bannon camp is trying to spin the attacks against
Strange as an indirect way of “supporting” Trump.
"Steve is coming to Alabama to support
President Trump against the Washington
establishment and Mitch McConnell. Steve
views Judge Moore as a fierce advocate
of Trump and the values he campaigned
on."
To be sure, Breitbart’s strategy may be working. Trump
appeared to admit during the rally last night that his
Strange endorsement may have been a mistake, and that he
would support Moore if he wins.
While the crowd at Friday’s rally cheered mightily for
Trump, the cheers for his chosen candidate were less
enthusiastic. As of Saturday afternoon, Moore leads
Strange by nearly 9 percentage points in the
RealClearPolitics polling average.

Whoever wins Tuesday’s primary has a virtual lock on the Given Trump’s distaste for “losers”, we imagine it’s not
senate seat. And as the race draws closer, we expect to out of the question.
hear more from Trump. But will Breitbart succeed in
convincing him to change his endorsement?

153
 Here’s Why NSC Staffer Rich Higgins Says He Was Fired
From The Trump Administration [VIDEO]
Ginni Thomas - Contributor
8:07 PM 09/23/2017
Rich Higgins Interview With Ginni Thomas TheDCNF/Sean Moody
National Security adviser H.R. McMaster fired Rich
Higgins, an Army veteran and former national security
surrogate for Trump, on July 21 for a memo he claims
captured the unprecedented cultural and ideological threats
meant to undermine President Donald Trump’s
governance.
When Ezra Cohen from the National Security Council was
fired a week later, Higgins’ memo and the back-to-back
firings sparked instant intrigue on social media. “Meet The
Press” host Chuck Todd invited McMaster to do an
interview about Higgins’ firing in August, and both men
called into question Higgins’ work and reputation.
Since then, Higgins reports that he has had no explanation
for the transpired events, saying “I’m still waiting for
Chuck Todd to give me a phone call” to explain what
really happened, he says in this exclusive interview with
The Daily Caller News Foundation. Higgins also claims
that no mainstream reporter will contact him, further
confirming the total corruption of the fourth estate that is
deceiving the American people.
Higgins explains that what America is experiencing is far
beyond any normal politics. As a military strategic
planner, the venom, vitriol and barrage of narratives
directed by the media and cultural elites at a duly-elected
president can be seen in an ideological light. Higgins
explains that the “nature of the president’s election
informed the reaction to his assumption of power.”
Globalists and those who prefer international governance
to constitutional are repelled by the notion of national
sovereignty and American interests. Trump’s campaign
refrain to “build a wall,” Higgins explains, was a clever
boiling down of sovereignty to the natural need for a
nation to enforce and have borders.
154
He says he was fired for remaining based in reality and not
succumbing to the politically correct, multicultural self-
delusion popular in the governing elite.
“There are a lot of external influences —
whether that be oil wealth from the Middle
East, our own ideologically incapable folks
who, you know, because they exist in the
post-modernist multi-culturalist worldview,
they can’t believe that an enemy really
would fight you and believe he has to kill
you because of his religion,” Higgins said.
He also calls on Trump supporters to have
“strategic patience” with Trump, who came
in as a classic counter-revolutionary. It’s
going to be a long fight, Higgins says, but
he and others plan to continue it on the
outside. Losses will be inevitable because
of some internal weak links and other
challenges, but he tells Trump supporters
to “soldier up.”
Higgins encourages more people to read more about
information campaigns, ideological battles and the long
term efforts from the Frankfurt school and liberal
intellectuals to use cultural Marxism subversion to subvert
American exceptionalism via political turmoil and
manipulation of public opinion.
For more on influence operations and ideological
subversion, listen to Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, who
discusses the demoralization of America that radically
altered forms of government.
For more on Higgins, see view my last interview with him
here.
Read the full transcript starting on next page.
Videographer Sean Moody is credited with the video work
for this piece.
Mrs. Thomas does not necessarily support or endorse the
products, services or positions promoted in any
advertisement contained herein, and does not have control
over or receive compensation from any advertiser.
 VIDEO OF RICH HIGGINS and GINNI THOMAS
DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION
September 23, 2017
[BEGIN FILE]
RICH HIGGINS:
The people who put their faith in Trump – I mean, I can speak for
myself, the people who put their faith in Trump put it in him
because he is a fighter, okay? And the thing about the nature of
his election is in taking on the establishment Republicans, the
establishment Dems, the Washington political power class --
which is what he’s now up against. Every, you know, you don’t
get to decide how long or how hard the fight’s going to be. No
soldier who jumps out of an airplane and onto a battlefield know
when the fight’s over. And I think you have to go into this fight
recognizing that it’s a fight.
Steve Bannon at CPAC, back last year gave a talk with Reince
Priebus and in it he said, you thought they were going to give you
your country back without a fight, you’re sadly mistaken. And I
think we need to recognize that we’re in a fight, we don’t know
how long it’s going to take, it isn’t going to be easy. You don’t get
to hit it on Google and get the answer and you’re going to have to
actually do some work. Now, soldier up. I mean, that’s what I
would tell the people who are, you know, if they claim to be
Trump supporters, we’re going to have losses. You know, my
colleagues and I who are working on the jihadi issue, yeah, sure,
we all got purged under General McMaster. But the reality is, all
of us are still in the fight and we’re not going to quit. And the
country deserves that.
Things like “build the wall” are good slogans. Because I think it
reached a large number of people with something as complex as
the sovereignty of a nation. You know, you can’t go around
explaining sovereignty and, you know, how global cultural
migration – you don’t want to get into that. It’s a simple thing that
Americans can understand and it’s something that I think I’m
hoping people who are curious about this will go and they’ll dig a
little bit deeper.
“Lock her up” in terms of a slogan is, you know, it’s fun, right? So,
there’s an energy that the crowd gets from doing it, you know,
picking on your opponent, etcetera. But in order to take these
difficult political concepts like rule of law, right, you know, and
equal protection under the law, and boil that down to something
that a campaign can use that everybody can say that fits on a
bumper sticker, I mean, it’s a really important part of any
movement.
And I think we need to recognize that the movement – and I think
this is what Steve Bannon is beginning to work on and others
who have left the administration, maybe prematurely, but in fact I
don’t think that we’ve really left the administration. I think the
recognition is that the fight remains outside, you know?
And until you get Congress back and representing its people, we
have to fight from there. The President can serve as maybe a
155
break. He can serve as a cheerleader. He can serve as a leader
over institutional things. And, he’s already begun to do some
stuff. But he really needs, and people need to recognise that
power in this town flows from Congress. And it’s up to the
American people to actually bring that back into place.
A campaign is – a campaign is not a good reflection of the reality
if you’re actually trying to manage the institutions of government.
It’s just not real. It’s not real. And so where, you know, where you
have right now – so you have the old adage, your team is as
strong as your weakest link, and right now, we have a lot of weak
links.
And the President, I think, you know, personally, I’m glad to see
him at least attempting to make an effort at bipartisanship.
Whether or not that will succeed, I don’t know. But the reality is,
you know, Ronald Reagan didn’t get anything he wanted to get
done without Tip O’Neill. And, you know, who is going to be
President Trump’s Tip O’Neill? I don’t know the answer to that
question, but the fact that the President seems to be looking for
answers, I’m not going to belittle him or besmirch him for that.
In terms of specific policy issues, I remain concerned that – and
where I see this happening especially is on the radical Islam
issue and I see it happening a little bit less along the economy,
you know, on the economy issue. We continue to allow this, you
know, the perpetuation of this mythology as it comes to the
formulation of security strategy policy
regarding this issue. And I, for the life of me, cannot understand
why we cannot just get to reality-based decision making when it
comes to this problem.
My personal opinion is that there are a lot of external influences -
- whether that be oil wealth from the Middle East, our own
ideologically incapable folks who, you know, because they exist
in the post-modernist multiculturalist worldview, they can’t believe
that an enemy really would fight you and believe he has to kill
you because of his religion. Look, I’m not some conspiracy
theorist, I’m a fact-based guy. My biggest concern is that the
McCarthyists on the left – and some on the right, have begun,
you know, they’ve purged people who simply want to introduce
facts into the discussion.
GINNI THOMAS:
When McMaster went on “Meet the Press” with Chuck Todd in
August, when he was asked about your firing, what he said was,
he made it sound like the memo you seemed to get fired about
represented “a narrow agenda” that wouldn’t help the president
and wouldn’t serve the nation. And when Chuck Todd asked
about it, he made it sound like having read it that he was glad
that somebody like this was fired. Tell us what happened and
what you were trying to convey, and what you would say to
McMaster today.

RICH HIGGINS:
What I worry about is where General McMaster says, I’m
“narrow-minded,” my voice, my opinion, my facts, my studies, my
twenty years of experience of working with this problem is now
not at the discussion table. And the reason that it’s not at the
discussion table is because it’s fact-based, not opinions and not
sold to us under some rubric that, oh, you know, the feel-
goodisms that people want to hear.
We need to take a hard line national security perspective at
things. And that’s not to be narrow-minded. That’s to be fact-
based. So if fact-based means narrow-minded, then, yes, I’m
narrow-minded. But I’m going to operate in reality and I think that,
you know, when you work in something as serious as national
security you’re required to do so.
After I was let go on the 21st [July 2017], and about a week and
a half later, Ezra Cohen, who was the senior director for INTEL at
the National Security Council was let go. At the same time, the
Atlantic had been calling me for about a week trying to run a
story. And, you know, I basically had no comment. No comment,
no comment. Well, that day – or it may have been the night
before, I got a phone call from the author of the article saying,
hey, I’m going to publish the article. Yeah, okay. Well, that
Wednesday comes and Ezra Cohen gets dragged into General
McMaster’s office and basically told he’s leaving. And he leaves
the building about 1:30 in the afternoon. Well, interestingly, the
Atlantic article drops at about 1:30 that afternoon.
By five pm that afternoon it had seven million Twitter
impressions. And a friend of mine who tracks media and media
exposure on Twitter said that by midnight that night it had
bloomed out to sixty-five million Twitter impressions.
So what that tells me is that the American public is deeply
concerned about what’s going on, as they should be, but I think
at the same time we need to remember, this is going to be a long
fight. All of us inside know that. And I think, you know, keep the
faith and stay focused on the long-term objective, recognize that
we’re going to have some short-term losses.
I’m still waiting for Chuck Todd to give me a phone call. You
know, I think I should get some equal exposure to General
McMaster if he’s going to invoke my name and my work on the
show. The mainstream media doesn’t want to discuss this
because I believe the mainstream media is almost ninety to
ninety-five percent complicit in, particularly, the Russia hacked
the election nonsense. Which is just, to me, it’s unforgiveable. It’s
a complete deception against the American public. And, you
know, it’s the total corruption of the fifth estate.
I’m seen as somebody who takes a hard line on radical Islam,
who understands the Islamic threat doctrine, and that that memo
gave them cause to remove me or at least some sort of cause to
remove me, but it was really always about the terrorism issue.
I guess the greatest concern I have continues to be our response
to the Islamic movement, which is what they call it -- the Islamic
156
movement -- reflects an organizational system of systems
mindset. And we have all these concocted terms we come up
with to explain these groups, right? And I think if you look at any,
you know, Rand just did some studies on this, I mean, you know,
explosive – exponential almost growth in terrorist organizations
and individuals aligned
with the movement is just unbelievable. Particularly since 2010 in
the Obama administration’s failed policy regarding the Arab
Spring. But we still don’t have experts inside the system.
I guess the simplest way to explain it to your audience would be
we’re now sixteen years post 9-11. Sixteen years after the start
of the Cold War, we had thousands and thousands of experts on
communism, socialism, Marxism, Sovietology, thousands and
thousands of linguists, and they weren’t all former Russians.
They were Americans who were trained on these doctrines and
trained in the languages and they were white guys and girls and
nobody said anything about it.
Today we are excluded from understanding this stuff. And I think
it’s some sort of, you know, a sick self-hatred that’s set in upon
us. The number of experts that we have inside this system is – I
can count it on my hands. I mean, it’s that small. And what
concerns me is, as we go forward, I don’t see any priority, you
know, any priority being given right now, whether you’re talking
about the Defense Department or the intelligence community, at
fixing this shortfall. And that is something that we’re going to
need. If we’re in this, you know, we’re going to be fighting these
guys for a long time. Well, we’re going to need a cadre that’s
capable of it. We do not have it today, not at all.
GINNI THOMAS:
The seven-page memo that you wrote, Rich, was stunning, was
masterful, and I just think people may not read it or they may not
understand what they’re reading. What did you hope to convey
now that it’s out in the public sphere to President Trump and his
team?
RICH HIGGINS:
Well, I think the first thing people need to know about the memo
is that it was written in a personal capacity. It wasn’t something I
was working on at the White House. It was something I was
working on outside the White House with people I had been
affiliated with during the course of the campaign. And the genesis
of the memo was, you know, in observing what was happening to
the President where you couldn’t turn on your Twitter feed,
Facebook, any mainstream media without hearing this consistent
deluge of “Russia hacked the election,” “Russia did this,” “Russia
did that.”
I mean, just complete and utter barrage of information, trying to
get people to accept the fact that the President was illegitimate,
that he was really working for Putin, you know, and all this other
nonsense. And what we wanted to do was lay out how that
narrative was being enforced by the mainstream media and why
the various power centers of government and of corporations,
etcetera, may be allowing that to happen or at least not speaking
up as vocally as one might have expected.
The memo, you know, allegedly it reached the President – I don’t
know whether that’s true or not. If it did, I’m flattered, if it didn’t,
that’s okay, too. The fact of the matter is that it bothers me that,
a) when they dismissed me they never gave me cause. They just
said, you’re out. And only later, you know, about a week later, did
I find out why I had even been removed.
I wanted them to understand that what they saw happening to the
President was not reflective of politics as usual in Washington.
You know, I mean, we need to remember President Trump is a
businessman, okay? And I think his perspective is one of a
businessman. He’s used to being at the top of a pyramid and he,
you know, he fights downhill in his organization and in parallel
with other organizations. Now he’s fighting uphill. You know,
going back to Omaha Beach, right? We’re going into Omaha
Beach.
And I wanted to make sure they understood that the nature of the
President’s election informed the reaction to his assumption of
power -- and what that reaction looked like and how it
manifested. So by explaining the operating environment that he
was coming into, which was informed by these cultural Marxist
memes and how those cultural Marxist memes could be
deployed in the form of “Russia hacked the election,” etcetera, in
order to subvert, delegitimize, etcetera. I was trying to convey to
people in the campaign the seriousness of the situation because
it was not, you know, something that, I mean, I’ve never seen
anything like it before. Maybe somebody else has, I never have.
Going forward, I think, you know, my hope is that people will take
the time to educate themselves. I don’t know everything about
this stuff. I’m the first guy to admit that, you know, I have some
knowledge, but I don’t know everything. And people who are
interested in this can go – they can read about the Frankfurt
School and they can
understand Marcuse and they can understand how Antifa – I
mean, it’s amazing to me. You can go back and look at history.
Antifa is, you know, is operating inside Germany in the 1930s
and the Nazis actually rise in opposition to Antifa. And you see
Antifa here on the streets today. And you say to yourself, can you
go back and just study the history, people have to do their
homework on this. And I think if we can – if we can at least incite
some curiosity in some young people to take the time to learn
this stuff, the country and the nation will be better off for it.
GINNI THOMAS:
Shocking to many of us was when Steve Bannon gave the “60
Minutes” interview that said within forty-eight hours there was a
strategic decision that they would allow the establishment to play
a big part in personnel. And that dispelled all the transition work
that had gone on up until the election. As someone who got in
after really struggling to get in, after working in the campaign,
Rich, who’s winning in the war on the swamp? Is the swamp
winning? Is Donald Trump winning? Where’s the battle and how
important was that early decision?
157
RICH HIGGINS:
Well, I think Steve coined it, right, he said” the original sin” of the
administration, right? I think, you know, the President came – the
President-elect at the time, came down to Washington, he had a
meeting here at the RNC and some deals were made there in
order to help form up a government that, you know. Whether it
was idealism – I mean, you know, I’m not going to assess what
drove that decision making. Steve made it sound like it was a
pretty pragmatic decision in his interview on “60 Minutes”.
I think guys who’d been battling the swamp for years on specific
policy issues, we recognized and a lot of us were saying to one
another, they don’t understand. We are going into Omaha Beach.
You know, and we were putting it out there, people saying, look,
you know, on November 9th, we boarded the LSTs and we are
going into Omaha Beach. And on January 20th, we’re going to hit
the shore. And what we saw happen, I mean, literally within days,
even during the transition, we were taking fire and guys who had
been with the President all along, throughout the campaign, were
getting taken out. You know, whether it be, you know, Steve
being the latest to leave, but, you know, early on, you know,
Monica Crowley, General Flynn, and several others.
So I think what we’re looking at right now is a long term
campaign has to be conducted if the people – it’s really up to the
people, right? I mean, I can tell you my personal opinion. But the
American public has to make the decisions to what they want. Do
they want a government that represents their interests? Do they
want a government that’s reflective of the core American idea?
Do they want a government that reflects an economic nationalist
perspective that seeks the benefit of all here, that prioritizes
citizenship, that recognizes sovereignty, includes borders, and
common laws, etcetera? Or do they want this globalist menu?
You know, and it’s really up to the people to decide. I mean,
that’s – that’s what we want. We want the American people to
make that decision. We don’t want it made for them by politicians
beholden to interests that aren’t theirs.
So how long will it take? Ginni, I’m thinking it’s going to take
fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years. It’s a mindset issue. It’s a
concept issue. The American public has to make these decisions,
but they need to be informed in order to be making these
decisions.
GINNI THOMAS:
But we may be in the process of losing our leader that we
thought was going to stomp down on all the pressures that
you’ve just described and that your memo talks about. How do
you talk to the Trump voter who thought by “building a wall” and
other phrases that were promised and campaigned on, what do
you say to those people as they watch President Trump not do
what he said he was going to do?
RICH HIGGINS:
I think that the American people need to understand that this is a
long fight. You know, you can’t take the country back in a couple
of months. I mean, we just have to be realistic about that. I don’t
believe even if he’s in office for eight years we’ll have completely
undone the work that’s been, you know, been accomplished by
the other side already.
Strategic patience is necessary with the President. At the same
time, I think that the movement itself needs – is in need of some
self -reflection. And to understand the core of how President
Trump got elected, what do we need to do? Do we need to bring
civics education back? Do we need to understand the concepts
of sovereignty?
I personally believe that President Trump won the election at the
first debate where he wouldn’t raise his hand and say he would
support the Republican candidate. Do you remember that? And I
think that’s where he actually won the election, where he
separated himself from the two party political system. He didn’t
carry Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania through, you
know, some sort of partisan political, you know, rhetoric. He
carried it because he was speaking to Americans about America.
And I think going forward the people who supported Trump need
to recognize that we need people in Congress -- Democrats and
Republicans, not just Republicans, Democrats and Republicans
who are willing to work with him.
GINNI THOMAS:
So help people connect the dots in America. There’s so much
going on. Whether it’s suddenly the emergence of transgender
rights, or the downing of statues or ESPN suddenly becoming left
wing commentators instead of sports people, or the closing down
of free speech on college campuses, or the censorship that’s
happening by media providers to conservative or pro-American
voices. How do you connect dots of what’s happening in America
so fast to the memo that you wrote in the White House?
RICH HIGGINS:
Well, I mean, it goes – it really goes back to the cultural Marxist
concept, right? If you understand that in America, the individual,
and the individual is the sovereign. And, you know, if you go back
and you read – I always try to explain to folks, the idea of
America is in the Declaration of Independence. That’s the idea.
The Constitution is the legal means, right, that we swear to
protect, because the nation exists under law, we swear to
protect. But we’re protecting the idea.
And when you begin to attack our history, all right, when you
attack the founders, for example, because the cultural norm at
the time included slavery, you know. I had an ancestor that
fought on the side of the North in the Civil War, I don’t have any
issue with, you know, personal guilt about the issue of slavery,
right? And this cultural attempt to kind of impart that upon people,
you see it in the public school system, you see it in the culture
now, it’s really – it’s a direct attack against those foundational
documents and the ideas of those men.
And so when the President, I think, accurately depicts the
situation in Charlottesville where ideologues from both the left
and the right are channelling people to violent action against one
158
another and he comes in and he calls them both out, he is doing
a heroic service and he is pilloried in the media for this. And it is
a reflection of the cultural Marxist memes that drive today’s
national media.
And I think the American public needs to become aware of that.
And my personal opinion is that they are aware of it. They may
not be able to articulate what they see, in terms of the political
warfare or political science rhetoric, etcetera, but they feel it. So
trust their instincts and recognize that, you know, the vestige –
the vestiges of America today still are, you know, still are as
strong as ever.
You see it in baseball, you see it in the home schooling
movement, you see it in the people who came out, who hadn’t
voted in decades in some cases, and voted for President Trump.
Who realized we need to move away from these ideologies. The
entire form of government that the founders created depends
upon reason and critical thinking. Without it, it will not work
anymore. And when you see ideologues on both sides, whether
you’re a white supremacist or hardcore Marxist Antifa guys, we
need to push them both out to the margins of society - instead of
bringing one side in and delegitimising the other. That’s just –
that’s just very dangerous for the country going forward.
GINNI THOMAS:
In a culture, Rich, that is – patriotism is on the decline culturally,
what is the best thing about America to you? What are we
fighting for?
RICH HIGGINS:
The thing that concerns me the most, I guess the thing I sense
slipping away is that America was so unique in, a) the time of the
founding, where we had had literally hundreds of years of
colonial self-governance and English common law to frame that.
And, you know, when the founding fathers decided, hey, we’re
going to form a government, they didn’t slapdash something
together in 1775 up in Boston with the Sons of Liberty. They took
thirteen years, you know, and they studied Plato and they studied
Rome and they studied ancient history, Greece, and they used all
that to actually form a republic where the people, the individual
was the sovereign. And the people actually were in charge. And I
think that’s an ethos that today a lot of our government officials
and certainly a lot of our politicians no longer recognize. And I
think it’s a return to that that the President’s campaign
represented.
GINNI THOMAS:
And who are the foreign and domestic threats to America?
RICH HIGGINS:
We, today, in the national security community, see threats from a
nation-state perspective. We always want to look at foreign
powers in terms of their governance structure, their military, their
intelligence apparatus, their economies. But America is
susceptible to other threats as well. Those threats are ideological
in nature, right?
So we have dealt with in the past ideological threats. We fought
the Cold War. And while we fixate today on the USSR and their
nuclear weapons and their armies, they were never our moral
equivalent. And there’s a moral dimension to warfare in the
ideological space. And it’s something that the communists began
to recognize and they’ve infiltrated, you know, in many parts of
our society, through these cultural Marxist memes that I wrote
about in the memo. And it’s understanding that those memes
themselves represent a threat to the national security of the
United States insofar as they subvert our ideology and our form
of governance.
When you’re trying to influence a nation to perform acts or
conduct behaviors that are inimical to their own interests, you do,
you know, influence campaigns, you try and introduce into their
society, into their culture memetics, memes, that over time erode
one’s sense of oneself. And I think it’s this return to, you know,
who we are.
You know, when I was out on the campaign for President Trump,
I would start my speeches, you know, raising money for him or
what not, and I always would say our grandfathers were smarter
than us. And when I would say that, I think it hit people. And then
I’d say it again at the end of the speech and they’d understand
what I meant. And what I was simply getting at was to be an
American.
You know, I’ve met people in Iraq, Afghanistan, France,
Germany, all over the world, they’re Americans. They believe in
the American idea. The government that they may be actually
sitting in right now may not be America, it may not be anything
even close. But we have to reflect upon the fact that we have a
responsibility to this idea.
But what these cultural Marxist memes do is they come in and
they erode our self-confidence in that idea, our faith in that idea.
And when we would do influence operations, you know,
societally, we target, you know. When we were targeting a
society, we would target four specific areas -- students and
youth, labor groups, media and elites. Because we know if you
can get control of those organs of power inside of a nation, you
can purposefully manipulate their perception of events in, you
know, basically to your interests. And we see that going on today.
You know, recently, I’ve been looking back through old
communist archives, back to the House on Un-American
Activities Committee, back to the 1920s and the rise of the
communist movements in Europe. We see reflected today with
groups like Antifa the very same rhetoric that we saw reflected
back in the 1920s, then again the 40s and the 50s. I mean, it is
unbelievable. And for people who are watching this who are
interested, I encourage you to go into the archives and go back
and look at the testimony. For example, Bella Dodd and others
who just absolutely illuminate the case for this is a very real thing
and you see it manifesting itself today.
159
We need to recognize that these revolutionary ideologies work
together because they share a common enemy. They don’t
necessarily share a common end state, all right? In some cases,
they do. In some cases, they don’t. A couple of key things to
remember, Sayyid Qutb, all right, who is the ideological founder,
if you will, of al-Qaeda, his first book is actually called Social
Justice in Islam and it’s how, you know, Marxist socialist
worldviews align with Islam.
Another book that was written in 2003 by Ilyich Sanchez
Ramirez, also known as The Jackal – I think it’s Ilyich Sanchez,
was Revolutionary Islam. It’s in French. It’s Islam Revolutionaire.
But it’s Revolutionary Islam. In it, he
talks about how the Islamic movement can work with leftist and
Marxist groups in the West in furtherance of their overall
objectives.
And you see that taking place in Charlottesville, you know, a few
weeks ago where you have the small, you know, couple hundred
right wing extremist lunatics. You have a large mass, I don’t know
the exact number, of Antifa folks there who are all talking about
taking down Confederate statues. And then you have CAIR,
Hamas, coming up and saying, yeah, we need to tear down all
those statues.
You know, it’s in this battle of information and synchronising
people to action under the rubric of political warfare that these
groups actually coalesce against that core American idea that we
spoke about earlier.
GINNI THOMAS:
Have you ever done politics before or what is your background or
highest and best use?
RICH HIGGINS:
I’m an Army veteran. I spent many years working in the counter-
terrorism community both with the Department of Justice,
Department of Defense, supporting the intelligence community in
myriad projects. But they were mainly focused on tactical
capability development things.
During the course of my professional career with the Pentagon, I
went to the National War College. Degree and masters – a
masters degree in strategic studies there. I think that, you know, I
am not a political animal whatsoever. I recognized the threat that
a possible Clinton administration would represent to the
American, you know, the American nation. And only became
involved in politics because I personally believe – and I think this
is true, that President Trump is himself not an ideologue.
You know, he doesn’t fit in the Democrat or Republican mold.
And when we constantly try and cast him in one of those two
binaries, it doesn’t work.
I’m kind of like that. You know, on social issues, I’m probably
more liberal than most people. On economic and foreign policy
issues, I’m a lot more conservative than most people. And I think
that’s what it means to be an American. You know, you’re – I’m
that five percent in the middle that gets to actually, you know, use
my freedom to decide which path we want to go down. I’m not
hide-bound onto some ideology.
In my professional career, I was always somebody who wanted
to move into the spaces that were innovative, right, pushing out
on the edge. And I think that President Trump represents an
innovative form of political calculus that this country hasn’t really
seen before. You would call it, you know, counter-revolutionary
.
almost in its nature, where he’s trying to return America to its
former self. You know, “make America great again.”
And it’s understanding the underlying political concepts that drive
the President’s campaign and, frankly, his election and how we
actually bring those into policy that is where, you know, it’s the
reason I agreed to go back into government in the first place.
[END OF FILE]

160
 ‘Russia Tried To Hack Election Results’: US Media
Misreports DHS Warning On Voter System ‘Targeting’
Published Time: 23 Sep, 2017 19:28 Edited Time: 24 Sep, 2017 08:25
© Michael Weber / Global Look Press
Misleading reports on Russia’s alleged role in the 2016
presidential election filled US media after DHS warned
several states of “potential targeting” of registration
systems. Some of the states had to rebuff claims of
attempts to tamper with “election results.”
In a statement to media quoted by TechCrunch and
reportedly referring to “21 states,” Homeland Security
spokesman Scott McConnell said the following:
“As part of our ongoing information sharing
efforts, today DHS notified the Secretary of
State or other chief election officer in each
state of any potential targeting we were
aware of in their state leading up to the
2016 election.”
While the statement mentioned neither election hacking
nor Russia, some media outlets hurried to interpret it in a
way matching their own narrative.
“JUST IN: “Russian government cyber
actors” unsuccessfully attempted to hack
2016 election results in Wisconsin, DHS
tells state officials,” NBC Politics tweeted.
161
Reuters outrageously concluded that the affected states
were those
“Russian government hackers targeted in
an effort to sway the 2016 presidential
election in favor of Donald Trump though
no votes were changed.”
ProPublica national politics reporter Jessica Huseman soon
identified the glaring inaccuracy in the NBC tweet,
pointing out that the Wisconsin Elections Commission
(WEC) statement said nothing about attempts to
compromise the election results. Furthermore, the
“Russian government cyber actors” quote appears to come
from a single source: WEC Administrator Michael Haas.
Insisting that NBC should remove the “false” and
“irresponsible” tweet instead of “clarifying” it, Huseman
pointed out that voter registration systems are
“disconnected” from the election results. It turned out that
the original WEC statement also confirmed that no data in
the registration systems was compromised.
Official Twitter for the Wisconsin Elections Commission
retweeted Huseman calling out NBC for spreading false
news.
The WEC statement indirectly quoted the DHS as saying
the alleged hackers scanned internet-connected election
infrastructure for specific vulnerabilities, such as voter
registration databases. It said the attempts to exploit the
vulnerabilities were unsuccessful.
In a somewhat dumbed-down explanation, AP also
clarified that
“being targeted does not mean that
sensitive voter data was manipulated or
results were changed. A hacker targeting a
system without getting inside is similar to a
burglar circling a house checking for
unlocked doors and windows.”
Judd Choate, the president-elect of the US National
Association of State Election Directors confirmed on
Friday:
 “There remains no evidence that the The states named were Alabama, Alaska, Arizona,
Russians altered one vote or changed one California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida,
registration,” according to Reuters. Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia,
The previously-unnamed 21 states were first linked to the Washington and Wisconsin.
alleged Russian interference in the November 2016
election following testimony to Congress in June by the
acting Director of Cyber Division of the department's
Office of Intelligence and Analysis, Samuel Liles.

Liles said 21 states “were potentially

targeted by Russian government-linked
cyber actors.”

A 50-state tally by The Associated Press on Friday showed

election officials in 21 states confirmed their election
systems were "targeted" last year.
.

162
 Make Afghanistan Great Again? Trump Touts ‘Delusional
Gold Rush’ In ‘Graveyard Of Empires’
Published Time: 23 Sep, 2017 19:24 Edited Time: 24 Sep, 2017 08:24
© Ahmad Masood / Reuters
The people of Afghanistan are not going to profit from US
mining rare-earth minerals there: it is always going to be
the elite in that country and the foreign corporations, said
journalist and foreign policy strategist Michael Hughes.
President Trump met with Afghan leader Ashraf Ghani in
New York on Thursday to discuss joint efforts to mine the
country's mineral resources.
According to the US government, Afghanistan has a
trillion dollars' worth of untapped rare-earth minerals,
including those used in the production of electronics. That
is about the same amount the US has spent in the country
since the 2001 invasion.
Last month, President Trump outlined his new strategy for
Afghanistan with thousands of extra troops and no
deadline for a withdrawal, also saying Washington needs
to think about its economic interests.
RT spoke to the political analysts who believe the US
strategy in Afghanistan is shifting towards commercial
goals.
“The only thing I think of is that Trump may
be pushing it out of perception so that it
looks like there is a good reason to stay,”
journalist and foreign policy strategist
Michael Hughes told RT.
“More as a pretext than anything, even for
the people on the right in his Republican
Party that it is profitable to stay here, all the
blood and treasure we’ve sacrificed, we
should get the minerals, not let China profit
all of our hard work. But it is a bit of a
fantasy because there is no evidence that
163
there is anything worth mining, meaning
after the extraction, many economists say,
it may not even be worth the endeavor. It is
a pretext,” he continued.
Hughes says the move is a political tactic by Trump to
show that there is a good reason for Americans to remain
in Afghanistan.
“Does he really believe companies are
going to profit of this? I doubt that.”
It would not surprise me if the US were
interested in trying to exploit mineral
resources in Afghanistan because
Trump is a businessman and he would
naturally take an interest in economic
opportunities in Afghanistan. However, I
think it would be a very bad idea and
very bad policy to try to take advantage
of these mineral reserves. It is very
tempting, because we are talking about
mineral reserves that could be valued
up to two-three trillion dollars. But it is
very dangerous just because is it safe
enough to try to invest all these money
and technology in extracting all these
mineral reserves when you have a
Taliban insurgency that is stronger than
it has ever been. - Michael Kugelman,
senior associate for South Asia with the
Woodrow Wilson Center
Another possible reason for Trump opting to beef up
America’s presence in Afghanistan is the growing
influence of the political and economic powerhouse in the
East.
“That is also part of it – he wants to send a
message to China,” Hughes said.
“There are people advising him like
American Elements or Michael N. Silver
who actually believe that this is all about
countering China strategically. These guys
have a theory, which I think is crazy, that
they need to counter China’s dominance of
rare earths in Afghanistan as a place to do
it, even if they only corner two percent of
the minerals – that is vastly better than
 letting China hold us “hostage”, so to
speak, on rare earth minerals, cause that is
what China has done for years,” he
claimed.
“There is messaging involved and he is
being coached by some people that may
be this is a good long-term industrial
strategic move. It may take years and
decades. But that is a fantasy, too,
because no US corporation thinks out that
far as China does. China looks at the world
in decades, 30-year, 40-year time horizons
and the US corporations are looking for a
return – they aren’t willing to wait that long,”
Hughes said.
Is there any reason to think that
Afghanistan would be able to sustain
this type of very intensive extractions
and excavations of mineral reserves? At
the end of the day, if the US were to go
ahead and try to get to these mineral
reserves, it would be a huge
propaganda victory for the Taliban
because they would say, ‘Look, the
foreign invaders are coming in here to
take away all our riches.’ It would
literally be true. - Michael Kugelman,
senior associate for South Asia with the
Woodrow Wilson Center
Hughes also raised the question as to where the funding for
US mining in Afghanistan will derive from.
164
“The Chinese government is willing to
make strategic investments. Is the US
government and public going to fund these
extraction costs and these long-term
investments? I think that is a fantasy as
well. It is just not the way US companies
operate,” he noted.
“To send a message to China and there
are some people coaching Trump saying
this is going to look brilliant as a long-term
strategic industrial policy-type move. That
is another factor that is working into it,”
Hughes pointed out.
“Let’s face it. It sounds like a cliché and
people roll their eyes, but it is neo-
colonialism. The Afghans, just like oil in
Africa, there is the resource curse: The
people are not going to profit –it will always
be the elite in that country and the foreign
corporations…The Afghans are not going
to benefit from this. If anything, it causes a
gold rush mentality, and because it’s so
valuable it is going to fuel the insurgency,
attract insurgents, even though, at the end
of the day, the question of profitability
remains... If this is some sort of gambit, like
a form of foreign aid, it is totally delusional.
It’s corporations selling [the idea of mining]
and it is not credible to think this will be for
the Afghan people,” he concluded.
 North Korea Official:
Trump On Suicide Mission.
Trump Tweets Response
By Joe Sterling, Taehoon Lee, Stella Ko And Steve Almasy, CNN
Updated 6:02 PM ET, Sun September 24, 2017

Trump took on Twitter Saturday night to respond to Ri's

remarks.

"Just heard Foreign Minister of North Korea

speak at U.N. If he echoes thoughts of
Little Rocket Man, they won't be around
much longer!," Trump wrote.

(CNN)The ongoing war of words between the United

States and North Korea saw several new fiery salvos
Saturday, a day on which the US military, in a show of
force, flew bombers in international airspace over waters
east of North Korea.
The heated remarks also came on a day in which
mysterious seismic activity in North Korea refueled
concerns over the rogue nation's nuclear ambitions.
North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho, speaking
before the United Nations, angrily responded to US
President Donald Trump's UN remarks in which he
referred to Kim Jong Un as "Rocket Man."
Meanwhile, analysts said that seismic activity detected
near the site of North Korea's Punggye-ri nuclear site
might be aftershocks from a nuclear test earlier this month.
Seismic activity is often the first indicator of a nuclear test,
but the magnitudes Saturday were much smaller than
anything declared as a nuclear test in previous years.
North Korea addresses UN, Trump tweets response
At the UN, Ri said that Trump had made a missile attack
on the US mainland more inevitable by insulting the
dignity of North Korea.
"None other than Trump himself is on a
suicide mission," Ri said in a speech at the
UN General Assembly. "In case innocent
lives of the US are harmed because of this
suicide attack, Trump will be held totally
responsible."
165
The foreign minister also said the
"dangerous reality (is) that the gambler who
grew old using threats, frauds and all other
schemes to acquire a patch of land holds
the nuclear button. These are what
constitute the gravest threat to the
international peace and security today."
Ri called Trump a "mentally deranged" person who used
"reckless and violent words."
There was no other immediate response from the White
House to Ri's remarks, but there were military manuevers.
The Pentagon said Saturday that B-1B Lancer bombers
from Guam and F-15C Eagle fighter escorts from
Okinawa, Japan, flew in international airspace over waters
east of North Korea.
It's the farthest north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that
US fighters or bomber aircraft have ever flown this
century, the Pentagon said.
The flight underscored "the seriousness
with which we take DPRK's reckless
behavior,"
the Pentagon said, using an acronym for North Korea's
official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
"This mission is a demonstration of US
resolve and a clear message that the
President has many military options to
defeat any threat," Pentagon
spokeswoman Dana White said in a
statement.
A U.S. Air Force B-1B Lancer deployed from Ellsworth Air Force
Base, South Dakota, prepares to take off from Andersen AFB, Guam,
Sept. 23, 2017.
"North Korea's weapons program is a
grave threat to the Asia-Pacific region and
the entire international community. We are
prepared to use the full range of military
capabilities to defend the US homeland
and our allies."
War of words
There has been name-calling and heightened tensions
between Washington and Pyongyang this week as the UN
met in New York.
In his speech Tuesday Trump threatened to "totally
destroy" North Korea if the US was forced to defend itself
or an ally.
Trump tweeted Friday that Kim was
"obviously a madman" who would be
"tested like never before."
UN Secretary-General António Guterres met with Ri on
Saturday.
"The Secretary-General expressed concern
over the tensions on the Korean Peninsula
and appealed for de-escalation and full
implementation of relevant Security Council
resolutions," a statement from a UN
spokesperson said. "The Secretary-
General emphasized the need for a political
solution."
Throughout the week Washington and Pyongyang have
had strong words for each other.
166
Earlier this week North Korea's Ri said his country could
test a powerful nuclear weapon over the Pacific Ocean in
response to Trump's threats of military action.
Those remarks came shortly after Kim Jong Un made an
unprecedented televised statement, accusing Trump of
being "mentally deranged."
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un delivers a rare statement in
response to US President Donald Trump's speech to the United
Nations.
In a rare direct statement, Kim said that
Trump would "pay dearly" for the threats,
and that North Korea "will consider with
seriousness exercising of a corresponding,
highest level of hard-line countermeasure
in history."
"I am now thinking hard about what
response he could have expected when he
allowed such eccentric words to trip off his
tongue," Kim said. "I will surely and
definitely tame the mentally deranged US
dotard with fire."
Concerns over nuclear program
North Korea has been working on developing missiles that
can reach the United States and its allies and pair them
with a miniaturized nuclear warheads.
To comply with a UN Security Council resolution calling
for sanctions over North Korea's nuclear activity, China
said Friday that it will limit its exports of refined
petroleum products to Pyongyang as well as ban imports of
the North's textiles.
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce said in a written
statement that it will restrict exports of refined petroleum
products from October 1, and ban the export of condensate
oil and liquefied natural gas immediately.
A ban on textile imports from the North will go into effect
immediately, the statement said.
On Thursday, Trump announced new US sanctions to
penalize any company or person doing business with North
Korea by either cutting off their access to the US financial
system or freezing their assets -- or potentially both.
Quakes near North Korean nuclear site
Scientists said they believe the seismic activity Saturday
could have been caused by North Korea's sixth test of a
nuclear weapon on September 3.
Analysts were working to determine whether the tremors
detected near the Punggye-ri nuclear site were natural or
man-made.
The Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
Organization, a watchdog group that works to end nuclear
testing worldwide, said there were two seismic events,
neither of very large magnitude.
The larger one had a 3.4 magnitude, the group's initial
assessment found.
"This geographical location is a non-
seismically active zone. The September 3
event would've weakened the zone, which
could still have further repercussions, such
as radioisotopes coming through possible
subsequent cracks which would allow
scientists to assess what type of materials
.
167
were used," said Lassina Zerbo, the
group's executive secretary.
The Korea Meteorological Administration also cited the
possibility that the seismic activity Saturday occurred
because of the geological stress from the nuclear test.
The South Korean agency confirmed there were two
earthquakes Saturday.
According to its website, the first quake -- with a 2.6
magnitude occurred at 12:43 a.m. ET. A second one took
place at 4:29 a.m. ET around the same area.
Park Jong-shin, an analyst for the agency, agreed the latest
earthquakes might be aftershocks.
"It is assumed that the earthquakes
occurred because of North Korea's latest
nuclear test," Park said.
The US Geological Survey measured a magnitude 3.5
earthquake 22 kilometers (more than 13 miles) east-
northeast of Sungjibaegam, North Korea. The depth at the
epicenter was 5 kilometers (3.1 miles).
"We cannot conclusively confirm at this
time the nature (natural or human-made) of
the event," the USGS said.
 Gotta Go: Trump White House Staffers Preparing to Bolt
© REUTERS/ Eduardo Munoz -0 US
01:09 24.09.2017(updated 06:48 24.09.2017)
Many White House staffers who joined Trump’s
administration in January are now looking for a way out,
reaching out to headhunters, lobbyists and GOP operatives,
in desperate attempts to find new jobs.
Staffers from the National Economic Council are talking
to headhunters about various options, including in-house
government affairs experts at major companies, trade
associations, or consulting firms.
"There will be an exodus from this
administration in January," one Republican
lobbyist said, according to Politico.
It doesn't help that several high-level advisors, including
Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus, have been forced out of
the White House.
"Everyone says, ‘I just need to stay for one
year,'" according to an unnamed
Republican lobbyist cited by Politico, who
added, "if you leave before a year, it looks
like you are acknowledging that you made
a mistake,"
.
168
Corporate and lobbying recruiters have confirmed that
multiple White House staffers have reached out to them.
"There is no joy in Trumpworld right now,"
said one adviser who has collaborated
with several staffers, cited by Politico.
"Working in the White House is supposed
to be the peak of your career, but everyone
is unhappy, and everyone is fighting
everyone else."
Regardless of who is president, White House political
positions — seen as plum position — normally demand
long hours with low pay in a high-stress environment.
"There is always a shake-out period at the
beginning with a few people not working
out," Anita Dunn, former White House
communications director for US President
Barack Obama said.
"But typically, you tend to get turnover
at the two-year marks like after a mid-term
or election."
One senior White House official quoted by Politico was
unsympathetic.
"I would say about anybody looking
to leave that they are probably having a
hard time keeping up with President
Trump. You sign for this, and you've got
to be ready to go."
U.S. Government Announces 21 States Had Hackers Target
Their System – Leaves Out DHS Hackers
By Aaron Kesel
September 24, 2017

Unlike the CIA’s narrative that the Russians hacked the

election, this is well documented, and even the DHS itself
has admitted it, blaming a “rogue employee.”

The problem that has since emerged for the DHS is that
there are now ten separate cyber attacks known coming
from the DHS, trying to breach Georgia’s computers
housing Americans’ voting data that was scanned for
vulnerabilities in 2016.
Image Credit: chrisdiontewalker
The other problem is the timing of the attacks. Georgia
Secretary of State Brian Kemp told The DCNF Jan. 24,
The federal government just announced on Friday that
2016, he was suspicious because four of the 10 attacks
election officials in 21 states had Russian hackers
against the Georgia election network occurred as he was
target their systems before last year’s presidential election
about to talk to DHS officials, or coincided with his public
according to the Associated Press. But what about the
testimony opposing designation of election systems as
DHS’s own attempted meddling in the election, getting
“critical infrastructure.”
caught red-handed running unauthorized scans for
vulnerabilities in voter databases in more than five states?
Georgia and Indiana aren’t the only states to confirm that
the DHS attempted hacking them according to a report
Last year, before the election the federal government was
from WSB-TV in Atlanta; two more states, West Virginia
attempting to declare state election systems as “critical
and Kentucky, also confirmed the same DHS IP address
infrastructure.” After that attempt failed, it seems they
accessed their election system close to election day.
attempted to illegally take matters into their own hands and
scanned election systems without first notifying each
respective state official. DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson told the Georgia Secretary of
State that the DHS accessing Georgia’s election system
was a federal contractor conducting “normal” internet
Several states reported the reconnaissance scans for
searches on the website.
vulnerabilities in their servers performed by DHS IP
addresses.
That’s not all. The DHS also attempted to hack Idaho, and
Maine, while the agency may have also backdoored
Cyber security experts agree the Obama administration’s
Hawaii’s election systems which seemingly had problems
Department of Homeland Security attempted to hack into
after being “secured” by the agency. Call it another long
states’ voter registration systems in Georgia, Idaho,
list of coincidences.
Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, and West Virginia.
In Idaho, Secretary of State Lawerence Denney said that
According to one report published by the Daily Caller
his state had detected attempts to hack the state’s election
News Foundation, the Department of Homeland Security,
system on Nov. 8, 2016.
under the Obama administration, attempted to hack the
Indiana State electoral system nearly 15,000 times.
Denney said that when they “looked at IP
addresses that tried to get into our system,”
The second case was revealed by Georgia’s secretary of
there wasn’t “a single IP address from a
state wh0 stated that the DHS tried to breach its firewall of
foreign country,” such as Russia, but one
computers housing voter registration data on November
from “our own Department of Homeland
15.
Security,” Computer World reported.

169
The DHS explained that:
When DHS conducts a cybersecurity scan
of a network or system, we do so only with
the cooperation and consent of the system
owner.
On November 3, 2016, it was reported that Hawaii was
working with the Department of Homeland Security to
secure its election systems.
On November 8, 2016, there were reports of equipment
problems at 18 different polling places with ballot
scanning machines.
The argument that many without any type of knowledge of
security are making is that it’s possible that DHS IP
addresses were spoofed. The problem with this is that if
this were done, it would have been pointless
because spoofing your IP address as a DHS IP address
would do nothing but show your IP address as the DHS’s.
You would not be able to receive information data packets
and, instead, the IP address you spoofed would receive
those replies.
In simple terms, imagine you spoof a phone number—as
was possible with Skype years ago—and someone called
that number back. They wouldn’t be talking to you, but
would instead be talking to the real owner of that phone
number you spoofed. For another example, it’s the
equivalent of sending a letter with the wrong return
address and expecting to receive your letter.
.
170
Thus it’s exposed that a rogue group in the DHS tried to
hack the election, which should be worrying because
originally the DHS wanted to oversee the election to
prevent just this. There have been no reported incidents
where any states had their votes changed, but the DHS
never looked into it – one has to question why.
On his way out of office then-DHS secretary Jeh Johnson
signed an order designating election systems as “critical
infrastructure” that U.S. President Donald Trump still
hasn’t rolled back, meaning the federal government could
easily rig the election disguised as protecting our election
integrity.
On election day voters all across the U.S. reported that
their votes were being switched from Donald Trump to
Hillary Clinton, according to CBS. It is not known who
hacked these machines or how many votes may have been
affected, and it probably never will be, but this should
concern you – it’s a bipartisan issue.
All 50 state-level secretaries of state have urged the Trump
administration to repeal the DHS directive. It’s worth
noting that according to the WikiLeaks Stratfor
documents, the 2008 election results were manipulated by
Democrats.
As Thomas Jefferson once wrote,
“Democracy requires constant vigilance.”
 Sessions Might Be Planning
To End Mueller’s “Witch Hunt”
By S. Noble
September 24, 2017
Attorney General Jeff Sessions could be back from
wherever he’s been for the last several months. He hired
Matthew Whitaker to serve as his chief of staff, taking
Jody Hunt’s place as Hunt moves up to assistant attorney
general in charge of the department’s Civil Division. What
makes Whitaker unique is he thinks Mueller’s
investigation could be a “witch hunt”.
He also thinks a strong case could have been made against
criminal Hillary Clinton.
Iowan Matt Whitaker
The fact that Sessions hired him makes one think he might
be planning to do something about the endless fishing
expedition by the Special Counsel.
Whitaker, who was a CNN legal commentator, wrote last
month that President Trump was “absolutely correct” in
his assertion that it was a “violation” for special counsel
Mueller to investigate the Trump family’s finances.
Whitaker said,
“Mueller has come up to a red line in the
Russia 2016 election-meddling
.
171
investigation that he is dangerously close
to crossing. If he were to continue to
investigate the financial relationships
without a broadened scope in his
appointment, then this would raise serious
concerns that the special counsel’s
investigation was a mere witch hunt.”
He contended that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should
“act to ensure the investigation is within its
jurisdiction and within the authority of the
original directive. It is time for Rosenstein,
who is the acting attorney general for the
purposes of this investigation, to order
Mueller to limit the scope of his
investigation to the four corners of the
order appointing him special counsel.”
Whitaker’s last position was as executive director of the
Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust (FACT), a
conservative watchdog group focused on Democrat ethical
issues.
Also interesting is that in May, he
said there was a “strong case” to be
made against Hillary Clinton and that
she should be “extremely grateful” she
wasn’t prosecuted.
It’s very interesting that in a Republican administration,
the only ones investigated are Republicans. With all that
the Democrats have done, not one has been investigated.
 Trump Accuses Iran Of Cooperation With North Korea
After Missile Test Launch
© Ap Photo/ Pablo Martinez Monsivais - Us
04:49 24.09.2017(Updated 11:46 24.09.2017)
Donald Trump claims that Iran and North Korea cooperate
after Tehran's recent ballistic missile test-fire.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — US President Donald Trump said
on Sunday that Iran was cooperating with Pyongyang
following the latest Tehran's ballistic missile test.
"Iran just test-fired a Ballistic Missile capable of reaching
Israel. They are also working with North Korea. Not much
of an agreement we have!" Trump posted on Twitter.
172
On Saturday, Iranian media reported that the country had
successfully carried out the test launch of a new ballistic
missile, dubbed Khorramshahr, with a range of 2,000
kilometers (1,242 miles).
Iran's ballistic missile program has triggered the discontent
and concerns of other states, in particular, the United
States due to its possible links to the Iranian nuclear
program. Despite the attempts by Washington to include
the provisions, concerning the ballistic missiles, in the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or the Iran
nuclear deal, the proposal was not supported by other
signatories.
In July 2015, Iran, the European Union and the so-called
P5+1 group of nations – the United States, the United
Kingdom, Russia, China, France and Iran – signed the
JCPOA, which led to gradual lifting of nuclear-related
sanctions imposed on Tehran in exchange for assurances
that its nuclear program would remain peaceful.
Pyongyang has contributed to the escalation on Korean
Peninsula by number of nuclear-capable intercontinental
ballistic missile launches and nuclear weapon tests
in violation of the UN Security Council resolutions. The
UN Security Council has imposed sanctions on North
Korea, which, however, have failed to prevent Pyongyang
from conducting new tests. During his recent speech at the
UN General Assembly, Trump said the United States
would "totally destroy" North Korea if it was forced to.
North Korea has repeatedly claimed that nuclear weapons
are only means of self-defense.
 Is Trump All Talk On North Korea?
The Uncertainty Sends A Shiver
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS
SEPT. 24, 2017
South Koreans at a rail station in Seoul watched Kim Jong-un, the
North Korean leader, deliver a statement last week. Mr. Kim called
President Trump “deranged.” Credit Jung Yeon-Je/Agence France-
Presse — Getty Images
WASHINGTON — When President Trump gave a fiery
campaign speech in Huntsville, Ala., on Friday evening, he
drew a rapturous roar by ridiculing Kim Jong-un, the
North Korean leader, as “Little Rocket Man.”
Among diplomats and national security specialists, the
reaction was decidedly different. After Mr. Trump
repeated his taunt in a tweet late Saturday and threatened
that Mr. Kim and his foreign minister “won’t be around
much longer” if they continue their invective against the
United States, reactions ranged from nervous disbelief to
sheer terror.
Mr. Trump’s willingness to casually threaten to annihilate
a nuclear-armed foe was yet another reminder of the steep
risks inherent in his brute-force approach to diplomacy.
His strengths as a politician — the ability to appeal in a
visceral way to the impulses of ordinary citizens — are a
difficult fit for the meticulous calculations that his own
advisers concede are crucial in dealing with Pyongyang.
The disconnect has led to a deep uncertainty about whether
Mr. Trump is all talk or actually intends to act. The
ambiguity could be strategic, part of an effort to intimidate
Mr. Kim and keep him guessing. Or it could reflect a rash
impulse by a leader with little foreign policy experience to
vent his anger and stoke his supporters’ enthusiasm.
His new chief of staff and his national security team have
drawn a line at trying to rein in his more incendiary
provocations, fearing that their efforts could backfire with
173
a president who bridles at any effort to control him. What
remains unclear — and the source of much of the anxiety
in and out of the government and on both sides of the
Pacific — is whether they would step in to prevent the
president from taking the kind of drastic action that
matches his words, if they believed it was imminent.
Football protests and fears about North Korea. What we
aren't talking about is Trump and Russia. Trump yells
"Squirrel!" again.
Trump and Kim are both maniacs who've never been held
responsible for their actions. What could go wrong?
Veterans of diplomacy and national security and specialists
on North Korea fear that, whatever their intended result,
Mr. Trump’s increasingly bellicose threats and public
insults of the famously thin-skinned Mr. Kim could cause
the United States to careen into a nuclear confrontation
driven by personal animosity and bravado.
“It does matter, because you don’t want to
get to a situation where North Korea
fundamentally miscalculates that an attack
is coming,” said Sue Mi Terry, a former
intelligence and National Security Council
specialist who is now a senior adviser for
Korea at Bower Group Asia. “It could lead
us to stumble into a war that nobody
wants.”
And while his bombast may be a thrill to Mr. Trump’s core
supporters, there is evidence that the broader American
public does not trust the president to deal with North
Korea, and is deeply opposed to the kind of pre-emptive
military strike he has seemed eager to threaten.
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 37
percent of adults trust Mr. Trump “a great deal” or “a good
amount” to responsibly handle the situation with North
Korea, while 42 percent trust him “not at all.” By contrast,
72 percent trust American military leaders, who have
largely avoided combative language on North Korea even
as they have said publicly that a military option is possible.
Two-thirds of respondents opposed launching a pre-
emptive attack against North Korea, while about three-
quarters supported using tougher economic sanctions on
Pyongyang as a way of pressuring the country to surrender
its nuclear arsenal.
Some senior administration officials acknowledge
privately that Mr. Trump’s rhetoric on North Korea is not
helpful, although they question whether it will alter the
discussion, given how far Mr. Kim has come in his quest
to develop a nuclear weapon that could reach the United
States.
The three current and retired generals advising Mr. Trump
— Jim Mattis, the defense secretary; Lt. Gen. H. R.
McMaster, his national security adviser; and John F. Kelly,
his chief of staff — as well as Rex W. Tillerson, the
secretary of state, have all chosen their words on North
Korea more carefully, emphasizing the role of diplomacy
and the grave stakes of any military confrontation.
“All three of the generals fully realize the
carnage that would result from a war on the
Korean Peninsula,” James G. Stavridis, the
former NATO commander and current
dean of the Fletcher School of Law and
Diplomacy at Tufts University, said on
Sunday.
“Knowing each of them personally, I am
certain they are counseling operational
caution, measured public commentary and
building a coalition approach to dealing
with Kim Jong-un,” Mr. Stavridis, a retired
admiral, said in an email. “But controlling
President Trump seems incredibly difficult.
Let’s hope they are not engaged in mission
impossible, because the stakes are so
high.”
Christopher R. Hill, a former ambassador to South Korea
who served Republican and Democratic presidents, argued
that the comments could badly undercut Mr. Trump’s
ability to find a peaceful solution to the dispute, playing
into Mr. Kim’s characterization of the United States as an
evil nation bent on North Korea’s destruction and relieving
pressure on the Chinese to do more to curb Pyongyang.
“The comments give the world the sense
that he is increasingly unhinged and
unreliable,” said Mr. Hill, the dean of the
Josef Korbel School of International
Studies at the University of Denver.
Mr. Hill, who as envoy to South Korea under George W.
Bush was the last American to hold formal talks with the
government in Pyongyang, said he and Condoleezza Rice,
then the secretary of state, routinely advised Mr. Bush to
“avoid the personal invectives,” because “they never help.”
“My sense from four years of those talks is
that getting personal is not helpful,” Mr. Hill
174
said. “Who could be telling Trump
otherwise?”
Yet current and former senior officials said it was clear
that Mr. Trump would continue his brinkmanship,
particularly his belligerent tweets, no matter what his
advisers do or say. One former administration official, who
spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal
policy workings, said nobody, including Mr. Kelly, could
control the president’s social media utterances, despite
what his military advisers thought about them.
The tweets most likely have forced Mr. Mattis and Joseph
F. Dunford Jr., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as
well as other national security officials, to spend a
significant amount of time on the phone reassuring
counterparts about Mr. Trump’s intentions.
Last week, Mr. Trump coined his mocking nickname for
Mr. Kim on Twitter and insisted on including it in his
maiden speech to the United Nations General Assembly.
“Rocket Man,” he said, “is on a suicide mission for
himself and for his regime,” which may leave the United
States “no choice than to totally destroy North Korea.”
The speech drew audible gasps from the diplomats and
national security officials in the General Assembly hall, as
well as an angry response from Mr. Kim himself, who
called Mr. Trump a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard.” A
few days later, a capacity crowd at the Von Braun Center
in Huntsville delighted in Mr. Trump’s warlike language,
cheering as he renewed his threats and added a dig at Mr.
Kim’s stature.
“He should have been handled a long time
ago,” Mr. Trump said, “but I’m going to
handle it because we have to handle it:
Little Rocket Man.”
“I’m sure he’s listening, because he
watches every word,” Mr. Trump added.
“He’s watching us like he never watched
anybody before, that I can tell you.”
The president appeared to be right about that. On Saturday,
Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho of North Korea said in a
speech at the United Nations that the president’s threats
were “making our rocket’s visit to the entire U.S. mainland
inevitable all the more.”
That is what appeared to have prompted the nighttime
tweet from Mr. Trump, who spent the weekend at his
Bedminster, N.J., golf resort.
“If he echoes thoughts of Little Rocket
Man,” Mr. Trump wrote of Mr. Ri, “they
won’t be around much longer!”
Ms. Terry said such menacing talk could put Mr. Trump
into a box.
“Trump is limiting our own options by
behaving and speaking like this, because
now we either have to act, which really is
unthinkable, or we’re going to look like a
paper tiger because we can’t act,” she said.
“Internationally, we look foolish, and now
he has made it extremely personal, so Kim
Jong-un cannot back down. It’s reckless.”
175
Some of Mr. Trump’s allies argue that his behavior is
strategic, a way of telegraphing to North Korea — and to
its primary patron, China — that the United States is
taking a tougher line under this administration. There may
be wisdom, they argue, in spurring fear and confusion in
the mind of a leader who frequently relies on both.
“We’re dealing with somebody that we’ll
figure out,” Mr. Trump said at the rally on
Friday. “He may be smart, he may be
strategic — and he may be totally crazy.”
 Patriots Fans Rain Boos
On Own Players For Anthem Protest
By Mark W. Sanchez
September 24, 2017 | 2:05pm

The Patriots have been intertwined with Donald Trump —

Brady, coach Bill Belichick and owner Robert Kraft have
been pals with the president. After Trump’s attack on the
protests, though — saying owners should cut ties with “the
son of a bitch” who kneels during the anthem — Kraft said
he was “deeply disappointed” in Trump.

It’s been a Sunday in which not just players, but owners,

executives and fans have been forced to take sides. There
were similar reports of booing in Indianapolis, too.

The Patriots players made their statement, and many fans

made their own in response.

Before Sunday’s Texans-Patriots matchup in Foxborough,

Mass., about 20 Patriots players, according to ESPN, took
a knee during the national anthem, the first time anyone on
the team had joined the growing protest.

In return, a loud chorus of boos was heard sandwiching the

singing of “The Star-Spangled Banner.” According to the
Boston Herald, there were shouts of “Stand up” as they
knelt.

Tom Brady, the face of the team and the league, did not
take a knee, but stood with his arms locked with other
players and his hand over his chest.

176
 Trump Allies See Vindication
In Reports On Manafort Wiretapping
By Katie Bo Williams
09/24/17 06:00 AM EDT
For some of President Trump’s staunchest allies, reports
that former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was under
U.S. surveillance are nothing short of vindication of the
president’s widely-dismissed claims that former President
Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.
Although surveillance experts from both sides of the aisle
say the claims mischaracterize reports about the order on
Manafort, that hasn’t stopped Trump allies from saying the
president was right all along.
Longtime advisor Roger Stone has gleefully circulated a
segment from Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News in
which the host says “all those patronizing assurances that
nobody is spying on political campaigns were false” and
“it looks like Trump's tweet may have been
right.”
When Trump made his claim in March, it was rejected by
members of both parties. The Justice Department later
stated that it had no evidence to back them up.
While there have been some conflicts in the reports on
surveillance of Manafort by both CNN and The Wall Street
Journal, they have been consistent in stating that officials
obtained a lawful order from a clandestine court to target
Trump’s former campaign chief as part of the
counterintelligence probe into Russian interference in the
election.
CNN reports that the order allowed officials to place a
wiretap on Manafort, while the Journal reports that it
covered only stored communications and did not allow
officials to intercept his phone communications in live
time.
But in either case, experts say, the reporting provides no
justification for Trump’s claim that Obama had his “wires
tapped” in Trump Tower.
“No — no — absolutely none,” said David
Shedd, a Heritage Foundation fellow who
was Deputy Director of National
Intelligence for Policy, Plans and
177
Requirements under former President
George W. Bush.
Under U.S. surveillance law, the government can target an
American citizen if it can show probable cause that that
person is knowingly acting as an agent of a foreign
government. Manafort has reportedly drawn federal
interest for years related to his work for a Russian-backed
political candidate in Ukraine — although it is unclear
what information sparked the warrant investigators
obtained as part of the Russia probe.
CNN reported that investigators obtained a
warrant related to his work in Ukraine that
lapsed in 2016 due to lack of evidence, but
that interest in Manafort was “reignited” due
to “intercepted communications between
Manafort and suspected Russian
operatives, and among the Russians
themselves.”
It is possible, experts say, that if Manafort spoke to
President Trump during the period he was under
surveillance, that the president’s communications may
have been collected as well — a legal practice known as
“incidental collection.”
According to the Journal, the surveillance began after
Manafort was ousted by the Trump campaign in August.
CNN reports only that it covered a period before and after
the Nov. 8 election but notes that it was conducted at a
time when Trump was known to talk to Manafort.
Still, there is no new evidence in the two reports to suggest
that Trump himself was under surveillance, experts say.
For supporters of the president — and most casual
consumers of news — the distinction is immaterial
between a court order targeting the president-elect and a
court order under which the president’s communications
may have been collected incidentally.
“That lack of understanding of the
granularity is exactly what the president
and his supporters are counting on,” said
 Pat Eddington, a surveillance policy expert
at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute.
If it turns out that any of Manafort’s communications with
the president were collected at Trump Tower — which is
possible given that he had an apartment in the building —
“then the whole story is, ‘it’s happening
every time, all the time, and I told you so,’ ”
Shedd said.
But that argument is specious, he said.
“Trump is only the other half of the
conversation by coincidence. Obviously
Manafort called people, so of course there
would be coverage of the other party.”
A spokesperson for Manafort, Jason Maloni, has
characterized the court orders as an abuse of power by the
Obama administration, which he says wanted to spy on a
political opponent.
“It’s unclear if Paul Manafort was the
objective,” Maloni told the Journal.
“Perhaps the real objective was Donald
Trump.”
Surveillance experts are skeptical of that suggestion. For
one thing, it is illegal for investigators to “reverse target”
an American by spying on a person with whom they know
their true target to be in communication.
If the president were in fact the oblique target of
government surveillance — either as a candidate or the
president-elect — both Eddington and Shedd say, it would
have been so explosive that it would have almost certainly
been leaked to the press.
178
Manafort has become increasingly central to the federal
probe into Russian interference in the election. Special
counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly told him to expect
to be indicted and a drumbeat of headlines linking him to
Russian officials have emerged in the press.
He was a participant in a highly-scrutinized meeting in
2016 between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian
government lawyer promising dirt on Democratic
presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Most recently, The
Washington Post reported on Wednesday that Manafort
offered to provide “private briefings” on the 2016 race to a
Russian billionaire with close ties to the Kremlin.
The disclosure of the warrants targeting Manafort has
drawn legitimate scrutiny as a violation of Manafort’s civil
liberties and a possible criminal leak — the mere existence
of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA,
warrant is classified.
House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-
Calif.), who first raised alarm about the practice of
“unmasking” the names of Americans caught up in
government surveillance, is currently under investigation
by the House Ethics Committee for allegedly exposing
classified information when he disclosed his findings to
reporters.
And many civil liberties advocates say there is a legitimate
need for more limitations and transparency in the FISA
process.
But, Eddington said,
“We can refute the notion that the
president was peddling that he was
wiretapped.”
“There is nothing in evidence right now that
suggests that,” he said.
 Nfler: If You Don’t Think USA Is Greatest,
Why Don’t You Leave?
By Mark W. Sanchez
September 24, 2017 | 2:42pm
Derek Wolfe
He clarified that protesting in the United States is a right,
but he also challenged the players taking a knee: If there’s
somewhere better, why don’t you leave?
Broncos defensive end Derek Wolfe explained Sunday
why he stands for the national anthem, referencing the
troops and the ideal vision of America. Wolfe, who is
white, did not reference whether he agrees with the basis
of the protest that gained steam Sunday following
President Trump’s condemnation: to object to the
treatment of minorities in the United States.
Entering Sunday, only one white player, Seth DeValve of
Cleveland, had joined the movement.
.
179
“I stand because I respect the men who
died in real battles so I have the freedom to
battle on the field,” Wolfe, 27, told ESPN in
a statement. “Paying tribute to the men and
women who have given their lives for our
freedom is why I stand. But everyone these
days likes to find a reason to protest and
that’s their right. It’s America and you are
free to speak your mind. I just feel it’s
disrespectful to the ones who sacrificed
their lives and it’s the wrong platform.
“But like I said to each their own it’s
AMERICA! The greatest country in the
world and if you don’t think we are the
greatest country in the world and you
reside here, then why do you stay? A lot
worse places in the world to call home.
Proud to be an American.”
Several of his Broncos teammates took a kneel Sunday,
days after Trump urged owners to kick the “son of a bitch”
who protests off the team. Wolfe’s teammate Brandon
Marshall knelt throughout last season.
Wolfe, in his sixth NFL season, grew up in Ohio and
played at the University of Cincinnati. He skipped visiting
the Obama White House following the Broncos’ Super
Bowl win in 2016, saying,
“I just had a lot of stuff going on, things to
do.”
 Understanding The Battle Between The Deep State – And
“One Nation Under God” – The Holy War Within The
United States Of America.
By Ruby Henley
Published September 21, 2017 · Updated September 24, 2017
If you believe a war is being waged against President
Donald Trump and the American people who supported
him, it is imperative you understand the roots of that war.
When Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th
President of the United States, he made a revealing speech
in the presence of his predecessors – George H.W. Bush,
Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. Trump
spoke straightforwardly to the establishment/Deep State in
a bold manner no one had heard before.
QUOTE:
“Today’s ceremony,” he began, “has very
special meaning. Because today we are
not merely transferring power from one
Administration to another, or from one party
to another – but we are transferring power
from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to
you, the American People.
For too long, a small group in our nation’s
Capital has reaped the rewards of
government while the people have borne
the cost.
Washington flourished – but the people did
not share in its wealth.
Politicians prospered – but the jobs left,
and the factories closed.
The establishment protected itself, but not
the citizens of our country.
Their victories have not been your victories;
their triumphs have not been your triumphs;
and while they celebrated in our nation’s
Capital, there was little to celebrate for
struggling families all across our land.
That all changes – starting right here, and
right now, because this moment is your
moment: it belongs to you.
It belongs to everyone gathered here today
and everyone watching all across America.
This is your day. This is your celebration.”
180
END OF QUOTE
I think “We the People” need to appreciate what Donald
Trump said on that day in January of 2017. It was a ground
breaking day for Trump and for those who voted for him.
In fact, it was a revelation for all Americans, as we were
being forewarned of the battle ahead. It was the beginning
of a war that was to be waged by the Deep State against
President Trump and those who voted for him.
Presently as we witness the assault on President Trump by
Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team, we ask
ourselves how could this be happening. How could those
who blatantly broke the law without being charged by the
Judicial system be prosecuting the President of the United
States?
The day Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein
appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special
Counsel charged with investigating possible “Russian
collusion” with President Trump’s campaign, Julian
Assange at WikiLeaks tweeted a WikiLeaks’ released
State Department cable documenting that Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton ordered Mueller to deliver a sample
of stolen Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia in
2009.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE85588_a.html
QUOTE:
S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy
Moscow is requested to alert at the highest
appropriate level the Russian Federation
that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver
the HEU sample once he arrives to
Moscow on September 21. Post is
requested to convey information in
paragraph 5 with regard to chain of
custody, and to request details on Russian
Federation’s plan for picking up the
material. Embassy is also requested to
 reconfirm the April 16 understanding from
the FSB verbally that we will have no
problem with the Russian Ministry of
Aviation concerning Mueller’s September
21 flight clearance.
END OF QUOTE
Julian Assange indicated an investigation was needed into
Mueller’s role in the complex saga of Uranium One,
involving the company Bill Clinton promoted with
Canadian Frank Giustra while Hillary Clinton served as
Obama Secretary of State. In fact, Hillary Clinton voted to
give the Russian State Atomic Nuclear Energy Agency,
Rosatom, control of 20 percent of all uranium holdings in
the United States. Yes, Russia now owns United States
land rich in uranium.
Mueller’s role in this deal with Vladimir Putin’s Russian
government should make him the prime suspect in a
Department of Justice investigation into the Clintons’
involvement with Uranium One. This should prevent him
from serving as Special Counsel appointed to target the
President of the United States of America. However, we
know that he is protected by the Deep State.
Further, we know that Ex-FBI Director James Comey
committed perjury and actually cleared Hillary Clinton in
the investigation into the leaking of classified information
before he even completed the investigation. Yet, this has
been swept under the rug, and James Comey nor Robert
Mueller will ever suffer prosecution. This is the reality we
are living in, and that reality proves a deep chasm between
those, who can freely break the law without prosecution
and those who are prosecuted. This is where the question
should be asked as to “who are the opposing parties in this
chasm?”
I believe those parties are the Deep State birthed from
Luciferians such as Saul Alinsky and those Americans
who believe in “One Nation Under God.” I would like to
refer at this point to a speech made by the Honorable Ben
Carson at the Republican convention in 2016.
QUOTE:
“Now, one of the things that I have learned
about Hillary Clinton is that one of her
heroes, her mentors was Saul Alinsky. And
her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky.
This was someone she greatly admired
and let me tell you something about Saul
Alinsky,” Carson said.
“He wrote a book called Rules for Radicals.
It acknowledges Lucifer, the original radical
who gained his own kingdom. Now think
about that. This is our nation where our
founding document, the Declaration of
181
Independence talks about certain
inalienable rights that come from our
creator, a nation where our Pledge of
Allegiance says we are ‘One nation under
God.’ This is a nation where every coin in
our pockets and every bill in our wallet
says, ‘In God We Trust.’ So are we willing
to elect someone as president who has as
their role model somebody who
acknowledges Lucifer? Think about that.”
END OF QUOTE
How did Saul Alinsky help to birth the Deep State?
http://www.newenglishreview.org/DL_Adams/Saul_Alins
ky_and_the_Rise_of_Amorality_in_American_Politics/
QUOTE:
Saul Alinsky and his “community
organizing” methods and philosophy have
had a profound influence on the politics of
the United States. Recent history would
suggest that this influence is just short of
catastrophic. Alinsky’s book, “Rules for
Radicals,” published in 1971 still has
enormous effects on our country today.
Hillary Clinton wrote her Wellesley College
thesis on Alinsky, interviewing him
personally for her research. After her
graduation Alinsky offered her a job with
his organization, which she refused to
pursue other opportunities. President
Obama worked for Alinsky organizations
and taught seminars in Alinsky tactics and
methodology during his “community
organizing” period in Chicago. Michelle
Obama echoed Alinsky’s words in her
speech at the Democratic Convention.
Alinsky’s dedication of “Rules for Radicals”
to Lucifer is easily understood; as a
champion of amorality and the
abandonment of ethics as nothing more
than props that sustain the status quo
Lucifer is the perfect model of the destroyer
 for the activist Alinsky. The fact that our top
political leadership has embraced this
amoral set of tactics for political gain
should cause all Americans concern.
Alinsky’s abandonment of morality and
ethics is not difficult to demonstrate. “Rules
for Radicals” is dedicated to Lucifer, the
rebel against God’s rule and great
destroyer of Christian ideology.
The rejection of morality and ethics and the
embrace of total pragmatism to achieve the
goal of power is characteristic of the
“radical” Lucifer so respected by Alinsky. It
is not important to Alinsky that Lucifer is the
embodiment of the idea of evil and
opposition to good; what matters is that
Alinsky sees Lucifer as effective; the trains
always run on time when Satan runs the
show. Effectiveness and success are
divorced from issues of morality and ethics;
success is its own morality for Alinsky and
his followers.
END OF QUOTE
Now how would you define the current Deep State?
Where does the Deep State hide?
http://skywatchtv.com/2017/07/27/saboteurs-new-online-
investigative-series-tom-horn-part-1/#_ednref5
QUOTE
Every four years voters choose to elect or
reelect a president, who then selects a
cabinet and other federal appointees to
oversee executive departments such as the
Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce,
Defense, Education, Energy, Health and
Human Services, Homeland Security and
so on. But “the real government of the
United States is not the Congress, not the
.
182
president, not the courts, not the
Constitution, but the federal bureaucracy.”
[i] This is what some have called the “fourth
branch of government” and it daily
influences the Constitutional three
branches of government most voters
perceive as functioning to serve we the
people (legislative, executive and judicial).
This bureaucracy, which is immersed in
liberal DC culture and ideology, globalist
objectives (which view US borders as
nationalistic impediments), multinational
corporate payouts, and social democracy
goals, is monstrous. It is made up of
roughly 2.6 million employees, career
government personnel, many freelance
contractors, the press (an analogy for the
Fourth Estate) and special interest groups
that increasingly perceive America’s Judeo-
Christian morality, historical emphasis on
rugged individualism, and free-market
capitalism as enemies of a socialistic new
world order they aspire to embrace.
END OF QUOTE
Thus, my point is the Deep State is indeed rooted in the
Luciferian agenda. It is deeply embedded in government
and in world powers, and I believe We the People/”One
Nation Under God” are fighting a Holy War within our
own Country.
I think to call it anything else is a great deception and a
great risk. If we fail to understand the hidden agenda of the
political war being waged against the President of the
United States and those who support him; we risk losing a
Holy war between Luciferians and if you will, Christians.
If you prefer to call us “One Nation Under God” instead
of “Christians,” that is your choice. But inevitably it is the
same people. It is us. It is “We the People,” who choose to
maintain our personal sovereignty and the sovereignty of
our Country.
 Trump At War With Dissent
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
9-24-2017
Trump continues finding ways to disgrace himself, the
latest episode Friday evening, criticizing legitimate
dissent.
It’s the highest form of patriotism, the comment attributed
to Thomas Jefferson, whether or not he actually said it.
In 1961, The Use of Force in International Affairs
publication used the phrase, asking
“(i)f what your country is doing seems to
you practically and morally wrong, is
dissent the highest form of patriotism?”
During the height of the Vietnam war in 1969, New York
Mayor John Lindsey said
“(w)e cannot rest content with the charge
from Washington that…peaceful protest(s)
(are) unpatriotic...The fact is that this
dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
The late Howard Zinn and other distinguished figures said
the same thing in similar or identical language.
During a Friday campaign rally in Alabama, Trump
disgraced himself by irresponsibly blasting NFL players -
kneeling, not standing, during the national anthem, their
legitimate right of dissent, and why not. There’s plenty to
dissent about America’s rogue state policies at home and
abroad.
Black players protesting police brutality deserve respect
for doing the right thing. Not according to Trump,
bellowing
“(w)ouldn’t you love to see one of these
NFL owners, when somebody disrespects
our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off
the field right now. Out! He’s fired. He’s
fired!’ ”
“You know, some owner is going to do that.
He’s going to say, ‘That guy that
disrespects our flag, he’s fired.’ And that
owner (will) be the most popular person in
the country.”
During America’s 1899 - 1902 war on the Philippines,
Mark Twain blasted another venerable US symbol.
183
Saying “I am an anti-imperialist,” he added
“I am opposed to having the eagle put its
talons on any other land,” harshly criticizing
ruthless US mass slaughter and
destruction.
Twain is an iconic figure in US history. Imagine what he’d
say today about America smashing one country after
another. He’d be a vocal Trump critic.
Unsigned NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick began
what’s perhaps becoming a trend - during the national
anthem, keeling, not standing, honorably protesting against
cops killing unarmed Black men and youths, getting away
with cold-blooded murder, Kaepernick so far punished by
NFL owners for his righteous stand against injustice.
In response to Trump’s hostile remarks, Minnesota
Vikings player Bishop Sankey tweeted:
“It’s a shame and disgrace when you have
the president of the US calling citizens of
the country sons of a bitches.”
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell issued a statement
saying:
“The NFL and our players are at our best
when we help create a sense of unity in our
country and our culture. There is no better
example than the amazing response from
our clubs and players to the terrible natural
disasters we’ve experienced over the last
month.”
“Divisive comments like these demonstrate
an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL,
our great game and all of our players, and
a failure to understand the overwhelming
force for good our clubs and players
represent in our communities.”
NFL players association executive director DeMaurice
Smith separately said
“(t)he peaceful demonstrations by some of
our players have generated a wide array of
responses.”
“Those opinions are protected speech and
freedom that has been paid for by the
sacrifice of men and women throughout
 history. This expression of speech has
generated thoughtful discussion in our
locker rooms and in board rooms.”
“However, the line that marks the balance
between the rights of every citizen in our
great country gets crossed when someone
is told to just ‘shut up and play.’ “
New York Giants co-owners John Mara and Steve Tisch
said the following:
“Comments like we heard last night from
the president are inappropriate, offensive
and divisive. We are proud of our players,
the vast majority of whom use their NFL
platform to make a positive difference in
our society.”
Miami Dolphins owner Stephen Ross said
“(o)ur country needs unifying leadership
right now, not more divisiveness. We need
to seek to understand each other and have
civil discourse instead of condemnation
and sound bites.”
San Francisco 49ers CEO Jed York sharply criticized
Trump saying:
“The callous and offensive comments
made by the president are contradictory to
what this great country stands for. Our
players have exercised their rights as
United States citizens in order to spark
conversation and action to address social
injustice.”
.
184
Green Bay Packers President and CEO Mark Murphy said
“(i)t’s unfortunate that the president
decided to use his immense platform to
make divisive and offensive statements
about our players and the NFL.”
Teresa Kaepernick, Colin’s mother, responded to Trump
calling protesting NFL players “sons of bitches,” tweeting:
“Guess that makes me a proud bitch.”
Will other NFL owners individually or together by joint
statement responsibly denounce Trump’s hostile remarks?
He disgraced himself. His reckless agenda speaks for
itself.
A Final Comment
Trump extended his war on dissent to the NBA, disinviting
Golden State Warrior’s star Stephen Curry to the White
House - because of his public criticism of the president.
NBA star LeBron James responded calling Trump “U
bum.” A spokesman for the University of North Carolina
national championship team said a White House visit was
cancelled, citing a scheduling conflict, likely polite
criticism of the president.
The key issue isn’t Trump. It’s America’s deplorable state.
He’s a front man for rogue state ruthlessness, threatening
humanity’s survival - what warrants universal criticism
and activism against.
 After Hallucinating Russians Everywhere,
The Hysterical Mainstream Media Is Now
Imagining Nazis Behind Every Corner
By JD Heyes
Sunday, September 24, 2017
First, Russia hijacked our elections to help Donald J.
Trump defeat Hillary because Vladimir Putin hates her.
Now, the legacy media is regularly claiming that there are
Nazis everywhere in American, and that’s, of course,
thanks to Trump as well.
Oh, and “Nazis” have now become the ‘new normal,’
thanks to the president.
Writing in one of media outlets most guilty of promoting
these ridiculous theories and falsehoods, The New York
Times, author Sasha Chapin, whose new book “The Perfect
Information Game” is forthcoming, asked this burning
question: “Are Many of Our Fellow Citizens ‘Nazis’?”
Chapin began his piece thusly:
One morning in mid-August, Americans
woke up in what felt, to some, like an
altered country. The week’s most notable
political event had begun with hundreds of
Americans carrying torches while chanting
“Sieg Heil” and “Jews will not replace us.”
White supremacist radicals like these had
been active and energized throughout the
presidential campaign, but much of their
energy had been restricted to the internet.
The rally in Charlottesville was markedly
different. It confronted America with an
unlikely question: Was it possible the
nation was seeing a burgeoning political
185
faction of … actual Nazis? People we
should actually call Nazis?
He was, of course, talking about competing rallies in
Charlottesville, Va., which, to ensure accuracy, were
attended by Right-wing neo-Nazis and white supremacists
and Left-wing domestic terrorists under the banner of
Antifa.
Chapin went on to observe:
“This is one of the most remarkable results
of the alt-right’s emergence in the new
national dialogue. Talking seriously about
Nazis is part of the new normal.”
Well, as Mark Tapson at Truth Revolt counters, if that’s
true it’s because of the Left-wing media, not actual Nazis,
made it so.
Tapson correctly notes that self-described ‘Nazis’ in
America constitute such a statistically small group that,
were it not for the media, would be insignificant to the
point of non-existence. But because it has become
fashionable on the Left, and especially within the Left-
wing establishment media circle, to refer to Trump’s
“America First” policies as the same kind of ultra-
nationalism practiced and preached by Hitler, it’s no
wonder millions of Americans now actually believe that
“Nazis” are everywhere.
That’s precisely what the Left wants everyone to think
because it serves their political goals and objectives, which
is to delegitimize our duly-elected president.
As Tapson further notes, the Left uses the word “Nazi”
synonymously with “conservative” and “Republican” and,
especially, the phrase “Trump supporters.” They equate
anyone who sides with the president on his policies of
ensuring our country isn’t taken advantage of by the rest of
the world as some sort of bigoted, racist “supremacist.”
And a Nazi.
Chapin writes that the word Nazi
“has resurfaced in American conversation,
aimed at the white supremacist arm of the
so-called alt-right: It is perhaps the single
most potent condemnation in our language,
a word that provides instant moral clarity.”
Only, it doesn’t. Because it is being used to demonize
people who really are not Nazis at all — just political
opposites. (Related: CNN Now Claims EVERYONE
Who Voted For Trump Is A “White Supremacist” …
Insanity Takes Hold Across The Liberal Media.)
Tapson speculates that Chapin knows better but simply
doesn’t care, and that’s probably right. That’s because
while Chapin recognized the word Nazi is “sloppy and
.
186
inexact,” and a “broad, imprecise and patronizing slur,” he
nevertheless concludes that it’s politically useful because it
diminishes a wide swath of the Left’s ideological
opponents as nothing more than hating extremists.
This tactic is well-worn and oft-used. When a Leftist wants
to shut down debate and discussion, he or she merely
labels his or her political opponent as some sort of “-ist”
practicing some form of “-ism.”
This is no different.
There is no “widespread” growth of “Nazism” in America.
It is, and remains, an invention of the Left to impugn a
president and his supporters because they have a different
vision for America — one that does not include self-
destruction.
 American Football Cries
Foul On Trump Over ‘Son-Of-A-Bitch’ Comment
© AP Photo/ Marcio Jose Sanchez, - Sport
01:35 24.09.2017(Updated 06:48 24.09.2017)

The union that represents National Football League (NFL)

players was unequivocal in expressing support for the
rights of players to protest peacefully, as the group's chief
After calling a prominent football star a “son-of-a-bitch” tweeted that the organization "will never back down"
and suggesting that fans walk out of games if players on that right.
display actions of peaceful protest, stars of the sport, as
well as members of the brass that run and regulate the
game, have universally condemned US President Donald
Trump.

During a stump speech in Alabama on Friday intended

to drum up votes for a Republican politician who
supported Trump's globally unpopular withdrawal from the
2016 Paris Climate Accords, the US president wandered
off-subject, remarking instead how football players who
refuse to stand at attention during the performance of the
US national anthem — dropping to one knee instead —
should be fired, and fans should walk out of the stadium.
"Get that son of a bitch off the field right
now," Trump suggested, in a thinly-veiled
reference to free-agent quarterback Colin
Kaepernick, declaring that spectators —
after plunking down ticket prices, parking
fees and doling out many dollars
for expensive branded merchandise —
should simply "leave the stadium," Roger Goodell, the commissioner of the NFL, tweeted that
in response to the peaceful protest actions "divisive comments like these demonstrate an unfortunate
of a handful of professional football players, lack of respect" for the game, the organization and the
according to The Hill. players.

The reaction to Trump's wandering commentary was

quick, unified, and pointed, as players past and present,
bosses and other officials uniformly decried the president's
remarks using words like "divisive," unacceptable" and a
"disgrace," cited by the Huffington Post.

187
 Many noted that Trump appeared to display much less
anger toward violent racists than toward Americans
exercising their right to free speech.

188
 Trump: NFL Comments Had
Nothing To Do With Race
By Solange Reyner
Sunday, 24 Sep 2017 07:31 PM

“I was not watching the games today,

believe me — I’m doing other things. But I
watched a little bit.”

Trump last Friday said NFL owners should fire players

who kneel during the national anthem, and doubled down
on those comments over the weekend.

“I think it’s very disrespectful to our flag and

to our country,” he said. “We have great
people representing our country, especially
our soldiers, our first responders, and they
should be treated with respect. And when
you get on your knee and you don’t respect
the American flag or the anthem, that’s not
being treated with respect.”
President Donald Trump.
(Photo by Olivier Douliery - Pool/Getty Images)
Trump made the suggestion while giving a spirited speech
at a campaign rally Friday night in Alabama.
President Donald Trump on Sunday said his comments
criticizing NFL players who kneel during the national
"Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL
anthem, had nothing do with race, the Washington Times
owners, when somebody disrespects our
reported.
flag, to say, 'Get that son of a b****I off the
field right now. He is fired. He's fired,'"
“I’ve never said anything about race,” Trump said.
Trump said when asked whether he was
“inflaming racial tensions” by a reporter.
Professional sports players and some NFL owners
“This has to do with respect for our country,
slammed Trump over his comments and NFL
and respect for our flag.”
commissioner Roger Goodell denounced the president’s
statements, saying his “divisive” comments showed a
The president also said there was “tremendous solidarity “lack of respect for the NFL.”
for our flag and for our country,” in the little bit of the
NFL games he watched.
.

189
 Trump Expands Travel Ban
To Include North Korea, Venezuela And Chad
Citizens Of Eight Countries, Including North Korea And Venezuela, Will
Face New Restrictions On Entry To The US.
05:51, UK, Monday 25 September 2017

Unlike Mr. Trump's first travel ban, which sparked chaos

at airports across the country and a flurry of legal
challenges, officials said they had been working for
months on the new rules, in collaboration with various
agencies and foreign governments.

Mr. Trump last week called for a "tougher" travel ban after
a bomb partially exploded on a packed Tube train in
Parsons Green, west London.

The new restrictions are set to take effect from 18 October

President Donald Trump has issued new travel restrictions

on visitors to the US that will expand his controversial
travel ban to eight countries.

North Korea, Venezuela and Chad have been added to the

list of affected countries which includes Iran, Libya, Syria,
Yemen and Somalia. Restrictions on citizens from Sudan
were lifted.

The restrictions, which will start on 18 October, are
targeted at countries that Department of Homeland
Security officials say refuse to share information with the
US or have not taken necessary security precautions.
"Making America Safe is my number one
priority. We will not admit those into our
country we cannot safely vet," Mr. Trump
said in a tweet.
Image: President Trump's travel bans to the US have sparked
protests
"The travel ban into the United States
should be far larger, tougher and more
specific-but stupidly, that would not be
politically correct!" he tweeted.
Amnesty International USA condemned the new measures,
saying:

The announcement comes on the same day Mr. Trump's "Just because the original ban was
temporary ban on visitors from six Muslim-majority especially outrageous does not mean we
countries is set to expire, 90 days after it went into effect. should stand for yet another version of
government-sanctioned discrimination.
The measures help fulfill a campaign promise the
President made to tighten US immigration procedures and "It is senseless and cruel to ban whole
align with his "America First" foreign policy vision. nationalities of people who are often fleeing
the very same violence that the US
government wishes to keep out. This must
But critics have accused Mr. Trump of overstepping his not be normalised."
legal authority and violating the US Constitution's
protections against religious bias each time he has ordered
new travel restrictions.

190
 Donald Trump Says NFL Anthem Protests Have 'Nothing
To Do With Race' As Fresh Demonstrations Follow
Wembley Stunt
By Julie Allen, In Washington & Chris Graham
25 September 2017 • 3:57am
Donald Trump insisted on Sunday that a wave of protests
held by National Football League players during the US
anthem before games had "nothing to do with race".
The president escalated his feud with American
football after players staged their biggest anti-racism
protest yet at London's Wembley Stadium.
The protest, which was followed by more
demonstrations in America, came hours after Mr. Trump
called for a boycott of the NFL as he vented his fury on
Twitter throughout the day.
In a direct challenge to Mr Trump, two dozen players from
the Baltimore Ravens and Jacksonville Jaguars went down
on bended knee as the US national anthem was played
while others, including the Jaguars owner Shad Khan, who
is Muslim, stood and locked arms.
Everyone on both teams stood for God Save the Queen.
191
It came as other team owners condemned Mr. Trump's
comments as "contrary to the founding principles of our
country".
The backlash also included musician Stevie Wonder
kneeling during a concert in New York, saying he was
"taking a knee for America".
An empty sideline as the players for the Pittsburgh Steelers did not
come out for the National Anthem before the game against the
Chicago Bears Credit: USA Today
Players throughout America's most popular sport took a
defiant stance following the protest at Wembley, kneeling,
linking arms or raising clenched fists during the anthem.
More than 150 players could be seen kneeling or sitting in
the 14 games that took place on Sunday, easily the largest
such demonstration since former San Francisco 49ers
quarterback Colin Kaepernick first began protesting in
2016.
One of the biggest protests took place in the nation's
capital, where almost the entire lineup of the Oakland
Raiders team sat on their bench ahead of their game with
the Washington Redskins.
The Pittsburgh Steelers, Seattle Seahawks and Tennessee
Titans took a different approach later by staying in their
locker rooms.
Only the Steelers coaches, including head coach Mike
Tomlin, were on the field for the anthem ahead of their
game against the Chicago Bears, while both sets of players
were absent at Nissan Stadium.

A statement from the Seahawks players read: "As a team,

we have decided we will not participate in the national
anthem. We will not stand for the injustice that has
plagued people of colour in this country.

The Titans also released a statement which read:

"As a team, we wanted to be unified in our

actions today. The players jointly decided
this was the best course of action.
"Our commitment to the military and our
community is resolute and the absence of
our team for the national anthem shouldn't
be misconstrued as unpatriotic."

In Foxborough, around 15 members of the Super Bowl

champion New England Patriots took a knee during the
Oakland Raiders players sit on the bench during the national anthem.
anthem Credit: USA Today

"Out of love for our country and in honor of

the sacrifices made on our behalf, we unite
to oppose those that would deny our most
basic freedoms. We remain committed in
continuing to work towards equality and
justice for all."

New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady (12) stands during

the anthem Credit: USA Today

Star quarterback Tom Brady stood but linked arms with his
teammates. Reports said the protests were greeted with
scattered boos as some fans chanted "Stand up!"

In Detroit, meanwhile, the singer of the national anthem

Rico LaVelle dramatically dropped to his knee at the end
of his rendition. At least eight Detroit Lions players were
seen kneeling during the anthem while others linked arms.

The row began last year when Colin Kaepernick, then the
quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers, began refusing to
stand for the Star-Spangled Banner before games in protest
at shootings of black people by white police officers.

A handful of other players have since followed suit.

Kaepernick is now unemployed despite having led his
team to the Super Bowl at the end of the 2012 season.

192
Before boarding Air Force One in New Jersey to head
back to Washington, Mr. Trump said the protests were
"disrespectful to our country and very disrespectful to our
flag."
He said "the owners should do something
about it."
"We have a great country. We have great
people representing our country, especially
our soldiers and first responders. They can
be treated with respect," the president said,
speaking under the wing of the plane.
"When you get on your knee and you don't
respect the American flag or the anthem
that is not being treated with respect... This
has nothing to do with race or anything
else. This has to do with respect for our
country, and respect for our flag."
Earlier on Sunday Mr Trump called for a boycott of the
sport and for players who didn't stand to be fired by their
teams.
Sam Koch for Baltimore Ravens warms up before the NFL match
between The Jacksonville Jaguars and The Baltimore Ravens Credit:
Mitchell Gunn/Getty Images
193
He wrote on Twitter:
"If NFL fans refuse to go to games until
players stop disrespecting our flag and
country, you will see change take place
fast. Fire or suspend!
"NFL attendance and ratings are way
down. Boring games yes but many stay
away because they love our country.
League should back US."
He later responded to the latest protests, saying on Twitter:
"Great solidarity for our National Anthem
and for our Country. Standing with locked
arms is good, kneeling is not acceptable."
He later added:
"Sports fans should never condone players
that do not stand proud for their National
Anthem or their Country. NFL should
change policy!"
However, several owners criticised Mr. Trump and
stood with their players.
That included Robert Kraft, owner of the New England
Patriots, and a friend of Mr. Trump's.
He said:
"I am deeply disappointed by the tone of
the comments made by the president.
There is no greater unifier in this country
than sports, and unfortunately, nothing
more divisive than politics.
 "Our players are intelligent, thoughtful and
care deeply about our community and I
support their right to peacefully affect social
change and raise awareness in a manner
that they feel is most impactful."
Martha Firestone Ford, owner of the Detroit Lions, said:
"Our game has long provided a powerful platform for
dialogue and positive change in many communities
throughout our nation.
"Negative and disrespectful comments
suggesting otherwise are contrary to the
founding principles of our country."
.
194
In a statement the Chicago Bears chairman George H
McCaskey, said the organisation was
"proud to support our players, to bring
peace and unity together through football".
Mr. Trump had already ignited controversy on Friday
when, at a rally in Alabama, he called players not standing
for the anthem "sons of b-----s".
He was cheered by a predominantly white audience as he
said:
"Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL
owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, you'd say, 'Get that son of a b---- off
the field right now. Out! He's fired.'"
Roger Goodell, the NFL Commissioner, who heads the
league, said:
"Divisive comments like these demonstrate
an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL,
our great game and all of our players."
Mr. Trump provoked further ire over the weekend by
rescinding a traditional invite to the 2017 basketball
champions the Golden State Warriers to the visit the White
House after their star player, Stephen Curry, said he would
be reluctant to attend because of Mr. Trump's policies.
 Seahawks, Titans, Steelers Stay
In Locker Rooms During National Anthem
As More Players Protest
By Katherine Lam, Fox News
September 25, 2017

owner Shahid Khan, locked arms during the national

anthem. The players then stood up for “God Save the
Queen,” the British anthem.

Baltimore Ravens players, including former player Ray Lewis,

second from right, kneel down during the playing of the U.S. national
anthem before an NFL football game against the Jacksonville
Jaguars at Wembley Stadium in London on Sunday. (AP)

Three NFL teams stayed in their locker rooms during the

national anthem ahead of NFL games on Sunday, as a
growing number of players from other teams joined in
protest by kneeling on the field.

As the national anthem rang out at Nissan Stadium in

Nashville, neither the Tennessee Titans nor the Seattle
Seahawks were out on the field. Earlier in the day in
Chicago, all but one of the Pittsburgh Steelers remained in
the locker room during the anthem ahead of their game
against the Bears.

Ahead of Sunday night's game, many Oakland Raiders and

Washington Redskins sat or kneeled, as others stood and
linked arms.
In all, more than 100 NFL players from several teams
across the country kneeled or locked arms Sunday, after
President Trump lashed out at the protesters and called for
those who disrespect the flag to be fired or suspended. One
Steeler was seen just outside the players' tunnel at Soldier
Field: offensive tackle Alejandro Villanueva, a former
Army Ranger.
Members of the Seahawks and Titans marched out onto the
field with arms linked after the anthem was played. Some
people in the crowd booed as the players finally emerged.
Pittsburgh's coach, Mike Tomlin, stood by himself on the
sideline in Chicago. Tomlin had said before the game that
Pittsburgh’s players would remain in the locker room and
that

NFL Sunday began with members of the Jacksonville “we’re not going to let divisive times or
Jaguars and the Baltimore Ravens either taking a knee or divisive individuals affect our agenda.”
locking arms as the U.S. national anthem was sung at Tomlin added that the Steelers made this
London's Wembley Stadium. Those who were not choice “not to be disrespectful to the
kneeling, including the coaches on both teams and Jaguars anthem but to remove ourselves from this

195
 circumstance. People shouldn’t have to
choose.”
Most teams in the early afternoon games locked arms in
solidarity. At least three team owners joined their players.
Several New Orleans Saints players sat during the national
anthem. The Jaguars tweeted a photo shortly after the
team's defiant message with the caption:
“Unity.” Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti
released a statement posted on Twitter
after the incident, saying: “We recognize
our players’ influence. We respect their
demonstration and support them 100
percent. All voices need to be heard. That’s
democracy in its highest form.”
The display marked a tumultuous weekend between the
NFL and Trump, who called the players kneeling during
"The Star-Spangled Banner" disrespectful. Trump took
note of the incidents at the start of the games on Sunday.
"Great solidarity for our National Anthem
and for our Country. Standing with locked
arms is good, kneeling is not acceptable.
Bad ratings!" Trump tweeted.
He wrote earlier on Twitter:
196
“If NFL fans refuse to go to games until
players stop disrespecting our Flag &
Country, you will see change take place
fast,” Trump tweeted Sunday morning.
"Fire or suspend!”
"...NFL attendance and ratings are WAY
DOWN. Boring games yes, but many stay
away because they love our country.
League should back U.S.," he tweeted.
Trump's criticism began on Friday during a rally in
Alabama when he called for players to be fired who
disrespect the American flag.
"Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL
owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, to say 'get that son of a b ---- off the
field right now? Out! He's fired! He's fired,'"
Trump said to the crowd.
His comments drew sharp criticism among professional
athletes and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.
"Divisive comments like these demonstrate
an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL,
our great game and all of our players, and
a failure to understand the overwhelming
force for good our clubs and players
represent in our communities," Goodell
said.
Goodell announced on Twitter Sunday that a video
titled, "Inside These Lines" will air during Sunday night's
game as a sign of unity in the league.
 Trump stood by his words on Saturday when he rescinded
Golden State Warrior Stephen Curry’s invitation to the
White House this spring to honor his team’s 2017 NBA
championship. He then suggested that NFL players who
kneel during the patriotic song should be fired.

Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick

began the controversial movement last year when he
refused to stand during “The Star-Spangled Banner” to
protest police brutality against the African-American
community. Kaepernick has since become a free agent, but
he has not yet been picked up by any team.

A number of players wore shirts during warmup Sunday

that said "#IMWITHKAP" in support of Kaepernick.

197
 Russia’s Secret Agent Man Hiding In Plain Sight
Russia Secret Agent Man' Barack Hussein Obama Is Hiding In Plain
Sight. In Fact He Hid In Plain Sight Right In The Oval Office For
Eight, Long Uninterrupted Years
By Judi McLeod
September 25, 2017
In the era of “Fake News” unvarnished truth rarely, if ever,
finds its way to the media-propagandized masses.
In order to keep the masses in the dark, Fake News leans
on a typical tactic of cultural Marxism—projection, falsely
projecting Conservatives as the only purveyors of Fake
News.
It isn’t just that lies get halfway around the world before
truth ever gets its pants on, it’s that social media is an
unidentified swamp creature snapping its capacious hungry
jaws on any truth making its way into the sunlight.
Truth of the whole truth and nothing but the truth variety is
about as welcome in a Marxist/media-run society as a
Trump supporter at an AntiFa gathering.
The biggest suppressed truth of our day is a Greek Tragedy
in the making:
President Donald J. Trump is not the
real Russia Agent plunging America
into a maelstrom from which there is
no return, Barack Hussein Obama, is.
The mainstream media’s propagated “Russia-gate” is a
crock; the Special Counsel investigation led by Robert
Mueller, a coming-any-day-now miscarriage of justice,
heading full-speed down the pike to replace a duly elected
Donald Trump with failed presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton.
198
If the Russians had hacked 2016’s presidential election,
they would have done it for Hillary Clinton, who is much
more their samovar of tea. Like Obama, Clinton, an
adoring disciple of Saul Alinsky, has spent her career
spreading the ideals of socialism. Ditto for Vladimir Putin,
who as an avowed Communist, appreciates a close
relationship with Marxist Socialism.
For Putin the choice of who should be U.S. president
would have been an easy one. Hillary Clinton ably proved
that she was open to Russian deal making when big money
could be made in uranium. (NY Times, April 24, 2015
To Clinton, Trump is a pig, a capitalist pig. Russia leans
on communism, not capitalism.
In spite of all the media hype, the Russians-stole-the-
election conspiracy has gone nowhere from the get-go.
All of its lies had hit a brick wall before useful idiot
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg entered the big picture.
“Facebook announced earlier this month
that an internal investigation found that
Russian operatives likely spent $100,000
on politically-charged ads shown to social-
media users during the 2016 U.S.
presidential race, supporting the U.S.
intelligence community’s assessment that
Moscow meddled in Mr. Trump’s election
last November. Details involving the ads
are being given to congressional
investigators examining Russia’s alleged
involvement in the 2016 race, and
Facebook has adopted new rules meant to
make political ads as transparent as
possible, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said
Thursday.” (Washington Times, Sept. 22,
2017)
Two spoilers on this Russian-fodder-for Mueller story:
 One: It took Facebook nine months after
election to claim Russian operatives “likely”
spent $100,000 on politically-charged ads
shown to social-media users during the
2016 U.S. presidential race, supporting the
U.S. intelligence community’s assessment
that Moscow meddled in Mr. Trump’s
election last November”? How “likely” is
that?
Who knew the outcome of American
presidential elections relied on a mere
worth of $100,000 Facebook ads?!
Who knew the outcome of American presidential elections
rely not on hundreds of millions of dollars raised by
candidates, but just $100,000 on Facebook ads?!
“Both President Trump and a Kremlin
spokesman on Friday separately denied
that Russian government operatives
purchased political ads on Facebook meant
to sway the 2016 White House.
(Washington Times)
“The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads
on Facebook,” Mr. Trump tweeted Friday
morning. “What about the totally biased
and dishonest Media coverage in favor of
Crooked Hillary,” he added, using his
nickname for former White House hopeful
Hillary Clinton.
“We do not know ... how to place an advert
on Facebook,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry
Peskov separately told reporters Friday.
“We have never done this, and the Russian
side has never been involved in it,” Mr.
Peskov said in a conference call, Reuters
reported.
Untold legions of conservatives can
attest to being thrown off Facebook
Untold legions of conservatives can attest to being thrown
off Facebook, which only allows those in their good favor
onto their platform.
Two: Hillary Clinton has already said that
“Dependent upon the results of Robert
Mueller’s investigation, she may contest
the official results of the election.” (CNN,
Sept. 18, 2017)
The president and the Kremlin can deny it all the way to
the blue-in-the-face stage, but Mueller’s coming down the
pike and won’t give up until he hands the Democrats the
‘impeachment proof’ they need to remove Trump from
office.
199
And make no mistake about it that’s precisely what
Mueller’s unwarranted ‘investigation’ is all about.
Leading the posse to have President Trump impeached as a
Russian agent, CNN was reporting on Friday that Trump
has used the term “Russia hoax” at least once a month
since March.
The Never Trumpers jumped in on the Facebook claim
with cloven feet and swishing tails.
“The president’s comment “doesn’t merely
deny collusion with Russia, as one might
expect,” conservative commentator and
frequent Trump critic Bill Kristol tweeted
Friday. “He seems to deny the fact of
Russian interference.” (Washington Times)
Shouldn’t it matter to Kristol, that under the law of the
land, the President, like any other American, is innocent
until proven guilty?
“Mr. Putin authorized state-sponsored
hackers and propagandists to interfere in
last year’s election in order to hurt Mrs.
Clinton’s presidential ambitions, according
to the U.S. Office of the Director of National
Intelligence. Moscow’s alleged involvement
as well as any collusion on the part of Mr.
Trump’s transition team and administration
are currently the subject of separate
investigations underway in the House,
Senate and Justice Department. The
Kremlin and White House have both denied
interfering in last year’s race.” (Washington
Times)
Some steadfastly believe that the real Russian interference
is rooted in the destabilization of America through the
unsuspected tag team of Russia and China plotting the
takedown of America in North Korea.
“How long can the United States continue
to ignore the “North Korean madman”?
Thus, it is only obvious that the United
States is being goaded, little by little. The
American president is being led to believe
that he hasn’t any choice in the matter, that
North Korea must be preemptively
attacked. (Jeff Nyquist)
“And what happens if the U.S. launches a
preemptive attack on North Korea?
“The Russians and Chinese will denounce
as “aggression” any preemptive strike on
North Korea and launch a prompt counter-
attack against the United States. In the
resulting battle the United States would
 almost certainly lose an aircraft carrier. The
blow to American prestige would be
tremendous. The president of the United
States would probably be forced to resign,
or he would be impeached. Perhaps there
would be a military coup. The dollar would
fall and America’s allies would be
encouraged by Russia and China to
abandon the United States and realign
themselves with the new East Bloc.”
The clock is nearing midnight for the removal from the
Oval Office of the best president ever elected since
President Ronald Reagan.
There is a Russia Secret Agent Man working in the
background to bring about radical change for America
without hope.
‘Russia Secret Agent Man’ Barack Hussein
Obama is hiding in plain sight. In fact he
hid in plain sight right in the Oval Office for
eight, long uninterrupted years.
Obama and Clinton continue to end run reality with a sick
reality of their own.
The mainstream media continues to give Hillary Clinton a
platform as though she won on November 8th.

Americans who long for a stable USA in the rot left behind
Sound the warning bells:
by Obama will only get it if they support America’s 45th,
who is up against all odds.
Hillary is waiting for Mueller. Obama is waiting to fill the
vacuum left by coming anarchy.
This is where the ticking clock is taking an America where
millionaire NFL players (and now baseball stars) are
taking a knee against the National Anthem; where little Clinton has stopped crying into her Chardonnay in
boys attending grade school are now coming back home as anticipation of reclaiming a presidency she claims always
little girls; where the screeching of protest anarchists have was rightfully hers.
reached ear-piercing levels:
How much worse can it get?
In the shadows, The Obama/Clinton/progressive cabal are
putting the finishing touches on a mammoth, Mueller-
proofed coup d’état.

200
 Patriotism Is No Defense
For Trump’s Attacks On Black Athletes
By John William Templeton, Opinion Contributor
09/25/17 01:40 PM EDT
Congress should censure President Donald Trump for
referring to African-American players in vulgar language
in a public speech. Any legislator who fails to support such
a measure is giving support to bigotry.
Historians will rank his decision to go after the most
untouchable person in the country — Stephen Curry — as
one of the biggest political mistakes in American history,
until he makes another one by continuing to antagonize
every African-American athlete in the nation.
Since Juan Garrido, a black conquistador from Spain,
arrived on the Florida shore in 1508, there has been a
debate in African-American circle about the relative merits
of accommodation or resistance to the various forms of
white racism.
The ability to choose which method in real time is a
testament to the endurance of Africans in this country.
However, Trump ended that debate for all time.
The son of an experienced player, Curry had the adroitness
to become a popular figure transcending racial boundaries
with an attractive family. Winning two NBA
championships in the past three years lifted him from
obscurity with genuine personality, which has made him a
darling of advertisers.
On the anniversary of the day that President Abraham
Lincoln issued the provisional Emancipation Proclamation,
while the Congressional Black Caucus was in the midst of
its annual legislative weekend, a day after meeting with
201
African heads of state, Trump would play the race card to
attempt to help a Republican Senate candidate.
Curry, like similarly commercially successful Michael
Jordan, had been considered one to avoid controversy
despite constant media scrutiny.
When Trump went after him with viciousness, it meant
Curry was subject to the same vitriol directed at former
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick.
As one might expect, it opened the door to players who
now no longer had to make the calculus of remaining
quiet.
In one fell swoop, the combined attack on Curry and the
cursing at NFL players who protested achieved a unity not
seen since the fabled meeting of black athletes in 1966 in
support of Muhammad Ali.
It now makes Trump completely radioactive for any entity
that is seen to support him. After Charlottesville, leading
CEOs were forced to walk away. But, it could get worse.
We can count on Trump to continue to fan these flames,
causing national heroes to put their full energy towards
taking steps to stop his brand of hate.
Most of them did not want this battle. But warriors don't
back away from a fight.
We need to address the real meaning of patriotism. The
protests of Kaepernick and others are no different than the
sit-ins of the 1960s or the campus protests that spotlighted
apartheid. In the 1960s, Maj. Gen. Tony Jackson, (RET,
USMC), was head of the black athletes at San Jose
State. His ancestor had been the wagon train driver for
Brigham Young across the desert and his mother and
grandmother were still practicing Mormons. But Jackson
would lead a boycott of San Jose State's football team
against Brigham Young University because of the church's
racial policies.
He would then join the Marine Corps and spend 30 years
as an officer. There is no cause to say that protesting is not
patriotic. In fact, it is the ultimate patriotism to stand up for recently, Seattle Seahawk Michael Bennett to know that
the values of freedom and justice when it is not fortune and fame does not immunize them from police
convenient. brutality.

Athletes need only look at the cases of tennis star James Now, every black athlete has learned that lesson.
Blake, basketball player Thabo Sefolosha and most
.

202
 Trump's NFL Anthem Crusade
Angers Billionaire Campaign Donors
Monday, 25 Sep 2017 07:32 AM
President Donald Trump (AP)
President Donald Trump put NFL owners in an unwanted
spotlight this weekend with his suggestion, starting at a
rally in Alabama on Friday and continuing on Twitter, that
they should fire players who protest during the national
anthem and calling on fans to boycott the league.
Until this week, the relationship between the National
Football League's owners and Trump was mostly a cozy
one. Nine team owners donated money to Trump or to
groups that supported him both during his campaign and
since his election. Together they've given more than $10
million, according to the Federal Election Commission.
On Sunday, several of these Trump donors responded to
his comments with words of rebuke and displays of
solidarity with players. Ahead of the Jacksonville Jaguars
game with the Baltimore Ravens at Wembley Stadium in
London, Jaguars owner Shahid Khan stood on the field
during the Star-Spangled Banner, arms locked with two of
his players. Dozens of players on both sides of the field
took a knee. Khan donated $1 million to Trump's inaugural
committee.
Later in the day, the New York Jets' acting owner
Christopher Johnson, who assumed daily operations of the
team after his older brother Robert (Woody) was appointed
by Trump to be the U.S. Ambassador to the United
Kingdom, also stood locking arms with two players before
a game with the Miami Dolphins. None of the Jets players
sat, while, across the field, several Miami players did.
Dolphins owner Stephen Ross, who is not on the list of
Trump donors, also stood locking arms with players.
203
Woody Johnson gave a combined $1.5 million to Trump's
inaugural committee, to the host committee for the
Republican National Convention, and to Trump Victory, a
joint fundraising effort by the campaign and the RNC.
Pre-game Picture
After the Jets game, the team posted a picture of the pre-
game ceremony on Twitter under the caption "Unity" and
put out a statement from the younger Johnson calling it an
"honor and a privilege to stand with players." The
statement did not mention Trump or refer to his call for a
boycott.
Trump's comments seem to have galvanized a typically
conservative group. In addition to the nine Trump donors,
another seven of the NFL's 32 owners made political
contributions in the 2016 election cycle, primarily to
Republicans. On Sunday, their common interests as
business owners appeared to trump any political
allegiances.
"We have a lot of work to do, and we can
do it, but the comments by the President
make it harder," Khan said in a statement
after the anthem in London.
He called it a privilege to stand with his players. In the
most dramatic gestures on a day full of them, players for
the Pittsburgh Steelers, Tennessee Titans, and Seattle
Seahawks stayed in their locker rooms during the national
anthem.
Drawing Line
Trump on Sunday continued to stoke the controversy on
Twitter, writing that the NFL should change its policy on
protests and drawing a line in the sand:
"Standing with locked arms is good,
kneeling is not acceptable," he wrote.
Robert McNair, owner of the Houston Texans and founder
of power company Cogen Technologies, was the most
generous NFL owner among Trump's donors, with $3.5
million in gifts to the inaugural committee, Trump Victory,
and Great America, a super-PAC that supported Trump.
McNair echoed other owners in a statement calling
Trump's comments "divisive and counterproductive."
Stan Kroenke of the Los Angeles Rams, Daniel Snyder of
the Washington Redskins, Robert Kraft of the New
England Patriots, and Jerry Jones of the Dallas Cowboys
joined Johnson and Khan in making $1 million gifts to
Trump's inaugural fund. Kraft's gift came through the
Kraft Group, a holding company for the family's
businesses, while Jones gave through Glenstone LP, a
company that shares an address with the Cowboys and
other of his businesses.
.
204
Jim Haslam of the Cleveland Browns and Edward Glazer
of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers round out the list of Trump
donors. Glazer also made a small contribution to Hillary
Clinton's campaign.
It's not known whether any of those owners have also
given to America First Policies, the pro-Trump nonprofit
that launched ads on Sunday urging Trump-supporting
football fans to "Turn off the NFL." It isn't required to
disclose its donors.
 Kathy Griffin As Che Guevara?:
‘I Shamed’ The ‘Accidental’ President
By Corinne Weaver
September 26, 2017 10:21 AM EDT
The only unforgivable sin in this culture are being
conservative. Everything else is so easily forgiven and
forgotten by the media.
Kathy Griffin made it to the cover of The Guardian this
week, dressed as Che Guevara, the infamous Marxist
revolutionary who helped bring communism to Cuba and
murdered a whole lot of people while doing it. The public
most likely knows her best as the woman who channeled
ISIS and held up a severed bleeding fake head that looked
like Trump for a photoshoot. But in the interview, Griffin
maintained that she had done nothing wrong.
“I took a picture that you or any one of your
friends could make,” she whined. “I put it
online and was under federal investigation
for conspiracy to assassinate the President
of the United States of America.” Yes,
making fake beheading photos is a classic
tradition at slumber parties. In a recent
tweet, Griffin stated that she “shamed the
current (accidental) prez.”
“I was vilified by everyone,” Griffin told The
Guardian. “I was vilified by Chelsea fucking
Clinton … Nobody had my back. It
happened so fast. I didn’t see it coming.”
This statement begs the question: how desensitized does
one have to be to not realize that holding a bleeding head
of anybody might be going too far?
.
205
The Guardian justified its decision to make the
controversial Griffin its cover interview by saying that
anti-Trump propaganda is literally the backbone of
comedy in 2017. Jonathan Bernstein argued that
“American comedy is synonymous with
being loudly anti-Trump,” which is true. But
he found a hint of irony and misogyny in
the fact that Griffin became the scapegoat
for audiences’ rage.
He must have been listening to Griffin too long. When
Bernstein told his thoughts to Griffin, she said,
“I will not be convinced this was not a
straight-up case of sexism and ageism. I
really thing Trump went for me because I
was an easy target.”
Then she went on to address how she really felt about
Trump:
“I will openly accuse the President of the
United States of human rights violations . . .
This administration is a fucking nightmare
for us.”
Well, bleeding severed heads have certainly added to the
nightmare that is Hollywood. Maybe sit this administration
out, Griffin.
 MRC’s Brent Bozell Lambastes NFL Protests,
Encourages Nationwide Boycott on October 1
By NB Staff
September 25, 2017 3:39 PM EDT
RESTON, Va. — On Monday afternoon, Media Research
Center President Brent Bozell released the following
statement reacting to the NFL protests during the National
Anthem:
“Protesting the National Anthem not only
distracts from the sport that pays these
players millions but, more importantly,
disrespects the men and women of the
military who risk their lives to allow them
that opportunity. This is a spectacle
designed to score political points, and the
.
206
public is sick and tired of it. People tune in
to football to enjoy themselves, not to have
to subject themselves to attacks on our flag
because spoiled players don't like the
politics of our president. The public needs
to have its voice heard. This Sunday,
October 1st, I ask football fans to support
our flag and turn off the NFL. One week
without football to support our flag. We
should not continue to give attention to
players who refuse to show respect for our
great nation.”
 NASCAR Owners Side With Trump
In Dispute Over ‘Protesting’ NFL Players
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 25, 2017
“Anybody that don’t stand up for that ought
to be out of the country. Period.”
(National Sentinel) Sports Politics: For football fans who
are disappointed about the politicization of their beloved
game and angry over the disrespect shown to them via
player protests of the National Anthem, take heed:
NASCAR owners feel your pain and are on your side.
NASCAR owners almost universally lined up behind
President Donald J. Trump after he called out the National
Football League’s owners and players whose choice of
kneeling for the National Anthem as a way to protest
alleged social injustice has infuriated tens of millions of
Americans.
Their support comes after the president, as he so often has,
stepped up on Friday to accept the mantle of representative
and spokesman for NFL fans and others who disagree with
the protests and whose voices have been subdued by a
Left-wing media that has, once again, chosen the wrong
heroes.
“Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL
owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a b***h off the
field right now!’?” Trump boomed at a
political rally on Friday for incumbent GOP
Sen. Luther Strange.
“If you see it – even if it’s one player –
leave the stadium. I guarantee things will
stop,” said Trump, who at one time owned
the New Jersey Generals of the long-
defunct United States Football League
(USFL), which folded in the mid-1980s after
just three seasons.
207
Needless to say, that set off a new wave of protests on
Sunday, as hundreds of players took knees or sat during
the anthem. A handful of teams didn’t even take the field
during the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner;” teams
that did locked arms in unity, many with owners standing
with them.
NASCAR owners, however, voiced their agreement with
the president and the majority of Americans who find the
politicization of football as disgusting as the displays of
disrespect.
“Get you a ride on a Greyhound bus when
the national anthem is over,” team owner
Richard Childress responded when asked
what he would do if one of his employees
protested during the anthem, as USA
Today reported. “I told them anyone who
works for me should respect the country we
live in. So many people have gave their
lives for it. This is America.”
Team owner Richard Petty, who won a record-tying seven
championships as a driver, said he would fire any
employee that didn’t stand for the anthem.
“Anybody that don’t stand up for that ought
to be out of the country. Period,” Petty said.
“If they don’t appreciate where they’re at …
what got them where they’re at? The
United States.”
The majority owner of Richard Petty Motorsports, Andy
Murstein, conceded to ESPN that he would not fire an
employee for protesting the anthem. However, he said he
disagreed with the act.
“I would sit down with them and say it’s the
wrong thing to do that [take a kneel], and
many people, including myself, view it as
an affront to our great country,” Murstein
told ESPN. “If there is disenchantment
towards the President or a few bad law
enforcement officers, don’t have it cross
 over to all that is still good and right about
our country.”
Whatever your stance on the issue, it’s important to note
that, once upon a time before the progressive-Left media
chose identity politics over reason to to elevate Colin
Kaepernick to martyred status after he began these protests
last year, most people tuned into sporting events to get
away from politics.
.
But the Left refuses to concede any ground anywhere, as
evidenced by its attempt to politicize even the game of
football in its unending quest to destroy one American
tradition after another.
At least the owners in one sporting franchise refuse to cede
their cultural ground.

208
 Actor: Get That ‘Bloated Mother****Er’
Out Of The ‘Mother****Ing White House’!
By Corinne Weaver
September 25, 2017 4:13 PM EDT
Editor’s Note: Graphic content below.
Profanity must get you extra brownie points in liberal
Hollywood, especially when it’s aimed at President
Trump.
Michael Rapaport, an actor from Boston Public, posted a
video of himself “taking a knee” and throwing a temper
tantrum peppered with profanity to Twitter on September
23. Overall, he referred to President Trump as a
“mother****er” six times to conclude in a yell,
“get that son of a bitch out of the
motherfucking White House. Get him the
fuck out!”
His rant began by defending Stephen Curry of the Golden
State Warriors, who said they wouldn’t visit the White
House. Trump then rescinded the invitation and invited the
NHL Pittsburgh Penguins instead.
Rapaport began his tirade against the president:
“Trump, you dumb motherfucker, you
talking shit about the Currys? Everybody
loves the Currys. Ayesha Curry, Riley
Curry, Steph Curry, Dell Curry, even the
pretty ass moms, you dumb motherfucker
.
209
don’t you even know who the Currys are?
That’s like talking shit about Mickey Mouse!
You took away his invitation to the White
House to come meet you? Motherfucker,
no one from the NBA is fucking with you!
KD (Kevin Durant), LeBron, Steve Kerr,
Greg Popovich, Yao Ming, Larry Bird,
nobody is coming to fuck with you man. No
one wants to meet your ass. And then
you was talking shit about Kaepernick.
Saying ‘get that son of a bitch off the field.’
No! You fat motherfucker, get that son of a
bitch out of the motherfucking White
House. Get him the fuck out!”
After this very classy rage, posted IN FULL on Twitter,
Rapaport knelt on the grass outside his lawn. (Boy his
neighbors must have had a field day.)
“So now what’s going to happen is we
gonna take a knee to you. You bloated
motherfucker you,” he concluded. “You
have any idea how uncomfortable this is for
a 47-year-old Jewish man with a bad back
and shin splints? We taking a knee to you,
motherfucker.”
Only Trump could get his biggest critics to kneel to him
(allegedly in protest). What a weird world we live in.
 Mueller Investigation Desperate
As More Information About Obama’s Illegal
Spying Is Uncovered
By Jim Hoft
Monday, September 25, 2017
The Mueller Investigation is Getting
Desperate to Find A Crime, Any Crime.
As more information comes out about
the illegal spying by the Obama
Administration, Mueller is under more
and more pressure to find or make up a
crime related to President Trump.
It is time to deal with the corruption and
criminal conduct in the Department of
Justice, Criminal Intelligence Agency,
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
and shut down the criminal and corrupt
Mueller investigation.
Americans during the election demanded the future
President deal with the corruption and criminal conduct in
Washington DC. President Trump’s rally participants
chanted : “Drain the Swamp” at nearly every rally.
210
and “Lock Her Up” –
It’s amazing that the most important and
emotional demands that Americans
wanted from this President when he was
campaigning were captured in these two
slogans!
All Americans knew that Hillary Clinton was given a pass
by the MSM, FBI and DOJ for receiving money for
providing uranium to Russia. She was guilty
of mishandling emails and destroying evidence related
to her illegal email account. And now we know that
President Obama helped her campaign by spying on the
Trump team during the election and after his election win.
Obama’s years in office boiled over with corruption.
Former Clinton aide Dick Morris told the Gateway Pundit
that the CIA is currently running a coup d’état against
President Trump as if tanks were rolling up Pennsylvania
Avenue.
The FBI and DOJ under President Obama were
transformed into corrupt organizations. How else could
Obama get away with so much crime, corruption and lies?
The corrupt individuals leading these formerly proud
institutions must be removed and brought to justice.
Dick Morris suggests that President
Trump open an investigation on the
Mueller investigation.
 Mueller’s investigation is a farce and
now Clarice Feldman at American
Thinker reports that Mueller’s team is
getting desperate to find any
crime related to Trump:
I agree with Daniel Greenfield. Based on what I’ve read
and observed, while the initial surveillance was to stop
Trump and help Clinton, Obama used FISA to provide a
“national security” cover for politically spying on Trump
right up to the inauguration. As he notes, the first 2016
application was made the month after Trump obtained the
nomination and the second in October, the month before
the election.
As the unmasking picked up pace after the election, the
reasonable assumption is that its purpose was to undo the
results of the election or hamstring the incoming President.
Now Obama and his allies are or should be terrified that
the scope of the illegal surveillance is revealing their
criminal acts.
This is why I believe Mueller is growing increasingly
desperate to find one crime by one person he can force by
threat of jail to provide any shred of anything that might be
used to justify their illegal espionage. Greenfield’s
.
211
conclusion is apt: “The left is sitting on the biggest crime
committed by a sitting president. The only way to cover it
up is to destroy his Republican successor. A turning point
in history is here. If Obama goes down, the left will go
down with him. If his coup succeeds, then America ends.”
The current US Attorney General is
either over his head or part of the
swamp.
He recused himself from the phony Russia scandal and left
our President open for attack. He’s the man in charge when
the FBI recently declined a request for information related
to the Hillary Clinton email investigation. He let crooked
IRS officials walk after targeting thousands of
conservative Americans.
Sessions should either address the
corruption in his shop or the President
should find someone who will.
It’s time to bring Mueller, the FBI, the
Department of Justice, the CIA and
former President Obama and his corrupt
and criminal teams to justice.
 Did New York Mag Admit
Mueller Investigation Is A Fishing Expedition?
By P.J. Gladnick
September 25, 2017 1:12 PM EDT
Yesterday's New York magazine had the best summary of
the state of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation by
Special Counsel Robert Mueller yet written. It was
contained in a single paragraph buried deep in an article
with no other surprises so you have to look for it. Yet
despite having to wade through material which basically
tells us what we already know about that investigation, that
one paragraph is so stunning in its revelation amid an
otherwise routine summary of what Mueller is possibly up
to, that it hits the reader like a hard slap across the face.
Before reaching that revelatory paragraph, New York
magazine correspondent Cristian Farias reminds us that it
is quite extraordinary that a private citizen, Paul Manafort,
was secretly surveilled twice via FISA warrants. Uh, yeah,
it was stunning and it also confirms that President Donald
Trump was almost certainly right in his claim that Trump
Tower was wiretapped. However, we have known this for
over a week.
Farias also lets us know that it would probably be wise for
other possible targets of the Mueller investigation to obtain
lawyers even if they have nothing to hide. Yup, good
advice but just as one is about to doze off from this story
seeming to go nowhere, Farias suddenly stuns us with this
shocking paragraph that gets right to the heart of the
matter:
One individual who is familiar with an
aspect of the Mueller inquiry but asked
to not be named told New York that,
.
212
unlike other federal probes that he’s
seen in action, where prosecutors build
their cases from clear allegations, this
one feels different. “This is a backward
investigation,” the individual said. “You
don’t have a crime. You’re searching.
And so you’re not really sure exactly
what you’re searching for. So you start
asking around and you see what comes
up. And you start creating a paradigm
and you see what else comes up and
figure out at some point whether or not
there’s a crime.”
Got that? This is a "backward investigation" where "you
don't have a crime" so "you're searching." Oh, and you
aren't "really sure what you're searching for" so you just
"start asking around and see what comes up." In fact you
have to figure out "whether or not there is a crime."
Does this "backward investigation" not sound exactly like
a perfect description of a fishing expedition? Every
correspondent covering the Mueller investigation should
print out that revelatory paragraph from New York
magazine, laminate it, and carry it around at all times as a
reminder as to what this Mueller investigation is all
about...a fishing expedition.
 'Swarm Attack' From Armed
Drones Pose 'Grave Threat' To Trump
By Paul Bedard
Sep 25, 2017, 7:33 AM
The Secret Service is facing a "grave" threat to President
Trump from a new wave of high-tech weapons including
armed drones, plastic guns made on 3-D printers and even
sophisticated IEDs, according to a new alert issued by a
former agent.
"This threat is grave," Dan Bongino told
Secrets. The author of a new book on the
Secret Service that calls for a seismic
change of thinking at the agency, Bongino
said terrorists are eager to unleash an
attack on their "ultimate prize."
New age threats include weaponized drones delivered in
"swarms" that could attack the White House or any place
the president is. The problem, he explained, is that the
agency's agents and Uniformed Division are trained mostly
to stop ground attacks.
"Distractions from the sky, whether planes
or drones, create additional security
complications for an obvious reason:
Secret Service agents and officers cannot
fly," he warned in Protecting the President.
He said that terrorists have looked at drones "for a long
time," and that "the real threat comes from the more
spectacular swarm attacks."
He also raised new concerns about computer-generated
guns that can be slipped through traditional magnetometers
and the wealth of online terrorist teaching aids.
"The compounded effects of what I'd refer
to as terrorism MOOCs — massive, open,
online courses — describing, in detail how
.
213
to commit these types of attacks and the
growing commercial availability of drones,
and 3-D printing devices, the terrorists
have an advantage that can't be countered
with traditional thinking," Bongino told
Secrets.
And, he said, a suicide attack requires little planning by
terrorists, giving the good guys less of a chance to detect
an oncoming assault.
"A tactical attack on the president is likely
being planned right now. Terrorists seeking
media attention for their heinous acts have
long understood that a successful attack on
the president of the United States is the
ultimate prize," he wrote in his book.
Bongino's goal in issuing new warnings is to change how
the nation addresses threats to top leaders, including
everything from a rewrite of counter-terror plans to simple
tactics such as replacing the old iron fence around the
White House with a new one that can detect movement
and assaults.
"Sticking with a ‘that's how we've always
done it' approach to the threat of a
massive, coordinated, assault on the White
House is a guaranteed strategy for failure
on a grand scale in this new environment,"
added the long-time former agent and critic
of top Secret Service leadership.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington
Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at
pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com
 N.F.L. Owners’ Unity With
Players Might Be Short-Lived
On Pro Football
By KEN BELSON
SEPT. 25, 2017
Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shahid Khan, center, who linked arms
with players during the national anthem on Sunday, said he was not
likely to do it again. Credit Paul Childs/Reuters
The image was striking — several owners of N.F.L. teams
locking arms with their players on the sidelines Sunday in
a dramatic statement of defiance to a president who
ridiculed their sport and condemned players for refusing to
stand during the national anthem as a protest against
racism.
And then on Monday night, the league’s most prominent
owner knelt with his entire team.
Beyond the appearance of unity, though, is a far different
reality: The owners have done little to support players who
protest to fight social injustice. A few owners have told
their players that kneeling for the anthem is inappropriate.
The owners by and large are a white, conservative group of
billionaires, several of them big-dollar donors to President
Trump. They have generally discouraged their players,
about three quarters of whom are African-American, from
anything that overshadows throwing passes and making
tackles.
These are the same owners who allowed junk science
produced by league-sponsored doctors to paper over the
growing scientific consensus that repeated head hits are
linked to long-term brain damage. They have warred
repeatedly, aggressively and publicly with players over
labor issues.
214
And as for Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback who inspired
the anthem protests by kneeling in order to raise awareness
about racial oppression and police brutality toward
African-Americans, no owner has deemed him worthy of
job, despite widespread handicapping that, while not in his
prime, he certainly still is of a caliber to play.
It is certainly true that some owners, most notably Arthur
M. Blank of the Atlanta Falcons and Stephen M. Ross of
the Miami Dolphins, have tried through charitable work to
address the many thorny problems around racism, poverty
and policing. It took a rebuke from Mr. Trump to compel
many of them to choose between remaining silent or
publicly siding with the players.
Jerry Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, keeping
with his preference for dramatic flourishes, went further
than any other owner when he knelt with his team before
the national anthem for his team’s game with the Cardinals
in Glendale, Ariz. Before Monday, Jones had been among
the most vocal owners in saying he preferred that his
players stand for the anthem.
But the public demonstration of unity and support may be
short-lived.
While it is too early to know if the protests will continue,
and in what form, Shahid Khan, the owner of the
Jacksonville Jaguars and on Sunday the first owner to be
seen linking arms with his players on the sidelines, has
said he would not continue the practice in the coming
weeks.
“I’m not a crusader, but this was a Rosa
Parks moment for the Jaguars,” he said. “I
do not plan any future sideline
appearances.”
The owners’ decision to go with the players at least this
time struck some as a fallback to protecting the league
brand, embodied in its ubiquitous shield emblem with the
American flag motif.
“This issue is about protecting the shield,”
said Andy Dolich, a former N.F.L. team
executive. “There’s a subliminal dollar sign
 in that shield, so it is fair to be cynical”
about the owners’ motives.
League executives, however, said they had minimal
involvement in the owners’ or players’ actions.
The image was striking — several owners of N.F.L. teams
locking arms with their players on the sidelines Sunday in
a dramatic statement of defiance to a president who
ridiculed their sport and condemned players for refusing to
stand during the national anthem as a protest against
racism.
And then on Monday night, the league’s most prominent
owner knelt with his entire team.
Beyond the appearance of unity, though, is a far different
reality: The owners have done little to support players who
protest to fight social injustice. A few owners have told
their players that kneeling for the anthem is inappropriate.
The owners by and large are a white, conservative group of
billionaires, several of them big-dollar donors to President
Trump. They have generally discouraged their players,
about three quarters of whom are African-American, from
anything that overshadows throwing passes and making
tackles.
These are the same owners who allowed junk science
produced by league-sponsored doctors to paper over the
growing scientific consensus that repeated head hits are
linked to long-term brain damage. They have warred
repeatedly, aggressively and publicly with players over
labor issues.
And as for Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback who inspired
the anthem protests by kneeling in order to raise awareness
about racial oppression and police brutality toward
African-Americans, no owner has deemed him worthy of
job, despite widespread handicapping that, while not in his
prime, he certainly still is of a caliber to play.
It is certainly true that some owners, most notably Arthur
M. Blank of the Atlanta Falcons and Stephen M. Ross of
the Miami Dolphins, have tried through charitable work to
address the many thorny problems around racism, poverty
and policing. It took a rebuke from Mr. Trump to compel
many of them to choose between remaining silent or
publicly siding with the players.
Jerry Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, keeping
with his preference for dramatic flourishes, went further
than any other owner when he knelt with his team before
the national anthem for his team’s game with the Cardinals
in Glendale, Ariz. Before Monday, Jones had been among
the most vocal owners in saying he preferred that his
players stand for the anthem.
215
But the public demonstration of unity and support may be
short-lived.
While it is too early to know if the protests will continue,
and in what form, Shahid Khan, the owner of the
Jacksonville Jaguars and on Sunday the first owner to be
seen linking arms with his players on the sidelines, has
said he would not continue the practice in the coming
weeks.
“I’m not a crusader, but this was a Rosa
Parks moment for the Jaguars,” he said. “I
do not plan any future sideline
appearances.”
The owners’ decision to go with the players at least this
time struck some as a fallback to protecting the league
brand, embodied in its ubiquitous shield emblem with the
American flag motif.
“This issue is about protecting the shield,”
said Andy Dolich, a former N.F.L. team
executive. “There’s a subliminal dollar sign
in that shield, so it is fair to be cynical”
about the owners’ motives.
League executives, however, said they had minimal
involvement in the owners’ or players’ actions.
On Saturday, the commissioner, Roger Goodell, issued a
statement condemning the president’s remarks. Several
clubs then contacted the league to find out what, if
anything, other teams were doing to follow up, while
players across the league consulted one another on what to
do.
“There was a lot of sharing and the league
was kind of a clearinghouse,” said Joe
Lockhart, an N.F.L. spokesman.
Nearly all 32 teams released statements, but most of the
owners have not commented further.
The owners, stewards of a $14 billion league, the richest
and most powerful in the United States, have tried to tread
carefully. They did not ask for this moment in the political
spotlight and seem in a hurry to leave it.
“Football and politics don’t mix easily,” the
Cincinnati Bengals, whose owner is Mike
Brown, said in a statement Monday. “Fans
come to N.F.L. games to watch great
competition on the playing field and that’s
where our focus should be.”
While some of the owners said they support the players’
right to speak out, they also worry about a backlash and
recognize that many spectators object to protests during
the national anthem.
“At this point, I want to get away from
politics and if they are going to continue
protest, then I don’t need to spend my
money there,” said Brandon Gill, a realtor
from Jacksonville, Fla., who is considering
giving up his Jaguars season tickets.
“Frankly, I’m just tired of it all.”
A state legislator in Louisiana, Kenneth Havard, a
Republican, said he wants to take away millions of dollars
in subsidies and tax breaks that the New Orleans Saints
and the N.F.L. receive because they have allowed players
to protest during the national anthem.
“Disrespecting our national anthem and
flag in the name of social injustice is the
.
216
highest form of hypocrisy,” Mr. Havard said
in a statement.
“It is time the taxpayers quit subsidizing
protest on big boy playgrounds. I believe in
the right to protest but not at a taxpayer
subsidized sporting event.”
Then again, with calls for boycotts of the N.F.L. over Mr.
Kaepernick’s not being hired, it is fair to say objections are
coming from the right and left.
N.F.L. owners are nothing if not businessmen, so until
attendance declines precipitously, or it can be determined
that the protests have directly led to a decline in television
ratings, they are unlikely to clamp down on the protests.
Indeed, the league got a pat on the back on Monday when
Ford and Nike, two big N.F.L. sponsors, issued statements
backing the players’ right to protest.
 Former Memphis Police Officer Arrested Outside White
House On Weapons Charges
Yolanda Jones,Michael Collins And Daniel Connolly, Gannett Published
4:12 P.M. ET Sept. 25, 2017 | Updated 9:41 A.M. ET Sept. 26, 2017
WASHINGTON — A former Memphis police officer was
arrested near the White House on Sunday when police
found 20 guns, including several assault weapons, in the
trunk of his car, according to a Metro D.C. police report.
Timothy Joseph Bates, 37, Collierville, Tenn., was arrested
around 7:15 am near the Renwick Gallery on Pennsylvania
Avenue, just across the street from the White House.
A Secret Service officer saw Bates urinating in public and
when the officer approached,
Bates told him he “came to the White
House in order to speak with Adm. Mike
Rogers and Gen. Jim Mattis for advice on
missing paychecks and how to get the dog
chip out of my head,” the police report said.
217
Former Memphis Police Officer Timothy Bates. (Photo: Memphis
Police Department)
Rogers is director of the National Security Agency. Mattis
is secretary of Defense.
Bates was driving a Silver 2009 Nissan bearing Tennessee
Fraternal Order of Police vanity license plates. Officers
noticed the FOP plates and asked Bates if he had any
weapons, to which he replied yes.
Police saw three gun cases and a further search uncovered
more than two dozen items, including a .40-caliber Smith
& Wesson, an M4 Platform Bushmaster assault-style
weapon, an AK-47 Platform Norinco, a Glock 30, a Tec-9
with a silencer, brass knuckles and several rounds of
ammunition.
Memphis police spokesman Sgt. Louis Brownlee said
Bates worked for the Memphis Police Department from
2000 until he retired as a patrolman in August 2013.
"We have no further comment on this
former employee," Brownlee said.
Metro D.C. Police charged Bates with six counts,
including possession of a prohibited weapon; possession of
an unregistered firearm; possession of unregistered
ammunition; carrying a dangerous weapon outside a home
or place of business; carrying a pistol without a license;
and unlawful transportation of a firearm.
Bates was arrested and taken to an area hospital for
observation.
 Puerto Rico's Governor Dismantles Media Attacks On
Trump's Response To Hurricanes Irma And Maria
By Patrick Poole
September 25, 2017

It was clear this weekend that the talking points had gone
out to the media: President Trump's response to both
Hurricane Irma earlier this month and Hurricane Maria last
week was as disastrous as Bush's response to Hurricane
Katrina.

All of these media figures became woke

on the topic in just the last 24 hours.

218

But is it true?
The pushback against the media narrative has come from a
surprising source: Puerto Rica Governor Ricardo Rosselló,
who served as a Hillary Clinton delegate to the 2008
Democratic National Convention and as an Obama
delegate in 2012.
In an interview with PBS Newshour this evening,
Rosselló thanked the Trump
administration for their prompt
response:
JOHN YANG: Governor, are you getting all
the aid you need or getting it fast enough
from the states?
GOV. RICARDO ROSSELLO: First of all,
we are very grateful for the administration.
They have responded quickly.
The president has been very attentive to
the situation, personally calling me
several times. FEMA and the FEMA
director have been here in Puerto Rico
219
twice. As a matter of fact, they were
here with us today, making sure that all
the resources in FEMA were working in
conjunction with the central
government.
We have been working together. We
have been getting results. The
magnitude of this catastrophe is
enormous. This is going to take a lot of
help, a lot of collaboration.
So, my call is to congressmen and congresswomen to take
action quickly and conclusively with an aid package for
Puerto Rico.
We are in the midst of potentially having a humanitarian
crisis here in Puerto Rico which would translate to a
humanitarian crisis in the United States. So, I call upon
Congress to take action immediately. You know, Puerto
Ricans are proud U.S. citizens.
This is a message that Gov. Rosselló and other Puerto
Rican officials had been putting out all weekend.
On Saturday, the Associated Press reported:
Rossello and other officials praised the
federal government for planning its
response in detail before the storm hit, a
contrast with what Puerto Rico has long
seen as the neglect of 3.4 million
Americans living in a territory without a vote
in Congress or the electoral college.
"This is the first time we get this type of
federal coordination," said Resident
Commission Jenniffer Gonzalez, Puerto
Rico's non-voting representative in
Washington.
On Monday, FEMA tweeted out about some of the help
that had already arrived.
A FEMA press release detailed some of the relief headed
towards Puerto Rico:

 Six commercial barges transported and delivered

meals, water, generators, cots, and other commodities
to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
 An air bridge is established, flying three flights per day
to St. Croix, each carrying approximately 33,000 meals.
 The logistics support ship SS Wright arrived carrying
more than 1.1 million meals, and nearly one million
liters of freshwater.
 Two shipping barges with 1.2 million liters of water, 31
generators, and more than 6,000 cots arrived in St.
Thomas.
 Two additional shipping barges loaded with food,
water, and emergency relief supplies are en route to
the Caribbean Sea from Florida.
 Millions of additional meals are being flown to Puerto
Rico from staging areas in Kentucky and Florida.
 The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) is transporting The 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) and
a shipment of 124,000 gallons of diesel fuel to Puerto Expeditionary Strike Group 2, as well as the USS Wasp,
Rico, with arrival in the coming days. USS Oak Hill, USS Iwo Jima and USS New York, have all
participated in recovery operations so far.
It may not be obvious to the media, but one of the
difficulties in getting supplies to Puerto Rico is that it's an
island 1200+ nautical miles from Miami, the closest major
U.S. port.

Clearing the ports takes time, and getting supplies for 3.4
million people by plane into devastated airports isn't a real
option.

Stars and Stripes reports that the Defense

Department has already sent 2,600
personnel to Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands to assist in recovery.
Now the media is pearl-clutching about President Trump's
tweets on the situation Monday night.

220
 In fact, CNN made this very point just hours before Irma
was supposed to arrive.

But again, Gov. Rosselló made the exact same

observations in an interview with CBS News earlier
Monday -- namely, that Puerto Rico's finances are figuring
into the recovery:

But the threat of a natural disaster comes as the territory

deals with a massive economic one.

Puerto Rico has been watching its economy decline for

years because of enormous government overspending, a
big dependence on debt and a costly, inefficient energy
system.

Those problems finally led the

commonwealth in May to file the biggest
municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history.
The Associated Press explains this is a cold, hard reality
for Puerto Rico: Puerto Rico has $74 billion in debt, and another $50 billion
in pension obligations on the books.
The island’s infrastructure was in sorry
shape long before Maria struck. A $73 And risk-management experts:
billion debt crisis has left agencies like
the state power company broke. As a
result the power company abandoned
most basic maintenance in recent years,
leaving the island subject to regular
blackouts.

A federal control board overseeing Puerto Rico’s finances

authorized up to $1 billion in local funds to be used for
hurricane response, but the governor said he would ask for
more.

“We’re going to request waivers and other

mechanisms so Puerto Rico can respond
to this crisis,” Rossello said. “Puerto Rico
will practically collect no taxes in the next
month.”

221
 It should be noted that with the
exception of one four-year term, the
governor of the Commonwealth has
been a Democrat since 1973.

While Congress shouldn't delay the much-needed financial

resources to begin to rebuild Puerto Rico from
unprecedented devastation, the media and the talking
heads attacking Trump are clearly trying to unfairly use
Hurricanes Irma and Maria as a bat to beat the president
with.

But is any of this new?

222
 Trump Goes To War With NFL: What Happened
Trump Is Lighting The Alcohol In The Cocktail. He Doesn’t Care.
Jon Rappoport
September 26, 2017
There is a ton of news about what the
current NFL protests mean, politically
speaking. For the moment, I’m leaving
that out. I want to take a different angle.
The first thing to know is that Donald Trump once played
a key role in an upstart pro football league called the
USFL, which lasted three seasons (1983-85) before it
collapsed.
As the owner of the New Jersey Generals and the most
powerful force in the League, Trump went up against the
NFL. He wanted the USFL to schedule its games opposite
the NFL starting in the fall, not the spring. Trump was a
key player in suing the NFL for monopolistic practices.
The USFL won that suit, and was awarded the grand sum
of…three dollars. Yes.
So The Donald has held a grudge against the NFL for a
long time.
His recent tweets and statements, urging the league to take
action against players disrespecting the National Anthem,
urging teams to fire protesting players…all this has a
history.
But there is a deeper story, and it emerges at a time when
television ratings for the NFL have already been declining,
and the television networks—especially ESPN—are
carrying massive billion-dollar contracts with the NFL for
the rights to broadcast games.
On top of that, ESPN features show-hosts who are firmly
in the Colin Kaepernick, pro-protest camp. These talking
223
heads are politicizing sports every day, and many fans
don’t want that.
What do they want from ESPN and from the NFL games
they watch? They want sports, competition, heroics on the
field. They want their favorite teams to win and the teams
they hate to lose. Period.
In theater, there is a phrase, “breaking the fourth wall.” It’s
used to describe plays that address the audience directly
and shatter the illusion of viewing a self-contained world
on stage.
This is where the deeper story of football enters the scene.
For fans, the political/sports commentary and the protests
on the playing field are breaking the fourth wall.
They can’t watch the games in a trance.
They can’t enjoy the vicarious thrills and chills.
The same thing is happening in the television news
business. During the Obama presidency, there was the
(promoted) mainstream illusion that White House business
was being conducted in the usual hermetically sealed
container. It was a controlled stage play—and people could
sit in front of their television sets in a popcorn trance and
watch it unfold. All in all, with major exceptions, the
hypnotic spell held. For a while.
But then along came Trump. He broke the fourth wall. He
laughed at the press. He called them idiots. He attacked
them mercilessly. He said they were fake.
This was quite disturbing to many news fans. It certainly
was disturbing to the major news networks. They make
their living by hypnosis.
And now it’s happening to one of the nation’s most
cherished institutions of distraction: football.
It isn’t football anymore. It’s a mixed drink. With serious
political overtones. What people want to get away from on
Sundays, Monday and Thursday nights is what they’re
being forced to swallow.
And Trump is making it much worse. He’s lighting the
alcohol in the cocktail. He doesn’t care.
Where can millions of trance-seeking Americans go to get
their fix? It’s a problem.
The protests have spilled over into the NBA and it looks
like Major League Baseball may suffer the same indignity,
thanks to Trump.
Here’s a piece of cognitive dissonance for you. At the
beginning of yesterday’s NFL games, fans in several
stadiums booed players for kneeling during the national
Anthem. It’s hard to maintain a hypnotic spell in the
middle of that contradiction.
What’s a “normal American” to do? Stay home and guzzle
a six-pack while watching Sunday cable re-runs of Cops?
“Give me back my fourth wall!”
When people complain these days that they’re triggered by
the contentious political scene in America, when they seek
professional help for their disturbed mental state, in many
cases they’re simply asking to return to simpler times.
“I want the news to lie to me as it’s always
lied to me, and I want to believe. Let me
concoct my old fantasies…”
In ancient Rome, it was bread, blood and circuses. Now
it’s sponsors like Budweiser and Ford, concussions, and
kneeling.
In order to corral millions of people in a news trance or a
football trance, you need transmissions without
disruptions.
Trump is escalating the disruptions.
Whether people are for or against his tweets about the
NFL, the spell is being torn apart.
“I want my football! I want my fourth wall!”
.
224
Trump talks about building one wall on the southern
border, and he’s ripping the “football wall.”
Aside from making business deals, disruption has always
been Trump’s game.
In a nutshell, the major pastime of America, in modern
times, is hypnosis. That sport appears to be falling apart.
This is the bigger issue. It comes down to: what is the
individual going to do? What is he waking up to? What
does he want others to wake up to?
Can the sleeper, jostled in his bed, forced to put his feet on
the cold floor, build a better reality? Or will he look for
another spell to fall under? Can he recognize he has been
sleeping all this time?
Does he think his favorite trance, which is under attack, is
the only reality that counts?
Waking up may be hard to do, but these days it is called
for.
Think about this: On one side, we have people who love
the flag, who support the veterans, who support US wars
of empire in any far-flung place, who support the massive
destruction of life in Iraq and Afghanistan, who support
the government with its unending Surveillance State. On
the other side, we have people who want to blame the
basic conditions of inner cities on police, who want to
avoid talking about gangs and shootings and drugs and the
failed war on poverty and race baiters and the theft of jobs
by Globalists.
Entering either of these realms is entering a trance. It may
be an active trance, but the game is still hypnosis.
“If you can keep your head when all [those]
about you are losing theirs…”
Controllers are in the business of pitting one trance against
another, for profit, advantage, and power.
 MSM Enraged Most Americans
Agree With Trump On NFL Controversy
The Establishment Is Furious That It Can’t Control The Narrative
David Knight | Infowars.Com
September 26, 2017

David Knight breaks down how the

NFL’s #TakeTheKnee protest is a part of
the ongoing attacks on the symbols of
freedom in America like the flag and the
national anthem.

225
 Dem Lawmaker Threatens
To Force Trump Impeachment Vote Next Week
By Cristina Marcos
09/26/17 11:22 AM EDT

Green denounced Trump’s comments, saying they amount

to “a level of indecency that is unbecoming the
presidency.”

“I rise to say to the world that this is not

what America is all about,” Green said,
hitting the podium for emphasis.

Under House rules, any member can file what is known as

a “privileged” resolution that argues something goes
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) said Tuesday that he will move against the dignity and integrity of the House.
to force a House floor vote to impeach President Trump
next week as he denounced Trump's attacks on NFL
Even if Republicans reject it, as expected, Green can still
players protesting police brutality.
force a procedural vote on his resolution.

Green, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus,

stood on the GOP side of the House chamber to announce
his plans to file a resolution that will automatically trigger
a floor vote.
“I rise today as a proud American. A person
who believes in his country, who salutes
the flag and says the Pledge of Allegiance
and sings the national anthem,” Green
said, wearing an American flag-themed tie.
“I will stand here in the well of the
Congress, and I will call for the
impeachment of the president of the United
States of America,” he said.
Green has called for Trump’s impeachment before. He
signed on to an article of impeachment filed by Rep. Brad
Sherman (D-Calif.) in July that argues Trump obstructed
justice by firing James Comey as FBI director amid the
agency’s investigation of whether his campaign colluded
with the Russian government.
Green previously threatened to file a privileged resolution
to impeach Trump in June if he ousted Robert Mueller, the
special counsel now overseeing the FBI’s investigation.
“I think that would be a part of the last
straw, if not the last straw, if he did that,”
Green told The Hill at the time.

Trump renewed the controversy over former San Francisco It's unclear if the latest privileged resolution on which
49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling protests at Green is threatening to force a vote will also cite the
a rally in Alabama on Friday. Comey firing as justification for impeaching Trump. A
spokesman didn't immediately return a request for
“Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL comment.
owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, to say, 'Get that son of a bitch off the
field right now. He is fired,’ ” Trump said.
.

226
 The "Russian Influence" Story
Falls Apart – A New Fairy Tale Is Needed
By B
September 26, 2017
The Obama White House and some Democratic officials
pressed Facebook to find evidence for alleged "Russian
interference" in the U.S. election. When Facebook found
none, the pressure increased. Facebook went back, again
found nothing and political pressure increase further.
Congress threatened to investigate. Senator Warner flew to
California and demanded the "right" results. Eventually
Facebook gave in:
By early August, Facebook had identified more than 3,000
ads addressing social and political issues that ran in the
United States between 2015 and 2017 and that appear to
have come from accounts associated with the Internet
Research Agency.
All hailed Facebook - finally there was something they
could build their anti-Russian campaign on.
It is of course idiotic to believe that 3,000 ads for which
some $100,000 was spent over two years would somehow
effect a U.S. election. In a U.S. presidential election more
than $2 billion is spend on advertising. Facebook's ad
revenue per year is some $27 billion.
Moreover - as it now turns out these 3,000 advertisements
which "appeared" to be "associated" with something
"Russian" were not anti-Clinton or pro-Trump but were a
mix of pro- and contra ads on various social issues:
The batch of more than 3,000 Russian-
bought ads that Facebook is preparing to
turn over to Congress shows a deep
understanding of social divides in American
society, with some ads promoting African
American rights groups, including Black
Lives Matter, and others suggesting that
these same groups pose a rising
political threat, say people familiar with
the covert influence campaign.
The Russian campaign — taking advantage of Facebook’s
ability to send contrary messages to different groups of
users based on their political and demographic
227
characteristics — also sought to sow discord among
religious groups.
Other ads highlighted support for
Democrat Hillary Clinton among Muslim
women.
(Note again - there is no evidence that any of the ads were
"Russian bought" or part of a "Russian campaign". Those
are mere assertions by the Washington Post authors.)
As we now learn that these ads were not, as earlier
assumed, pro-Trump and anti-Clinton, the narrative has to
change. Earlier it was claimed that the alleged Russian aim
was to get Trump elected. That no longer holds:
“Their aim was to sow chaos,” said Sen.
Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), vice chairman of
the Senate Intelligence Committee. “In
many cases, it was more about voter
suppression rather than increasing
turnout.”
How pro- and anti-Black Lives Matter ads might have
suppressed voter turnout will stay Senator Warner's secret.
Instead of "Russia helped Trump" we now get an even
more implausible "Russia wanted to sow discord"
narrative. As if Donald Trump's campaign style had not
been enough to cause controversies.
The Washington Post has been the major outlet to push the
"Russian influence" baloney. It has long left all journalistic
standards behind. Today it goes even further. An editorial
now claims that Russia interfered in the German elections
by pushing the right-wing AfD vote through last minute
tweets from some Twitter bots:
The party was buoyed by social-media
campaigns of the kind Russia has used
elsewhere — faceless bots that multiply
messages over and over. Once again, the
Kremlin’s quest to disrupt democracy,
divide the West and erode the rules-based
 liberal international order may have found a
toehold.
No evidence is presented that any online activity "buoyed"
the AfD. No evidence is presented that anything Russian
was involved. Here is the sole point the editorial builds on:
In the final hours of the campaign, online
supporters of the AfD began warning their
base of possible election fraud, and the
online alarms were “driven by anonymous
troll accounts and boosted by a Russian-
language botnet,” according to the Atlantic
Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab.
The Atlantic Council is financed by foreign (Middle East)
interest, NATO and the oil- and weapon industry. It has
been a major driver of the anti-Russian new Cold War
narrative. Its "Digital Forensic Research Lab" indeed
claims to have found a few Twitter accounts which have
their names written in Cyrillic(!) letters. Only Russian
influence accounts would ever do that! It even found one
tweet warning about election fraud that was retweeted
500(!) times. That MUST have helped the AfD to receive
more than 12% of the 47 million cast votes in Germany -
(not!).
Election fraud in the German pen and paper balloting is
nearly impossible. No one will take vague claims thereof
as serious. It is simply not an issue in Germany and any
such claim would not effect the vote. German officials
have found no sign of "Russian" election hacking or of
voting fraud.
What the Washington Post editors and the Atlantic Council
have missed in their search for undue election influence in
the German election is the large support of a islamophobic
U.S. megadonor for the rightwing Germany AfD party:
.
228
[O]ne of the major publishers of online
content friendly to the far-right [German]
party is an American website financed in
large part and lead by Jewish philanthropist
Nina Rosenwald.
Rosenwald’s site, the Gatestone Institute, publishes a
steady flow of inflammatory content about the German
election, focused on stoking fears about immigrants and
Muslims.
The fake news stories by the Zionist agitators were
translated into German and disseminated to support the
AfD.
Allegations of "Russian influence" in U.S., French and
German elections is made up from hot air. No evidence is
or ever was presented to support these claims. Massive
election interference by other foreign interests, like large
Saudi donations to the Clinton Foundation, or Zionist
Jewish financier support for extremist positions in
Germany and France is ignored.
The story about "Russian influence" was made up by the
Democrats to explain Clinton's loss of the election and to
avoid looking at her personal responsibility for it. It also
helps to push the new cold war narrative and to sell
weapons. As no evidence was ever found to support the
"Russian influence" campaign, Facebook and others come
under pressure to deliver the "evidence" the U.S.
intelligence services could not produce. The now resulting
story of "sowing chaos" is something out of la-la-land.
If there is something to learn from this sad story it is this:
The lack of objectivity and journalistic integrity is a
greater threat to western democracy than any "Russian
influence" could ever be.
 Was Facebook Pressured
Into Finding ‘Something’ To Implicate Russia?
Michael Krieger
Posted Tuesday Sep 26, 2017 At 3:18 Pm
Robert Parry of Consortium News just published an
extremely important article picking apart The Washington
Post’s latest attempt to convince readers that Russia
influenced the 2016 U.S. election. In this case, by
purchasing a measly $100,000 of Facebook ads.
The Washington Post, which has a history of falsely
claiming certain alternative media websites work for the
Kremlin, is owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos, founder and
CEO of Amazon, which has a $600 million contract with
the CIA. When it comes to Russia hysteria, the paper is in
a class of its own.
What follows are some key excerpts from Parry’s
piece, WPost Pushes More Dubious Russia-bashing. You
should read the entire thing and share.
Some people are calling the anti-Russian
hysteria being whipped up across the U.S.
mainstream news media a new “golden
age of American journalism,” although it
looks to me more like a new age of yellow
journalism, prepping the people for more
military spending, more “information
warfare” and more actual war.
I know that some people feel that the evidence-lite and/or false
allegations about “Russian meddling” are the golden ticket to
Trump’s impeachment. But the unprofessional behavior of The
New York Times, The Washington Post and pretty much the
229
entire mainstream media regarding Russia-gate cannot be
properly justified by the goal of removing Trump from office.
The U.S. mainstream media has clearly joined the anti-Trump
Resistance and hates Russian President Vladimir Putin, too. So,
we are given such travesties of journalism as appeared as a
banner headline across the front page of Monday’s Washington
Post, another screed about how Russia supposedly used
Facebook ads to flip last November’s election for Trump.
The article purports to give the inside
story of how Facebook belatedly came
to grips with how the “company’s social
network played a key role in the U.S.
election,” but actually it is a story about
how powerful politicians bullied
Facebook into coming up with
something – anything – to support the
narrative of “Russian meddling,”
including direct interventions by
President Obama and Sen. Mark Warner
of Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the
Senate Intelligence Committee and a
key legislator regarding regulation of
high-tech industries.
In other words, Facebook was sent back
again and again to find what Obama and
Warner wanted the social media
company to find. Eventually, Facebook
turned up $100,000 in ads from 2015
into 2017 that supposedly were traced
somehow to Russia. These ads
apparently addressed political issues in
America although Facebook has said
most did not pertain directly to the
presidential election and some ads were
purchased after the election.
Left out of the Post’s latest opus is what a very small pebble
these ads were – even assuming that Russians did toss the
$100,000 or so in ad buys into the very large lake of billions of
dollars in U.S. political spending for the 2016 election cycle. It
also amounts to a miniscule fraction of Facebook’s $27 billion in
annual revenue.
So the assertion that this alleged “meddling” –
 and we’ve yet to see any evidence
connecting these ads to the Russian
government –
“played a key role in the U.S. election” is both silly and
outrageous, especially given the risks involved in stoking
animosities between nuclear-armed Russia and nuclear-armed
America.
Even the Post’s alarmist article briefly
acknowledges that it is still unclear who
bought the ads, referring to the
purchasers as “suspected Russian
operatives.” In other words, we don’t
even know that the $100,000 in ads over
three years came from Russians
seeking to influence the U.S. election.
(By comparison, many Facebook
advertisers – even some small
businesses – spend $100,000 per day on
their ads, not $100,000 over three
years.)
Monday’s Post exposé simply asserts the claim as flat fact. Or as
the article asserts: “what Russian operatives posted on Facebook
was, for the most part, indistinguishable from legitimate political
speech. The difference was the accounts that were set up to
spread the misinformation and hate were illegitimate.”
In responsible journalism, such an accusation would be followed
by a for-instance, giving an example of “the misinformation and
hate” that the “Russian operatives” –
note how they have been magically
transformed from “suspected Russian
operatives” to simply “Russian
operatives” – were disseminating.
Indeed, what is shown in the article is often contradictory to the
story’s conclusion. The article says, for instance, “A review by the
company found that most of the groups behind the problematic
pages had clear financial motives, which suggested that they
weren’t working for a foreign government. But amid the mass of
data the company was analyzing, the security team did not find
clear evidence of Russian disinformation or ad purchases by
Russian-linked accounts.”
So, Facebook initially – after extensive
searching – did not find evidence of a
Russian operation. Then, after
continued pressure from high-level
Democrats, Facebook continued to
scour its system and again found
nothing, or as the Post article
acknowledged, Facebook “had
searched extensively for evidence of
foreign purchases of political
advertising but had come up short.
230
That prompted Warner to fly out to
Silicon Valley to personally press
Facebook executives to come up with
the evidence to support the Democrats’
theory about Russia paying for carefully
targeted anti-Clinton ads in key
districts.
The Post’s article reported that “Finally, [Facebook Chief Security
Officer Alex] Stamos appealed to Warner for help: If U.S.
intelligence agencies had any information about the Russian
operation or the troll farms it used to disseminate misinformation,
they should share it with Facebook. The company is still waiting,
people involved in the matter said.”
If the context of this story were changed slightly – say, it was
about the U.S. government trying to influence public opinion in
another country (which actually does happen quite a bit) – the
Post would be among the first news outlets to laugh off such
allegations or dismiss the vague accusations as a conspiracy
theory, but since these allegations fit with the prejudices of the
Post’s editors, an entirely different set of journalistic standards is
applied.
What the article also ignores is the
extraordinary degree of coercion that
such high-level political pressure can
put on a company that recognizes its
vulnerability to government regulation.
In other words, another way to have framed this story is that
powerful politicians who could severely harm Facebook’s
business model were getting in the face of Facebook executives
and essentially demanding that they come up with something to
support the Democratic Party’s theory of “Russian meddling.”
Careerist journalists understand that there is no danger in
running with the pack – indeed, there is safety in numbers – but
there are extraordinary risks to your career if you challenge the
conventional wisdom even if you turn out to be right. As one
establishment journalist once told me, “there’s no honor in being
right too soon.”
So, for the Post reporters responsible for the latest journalistic
violation of standards – Adam Entous, Elizabeth Dwoskin and
Craig Timberg – there will be no penalty for the offense of telling
about Russia’s alleged “disinformation” and “fake news” – rather
than showing, i.e., providing actual examples.
When it comes to Russia these days –
as with the Vietcong in the 1960s or Iraq
in 2002-03 – you can pretty much write
whatever you want. All journalistic
standards are gone.
The most concerning part of the article, which Parry correctly
highlights, is the fact that Facebook looked for months and
couldn’t find anything. Then it suddenly comes up with something
for desperate politicians to point to after months of pressure.
For example, here’s what The Washington Post itself noted in its
piece:
The extent of Facebook’s internal self-examination became clear
in April, when Facebook Chief Security Officer Alex Stamos co-
authored a 13-page white paper detailing the results of a
sprawling research effort that included input from experts from
across the company, who in some cases also worked to build
new software aimed specifically at detecting foreign propaganda.
Notably, Stamos’s paper did not raise the topic of political
advertising — an omission that was noticed by Capitol Hill
investigators. Facebook, worth $495 billion, is the largest online
advertising company in the world after Google. Although not
mentioned explicitly in the report,
Stamos’s team had searched
extensively for evidence of foreign
purchases of political advertising but
had come up short.
A few weeks after the French election, Warner flew out to
California to visit Facebook in person. It was an opportunity for
the senator to press Stamos directly on whether the Russians
had used the company’s tools to disseminate anti-Clinton ads to
key districts.
Officials said Stamos underlined to Warner the magnitude of the
challenge Facebook faced policing political content that looked
legitimate.
Stamos told Warner that Facebook had
found no accounts that used advertising
but agreed with the senator that some
probably existed. The difficulty for
Facebook was finding them.
For months, a team of engineers at Facebook had been
searching through accounts, looking for signs that they were set
up by operatives working on behalf of the Kremlin. The task was
immense.
.
231
Warner’s visit spurred the company to
make some changes in how it
conducted its internal investigation.
Instead of searching through impossibly large batches of data,
Facebook decided to focus on a subset of political ads.
Technicians then searched for “indicators” that would link those
ads to Russia. To narrow down the search further, Facebook
zeroed in on a Russian entity known as the Internet Research
Agency, which had been publicly identified as a troll farm.
“They worked backwards,” a U.S. official said of the process at
Facebook.
The breakthrough moment came just
days after a Facebook spokesman on
July 20 told CNN that “we have seen no
evidence that Russian actors bought
ads on Facebook in connection with the
election.”
Did Facebook get a call from Warner after the July 20th
statement? From Obama? Who knows, but the way this unfolded
seems questionable.
Facebook’s talking points were about to change.
By early August, Facebook had identified more than 3,000 ads
addressing social and political issues that ran in the United
States between 2015 and 2017 and that appear to have come
from accounts associated with the Internet Research Agency.
After making the discovery, Facebook reached out to Warner’s
staff to share what they had learned.
What does this timeline look like to you? To me it looks
like Facebook couldn’t find anything damning, and then
finally after months of enormous political pressure to find
something to fit the desperate and collapsing Russia
narrative, the company came up with a measly $100,000
worth of ads, which in many cases had nothing to do with
the election or the specific candidates.
Consider me unconvinced.
 Special Counsel Interviews With
White House Staff Could Start Later This Week
By Gloria Borger And Pamela Brown, CNN
Updated 2:57 PM ET, Tue September 26, 2017
witnesses, including former chief of staff Reince Priebus,
former press secretary Sean Spicer, communications
director Hope Hicks, White House counsel Don McGahn,
communications adviser Josh Raffel and associate counsel
James Burnham.

Mueller's team also approached the White House about

interviewing staffers who were aboard Air Force One for
the creation of the initial response to news of Donald
Trump Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer,
sources previously told CNN.

Mueller's investigators are looking for documents and

(CNN)Special counsel investigators could start emails relating to the dismissals of national security
interviewing current and former White House staff as soon adviser Michael Flynn and FBI Director James Comey,
as later this week regarding the Russian probe, two sources
according to the sources. In addition, one source confirms
familiar with the matter tell CNN.
that Mueller's team wants information connected to the
Oval Office meeting Trump had with Russian officials in
One source cautioned it is still being worked out with which he bragged about firing Comey, saying it eased
Robert Mueller's office and said it might be delayed until pressure on his White House.
next week.
The special counsel's office declined to comment.
As CNN previously reported, among the people Mueller
has expressed interest in speaking with are former and
current White House staffers whom investigators consider
.

232
 Congress Might Not Be
Able To Protect Mueller From Firing
By Brian Murphy - Bmurphy@Mcclatchydc.Com
September 26, 2017 5:15 PM
In this June 21, 2017, file photo, former FBI Director Robert
Mueller, the special counsel probing Russian interference in the 2016
election, departs Capitol Hill following a closed door meeting in
Washington. Andrew Harnik AP
WASHINGTON
Congress may be unable to provide any job protection
legislatively for special counsel Robert Mueller, whose
wide-ranging investigation into Russian meddling in the
2016 election continues to anger President Donald Trump.
While Trump confidant Roger Stone was defending
himself in front of a separate committee elsewhere on
Capitol Hill, legal scholars offered competing views on
whether two Senate bills designed to protect Mueller from
firing by Trump or someone in the Justice Department
would pass constitutional muster during a hearing of the
Senate Judiciary Committee.
A bill sponsored by North Carolina Republican Thom
Tillis and Delaware Democrat Chris Coons would allow a
fired special counsel to have his dismissal reviewed by a
three-judge panel within 14 days. Another measure, put
forward by Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Cory Booker, D-
N.J., would require the Justice Department to clear such a
firing with a panel of judges before it could take effect.
“The bills in their current form are unwise
and unconstitutional,” said Akhil Reed
Amar, a constitutional law professor at Yale
Law School and a Democrat who publicly
opposed Trump in the election.
Eric Posner, also no fan of Trump, disagreed.
233
“I’ve concluded they do not violate the
principle of the separation of powers and
on the contrary advance important
constitutional values,” said Posner, a
professor at the University of Chicago’s law
school.
John Duffy, a law professor at the University of Virginia
and former clerk of the late conservative Supreme Court
Justice Antonin Scalia, argued that parts of both bills were
legally questionable, but said they could be tweaked to
help pass judicial reviews. He, however, declined to offer
an opinion on how the Supreme Court might view them.
“With such judicial variability, I have to
balk,” Duffy said.
The complex legal issues and the scholars’ differing
perspectives seemed to give senators pause about how, or
whether, to move forward.
The law professors referenced almost a dozen Supreme
Court cases, most notably Morrison v. Olson, a 1988
decision that held the Independent Special Counsel Act
was constitutional.
“It’s hard to make a point of what’s
constitutional,” said the panel’s chairman,
Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.
Tillis agreed to make changes to his bill, including
removing a line that would make his legislation retroactive
to Mueller’s hiring date.
“This is about checks and balances. This is
about the Senate asserting its authority,”
 said Tillis, who stressed his support for
Trump during and after the hearing.
But he acknowledged the committee has plenty on its
calendar and was uncertain about when the bills might be
back before the panel.
Trump has repeatedly called the Russia investigations —
besides Mueller’s, the Senate has two probes ongoing and
the House one — a “hoax.” During the summer Trump
was reported to be considering asking Deputy Attorney
General Rod Rosenstein to fire Mueller — prompting
senators to draw up legislation.
In August, Trump said he wouldn’t fire Mueller. Trump
probably doesn’t have the authority to do so directly, but
he could ask a high-ranking official at Justice, like
Rosenstein, to do it.
in American Politics.” “He may have the
constitutional authority, if he can find
someone in the Department of Justice to
do it,” she added. “Mueller is not protected
from that right now, except by politics.”
Meanwhile, Roger Stone testified to the House Intelligence
Committee behind closed doors. Monday evening he
issued a statement accusing panel members, particularly
Democrats, of making “false allegations” about collusion
between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.
Mueller appears to be making progress in his investigation,
which seems focused, for the moment, on former Trump
campaign chief Paul Manafort. The special counsel has
also asked for numerous emails and notes about the firing
of former FBI Director James Comey, according to
reports.

“We’re trying to make sure something out Brian Murphy: 202.383.6089; Twitter: @MurphinDC
bounds doesn’t happen, and Mr. Mueller
can proceed with some confidence,”
Graham said. “What I’m trying to avoid is a
Saturday Night Massacre and the upheaval
in the nation. ... I want the president to
know there is a process in place. There are
checks and balances long before you got
here and they’ll be here long after your
gone.”

The Saturday Night Massacre refers to former President

Richard Nixon’s decision to fire independent special
prosecutor Archibald Cox during Watergate. The Attorney
General and his deputy both resigned rather than carry out Amid Mueller investigation, White House statements
Nixon’s order. Finally, Solicitor General Robert Bork fired
on Comey intensify
Cox.

In the end, said Wake Forest professor Katy Harriger,
Congress’ very public support for Mueller might be more
important than passing one or both of the bills.
“The much more important thing it did was
sort of put the president on notice that
there’s bipartisan support for Mueller,” said
Harriger, author of “The Special Prosecutor
.
James Comey was fired as the FBI's director in May
prompting the appointment of Special Counsel Robert
Mueller to investigate Russia’s meddling in the 2016
election. As Mueller's investigation into whether Donald
Trump’s campaign or associates colluded with Moscow
moved into a more serious phase, the White House's press
secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders has made several
statements about Comey from the podium.

234
 Left-Wing Media Now Blaming Trump For Puerto Rico
Hurricane Damage… Is EVERYTHING His Fault?
By JD Heyes
Tuesday, September 26, 2017

Don’t look now, but the Alt-Left now has something new
to blame on President Donald J. Trump: The damage
inflicted on Puerto Rico by Hurricane Maria. Some guys
just can’t catch a break.

As reported by PJ Media, the so-called “talking points”

that everyone knows exists within the legacy,
establishment media were thus: The president’s response
to both Maria and Hurricane Irma were every bit as bad as
that of President George W. Bush’s lack of timely
response to Hurricane Katrina.

As noted on social sites and in published reports, it was

clear that marching orders had been given and the narrative And this from CNBC’s Washington hack, John Harwood:
was being crafted:

From the Daily Beast:

There are more — many more — and you can see them
here. But there are three points to be made here.

The first one is that even if Trump had ordered a fleet of

cargo ships to stand by with all sorts of basic foodstuffs,
generators, and medical supplies, they couldn’t have
docked because the island’s ports were choked with debris,
as The Associated Press reported. So anything shy of a
massive airdrop on the scale of the Berlin Airlift or the
sudden invention of a Star Trek-type of transporter was
going to come up short of the unrealistic goal of needed
supplies immediately showing up on the ravaged island.

From The Atlantic:

235
The second point is this: This fake news narrative was
created out of whole cloth by people who claim to be
journalists, which means they’re supposed to be in the
accuracy business. It’s not like they can’t have an opinion
— and they hate Trump. Got it. But hating Trump does not
give a media hack license to outright lie about a subject or
an issue.
Third, it is beyond pathetic that these clowns have the
temerity to use massive devastation and death as a political
tool with which to strike the president. The Alt-Left did the
same thing when Katrina hit, and while it was actually the
Federal Emergency Management Agency that failed in its
response efforts, the White House got the blame — like
Bush himself was supposed to be driving the trucks and
flying in the supplies himself. It was appalling then, and
it’s appalling now. (Related: Geraldo hits back at critics of
Trump’s $1 million donation to Harvey victims)
As to the second point — accuracy — while the media
hacks push their lie, leaders on the ground who have been
dealing with the administration are saying something
completely different.
Let’s start with Puerto Rico. In an interview with PBS
Newshour, whose correspondents were no doubt hoping
the lie was true, asked PR Gov. Ricardo Rossello how
Washington’s response was going just a few days after the
storm hit:
JOHN YANG: Governor, are you getting all
the aid you need or getting it fast enough
from the states?
.
236
GOV. RICARDO ROSSELLO: First of all,
we are very grateful for the administration.
They have responded quickly.
The president has been very attentive to
the situation, personally calling me
several times. FEMA and the FEMA
director have been here in Puerto Rico
twice. As a matter of fact, they were
here with us today, making sure that all
the resources in FEMA were working in
conjunction with the central
government.
We have been working together. We
have been getting results. The magnitude
of this catastrophe is enormous. This is
going to take a lot of help, a lot of
collaboration.
Opps. For every Left-wing media #TrumpHate narrative,
there is always the truth.
There’s more. Right after the first of these major storms —
Hurricane Harvey — struck Texas, the media hacks
jumped on the “Bush-Katrina” narrative. Texas leaders hit
back immediately, praising the Trump administration’s
response and actually hitting back at critics.
“But I will say this, and I’d say it’s down to
politics in all of this. But for anyone to
criticize the president or anyone else, this
is not the time. First of all, he has really
been on top of this with Gov. Abbott, I can
tell you,” said Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick
said. “The president has approached this
as a businessman and gone into action.”
 Roger Stone: ‘I Tend To Believe
That The DNC Hack Was An Inside Job’
By Staff Writer -
September 26, 2017

on Tuesday that the so-called ‘DNC hack’ may not have

been a hack at all and was likely an “inside job.”

“Computer science seems to indicate an

inside job,” Stone told reporters. “I don’t
know whether the DNC was hacked, at
all, by Russians and now on the basis of
this report I tend to believe that it was
an inside job — meaning the data was
downloaded to say a thumb drive and
spirited out of the building.”

Roger Stone told reporters that he Stone believes that such a thumb drive could have been
thinks a “thumb drive” may have been delivered to Wikileaks.
used physically on location at the DNC
to obtain Wikileaked data

WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) — Political pundit and

best-selling author Roger Stone told members of the press
.

237
 Entire Narrative Regarding NFL Players Protests Over
National Anthem Based On Yet Another Left-Wing LIE
By JD Heyes
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
The more justification I see for mostly black NFL players
protesting the National Anthem before games, the angrier
it makes me because frankly, the protesting is based on a
big, fat lie.
There is no other way to put it. It’s a lie. Not
a “half-truth.” Not a “misunderstanding.”
Not a “miscalculation.”
A lie, period.
I’ll give you an example of what I’m talking about,
because this sentiment is typical from those who are
excusing the incredibly bad and tone-deaf behavior by
players, coaches, and league officials who just don’t seem
to care they’re shedding NFL fans by the minute as they
continue to excuse disrespectful behavior that is, again,
based on a lie.
Joe LaPointe, writing in the reliably Left-leaning New York
Observer, naturally blamed the rise in protests (which
began last year during Obama’s tenure) on President
Donald J. Trump because, why not? Everything is political
these days, and everything political is Trump’s fault.
“After Trump called black football players
sons of bitches for kneeling in protest
during the national anthem, the athletes of
the National Football League and the
National Basketball Association called a
flagrant personal foul on the large, 71-year-
old, orange-faced, yellow-haired chief
executive.”
That’s Mr. President to you, LaPointe.
238
Anyway, there’s more. He goes on to note that mostly
black players were outraged over Trump’s comments at a
political rally in Alabama last Friday, in which he said:
“Wouldn’t you love to see those NFL
owners, when somebody disrespects our
flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the
field right now!’ Out! He’s fired. Fired!”
(Related: In our twisted “progressive”
society, what takes real courage is
STANDING for the national anthem…
#BoycottNFL)
“Trump said he didn’t like players
protesting during the anthem about deaths
of young black people, usually men, in
confrontations with armed police,” LaPointe
lectured. Uh, Trump didn’t say that.
Trump never even mentioned race. Only
Trump’s liberal detractors are the ones who
keep mentioning race.
LaPointe’s fact-less rant also included comments in his
piece from other race-baiters including William Rhoden, a
“journalist” for the sports version of MSNBC, ESPN.
“These racist police… are blowing
people away, and nobody’s got convicted,”
Rhoden said of the player protests. “That’s
what this is about. And for you to get on
national television and spout this garbage,
it’s completely ridiculous, man. It’s without
merit.”
No, what Rhoden is saying and what
LaPointe is saying is without merit.
Because it’s complete, utter BS.
First of all, the general assumption and presumption that
all police are racist towards black people are not only
factually incorrect, they outrageously insulting to the men
and women who put on a uniform and put their lives on
the line every day even for ungrateful, lying hacks.
What’s more, the presumption that black men who are
being shot and killed by police aren’t at all responsible for
their own situations and eventual demise is ridiculous, and
it’s time someone uttered that truth.
This assumption stems from the Michael Brown incident Here’s the truth:
in Ferguson, Missouri — birthplace of Black Lives Matter
and the phony, 1) Cops don’t kill Americans in large, unacceptable
numbers;
“Hands up, Don’t shoot,” narrative that 2) Of Americans killed by police, most are white;
never happened. Who says so? Obama’s 3) Police officers almost always are not convicted for
Department of Justice, that’s who. shooting whites, either; and
4) You don’t see white NFL players or white Americans
Brown was neither innocent nor was he
protesting the anthem over two facts they could
running from the police when he was
definitely use to do so.
shot and killed, but that is where the
narrative was born that guides the anthem
protests today. Mr. Protest himself, former Here’s one more truth.
NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick said so.
“To me, this is bigger than football, and it No matter what color our skin, the civil
society would collapse within hours if the
would be selfish on my part to look the
other way,” Kaepernick said. “There are thin, blue line wasn’t on duty. And guess
what? Among other things, there would be
bodies in the street and people getting
no more football.
paid leave and getting away with
murder.”
Some big, fat, huge lies form the basis for the Alt-Left’s
Really? hijacking of the NFL and the overall politicization of
sports in general in America. It’s disgusting, it’s pathetic,
and it’s time these divisive frauds were called out for them.
Are you a lawyer now, Kaepernick? Because juries and (Read LIES.news for more coverage of left-wing lies.)
courts of law have been finding officers innocent as
charged — except when they are guilty. No police officers
are getting “paid leave” for “murdering” black people.
That’s just absurd.

239
 Zinke Says A Third Of Interior’s Staff
Is Disloyal To Trump And Promises ‘Huge’ Changes
By Darryl Fears And Juliet Eilperin
September 26
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, accompanied by Republican
lawmakers, signs an order in March lifting a moratorium on new
coal leases on federal lands and a related order on coal royalties.
(Molly Riley/AP)
In a speech to a federal advisory board dominated by oil
and gas industry executives, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke
claimed that nearly a third of his staff is disloyal to
President Trump, saying that workers in Washington are
reluctant to relax regulations to permit increased mining
for coal and drilling for natural gas and oil on public land.
Zinke promised a “huge” change by restructuring staff
positions and possibly shifting decision-making positions
in the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of
Reclamation from Washington to points out West in the
speech Monday to the National Petroleum Council. His
remarks were first reported by the Associated Press.
“I got 30 percent of the crew that’s not loyal
to the flag,” the secretary said, according to
participants. Zinke, a former Navy
SEAL, invoked military and seafaring
jargon to describe his approach to running
the department.
He compared his experience taking over Interior to
capturing a pirate ship where “only the captain and the first
mate row over” to take over the vessel. The audience
laughed in response.
Zinke explained that he wanted to ensure Interior officials
accelerated federal permitting for drilling and mining
activities on federal land, saying it’s necessary to relocate
240
some of the department’s major divisions to “push the
generals where the fight is.”
The speech reflected a broader effort by Zinke to shake up
the department. He told a Senate panel in June that he
wanted to strip 4,000 employees from the Interior
Department — about 8 percent of the full-time staff — as
part of meeting Trump’s proposed budget cuts. Attrition,
reassignments and buyouts would be employed to achieve
his goal, Zinke said.
If that didn’t work, he said, layoffs could follow. That
same month, Zinke ordered the reassignments of 50 Senior
Executive Service employees, forcing many into jobs for
which they had little experience and that were in different
locations. At least one executive, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife
director stationed in Atlanta, quit.
Interior’s Office of Inspector General is evaluating the
reassignments to determine whether they violate the U.S.
code, which instructs an agency’s leadership to notify
affected personnel well in advance of reassignment and
give them a chance to choose a job option. Several
executives said their reassignment notices arrived out of
the blue with no prior discussion.
The National Petroleum Council advises the Energy
Department on policies related to the oil and gas industry,
and both Zinke and Energy Secretary Rick Perry delivered
opening remarks and took questions at the group’s annual
meeting. At one point, according to a participant, Perry —
who served on the boards of a couple of energy companies
before joining the Cabinet — said he was “proud” to be
“part of the energy industry.”
Interior spokeswoman Heather Swift declined several
requests to comment or confirm Zinke’s remarks Tuesday.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking member on
the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, slammed
the speech.
“The public servants at [Interior] deserve
respect from the man charged with leading
them — not cheap shots in the press,”
Cantwell said. Zinke’s comments “betray a
fundamental misunderstanding of the role
of federal civil service,” she added. “They
 are nonpolitical employees charged with
implementing and enforcing laws passed
by Congress.”
Other groups — the Coalition to Protect America’s
National Parks, Public Lands Foundation and Association
of Retired Fish and Wildlife Service Employees — also
took issue with the remarks.
“Saying that over 20,000 employees in his
department are not loyal to the flag is
simply ludicrous, and deeply insulting,” the
groups said in a joint statement.
They called on the secretary to apologize.
In an unrelated missive to Interior staff, Deputy
Secretary David Bernhardt took the unusual step of sharing
the names of executives who were dismissed after an
inspector general report determined that they had engaged
in poor behavior.
.
241
“I am troubled that there is not a universal
sense in … Interior that those few
employees who have failed to uphold …
standards are appropriately being held
accountable,” Bernhardt wrote in a memo
Monday. “Please be assured, that I am
committed to ensuring that leaders at all
levels of the department are, themselves,
ensuring that legally sound, measured and
decisive action is being taken.”
He went on to name a BLM supervisor and National Park
Service ranger who were fired for “misuse of his position
for personal gain” in the first case, and “misuse of
government equipment” in the second.
“I share these examples because you need
to know that your leadership is
listening,” Bernhardt wrote. “We will hold
people accountable when we are informed
that they have failed in their duties and
obligations.”
 This Is What Roger Stone Told
The House Intelligence Committee About Russiagate
By Staff Writer -
September 26, 2017
Stone pointed out how “our intelligence
Roger Stone tells the House Intel agencies have become politicized” and, to
Committee how it is, demands an this day, ‘continue to leak information in
apology, calls ranking member a liar detriment to President Trump.’

WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) Best-selling author and
political pundit Roger Stone testified to the House
Intelligence Committee in secret behind closed doors
Tuesday, where he made clear to the committee that he had
“no involvement in the alleged activities
within the scope of this committees
investigation.”
After Stone’s testimony concluded, the flamboyantly
outspoken pundit said that he “had no choice” but to go on
Infowars’s platform to tell the world what he told the
committee Tuesday.
Stone said that although investigators think that he was
somehow involved some type of collusive activity between
the Trump Campaign and the Russian State there is “not
one shred of evidence” to back up the allegation which
Stone said is “conjecture” at best.
Additionally, Stone said that he never “predicted” that
John Podesta’s emails would be hacked before they
actually were and requested that Ranking Member of the
House Intel Committee Adam Schiff show him a quote
which suggests he did.
Stone also got into his “extensive knowledge of the
Podesta Brothers” and their business activities in Russia,
including their “uranium deal” which was resurrected
publically in July of 2016 after Intellihub’s release of the
bombshell report authored by the agency’s founder and
editor-in-chief Shepard Ambellas titled “Clinton
Foundation Took Massive Payoffs, Promised
Hammond Ranch And Other Publicly Owned Lands
To Russians Along With One-Fifth Of Our Uranium
Ore.”
Related:

During his statement,

242
 Trump Urges NFL To Ban
Players Kneeling During Anthem
Reuters Staff
September 26, 2017 / 7:43 AM / A Day Ago
(Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump ramped up his
fight with the National Football League on Tuesday,
calling on the league to ban players from kneeling in
protest at games while the national anthem is played.
“The NFL has all sorts of rules and
regulations. The only way out for them is to
set a rule that you can’t kneel during our
National Anthem!” Trump wrote on Twitter.
For the fifth straight day the president denounced the
symbolic gesture, which has been adopted by some black
players in the last year to protest against racial disparities
in the criminal justice system.
An NFL spokesman did not respond to requests for
comment.
Trump praised two teams that played on Monday night and
largely steered clear of the controversy. The Arizona
Cardinals linked arms and stood for the “Star-Spangled
Banner” along with the Dallas Cowboys, who knelt before
the song.
Last Friday, Trump told a political rally any protesting
player was a “son of a bitch” who should be fired, and
urged a boycott of NFL games, triggering protests by
dozens of players, coaches and some owners before
Sunday’s games.
Trump’s verbal assault may appeal to his conservative
base as the Republican president grapples with critical
issues including North Korea’s nuclear threats, a
humanitarian crisis in hurricane-struck Puerto Rico, an
investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election
and the healthcare struggle in Congress.
243
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks before signing a memorandum
"Increasing Access to High-Quality Science, Technology,
Engineering and Math (STEM) Education" in the Oval Office of the
White House in Washington, U.S., September 25, 2017.
REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
Paul Ryan, the most senior Republican in the U.S. House
of Representatives, said he also disapproved of the gesture.
“People are clearly within their rights to
express themselves how they see fit,” he
told reporters. “My own view though is that
we shouldn’t do it on the anthem.”
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session told an audience at
Washington’s Georgetown Law School that the protesting
athletes were wrong.
“The players aren’t subject to any
prosecution, but if they take a provocative
act, they can expect to be condemned,” he
said.
Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic rival in the 2016
election, called Trump’s comments “a huge, loud dog
whistle to his supporters” in an interview with CBS.
Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick
first kneeled during the anthem last year to protest police
shootings of unarmed black men.
His former teammate Eric Reid wrote in a New York
Times opinion article that he and Kaepernick chose to
kneel as a “respectful” gesture, comparing it to “a flag
flown at half-mast to mark a tragedy.”
 Bannon Celebrates Roy Moore's Victory
Over Trump Pick: 'Revolution' For GOP
By Ben Kamisar
09/26/17 10:24 PM EDT

Moore's biggest boosters both behind the scenes and

eventually in public.

While Bannon was campaigning against President Trump's

pick in Sen. Luther Strange (R-Ala.), Bannon repeatedly
framed a vote for Moore as "a vote for Donald J. Trump."

Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon

celebrated Roy Moore's victory in Tuesday night's GOP
Senate primary runoff in Alabama as the beginning of a
"revolution" for insurgent Republicans looking to
challenge incumbent senators.

In remarks introducing Moore before his victory speech,

Bannon recalled his comments at a pro-Moore rally on
Monday night.

He pointed to Moore's victory

and Tuesday's announcement by Sen. Bob Corker (R-
Tenn.) that he'll retire at the end of 2018 as proof that the
insurgent right is on the rise. Corker had been targeted as a
potential incumbent for Bannon and his allies to pick off in
a GOP primary.

"Last night we talked about starting a

revolution with Judge Moore's victory. Well,
Sen. Corker stepped down today, he's not
going to run for reelection," Bannon said.
"You are going to see, in state after state
after state, people that follow the model of
Judge Moore, that do not have to raise
money from the elites, the crony capitalists,
from the fat cats in Washington D.C., New
York City and Silicon Valley."
Upon leaving the White House in August, Bannon returned
to the conservative Breitbart News and became one of
.
Bannon and his allies have been furiously advocating for
Moore, a former state Supreme Court chief justice, in the
hopes that a victory will spark a wave of primary
challenges against establishment Republican senators.
One of those challengers is former Arizona state Sen. Kelli
Ward, who is going up against Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.),
one of Trump's most prominent critics in the GOP. She
too signaled a wider victory in a statement congratulating
Ward, arguing that the frustration with the Washington
establishment that won Moore the primary is present
in Arizona too.

244
 Angry Steve Bannon Blasts NFL And Mitch McConnell;
Predicts "Day Of Reckoning" For Republicans
By Tyler Durden
Sep 26, 2017 8:35 AM
Last night, after a fiery campaign appearance for Judge
Roy Moore in Alabama, former White House Chief
Strategist Steve Bannon took to Fox News to lash out at
everyone from NFL players taking a knee at football
games to the "spineless" Republican establishment. Here's
a recap of the more salient points:
“If people in this country take a knee
and the national football players want to
take a knee, they should take a knee at
night, every night, and thank God in
heaven Donald J. Trump is president of
the United States."
“He has saved this country so much grief.
He has done such a tremendous job with
virtually no help."
"I stepped out to make sure that Mitch
McConnell and the Republican
establishment start to have a Republican
back. Mitch McConnell wouldn’t be
majority leader if Donald Trump didn’t
drag half a dozen senators across the
goal line in November."
"So it's time for the Republican
establishment to step up and have the
back of President Trump."
Meanwhile, as Politico notes, Bannon's comments on Fox
News were somewhat tame compared to the verbal lashing
he levied upon McConnell and crew at Moore's campaign
event in Alabama.
245
“For Mitch McConnell and Ward Baker
and Karl Rove and Steven Law — all the
instruments that tried to destroy Judge
Moore and his family — your day of
reckoning is coming,”
Bannon said, referring to the Republican Senate leader and
a trio of prominent GOP strategists backing incumbent
Sen. Luther Strange.
“But more important, for the donors
who put up the [campaign] money and
the corporatists that put up the money,
your day of reckoning is coming, too.”
Bannon said mainstream Republicans
behind Strange's campaign regard
Alabama voters as “a pack of morons.
They think you’re nothing but rubes. They
have no interest at all in what you have to
say, what you have to think or what you
want to do. And tomorrow, you’re gonna
get an opportunity to tell them what you
think of the elites who run this country!”
“Mitch McConnell and his permanent
political class is the most corrupt,
incompetent group of individuals in this
country!” Bannon said to loud applause.
Of course, if you believe the polls then it's looking
increasingly likely that Bannon's candidate, Roy Moore,
will score an easy victory in tonight's runoff election.
 White House Aides Are Stopping
Deal With Assange, Congressman Says
Alex Pfeiffer - White House Correspondent
2:33 PM 09/26/2017
President Donald Trump is being blocked from knowing
he can pardon WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in
exchange for information vindicating Russia of hacking
allegations, according to Republican California Rep. Dana
Rohrabacher.
Trump told reporters Sunday that he has “never heard” of a
potential deal with Assange.
“I think the president’s answer indicates
that there is a wall around him that is being
created by people who do not want to
expose this fraud that there was collusion
between our intelligence community and
the leaders of the Democratic Party,”
Rohrabacher told The Daily Caller Tuesday
in a phone interview.
Rohrabacher met with Assange in August at the
Ecuadorian embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks
founder has lived in asylum since 2012 due to now-
dropped sexual assault charges in Sweden. However,
American authorities are reportedly still investigating
Assange for his role in disseminating thousands of
classified U.S. documents.
The California congressman told TheDC in August that
Assange promised him information that reveals Russia is
not behind the hacking and leaking of Democratic National
Committee emails during the 2016 election, as U.S.
intelligence officials have claimed.
The U.S intelligence community has also said that Russian
state actors were involved with the hacking and leaking of
Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails.
Rohrabacher told TheDC Tuesday that he “didn’t go into
detail other than the DNC” with Assange.
246
The WikiLeaks founder has previously said that Russia
was not the source of either the Podesta or DNC emails
that his site released.
Rohrabacher said that a pardon would likely have to occur
for Assange to give up this information about the source of
the DNC emails. Assange has long maintained that he
would never reveal a source, but Rohrabacher said that
Assange now
“wants to get out of the Ecuadorian
embassy.”
Rohrabacher told TheDC that he has yet to view the
information Assange says vindicates Russia, but that
Assange would be able to exchange it if the president “is
on board.” The president is able to preemptively pardon
someone.
The congressman spoke to chief of staff John Kelly two
weeks ago about the potential deal with Assange. The Wall
Street Journal reported that Kelly told Rohrabacher to
bring the information to the intelligence community.
“This would have to be a cooperative effort
between his own staff and the leadership in
the intelligence communities to try to
prevent the president from making the
decision as to whether or not he wants to
take the steps necessary to expose this
horrendous lie that was shoved down the
American people’s throats so incredibly
earlier this year,” Rohrabacher said.
Several media outlets have covered Rohrabacher’s
comments about a potential deal with Assange and Trump
is known to be an avid consumer of media. However, it has
recently been reported that Kelly is blocking certain news
articles from reaching the president’s desk.
Rohrabacher previously worked as a speechwriter for
President Ronald Reagan and told TheDC:
“This happens in every administration, and
it’s a great disservice to the president.”
“It’s an undercutting of democracy when
the guy who’s elected, his staffers take it
upon themselves to make the decision
rather than let the actual president make
the decision.”
“I am confident that if the president is
permitted to know that this avenue is open
.
to him to debunk the horrible lie that was
told to the American people about him
stealing the election with the help of the
Russians… that I think the president will
accept it if he’s permitted to know.”

247
 Hillary Compares Trump To Putin:
"Hopefully He Hasn't Ordered The Killing Of Journalists"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 26, 2017 8:45 PM
As Hillary Clinton tours the country desperately trying to
explain "What Happened" during the 2016 election, she
aggressively ramped up her rhetoric game to an 11 during
a recent interview with Charlie Rose. After saying that
Trump has authoritarian tendencies, Clinton went on to
compare him to Putin and said that she can only hope he
hasn't "ordered the killing of people and journalists and
the like."
Clinton: "I don’t think he really values
democracy, Charlie."
Rose: "He doesn’t value democracy? So
he’s not a ‘democrat,’ little ‘d?'"
Clinton: "No, he’s not, he’s a top-down
guy."
Rose: "He’s an authoritarian?"
248
Clinton:: "He has tendencies toward
authoritarianism."
Rose: "So, he’s no different than Putin?"
Clinton: "Well, hopefully he hasn’t
ordered the killing of people and
journalists and the like."
Of course, if Trump is truly that bad then it's only a matter
of time before he's breaking federal laws, deleting emails
subject to congressional subpoenas, destroying evidence
with hammers and sending Melania out to meet privately
with the Attorney General of the United States when
criminal investigations are at risk of "going too far"...oh
wait, that was Hillary.
Oh well, here is the clip anyway:
 Expect NFL Madness To Fumble 'Big Media' Empires
By Tom McGregor, CCTV.Com Commentator And Editor For CCTV.Com, Based In Beijing
18:07 26.09.2017(Updated 18:09 26.09.2017)
© AP Photo/ Matt York - US
The NFL serves as a money-making driver for the MSM’s
top US-based TV networks. But football owners and
players have taken a knee to disrespect the American flag
and fans, which will likely result in huge financial losses
for the league. Tom McGregor takes a closer look.
The mainstream media (MSM) appears indestructible.
They control a media narrative that endorses ‘globalist
first’ and social justice warrior (SJW) principles. And
despite the MSM’s dwindling audience numbers, Western
media empires refuse to change and have continued a
relentless assault on US President Donald Trump and his
supporters.
But for those who oppose the MSM, they should not lose
heart since Trump has recently uncovered the “Achilles
heel” of major TV networks in the country.
The big TV networks — Fox, CBS, and NBC (along
with ESPN-owned by ABC) — are bankrolled by ad
revenues generated from broadcasting NFL (National
Football League) games. The ‘cash cow’ allows the MSM
to pursue their own political agendas, while media
executives and reporters can enjoy the high-life
with superstar salaries and benefits.
Trump Telling Like It Is
Apparently, Trump has taken notice. According to video
footage, Trump spoke at a rally in Huntsville, Alabama
on Friday. He blasted NFL players for taking a knee
in front of the American flag during the national anthem,
which is considered unpatriotic since players and
spectators are expected to stand at that time.
249
“We are proud of our country, we respect
our flag,” said Trump. “Wouldn’t you love
to see one of these NFL owners, when
somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get
that son of a b**** off the field, he’s fired.”
Trump also highlighted the NFL’s slide in ratings, which
are “down massively, massively.”
And here’s the huge dilemma, TV networks pay enormous
sums for NFL broadcasting rights.
Back-Breaking Deals
In Dec. 2011, the NFL signed a nine-year TV deal (2013-
2022) worth over US $27bn.
According to Forbes magazine,
“Financial terms have not been released,
the three networks (CBS, Fox, and NBC)
are expected to pay roughly $3bn. a year,
(compared to prior contract — collective
annual payment, $1.9bn.) ESPN re-upped
its deal with the NFL … at an annual rate of
$1.9bn.”
The money figures seem astronomical, considering that
major TV networks are struggling. They are required
to make annual payments and can’t renegotiate terms
until NFL contract expires in 2022.
Meanwhile, MSM reporters have encouraged football
players to take a knee to support the Hillary Clinton-
inspired resistance movement. Hence, TV networks have
signed on to a suicide pact to keep ‘identity politics’
mainstream.
Momentum Set for Failure
TV ratings for the NFL may continue to plunge, especially
since most die-hard football fans are pro-Trump and many
have joined the NFL Boycott. Some fans have posting
videos of themselves burning their team’s jerseys and
memorabilia.
The demise of the NFL would eventually lead to lower
salary caps for teams, and perhaps the day may arise when
players score touchdowns for minimum wage. But the
hardest hit will be the MSM and we may witness
bankruptcies coming soon.
When ad revenues decline for TV networks, they can no
longer afford to pay for broadcasting rights of the NFL.
But they must pay off their debts and if unable to do so,
they must file Chapter 11 (bankruptcy declaration)
to renegotiate payments to creditors.
Point of No Return Has Arrived
The TV networks, as well as NFL owners and players, can
no longer change their fortunes under their control. Last
week, more than 200 NFL players took a knee to protest
the flag and fans are unlikely to forgive them.
.
250
To make matters worse, Pittsburgh Steelers Offensive
Guard Alejandro Villanueva, an Army Ranger, and veteran
of the Afghanistan war appeared to have taken a heroic
stand last Sunday as the lone player on his team to stand
up for the flag.
But Villanueva had disavowed his patriotic actions a day
later, writing on Twitter,
“Every single time I see that picture of me
standing by myself, I feel embarrassed.”
What a shame, but the snowflake and SJW crowds have
assumed control of America’s stadiums and we can expect
them to demand safe spaces for non-football fans to join
players in taking a knee.
The TV networks may soon realize that politicizing the
NFL does not boost profits and former fans will eventually
find a new sport to cherish.
 In Stunning Reversal, DHS Says Russians
Were Not Behind Attempted Wisconsin Vote Hacking
By Tyler Durden
Sep 26, 2017 7:07 PM
Just in time for the weekend, the Associated Press reported
on Friday that the Department of Homeland Security had
notified 21 states earlier that day that their election systems
had been targeted by malicious cyber actors. The states
and DHS quickly jumped to the conclusion that Russia had
ordered the cyberattacks, even though it was reported that
the identity or identities of the perpetrators were
inconclusive Yet, the news spread like wildfire after
readers had been primed as reports of possible infiltartion
of state election systems had circulated for nearly a year.
Even so, for many states, the call Friday from the
Department of Homeland Security was the first official
confirmation that their election systems had, in fact, been
targeted by hackers.
Federal officials said that in most of the 21 states, the
targeting was preparatory activity such as scanning
computer systems.
But in a stunning reversal - one which we
doubt will put endless rumors of Russian
cyberinterference to bed - the AP now
reports that DHS has told Wisconsin that
the Russian government was not
involved in the cyber-targeting.
In an email to the state’s deputy elections administrator
that was provided to reporters at the Wisconsin Elections
Commission meeting on Tuesday,
Homeland Security said that initial
notice of Russian involvement was
made in error.
251
Also, as we noted at the time, the government did not
originally assign blame to the Russians when news of the
alleged "scanning" initially broke on Friday although most
medias jumped at the opportunity to blame Putin.
Infuriated by the error, some state officials said that DHS
should provide an expalanation for the errror, or at least
issue an apology to state elections officials, who were
understandbly unnerved by the news of Russian
involvement.
“Based on our external analysis, the WI
IP address affected belongs to the WI
Department of Workforce Development,
not the Elections Commission,” said the
email from Juan Figueroa, with Homeland
Security’s Office of Infrastructure
Protection.
It wasn’t immediately known if
Homeland Security made similar
mistakes with any of the other 20 states.
Figueroa did not immediately reply to an
email seeking an explanation of how the
mistake was made.
Homeland Security initially told the Elections Commission
that the Russians scanned the state’s internet-connected
election infrastructure, likely seeking specific
vulnerabilities to access voter registration databases.
“Either they were right on Friday and
this is a cover up, or they were wrong
on Friday and we deserve an apology,”
Mark Thomsen, the commission’s
chairman, said in light of the new email.
Wisconsin’s chief elections administrator Michael Haas
told AP that Homeland Security had assured the state that
it had not been targeted - by Russians, or anybody else, for
that matter.
“Wisconsin was not provided any
information that indicated before the
November election that Russian
government actors were targeting
election systems,” Haas said. He said
 one theory is that Homeland Security saw
suspicious activity from IP addresses
targeting state election systems in other
states and assumed that was the intent in
Wisconsin as well.
Others were apparently in shock:
“It’s been a difficult process trying to
piece all of this together,” said Wisconsin
Elections Commission spokesman Reid
Magney. “We’re trying to understand
what happened.”
Furthermore, Wisconsin’s chief information
officer, David Cagigal, told the elections
commission that Wisconsin had never
been told by Homeland Security, prior to
the Friday notice, that Russians had
targeted Wisconsin’s election system or
anything else.
Deputy information officer, Herb Thompson, said
Homeland Security told the state in October to check on a
certain IP address that the state had blocked from
accessing its systems in August 2016.
“We have never seen any of those
activities result in anything other than
.
252
someone trying to turn the doorknob to see
if a door is open,” Thompson said. “Those
IP addresses we talked about, we had
blocked, they were related to non-
election systems.” Cagigal said, “Our
systems were protected and we had no
incidences.”
Still, the state's election commission has promised to
improve security before the midterms next year. Reports
that Russians may have targeted, or infiltrated, state voting
systems have been circulating since late last year, when the
Washington Post published a story about alleged Russian
infiltration in Vermont, only to retract the story shortly
after.
While we doubt that this will be the last "Russia hacked
the elections" fake news, it is reassuring that all this
frenzied chaos will at least bring some security to
America's voting systems. Security enhancements being
considered include encrypting the entire voter registration
database to protect the information and make it unusable to
anyone who may be able to steal it and requiring two-
factor authentication for the roughly 3,000 local and state
officials who have access to the WisVote system.
Perhaps an appropriate question is why this wasn't done
before?
 Prince Harry Flashing ‘Devil Sign’
In Melania Trump Photo Takes Internet By Storm
Tom Tillison
September 26, 2017
“Prince Harry and the devil signs” sound like a new
titillating mystery novel, but it’s actually a reference to the
prince meeting U.S. first lady Melania Trump this week at
the Invictus Games 2017 in Toronto, Canada.
In one of a series of photos, Prince Harry is seen with
his hand haphazardly tucked into his jacket. His middle
and ring finger were tucked inside the jacket along with his
thumb, while the two remaining fingers were on the
outside.
In effect, according to social media users with FAR TOO
MUCH time on their hands, a royal sign of devil horns.
Image: AP
And with that, the conspiracy theories flowed… and, boy,
were there some doozies!
Here’s a sampling of responses from Twitter:
first thing I noticed when I saw this photo is
Prince Harry doing he devil's horn/satan
hand sign. also in the video, it was
intentional pic.twitter.com/HUHZfs8Tkh
— GLEGEND DISCIPLE
(@YujuAndTheBoooy) September 24,
2017
Prince Harry giving us a subliminal
message that he knows the Trumps are the
devil, too ? Trying to ward off the evil ?
pic.twitter.com/1b6w1XGtOI
— Sarah (@goldenlamb13) September 24,
2017
Prince Harry meeting FLOTUS and making
devil hand sign. Is that a Hi Donald, or I'm
253
Here So I Won't Get Fined?
pic.twitter.com/BN61WH3dGx
— Karen DaltonBeninato (@kbeninato)
September 23, 2017
Prince #Harry's hand signal harkens back
to Middle Ages – indicates that he believes
the Devil's concubine is in the room.
#FLOTUS45 pic.twitter.com/hsiCyhyuS0
— Blake Lawrence (@BlakeLawrence)
September 23, 2017
People are saying Prince Harry's hand is a
sign that he's the Devil.
Ridiculous.
Can you imagine how burnt a ginger would
get in Hell? pic.twitter.com/rmtHGo3Oqo
— Toby Tarrant (@tobytarrant) September
25, 2017
Prince Harry with Melina Trump throwing
out the devil sign these rich people are all
worshiping the devil
— kevinnicksUSA (@Kevin60550162)
September 26, 2017
Even last night, they ran an article about
how Prince Harry supposedly put up "devil
horns" while meeting Melania as a signal
for "help".
— Nylis ?? (@MsOsabear) September 26,
2017
Kudos to the one social media user who finally figured out
what the prince was trying to convey!
“Ppl r making a fuss abt Prince Harry’s
hand gesture, calling it free-masonic
“devil”. Untrue. Just ILY (I love you) in sign
language,” the tweet reads.
Ppl r making a fuss abt Prince Harry's hand
gesture, calling it free-masonic "devil".
Untrue. Just ILY (I love you) in sign
language. pic.twitter.com/E68XKgUJ4D
— Sheldon Chang (@sheldonchang)
September 24, 2017
 McMaster Says US Has "Four Or Five"
North Korea Scenarios, "Some Are Uglier Than Others"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 26, 2017 9:15 AM
As tensions between North Korea and the U.S. continue to
escalate with every Trump tweet and subsequent response
by Kim Jong-Un, National Security Adviser H.R.
McMaster said that the U.S. has prepared "four or five
different scenarios" for how the crisis with North Korea
will be resolved, adding ominously that
“some are uglier than others."
McMaster declined to comment on the extent to which
North Korea’s deeply-buried nuclear program was
vulnerable to U.S. military strikes -- an assessment made
of Iran before the 2015 framework agreement designed to
stop its nuclear program.
He acknowledged that every military
option assumed a reaction from North
Korea that endangered South Korean
citizens, adding it’s “foremost in our
minds.” That danger “is certainly taken
into consideration in all our planning and
war gaming, table-top exercise efforts,”
McMaster said.
Still, while McMaster said the threat from Pyongyang is
“much further advanced” than anticipated and the
Pentagon said the president has a “deep arsenal” to draw
upon if needed, Bloomberg quoted U.S. officials who
dismissed North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho’s
comment that President Donald Trump’s warnings to
Pyongyang at the United Nations amounted to a
declaration of war.
That said, both governments have said “all options” are on
the table in dealing with the tensions. Defense Secretary
Jim Mattis, speaking in India on Tuesday, said the U.S.
wants to keep engagement with North Korea in the
diplomatic realm as long as possible. But on Monday Ri
escalated tensions with his remark that North Korea would
be within its rights to shoot down U.S. warplanes flying in
international airspace. That startled markets, coming just
days after the Pentagon sent planes near North Korea’s
border.
Additionally, as reported this morning, North Korea
boosted defenses on its eastern coastline after the US flew
B-1B Lancer bombers and F-15C Eagle fighter escorts
from Okinawa, Japan, just off the coast of North Korea -
254
the farthest north of the demilitarized zone any U.S. fighter
or bomber aircraft have flown off North Korea’s coast this
century, the Pentagon said. North Korea was surprised by
the bombers, which weren’t caught by its radar,
Yonhap News reported, citing the head of the intelligence
committee of South Korea’s parliament.
The Pentagon said its most recent bomber and fighter
exercises were meant to underscore “the seriousness with
which we take DPRK’s reckless behavior,” White said last
week, using the initials for North Korea’s formal name.
“This mission is a demonstration of U.S.
resolve and a clear message that the
President has many military options.”
The question of course, is how would Pyongyang respond
to any potential strike: military analysts have said any
conflict between the U.S. and North Korea would risk a
devastating attack by Pyongyang on the South Korean
capital Seoul.
“There’s not a ‘precision strike’ that
solves the problem,” McMaster said at an
event in Washington hosted by the Institute
for the Study of War. “There’s not a
military blockade that can solve the
problem. What we hope to do is avoid
war, but we cannot discount that
possibility.”
Meanwhile, Lu Kang, a spokesman for China’s foreign
ministry said assertiveness from both sides would only
increase the risk of confrontation. “We have witnessed a
lot of saber rattling recently on the Korean peninsula,” he
said.
“We hope the U.S. and DPRK politicians
can realize that resorting to military means
will never be a viable way out for this
issue.”
***
In conclusion, Bloomberg reminds us that in 1969,
President Richard Nixon considered tactical nuclear strikes
after North Korea shot down a U.S. reconnaissance plane,
according to documents declassified in 2010 and published
by the National Security Archive.
 Roger Stone: ‘Neo-McCarthyism’
To Blame For Claims Of Russian Collusion
Published Time: 26 Sep, 2017 15:27 Edited Time: 27 Sep, 2017 07:53

He asks: “What is it you fear? Why do you oppose

transparency? What is it you don’t want the public to
know?”

“Our intelligence agencies have been

politicized,” he adds, criticizing the lack of
evidence provided by US intelligence
bodies to support claims of alleged Russian
interference in the 2016 election.
Political advisor Roger Stone © Brendan McDermid / Reuters

Roger Stone has demanded a public apology from leading

Democratic members of Congress, accusing his rivals of
conducting a “witch-hunt” against him ahead of his
appearance before the House Intelligence Committee.

In a statement he plans to deliver Tuesday, the former

adviser to US President Donald Trump accused Committee
members of “neo-McCarthyism” for alleging collusion
between the Trump campaign and the Russian state.

Stone, whose testimony will be heard in a closed session,

then accused Democratic Party members of waging a
campaign against Trump allies such as himself and his
“boyhood friend,” and the president’s one-time campaign
manager, Paul Manafort.

“I do not have and I’ve never had any

relationship with Russia or any Russian
entity. You have falsely accused me
without any evidence – you should
apologize today,” he says in the opening
remarks.
“[A] number of members of this Committee
have made irresponsible, indisputably, and
provably false statements in order to create
the impression of collusion with the
Russian state without any evidence that
would hold up in a US court of law or the
court of public opinion."
Stone also took aim at the Committee’s lack of
transparency, accusing it of failing to make its alleged
evidence publicly available and for holding its hearings
behind closed doors, without allowing participants the
same public forum to refute claims made against them in
the media by Committee members.
The conservative activist repeatedly denied accusations
that he had any ties to Russia, citing a study by Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), a group of
former intelligence analysts, which claimed the hack of the
Democratic National Committee’s email system was “an
inside job.”
VIPS criticized claims by FBI, CIA and NSA analysts for
shortcomings in their assessment of the DNC leak,
accusing them of being "agenda-driven" and lacking in
"any apparent evidence."
In his statement, Stone urged the Committee to investigate
contacts between the Clinton campaign and Ukraine, and
cited media reports that Ukraine is “providing
sophisticated missile technology to North Korea.”

255
Ukraine has denied these reports.
Stone, long-time friend of Donald Trump, also responded
to accusations that he knew of the DNC email hack in
advance, saying that a tweet posted to his timeline on
August 21, 2016, in which he predicted that Clinton
campaign chairman John Podesta would come under
intense media scrutiny, was the product of an opposition
research paper.
256
The document claimed that Podesta and his family
members had ties to Russian oligarchs and Russian
President Vladimir Putin through banking and energy
deals.
“There was no need to have John
Podesta’s email to learn that he and his
presidential candidate were in bed with the
clique around Putin,” said Stone.
He also dismissed statements made by the ranking
Democratic member of the Committee, Rep. Adam Schiff,
that Stone has had direct communication with Julian
Assange. Instead he said he was in touch with the
WikiLeaks founder through a journalist intermediary.
 Call For Trump Impeachment
Puts Pressure On Top Dems
By Cristina Marcos
09/27/17 06:00 AM EDT
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) on Tuesday threatened to force a
House floor vote next week on impeaching President
Trump, creating a new dilemma for his party’s leaders.
Green said he would file an impeachment resolution next
week while condemning Trump’s attacks on NFL players
who have kneeled during the national anthem to protest
police brutality.
Because the resolution is considered privileged under
House rules, it would automatically force action on the
House floor within two days.
While House Republicans would presumably reject the
resolution, Green could still force a procedural vote that
would put his colleagues on the spot on impeachment.
“I rise to say to the world that this is not
what America is all about,” Green said
during a House floor speech on Tuesday
as he condemned Trump’s attacks on
athletes.
“I will stand here in the well of the
Congress, and I will call for the
impeachment of the president of the United
States of America,” he said.
Green did not say what the exact argument for
impeachment in his resolution will be and declined to offer
specific details.
Democrats have had no problem criticizing Trump, but
most have stopped well short of calls for impeachment,
worried it could backfire on them as it did on Bill Clinton-
era Republicans.
257
Most rank-and-file Democrats worry that rushing to
endorse impeachment proceedings would look like an
overreach.
Impeachment proceedings have traditionally begun in the
House Judiciary Committee, which would hold hearings
and vote on articles to remove a president before sending
them to the full chamber for consideration.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a senior member of the
House Judiciary Committee, said,
“We’re not there yet” even though he thinks
Trump has done “really terrible things.”
Nadler is hardly the kind of Democrat who would have to
worry about an impeachment vote alienating swing voters
back home: Democratic presidential nominee Hillary
Clinton won 78 percent of his Manhattan-area district in
2016.
“I don’t want to vote on impeachment. I
think it’s too early. We don’t have the
evidence; we don’t have the case,” Nadler
told The Hill.
Nadler said he could not support an impeachment
resolution if it were brought to the floor next week.
Forcing a vote on impeachment now could make it harder
for Democrats to justify a case in the future if events
warranted, he warned.
“You don’t want to discredit it by voting for
impeachment resolutions before you have
the facts,” Nadler said.
Even Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), a vocal Trump critic
who has also called for impeachment, declined to say how
she would vote if Green’s resolution came to the floor.
But she added:
“At some point in time, impeachment is
inevitable.”
Green isn’t the first Democrat to raise the possibility of
forcing a vote on impeachment. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-
Calif.) suggested over the summer that he might force a
vote on his article of impeachment alleging that Trump
obstructed justice by firing James Comey as FBI director
amid the agency’s investigation of potential collusion with
the Russian government.
Sherman at the time faced pushback from Democrats who
warned that forcing a vote on impeachment could hurt
fellow Democrats and candidates trying to unseat
Republicans in swing districts.
Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.), who was among the
Democrats to raise objections at the time, reiterated
Tuesday that any lawmaker seeking to force a vote on
impeachment should consult the rest of the caucus.
“I think that anybody who’s going to bring
something like that to the floor has an
obligation to talk to his colleagues before
he does it,” Capuano said.
.
258
Only a handful of Democrats have endorsed impeaching
Trump. Green signed on to the article of impeachment
filed by Sherman in July, which remains the only measure
introduced in Congress to remove Trump from office.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) endorsed
censuring Trump after he gave an equivocating response to
the violent clashes between white supremacists and
counterprotesters in Charlottesville, Va., last month. But
she has been careful to distance herself from impeachment
efforts, saying that Democrats should wait for a full
accounting of Russia’s role in the 2016 election and focus
on other legislative efforts in the meantime.
Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) announced in August that he
would file articles of impeachment in response to Trump’s
handling of the events in Charlottesville. Cohen has not yet
followed through on introducing an impeachment measure,
but said Tuesday he planned to do so sooner rather than
later.
 Republicans Press For SECOND
Special Counsel To Investigate Hillary, Comey And Lynch
Their Crimes Are Well Documented, But Will Congress Have
The Guts To Press Forward?
By Alex Christoforou
September 27, 2017, 11:45

House Judiciary Committee renewed called for a second

special counsel Tuesday.

As Robert Mueller’s investigation into Trump-Russia

collusion turns into a witch-hunt in search of anything, or
anyone that can be scapegoated to justify the year long
circus originating from a Hillary Clinton-John Podesta
concocted story to explain away their failed $2 billion
election disaster, documented crimes were committed by
Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and Loretta Lynch.

Perjury, obstruction of justice, secret airport tarmac

meetings, leaking of government documents, and the
destruction of 33,000 government emails…perhaps the
Excerpt of the letter can be read below or click here to read
GOP has finally mustered up the balls to bring in the real
full text.
criminals to justice.

September 26, 2017

The Gateway Pundit reports…
In July, Republicans on the House
Judiciary Committee requested a second
special counsel separate from Robert
Mueller to probe aspects of the 2016
election and actions by the Obama
administration including Hillary Clinton.
In light of reports that Comey ended the FBI investigation
into Hillary’s emails before interviewing seventeen key
witnesses including Hillary herself, Republicans on the
259
Dear Attorney General Sessions and Deputy Attorney
General Rosenstein:
We write to renew this Committee’s recent call for a
second special counsel, to investigate matters which
may be outside the scope of Special Counsel Robert
Mueller’s investigation. Such a step is even more
critical given the recent revelation that former FBI
Director James Comey had prepared a statement
ending the investigation into former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, before interviewing at least 17 key
witnesses, including the former Secretary herself. At
least one former career FBI supervisor has
characterized this action as “so far out of bounds it’s
 not even in the stadium,” and “clearly communicating Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), and the United
to [FBI executive staff] where the investigation was States Marshals Service (USMS) will electronically
going to go.” record statements made by individuals in their
custody.
Among those witnesses the FBI failed to interview
prior to the Director’s preparation of his statement This policy also encourages agents and prosecutors
were Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, both of to consider electronic recording in investigative or
whom were close Clinton aides with extensive other circumstances where the presumption does not
knowledge of the facts surrounding the establishment apply. The policy encourages agents and prosecutors
of a private email server. Last year, this Committee to consult with each other in such circumstances.
inquired repeatedly of the Justice Department about
Despite this, the DOJ and FBI declined to exercise
the facts surrounding Ms. Mills’ and Ms. Samuelson’s
their discretion to record the interview of former
involvement. Our inquiries were largely ignored. Secretary Clinton. This is truly inexplicable, given that
Recently, we wrote to you to request responses to
the case was of keen national interest and
those and other unanswered questions pertaining to importance, and involved a former Secretary of State
the Clinton investigation. We have not received a
and candidate for President of the United States who
response. However, as the most recent Comey
was accused of violating the Espionage Act. It only
revelations make clear, ignoring this problem will not reinforces the sense that our nation’s top law
make it go away.
enforcement officials conspired to sweep the Clinton
As we pointed out at the time, both Ms. Mills and Ms. “matter” under the rug, and that there is, truly, one
Samuelson received immunity for their cooperation in system for the powerful and politically well-connected,
the Clinton investigation, but were nevertheless and another for everyone else.
permitted to sit in on the interview of Secretary
In this case, it appears that Director Comey and other
Clinton. That, coupled with the revelation that the
senior Justice Department and government officials
Director had already drafted an exoneration may have pre-judged the “matter” before all the facts
statement, strongly suggests that the interview was a
were known, thereby ensuring former Secretary
mere formality, and that the Director had already
Clinton would not be charged for her criminal activity.
decided the case would be closed.
We implore you to name a second special counsel, to
Why, indeed. Perhaps it was because, just as the investigate this and other matters related to the 2016
Comey revelation suggests, the decision had already election, including the conduct of the Justice
been made – prior to the interview of Secretary Department regarding the investigation into Secretary
Clinton, Ms. Mills, Ms. Samuelson, or any of the other Clinton’s private email server.
14 potential witnesses – that Secretary Clinton would
#BREAKING: Judiciary GOP renews call
not be charged with any crimes for her conduct.
for 2nd Special Counsel for issues outside
President Obama had indicated as much, by stating scope of Mueller’s investigation
publicly at the time that although Secretary Clinton
https://t.co/42HxVKj2GD
showed “carelessness” in conducting government — House Judiciary
business on a private server, she had no intent to
(@HouseJudiciary) September 26, 2017
endanger national security. Of course, Secretary
Clinton’s supposed lack of “intent to harm national
security” is a red herring, since the law merely
requires the government to show “gross negligence.”
Moreover, we note that not only did the former
Director end the investigation prematurely — and
potentially at the direction, tacit or otherwise, of
President Obama — but he did so while declining to
record the interviews of former Secretary Clinton or
any of her close associates, as provided for by DOJ
policy.
The policy states:
This policy establishes a presumption that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
.

260
 "Betrayal": Drudge Slams Trump Tax Plan,
Says "Illusion Of Party Differences Is Finished"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 27, 2017 12:47 PM

Despite the ubiquitous "tax cuts for billionaires" comments
from the likes of Schumer and Pelosi, Matt Drudge has
seen enough when it comes to President Trump's policies.
After the leaked details of Trump's tax plan suggests a
'surcharge on the wealthiest Americans', Drudge took to
Twitter...
First keep Obamacare, now raise taxes on
top earners? At least illusion there is
difference between parties is finished once
and for all!
— MATT DRUDGE (@DRUDGE)
September 27, 2017
His website also led with a scathing headline: "More
Betrayal Republican Plan to Raise Taxes."
All the core systems of the nation are failing, visibly,
painfully, badly, and yet all the parties can dredge up is
more of the same and TINA--there is no alternative.
The citizen who just awakened also
awakened to the truth: the legacy
parties have no solutions;
their game plan is to milk the system as long as they can
before it collapses in a rotten heap of corruption, fraud,
collusion, debt and profiteering that benefits the few at the
expense of the many.
When the parties do finally implode, the
general mood will be: good riddance.
A centralized spoils system is no longer a viable way to
govern the nation. Political systems everywhere are facing
a choice: Decentralize or die.
* * *
Drudge tends to delete his tweets soon after releasing them
so here it is for posterity...

Drudge is criticizing the GOP for making concessions to

Democrats on taxes and health care,
confirming there is no longer an
"illusion" of difference between the two
major parties... Interestingly, shorly after tweeting, Drudge altered the
headline on his homepage...
Something we have discussed numerous times. As Charles
Hugh Smith recently exclaimed...
All the legacy claims of both parties ring
false; neither party gives a hoot about
the working class, small business or
civil liberties. Their entire game plan is
to whip up hot-button social issues to
distract a fragmented citizenry and
arouse last-gasp emotional loyalty to
empty slogans.
Is it any wonder that people are
abandoning both parties and claiming
Independent status? Regulatory 'tap on the shoulder'?
.

261
 The UN Stinks Of Sulfur With Trump’s Presence
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
9-27-2017
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez always expressed his
views candidly on vital issues, a hallmark of his governing
style.
He once said
“(t)he grand destroyer of the world, and the
greatest threat...is represented by US
imperialism.”
“Let the dogs of the empire bark. That’s
their job. Ours is to battle to achieve the
true liberation of our people.”
He called George Bush a “donkey.” “Mr.
Danger.
A “coward.” An “assassin.” A “genocid(ist),”
a “drunk,” a “sick man, a psychologically ill
man.”
He condemned Israel’s “holocaust” against the Palestinian
people, called Tony Blair “an imperialist pawn,” expressed
solidarity with Syrian President Assad, called Obama an
imperial “clown.”
He said Gaddafi
“will be remembered as a great fighter, a
revolutionary and martyr. They
assassinated him. It is another outrage.”
He called on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to resign,
saying
“(i)t’s the least you can do. Resign, along
with those other spies and delinquents
working in the State Department.”
“And the Devil came here yesterday...Right
here. And it smells of sulphur still today.”
He “came here talking as if he owned the
world. Truly. As the owner of the world.”
On Monday, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza
delivered a stirring address before UN General Assembly
members, repeating Chavez’s memorable comment, saying
the podium still “stinks of sulfur” because of Trump’s
presence days earlier, his speech one of the most
deplorable ones in UN history, sounding like the ravings of
262
a madman, angering other member states wanting peace,
not war.
His demeanor resembled a world emperor with “dictatorial
powers,” said Arreaza, making aggressive “unilateral
threats,” mocking the UN’s Charter.
It’s “been profaned, disrespected and offended over and
over again by arrogant powers who intend to impose
unilateral rules” on others, none more aggressively than
Washington, Trump a rogue leader like the Clintons,
Bush/Cheney and Obama.
Arreaza compared Trump to Joe McCarthy and Obama, he
and his predecessor differing only in style, pursuing the
same destructive objectives. He called Trump’s planned
border wall “political terrorism.”
His country will continue championing Bolivarian social
democracy regardless of his attempts to destroy it,
devoting over two-thirds of Venezuela’s wealth to social
programs - nothing for militarism and warmaking.
He called the General Assembly a “home of peace,” its
podium a sacred place for supporting global understanding
and equality.
Venezuela respects the sovereign rights of all other
nations. It’s prepared to defend its own “in any way,” he
stressed.
He condemned illegal, unilateral US sanctions on Russia
and Iran, denounced the criminal blockade of Cuba, urged
dialogue to avoid war on the Korean peninsula, and
rejected Washington claiming his country doesn’t belong
on the UN Human Rights Council.
America, other NATO belligerents, Israel, Saudi Arabia
and their rogue allies should be denied membership, the
world’s leading human rights abusers.
Separately, Venezuela’s government condemned Trump’s
travel ban, targeting its officials and family members,
banning their travel to America, saying:
“These types of lists are incompatible with
international law and constitute in
themselves a form of psychological and
political terrorism.”
They’re “hostile actions,” aiming to “stigmatize”
Venezuela on the phony pretext of “combating terrorism” Venezuela “repudiates the imperialist
Washington supports. conduct of the US government,
unilateral(ly) (imposing) “coercive
Trump wants Venezuelans “punished for their peaceful measures that deliberately ignore
aspirations, as well as for their tolerance and respect for international laws regulating friendly
different religions and beliefs that are professed freely and relations and cooperation between nation
harmoniously in our country.” states.”
.

263
 Washpost Opinion Writer Loses It Over
'Firebrand' Moore's GOP Runoff Victory In Alabama
By Tom Blumer
September 27, 2017 12:50 AM EDT

The labeling in the press's reaction to Roy Moore's victory
over Luther Strange in Alabama's GOP Senate primary
runoff Tuesday night has been negative and predictable.
The dominant word, seen at both the home page of the
New York Times's and at the Associated Press at about 11
p.m. on Tuesday, was "firebrand."
But Washington Post opinion writer Stephen Stromberg
went miles over the top in a column at the paper's "Post
Partisan" blog published shortly after Moore's victory
became assured.
Moore would make an unusually toxic
addition to Washington. ... Moore touts
politics that are raw and identity-based,
appealing to those who believe that
conservative Christian religious culture
should infuse the civic institutions that
govern all of us.
Geez, Moore should be right at home at America's colleges
and universities, where "identity" seems to be everything.
That's sarcasm, folks.

Stromberg didn't limit his venom to the candidate. He also Actually, the "identity" charge is a straw-man argument
saved part of it for the Republican base (bolds are mine): targeting someone said to strongly follow Biblical
principles, the most important of which is that your
Roy Moore wins. The country loses. "identity" as a human being is what is important.

Democrats might be tempted to crack a smile at Roy Additionally, the belief that "Christian
Moore’s Tuesday night victory in Alabama’s GOP Senate religious culture should infuse" the nation's
primary runoff. civic institutions goes back to the nation's
Founding Fathers. As Bill Flax noted in a
2012 Forbes column, "The idea that the
The Republican base is so nuts that
United States is a ‘Christian nation,’ has
even President Trump’s late
always been central to American identity."
intervention could not persuade GOP
primary voters to support sitting Sen.
Luther Strange (R-Ala.), who is merely
an extreme Trump supporter. Instead,
they had to pick one of the most divisive
figures in American politics to represent
them.

I'm sure it hasn't occurred to Stromberg that former

President Barack Obama virtually
board divisiveness dwarfs Moore's. Of
"Polarizing" and "divisive" are adjectives
conservatives and Republicans. Oh, and
"bombthrower," which are coming up.
Continuing:
... no one should be happy about what
occurred Tuesday night.
Moore is still almost certain to beat (Democratic Party
nominee Jones. And, like Trump,
across-the-
course not.
reserved for
"toxic" and
In other words, Stromberg hasn't made anything
resembling a strong argument yet. He never does, but
here's the clinching giveaway to me. It's in the context of
Moore's fight to prevent the removal of the Ten
Commandments from his Etowah County courtroom,
which clearly drives the Post opinion writer crazy, but the
sentence he wrote to summarize his views of Moore's
actions during this controversy clearly has far broader
significance:
Civilized people do not get to decide
which court rulings they follow.
264
Oh really, Stephen? That's hardly been the position liberals
have used for conservative rulings they don't like.
Thanks for letting us know whose side you're really on,
Stephen.
Continuing:
When votes will be needed to keep the government open,
pass a budget or respond to a natural disaster,
Moore is likely to join bomb-throwers
such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) in
threatening counterproductive disruption if
the country refuses to bend to his views.
265
The use of "bombthrowers" is especially rich, considering
the Post's and the rest of the media's deliberate
downplaying of the far-left antifa violence that actually
began before Donald Trump's election in 2016 and has
continued unabated in many leftist locales.
As the "Resistance" continues its unhinged campaign of
disruption and defiance, Stromberg's third-last sentence is
particularly offensive — and that's saying something,
giving everything that preceded it:
Roy Moore stands for anarchy, disorder,
disunity and conflict.
 All You Need To Know About
Trump Tax Reform: Goldman Explains
By Tyler Durden
Sep 27, 2017 10:13 AM
This afternoon, during a speech in Indianapolis, President
Trump will unveil the long-anticipated Republican tax
reform proposal that calls for substantial business and
individual tax cuts. As has been leaked previously, the tax
plan is anticipated to disclose a 35% individual tax rate
(although Congress may push it higher), a tax rate on
corporations and pass thrus that will be around 20% and
25% respectively, while doubling the standard deduction
to $12,000 for individuals. While offsetting these will be
such proposed tax increases as the elimination of state and
local tax deductibility, according to Goldman, the proposal
will likely reduce federal revenues by around $4 trillion
over ten years (or 1.7% of GDP over that period).
By contrast, as Goldman's Alec Phillips writes in an
overnight report, the debate in Congress has ranged from
revenue-neutral tax reform to a recently floated proposal in
the Senate that might allow for a $1.5 trillion tax cut over
ten years (0.6% of GDP over that period).
Even if this tentative budget agreement in
the Senate becomes official the
forthcoming proposal would have to be
scaled substantially to fit within the
fiscal constraints Congress is likely to
impose.
In other words, for all the hype, the final Trump tax cut - if
it passes - will be a pale shadow of its initial proposal.
That said, and as the recently surging dollar has confirmed,
tax reform is finally starting to move and recent
developments suggest a rising probability that tax
legislation will be enacted by early 2018. Following the
expected release of the tax proposal this week, Goldman
now expect the Senate Budget Committee to vote on its
fiscal year 2018 budget resolution the week of October 2,
which looks likely to include a
“reconciliation instruction” for a net tax
cut of $1.5 trillion over ten years.
If a similar instruction is finalized by the House and Senate
(probably by late October), enactment of tax reform by
early 2018 would become more likely in Goldman's view,
as it would allow for a corporate rate reduction and some
individual tax relief while allowing lawmakers to avoid
some of the most controversial base-broadening measures
266
that might otherwise be necessary to offset the cost of the
tax cuts.
So with that in mind, here are Goldman's thoughts on tax
reform ahead of Trump's announcement this afternoon.
Thoughts on Tax Reform Ahead of the
President’s Announcement
The White House is expected to release an outline of tax
reform that is meant to represent a consensus among White
House officials and House and Senate Republican leaders.
Some details have begun to trickle out through various
media reports, and appear to represent a middle ground
between the House Republican “blueprint” on tax reform
and the President’s prior proposal. Exhibit 1 compares
prior proposals with what has been reported of the
upcoming White House proposal and what we expect a
plausible end result might be. We note that there has been
little detail reported regarding a few areas, like taxation of
capital income (we assume no change) and treatment of
corporate interest expense (we do not expect the White
House to propose repeal of interest deductibility, but some
type of limitation might be floated).
That said, the White House proposal will represent only an
opening bid, and many provisions are likely to change
during the course of the legislative process. In particular,
we expect any proposal to repeal the state and local tax
deduction to face substantial political friction, in light of
the fact that Republicans can afford to lose only 23 votes
in the House, assuming no Democratic support, and there
are 28 Republican House members from New York, New
Jersey, and California alone, and dozens more from other
states with substantial state and local income taxes. Exhibit
2 shows the cumulative number of House members in the
top 20 high tax states, measured by per capita itemized
income tax and property tax deductions.
The other aspect of the reported proposal that seems likely
to change, in our view, is the interplay between corporate
rate reductions, full expensing of capital investment, and
potential limitations on corporate interest deductibility.
While House Republicans have consistently favored full
expensing of business investment, the cost of which would
be offset by partly repealing the deductibility of corporate
interest expense, the President stopped short of endorsing
this concept in the campaign and the White House tax
reform outline earlier this year was silent on the issue.
While the White House might propose to temporarily
allow businesses to fully deduct capex for several years in
return for limiting interest deductibility, many businesses
appear to support the former more than they oppose the
latter.
We would also expect the 20% corporate tax rate that the
White House looks likely to propose to drift higher as the
debate continues. The corporate income tax is projected to
take in around $3.75 trillion over the next ten years (1.6%
of GDP over that period); reducing the rate to 20% would
take projected receipts down to around $2.1 trillion (0.9%
of GDP), for a revenue loss of around $1.6 trillion (0.7%
of GDP). To offset the cost of cutting the rate by nearly
half, the corporate tax base would need to be nearly
doubled.
However, there are simply not enough politically feasible
opportunities to eliminate deductions and other tax
preferences to broaden the base by this amount. For
example, the Tax Policy Center recently estimated that
eliminating all corporate tax preferences would allow the
corporate tax rate to come down to 26% without losing
revenues. However, some of the changes this would
require, such as ending accelerated depreciation, are
extremely unlikely to be included in a reform proposal
since most lawmakers want to change policy in the
opposite direction (i.e., increasing investment incentives).
The Tax Foundation estimates that repealing all corporate
tax preferences except for those dealing with depreciation
and foreign income would raise around $900bn over ten
years (0.4% of GDP) at current tax rates. However, this
would only be enough income to reduce the corporate tax
rate to around 28% in a revenue-neutral manner. Some of
these would undoubtedly be too controversial, suggesting
that a revenue-neutral tax reform would struggle to achieve
a rate much below 30%.
This is why the tentative budget agreement in the Senate
could be so important. As we noted last week, an
agreement to allow for a $1.5 trillion (0.6% of GDP) tax
cut in the upcoming budget resolution for fiscal year 2018
was reached in principle between Senator Toomey (R-PA),
who has supported a larger tax cut, and Senator Corker (R-
Exhibit 1: Proposal to Repeal State and Local Deduction Would Likely Face Opposition
267
TN), who has been cautious on tax cuts, citing deficit
concerns. If an agreement is finalized over the next few
weeks that allows for a tax cut of around $1.5 trillion to
pass via the budget reconciliation process, a corporate rate
cut would become much easier since a portion of the cost
would not need to be paid for.
At this point a budget agreement calling for a net tax cut
looks like the most likely outcome, but three hurdles need
to be overcome. First, the Senate Budget Committee is
likely to vote as soon as next week on a draft budget
resolution for FY 2018, which looks likely to include a
reconciliation instruction to the Senate Finance Committee
to cut taxes by around $1.5 trillion over ten years (the
details could be released later this week). Second, the full
Senate will debate and vote on the resolution. This will
take only 51 votes to pass, but some Republican senators
might raise concerns related to the fiscal implications of
the tax cut. A few Republicans have also recently raised
the possibility that they will seek to pair tax reform with
another effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care
Act (ACA), which would be a major setback for tax reform
if it occurred. Third, the House also needs to pass its own
version of the budget resolution, and an earlier version
called for revenue-neutral tax reform. We expect the
House will end up closer to the tax cut called for under the
tentative agreement in the Senate, but this remains a source
of uncertainty. We would not expect the budget resolution
to be finalized until late October.
Even if the budget agreement calls for a meaningful net tax
cut, the proposed changes the President looks likely to
announce on September 27 seem likely to be scaled back
as the congressional debate progresses, given the likely
cost of the proposal the White House is likely to release
compared with the fiscal constraints the plan will face in
Congress. Without a detailed proposal it is difficult to
estimate the cost of the plan, but as a very rough estimate
we expect policies similar to those laid out in recent press
reports would reduce tax receipts by around $4 trillion
over ten years on a static basis. Even if the upcoming
budget resolution targets a tax cut of $1.5 trillion over ten
years, this suggests that the plan released this week will
need to be scaled back substantially.
Exhibit 2: Prior Tax Proposals vs. Reported White House Plan
.

268
 Trump Suggests Facebook
Colluded With Media Against Him
By Julia Manchester
09/27/17 09:52 AM EDT

The president's comments come after the social media

President Trump on Wednesday seemed to suggest
that Facebook had colluded with the news media against
him during the 2016 presidential race.
"Facebook was always anti-Trump. The
Networks were always anti-Trump hence,
Fake News @nytimes (apologized) &
@WaPo were anti-Trump. Collusion?" the
president tweeted.
platform told investigators that it discovered that thousands
of political ads published on its platform over the past two
years were linked to fake accounts based in Russia.
Facebook's CEO Mark Zuckerberg subsequently
announced his strategy last Thursday to bring the
company’s advertising tools to a “higher standard of
transparency."
Trump on Friday downplayed the reports surrounding the
ads, calling them a part of the "Russia hoax."

He added:

"But the people were Pro-Trump! Virtually

no President has accomplished what we
have accomplished in the first 9 months-
and economy roaring."

Facebook declined to comment on the president's latest

tweet.

269
 Angry Trump Lashes Out At MSM:
"Facebook, Networks, Nytimes, Wapo Were
Always Anti-Trump. Collusion?"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 27, 2017 9:54 AM

President Trump has just hit on a theme that we've

mentioned multiple times over the past 9 months, namely
the Left's preposterous assertion that somehow $100,000
worth of ads on Facebook outweighed the constant anti-
Trump rhetoric being spewed on every mainstream media
outlet and newspaper 24 hours a day and 7 days a week for
over a year.

"Facebook was always anti-Trump.The

Networks were always anti-Trump
hence,Fake News,
@nytimes(apologized) & @WaPo were
anti-Trump. Collusion?"
"..But the people were Pro-Trump!
Virtually no President has accomplished
what we have accomplished in the first 9
months-and economy roaring"
Of course, as we pointed out last night (see: Was
Facebook Pressured Into Finding "Something" To
Implicate Russia?) and on multiple other occasions, the
underwhelming amount of evidence offered up by
Facebook, a measly $100,000 worth of ad buys, would
seem to suggest that the social media giant may have been
forced by the Left to disclose something/anything to
support the mainstream media's 'Russian collusion'
narrative...

even if it made Facebook and it's

founder look foolish in the process.

270
 IRONY: CNN Calls Trump Racist While They’re Getting
Sued By 175 Black Employees For Discrimination
September 27, 2017

News personalities and writers at CNN repeatedly try to

paint President Donald Trump as a racist, which is ironic
considering that they’re being sued by 175 African-
American former and current employees for racial
discrimination.

271
 Gumbel Thanks Trump’s ‘Racist’
‘Childish’ Comments for ‘Energizing’ Athletes
By Nicholas Fondacaro
September 27, 2017 12:18 AM EDT
With President Trump’s feud with the NFL still swirling
around the liberal media, sportscaster Bryant Gumbel
signed off of his HBO show, REAL Sports, on Tuesday by
thanking Trump for waking up American athletes. But
being Bryant Gumbel, he had to go as low as he possibly
could. With claims that the President was being racist, he
lamented that America hasn’t come that far.
“Finally, tonight, a quick thanks to the
current occupant of the White House for
energizing the social consciousness of
the modern American athlete,” Gumbel
began.
“That occupants weekend series of
racist, churlish, and childish comments
drew a variety of stunning rebukes and
actions, which suggests that jocks may
finally be realizing that apathy won't cut
it anymore,” he smeared and praised.
“That, in conjunction with their fame,
they have important civic roles to play,
especially now.”
Playing himself up to be some sort of intellectual, Gumbel
opined about he and certain others were looking forward to
the day athletes would become politically motivated en
masse.
“Those of us who’ve long focused on
the intersection of sports and society
have often wondered what it would take
for today's athletes to forsake the path
of least resistance and actually stand
for something, and now we know,” he
told the camera.
“Many suddenly seemed not just willing
but also eager to follow in the giant
272
footsteps of Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown,
Bill Russel, Billie Jean King, Roberto
Clemente, Arthur Ash and many others
who courageously use their athletic
platforms to challenge authority in the
pursuit of justice,” he added.
Gumbel wrapped up his monologue by lamenting how
somethings in America have changed very little: “Back in
their day, Bob Dylan famously said, "The times, they
are a-changin'," and that’s still true today, as well as is
the sad reality that certain things haven't changed at
all.” Presumably, he’s referring to America’s racism.
Transcript below:
HBO
REAL Sports with Brant Gumbel
September 26, 2017
10:58:24 PM Eastern
BRYANT GUMBEL: Finally, tonight, a quick thanks to the current
occupant of the White House for energizing the social
consciousness of the modern American athlete. That occupants
weekend series of racist, churlish, and childish comments drew a
variety of stunning rebukes and actions, which suggests that
jocks may finally be realizing that apathy won't cut it anymore.
That, in conjunction with their fame, they have important civic
roles to play, especially now.
Those of us who’ve long focused on the intersection of sports
and society have often wondered what it would take for today's
athletes to forsake the path of least resistance and actually stand
for something, and now we know. Many suddenly seemed not
just willing but also eager to follow in the giant footsteps of
Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown, Bill Russel, Billie Jean King, Roberto
Clemente, Arthur Ash and many others who courageously use
their athletic platforms to challenge authority in the pursuit of
justice.
Back in their day, Bob Dylan famously said, "The times, they are
a-changin'," and that’s still true today, as well as is the sad reality
that certain things haven't changed at all.
And that is our show for this evening. For all of the good folks
here at Real Sports, I'm Bryant Gumbel. Thank you so very much
for being with us and good night.
 "Fake News" Writer Who "Felt Responsible
For Trump's Election" Found Dead In Phoenix
By Tyler Durden
Sep 27, 2017 11:12 AM

A self-described "fake news" writer, and no check anything! Now he’s in the White
he didn't write for CNN or the New York House. Looking back, instead of hurting the
Times, has been found dead in Phoenix of campaign, I think I helped it. And that feels
an apparent "accidental overdose." [bad].”
According to The Hill, Paul Horner often
said that he felt "responsible for Trump's
election" because of how many of his fake
news stories went viral over Facebook and
Twitter but an immediate inconsistency
arises when you realize the "Horner"
doesn't sound Russian at all.

Here's more from The Hill:

Horner, whose fake news stories often went viral on

Facebook and Twitter, told The Intersect, a Washington
Post blog, last year that Trump supporters were especially
susceptible to being fooled. So what kind of "fake news" stories,
written by Horner, were so powerful that
they could sway an entire presidential
“My sites were picked up by Trump
election?
supporters all the time,” Horner said. “I
think Trump is in the White House
because of me." Well, as Wapo pointed out last November, this piece
noting that the Amish community in America had thrown
“His followers don’t fact-check their full support behind Trump apparently went a long
anything — they’ll post everything, way toward accomplishing that goal.
believe anything.
His campaign manager posted my story
about a protester getting paid $3,500 as
fact. Like, I made that up. I posted a fake
ad on Craigslist.”

Horner also said at the time he published his hoax stories

to make Trump supporters look bad.

“I thought they’d fact-check it, and it’d

make them look worse,” Horner said. “I
mean, that’s how this always works:
Someone posts something I write, then
they find out it’s false, then they look like Ironically, we don't even recall Hillary ever blaming
idiots. Horner for her loss... which is a disaster because she's
going to have to republish an edited version of "What
“But Trump supporters — they just Happened" now.
keep running with it! They never fact-
.

273
 'Collusion?' Trump Slams Facebook,
'Fake News' Media For Conspiring Against Him
By Brooke Singman, Fox News
September 27, 2017
President Trump slammed Facebook and ‘fake news’ on
Twitter Wednesday, accusing media outlets and the social
media network of “collusion.”
“Facebook was always anti-Trump. The
Networks were always anti-Trump hence,
Fake News, @nytimes (apologized) &
@WaPo were anti-Trump. Collusion?”
Trump tweeted Wednesday.
Moments later, he gave a hat-tip to his supporters and
touted his administration's accomplishments in the first
nine months of his presidency.
“..But the people were Pro-Trump! Virtually
no President has accomplished what we
have accomplished in the first 9 months-
and economy roaring,” Trump tweeted.
274
Trump’s comments come after Facebook CEO Mark
Zuckerberg said the platform planned to hand over
political ads purchased by Russian operatives to Congress.
"I don't want anyone to use our tools to
undermine democracy," Zuckerberg said
on Sept. 21, during remarks broadcast live
on his Facebook page.
One senior source familiar with discussions told Fox News
there is a “deal” with Facebook. However, another senior
source close to the negotiation says there is no agreement
on the breadth of material Facebook may provide.
“After an extensive legal and policy review,
today we are announcing that we will also
share these ads with congressional
investigators,” Facebook’s general counsel,
Colin Stretch, wrote. “We believe it is vitally
important that government authorities have
the information they need to deliver to the
public a full assessment of what happened
in the 2016 election.”
The president suggested last week that the Facebook ad
controversy was part of the “Russia hoax” dispute.
“The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads
on Facebook,” the president tweeted on
Friday. “What about the totally biased and
dishonest Media coverage in favor of
Crooked Hillary?”
Earlier this month, Facebook uncovered approximately
$100,000 spread over almost 3,000 ads in fraudulent ad
spending across its platform tied to the 2016 presidential
election.
Fox News’ Chris Ciaccia contributed to this report.
 Malkin: Roy Moore Win Rejects
McConnell's 'Failure Theater'
By Chris Pandolfo
Posted September 27, 2017 10:27 AM
Appearing on Fox & Friends Wednesday morning, CRTV
host Michelle Malkin said Roy Moore’s victory in the
Alabama Senate Republican primary runoff was a
referendum on the “failure theater” of Mitch McConnell
and the D.C. swamp.
“This is not a referendum on Donald
Trump. What this was a referendum on
was Mitch McConnell and the ‘Swamp
King’ politics of what my colleague at
275
Conservative Review calls ‘failure theater,’”
Malkin said.
“This was about rejecting business as
usual. And the fact is that McConnell
directed and misdirected all of these funds
that should have gone to races where
Republicans could be challenging
Democrats,” Malkin said. “So the misplaced
priorities here, that’s what this was a
referendum on.”
Asked about the ramifications of this race on GOP
primaries in other states, Malkin said the message should
be sent to incumbents like Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., that it’s
time to remember why they were sent to office in the first
place.
“It’s not to get perpetually re-elected. It’s to
represent a specific agenda that grassroots
Republicans especially sent them to do.
And that is to limit the size of government,
not to expand it endlessly.”
 Who Leaked The Fake News Story That Obama
Lectured Mark Zuckerberg About Russia:
Susan Rice Or ... Ben Rhodes?
By Tyler O'Neil
September 27, 2017
Former President Barack Obama, Former Deputy National Security
Adviser For Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes, Former
Ambassador Michael Froman, and Former National Security
Adviser Susan Rice. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
Monday's version of "Democracy Dies in Darkness"
featured a fake news story on the top of the front page:
"Obama Sought To Prod Facebook On Russia Role."
After the story ran, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg
corrected The Washington Post, pointing out that Russia
was not the topic of discussion — the meeting centered on
fake news, and the president did not mention Russia.
Axios broke the story on Tuesday, reporting that the Post's
online version noted the article "has been updated with an
additional response from Facebook." That response led to
the report that
"Obama made a personal appeal to
Zuckerberg to take the threat of fake news
and political disinformation seriously ...
though the president did not single out
Russia specifically."
The revised story also reported that Obama and top aides
"quietly agonized on how to respond to Russia's brazen
intervention on behalf o the Donald Trump campaign
without making matters worse." Elliot Schrage, Facebook's
vice president of communications, told the Post that
Obama's discussion with Zuckerberg was about
"misinformation and false news" and "did not include any
references to possible foreign interference or suggestions
about confronting threats to Facebook."
276
In light of recent revelations that $100,000 in Russia-
backed political ads were given visibility on Facebook, the
story seemed an attempt on behalf of former Obama
staffers to make the previous administration seem more
educated and proactive than it actually was.
Overnight, the story flipped from
"Obama was ahead of his time" to "which
former Obama staffer leaked this fake
news to The Washington Post?"
The Resurgent's Erick Erickson has an answer: Obama's
former UN ambassador and national security advisor,
Susan Rice. Rice, who took the fall for the deaths of four
Americans in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, is also
infamous for requesting the unmasking of U.S. citizens
under FISA surveillance connected to the Donald Trump
campaign.
"A source tells me that when the
conversation took place the person who
accompanied Obama in this meeting was
none other than Susan Rice," Erickson
reported Wednesday. "So Susan Rice,
once again, was trying to mask her own
failures by pointing the blame somewhere
else. Sound familiar?"
Erickson argued that the Washington Post story seemed
yet another attempt on behalf of "Susan Rice and the
Obama team" to "point the finger at Zuckerberg to their
friends in the Washington Post rather than come to terms
with what really happened" in the 2016 campaign — their
side lost because Clinton and her policies were unpopular.
The real story of Russia's involvement in the 2016 election
is rather embarrassing to the Obama team, of course. As
Erickson noted,
"When it came to Russia, Obama, Clinton,
and Rice were asleep at the switch for 8
years. From the reset button, to promising
 to be 'more flexible' to doing nothing in
2016 when their intelligence indicated
Russians were trying to impact our
elections."
The whole story might make Americans nostalgic for Mitt
Romney... the man Obama dismissed as insane for warning
that Russia would be America's primary geopolitical foe.
Furthermore, Obama and Rice were warned about Russian
meddling in 2014 ... and did nothing.
Of course, there is another potential culprit for the fake
news leak to WaPo — a man who has been described
(by The New York Times, no less) as the "master shaper
and retailer of Obama's foreign policy narratives."
That's right, ladies and gentlemen — Ben Rhodes, the
speechwriter without any foreign policy, military, or
international experience who became Obama's deputy
national security advisor for strategic communications,
was in Lima, Peru with Obama and Rice. He did not sit in
the meeting with Zuckerberg, but he likely knew
everything — or almost everything — about it.
277
Indeed, the speechwriter responsible for selling the
horrifically dangerous and naive Iran nuclear deal seems a
perfect match for the leaker behind the fake WaPo story.
There is even one more reason to suspect Rhodes. While
Rice was a direct witness of the meeting between Obama
and Zuckerberg, Rhodes was one step removed. If a leaker
wanted plausible deniability after his or her story was
revealed to be false, Rhodes would have that deniability.
He was traveling with Obama and Rice but did not sit in
the actual room with Zuckerberg.
If Rice is the leaker, she has been caught in a lie. If it's
Rhodes, he can at least say,
"Well, Rice told me Obama mentioned
Russia."
Whoever the source for the Post's story, his or her
credibility has taken a major hit. Or at least, it would have
— if the mainstream media were not in thrall to the former
administration.
 Paul Ryan Rebuffs Trump On NFL:
Kneeling During The Anthem Is “Within Their Rights”
By Jim Hoft
Thursday, September 28, 2017
He just can’t help it.
Speaker Paul Ryan had to distance
himself from President Trump again
today. Ryan told reporters, “People
clearly have the right to express
themselves as they see fit.”
He then added that in his own view
people shouldn’t do it on the anthem.
Paul Ryan always has to make sure he
is not seen as too close to President
Trump.
.
278
A Remington Research Group Poll released on Tuesday
found that two-thirds of Americans stand with Trump and
National Anthem.
The Hill reported:
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday
that NFL players who kneel or sit during the
national anthem are protected by the First
Amendment. But that doesn’t mean he
agrees with their actions.
“People are clearly within their rights to
express themselves as they see fit,” said
Ryan, a lifelong Green Bay Packers fan
who likes to remind people he is one of
360,000 shareholders of the NFL’s only
publicly held team.
“My own view, though, is we shouldn’t do it
on the anthem,” he continued. “Our
national anthem, our flag and the people
who defend it and represent it — that
should be celebrated everywhere and
always.”
 Trump Goes Nuclear:
NFL Will "Go To Hell"
By Tyler Durden
Sep 28, 2017 5:12 AM
It appears Moore's victory in Alabama last night has
rekindled President Trump's more boisterous populist side
- as many suspected it might –
as he congratulated Roy Moore's "really
great race."
In a brief discussion with reporters at The
White House this morning, Trump pulled no
punches urging "the toughest possible
travel ban" and then took a serious
swing at The NFL once again warning:
"I think The NFL is in a box, the only
thing that is doing well for The NFL is
the pre-game...
They can’t have people disrespecting
the national anthem. The NFL has to
change or their business is going to go
to hell."
It appears 'change' is happening...
Just one week after many members of the
Patriots kneeled during the national
anthem, a new report indicates that they
will all stand together as a team next
time out.
279
Trump says Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry
Jones promised him America's Team will
stand for the National Anthem: 'Jerry is a
winner who knows how to get things
done'.
Or this...
Interestingly, former Trump deputy assistant Sebastian
Gorka, who backed Moore, said despite Trump backing
the establishment favorite, the Moore victory strengthens
Trump...
“But guess what happens – when Judge
Moore wins on Tuesday, it will
strengthen the president because now
he’ll be able to go to the establishment
GOP – to the swamp dwellers and say,
‘Hey guys, we are back on my agenda.
This wasn’t worth it.’
So, the president is going to stay – he’s going to return to
the Make America Great Again agenda.
We just have to help him, and we’re
going to do it from the outside by
endorsing people like Judge Moore.”
And that appears to be the approach Trump has taken this
morning.
As he additionally noted,
he's "not happy" with Health and Human
Services Secretary Price, is looking
closely at his private plane use.
 Lawmakers Turn Up The Heat On Obama Unmasking
Scandal – Allege Larger Obama Spy Op On Trump
By Cristina Laila
Thursday, September 28, 2017
Senior Congressional leaders are turning up the heat
on their investigation into the Obama unmasking
scandal after recent reports of obvious abuses from
former UN Ambassador Samantha Power that cannot
be ignored.
The recent admission from Susan Rice that she unmasked
Trump’s associates to understand more about a meeting
between UAE crown prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed
al-Nahyan and senior Trump aides that took place late last
year also renewed their focus on the former NatSec
Advisor.
The Washington Free Beacon reports:
Congressional leaders and other insiders
told the Washington Free Beacon that the
investigation into the Obama
administration’s unmasking campaign is
gaining greater steam, even as the federal
probe into alleged collusion with Russia
drags on.
“The misuse of intelligence information by
members of the Obama administration is a
serious issue that requires an exhaustive
investigation and accountability,” Rep. Ron
DeSantis (R., Fla.), chair of House
Subcommittee on National Security, told
the Free Beacon.
The investigation into these unmasking
efforts continues to focus on top Obama
officials, particularly Power, who is said to
have had little need to unmask such
sensitive classified information from her
perch at Turtle Bay.
280
Rep. Sean Duffy (R. Wis.), another
Republican member closely tracking the
unmaksing scandal, encouraged his
congressional colleagues to move past the
Russia probe in pursuit of the facts about
Obama’s potentially illicit spy operation on
Trump associates.
The Democrats better be careful what they wish for.
Ironically, the Dems have dug a deeper hole for
themselves with this Russia investigation as more damning
information is uncovered about the Obama admin.
“Congress is determined to follow the facts
wherever they may lead us. And,
ironically, the most damning revelations of
the Russia investigation thus far
incriminates the Obama administration,”
said the official, who was not authorized to
speak on record. “Susan Rice’s admission
to widespread unmasking against Trump
associates may just be the tip of the
iceberg. We are going to get to the bottom
of this.”
The Free Beacon also reported that former officials are
very disturbed by the mind blowing number of people
Samantha Power unmasked.
The hundreds of unmasking requests by
Power—which amount to nearly one a
day—are extremely suspicious, the former
officials said.
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, an attorney
for Trump Jay Sekulow and his partner at the ACLJ Jordan
Sekulow broke down Samantha Power’s unprecedented
unmasking requests on their Friday radio show.
Jordan Sekulow pointed out that Power’s unmasking was
crammed in the last few weeks or perhaps days of the
Obama administration which means she was unmasking
dozens of people OR MORE in a single working day.

Sekulow puts Power’s unmasking requests into context by

comparing it to other UN Ambassadors of the past.

“Her number of requests are

unprecedented in the history of UN
Ambassadors who also have the position to
unmask,” Jordan Sekulow began.

“No other UN Ambassador has ever even

made half of the requests Power made in
their ENTIRE CAREER, let alone a few
months.”

VIDEO:

281
 Marine General Joseph Dunford:
Russia And China Are Threat To New World Order
By Jonas E. Alexis
September 28, 2017
Obviously the Israeli regime will not allow ISIS to be
obliterated without a fight, and they will almost certainly
push the United States to stop that from happening. Russia
must be prepared to flesh out a rigorous, consistent, and
reasonable response to the Israeli regime, otherwise they
are going to be in Syria fighting ISIS and other terrorist
groups permanently.
US Marine General Joseph Dunfort has
suddenly come to the conclusion that
both Russia and China are two of the
greatest threats that the United States is
currently facing in the world. “I think
China probably poses the greatest
threat to our nation by about 2025,” he
said.[1] He added:
“China is focused on limiting our ability to
project power and weakening our alliances
in the Pacific. [It has the] potential to
degrade core U.S. military technological
advantages.”[2]
Dunfort never told his listeners how China has been able to
“degrade core U.S. military technological advantages.” It
was just an assertion without a single proof. Then he
moved on to the inexorable truth:
“In terms of overall military capability” he
said, “Russia still posed the greatest threat
to the U.S.”[3]
Dunfort knows that both China and Russia are partners,
and both countries do not support the Trump
administration’s aggressive approach to the North Korea
282
crisis. What is more interesting is that Russia has caught
the United States again buddying up with ISIS in Syria.
And this time Russia has pictures to make their case. As
Gordon Duff has recently reported, Russia has satellite
proof which conclusively places America in a hot seat.
America is now ISIS, and ISIS is America. They are
basically concentric circles.
In other words, ISIS would not have made inroads in Syria
had U.S. officials not been able to support the terrorist
group.
“The newly released images ‘clearly show
that US special ops are stationed at the
outposts previously set up by ISIS
militants.’ ‘Despite that the US strongholds
being located in the ISIS areas, no
screening patrol has been organized at
them,’ the Russian Ministry of Defense
said. This could mean that the US military
staff ‘feel absolutely safe’ in the area which
is held by the terrorists, the ministry of
defense stated.”
Obviously the United States views Russia as dangerous for
ideological reasons, not for legitimate reasons. Russia
keeps exposing the United States as the villain and keeps
revealing that the emperor simply has no clothes, and
United States officials and indeed the Neocon war machine
aren’t happy.[4] We know why they are not happy: the
Israeli regime isn’t happy. This is one reason why Ayelet
Shaked, Israeli Justice Minister, “threatens Putin’s life!”
This is one reason why Zionist organs like the Atlantic are
writing ridiculous things about Russia without serious
evidence.[5]
The Syrian government, with the help of Russia and Iran,
continues to obliterate ISIS in the region, and they intend
to complete the job before the year is over. Walid
Muallem, Syria’s foreign minister, said:
“I say that the main battles in Syria are
coming to an end, and, therefore, we are
completing the last chapter in the
history of the crisis. The Syrian state
intends to liberate every inch of our
 country from terrorists. If we manage to
do this before the end of this year, then
we will only be happy about it.”[6]

Obviously the Israeli regime will not allow ISIS to be

obliterated without a fight, and they will almost certainly
push the United States to stop that from happening. Russia
must be prepared to flesh out a rigorous, consistent, and
reasonable response to the Israeli regime, otherwise they
are going to be in Syria fighting ISIS and other terrorist
groups permanently. Is that what they really want?

.
[1] Tom O’Connor, “China May Take Over North Korea, Russia as Greatest Threat to U.S., Top General Warns,” Newsweek,
September 28, 2017.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] See for example Noah Rothman, “The Consequences of Letting Russia Run Wild,” Commentary, September 26, 2017; “Don’t
Trust the Russians,” Commentary, July 11, 2017.
[5] David A. Graham, “Why Would Russia Try to Foment Protests in the U.S.?,” Atlantic, September 12, 2017.
[6] “‘Tables have turned, battle goes on’: ISIS surrounded in Deir ez-Zor – Syrian Army to RT,” Russia Today, September 28, 2017
.

283
 TV Goes To War With Trump:
16 Shows Blast President This Fall
By Corinne Weaver
September 28, 2017 3:54 PM EDT
This is war.
Hollywood is arming themselves with the written word
and preparing to do battle in politics. With the fall
television season, Hollywood writers and actors bring a
barrage of material aimed at portraying President Trump
and his policies in the worst light possible. As of
September, there are 16 scripted television shows either
already airing or scheduled to air that focus on attacking
Trump in their plots.
Two Trump impersonators currently mock the president’s
every move, two science fiction shows depict villains
based on Trump, and five new shows are set to gain
publicity through assailing Trump, supposedly as a way to
enlist viewers. American Horror Story: Cult has already
had one character state that Trump will “kill us all” and
another “Trump supporter” literally hump a television set.
Broad City shows the two main characters getting run over
by a “Trump bus,” or a bus with Trump’s face on it. Rather
than creating original content, these 16 shows go out of
their way to date their plots with this war on Trump.
Saturday Night Live
Politics is no stranger to NBC’s liberal sketch comedy, but
Trump is essentially the star of the show. Alec Baldwin
has gained an Emmy and a recurring role on the show for
his impersonation of the president. As Baldwin shared on
Ellen, he was signed for the upcoming season to play
Trump again.
Last season, Baldwin depicted Trump as making out with
Melissa McCarthy’s Sean Spicer, not knowing where
Afghanistan was, and calling Jared Kushner a “globalist
284
cuck.” This season, with Baldwin as a regular, the attack
will continue.
American Horror Story: Cult
The seventh season of the FX horror series takes on the
election in an unprecedented fashion. While Trump is not a
character in the show, an image of him makes a regular
appearance during the theme song.
Trump is also the catalyst for the plot. The story begins
with a liberal female having a screaming, hyperventilating
meltdown as Trump wins the 2016 election. Meanwhile, a
Trump supporter is depicting as humping his television
screen. One of the other characters comments, “I hope
everyone of those voters who decided it was a good time to
cast a protest vote is happy when that … psycho gets us all
killed.”
Showrunner Ryan Murphy has never tried to hide his
strategies to wage cultural war through television,
especially in his treatment of religion and sexuality, but
this latest approach takes the conservative political scene
and depicts it as hell.
South Park
South Park is an equal-opportunity offender but, even
though the showrunners vehemently denied any attacks on
Trump in the new season, the first two episodes do so
explicitly. The first episode depicts Trump’s voter base as
white supremacists with tiki torches, while the second
episode centers around a song asking the president to put
his phone down.
The lyrics to the song include the chorus: “Put it down.
Don’t be on your phone while being president. Put it
down, you might do something dumb and cause an
accident. Let’s all agree, here today that if we’re leader of
the U.S.A., we’ll put it down.” Hillary Clinton then steps
up and agrees to take the pledge in a montage of people
taking the pledge.
Broad City
Comedy Central makes a living on mocking the
conservative politics scene. Creator and co-star Ilana
Glazer promised early in the summer of 2017 that she
would “bleep out the name of Trump” in the show. While
apparently she has kept that promise, it hasn’t prevented
her from writing Trump into the show. In a recent episode,
the two main characters are run over by a bus with a giant
Trump poster on it, after expressing a desire to have a
“throuple” with Barack and Michelle Obama.
The Opposition with Jordan Klepper
Yet again, Comedy Central jabs at Trump with the scripted
weapon of satire, this time, with a spinoff from Trevor
Noah’s The Daily Show (a late night show which claims to
be ‘factually accurate.’) Jordan Klepper plays a
conservative version of himself, much like Colbert did on
the Colbert Report. Instead of basing his approach on
people like Bill O’Reilly, Klepper is sourcing his act from
“alt-right” figures such as Alex Jones and Steve Bannon.
With ridiculous defenses of Trump meant to ridicule the
president, this one fits right in with the rest of Comedy
Central’s lineup.
The President Show
Trump impersonator Anthony Atamanuik is bringing new
material to the Trump entertainment scene. In the past
season, he has portrayed Trump as fighting with Melania,
referring to her as “that bitch,” and has a segment where he
deems things as “nice” or “not nice,” and calling the press
a “hate group.”
285
In the line-up, this is Comedy Central’s fourth scripted
show aimed at attacking Trump. While this list doesn’t
include the unscripted shows, Comedy Central clearly has
decided to work the Trump-hate angle for all it’s worth.
Just look at The Daily Show and the Jim Jefferies Show.
Will & Grace
The reboot of the popular NBC sitcom that, according to
Vice President Joe Biden, made the American people
comfortable with the idea of gay culture, is destined to be
as “progressive and offensive as possible,” according to
creator David Kohan. The cast reunited in 2016 to stump
for Hillary.
In the campaign video, Megan Mullally’s Karen tells
another character, “Honey, if you don't vote for Trumpy,
there will be wars and monsoons and locusts and hordes of
brown people pouring over our borders from every
direction. I mean, it's one thing if you're sitting in the
audience at 'Hamilton,' but do you really want to see those
people everywhere?”
Law and Order: Special Victims Unit
Showrunner Michael Chernuchin has made it infinitely
clear the 19th season of NBC’s classic show will be
divisive. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, he
stated that the new season will tackle Charlottesville.
He said, “we do rip from current headlines, so if the
headlines have to do with politics, we’ll do it. With what
just happened in Charlottesville, you can bet your bottom
dollar that we’ll do that. I mean, we like to do that, we
don’t want to take a stand on any political point of view,
but we like to present the issues. What I want is at the
end of a show half the people to stand up and cheer and
the other half to throw their shoes at the television. I
want controversy.”
Star Trek: Discovery
While this series is the first in the Star Trek canon to
accept atheist principles, it also finds time to poke at
Trump specifically through the Klingons. Executive
producer Aaron Harberts told Rolling Stone that the
“Trump phenomenon was front and center in our minds” in
creating the new series.
A Klingon leader, one of the villains of the show, tries to
position his people against Starfleet’s mission for
multiculturalism. His slogan, “Remain Klingon,” is
interpreted by Business Insider as “Make Klingons Great
Again!”
One Mississippi
The second season of the Amazon series starts out with a
character attributing a character’s racism to the fact that
Trump was elected. Vicky, a Vietnamese woman at a Civil
War re-enactment, lashes out at someone else, “You did
nothing to stop a racist bully from becoming president?”
The episode also includes an idea to move to New Zealand
to escape Trump. In an interview with the Hollywood
Reporter, Tig Notaro, the creator and star of the show, said
the show would address Trump, racism, and controversial
sexuality because “it still felt like it would be irresponsible
to not touch on issues that are going on and that have been
going on, rather than just paint Mississippi and life as this
beautiful picture always.”
Bojack Horseman
The creator of this animated Netflix series told IndieWire
shortly after the election that he was steering the show
away from its previous mindset: “exploring the small
hypocrisies of rich liberals” Instead, “I’m not in the mood
to poke fun at those kinds of people when there are real,
real problems that we need to talk about.”
That was 10 months ago. Now, the preview for the new
season begins with a character, Mr. Peanutbutter, running
for governor. His posters are similar to President Obama’s
campaign posters, and his slogan is decidedly aimed at
politicians: “I am specifically on the side of the facts, and
also on the side of feelings.” The first episode addresses
the gun control debate.
Scandal
Shonda Rhimes’ controversial, political ABC drama will
take on Trump in the 7th and final season. The main
character, Olivia Pope, follows a “Trump-like power arc,”
according to Refinery29. Variety told a story of how in
Olivia’s case, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Marvel’s Inhumans
Huffington Post reported back in June that the ABC series
would feature a “Trump-like character” in the role of a
villain who is very concerned about refugee immigrants
coming into his territory. This move seems to imitate Star
Trek: Discovery, as yet again, Trump is portrayed as the
villain whom the heroes will overcome in the plot.
Difficult People
This is the third season of the Hulu series, and among the
long list of political positions taken in the series, the
season so far has displayed Vice President Pence’s seal as
a swastika, a character flaunting a “Make America Straight
Again” baseball cap, and several swipes at Trump and
conservatives throughout the season.
The Bold Type
The Freeform drama spent an entire episode this season
mocking Trump, with characters whining about him
leaving New York City and going to live in Mar-a-Lago,
and a character who joined a loud anti-Trump protest.
Unscripted Talk Shows’ War With Trump
This list does not include the part of Hollywood’s war that
remains unscripted, nor does it include future unscheduled
projects that have been announced. Chelsea Handler’s
Netflix series Chelsea shows just how far networks are
willing to go to make sure their position on Trump is loud
and clear. Late night talk shows are some of the cannons
behind the entertainment’s rapid-fire attack on Trump,
with show hosts like John Oliver telling audiences that
“Trump rubs his boner on the flag” and Stephen Colbert
cracking homosexual jokes about Trump and Putin.

In previous seasons, Scandal has portrayed conservatives

as deeply corrupt businessmen and politicians who don’t
believe in education or racial equality. There was even a
character meant to parallel Trump, a misogynistic
billionaire who grumbled about “freeloading illegals.”

The Mayor

In a twist allegedly meant to tickle the liberal agenda’s

funnybone, ABC’s new comedy follows an “African
American Donald Trump.” The plot centers around a
young, unknown rapper who runs for mayor of his town
and accidentally wins. Needless to say, he doesn’t do a
very good job being mayor.
War has been waged. The die is cast. Entertainment has
sacrificed audiences, creativity, and originality to join the
liberal agenda.

286
 Deep State Update: White House Aides
Are Blocking Deal With Assange, Rohrabacher Says
By Cristina Laila
Thursday, September 28, 2017
White House aides are blocking
President Trump from knowing he can
pardon Wikileaks founder Julian
Assange in exchange for information on
the DNC leaks according to
Congressman Rohrabacher.
President Trump told reporters on Sunday that he “never
heard” of any potential deal with Julian Assange.
California Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher
told White House Correspondent Alex Pfeiffer for The
Daily Caller in a phone interview:
“I think the president’s answer indicates
that there is a wall around him that is being
created by people who do not want to
expose this fraud that there was collusion
between our intelligence community and
the leaders of the Democratic Party
Republican Congressman Dana
Rohrabacher (R-CA) met with WikiLeaks
founder Julian Assange in August at the
Ecuadorian embassy in London to
discuss a possible deal with the United
States.
Sean Hannity interviewed Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)
after his meeting with Assange. The California Republican
went to London to interview Wikileaks founder Julian
Assange about the Hillary Clinton emails that were
published by Wikileaks during the 2016 presidential
campaign.
Rohrabacher told Sean Hannity he was 99% certain that
the Russian collusion narrative is a total lie.
After meeting with WikiLeaks boss
Julian Assange, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher
(R-CA) issued a statement calling for
hearings on links between the Clinton
Foundation and Russia.
This is when the Deep State stepped
in….
The Gateway Pundit reported, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-
CA) had a call with White House Chief of Staff John Kelly
.
287
on September 13th about a potential deal with Julian
Assange on the Wikileaks Podesta documents.
The Wall Street Journal reported on this phone call
between Kelly and Rohrabacher on September 15th.
Rohrabacher said his phone call was leaked by the Deep
State in order to undermine his efforts to speak to
President Trump directly about it.
Rohrabacher told the Washington Examiner on the night of
the 15th that no one from his office disclosed the call.
“I have honored the confidentially of a very
important business-related call,” he said,
speculating that someone inside the White
House or within U.S. intelligence agencies
leaked the call.
“I don’t know who it is, all I know is I’m up
against an array of very powerful forces,
including the intelligence services and
major newspapers that are basically allied
with the liberal Left who have every reason
to undermine communication on this issue,”
he told the Washington Examiner.
“Look, there are very powerful forces at
work,” he added. “We’ve got the NSA, the
FBI and the CIA, all of whom confirmed a
major lie that was being used for political
purposes and a lie that was repeated and
repeated in order to undercut our new
president.”
“You’ve got people who are obviously just
trying to cover their ass for mistakes they
have made,” he added, referring to the
intelligence agency theory. “They will
probably do their best to keep Trump from
knowing about this and knowing about his
options to expose this.”
Other reports also say that General Kelly and globalists in
the White House are blocking Trump from conservative
media outlets.
 The Truth About Russiagate:
What The Media Doesn’t Want You To Know
Written By Robert Parry
September 28, 2017 At 10:41 Pm
As the U.S. government doles out tens
of millions of dollars to “combat
Russian propaganda,” one result is a
slew of new “studies” by “scholars” and
“researchers” auditioning for the loot,
reports Robert Parry.
(CN) — The “Field of Dreams” slogan for America’s
NGOs should be: “If you pay for it, we will come.” And
right now, tens of millions of dollars are flowing to non-
governmental organizations if they will buttress the thesis
of Russian “meddling” in the U.S. democratic process no
matter how sloppy the “research” or how absurd the
“findings.”
And, if you think the pillars of the U.S. mainstream media
– The Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN and
others – will apply some quality controls, you haven’t been
paying attention for the past year or so. The MSM is just as
unethical as the NGOs are.
So, we are now in a phase of Russiagate in which NGO
“scholars” produce deeply biased reports and their
nonsense is treated as front-page news and items for
serious discussion across the MSM.
Yet, there’s even an implicit confession about how pathetic
some of this “scholarship” is in the hazy phrasing that gets
applied to the “findings,” although the weasel words will
slip past most unsuspecting Americans and will be
dropped for more definitive language when the narrative is
summarized in the next day’s newspaper or in a cable-
news “crawl.”
288
For example, a Times front-page story on Thursday
reported that
“a network of Twitter accounts suspected of
links to Russia seized on both sides of the
[NFL players kneeling during the National
Anthem] issue with hashtags, such as
#boycottnfl, #standforouranthem and
#takeaknee.”
The story, which fits neatly into the current U.S.
propaganda meme that the Russian government somehow
is undermining American democracy by stirring up dissent
inside the U.S., quickly spread to other news outlets and
became the latest “proof” of a Russian “war” against
America.
However, before we empty the nuclear silos and
exterminate life on the planet, we might take a second to
look at the Times phrasing:
“a network of Twitter accounts suspected of
links to Russia.”
The vague wording doesn’t even say the Russian
government was involved but rather presents an
unsupported claim that some Twitter accounts are
“suspected” of being part of some “network” and that this
“network” may have some ill-defined connection – or
“links” – to “Russia,” a country of 144 million people.
‘Six Degrees from Kevin Bacon’
It’s like the old game of “six degrees of separation” from
Kevin Bacon. Yes, perhaps we are all “linked” to Kevin
Bacon somehow but that doesn’t prove that we know
Kevin Bacon or are part of a Kevin Bacon “network” that
is executing a grand conspiracy to sow discontent by
taking opposite sides of issues and then tweeting.
Yet that is the underlying absurdity of the Times article by
Daisuke Wakabayashi and Scott Shane. Still, as silly as the
article may be that doesn’t mean it’s not dangerous. The
Times’ high-profile treatment of these gauzy allegations
represents a grave danger to the world by fueling a
growing hysteria inside the United States about being “at
war” with nuclear-armed Russia. At some point, someone
might begin to take this alarmist rhetoric seriously.
Yes, I understand that lots of people hate President Trump
and see Russiagate as the golden ticket to his
impeachment. But that doesn’t justify making serious
allegations with next to no proof, especially when the
outcome could be thermonuclear war.
However, with all those millions of dollars sloshing around
the NGO world and Western academia – all looking for
some “study” to fund that makes Russia look bad – you are
sure to get plenty of takers. And, we should now expect
that new “findings” like these will fill in for the so-far
evidence-free suspicions about Russia and Trump
colluding to steal the presidency from Hillary Clinton.
If you read more deeply into the Times story, you get a
taste of where Russiagate is headed next and a clue as to
who is behind it:
“Since last month, researchers at the
Alliance for Securing Democracy, a
bipartisan initiative of the German Marshall
Fund, a public policy research group in
Washington, have been publicly tracking
600 Twitter accounts — human users and
suspected bots alike — they have linked to
Russian influence operations. Those were
the accounts pushing the opposing
messages on the N.F.L. and the national
anthem.
“Of 80 news stories promoted last week by
those accounts, more than 25 percent ‘had
a primary theme of anti-Americanism,’ the
researchers found. About 15 percent were
critical of Hillary Clinton, falsely accusing
her of funding left-wing antifa — short for
anti-fascist — protesters, tying her to the
lethal terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, in
2012 and discussing her daughter
Chelsea’s use of Twitter. Eleven percent
focused on wiretapping in the federal
investigation into Paul Manafort, President
Trump’s former campaign chairman, with
most of them treated the news as a
vindication for President Trump’s earlier
wiretapping claims.”
The Neocons, Again!
So, let’s stop and unpack this Times’ reporting. First, this
Alliance for Securing Democracy is not some neutral
truth-seeking organization but a neoconservative-
dominated outfit that includes on its advisory board such
neocon luminaries as Mike Chertoff, Bill Kristol and
former Freedom House president David Kramer along with
289
other anti-Russia hardliners such as former deputy CIA
director Michael Morell and former House Intelligence
Committee Chairman Mike Rogers.
How many of these guys, do you think,
were assuring us that Iraq was hiding
WMDs back in 2003?
This group clearly has an ax to grind, a record of
deception, and plenty of patrons in the Military-Industrial
Complex who stand to make billions of dollars from the
New Cold War.
The neocons also have been targeting Russia for regime
change for years because they see Russian President
Vladimir Putin as the chief obstacle to their goal of helping
Israel achieve its desire for “regime change” in Syria and a
chance to bomb-bomb-bomb Iran. Russiagate has served
the neocons well as a very convenient way to pull
Democrats, liberals and even progressives into the neocon
agenda because Russiagate is sold as a powerful weapon
for the anti-Trump Resistance.
The Times article also might have mentioned that Twitter
has 974 million accounts. So, this alarm over 600 accounts
is a bit disproportionate for a front-page story in the Times,
don’t you think?
And, there’s the definitional problem of what constitutes
“anti-Americanism” in a news article. And what does it
mean to be “linked to Russian influence operations”? Does
that include Americans who may not march in lockstep to
the one-sided State Department narratives on the crises in
Ukraine and Syria? Any deviation from Official
Washington’s groupthink makes you a “Moscow stooge.”
And, is it a crime to be “critical” of Hillary
Clinton or to note that the U.S. mainstream
media was dismissive of Trump’s claims
about being wiretapped only for us to find
out later that the FBI apparently was
wiretapping his campaign manager?
However, such questions aren’t going to be asked amid
what has become a massive Russiagate groupthink,
dominating not just Official Washington, but across much
of America’s political landscape and throughout the
European Union.
Why the Bias?
Beyond the obvious political motivations for this bias, we
also have had the introduction of vast sums of money
pouring in from the U.S. government, NATO and
European institutions to support the business of
“combatting Russian propaganda.”
For example, last December, President Obama signed into
law a $160 million funding mechanism entitled the
“Combating Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act.”
But that amounts to only a drop in the bucket considering
already existing Western propaganda projects targeting
Russia.
So, a scramble is on to develop seemingly academic
models to “prove” what Western authorities want proven:
that Russia is at fault for pretty much every bad thing that
happens in the world, particularly the alienation of many
working-class people from the Washington-Brussels elites.
The truth cannot be that establishment policies have led to
massive income inequality and left the working class
struggling to survive and thus are to blame for ugly
political manifestations – from Trump to Brexit to the
surprising support for Germany’s far-right AfD party. No,
it must be Russia! Russia! Russia! And there’s a lot of
money on the bed to prove that point.
There’s also the fact that the major Western news media is
deeply invested in bashing Russia as well as in the related
contempt for Trump and his followers. Those twin
prejudices have annihilated all professional standards that
would normally be applied to news judgments regarding
these flawed “studies.”
On Thursday, The Washington Post ran its own banner-
headlined story drawn from the same loose accusations
made by that neocon-led Alliance for Securing
Democracy, but instead the Post sourced the claims to Sen.
James Lankford, R-Oklahoma. The headline read:
“Russian Trolls Are Stoking NFL Controversy, Senator
Says.”
The “evidence” cited by Lankford’s office
was one “Twitter account calling itself
Boston Antifa that gives its geolocation as
Vladivostok, Russia,” the Post reported.
By Thursday, Twitter had suspended the Boston Antifa
account, so I couldn’t send it a question, but earlier this
month, Dan Glaun, a reporter for Masslive.com, reported
that the people behind Boston Antifa were
“a pair of anti-leftist pranksters from
Oregon who started Boston Antifa as a
parody of actual anti-fascist groups.”
In an email to me on Thursday, Glaun cited an
interview that the Boston Antifa pranksters had done with
right-wing radio talk show host Gavin McInnes last April.
And, by the way, there are apps that let you
manipulate your geolocation data on Twitter. Or, you can
choose to believe that the highly professional Russian
290
intelligence agencies didn’t notice that they were
telegraphing their location as Vladivostok.
Mindless Russia Bashing
Another example of this mindless Russia bashing appeared
just below the Post’s story on Lankford’s remarks. The
Post sidebar cited a “study” from researchers at Oxford
University’s Project on Computational Propaganda
asserting that “junk news” on Twitter “flowed more
heavily in a dozen [U.S.] battleground states than in the
nation overall in the days immediately before and after the
2016 presidential election, suggesting that a coordinated
effort targeted the most pivotal voters.” Cue the spooky
Boris and Natasha music!
Of course, any Americans living in “battleground states”
could tell you that they are inundated with all kinds of
election-related “junk,” including negative TV advertising,
nasty radio messages, alarmist emails and annoying robo-
calls at dinner time. That’s why they’re called
“battleground states,” Sherlock.
But what’s particularly offensive about this “study” is that
it implies that the powers-that-be must do more to
eliminate what these “experts” deem “propaganda” and
“junk news.” If you read deeper into the story, you
discover that the researchers applied a very subjective
definition of what constitutes “junk news,” i.e.,
information that the researchers don’t like even if it is
truthful and newsworthy.
The Post article by Craig Timberg, who apparently is using
Russiagate to work himself off the business pages and onto
the national staff, states that “The researchers defined junk
news as ‘propaganda and ideologically extreme,
hyperpartisan, or conspiratorial political news and
information.’
“The researchers also categorized reports
from Russia and ones from WikiLeaks –
which published embarrassing posts about
Democrat Hillary Clinton based on a hack
of her campaign chairman’s emails – as
‘polarizing political content’ for the purpose
of the analysis.”
So, this “study” lumped together “junk news” with
accurate and newsworthy information, i.e., WikiLeaks’
disclosure of genuine emails that contained such valid
news as the contents of Clinton’s speeches to Wall Street
banks (which she was trying to hide from voters) as well as
evidence of the unethical tactics used by the Democratic
National Committee to sabotage Sen. Bernie Sanders’s
campaign.
Also dumped into the researchers’ bin of
vile “disinformation” were “reports from
 Russia,” as if everything that comes out of
Russia is, ipso facto, “junk news.”
And, what, pray tell, is “conspiratorial political news”? I
would argue that the past year of evidence-lite allegations
about “Russian meddling” in the U.S. election
accompanied by unsupported suspicions about “collusion”
with the Trump campaign would constitute “conspiratorial
political news.” Indeed, I would say that this Oxford
“research” constitutes “conspiratorial political news” and
that Timberg’s article qualifies as “junk news.”
Predictable Outcome
Given the built-in ideological bias of this “research,” it
probably won’t surprise you that the report’s author, Philip
N. Howard, concludes that “junk news originates from
three main sources that the Oxford group has been
tracking: Russian operatives, Trump supporters and
activists part of the alt-right,” according to the Post.
I suppose that since part of the “methodology” was to
define “reports from Russia” as “junk news,” the
appearance of “Russian operatives” shouldn’t be much of a
surprise, but the whole process reeks of political bias.
Further skewing the results, the report separated out
information from “professional news organizations [and]
291
political parties” from “some ‘junk news’ source,”
according to the Post. In other words, the “researchers”
believe that “professional news organizations” are
inherently reliable and that outside-the-mainstream news is
“junk” – despite the MSM’s long record of getting major
stories wrong.
The real “junk” is this sort of academic or NGO research
that starts with a conclusion and packs a “study” in such a
way as to guarantee the preordained conclusion. Or as the
old saying goes, “garbage in, garbage out.”
Yet, it’s also clear that if you generate “research” that
feeds the hungry beast of Russiagate, you will find eager
patrons doling out dollars and a very receptive audience in
the mainstream media.
In a place like Washington, there are scores if not hundreds
of reports generated every day and only a tiny fraction get
the attention of the Times, Post, CNN, etc., let alone result
in published articles. But “studies” that reinforce today’s
anti-Russia narrative are sure winners.
So, if you’re setting up a new NGO or you’re an obscure
academic angling for a lucrative government grant as well
as some flattering coverage in the MSM, the smart play is
to join the new gold rush in decrying “Russian
propaganda.”
 "Clear That DHS Was Wrong":
California Says Russians Did Not Hack Voting Systems
By Tyler Durden
Sep 28, 2017 11:10 AM

Last Friday the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
dropped a "bombshell" statement that sent a "thrill up the
leg" (to quote Chris Matthews) of every CNN reporter
across the country. The news from DHS implied that the
election systems of 21 states around the country had been
hacked, or at least were close to being hacked, which set
off a new wave "Russian collusion" speculation in the U.S.
news media (see: DHS Notifies 21 States Of Hacker
Targeting; Election Officials Blame "Russian
Government Cyber Actors").
itself and 'now says Russia didn’t target
Wisconsin’s voter registration system,'
which is contrary to previous briefings.”
“The work of our intelligence agencies is
critical in defending against cyber threats. I
remain committed to a partnership with
DHS and other intelligence agencies,
however, elections officials and the
American public expect and deserve timely
and accurate information.”

That said, according to California Secretary of State Alex

Padilla who released a statement this morning in response
to the DHS,

the whole thing was just a bunch of

"fake news." Padilla noted that after
requesting additional information from DHS
on the "hacks" it quickly became clear that
their "conclusions were wrong" and that
"California's elections infrastructure
and websites were not hacked or
breached by Russian cyber actors.”
“Last Friday, my office was notified by the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) that Russian cyber actors 'scanned' Meanwhile, this comes after another stunning and
California’s Internet-facing systems in embarrassing reversal from the DHS earlier this week in
2016, including Secretary of State which they first blamed Russians for hacking the
websites. Following our request for Wisconsin election systems, then reversed and said it
further information, it became clear that wasn't the Russians then reversed further and said there
DHS’ conclusions were wrong.” was actually no hack on the WI election system at all.
“DHS confirmed that Russian scanning
activity had actually occurred on the But in a stunning reversal - one which we doubt will put
California Department of Technology endless rumors of Russian cyberinterference to bed –
statewide network, not any Secretary of
State website. Based on this additional the AP now reports that DHS has told
information, California voters can Wisconsin that the Russian government
further rest assured that the California was not involved in the cyber-targeting.
Secretary of State elections
infrastructure and websites were not
hacked or breached by Russian cyber In an email to the state’s deputy elections administrator
actors.” that was provided to reporters at the Wisconsin Elections
Commission meeting on Tuesday,
“Our notification from DHS last Friday
was not only a year late, it also turned Homeland Security said that initial
out to be bad information. To make notice of Russian involvement was
matters worse, the Associated Press made in error.
similarly reported that DHS has reversed
292
Also, as we noted at the time, the government did not
originally assign blame to the Russians when news of the
alleged "scanning" initially broke on Friday although most
medias jumped at the opportunity to blame Putin.
Infuriated by the error, some state officials said that DHS
should provide an expalanation for the errror, or at least
issue an apology to state elections officials, who were
understandbly unnerved by the news of Russian
involvement.
Wisconsin’s chief elections administrator Michael Haas
told AP that Homeland Security had assured the state that
it had not been targeted - by Russians, or anybody else, for
that matter.
“Wisconsin was not provided any
information that indicated before the
November election that Russian
government actors were targeting
election systems,” Haas said. He said
one theory is that Homeland Security saw
.
293
suspicious activity from IP addresses
targeting state election systems in other
states and assumed that was the intent in
Wisconsin as well.
Others were apparently in shock:
“It’s been a difficult process trying to
piece all of this together,” said Wisconsin
Elections Commission spokesman Reid
Magney. “We’re trying to understand
what happened.”
So, for folks, like WI's Elections Commission spokesman
Reid Magney,
who are still "trying to understand what
happened"...allow us to clarify:
NOTHING HAPPENED. Hillary Clinton lost
an election...other than that, not much
happened that hasn't happened in every
election since the 1950's.
 Trump Sending Hospital Ship To Puerto Rico;
Washington Post Credits Hillary Clinton
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 29, 2017
Note to WaPo: Hillary isn’t president
(National Sentinel) Trump Hate: President Donald J.
Trump has been widely praised by officials in Texas,
Florida, and Puerto Rico for his administration’s prompt
relief responses to a series of hurricanes.
But because its reporters and editors are hopelessly
afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome,
the Washington Post continues to ignore the good work the
president has done, and has even gone so far as to
praise other people for Trump’s responses.
Including Hillary Clinton.
You just can’t make this stuff up.
As noted by The Daily Caller:
The Trump administration is sending the
hospital ship USNS Comfort to Puerto Rico
to provide assistance in the wake of
Hurricane Maria, but the president isn’t the
one getting the credit.
The Washington Post is praising former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who
tweeted about sending the hospital ship
Sunday, for the federal government’s
decision to provide additional relief.
294
Gee, why didn’t they think of that?
Oh wait. Turns out they did. And before Clinton mouthed
off:
The Post article links Clinton’s tweet to
a petition that was launched on change.org
to send the Comfort to Puerto Rico, even
though the petition appears to have been
put in motion before her social media post.
The petition gained more than 100,000
signatures, but there is no clear indication
that Clinton’s actions triggered the
deployment of the Comfort. The WaPo
article may be a logical “post hoc ergo
propter hoc” fallacy.
“I don’t know anything about that,” a Department of
Defense official told The Daily Caller News Foundation
when asked if the Pentagon took the former Democratic
presidential nominee’s tweet or the petition into
consideration when it decided to send the Comfort.
The ship is expected to depart in a few days; DoD officials
said it takes time to supply and staff it.
One thing that mitigated sea response:
Puerto Rico’s ports were hammered by the
Hurricane Maria as well, filling them with all
sorts of debris. No ships could dock at any
of them for days afterward, and that
included cargo ships full of relief supplies.
Some have been cleared by now, but the
supplies are piling up on docks because
the logistics infrastructure necessary to
actually deliver it has been largely
destroyed as well.
Note to the Washington Post: We know you like to think
of Hillary as presidential, but she didn’t win. Trump did.
It’s time you recognized that.
 FALSE: No, Russia Did NOT
‘Hack’ Election Systems In 21 States
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On September 29, 2017
Another Russian election hoax falls apart
(National Sentinel) Russia Hoax: Earlier this week USA
Today and every other lame stream media outlet reported
the latest Election 2016 bombshell: “Russians attempted to
hack elections systems in 21 states in the run-up to last
year’s presidential election, officials said Friday,” the story
began.
The story was based on a claim by the Department of
Homeland Security, which said its intelligence division
discovered uncovered the hacking attempts in June.
Predictably, the usual Left-wing suspects led by the
perpetually outraged Rachel Maddow at MSNBC, shrieked
“Foul!” and called (wait for it) for a new election based on
the fact — the FACT — that President Donald J. Trump’s
election victory is now illegitimate.
“What we have now figured out,” Maddow
intoned as she showed the multi-colored
maps she made, is that “Homeland
Security knew at least by June that 21
states had been targeted by Russian
hackers during the election. . .targeting
their election infrastructure.”
But as Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept noted, the story
turned out to be false:
The story began to fall apart yesterday
when Associated Press reported that
Wisconsin – one of the states included in
the original report that, for obvious reasons,
caused the most excitement – did not, in
295
fact, have its election systems targeted by
Russian hackers.
The spokesman for Homeland Security
then tried to walk back that reversal,
insisting that there was still evidence that
some computer networks had been
targeted, but could not say that they had
anything to do with elections or voting. And,
as AP noted: “Wisconsin’s chief elections
administrator, Michael Haas, had
repeatedly said that Homeland Security
assured the state it had not been targeted.”
Then the story collapsed completely last
night. The Secretary of State for another
one of the named states, California, issued
a scathing statement repudiating the
claimed report:
Greenwald noted that at times, stories do get debunked and
there isn’t anything particularly fantastic or odd about that.
But he correctly noted further that this has happened quite
a bit when it comes to the lame stream media’s reporting
on all things Russian as it pertains to the November
election results. The Left-wing media still cannot get over
the fact that their candidate, Hillary Clinton, was possibly
the worst, most corrupt ever, and that Trump was able to
strike a cord with the majority of the country living outside
of California.
Greenwald recounts just a few of the examples:
Remember that time the Washington Post
claimed that Russia had hacked the U.S.
electricity grid, causing politicians to
denounce Putin for trying to deny heat to
Americans in winter, only to have to issue
multiple retractions because none of that
ever happened? Or the time that the Post
had to publish a massive editor’s note after
its reporters made claims about Russian
infiltration of the internet and spreading of
“Fake News” based on an anonymous
group’s McCarthyite blacklist that counted
 sites like the Drudge Report and various
left-wing outlets as Kremlin agents?
Or that time when Slate claimed that Trump
had created a secret server with a Russian
bank, all based on evidence that every
other media outletwhich looked at it were
too embarrassed to get near? Or the time
the Guardian was forced to retract its report
by Ben Jacobs – which went viral – that
casually asserted that WikiLeaks has a
long relationship with the Kremlin? Or the
time that Fortune retracted suggestions
that RT had hacked into and taken over C-
SPAN’s network? And then there’s the
huge market that was created – led by
leading Democrats – that blindly ingested
every conspiratorial, unhinged claim about
Russia churned out by an army of
crazed conspiracists such as Louise
Mensch and Claude “TrueFactsStated”
Taylor?
296
And now we have the Russia-hacked-the-
voting-systems-of-21-states to add to this
trash heap. Each time the stories go viral;
each time they further shape the narrative;
each time those who spread them say little
to nothing when it is debunked.
Greenwald does go onto say that none of this is proof that
Russian narrative is a hoax, but we’d beg to differ, given
the numerous examples of false reporting and fake news
surrounding it. If it were true, we’d know by now;
irrefutable proof would have been leaked by the Deep
State that’s been doing all the “leaking.”
Rather, this smacks of a covert operation designed to
discredit Trump, delegitimize his victory, and make it
harder for him to form a consensus and govern effectively.
In other words, it looks like the same kind of operation
the U.S. intelligence community has launched
against other countries, including Russia.
 BREAKING: Wikileaks Founder
Drops Russiagate Bombshell
Jeff Charles
September 30, 2017
Is President Trump receiving the information he needs to
do his job?
A recent report from The Daily Caller
reveals that Julian Assange, the founder
of WikiLeaks, has offered to provide
evidence that the Russia hacking
allegations are false. Not only that, but it
seems as if the president was prevented
from learning of Assange’s offer.
According to Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA),
members of President Trump’s staff have kept him from
learning that he has the authority to grant a preemptive
pardon to Assange. He told The Daily Caller that
“There is a wall around him that is being
created by people who do not want to
expose this fraud that there was collusion
between our intelligence community and
the leaders of the Democratic Party.”
Last Sunday, President Trump told reporters that he had
“never heard” of the possibility of a deal with Julian
Assange. This statement is alarming, considering the fact
that it is the duty of his staff to ensure that he is fully
informed on such matters.
The idea that staffers would push their own agenda by
preventing the president from receiving critical
information should be disturbing to all Americans.
However, Rohrabacher, a former speechwriter for
President Ronald Reagan, indicated that this type of
behavior took place in other administrations. He said,
“It’s an undercutting of democracy when
the guy who’s elected, his staffers take it
upon themselves to make the decision
rather than let the actual president make
the decision.”
He also stated that he believes the president would take
Assange up on his offer — if he knew about it.
“I am confident that if the president is
permitted to know that this avenue is open
to him to debunk the horrible lie that was
297
told to the American people about him
stealing the election with the help of the
Russians… that I think the president will
accept it if he’s permitted to know.”
Rep. Rohrabacher sat down with Assange in August at the
Ecuadorian embassy in London. Assange has been taking
asylum at the embassy since 2012 as the result of sexual
assault charges that have now been dropped. However, he
cannot leave because the United States is investigating the
WikiLeaks founder because of his involvement in
distributing classified documents.
Assange has promised to provide the Trump administration
with information that shows that Russia was not involved
with the hacking and subsequent leaking of Democratic
National Committee emails. The US Intelligence
Community has accused the Kremlin of attempting to
meddle in the election. The establishment media has also
promoted the idea that President Trump colluded with
Russia to influence the outcome of the election — even
though there is no evidence of collusion.
After leaking the emails, Assange claimed that his source
was not the Russian government, but he provided no
evidence of this. Many have been dubious about his
claims, however, it appears as if he might be willing to
provide the proof in exchange for a presidential pardon.
While the WikiLeaks founder has previously stated that he
would never reveal a source that provides him with
information, Rohrabacher says that he “wants to get out of
the Ecuadorian embassy.” The Congressman has not seen
the information Assange claims to have, but he would be
able to see it if the president is willing to grant the pardon.
Two weeks ago, Rohrabacher spoke with John Kelly,
Trump’s chief of staff, about the deal with Assange.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Kelly asked the
Congressman to give the information to the intelligence
community. Rohrbacher states,
“This would have to be a cooperative effort
between his own staff and the leadership in
the intelligence communities to try to
prevent the president from making the
decision as to whether or not he wants to
 take the steps necessary to expose this
horrendous lie that was shoved down the
American people’s throats so incredibly
earlier this year.”
The Daily Caller notes that Rohrabacher’s comments have
been covered by several different media outlets. Since the
president consumes a lot of media, the staffers in question
would have to work hard to ensure that he does not learn
about the deal. However, The Daily Caller also points out
that John Kelly blocks certain articles from reaching the
president.
.
298
Kelly’s reasons for preventing the president from learning
about Assange’s offer are not clear, but it is obvious that
others in the administration do not want the Russiagate
narrative to die. If Assange is telling the truth, there are
plenty of people in the intelligence community and the
executive branch who would not want the American public
to learn that it was not the Russians who interfered in the
election. It doesn’t seem likely that these individuals can
keep the information from the president forever —
eventually, he will learn about Assange’s offer. However,
the question is: can Assange’s information be trusted?
 Disaster Expert Refutes ALL The Negativity
Being Directed At Trump Admin Over Puerto ico Response
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 2, 2017
“Mr. Trump’s handling of the hurricane
response thus far is to be commended”
(National Sentinel) Hurricane Maria: A disaster expert is
indirectly hitting back at the myriad of haters who are
attempting to paint the Trump administration’s response to
the storm-related devastation of Puerto Rico as woefully
inadequate.
As reported by Breitbart News, Former Deputy Secretary
of Health and Human Services Tevi Troy told the news
site’s Sunday SiriusXM radio program that the
administration’s response to Hurricane Maria’s devastation
was actually better than the responses to storm damage in
Texas and Florida, which were widely praised as efficient
and timely.
“I’ve been looking into this pretty carefully,”
Troy said. “The truth is that FEMA — if you
look at this in retrospect, we may find that
FEMA did a more Herculean task, in some
ways in Maria, in terms of the distance they
had to travel, the amount of logistics they
.
299
had to bring, and the propping up of the
local response effort. So I think in time we
may actually praise FEMA to some degree
because they had to do more here than in
the Harvey situation.”
Troy served in the George W. Bush administration which
dealt, rather inefficiently, with the aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina, which struck New Orleans head-on. He said that
FEMA had learned much since Hurricane Katrina — the
disaster to which Trump’s critics are eager to compare
Hurricane Maria — but said that Puerto Rico’s weak
economy and struggling government made the federal
response to Puerto Rico’s problems more difficult:
A state with a strong economy and a strong response
network — Florida and Texas, for example, are among the
two best states at emergency response — that kind of place
is easier to respond. That place has an easier time
recovering because you have an existing strong economy,
and you have an existing situation of a very strong
response operation.
Troy wrote an op-ed in late August in which he praised
President Donald Trump’s response to Hurricane Harvey
in Texas and Louisiana.
“Mr. Trump’s handling of the hurricane
response thus far is to be commended,”
he wrote, adding — prophetically, given
the storms that followed — “this is no
time for complacency.”
 Celebs, Journalists, Hillary Couldn’t
Wait To Politicize Vegas Shooting Tragedy
By Corinne Weaver
October 2, 2017 10:59 AM EDT

The elite have their versions of ambulance chasers. In the

wake of a national tragedy, the insensitive calls from Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton tweeted that
wealthy celebrities and journalists to join the bandwagon
of liberal political activism showcases their complete lack “We can and must put politics aside, stand
of empathy. up to the NRA…”

After the “deadliest shooting in modern US history,”

where more than 50 died and over 400 were wounded, the
left was quick to take the moral high ground to talk about
guns, gun control, and white supremacy. Atheist Oxford
professor Richard Dawkins offered his insensitive two
cents on the tragedy:

“Durn tootin’, great shootin’. Cool dude

sertin’ he’s 2nd Mendment rahts. Hell yeah!
Every country has its psychopaths. In US
they have guns.”

Comedian Michael Ian Black tweeted,

“The NRA is a terrorist organization.

There’s no other way to say it.”

Journalists and Black Lives Matter activists turned the

tragedy into a pulpit to talk about white supremacy. Tariq
Nasheed tweeted,
“Terrorist Stephen Paddock being from
Mesquite NV, the same place where armed
white supremacists pointed guns are LE, is
not a coincidence.” CBS analyst Jamelle
Bouie tweeted “That Las Vegas authorities
have ruled out terrorism at this early stage
is another example of how the idea has all
but been racialized.”
300
Top Chef’s Padma Lakshmi tweeted,
“So sad to hear about Vegas. Perhaps this
one is finally enough to convince the
#NRA? You are slowly killing us for profit.
#nomachineguns.” Actress and gun control
activist Julianne Moore expressed the
same sentiment, saying: “What will it take,
#Congress, for you to act?”
Singer Sheryl Crow stated:
 “Can we discuss the loss of rights of people
going to a concert because of the lack of
assault rifle regulations?” Actually, could
people offer sympathy, blood, or assistance
instead of making this about politics?
Alyssa Milano stated,
“Sensible gun control NOW.”
Shameless actress Emmy Rossum called for her followers
to call their senators in order to prevent legislation on gun
silencers. Jeffrey Wright posted,
“The fuck’s the argument from @NRA &
the @DLoesch types? Arm yourselves at
concerts w/ .50-cals., Kevlar & night-vision
goggles? IGNORANCE!!!” MSNBC’s Joy
Reid tweeted, “This country refuses to be
rational about guns, even in defense of our
children’s lives.”
Charmed actress Rose McGowan blamed the shooting on
301
“lies and stupidity and greed. People are
being slaughtered because of greed. F U I
won’t say anything.” Orange is the New
Black actress Danielle Brooks posted, “Gun
control!!!! #LasVegas.” Actress Zoe Kazan
tweeted “Ban assault weapons. Ban hand
guns.”
New York Times columnist Charles Blow tweeted, in
defense of his capitalizing on this tragedy,
“Whenever someone shoots someone else,
with a GUN, it is PRECISELY the right time
to talk about preventing ppl from shooting
ppl, with GUNS!”
No, it’s about the same as telling a cancer patient how they
could have prevented having cancer. But singer Idina
Menzel (Frozen) retweeted Blow’s rant and added
“we can mourn AND we can talk policy.”
A timely reminder that the shooting took place hours ago.
 CONFIRMED: Obama Used Secret Government
Surveillance On His Political Enemies During The 2016
Election To Help Hillary Get Elected
By Ethan Huff
Monday, October 02, 2017
New evidence has emerged to show that the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under Barack Obama did, in
fact, wiretap former Trump campaign chairman Paul
Manafort under secret court orders both before and after
the 2016 election. According to reports, government
officials under Obama had, indeed, listened in on
Manafort’s private conversations, including those that took
place with Donald Trump, as part of a covert plan to take
down the President.
Before November 4, the goal of the snooping appears to
have been to prevent Trump from winning the election,
instead fixing it for Hillary Clinton. After Clinton lost on
election day, however, the wiretapping continued,
presumably as part of the Democrats’ plan B, which was to
accuse Trump of colluding with the Russians to “hack” the
election in his favor. Though the wiretapping is said to
have ceased not long after due to a lack of evidence, a
special counsel led by Robert Mueller has since resumed
the witch hunt against Trump for his alleged ties to Russia,
which is still an unproven claim being parroted by his
political opponents.
Meanwhile, raw details about Obama’s involvement in
secretly wiretapping Trump and his campaign team
continue to emerge – this, despite months of mainstream
media mockery against the President for daring to even
make this claim, which has since been proven true. These
details suggest that a sitting president who was about to
end his second term was himself directly involved in trying
to throw the election of his rightfully elected successor.
Instead of Donald Trump colluding with the Russians to
win the presidency, it appears that his Democratic
opponents are actually the ones who are guilty of such
meddling.
302
In order for the FBI to reinstate its investigation of
Manafort, it had to receive special approval from top
Department of Justice (DoJ) and FBI heads. This approval,
as well as necessary information that the courts would
have needed to grant a second warrant, would have had to
have been procured while Obama was still in office,
revealing that the former President’s administration had
apparently made a concerted effort to go after the
President-elect via his campaign chairman. Reuters earlier
reported that federal investigators had actually plotted to
“flip” Manafort in order to create leverage against the
President.
FBI interest in Manafort dates back to at least 2014,
sources claim
But the FBI’s focus on Manafort didn’t begin in 2016.
Sources claim that the agency had flagged him as far back
as 2014 when federal investigators were looking into the
situation of Viktor Yanukovych, the former Ukraininan
president whose pro-Russia administration was taken
down amidst a growing wave of civil unrest at the time.
Yanukovych’s “Part of Regions” had been accused of
corruption after authorities alleged that he siphoned
millions of dollars out of the country.
U.S. investigators have ever since been probing Manafort,
his consulting firm, and other related firms, looking for
clues as to his alleged involvement with Russian groups
that may have tried to steal the 2016 election. These firms
include the Podesta Group and Mercury LLC, both of
which had close ties to the former Ukrainian government.
Thus far, no credible evidence has been brought forward to
tie the Trump administration to Russia.
But there is evidence that seems to suggest that Obama’s
FBI had been actively surveilling not only Manafort but
possibly even Trump himself, though the latter can’t be
conclusively proven. The FBI also listened in on
conversations had by Carter Page, a campaign associate
that Trump, while he was still running, referred to as a
national security advisory. Page is said to have been a
target of Russian spies who had attempted to “cultivate
him,” which prompted the FBI to obtain a FISA court
warrant back in 2014.
 SNL’s Michael Che Calls
Trump ‘B*Tch,’ ‘Cheap Cracker’
By Corinne Weaver
October 2, 2017 3:11 PM EDT
One can’t accuse people of being racist and then casually
fling racial slurs around.
But Saturday Night Live’s Michael Che did just that, on
the “Weekend Update” skit. After playing a video clip
showing Trump criticizing the mayor of Puerto Rico, the
actor ranted, (presumably as a part of the skit.) He said,
“Oh really Donald? You bitch … write them
a check with our money you cheap
cracker!”
The episode took many a swing at Trump and the White
House, including a skit where the actress impersonating
Sarah Huckabee Sanders says,
“People listen to me because I’m no
nonsense -- but I’m all nonsense.”
The skit, which was the show’s beginning to an otherwise
apolitical episode, showed Jeff Sessions sitting on Trump’s
lap, apparently as a form of punishment.
But during the “Weekend Update” skit, buried beneath
some imitation of Angela Merkel as someone who still has
.
303
undying love for Obama, actor Michael Che broke into a
rant about Trump’s criticism of Puerto Rico, implying that
the president was a racist for helping the “white people” in
hurricanes but not the Puerto Ricans. The rant ignored the
fact that Trump lifted the 1920 Merchant Marine Act for
10 days in order to help the people of Puerto Rico, as well
as his planned visit to the island.
The full rant went:
“Oh really Donald? You bitch. Was she
nasty to you? How nasty? Are you
shaking? Do you want to go smoke a
Virginia slim until your hand stops moving?
This isn’t that complicated, man, it’s
hurricane relief. People need help. You just
did this for white people twice. Do the same
thing! Go tell Melania to put on her flood
heels, get some bottled water, some food,
pack up some Atlanta falcons superbowl t-
shirts, and write them a check with our
money you cheap cracker! In one month
you’ve mishandled Puerto Rico, DACA, the
NFL--it’s like when anybody darker than
your golf pants has a problem you’re
thinking how can I make this worse?”
 So Much BOOM! James Woods Uses Colin Kaepernick To
DESTROY Kathy Griffin, And It’s PERFECT
By Sam J.
Posted At 10:43 Am On October 3, 2017

Boom. James Woods is definitely the kind of guy you’d like to

buy a beer for and hang out with; you know his stories are
CRAZY.

Ouch.

When James Woods is right, he’s right. And this time, he’s
really right.

Kathy Griffin was SUPER proud of Colin for losing his

job because he decided to kneel and disrespect cops. Ok,
actually anyone who understands football knows Kaep
wasn’t a great QB anyway and wasn’t likely worth the Our eyes, they burn!
headache, but whatevs.

Amen.

304
 Establishment Media Coverage
Of Trump Nearly ALL Negative
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 3, 2017
Trump has frequently said that most media coverage of
him has been negative
(National Sentinel) Political Media: No, the so-called
“mainstream media” is not fair, is not unbiased, and has a
serious credibility problem when it comes to coverage of
President Donald J. Trump and his administration.
Those are the only possible conclusions any reasonable
person can make based on the results of a Pew Research
Center of Journalism and Media study that has just been
released: A content analysis of his first days as president
found that 62 percent of media coverage was negative,
while just 5 percent was positive.
Contrast that with the early coverage of Obama: 42 percent
was positive while just 20 percent was negative
NBC News reported:
305
Among recent presidents, Bill Clinton and
George W. Bush had higher negative than
positive coverage early in their
administrations, but not nearly to Trump’s
degree. Clinton had 28 percent negative
coverage and 27 percent positive in 1993,
while Bush had 28 percent negative and 22
percent positive in 2001.
Coverage of Trump was primarily focused
on “character and leadership” versus
policy, according to the Pew Center, a
nonprofit based in Washington. The study
also showed that only 2 percent of stories
from outlets with a right-leaning audience
refuted statements made by Trump or his
administration, while 15 percent of stories
carried by left-leaning outlets questioned
the administration.
“It certainly shows that where people turn
for news has implications for what they’re
hearing about President Trump,” said Amy
Mitchell, Pew’s director of journalism
research.
Trump has frequently said that most media coverage of
him has been negative. Once again, the president is right
and his detractors — many of them in the media — are
wrong.
 Whose Bright Idea
Was Russiagate?
Paul Craig Roberts
October 3, 2017

Russia bashing became more intense when Washington’s

coup in Ukraine failed to deliver Crimea. Washington had
intended for the new Ukrainian regime to evict the
Russians from their naval base on the Black Sea. This goal
was frustrated when Crimea voted to rejoin Russia.

The neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony

requires the principal goal of US foreign policy to be to
prevent the rise of other countries that can serve as a
restraint on US unilateralism. This is the main basis for the
hostility of US foreign policy toward Russia, and of course
there also is the material interests of the military/security
complex.

Russia bashing is much larger than merely Russiagate. The

danger lies in Washington convincing Russia that
Washington is planning a surprise attack on Russia. With
The answer to the question in the title of this article is that US and NATO bases on Russia’s borders, efforts to arm
Russiagate was created by CIA director John Brennan. Ukraine and to include Ukraine and Georgia in NATO
The CIA started what is called Russiagate in order to provide more evidence that Washington is surrounding
prevent Trump from being able to normalize relations with Russia for attack. There is nothing more reckless and
Russia. The CIA and the military/security complex need an irresponsible than convincing a nuclear power that you are
enemy in order to justify their huge budgets and going to attack.
unaccountable power. Russia has been assigned that role.
The Democrats joined in as a way of attacking Trump.
Washington is fully aware that there was no
They hoped to have him tarnished as cooperating with
Russian interference in the presidential
Russia to steal the presidential election from Hillary and to
election or in the state elections. The
have him impeached. I don’t think the Democrats have
military/security complex, the
considered the consequence of further worsening the
neoconservatives, and the Democratic
relations between the US and Russia.
Party are merely using the accusations to
serve their own agendas.
Public Russia bashing pre-dates Trump. It has been going
on privately in neoconservative circles for years, but
These selfish agendas are a dire threat to life on earth.
appeared publicly during the Obama regime when Russia
blocked Washington’s plans to invade Syria and to bomb
Iran.

306
 The Donors Of Anti-Trump
‘Resistance’ PAC Uncovered
By Warner Todd Huston
4 Oct 2017
The secret group of left-wing
foundations and millionaire donors to
an anti-Trump “resistance” group has
been revealed to include the left-wing
W.K. Kellogg Foundation, according to a
report.
The donors to the Center for Community Change Action, a
group that has funded direct attacks on the Trump
administration, were revealed in a new report by the
Washington Free Beacon.
The Beacon was able to obtain the anti-Trump
organization’s 2015 tax documents that showed major
donations from a handful of high-dollar foundations such
as the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Ford Foundation.
Indeed, the largest donation came from the far-left Kellogg
Foundation which gave an incredible $3,000,000, the
report states.
307
With a donation of $2,350,000, the Ford Foundation (not
affiliated with the Ford Motor Co.) gave nearly as much,
the documents reveal.
Anti-American billionaire George Soros
also jumped into the game with a
$1,750,000 donation from his Open Society
Foundations.
Some of the other foundations that donated to the anti-
Trump group include the following:
 $524,500 from the California Endowment
 $515,000 from the Marquerite Casey Foundation
 $505,100 from Fidelity Charitable Gift
 $316,000 from National Immigration Law Center
 $1,750,000 from the Hillary Clinton affiliated Every
Citizen Counts
 $1,475,000 from another Soros group named the
Open Society Policy Center
 $150,000 from government workers union the SEIU
In yet another connection to anti-American George Soros,
the executive director of the Center for Community
Change, Deepak Bhargava, sits on the advisory board of
Soros’s Open Society Foundation.
Another notable connection to anti-American efforts
comes in the form of Charlene Sinclair, the director of
reinvestment at the Center for Community Change.
Sinclair also sits on the board of a group called The
Emergent Fund that has donated tens of thousands to the
violent Black Lives Matter movement.
 Donors of Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Group Revealed
(Updated) Center For Community Change's Unredacted
Tax Forms Show Stealth Funders
BY: Joe Schoffstall
October 4, 2017 5:00 am
The hidden donors to a prominent anti-Trump "resistance"
organization are revealed in unredacted tax forms obtained
by the Washington Free Beacon.
The Center for Community Change Action, a Washington,
D.C.-based progressive community organizing group that
does not reveal its donors, has been involved in direct
action against President Donald Trump and Republicans
before and after the November elections. The
organization's members sit on the boards of other
prominent liberal activist groups.
The Free Beacon has obtained the group's unredacted 2015
tax forms that shed light on its funders, who provide
millions of dollars in assistance. The group appears to rely
heavily on a few major liberal foundations, organizations,
and unions.
The Center for Community Change's largest contribution
was $3,000,000 from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, which
was initially created by Will Kellogg, the food
manufacturer and founder of Kellogg Company. The Ford
Foundation, which was first created by the founders of the
Ford Motor Company, added a $2,350,000 donation. The
Open Society Foundation, a foundation run by liberal
billionaire mega-donor George Soros, gave $1,750,000 to
the Center for Community Change.
Other donors to the organization include the California
Endowment, which gave $524,500; the Marquerite Casey
308
Foundation, which gave $515,000; Fidelity Charitable
Gift, which donated $505,100 (Note: Fidelity itself did not
donate, this figure reflects private individuals who used the
company as a charitable vehicle for their own donations.);
and the National Immigration Law Center, which gave
$316,000.
The Center for Community Change Action, the "social
welfare" (c)(4) arm of the group, additionally relies on a
handful of donors for almost all of its funding, according
to its documents that do not include the privacy redactions.
Donors to its "social welfare" arm in 2015 included Every
Citizen Counts ($1,750,000 contribution), a nonprofit that
was created by allies of Hillary Clinton to mobilize Latino
and African-American voters; the Open Society Policy
Center ($1,475,000), another Soros group; the Sixteen
Thirty Fund ($610,000), a progressive advocacy group;
Center for Community Change ($150,000); Services
Employees International Union (SEIU) ($150,000);
Atlantic Philanthropies ($75,000); and the Tides
Foundation ($50,000), the largest liberal donor-advised
network, among other funders.
The Center for Community Change Action has been
involved with anti-Trump campaigns for some time now.
The group's members also sit on the advisory boards of
other prominent liberal organizations.
Deepak Bhargava, the executive director of the Center for
Community Change, sits on the advisory board of George
Soros's Open Society Foundation.
The "Families Fight Back" voter campaign was launched
during the 2016 presidential election by the Center for
Community Change Action, the Latino Victory Project, an
immigration group co-founded by actress Eva Longoria,
and America's Voice, a group that fights for a "direct, fair,
and inclusive road to citizenship for immigrants in the
United States without papers."
Soros, who last year vowed to spend $15 million to court
Hispanic voters, was for months the sole funder of the
Immigrant Voters Win PAC, which was part of the
"Families Fight Back" campaign.
Others involved with the Center for Community Change
sit on boards of other resistance groups.
The Emergent Fund, a fund that consists of the Solidaire
Network, the Threshold Foundation, and the Woman's
Donor Network, claims a goal of pushing back against
"immediate threats" to "immigrants, women, Muslim and
Arab-American communities, black people, LGBTQ
communities, and all people of color."
The Emergent Fund's advisory board, which decides what
organizations receive money from the group, features
individuals from a number of prominent liberal
organizations.
Charlene Sinclair, the director of reinvestment at the
Center for Community Change, sits on the board of
directors of the Emergent Fund, which surpassed its initial
fundraising goal of $500,000 following its inception and
quickly approved $205,000 in rapid-response grants at the
end of last year.
The Emergent Fund gives grants ranging from $10,000 to
$50,000 and has provided financing to Black Lives Matter;
the Center for Media Justice, which was created to
"organize the most under-represented communities in a
national movement for media rights"; the Muslim Anti-
.
From Form 8879EO – 2015 Exempt Orginnazation “Center For Community Change”
309
Racism Collaborative; and United We Dream, the largest
immigrant youth-led organization in the United States.
The Center for Community Change later joined United We
Dream for nationwide immigration protests leading up to
Trump's inauguration. United We Dream was additionally
behind "sanctuary campus" anti-Trump protests across the
country to protect undocumented students.
Christina Jimenez, the co-founder and managing director
of the United We Dream Network, herself attended high
school and college as an undocumented immigrant.
The Center for Community Change did not return a request
for comment by press time.
UPDATE 10:30 AM: Following publication, a
representative from Fidelity Charitable said that the
donations under their name was recommended from
individual donors who have donor-advised fund accounts
with the group, and do not represent the views or
endorsement of Fidelity Charitable or Fidelity Investments.
Ford additionally added that although the charity was
started by Ford family members, it is no longer connected
to the Ford Motor Company.
 Never-Ending Congressional ‘Russia Collusion’
Probe With Trump Campaign To…Never End
If There Was Any Campaign “Collusion” The FBI
Would Have Found It Long Ago
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 4, 2017

when that can be. We will share with you

after we’ve exhausted every thread of
intelligence,” he continued.

What’s more, Mr. And Mrs. America don’t get to know a

damned thing about what’s going on, who’s been
interviewed and why, and what, if anything, has been
uncovered that justifies the continuation of this political hit
job.

(National Sentinel) Russian Hoax: Despite the fact that “The truth is, none of us in this room may
after more than year’s worth of investigating the know everybody we’ve met with. We’re not
Democrat-alleged “Russian collusion” between the going to share who we interview. We’re not
campaign of President Donald J. Trump and the Kremlin going to share what we ask, and we’re
there is no evidence whatsoever to the claim, at least one certainly not going to share what they tell
congressional committee announced today the probe will us. We’re not going to share with you the
go on. documents that we got,” said Burr.
“We’re going to get the best view of what
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-
happened that anybody could possibly get.
N.C., said that he “can’t set a date” for when the panel’s
At the end of this process, we will be sure
investigation will end, The Daily Caller reported.
that we present to the American people our
findings as best we have been able to
““I’m confident today that we chose wisely accumulate,” added.
by choosing our professional staff to do this
investigation, and not to the talking heads
Right. As if the findings will actually matter, Despite what
all around the country that suggested we
is presented, one side or the other will claim it’s all
couldn’t do this unless we went out and
“political,” and this will especially be the case when
hired a whole new group,” Burr said.
Trump is cleared.
“And I think the numbers here reflect that.
Ultimately, we look forward to completing Yes, we said when Trump is cleared because he will be.
our work and presenting our findings to the
public. I can’t set a date as to when that will
This is a farce and it needs to end.
be. Mark [Warner] can’t set a date as to
.

310
 Mueller Takes Over "Trump Dossier"
Probe After Intel Committee "Hits A Wall"
by Tyler Durden
Oct 4, 2017 8:45 PM

Now that the FBI and investigators from the Senate
Intelligence Committee have given up on trying to verify
the contents, Reuters is reporting that the infamous
"Trump Dossier" hot potato has passed to Special Counsel
Robert Mueller and his team.
According to Reuters,
Mueller has taken over the FBI inquiry into
the dossier after it was widely reported
earlier this year that the FBI failed to
verify its most salacious allegations,
During a public update about the status of the committee's
investigation,
Burr said that the committee’s efforts to
investigate the dossier’s allegations had
“hit a wall” because it’s been unable to
interview the dossier’s author, former
British intelligence officer Christopher
Steele.

but still used it to justify launching an investigation into

potential collusion between the Trump campaign and the
Russian government.

Three sources with knowledge of Mueller’s probe said his

investigators have assumed control of multiple inquiries
into allegations by U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia
interfered in the election to benefit Trump, a Republican.

Russia has repeatedly denied any meddling in the election.

The timing of the story is interesting,

considering that only a few hours ago,
Senate Intelligence Committee
Chairman Richard Burr admitted that
the committee’s investigators had given
Without Steele’s cooperation, Burr said, the dossier’s
up on trying to corroborate the
contents and provenance, as well as the identity of its
document's allegations.
financial backers, appear impossible to verify up until it
was first turned over the FBI in June 2016. The tacit
suggestion here is that the only thing stopping
investigators from publicly confirming that the dossier’s
allegations have been debunked is the hope that Steel may
one day come forward with the smoking gun that could
lead to the downfall of a president…an eventuality that
appears increasingly remote.

In case they forgot, Reuters reminds

readers that its reporters had been
briefed on the dossier’s contents before
the election, but, like most media outlets
at the time, decided not to report it
because it couldn’t be verified.

311
Reuters added that since then, several US intelligence Mueller’s “takeover” of the Russia dossier
agencies have said they’re taking the allegations seriously. investigation is really just another hail
mary in the hopes that Steele or
In summary, somebody else will come forward with
something, anything, that could verify the
document’s assertions.
.

312
 Memo To The President: DON’T Fall
For Dem Gun Control Or You’ll Lose Your Base
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 4, 2017
It could just be that he’s mollifying reporters on the issue
for the time being, while waiting for more information
about the shooting
(National Sentinel) Gun Control Hoax: In the wake of the
horrific Las Vegas shootings, which occurred with legally
purchased firearms in a legal manner by a man with no
criminal background, President Donald J. Trump hinted on
Tuesday that the administration might be open to new gun
control laws.
This from a president who campaigned as an open, ardent
advocate of the Second Amendment.
Mr. President, with all due respect, if you chase the
Democrats down the gun control rabbit hole, you will lose
a large portion of your base.
As reported by the Washington Times:
President Trump said Tuesday that his
administration will weigh gun laws in the
wake of the Las Vegas massacre, a move
that advisers say would shock and
disappoint core supporters like no other
action of his presidency.
Mr. Trump was asked by reporters if the
mass shooting at an outdoor concert that
left at least 58 dead, plus the gunman, and
nearly 530 injured — the worst in modern
U.S. history — would prompt him to
consider gun control legislation.
“We have a tragedy,” Mr. Trump said at the
White House. “We’ll be talking about gun
laws as time goes by.”
313
Pressed by reporters later Tuesday, the
president said of engaging in a gun control
debate, “At some point, perhaps that will
come. But that’s not for now; that’s for a
later time.”
Asked whether he believed the gunman
should have been allowed to own the high-
powered arsenal, Mr. Trump said, “We’ll
talk about that on a later date.”
Now admittedly, what the president actually said does not
constitute a major shift in attitude about the Second
Amendment and gun rights in general. It could just be that
he’s mollifying reporters on the issue for the time being,
while waiting for more information about the shooting to
come out as investigators continue their probe.
And surely the president knows just how important this
issue is to his core group of supporters, and that any
attempt to adopt new legislation that essentially punishes
the 99.999999 percent of legal, honest owners of semi-
automatic rifles of the kind Democrats now want to ban
(again) would be viewed among those supporters as a
betrayal like no other.
Surely. Right?
We’ll see. As far as we’re concerned here at the Sentinel,
Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock could just as easily have
killed the same number of people with a truck, as ISIS-
aligned terrorists have been doing in Europe for the past
year. And no sane politician is going to call for a ban on
“assault vehicles.”
Trump knows that a long-term goal for authoritarian
Democrats is to eviscerate the Second Amendment and
take away as many guns as possible from as many
Americans as possible, not as a way of ‘improving public
safety’ but as a way of enslaving more of us.
So here’s hoping he doesn’t fall for this trap. The tragedy
in Vegas is just that — a tragedy — but it’s not a
constitutional crisis and should not be turned into one by
disgusting Democrats who politicize mass murder in order
to advance their gun control agenda.
 Federal Judge
Upholds Trump's Arpaio Pardon
By Tyler Durden
Oct 4, 2017 2:40 PM

A federal district judge in Phoenix has accepted President guilty of contempt. Prosecutor John Keller says the pardon
Donald Trump's pardon of former Maricopa County ends the case and that Arpaio will never be held
Sheriff Joe Arpaio on Wednesday, confirming that the accountable for defying the order, according to the
controversial tough-on-crime sheriff and early supporter of Associated Press.
Trump's presidential bid will walk free with no legal
record after being found guilty of contempt in July for
refusing to honor a 2011 court order.

At the request of lawyers representing both Arpaio and the

Department of Justice, Judge Susan Bolton dismissed the
guilty verdict against Arpaio with prejudice, meaning it
cannot face another legal challenge, according to AZ
Central.

After Trump took the unprecedented step of pardoning

Arpaio before the 84-year-old was sentenced, the former
sheriff's lawyer confirmed that he will walk free
immediately, and will not face jail time.

Bolton was widely expected to accept the pardon. Arpaio

did not attend the hearing. The ruling comes five weeks
after Trump pardoned Arpaio's conviction for disobeying a
2011 court order in a racial profiling case demanding that
he stop his traffic patrols that targeted immigrants.
Notably, Bolton is the same judge who found Arpaio
.

314
 Senate Intel Committee Says
Investigation Hasn't Determined Whether Russians
Supported Trump Or Clinton
By Tyler Durden
Oct 4, 2017 2:03 PM

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr and
Vice Chairman Mark Warner told reporters on Wednesday
that,
after conducting more than 100
interviews and reviewing 100,000 pages
of documents, it has yet to come to a
finding in its probe into whether Russia
meddled in the US election to benefit
one candidate over the other.
determine if there was collusion by either the Clinton or
Trump campaign, offer an assessment of the ICA – the
intelligence community’s initial assessment that Russia
interfered in the US election – and provide an assessment
of ongoing efforts by Russia to meddle in the US political
process. The committee has concluded that the ICA’s
assessment is accurate – though it’s not ready to close that
part of the investigation just yet.

So in the spirit of being sufficiently diligent (or in forcing

Trump to live under a cloud of unfounded suspicion for as
long as possible), Burr and Warner announced that they’re
expanding the scope of their inquiry to involve...even more
interviews and document review as the fishing expedition
enters month nine.

“We have interviewed every official of the

Obama administration to see what clarity
they had on Russian involvement…and
more importantly what they did or did not
do and what drove those actions.”
“We have interviewed indiviuals from
around the world…it’s safe to say that
the inquiry has expanded
slightly…document review generated
hundreds of requests on our part for
information and identified leads that “There are some areas of our investigation
expanded our initial inquiry." that we hope very soon will reach a definite
conclusion – but we’re not there yet.”
However, one element of the
investigation that has been exhaustively
explored is whether President Trump
intended to obstruct justice when he
fired former FBI Director James Comey.
The committee has found nothing to
support this allegation, and is moving
on.
“The last thing I want to cover is the Comey
memos. This topic has been hotly debated
and I just want to say that our investigation
into it has reached its logical end with
Burr reminded reporters that the committee had three regards to its relation to the Russia
objectives in mind when it launched the investigation: To investigation.”
315
 “Questions that you have about
Comey’s firing are better answered by
the general counsel of the Department
of Justice, not the intelligence
committee of the United States senate,”
Burrs said.
But the comment that provides perhaps the most clarity on
the state of the investigation, Burr reminded reporters that
the committee hasn’t ruled out the possibility that Russian
entities intended to help the Clinton campaign.
"Neither Mark nor I have said that there
was a campaign against one. The ICA
[the intelligence community’s original
assessment alleging that Russia
interfered with the election] looked at
Russian involvement in the election
process, we’re in agreement on that. We
have not come to any agreement on
collusion or Russia’s preferences.”
316
Warner and Adam Schiff, Warner’s counterpart on the
House Intelligence Committee, have both called on
Congress to release copies of the 3,000 “Russia ads” to the
public.
In a stunning irony, just minutes after Warner appeared to
purposefully mischaracterize information released by the
DHS (the agency has publicly repudiated claims that the
agency told state officials that it had definitely linked the
attempted voting-system intrusions to Russia), the Virginia
senator emphasized that while the committee is aiming to
finish the investigation as quickly as possible, “following
the facts” is paramount. Burr said that while the
committee is shooting to finish its investigation by year’s
end, the real hard deadline is the 2018 mid-terms…which
means periodic “updates” like this one could continue for
another year.
Reinforcing the notion that the committee has found
nothing to support the collusion narrative, Burr scoffed
when a reporter asked if there’s still a chance that the 2016
election might be annulled.
“All I can tell you is the votes were
counted, one person won, and that’s
how it’s going to stay.”
Watch the entire briefing below:
 NBC News: 'Tillerson Called
Trump A 'Moron,' Threatened To Resign'
By Michael Van Der Galien
October 4, 2017
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson looks on as President
Donald Trump speaks at a luncheon with South Korean
President Moon Jae-in and Japanese Prime Minister
Shinzo Abe, at the Palace Hotel during the United Nations
General Assembly, Thursday, Sept. 21, 2017, in New
York. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
All is not well in Trumpland. According to NBC, Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson was on the verge of resigning this
past summer. He only changed his mind when Vice
President Mike Pence personally intervened.
NBC explains:
The tensions came to a head around the time President
Donald Trump delivered a politicized speech in late July to
the Boy Scouts of America, an organization Tillerson once
led, the officials said.
Just days earlier, Tillerson had openly disparaged the
president, referring to him as a “moron,” after a July 20
meeting at the Pentagon with members of Trump’s
national security team and Cabinet officials, according to
three officials familiar with the incident.
317
Aside from Pence, NBC says, other top administration
officials also contacted Tillerson and "urged him to remain
in the job at least until the end of the year." Those officials
believed, NBC continues, that the administration wouldn't
have been able to deal with "the fallout from a Cabinet
secretary of his stature departing within the first year of
Trump's presidency."
Shortly after NBC published its report, President Trump
took to Twitter to share his thoughts on it. As usual, he
didn't mince words:
In a sign that the report caused distress in the White
House, Tillerson actually convened a press conference in
which he personally refuted NBC's claims. Tillerson
refused to address "petty stuff" like the "moron" claim, and
said he did not even think about resigning. He went on to
praise Trump's foreign policy agenda and his love for his
country, saying:
He loves this country. He puts Americans and America
first. He’s smart.
As for Pence's supposed intervention to keep Tillerson on
board, Tillerson said no such thing happened:
My commitment to the success of our president and our
country is as strong as it was the day I accepted his offer to
serve as secretary of state. … There is much to be done,
and we’re just getting started. The vice president has never
had to persuade me to remain as secretary of state because
I have never considered leaving this post.
After Tillerson's press conference, Trump took to Twitter
to demand an apology from NBC News:
 Tillerson and Trump's relationship has been rocky from the
get-go. Although both men are former businessmen,
Tillerson is more of a traditional Republican elite, whereas
Trump has positioned himself as a nationalist-populist
during the presidential campaign. The two have reportedly
butted heads on a host of issues. Their most public spat
came after Trump responded to the violence in
Charlottesville, Virginia. When asked, Tillerson then told
reporters that the president didn't talk for the nation (or
even for the administration), but only for himself.
.

318
 NBC News Won't Apologize
To America Despite Trump's 'Fake News' Claim
By Brian Flood, Fox News
October 4, 2017

president “loves this country and “puts Americans and

America first.”

“We stand by it. We’ve extensively reported

NBC News has no plans to apologize to America, despite
President Trump saying the network should “issue an
apology” for spreading “fake news.”
“It’s safe to say NBC News will not be
issuing an apology to America,” NBC News
Chief White House Correspondent Hallie
Jackson said on MSNBC in a video that
was tweeted by NBC News’ public relations
department.
on this. We talked to a dozen people for
this story,” Carol Lee, the reporter who filed
the story, told Jackson.
Trump took to Twitter to bash NBC over the report,
mocking his former network’s ratings and even saying it is
“more dishonest” than CNN, the network he originally
awarded the “fake news” nickname.
“NBC news is #FakeNews and more
dishonest than even CNN. They are a
disgrace to good reporting. No wonder their
news ratings are way down!” Trump
tweeted.

Trump called for an apology in a follow-up tweet,

“The @NBCNews story has just been

totally refuted by Sec. Tillerson and @VP
Pence. It is #FakeNews. They should issue
an apology to AMERICA!”

The NBC report that upset the president said Secretary of

State Rex Tillerson called Trump a “moron” and
considered resigning this summer after a meeting at the
Pentagon. Tillerson denied that he considered stepping
down and would not address “petty” stuff, but said the
319
 world. On Saturday night, NBC’s “Saturday Night Live”
featured a segment in which Trump was referred to as a
“cheap cracker” and he has criticized the network’s
reporting several times in the past.

Meanwhile, Trump might want to rethink his compliment

regarding CNN, as the network is now also reporting that
Tillerson had referred to him as a "moron" at the Pentagon
this summer, citing “a source familiar with the
conversation.”
Trump was famously a longtime NBC employee when he
hosted “The Apprentice” but his relationship with the “We stand by our reporting,” an NBC News
network has been rocky since he entered the political spokeswoman told Fox News.
.

320
 Tillerson On Report He Called Trump 'Moron':
'Not Going To Deal With Petty Stuff' To 'Divide'
By Bridget Johnson
October 4, 2017

wanted to "dispel this notion that I have ever considered

leaving."

"There's never been a consideration in my

mind to leave. I serve at the appointment of
the president and I am here for as long as
the president feels I can be useful to
achieving his objectives," he said.

Asked if he called Trump a moron, Tillerson replied,

Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson sit in
the Oval Office on Aug. 28, 2017. (Rex Features via AP Images) "I'm not going to deal with petty stuff like
that."
WASHINGTON -- Secretary of State Rex Tillerson would
"I mean, this is -- this is what I don't
not directly state whether or not he called President Trump
understand about Washington. Again, I'm
a "moron," as alleged in an NBC News report, but said at a not from this place, but the places I come
morning press conference that his from we don't deal with that kind of petty
nonsense. And it is intended to do nothing
"commitment to the success of our but divide people. And I'm just not going to
president and our country is as strong as it be part of this effort to divide this
was the day I accepted his offer to serve." administration," he added.

According to the report, tensions between Trump and Tillerson said he had not spoken yet today with Trump,
Tillerson peaked over the summer after Trump gave a who was on his way to Las Vegas.
politically charged speech at the Boy Scout Jamboree in
July. Tillerson once led the Boy Scouts of America, and Trump went after NBC on Twitter:
reportedly threatened not to return to his post in
Washington before other cabinet officials -- John Kelly
and James Mattis -- convinced him to stay. Vice President "NBC news is #FakeNews and more
Mike Pence reportedly gave Tillerson a "pep talk" dishonest than even CNN. They are a
afterward that included encouragement on toeing Trump's disgrace to good reporting. No wonder their
policy line. news ratings are way down!"
"The @NBCNews story has just been
The report said Trump and Tillerson have battled on issues totally refuted by Sec. Tillerson and @VP
such as Iran, North Korea, Qatar and the white supremacist Pence. It is #FakeNews. They should issue
violence in Charlottesville; Trump has also wanted an apology to AMERICA!" he added.
Tillerson to publicly defend him more. Tillerson allegedly
called Trump a "moron" in a July 20 Pentagon meeting in Asked en route to Nevada if Trump has confidence in
response to the president suggesting that he would can the Tillerson, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee
commander in Afghanistan and comparing troop-level Sanders replied,
decisions to a 1980s N.Y. restaurant renovation.
"As we've said many times before, if the
Tillerson emerged at the State Department for an president doesn't have confidence in
unscheduled statement after the story broke, saying he somebody, they will no longer be in their
position."

321
 Russians File Suit Against DC Firm
Responsible For Bogus Trump ‘Dossier’
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 5, 2017
The former British spy who compiled the dossier,
Christopher Steele, has admitted it contains bogus
information
(National Sentinel) Political Hit Job: Three Russians who
were named in the so-called “Trump dossier” have filed
suit against Fusion GPS, a Washington, D.C.-based firm
responsible for producing the document.
As reported by Politico:
Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven and German
Khan filed suit Tuesday in U.S. District
Court in Washington, claiming that their
reputations were unfairly tattered by the so-
called dossier — a largely unsubstantiated
document that has taken on a larger-than-
life role in several investigations into
alleged collusion between the Trump
campaign and Russia.
The plaintiffs are among the backers of Alfa
Bank, a financial institution that the dossier
accuses of involvement in Russian efforts
to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential
election.
“Even though the Dossier contained
unverified allegations, Defendants
recklessly placed it beyond their control
and allowed it to fall into the hands of
media devoted to breaking news on the
hottest subject of the day: the Trump
candidacy,” the suit claims.
In May, the same three Russian oligarchs filed suit in state
court in New York against Left-wing news site Buzzfeed,
which published the dossier in its entirety earlier this year.
322
The site repeatedly noted that nothing in the dossier had
been confirmed, but editor Ben Smith claimed that it was
nevertheless important to publish what are baseless
allegations because of some mystical ‘public’s right to
know’ (that the dossier is fake…?).
That suit followed another one filed in February
against Buzzfeed by Russian-tied tech firm XBT Holdings,
a Cyprus-based company owned by Russian tech magnate
Aleksej Gubarev.
More:
The new suit accuses Fusion GPS and
former Wall Street Journal reporter
Simpson of circulating the dossier to
journalists for The New York Times, The
Washington Post, Yahoo, CNN and others.
The reports were shared so broadly that
they were all but certain to be published in
some form, the suit alleges.
“Plaintiffs seek an award of compensatory
and punitive damages for the harm to their
personal and professional reputations,
current business interests, and the
impairment of business opportunities that
resulted from the blatantly false and
defamatory statements and implications
about them published by the Defendants
and republished by BuzzFeed and
countless other media around the world,”
the complaint says.
Carter Page, a former low-level Trump campaign associate
acting as his own lawyer, has also filed a lawsuit in U.S.
District Court in Manhattan against Yahoo News and
HuffPost (formerly The Huffington Post) through owner
Oath Inc. His suit alleges that the two news outlets libeled
him by repeating dossier accusations that he met two
Kremlin figures in July 2016 and tried to negotiate an end
to U.S. sanctions. He never did, he says.
The former British spy who compiled the dossier,
Christopher Steele, has admitted it contains bogus
information and has said he was upset that Buzzfeed
published it.
 Morning Joe Contradicts MSNBC’s Own
Reporting To Push Russian Collusion Conspiracy
By Chris Reeves
October 5, 2017 3:54 PM EDT
On Thursday’s Morning Joe, the panel demonstrated that
they are so consumed by their Russia-Trump collusion
conspiracy theory that they will go to absolutely absurd
lengths, even going against their own reporting and
information displayed right in front of their faces, in order
to support their preconceptions.
Katty Kay, BBC World News anchor, began the segment
on the Russian Facebook ads story by reading a prepared
script about the latest reporting on the case:
KAY: Meanwhile, we're also learning more about Russia's
use of Facebook to interfere in the election. It turns out
about a quarter of the 3,400 ads linked to Russia targeted
specific states,-
[shows graphic depicting California, Texas, Missouri,
Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, New York, Maryland,
Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida as targets of
Russian Facebook ads]
KAY: -including traditionally Democratic strongholds like
Wisconsin and Michigan that ended up of course flipping
for Donald Trump as well as the battleground states of
Florida and Ohio. The Russians also targeted states with
high profile incidents of violence between police and
African Americans, states like Missouri, Maryland, New
York, and Ohio. Ads were also planted in solidly red
states like Texas, Alabama, and Mississippi. Last month
Facebook revealed that groups linked to Russia spent
$100,000 on election ads. Both Facebook and Twitter have
agreed to testify now before the Senate Intelligence
committee investigating Moscow's election interference.
This was quite a meaningful revelation. As Kay said in
reading her script, the ads were mostly placed in states that
323
not only aren’t swing states, but actually tend to
predictably vote for either Republicans or Democrats in
presidential elections. So what was the panel’s take-away
from this new information? Not quite what you might
think:
KAY: You know, just looking at the states that they chose,
either somebody in the Russian side or they had links with
somebody here, was giving them a pretty good take on
how to use their money.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: A pretty good take on how to use
their money. And also, if you look at the content of
advertisements, at least some of ‘em that you’ve seen out
there already, it's also somebody that's pretty darn aware of
how to target, what bells to ring. It certainly looks like they
had the help of Americans who might know how to
campaign and how to win elections.
Instead of coming to some kind of a reasonable
conclusion, like realizing that the Russians probably
weren’t trying to flip California, New York, or
Maryland to Trump or protect some tenuous
Republican hold on Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas,
Scarborough and Kay just ploughed ahead with the
narrative that these newest findings were more evidence
that some electoral and political expert must have been
colluding with the Russians (to help Trump, presumably).
Later on in the show, they again came back to the same
story and got guest panelist Natasha Bertrand, political
correspondent for Business Insider, to join in on the
Russian conspiracy line:
KAY: Okay, Natasha, let's talk about these Facebook ads.
Of course, we haven’t actually seen them yet. But the
states that they were targeting, maybe they should have
told Hillary Clinton that they needed to target Michigan
and Wisconsin a bit more closely, that they clearly thought
these were swing states. What does, you look at that map
and the issues that were raised in some of those ads, the
divisive political issues, what does it tell you about the
sophistication of the people behind the ads?
BERTRAND: So, my experts that I've spoken to have
told me that it would be inaccurate to say that it would
require a really high degree of sophistication by the
Russians to figure out which states were swing states
and which states to target. This is information that's readily
available on the internet. They understand moreover, what
kinds of topics and issues in the United States are
incredibly divisive, issues like race and immigration. That
being said, it is notable that they knew to target swing
states and voters for that matter, that would have been
particularly vulnerable to falling for this fake news,
propaganda, etcetera. [...]
KAY: Hey, so Joe, it sounds like the country is so divided
that we’re pretty much an open book making ourselves
even more of a target for people that want to come in and
spread these fake ads, right?
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.
Although Bertrand did correctly note that it’s not hard for
anyone with internet access to figure out the issues that
make America tick, that was the full extent of her
pushback. She fell right in line with the conclusion that
Russia clearly was targeting swing states for electoral
purposes, even though Morning Joe’s own graphic
clearly showed that most of the states that Russia
targeted were not swing states.
It’s worth noting here as well that at the time of the
election, according to The Washington Post, Wisconsin
and Michigan were both “states that have long eluded the
GOP's grasp and didn't seem likely to be winnable for
Trump.” In other words, they were not known swing
states. Thus, it’s not clear that the Russians or Trump
would have even realized that targeting Wisconsin and
Michigan was a viable electoral strategy at the time.
More concerning than Morning Joe’s extreme
confirmation bias, however, was that their analysis directly
contradicted previous comments by their own journalists
Carol Lee and Kasie Hunt, who broke the very Facebook
ads story that the panel were discussing Thursday morning.
To make matters worse, Lee, who explicitly laid out on
MSNBC on Wednesday how her and Hunt’s reporting
casts doubt on the Russia-Trump collusion charge, was
present on Morning Joe for the above segments, but
somehow did not feel it necessary to reiterate any of her
salient points:
324
CAROL LEE [NBC NEWS, REPORTER]: What we know from
two people familiar with these Facebook ads, they tell NBC News
that the list of states that these Russian-tied ads targeted during
the campaign includes not just Michigan and Wisconsin, which
has been reported, but also Maryland, New York, California,
Texas, Ohio and Missouri. And specifically on Ohio and Missouri,
we're told that they were targeted to those states because they
had seen police violence. And we know that these ads have
been, in part, were aimed at sowing racial divisions, and that is
what these particular ads in Ohio and Missouri were believed to
be designed to do. Now, the interesting thing about this, and by
the way, I should mention, this is not, we are told, a definitive list
of states, but what it gives is a broader picture of how Russia was
using these ads to target and what it suggests is that there was
not necessarily what you would consider a traditional elec-,
presidential politics targeting because, as you know, states like
New York and California are not states that are in play and
decisive in a presidential election.
HALLIE JACKSON: [...] Your reporting is now coming after there
was originally word that perhaps these ads had maybe just
targeted Michconsi-, Michigan and Wisconsin, rather. What
you're saying is, this was bigger than that, that maybe a quarter
of these ads were geographically targeted, correct? And it wasn’t
just states that were, sort of, favorable potentially to somebody
like Donald Trump.
LEE: Right. And speaking to sources about this, you know, they
were saying if there was a Republican operative guiding the hand
of Russia and targeting these ads, that person should be fired
because this is not how you would necessarily target ads if you
were trying to get a Republican candidate or even a Democratic
candidate to win. And so it gives a picture, a larger picture than
we’ve had so far and you're right, it comes ahead of this press
conference and also as the Senate committees and the special
counsel's investigation begin to really drill down on this use of,
Russia’s use of social media to interfere with the election.
JACKSON: Yeah, and interestingly Carol, and as I’m reading this
breaking news that is just now getting up on our website,
reported out by you and Kasie Hunt, who will be joining us
momentarily, you talk about how some of these ads were
targeted to states that saw police violence or a [sic] incidence of
violence involving police. And specifically African-American
victims, right?
LEE: That's exactly right. I mean, Missouri, in particular,
everyone remembers Ferguson. And, you know, the ads were
targeted there. They were targeted in Ohio because of a shooting
in Cleveland that had similar overtones. And so it’s just part of
what we already know that Russia did, which is try to take these
very divisive issues among Americans and really exacerbate
them. It wasn’t just race but it was other issues. And so, you
know, more so than necessarily running what you think of as a
traditional ad, you know, supporting certain candidate [sic] or
something like that. These were, you know, ads that were
designed to stoke divisiveness on these sorts of issues: social
issues, race issues, and otherwise.
(...)
KASIE HUNT [NBC NEWS, CAPITOL HILL
CORRESPONDENT]: Well first Hallie, I just want to underscore
one point that Carol was making in the conversation you just had,
which is: the reason we're so focused on where these ads might
have been targeted is because if you are looking for collusion
between the Trump campaign and Russians, the idea that there
might have been somebody who understood that they need to
talk to people in Wisconsin and Michigan could suggest that that
collusion happened. And this is something that we have been
hearing quite a bit from, privately, from people that worked for
Hillary Clinton. And so, this new reporting that we have suggests
that this effort was potentially broader than that, and maybe not
quite as suggestive at, you know, at a political connection, but
rather one that points to sowing unrest broadly and stoking
political divisions in America.
Apparently, as long as her reporting was being used to trash
Trump and Republicans as traitors, Lee didn’t have any problems
seeing her work misrepresented.
The full transcript for the Morning Joe segments can be found
below:
6:31 AM EST
(...)
KATTY KAY [BBC WORLD NEWS, ANCHOR]: Now Reuters
reports that special council Bob Mueller has taken over
investigations of the [Steele] dossier according to three different
sources with knowledge of that probe. Meanwhile, we're also
learning more about Russia's use of Facebook to interfere in the
election. It turns out about a quarter of the 3,400 ads linked to
Russia targeted specific states,-
KAY: -including traditionally Democratic strongholds like
Wisconsin and Michigan that ended up of course flipping for
Donald Trump as well as the battleground states of Florida and
Ohio. The Russians also targeted states with high profile
incidents of violence between police and African Americans,
states like Missouri, Maryland, New York, and Ohio. Ads were
also planted in solidly red states like Texas, Alabama, and
Mississippi. Last month Facebook revealed that groups linked to
Russia spent $100,000 on election ads. Both Facebook and
Twitter have agreed to testify now before the Senate Intelligence
committee investigating Moscow's election interference. [stops
reading script] You know, just looking at the states that they
chose, either somebody in the Russian side or they had links with
somebody here, was giving them a pretty good take on how to
use their money.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: A pretty good take on how to use their
money. And also, if you look at the content of advertisements, at
least some of ‘em that you’ve seen out there already, it's also
somebody that's pretty darn aware of how to target, what bells to
325
ring. It certainly looks like they had the help of Americans who
might know how to campaign and how to win elections.
[shows graphic depicting California, Texas, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan,
Ohio, New York, Maryland, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida as
targets of Russian Facebook ads]
(...)
7:24 AM
KAY: Okay, Natasha, let's talk about these Facebook ads. Of
course, we haven’t actually seen them yet. But the states that
they were targeting, maybe they should have told Hillary Clinton
that they needed to target Michigan and Wisconsin a bit more
closely, that they clearly thought these were swing states. What
does, you look at that map and the issues that were raised in
some of those ads, the divisive political issues, what does it tell
you about the sophistication of the people behind the ads?
NATASHA BERTRAND [BUSINESS INSIDER, POLITICAL
CORRESPONDENT]: So, my experts that I've spoken to have
told me that it would be inaccurate to say that it would require a
really high degree of sophistication by the Russians to figure out
which states were swing states and which states to target. This is
information that's readily available on the internet. They
understand moreover, what kinds of topics and issues in the
United States are incredibly divisive, issues like race and
immigration. That being said, it is notable that they knew to target
swing states and voters for that matter, that would have been
particularly vulnerable to falling for this fake news, propaganda,
etcetera. I think that now what we really need to see from
Facebook is these ads. Facebook has said originally that they
could not release them because of the Senate Intelligence
committee investigation. Well, the chairman of the committee just
said yesterday we welcome, you know, for Facebook to release
the ads if they want to. Now Facebook is saying that they can't
release the ads because of Bob Mueller's investigation. So I think
it’s, I think people are really eager to see what the ads were,
especially since, while millions of people already saw them
during the election.
KAY: Hey, so Joe, it sounds like the country is so divided that SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.
we’re pretty much an open book making ourselves even more of
a target for people that want to come in and spread these fake (...)
ads, right?

326
 Facebook Admits It Works With Government,
As Efforts To Blame Russia For Everything Intensify
"The Russia Hoax Continues, Now It’s Ads On Facebook."
Apart From Allegations, No Evidence Has Been Presented.
By Hang The Bankers
October 5, 2017
Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg admitting it works with
the government:
US President Donald Trump has
accused the media of bias over a
continuing “Russia hoax.”
The statement comes on the heels of a Facebook
investigation into alleged Russia-linked ads on the social
network during the 2016 presidential campaign.
“The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads
on Facebook,” Trump tweeted on Friday.
“What about the totally biased and
dishonest Media coverage in favor of
Crooked Hillary?”
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
The Russia hoax continues, now it’s ads on
Facebook. What about the totally biased
and dishonest Media coverage in favor of
Crooked Hillary?
327
1:44 PM – Sep 22, 2017
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The greatest influence over our election
was the Fake News Media “screaming” for
Crooked Hillary Clinton. Next, she was a
bad candidate!
2:26 PM – Sep 22, 2017
On Thursday, Facebook founder and CEO Mark
Zuckerberg said that the company will release to US
Congress the activity it uncovered concerning “fake
accounts linked to Russia running ads” during the US 2016
presidential campaign.
Earlier in September, Facebook said it had discovered
some 3,000 ads purchased between June 2015 and May
2017, connected to 470 “inauthentic” accounts and pages
“in violation of our policies.”
“Our analysis suggests these accounts and
Pages were affiliated with one another and
likely operated out of Russia,” Facebook
said in a statement.
In the same statement, the company
admitted that the “vast majority of ads
run by these accounts” had nothing to
do with the election, voting, or a
particular candidate.
Russia has denied the allegations and says it is not
involved in political advertisements on Facebook.
“We don’t know who placed the
advertisements on Facebook or how, and
have never done it. The Russian side has
never been part of it,” Kremlin spokesman
Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Friday.
The US establishment and intelligence community have in the 2016 presidential campaign. However, apart from
been desperately trying to find traces of Russian meddling allegations, no evidence has been presented.
.

328
 Senate Intelligence Committee Finds No
Evidence Of Russian US Election Interference
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
10-5-2017
Let’s set the record straight before commenting further. No
Russian US election interference occurred. No evidence
suggests it. Without it, accusations are groundless.
Yet they persist. On October 7, 2016, the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence and Department of
Homeland Security claimed Russia interfered in the US
2016 presidential election by hacking DNC servers and
email account of Hillary’s campaign manager John
Podesta, supplying the material to WikiLeaks.
From then until now, an entire year, not a shred of
evidence was presented supporting the accusations. Why
not? Obviously because none exists, nothing that would
pass independent scrutiny.
Information passed to WikiLeaks came from one or more
DNC inside sources. Nothing was hacked. Russia had
nothing to do with what happened. Nothing proves
otherwise.
In January, House and Senate Intelligence Committee
members began their investigations, ongoing for over eight
months, discovering nothing suggesting Russian US
election interference.
During a Wednesday news conference, Senate Intelligence
Committee chairman Richard Burr tried putting a brave
face on a witch-hunt investigation.
Saying he has high confidence in the intelligence
community’s assessment of Russian interference, he
admitted his committee found nothing proving it.
.
329
The issue remains an “open question” as to whether there
was collusion by Russia with the Trump campaign, he
said, deplorably warning Moscow could meddle in next
year’s congressional races.
“You can’t walk away from this and believe
that Russia’s not currently active,” he
roared. Despite no evidence proving it last
year or now, he said “(t)here is consensus
among members and staff that we trust the
(intelligence community’s) conclusions…”
Investigations reflect longstanding Russia bashing. Trump
was right calling them “a hoax,” shameful congressional
action, along with endless other other examples of rogue
governance.
Months of time, effort and money spent drew a blank.
Without setting a deadline, Burr said
“(w)e hope we will very soon reach some
definite conclusion.”
House Intelligence Committee members and special
counsel Robert Mueller are conducting their own witch-
hunt investigations.
They found nothing suggesting Russian interference in last
year’s presidential election because there’s nothing to find
no matter now long investigations continue.
 $100k ‘Russian’ Facebook Ads Are A Drop In The Bucket,
Pretext To Discredit Trump – Senator
Published Time: 5 Oct, 2017 00:44 Edited Time: 5 Oct, 2017 17:28
© Dado Ruvic / Reuters
The potential impact of the so-called Russia-linked
Facebook ads recently turned over to Senate Intelligence
Committee, is vastly exaggerated, Virginia Senator
Richard Black (R) told RT, adding that the only goal of the
ever-expanding probe is to defame US President Trump.
On Wednesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee briefed
the public on the ongoing investigation into the alleged
Russian meddling in the US election. Senator Mark
Warner (D-VA), the top Democrat on the Senate
Intelligence Committee, advocated new restrictions on
online ads. According to a proposed bill, the ads purchased
by “foreign entities,” such as Russia, would be labeled as
such to “protect” Americans from outside interference.
“If you see an ad on a social media site,
Americans should know whether the
source of that ad was a foreign entity,”
Warner said.
Black believes that the whole issue with Russia-linked
Facebook ads is blown out of proportion, arguing that the
amount purchased could not influence the campaign in any
case.
“When they are talking about social ads,
they are talking about a hundred thousand
dollars’ worth of ads – that is a drop in a
bucket, I mean that’s like throwing a small
pebble into the Atlantic Ocean. You’re not
going to affect anything with a hundred
thousand dollars in ads,” Black told RT.
The Senate Intelligence Committee’s own acknowledge-
ment that the ads were not directly promoting either of the
candidates, but “sort of aimed at various people” did not
330
give the accusations against Russia any credibility, he
pointed out.
The mere fact that the ads were paid for in Russian rubles
cannot serve as compelling evidence of Moscow’s
involvement, as they could be just as well purchased by
Americans living in Russia, for instance.
“There are plenty of American citizens who
are residents of Russia right now who may
have just sat down and said: 'You know I’m
going to push something out, I’m going to
buy Facebook ads and I’m going to spend
a few thousand dollars to do it – I’m going
to go after Clinton or I’m going to go after
Trump.'
“So, the fact that there happen to be ads
purchased in rubles tells me absolutely
nothing,” Black said.
The fact that nine months into the probe the committee has
not come to any definite conclusions and has so far to
present any findings, points to the lack of any evidence of
collusion between Moscow and the current US
administration, Black said, calling the speech by Senate
Intelligence Committee Richard Burr and Senator Mark
Warner the
“most vacuous interview I have ever
heard.”
“They have not found any evidence of
President Trump or his administration
colluding and so they felt the need to sort
of come up with something that is anti-
Russian,” Black said, adding that he
believes that the committee “is designed
with an express purpose of undermining
the President.”
“The whole plan is farcical,” he added.
After Facebook turned over some 3,400 ads the social
media giant said are linked to some fake pages “affiliated
with one another” and “likely operated out of Russia,” the
focus of the Senate probe shifted to the role of social
media.
The ads were purchased in the period from June 2015 to
May 2017 and, according to Facebook’s analysis did not
endorse either of the candidates but were aimed at
“amplifying divisive social and political
messages across the ideological
spectrum.”
This week, Facebook reported that the majority of the ads,
56 percent, were displayed after the election. Some 10
million American voters are estimated to have been
exposed to the ads.
‘Russian’ Facebook ads ‘absolute joke
compared to US operations
internationally’
The perceived impact of the Russia-linked Facebook ads
cannot stand any comparison with the millions of dollars
spent by lobbies and by Washington itself to interfere in
other countries’ affairs, former US intelligence officer
Scott Rickard told RT.
“Compared to the millions upon millions of
dollars if not tens of millions and hundreds
of millions of dollars that's spent by AIPAC
331
[The American Israel Public Affairs
Committee], or that was spent by Open
Society Foundation in Ukraine in the
overthrow and the corruption and chaos in
Maidan,” the alleged $100,000-worth of ads
are “absolutely a joke,” Rickard said.
If there can be talk about collusion that might undermine
the integrity of the US election, it should be about the
apparent collusion between Google, Facebook and the
Democratic Party, he argued, labelling the search engine
and the social media giant “absolutely left-wing
organizations.”
“Google started New America Foundation,
it is a think-tank in Washington, DC, that
has tremendous influence on the left-wing
side of the intelligence community,” he
said, arguing that both companies are
owned by the Democrats “lock, stock and
barrel.”
Rickard went on to note he believes that the Senate
Intelligence Committee’s probe will bear no fruit, as it is
only needed
“to push an agenda that is incredibly anti-
Russia.”
“It’s going to be dragged out and in the end
what we’ll find is that yes, some ads were
purchased, and, yes, some means were
hacked, but certainly no impact on
American election,” he said.
.
 Pompeo To Replace Tillerson?
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
10-6-2017
A previous article explained Tillerson is frustrated over
disagreements with Trump on Iran, deep State Department
cutbacks, and other issues, including his differing views
with the president on North Korea.
He’s out of the loop on warmaking, delegated to hawkish
administration and Pentagon generals.
He wasn’t consulted about Trump’s travel ban on
predominantly Muslim countries, or use of special forces
in Yemen and Somalia. Nor is he involved America’s
phony war on terror.
He’s excluded from other geopolitical decision-making.
Last summer, Nikki Haley was under consideration to
replace him, an unnamed senior administration official
saying it’s 75 - 80% certain.
His relationship with Trump soured months ago. Clearly
he wants out, possibly in months or sooner, despite his
remarks otherwise.
According to Axios.com, neocon CIA director Mike
Pompeo is being considered to replace him, saying Trump
works with him comfortably, seeking his advice on various
issues.
He
.
332
“personally delivers the president’s daily
brief, making him one of the few people
Trump spends a great deal of time with on
a daily basis.”
He knows how to convey tough news to Trump,
comfortable as well disagreeing with him. Perhaps he’d
love a chance to be Washington’s top diplomat, serving
three terms earlier as a House member.
He’s a key member of Trump’s inner circle, polar opposite
Tillerson’s status. “(I)nsiders say Trump’s relationship
with Tillerson is broken beyond repair,” said Axois,
adding:
“We’re told Trump was furious that
Tillerson didn’t try to blunt the story about
him calling the president a ‘moron, by just
going out and denying it (whether or not it
actually occurred).”
Their “relationship is so toxic…few in the White House
think it can be rebuilt. There’s zero trust between the West
Wing and the State Department.”
Tillerson could be replaced by yearend, sooner or early
next year.
 Imran Awan ‘Very Strongly’ Wants
To Block Review Of Hard Drive, Was Using Alias
Luke Rosiak - Investigative Reporter
3:19 PM 10/06/2017
Lawyers for Imran Awan, an ex-aide who ran information
technology (IT) for Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman
Schultz, “feel very strongly” that data recovered from a
hard drive on Capitol Hill should not be valid as evidence
because he put a note that said “attorney client privilege”
near it before leaving it in a phone booth, they said in
federal court Friday. A police report shows that the
backpack contained a laptop with the username
“RepDWS,” copy of Imran Awan’s ID, and the notebook.
Prosecutors revealed that when they arrested Imran at the
airport in July as he tried to board a flight to Pakistan, he
was carrying a resume with an alias in the Jackson
Heights, Queens neighborhood of New York City. Imran
may have planned to “relocate” there, seemingly under a
different identity, Prosecutors suggested. They said he had
wiped his cell phone hours before the arrest, suggesting
that he was taking “active measures” to hide evidence.
Hina Alvi, Imran’s wife, was arraigned on four felony
counts of bank fraud. Wasserman Schultz of Florida added
Alvi to her payroll after the couple was already the focus
of a criminal investigation into misconduct on Capitol Hill.
Hina handed a U.S. passport to prosecutors, and prosecutor
Michael Marando asked if she had a Pakistani passport
too. Hina shook her head “no” before her lawyer, Nikki
Lotze, acknowledged that Hina did have one, but that it
was in Pakistan. Lotze later said the passport was expired,
and the judge requested that she try to have it mailed to
U.S. authorities.
The investigation into Imran and his family began when
House authorities noticed they were billing expensive
equipment to congressional offices and falsely listing the
price as exactly $499.99, one penny under the threshold at
which equipment is automatically tracked by House
administrators. The Awans’ relatives told The Daily Caller
News Foundation that similar equipment was being sent to
Pakistan. The investigation soon broadened into
cybersecurity issues, when authorities found the Awans
had accessed a congressional server 5,400 times without
authorization and moved “massive” data off the House
network, The Washington Post reported in September.
After they learned of the investigation, prosecutors say the
husband and wife tried to go to Pakistan, first wiring
hundreds of thousands of dollars there that prosecutors
333
allege was obtained through bank fraud. Authorities have
not charged the Awans, as of yet, with crimes related to the
original investigation in the House.
Chris Gowen, Imran’s attorney, sought on Friday to
preemptively stop prosecutors from using the laptop as
evidence as it relates to potential additional charges,
saying:
“We do expect there being an attorney-
client privilege issue in this case… What
occurred is a backpack from my client was
found, he was trying to get a better signal,
there was a note that said attorney client
privilege and a hard drive. We feel very
strongly about this.”
A Capitol Police report shows that the laptop was found in
a phone booth in the Rayburn House Office Building after
midnight, after Imran had already been banned from
touching the House network, and that the laptop had the
username RepDWS.
In an emotional exchange caught on video in May,
Wasserman Schultz demanded that the Capitol Police chief
return the laptop, saying there would be “consequences” if
they did not. She said “if a member loses” equipment,
police should not be able to look at it. She hired an outside
lawyer to try to block prosecutors from looking at it,
invoking the “speech and debate” clause, which covers
members’ legislative activity. Two months later, she said it
was actually Imran’s laptop and she had never seen it. She
did not fire Imran for months after the laptop was found in
his backpack, and continued to pay him until his arrest.
Prosecutors accidentally gave information about law
enforcement activities to Imran’s attorneys and claim that
they should not have.
“Earlier this week, there was the
inadvertant disclosure of law enforcement
materials to defense counsel,” Marando
said. “There may be a motion on that.”
Prosecutors did not request that Hina wear a GPS monitor,
and Imran’s lawyers repeatedly asked for his to be
removed. The judge denied a similar request last month.
The judge said she was open to removing the monitor,
partly because of the disparity introduced by prosecutors
not requesting one for Hina.
“If he’s charged with the same thing, why
should I keep him on the GPS
monitor?” Judge Tanya S. Chutkan said.
Hina left the country in March, but Imran’s lawyers said,
“Alvi has returned with the children, so the
government’s flight risk argument is
negated.”
The judge said,
“I will consider reducing [conditions] further,
his motivation to flee is lessened when his
family is here.”
Gowen cited
“tremendous financial hardship,” but
Marando noted the family owned four
properties in the U.S. that they sold, and
that they were doing a major land deal in
Pakistan. “There’s no reason for him to
stay in the U.S. with property in Pakistan,”
Marando said. “He was [already] going to
be in Pakistan away from his wife and kids”
for months with the flight arrangements
they made before being charged.”
“I cannot say what goes on in the mind of
an industrious person who wants to leave
the country,” Marando said. “But he’s
traveled to Pakistan numerous times and
made numerous wires of significant
.
334
amounts of money for the purchase of
property, potentially to set up a life there.
He had on him two cell phones [and a]
laptop. One cell phone was wiped two
hours before we arrested him. He was
taking active measures to [evade] our
investigation.”
“When we arrested him there was a
Whatsapp message from his lawyer asking
to speak with his client,” indicating he may
have had reason to believe he was about
to be arrested,” Marando continued. “There
wasn’t much on the laptop, but there was a
resume with an alias in Jackson Heights,
Queens. So when we say intent to leave,
it’s also intent to relocate.”
“Awan’s father was dying and he had a
land deal they were trying to help him fix
and there’s no allegation of anything wrong
with that deal,” Gowen said. Gowen
acknowledged to TheDCNF that Imran was
sending money to Azhar Awan, who is a
member of the Faisalabad police force, and
said, “You need to understand how land
purchases work in Pakistan and I don’t
have time to explain it to you.” He added
“there were attempts to steal the property
from the father.”
“They found a file called
‘.obliterate’,” Marando said of the iPhone
Imran was carrying when authorities
arrested him at the airport. “It includes the
time it was wiped, which was at 6 p.m.,”
hours before he was arrested. Imran had
just purchased the phone, Gowen said.
 Great Again: Trump-Era Employment,
Pay Rates, Stock Market The BEST In Years
By JD Heyes
Saturday, October 07, 2017
The U.S. economy lost a total of 33,000 jobs last month —
the first decline in seven years, after analysts expected
gains of about 90,000 positions — but everything else
about employment, personal wages and the economy in
general in the era of President Donald J. Trump is positive.
As reported by CNBC, analysts are blaming the job losses
primarily on Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, which
devastated parts of Texas and Florida, respectively, leading
some companies shuttered and their workers idled.
But overall, despite the drop-off in employment last
month, the unemployment rate fell to a 16-year low, 4.2
percent, according to data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. What’s more, the government said that the
closely-watched hourly wages figure also increased,
jumping to an annualized rate of 2.9 percent.
Economists surveyed by Reuters expected payrolls to grow
by about 90,000 in September, compared to 169,000 the
previous month. Also, they anticipated that the
unemployment rate would hold steady at 4.4 percent. But it
fell as the labor force participation rate — the number of
Americans in the workforce — grew as well, rising to 63.1
percent, the highest level of this year and the best rate
since March 2014.
“The lousy returns from the September jobs
report will make little impression on
observers, who essentially gave the labor
market a free pass due to the impact of
Hurricanes Harvey and Irma,” Curt Long,
chief economist at the National Association
of Federally Insured Credit Unions, told
CNBC.
335
Adding to the generally good economic and labor news,
the number of discouraged workers and those working
part-time for economic reasons fell as well, from 8.6
percent to 8.3 percent, which is the lowest level since June
2007.
Also, CNBC reported:
Harvey and Irma’s effects weren’t all
negative when it came to jobs — Wall
Street-related finance positions grew by a
net 10,000 thanks to an increase of 11,000
for insurance carriers and related
activities.
The site noted that a number of economists were ready to
simply dismiss the BLM report out of hand because of the
effect that the hurricanes were expected to have on labor.
But the increase in wages drew their attention.
The government reported that wages increased by an
average of 12 cents an hour to $26.55, or a gain of about
2.9 percent on the year — much higher than the 2 percent
target the Federal Reserve says is necessary for healthy
inflationary increases. That also means the Fed is liable to
approve another rate hike at its December meeting.
In addition to positive labor figures in the Trump era, Wall
Street continues its meteoric rise, which was
acknowledged by the president in a tweet on Thursday.
“Stock Market hits an ALL-TIME high! Unemployment
lowest in 16 years! Business and manufacturing
enthusiasm at highest level in decades!” (Related: Left-
wing media now blaming Trump for Puerto Rico hurricane
damage… is EVERYTHING his fault?)
As noted by the Los Angeles Times, Thursday’s gain was
the latest for a market that has steadily advanced since
Trump won the election in November. The rise means both
the economy and corporate profits have improved, but also
the retirement portfolios of tens of millions of Americans
who have retirement accounts and IRAs tied to
investments.
The paper noted:
The S&P 500 rose 14.33 points, or 0.6%, to
2,552.07. The Dow Jones industrial
average gained 113.75, or 0.5%, to
.
336
22,775.39, and the Nasdaq composite rose
50.73, or 0.8%, to 6,585.36. All three
indexes added to their records set a day
earlier, again.
Despite the fact that the economy has steadily improved
following Trump’s election, spurred on in part by his
efforts to reform the tax code, repeal Obamacare and
dramatically cut regulations, Democrats and the Left-wing
“mainstream” media are loathe to give him credit. But you
can bet if the economy were tanking, Trump would get
the blame.
 Media Give Trump Most
Negative Presidential Coverage In 25 Years
Only 5 Percent Of News Reports Are Positive,
According To Pew Research Center
By Jasper Fakkert
October 6, 2017 11:05 Am Last Updated: October 8, 2017 12:31 Pm

those of his predecessors,” wrote the Pew

Research Center.

Dominating Topics

Five topics dominated the news coverage during the time

period evaluated by the Pew Research Center, Jan. 21-
April 30, making up two-thirds of all media coverage.

The main topic covered centered around President

Trump’s political skills (17 percent), followed by coverage
on immigration, a key policy issue of Trump (14 percent),
The Feb. 15 edition of The New York Times. (Samira Bouaou/Epoch presidential appointments and nominations (13 percent),
Times)
U.S.-Russia relations (13 percent), and health care (9
percent).
Claims by President Donald Trump that media
organizations primarily report negatively on him were
proven true by new research by Pew Research Center.

An analysis of 3,000 stories during the first 100 days of his

presidency across 24 different media organizations found
that reporting on Trump has been the most negative
compared to other presidents over the past 25 years.

The research shows that only 5 percent of media reporting

during the period was positive. Sixty-two percent of the
stories were negative, and 33 percent were neither positive
nor negative.

By comparison, coverage of President Barack Obama

during the same time period was 42 percent positive, and
20 percent negative. For President George W. Bush the
number was 22 percent positive, and 28 percent negative.
And for President Bill Clinton it was 27 percent positive,
and 28 percent negative.
The study also revealed that most media coverage of
Trump focused on his character traits rather than policy.
Only 31 percent of all stories published on Trump focused
on policy issues, compared to 50 percent for Obama, 65
percent for Bush, and 58 percent for Clinton.
“The evaluations of President Trump were
far more negative and less positive than
337
President Donald Trump salutes a Marine after arriving at the White
House in Washington on Sept. 27, 2017. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Since Trump won the presidency in November, much of
the media coverage has sought to question the legitimacy
of his presidency and create divisions in society. Most
media organizations reported extensively on the
allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and
the Russian government.
However, many of the stories relied heavily on anonymous
sources from within the intelligence community, resulting
in frequent erroneous reporting.
Speaking under oath before the Senate Select Committee
on Intelligence on June 8, former FBI Director James
Comey discredited a Feb. 15 front page story in The New
York Times, which claimed that members of Trump’s
2016 presidential campaign
“had repeated contacts with senior Russian
intelligence officials in the year before the
election.”
At the time, The Epoch Times noted many flaws in the
report, which The New York Times used to push a narrative
of collusion.
At the hearing, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) pressed Comey
further on the piece from The New York Times, asking
“would it be fair to characterize that story as almost
entirely wrong,” to which Comey replied, “Yes.”
Comey went on to discredit other media reports, which
have frequently cited unnamed intelligence and
government sources to push their narrative that the Trump
campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election.
Former FBI Director James Comey pauses as he testifies before a
Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Russia’s alleged
interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election on Capitol Hill in
Washington on June 8, 2017. (BRENDAN
SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images)
“All of you know this. Maybe the American
people don’t,” Comey said, addressing the
Senate committee. He said when it comes
to reporters writing stories about classified
information, “the people talking about it
often don’t really know what’s going on.”
He said there have been many stories about the Russia
investigations “that are dead wrong.”
.
338
Divisions
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson responded to a story
published by NBC News earlier this week which had
claimed Tillerson had considered resigning.
Tillerson told reporters at an unscheduled press briefing
that the story was false and that he had never considered
resigning. He also accused media organizations of trying to
divide people.
“This is what I don’t understand about
Washington. I’m not from this place. But
the places I come from we don’t deal with
that kind of petty nonsense. It is intended to
do nothing but to divide people. I’m just not
going to be part of this effort to divide this
administration,” Tillerson said.
President Trump also called out NBC News
for the article writing on Twitter that “Rex
Tillerson never threatened to resign. This is
Fake News put out by @NBCNews.”
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said on
Thursday that with the freedoms of the First Amendment
also comes responsibilities.
“You have a responsibility to tell the truth,
to be accurate,” Sanders told reporters in
response to a question about the issue.
“We’ve seen recent information that says
that only 5 percent of media coverage has
been positive about this President and this
administration, while at the same time you
have the stock market and economic
confidence at an all-time high.”
“Frankly, those are the issues most
Americans care about—not a lot of the
things that you cover, not a lot of the petty
palace intrigue that you spend your time
on. I think that we need to move towards a
certainly more fair, more accurate, and,
frankly, a more responsible news media for
the American people,” she said.
 Is Trump The World’s
Most Dangerous Man?
By Stephen Lendman - stephenlendman.org
10-8-2017
His words and mannerisms are telling. His deplorable
actions explain best.
“The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump,”
published this week, includes opinions from
over two dozen mental health experts.
They found “overwhelming evidence of profound
sociopathic traits,” along with malignant narcissism.
Both disorders can cause loss of reality, paranoia, bullying,
violent impulses, low self-esteem, lying, cheating, rage,
impulsivity, lack of empathy or compassion, and possibly
dementia or alzheimer’s disease.
Professor of Psychiatry and Law James Gilligan noted
“(t)he issue here is not whether President
Donald Trump is mentally ill. It is whether
he is dangerous.”
“He publicly boasts of violence and has
threatened violence. He has urged
followers to beat up protesters. He
approves of torture. He has boasted of his
ability to commit and get away with sexual
assault.”
It’s “irresponsible” to remain passive in the
face of clear evidence Gilligan sees. It’s
vital to “warn the potential victims in the
interests of public health,” he said.
Remaining silent about Trump’s disturbing actions
“passively support(s) and enable(s) the
dangerous and naive mistake of treating
him as if he were a ‘normal’ president,” he
added.
“He is not, and it is our duty to say so.”
Strong stuff.
Last April, Psychology Today headlined “Shrinks Define
Dangers of Trump Presidency,” saying he “may or may
not be mentally ill. He may or may not have an organic
brain disease.”
Whatever the case, prominent mental health experts agree
they’re ethically obligated to inform the public about
339
“every instance of reality distortion,
impulsive decision-making, and violation of
presidential norms of behavior that
singularize the Trump presidency.”
Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton stressed the importance of
averting Trump’s “malignant normality,” threatening the
nation - omitting the danger to world peace, stability and
security, what’s most important of all.
Clinical Professor of Law and Psychiatry Bandy Lee said
her
“(c)olleagues are concerned about the
repercussions of speaking” out, lacking
legal protections from a president willing to
strike back at critics.
At times he’s justified, she failed to explain, especially
about “the dishonest media” I blast more than he does,
without his bully pulpit for extra resonance.
Psychologist John Gartner collected tens of thousands of
professional signatures to a Facebook petition from
individuals believing mental health experts have a duty to
warn people about Trump’s dangerous behavior.
Professor of Law and Psychiatry Charles Dike disagrees,
saying mental health professionals are responsible to their
patients, not the public, adding:
“We are not police.”
Psychiatrist Judith Herman believes professional expertise
isn’t needed to recognize signs of Trump’s instability.
His bluster, bravado and other mannerisms aside, I’ve
argued he’s been co-opted to serve Wall Street, other
corporate interests, and the imperial state exclusively at the
expense of the public interest he likely doesn’t care about
anyway.
He didn’t become a billionaire by becoming a good guy.
Shady dealings likely enabled him to accumulate super-
wealth.
He associates with his own kind, indifferent to ordinary Is he the world’s most dangerous man? He’s a front man
people except rhetorically to score political points. His for dark forces running America. Therein lies the real
deplorable actions explain where he stands. danger no matter who’s president.

A new AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs poll showed It’s for mental health experts to judge if he’s mentally
his approval rating at 32%, a new low in his presidency - sound or imbalanced. His deplorable domestic and
down from 42% in March and 35% in June. geopolitical policies speak for themselves.

His failure to address Puerto Rico crisis conditions likely

contributed to his low rating. Nor do some of his hostile
tweets help him.
.

340
 'It's A Shame The White House
Has Become An Adult Day Care Center'
Tennessee Senator Bob Corker Turns Against The President He Once
Played A Crucial Role In Promoting.
David A. Graham
Oct 8, 2017
Joshua Roberts / Reuters
True to his state’s nickname, and his alma mater’s teams,
Bob Corker has twice stepped up as a pivotal volunteer in
the political career of Donald Trump—first, volunteering
his support when few mainstream Republicans were
willing to get near Trump, and more recently, after
announcing his intention to retire from the Senate, putting
himself forward as a leading elected critic of the White
House.
After a series of remarks by the Tennessean over the last
month, but especially more recently, Trump unloaded
Sunday morning.
341
Corker responded with his most acid comment yet,
belittling the president as mentally unfit for his job:
That’s a dramatic and ironic turnaround, because Corker’s
word and credibility, as a senator respected for his
principles and seriousness, was instrumental in paving the
way for mainstream Republican acceptance of the Trump
candidacy in spring of 2016.
By that point, Trump had solidified his status as the GOP
frontrunner, and no longer looked like a mere novelty
candidate. But few major elected Republicans had gotten
in line behind him—Governor Chris Christie had been the
first, and Senator Jeff Sessions followed at the end of
February, but most mainstream GOP figures were still
hoping for some way to stop Trump. He wouldn’t
effectively lock down the nomination until the May 3
Indiana primary.
On April 27, Trump spoke at the Mayflower Hotel in
Washington, giving his first major foreign-policy address
as a candidate. (The event is now infamous for a reception
attended by Trump, Sessions, and then-Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Sessions failed to disclose
the encounter, spurring investigations and questions.) As
my colleague Russell Berman wrote at the time, Trump
“delivered the most scripted, and stilted, speech of his 10-
month presidential campaign on Wednesday. He used a
teleprompter,” promising “to develop a foreign policy that
would both be ‘unpredictable’ and ‘consistent.’” By
clearing the low bar for knowledge the candidate had set
up to that point, the speech won some cautious praise. But
Corker was less reserved.
“Today, Donald Trump delivered a very good foreign-
policy speech in which he laid out his vision for American
engagement in the world,” he said. And because Corker
was (and is) the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, and is an establishment Republican, that
statement carried a great deal of weight.
Corker began counseling Trump on foreign policy. At a
time when opponents were arguing that Trump couldn’t be
trusted with America’s nuclear arsenal, Corker vouched
for him—or rather, he vouched for his faith that Trump’s
behavior would improve.
“I don’t really worry about that caricature,” Corker told the
Tennessean. “Once you come into the Oval Office and you
understand the tremendous decisions that you have to
make and the magnitude of those and the effect that it’s
going to have on the world, I think that there’s a
tremendous soberness and typically when you go in, you
end up with lots of very highly qualified people around
you.”
Corker must have seen a little of himself in Trump. He had
moved seamlessly from a business career to the mayorship
of Chattanooga, then the Senate, and finally the Foreign
Relations Committee, learning what he needed along the
way and growing into each new role. Corker, like Trump,
had also bucked ideological hardliners in the GOP and
earned a reputation as a dealmaker.
Even so, there were some notable differences between the
men, including on policy. Corker, while critical of the
Obama administration, had clinched a deal with Democrat
Ben Cardin to prevent Iranian nuclear-weapons
proliferation. Trump, at the Mayflower, called the
agreement “a disastrous deal.”
By May, Corker was rumored to be a leading contender to
join Trump as a vice-presidential candidate. But he still
had reservations. After Trump attacked Judge Gonzalo
Curiel as unfit to preside over a Trump University fraud
case because of his Mexican ancestry, the senator was
critical.
“He’s obviously stepped in it. He’s made statements that
are inappropriate,” he said in June. “He’s got this defining
period that’s over the next two or three weeks where he
could pivot, can pivot, hopefully will pivot to a place
where he becomes a true general election candidate.”
342
How brave you found this depended on what you thought
Corker’s ambitions were. If he wanted to be vice president,
this was some tough speech, but then again Corker was
also simply saying what many Republicans, whether they
supported Trump or not, believed: The campaign was on
the verge of collapse.
Apparently Trump passed the three-week test (though he
neither withdrew the Curiel attack nor notably moderated
his tone and language), because a month later Corker was
stumping for him in North Carolina, though he said on July
6 that he was withdrawing from the veepstakes.
Later that month, Trump was officially nominated for
president, and most of the GOP rallied around him, as
Corker had long before. When a tape emerged of Trump
boasting about sexually assaulting women, Corker was
critical—“These comments are obviously very
inappropriate and offensive and his apology was absolutely
necessary”—but did not step down from an advisory
position to which he’d been appointed that day.
That looked like a wise (if ethically arguable) gamble after
Trump won the race, surprising even himself, and Corker
became a frontrunner to be secretary of state. Although
many Republicans were eager for Corker to get the job—
seeing him as a sober adult who would keep Trump in
line—the senator said he doubted he’d get the pick, and in
fact the job went to Rex Tillerson, who has endured a
painful and ineffectual tenure that may end soon. Long-
escalating tension between the president and his secretary
of state has only intensified in recent weeks.
Corker has seemed to get more and more disillusioned
about Trump as time goes on. In August, after Trump
endorsed a soft white supremacy in the wake of the race
riot in Charlottesville, Corker criticized him harshly.
“The president has not yet been able to demonstrate the
stability nor some of the competence that he needs to
demonstrate in order to be successful,” Corker told
Chattanooga website Nooga.com. “He has not
demonstrated that he understands what has made this
nation great and what it is today, and he's got to
demonstrate the characteristics of a president who
understands that.”
Trump fired a warning shot shortly after that:
Whether or not that was true, Corker was indeed weighing
running for reelection. On September 26, he announced he
would retire when his term ends next year. That day, he
made a statement that sounded like a warning to the Trump
administration. “I also believe the most important public
service I have to offer our country could well occur over
the next 15 months,” he said.
Since then, he has seemed liberated to speak more freely.
On October 1, he said on Meet the Press that he stood by
his post-Charlottesville criticism. On Tuesday, he
suggested a willingness to vote against the White House
tax-cut effort—a crucial piece of legislation for an
administration that is still desperately seeking its first
major legislative victory, some nine months into office.
Even more pungent were comments on Wednesday, after
NBC News reported (and other outlets confirmed) that
Tillerson had called Trump a “moron” behind closed
doors, and had considered resignation.
“I think Secretary Tillerson, [Defense] Secretary [James]
Mattis and Chief of Staff [John] Kelly are those people
that help separate our country from chaos,” Corker said.
It’s a good bet those comments, which were discussed on
this week’s Sunday shows, are what caught Trump’s
attention. They also point to how the Iran deal, as the
president’s tweets indicated, remain another center of
tension between Corker and Trump. Trump has continued
to speak critically of the Iran deal, even as he has
continued to leave it in place. Tillerson, Mattis, and Kelly
all believe the deal should remain in place; the most recent
reports suggest that Trump might try to pass the buck by
decertifying the deal but allowing Congress to affirm it and
leave it in place.
As to whether Trump’s comments about not endorsing
Corker are true, the president has a well-earned reputation
.
343
for making things up. Although Trump has threatened to
oppose GOP incumbents in Senate primaries, especially
Arizona’s Jeff Flake, CNN reported that Trump had
indicated he would endorse Corker.
One interpretation of all of this is that Corker is an agile
politician. He recognized early on that Trump was
unstoppable and aligned himself with the candidate; he
prudently removed himself from consideration as vice
president, then has seen Trump repeatedly humiliate Mike
Pence; he sidestepped the secretary of state role, and has
watched Rex Tillerson grow increasingly miserable and
repeatedly been undercut by the president. Now, he’s
attacking Trump as the presidency sinks into the
quagmire—and leaving Washington before Trump can
drag down the GOP around Corker.
Perhaps that is true, or perhaps Corker is genuinely
appalled by Trump. Likely both are factors. But what is
striking about Corker’s more recent statements, from his
judgment that Trump has not “demonstrate[d] the stability
nor some of the competence” he needs to his much blunter,
crasser “adult day care” tweet, is how neatly they invert
what he said 18 months ago. Back then, many Americans
seemed to wonder whether Trump had the maturity to take
on the role of president, and Bob Corker was there to
assure them he’d grow into it, especially with wise
counselors.
Now it is Corker who is warning that Trump not only has
not grown into the role, but is too juvenile for it and
requires minding by so-called adults in the room like
Mattis, Kelly, and Tillerson. The Tennessee senator is the
latest to recognize, or at least to state publicly, that there is
no new Trump, no blossoming into the role of the
presidency, no maturation—so in the absence of the Trump
pivot he promised in April 2016, the nation has instead
received a Corker pivot in October 2017.
 Trump Unveils New Strict
70-Point Immigration Enforcement Plan
Calls For Comprehensive Rewrite Of Laws To Stiffen Border
And Interior, Cut Chain Migration
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times –
Sunday, October 8, 2017
EXCLUSIVE:
Determined to finally solve illegal immigration, the White
House submitted a 70-point enforcement plan to Congress
Sunday proposing the stiffest reforms ever offered by an
administration — including a massive rewrite of the law in
order to eliminate loopholes illegal immigrants have
exploited to gain a foothold in the U.S.
The plans, seen by The Washington Times, include
President Trump’s calls for a border wall, more
deportation agents, a crackdown on sanctuary cities and
stricter limits to chain migration — all issues the White
House says need to be part of any bill Congress passes to
legalize illegal immigrant “Dreamers” currently protected
by the Obama-era deportation amnesty known as DACA.
But the plans break serious new ground on the legal front,
giving federal agents more leeway to deny illegal
immigrants at the border, to arrest and hold them when
they’re spotted in the interior, and to deport them more
speedily. The goal, the White House said, is to ensure
major changes to border security, interior enforcement and
the legal immigration system.
“Anything that is done addressing the
status of DACA recipients needs to include
these three reforms and solve these three
problems,” a senior White House official
told The Times. “If you don’t solve these
problems then you’re not going to have a
secure border, you’re not going to have a
lawful immigration system and you’re not
going to be able to protect American
workers.”
All told, the list includes 27 different suggestions on
border security, 39 improvements to interior enforcement
and four major changes to the legal immigration system.
The White House said the list was built from the ground
up, with input from the Justice, State and Labor
Departments and the three main immigration agencies at
344
Homeland Security, each of whom was asked what tools
they needed to finally get a handle on illegal immigration.
Ideas poured in, ranging cracking down on sanctuary cities
that shield illegal immigrants — a long-running battle —
to new proposals, such as doling out assistance to other in
the Western Hemisphere, enlisting them as partners in the
effort to stop illegal immigrants heading north.
The running theme of the list, though, is closing loopholes
that illegal immigrants have exploited:
• Lax asylum standards, which illegal immigrants have
learned to game through saying “magic words” that
earn them instant protections, would be stiffened.
• The Unaccompanied Alien Children — or UAC — who
streamed to the U.S. under President Obama would
have to prove they really are without parents and are
fleeing abuse, in order to access generous
humanitarian protections.
• Visitors who come legally but overstay their visas —
perhaps now an even larger group of illegal immigrants
than those who jump the border — would, for the first
time, face a misdemeanor penalty.
• A 2001 Supreme Court decision that has forced the
release of tens of thousands of illegal immigrants,
including murderers, would be curtailed.
• The ability of federal, state and local authorities to
detain illegal immigrants would be fully enshrined in
law, helping settle a long-running question that’s
fueled some sanctuary cities.
Also on the list are proposals that have been included in
past immigration bills that garnered bipartisan support
such as canceling the annual visa lottery that doles out
50,000 green cards at random, and requiring all businesses
to use E-Verify, the government’s currently voluntary
system for checking to make sure new hires are legally
eligible to work.
Immigrant-rights advocates had feared the move, saying
they believed Mr. Trump was giving in to hard-liners in his
administration, including senior adviser Stephen Miller.
 “President Trump and Members of
Congress need to decide – do they want to
resolve this crisis, or do they want to fall
prey to Stephen Miller et al’s strategy to kill
legislation and expose all 800,000 DACA
beneficiaries to deportation?” Frank Sharry,
executive director of America’s Voice, said
in a statement last week in anticipation of
the announcement.
Many of the items on the president’s list have drawn
bipartisan support in the past, including more fencing, a
massive boost in Border Patrol agents, the end to the
diversity visa lottery and mandatory use of E-Verify.
Each of those was, in fact, part of the 2013 immigration
bill the Senate approved, with the support of every single
Democrat in the chamber.
But Democrats say they only supported those measures at
the time as part of a broad compromise that offered legal
status to some 8 million of the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants in the country at that point. They said a smaller
legalization for Dreamers can’t be coupled with that broad
an enforcement surge.
“Please do not put the burden on the
Dreamers to accept every aspect of
comprehensive immigration reform to get a
chance to become citizens of the United
.
345
States,” Sen. Richard Durbin, a Democrat
who was part of the so-called “Gang of
Eight” senators that wrote the 2013 bill, told
top administration officials at a hearing last
week. “That’s too much to ask.”
The senior White House official, though, said Mr.
Durbin’s logic amounted to a
“false pretense that the safety of the
American people should be held hostage to
some other goal.”
“Congress doesn’t need an excuse to pass
laws that make our streets safer or our
country safer or make our jobs more
secure. It’s just the right thing to do,” the
official said.
The administration’s new list is likely to irk Senate
Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi, who emerged from a meeting with
Mr. Trump last month insisting they had the outlines of a
Dream Act-style deal that would grant a pathway to
citizenship to Dreamers in exchange for limited border
security, such as technology, boosting the Coast Guard or
adding more inspectors at ports of entry.
The two leaders said they had explicitly won an agreement
not to couple the Dream Act with any new action on Mr.
Trump’s proposed border wall.
 DHS Admits Russia Election
Hack Was A Total Myth… It Never Happened
By Jayson Veley
Sunday, October 08, 2017
Democrats who are still obsessing over the so-called
Russia scandal are like children who throw temper
tantrums in the supermarket when mommy doesn’t buy the
candy bar that they want. It’s blatantly obvious that they
are still angry and bitter over the fact that Hillary Clinton –
the “anointed one” – didn’t become the 45th president of
the United States, and they are incapable of coming to
terms with the fact that Donald Trump is our commander-
in-chief. They are still in a state of shock, and are clinging
to any excuse they possibly can that furthers the narrative
that Trump is not a legitimate president. There’s just one
problem – the idea that Trump and his team colluded with
the Russians during the presidential election has been
disproven time and time again.
Late last month, the Daily Caller published a report
alleging that the Department of Homeland Security was
wrong when it told the states of California and Wisconsin
that Russian hackers had tried to break into their election
websites and tamper with their registration files.
The Department of Homeland Security had previously told
a total of 21 states, including California and Wisconsin,
that Russians had tried to hack into voter registration files
and election websites. Now, however, the DHS is claiming
that the hackers actually went after the California
Department of Technology and the Wisconsin Department
of Workforce Development.
“The work of our intelligence agencies is
critical in defending against cyber threats,”
said California Secretary of State Alex
Padilla in a statement. “I remain committed
346
to a partnership with DHS and other
intelligence agencies; however, elections
officials and the American public expect
and deserve timely and accurate
information.”
Scott McConnell, a spokesman for the Department of
Homeland Security, released a rather blunt and
unapologetic statement to the Daily Caller.
“While we defer to each state whether to
disclose the circumstance surrounding their
networks, it’s important to point out that
discussions of specific IP addresses do not
provide a complete picture of potential
targeting activity. The Department stands
by its assessment that Internet-connected
networks in 21 states were the target of
Russian government cyber actors seeking
vulnerabilities and access to U.S. election
infrastructure,” he said.
Still, however, there is absolutely no proof that the
Russians colluded with Trump or members of his team to
sway the election in his favor. The Department of
Homeland Security was wrong when they told the states of
California and Wisconsin that Russians had tampered with
their registration files and public election websites, and
even more than that, most of the liberals in Washington
D.C. and the mainstream media have known that this entire
thing was BS from the start. (Related: The bogus
“Trump-Russia” collusion story is nothing but a
political hatchet job cooked up by Obama loyalist John
Brennan.)
Back in June, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas captured
undercover video footage of a senior CNN producer
actually admitting that the network’s attempts to link
President Trump to the Russians lacked any significant
proof.
“Could be bullshit. I mean, it’s mostly
bullshit right now,” admitted John Bonifield
after being asked a question about his
thoughts on the Russia investigation.
But if the entire Russia scandal is made up, and even the
liberals within the mainstream media know that it’s made
up, then why do they continue to talk about it day in and
day out? (Related: CNN’s credibility collapses under
the weight of a fake news scandal.)
The reason is simple:
The leftists hate President Trump, and they
are willing to do anything and everything in
their power to tear him down. If that means
.
347
lying to the American people and making
up some kind of phony scandal, then so be
it. But as the truth continues to come out,
and as more and more Americans start to
catch on to the game the liberals are
playing, the more credibility they will lose
and the tougher it will be for them to regain
power in Washington.
 Senior Republican Says Trump
Is Steering US Towards World War III
Published Time: 9 Oct, 2017 05:24 Edited Time: 9 Oct, 2017 07:30

could not win without my endorsement. He

also wanted to be Secretary of State, I said
‘NO THANKS,’” Trump said in a series of
Tweets, labeling Corker a “negative voice”
that “stands in the way” of his
administration’s agenda.

Joshua Roberts / Reuters

US President Donald Trump is leading the US towards a

third World War, and his governing style is fit more for a
reality show than for the White House, Senator Bob
Corker (R) said, further fueling the bitter public row
between the former allies.

Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations

Committee, expressed serious doubts about Trump’s
ability to lead the country in the right direction in an
interview with the New York Times on Sunday.

“He concerns me. He would have to
concern anyone who cares about our
nation,” Corker said of Trump.
He went on to blame Trump, his fellow party member, for
treating the job of running the country like a never-ending
reality show, saying that by continually threatening other
countries Trump is setting the US “on the path to World
War III.”
Corker’s latest remark comes as the two are engaged in a
fiery debate, having traded barbs since Sunday morning.
He also blamed Corker for being the architect of what he
called
“the horrendous Iran Deal.”
The Senator, for his part, offered his own version of
events, claiming that Trump himself asked him to run for
Governor again, vowing support to his candidacy.
“I don't know why the president tweets out
things that are not true,” he riposted.

Trump launched a scathing attack on Corker seemingly out

of the blue. Trump called out Corker for a lack of
leadership skills, and impeding his administration’s policy
with his tweets.

“Senator Bob Corker ‘begged’ me to

endorse him for re-election in Tennessee. I
said ‘NO’ and he dropped out (said he
.

348
 Stephen A. Smith Says Trump
Is ‘Winning’ The National Anthem Debate [VIDEO]
Ford Springer - Entertainment Reporter
11:44 AM 10/09/2017

Donald Trump is now winning the national anthem debate

without question, according to ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith.

Vice President Mike Pence attended the Indianapolis Colts

and San Francisco 49ers game on Sunday, but promptly
left after several players kneeled for the national anthem.
Donald Trump later tweeted claiming that he told Pence to
leave if any players disrespected the flag and our country.

The “First Take” host then claimed that he believes Trump

is doing this to get back at the NFL community that didn’t
welcome him back when he tried to become an owner of a
team.

“In the end what it really really comes down

Stephen A. Smith discussed Pence’s move on ESPN’s
“First Take” Monday morning where he said Trump has
successfully hijacked the issue and is winning the national
anthem argument.
“The president has successfully gone about
the business of hijacking the issue,” Smith
began noting that he’s turned a protest
against police brutality into a debate about
patriotism.
.
to is the president has successfully
hijacked this issue. He’s turned it into an
issue about patriotism and beyond, he’s
catering to his base in the process and the
biggest thing he’s doing is he’s pulling it all
off hiding behind these issues when, in my
opinion, his real agenda is going after an
NFL community that didn’t let him in that
‘good ole boys club,'” Smith said.
“He is the one that’s winning because he’s
turned this into something that the players
didn’t intend to. So they’re going to have to
find a different mechanism to have their
voices heard, because Trump has won this
round.”

349
 Another Collusion Narrative Dies: New Emails Support
Trump Jr.'S Account Of Infamous "Russia Meeting"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 9, 2017 8:54 PM
Another Trump-Russia collusion narrative has bitten the
dust.
In a stunning revelation that goes a long way toward
alleviating the cloud of suspicion that has hovered over
Donald Trump Jr. since details about a meeting organized
by Trump Jr. involving Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort
along with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and her
entourage were first publicized in July, the Wall Street
Journal is reporting that newly disclosed emails
between Veselnitskaya and Azerbaijani-Russian
billionaire Aras Agalarov largely support
Veselnitskaya’s account that the meeting focused on
her yearslong lobbying effort to kill the Magnitsky Act.
The emails, which were provided to WSJ by Scott
Balber, a lawyer for Agalarov, cover a period of time
leading up to the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower.
They begin in October 2015, when Veselnitskaya first
shared information about her anti-Magnitsky efforts with
Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika.
Veselnitskaya also shared allegations about a US
investment firm called Ziff Brothers possibly dodging
taxes in Russia. The firm later donated to Democrats.
In October 2015, Ms. Veselnitskaya shared information
about her anti-Magnitsky campaign with Prosecutor
General Yuri Chaika, a top official appointed by the
Kremlin, Mr. Balber said. In May 2016, less than two
weeks before the June 9 Trump Tower meeting, Ms.
Veselnitskaya also provided Mr. Agalarov with a five-page
.
350
set of talking points that included the same information she
had given Mr. Chaika, Mr. Balber said.
Included in the information she shared with the men, Mr.
Balber said Monday, was a single reference to Mrs.
Clinton. Ms. Veselnitskaya alleged that a U.S. firm, Ziff
Brothers Investments, had dodged taxes in Russia and later
donated to Democrats, including possibly Mrs. Clinton.
Mr. Chaika’s office released a statement in spring 2016
alleging Ziff Brothers Investments of evading taxes in
Russia. The company hasn’t been charged and has
previously declined to comment on the allegations.
The emails largely support Trump Jr.’s and
Veselnitskaya’s version of events. Trump said the
meeting proved disappointing. In July of this year, after
reports of the meeting first emerged, Trump said that Ms.
Veselnitskaya “stated that she had information that
individuals connected to Russia were funding the
Democratic National Committee and supporting Clinton,”
but “it quickly became clear that she had no meaningful
information.” Trump said he cut the meeting short after
Veselnitskaya started talking about the Magnitsky Act.
The meeting is now being probed by Special Counsel
Robert Mueller, who is investigating whether associates of
Mr. Trump colluded with Moscow as part of his probe into
Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 U.S. election,
according to people familiar with the matter.
The emails represent a blow to Special Counsel Robert
Mueller, who’s been aggressively investigating the
meeting between Trump Jr. and Veselnitskaya. While
Trump Jr. is still exposed for his infamous “if it’s what you
say it is then I love it” comment made in response to
publicist Ronald Goldstone’s claim that Veselnitskaya had
damaging information about Clinton – the pretext for
setting the meeting – all of the leaks have so far
supported Trump Jr.’s version of events: Namely, that
Veselnitskaya did not provide Trump Jr. with the
“opposition research” he had been seeking.
We suspect this new information will not be the lead story
on MSNBC, CNN, or at The Washington Post.
 The Problem With 'Containing' Donald Trump
When Bob Corker Says Officials Are Trying To “Contain” The President,
He’s Pointing To A Long-Term Threat To Democratic Stability.
David Frum
Oct 9, 2017
Yuri Gripas / Reuters
The United States is gripped by two interlocking
constitutional crises: one spectacularly visible and noisy;
the other unfolding more quietly. Senator Bob Corker’s
Sunday remarks to The New York Times brought the quiet
crisis into full public view.
The noisy crisis is, of course, the presidency of Donald
Trump. The quiet crisis is the response of the national-
security system to the noisy crisis.
Mr. Trump poses such an acute risk, the senator said, that a
coterie of senior administration officials must protect him
from his own instincts. “I know for a fact that every single
day at the White House, it’s a situation of trying to contain
him,” Mr. Corker said in a telephone interview.
This observation by the chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee has been seconded by other insiders.
“There are people inside the administration that think it is
their job to save America from this president,” then-White
House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci told
CNN’s New Day in July. In April, an unnamed senior
administration official praised the work of Rex Tillerson,
Jim Mattis, and John Kelly, then still secretary of
homeland security: “They realize this is a tumultuous
White House, and they are serving as a leveling influence
over fractious personalities … responsibly protecting the
country from enemies both foreign and domestic.” The
“domestic enemies” in this formula apparently included
much of President Trump’s own senior staff.
351
Good news: The people containing the commander-in-
chief have to a considerable extent succeeded. The United
States has not launched a preemptive attack on North
Korea, abandoned Estonia to the Russians, canceled
NAFTA, or started a trade war with China—each and
every one of those outcomes a seemingly live possibility if
you heeded Trump’s own words.
Bad news: The national-security services are apparently
coping with Donald Trump in ways that circumvent the
president’s constitutional role as commander-in-chief. One
example spotlights the ways Trump’s orders are shirked by
his nominal subordinates. Trump tweeted in July that the
“United States Government will not accept or allow
Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the
U.S. Military.” The actual policy set forth in executive
orders in August will be very different: It leaves discretion
to the secretary of defense to determine whether “military
readiness” will be assisted or impaired by allowing
transgender soldiers to continue their service.
We’ve seen the president issue threats of imminent
military action—only to be contradicted by cabinet officers
and military staff assuring potential adversaries that the
United States will not initiate the use of force that the
president had threatened to initiate.
The military and intelligence agencies are learning new
habits of disregard for presidential statements and even
orders that those agencies deem ignorant or reckless. By
and large, those agencies’ judgments are vastly to be
preferred to the president’s—but that does not make these
habits any less dangerous.
Among other insights, Corker’s Sunday interview forces
Americans to confront some tough questions: By what
methods is the president being contained? Is he, for
example, being denied sensitive information by agencies
that remember how he blurted a closely guarded secret to
the Russian foreign minister and the location of U.S.
nuclear submarines to the president of the Philippines? Are
allies and potential adversaries being signaled that
presidential statements do not actually represent the policy
of the United States government? That was how National-
Security Adviser H.R. McMaster dealt with Trump’s
refusal to read aloud the endorsement of NATO’s Article 5
in the speech written for Trump to deliver at NATO
headquarters in May. “He did not make a decision not to
say it."
To what extent does the president remain in the military
chain of command? It seems incredible that the military
would outright defy a presidential order. But not hearing
it? Not understanding it? Not acting on it promptly?
Holding back information that might provoke an unwanted
presidential reaction? White House insiders told a reporter
Monday that Vice President Pence had made a mistake in
telling Trump he planned to attend a game featuring a
tribute to Indiana football great Peyton Manning on
Sunday: It was that casual remark that goaded Trump into
ordering Pence to stage his walk-out stunt.* Whether the
story is true or not, it reveals the preferred method of
managing a distrusted president: Deny him information
that could have unwanted effects.
Thank you and congratulations to those officials struggling
to protect American security, the Western alliance, and
world peace against Donald Trump. But the constitutional
order is becoming the casualty of these struggles. The
.
352
Constitution provides a way to remedy an unfit presidency:
the removal process under the 25th amendment. Regencies
and palace coups are not constitutional. I dare say many
readers would prefer a Mattis presidency to a Trump
presidency. But to stealthily endow Secretary Mattis with
the powers of the presidency as a work-around of Trump’s
abuse of them? That’s a crisis, too, and one sinister for the
future. What if Trump is succeeded by a Bernie Sanders-
type whom the military and intelligence agencies distrust
as much as they distrust Trump: Will they continue the
habits they acquired in the Trump years?
Bob Corker’s “containment” remark both reassures and
warns: The “lesser evil” response to Trump’s challenge to
the constitutional order—isolate and ignore him—remains
a significant hazard in itself.
* This article originally stated that the game Vice
President Pence attended was Peyton Manning's last. We
regret the error.
 New Evidence Shows McCain Helped Fund FBI Plot To
Frame Trump; Backed Bogus Russian Trump Dossier
By Investigative Bureau
Posted on October 9, 2017

New evidence from court documents and intelligence
sources combine to show the unthinkable: U.S. Senator
John McCain colluded with the FBI and possibly the DNC
to sandbag President Donald Trump, before and after the
2016 election.
And McCain is from the same political party as President
Trump. Allegedly.
True Pundit broke a story weeks ago that ex-FBI chief
James Comey’s FBI funded the bogus Trump dossier to
the tune of $100K+ with the help of McCain who brokered
the deal. The revelations the FBI paid for the dossier were
also confirmed by Judicial Watch.
But now court documents and new source Intel raise
suspicions that McCain may have chipped in financially
with the FBI or privately funded the counterfeit research,
either himself or through his shady foundation.
Regardless, the research firm of former spooks — Fusion
GPS who commissioned the problematic report — could
have been paid for the same report by the multiple entities:
 The FBI, through a black-budget fund as reported by
True Pundit
 John McCain campaign coffers and connections
 McCain’s foundation: Arizona State University’s
McCain Institute for International Leadership
opportunity to smear Trump. These included: The New
York Times, The Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New
Yorker and CNN and others. Only lowly liberal rag sheet
Mother Jones took the poisoned bait and sprinted to
publish portions of the dossier.
When the mainstream media balked, McCain shopped the
dossier to Comey. According to True Pundit’s reporting,
the FBI cut what now appears to be a side deal to further
underwrite Steele’s unfounded research.
Did McCain augment the FBI’s payment to Steele with his
own cash? Did McCain push or vouch for the FBI’s
payment to Steele? Or Did McCain, through his campaign
coffers or shady foundation, underwrite the research before
DNC-backed entities also paid for it?
Or did all of this take place in an elaborate, much larger
plot to discredit and unseat President Trump?
How was McCain the first person to obtain the falsified
research if he didn’t in fact have a role in commissioning
the dossier? It was provided to no other U.S. senator.
The bogus dossier, after all, was used as a wedge to obtain
what appears to be illegal wiretaps on Trump and
associates. Evidence gathered from those taps is being
employed now bu U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller
who is investigating Trump and his White House for
alleged Russian collusion.

 Hillary Clinton-backed campaign operatives who paid
$1 million for the research
Ye olde triple dip by Fusion GPS. Smart profit model
perhaps especially while peddling a very poor product and
when it comes to cutting deals with Comey, the FBI and
McCain: a lesson in who not to do business with.
As the evidence mounts, all fingers point to McCain for
colluding to smear Trump and cooking up the Russian
narrative. We doubt that is being investigated by Mueller
who has used the dossier’s baseless Russian allegations to
wage his probe.
We are talking about The Swamp after all.

According to a court document (attached below) in a

British lawsuit against the author of the Fusion GPS report,
Christopher Steele, McCain along with a man named
David Kramer were the first people to obtain the Trump
dossier.
Kramer, a virtual mystery man before the election,
previously worked for the State Department under Hillary
Clinton. During the 2016 election, Kramer reportedly
worked as senior director for Arizona State University’s
McCain Institute for International Leadership.
McCain and Kramer shopped the damaging dossier to the
U.S. media with hopes the press would jump on the
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
 Bannon Calls For Corker
To Resign After Insulting Trump
Tue Oct 10, 2017 06:05AM
Former White House strategist Stephen Bannon (Photo by AP)
Stephen Bannon, US President Trump's
former chief strategist, says Senator
Bob Corker should “resign
immediately” if the Tennessee
Republican has “any honor or
decency,” following his disparaging
remarks about the president's ability to
lead.
"If Bob Corker had any honor or decency,
he should resign immediately," Bannon
said in an interview with on Fox News on
Monday night.
He added that Corker, Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell and
“the entire establishment, globalist clique
have to go.”
"The American people see: This is what
they think about President Trump behind
closed doors. He happened to tell the New
York Times exactly what he thought. It is
totally unacceptable," Bannon said.
Trump’s allies on Monday slammed Corker, who engaged
in a heated exchange with Trump on Twitter on Sunday.
Later in the day, the senator fired back at the president in
an interview with the New York Times, saying Trump is
leading the US towards World War III, and that he is
treating the presidency like a "reality show."
364
Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee (Photo by AFP)
Bannon said it was "totally unacceptable" for Corker to
question the president’s intelligence level when American
troops are fighting wars abroad, after the chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee tweeted on Sunday
that
"the White House has become an adult day
care center."
Bannon was sacked as the White House chief strategist in
August. After his dismissal, he vowed to "go to war" for
the president’s agenda.
The 63-year-old strategist was labeled as a white
supremacist as he was formerly the executive chairman of
the far-right news outlet Breibart, an online news website
which many believe publishes racist and anti-Semitic
articles.
Bannon on Monday pointed out that many other
lawmakers in the Republican establishment share Corker’s
views about Trump, saying they have
"total contempt for the forgotten man and
the [Republican] base."
He said he agreed with Jason Miller, Trump's ex-
communications strategist, who called for Corker to resign
immediately. Corker has announced that he is retiring after
2018.

Former top Donald Trump aide Jason Miller
(Photo by Getty Images)
“And look, if Senator Corker is retiring and
he doesn't want to be in the U.S. Senate
and he doesn't want to support President
Trump and doesn’t want to support such
basic conservative principles, he should
just resign,” Miller told CNN.
A firm supporter of Trump during last year’s presidential
election campaign, Corker turned against Trump after
being shortlisted for both the vice president and secretary
of state.
Corker said Wednesday that Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, White House
Chief of Staff John Kelly and other top administration
officials “help separate us from chaos.”
365
Earlier on Monday, McConnell defended Corker, calling
him
"a valuable member of the Senate
Republican caucus.”
US Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) speaks during
a news conference to discuss their plans for tax reform, September
27, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by AFP)
"Sen. Corker is a valuable member of the
Senate Republican caucus and he's also
on the Budget committee and a particularly
important player as we move to the floor on
the budget next week and he's an
important part of our team," the Kentucky
Republican said.
 Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s IT Hacker, Imran Awan,
Wiped Cell Phone Clean Hours Before Arrest
He Learned From Hillary Clinton.
By Alex Christoforou
October 10, 2017, 16:50

Just like when Hillary Clinton and her team smashed up
their Blackberry phones with hammers so as to destroy US
government evidence that they were up to no good,
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Mirando revealed in a
court hearing that Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s IT
consultant Imran Awan apparently wiped his cell phone
clean just hours before being arrested by the FBI at Dulles
Airport while attempting to flee to Pakistan.
Forbes reports that this new information came out in a
hearing in which Awan’s attorney argued that his curfew
should be lifted and his ankle bracelet removed.
Imran Awan, the IT professional Rep. Debbie Wasserman
Schultz (D-FL) kept on her congressional payroll long
after it became known he was under investigation by the
Capitol Police, wiped his phone hours before he was
arrested last July.
But we are just starting to learn about this case. This is
new revelation that Awan wiped his phone just before he
attempted to fly away to Pakistan came out last Friday
when Awan appeared in court.
Awan’s attorney, Chris Gowen, argued that Awan should
have his curfew lifted and that the tracking device on his
ankle should be removed.
This prompted Assistant U.S. Attorney
Michael Mirando to say that when Imran
was arrested at Dulles International
Airport a cellphone found on him “had
been wiped clean just a few hours
before.”
Zerohedge reports that Awan’s attorney, and long-time
Clinton employee, Chris Gowen tried to argue that Awan’s
phone was blank because he had just purchased it while
seemingly hoping that the FBI had simply overlooked the
“.obliterate file” that was created when the phone was
intentionally wiped clean.
Gowen tried to counter this by telling the judge:
“Awan had recently bought the phone,
so of course it didn’t have any data on
it.”
But Mirando countered by saying the
FBI found that the phone had been
wiped on purpose. A time stamp on the
iPhone indicated it had been wiped at
6:30 p.m. that evening (Awan was
arrested around 10 p.m.).
Awan also had a laptop on him, but one of the few things
on the computer was a resume. Mirando used this and
other details—such as that the Awan’s quickly sold many
of their Virginia properties—to explain that Imran had no
intention of returning.
The iPhone Awan was carrying has a feature built in that
allows someone to wipe it before they sell it.
Investigators were nevertheless able to
determine when it was wiped because
the phone created a “.obliterated” file
with a time stamp.
There are some cases where an iPhone won’t create a
.obliterated file that can be easily found, but there are other
techniques used by investigators to uncover and see when
an iPhone was wiped.
Awan might be a savvy former IT professional, but in this
case the FBI was able to see that he purposely deleted data
before showing up for his flight to Pakistan. Awan knew
his wife had been detained temporarily at the airport and
questioned, so he had reason to believe the same would
happen to him.

366
 "Russia Interfered!" –
By Purchasing Anti-Trump Ads?
By B
October 10, 2017
After the ludicrous "Russian hacking" claims have died
down for lack of evidence, the attention was moved to
even more ludicrous claims of "Russian ads influenced the
elections". Some readers are upset that continue to debunk
the nonsense the media spreads around this. But lies
should not stand without response. If only to blame the
reporters and media who push this dreck.
As evidence is also lacking for any "Russian interference"
claims the media outlets have started to push deceiving
headlines. These make claims that are not covered at all by
the content of the related pieces. The headlines are
effective because less than 20% of the viewers ever read
beyond them.
On the NYT Homepage today we find another one of these:
Google Finds Russia Bought Ads to
Interfere in Election.
Google has found no ads that "Russia", the state or nation,
has bought. There is also no evidence that the ads in
question interfered in any way with the election. There is
evidence that any of the ads in questions aimed to achieve
that. The opener of the piece repeats the false headline
claims. But now we have "Russian agents", not "Russia",
which allegedly did something.
Google has found evidence that Russian agents bought ads
on its wide-ranging networks in an effort to interfere with
the 2016 presidential campaign.
The term "Russian agents" is not defined at all. Where
these "secret agents" or Public Relation professionals in
Washington DC hired by some Russian entity?
Using accounts believed to be connected to the Russian
government, the agents purchased $4,700 worth of search
ads and more traditional display ads, according to a person
familiar with the company’s inquiry ...
"Accounts believed to be connected to the
Russian government." Believed by whom?
And how is "connected" defined? Isn't any
citizen "connected" to his or her
government?
367
Those believed, connected accounts bought a whopping
$4,700 of ads? Googles 2016 revenue was
$89,000,000,000. The total campaign expenditures in 2016
were some $6,000,000,000. The Clinton campaign spent
some $480,000 on social network ads alone. But
something "Russian" spending $4,700 was "interference"?
But wait. There is more:
Google found a separate $53,000 worth of
ads with political material that were
purchased from Russian internet
addresses, building addresses or with
Russian currency. It is not clear whether
any of those were connected to the
Russian government, and they may have
been purchased by Russian citizens, the
person said.
So now we are on to something. A full $53,000 worth of
ads. But ....
The messages of those ads spanned the
political spectrum. One account spent
$7,000 on ads to promote a documentary
called “You’ve Been Trumped,” a film
about Donald J. Trump’s efforts to build a
golf course in Scotland along an
environmentally sensitive coastline.
Another spent $36,000 on ads questioning
whether President Barack Obama needed
to resign. Yet another bought ads to
promote political merchandise for Mr.
Obama.
The film is anti-Trump. Obama not resigning would have
been anti-Trump. Selling Obama merchandise may have
been good business, but is certainly not pro-Trump. So at
least $43,000 of a total of $53,000 mentioned above was
spent by believed, connected "Russians" on ads that
promoted anti-Trump material. How does that fit with the
claims that "Russia" wished to get Trump elected? Putin
pushed the wrong button?
The allegedly "Russian" Facebook ads were just a click-
bait scheme by some people trying to make money. The
allegedly "Russian" Goggle ads were of a volume that is
unlikely to have made any difference in anything. They
were also anti-Trump.
368
Clinton lost because people on all sides had learned to
dislike her policies throughout the years. She was
unelectable. Her party was and is acting against the interest
of the common people.
No claim of anything "Russian" can change those facts.
 Another Phony Russia Conspiracy
By Stephen Lendman - Stephenlendman.Org
10-10-2017
They keep coming, new ones fabricated like others, part of
longstanding Russia bashing, blaming the country for
almost everything.
The latest one was concocted by Oxford University
researchers, a study claiming Moscow exploits social
media to target current and former US military personnel
with propaganda and other misinformation.
The so-called study covered a one-month period last
spring, falsely claiming Russian cyberwar aims to
undermine the trust of Americans in US democracy.
What doesn’t exist can’t be undermined. Study director
Philip Howard claimed
“(w)e’ve found an entire ecosystem of junk
news about national security issues that is
deliberately crafted for US veterans and
active military personnel.”
“It’s a complex blend of content with a
Russian view of the world wild rumors and
conspiracies.”
Former Pentagon official Mike Carpenter claimed the
study “is further evidence of the Kremlin’s holistic effort
to try to get inside the minds, computers and
communications of our forces to steal information on
things such as the locations and deployment schedules of
specific military units and to conduct psy-ops against our
troops.”
The problem with studies like Oxford’s and US
intelligence community claims about so-called Russian
interference in America’s presidential campaign is
accusations and allegations aren’t supported by verifiable
evidence. There is none.
.
369
Without it they’re groundless - gratuitous Russia bashing
without a leg to stand on. The Oxford study also named
independent web sites it claimed are linked to the Kremlin,
including Veterans Today, Veterans News Now, and the
Strategic Culture Foundation.
All three published some of my articles. By Oxford’s
standard, that makes me a Russian agent, especially
because I speak highly of Vladimir Putin and Sergey
Lavrov, earlier calling them the most worthy candidates
for Nobel Peace Prize recognition.
Carpenter called the above-named web sites, others Oxford
cited, along with RT and Sputnik News
“Russian fronts, given the high degree of
Russian content.”
My web site has lots of it, the kind Carpenter, Oxford
researchers and others like them loathe - hard truths they
want suppressed, how imperial states and their supporters
operate.
The Oxford study claimed thousands of Facebook and
Twitter users referred to or used content from Russian-
linked web sites over the period studied, calling it junk or
phony news.
Carpenter invented his own reality, claiming the Kremlin
is
“very good at targeting specific
demographics and subgroups within
American society, with tailored content in
order to sow discord and undermine trust in
government.”
Months of House and Senate investigations into alleged
Russian US election interference struck out, finding
nothing, yet continue wasting time and money.
 Undercover Video Catches NYT Online Editor
Bragging About Slanting The News Against Trump
By Scott Whitlock
October 10, 2017 3:34 PM EDT

“Like, after the Clinton campaign, I'm like,

no I need to get back into news and keep
doing shit because, like, this isn't going to
change.”

Unaware that he was being recorded, Dudich said of

Trump,

“I saw the threat and I was, like, ‘I want to

do something. I can’t just do what I do
because, yeah, Trump was a threat... and
Undercover journalist James O’Keefe claims to have is a threat.”
exposed another left-wing propagandist, this time at the
New York Times. Hidden video posted on Tuesday The Times employee told Project Veritas that he’s a
allegedly shows Nick Dudich telling Project Veritas that “gatekeeper” at the paper and bragged,
the Times “always” slants stories against Trump.
“My imprint is on every video we do.”
Dudich, who O'Keefe cites as the audience strategy editor
for NYT Video, explained his previous advocacy for the
Hillary Clinton campaign:

“So I have that background, so when

Clinton in 2016... they needed a volunteer
strategist to do video... well, they needed
someone to help them do video, and how
to make it heartfelt, for Clinton.”

Blurring the line between journalist and activist, he added,

370
 The Democrats IT Scandal Has Just
Been Shoved Into The Realm Of Bizzare
Dawn Luger
October 10, 2017
Since most of the media is ignoring the democrats IT
scandal in favor of focusing on national anthem protests
and things Donald Trump Tweeted, many missed the new
bizarre twist. The slowly exploding scandal is being swept
away by the mainstream media.
Back in July, The Daily Sheeple reported on some of the
odd things going on surrounding the strange case of Imran
Awan, the IT aide Representative Debbie Wasserman
Schultz, (D-Fla.,) kept on her payroll even though he and
wife Hina Alvi Awan, were being investigated by the
Capitol Police for possible theft, fraud, moving terabytes
of data from Congress’s system and more. There was a
media blackout surrounding this scandal, and that has not
changed.
Roger Stone has even alleged that on the night of his
murder, Seth Rich was partying with Imran
Awan. Coincidence? More than likely not since the
mainstream media fails to even mention this case.
But, Imran Awan was back in court last week. According
to Fox News, only a few reporters sat in the almost empty
wooden benches in the back of the courtroom. Anyone
who didn’t know this was the latest scene in a slowly
371
exploding political scandal would have thought this was
only a forgettable bank fraud case. When pressured,
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Mirando revealed some
telling things about this case:
Chris Gowen, Imran’s attorney, asked that Imran’s travel
restrictions be removed.
This prompted Assistant U.S. Attorney Mirando to say that
when Imran was arrested at Dulles International Airport a
cellphone found on him “had been wiped clean just a few
hours before.”
Gowen tried to counter this by saying, “Awan had recently
bought the phone, so of course it didn’t have any data on
it.”
But Mirando was ready. He said the FBI found that the
phone had been wiped as clean as Hillary’s server. A time
stamp on the iPhone indicated it had been wiped at 6:30
p.m. that evening. Also, Imran did have a laptop on him,
but one of the few things on it was a resume. Mirando used
this and other details—such as the Awans quickly selling
many of their Virginia properties—to explain that Imran
had no intention of returning.
In another twist, Gowen brought up a computer that Rep.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz wants back so badly she
actually threatened the chief of the Capitol Police in a
public hearing with “consequences” if she didn’t get it
back.
Gowen argued that the computer and documents seized in
a bag left in a public area of a congressional building
around midnight on April 6, 2017, are “protected by
attorney-client privilege.” Gowen hopes to remove this
evidence from future court proceedings.
Gowen, however, didn’t answer what Imran was doing in
the Longworth congressional building late at night and
long after he’d been fired by every Democrat aside from
Rep. Wasserman Schultz (Wasserman Schultz’s office
isn’t in Longworth). –Fox News
But before the court hearing even started, Imran’s wife
was the source of scrutiny. Hina Alvi Awan had flown
away to Pakistan with their children soon after the
investigation became known, but she was in the
courtroom. Fox News speculated that she may have been
back as part of a plea deal.
While Hina Alvi was gone, on August 17, 2017, a federal
grand jury indicted her and Awan on four counts,
including conspiracy and conspiring to obtain home equity
loans for $165,000 and $120,000 from the Wright Patman
Congressional Federal Credit Union and then transferring
the money to Pakistan.
372
Imran Awan is considered such a flight risk that his
passport was taken, he was given a curfew and was fitted
with a tracking device. Meanwhile, Hina Alvi’s passport
was also publicly taken during the court hearing, but she
was officially listed as a “walk in,” a tracking device
wasn’t attached to her ankle, and the government had
asked the court to quash an outstanding warrant for her
arrest.
Quietly, this scandal unfolds bizarrely with nary a peep
from the media.
 Trump Summons Generals To War Room After Hawaii
Students Get "In The Event Of A Nuclear Attack" Email
By Tyler Durden
Oct 10, 2017 9:02 PM
Here is what not to do when addressing your student
population at a time when tensions with a nuclear-armed
adversary are running at fever pitch: send an email to the
student population with the subject title "in the event of a
nuclear attack." Unfortunately for hundreds of students at
the Aloha State school, that is precisely what they got in
the inboxes on Monday, and as the NY Daily News notes,
the message sent Cold War-style shivers down the spines
of those not accustomed to the "duck and cover" drills of
the 1950s, which in this day and age of pervasive
snowflakyness, would be pretty much everyone.
"In light of concerns about North Korea
missile tests, state and federal agencies
are providing information about nuclear
threats and what to do in the unlikely event
of a nuclear attack and radiation
emergency," says the email obtained by
Hawaii News Now.
The email also told students and faculty to be aware of
emergency sirens and to follow instructions on "sheltering
in place."
For Hawaii, which is far closer to North Korea than the US
West Coast, the threat of a nuclear attack by Pyongyang is
far more tangible. Furthermore, the American military has
recently practiced missile defense tests off of Hawaii,
because despite international efforts for a peaceful
solution, Kim and President Trump have continued to fire
insults at each other, with the commander-in-chief's jabs
suggesting that words could soon be replaced by "fire and
fury."
The ominous email also came as the president indicated
that diplomatic efforts have stalled.
Adding fuel to the fire, the Army Times reports that on
Monday Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said that
America’s relationship with North Korea remains a
diplomatic one, but he urged members of the military to be
ready for war in case the situation breaks down. Mattis
also used his keynote speech at the annual AUSA
conference in Washington, D.C., to thank allies who have
stood with the U.S. through the ages.
373
“It is right now a diplomatically, economic-
sanctions-buttressed effort to try and turn
North Korea off of this path,” Mattis told the
audience. “What does the future hold?
Neither you nor I can say.”
In contrast to some of the president’s tweets, Mattis’
comments represent a fairly regular baseline of the North
Korea situation — that diplomacy has the lead, with the
military ready to back it up.
“There is one thing the U.S. Army can do,
and that is you have to be ready to ensure
we have military options that our president
can deploy if needed,” Mattis said. “The
international community has spoken, but
that means the U.S. Army must stand
ready.“
“So if you’re ready, that’s your duty at this
point and time, and I know the Army will
always do its duty.”
Readiness for a major conflict was a theme throughout the
secretary’s speech, which burrowed into the Army’s
history and came with a series of book recommendations.
The big takeaway, Mattis emphasized, was that the Army
needs to be ready to go at a moment’s notice because if
diplomacy fails, the military must be deployable right
away.
“What we want to do is be so ready and be
very much aware that we fight the way we
come, that everybody in the world wants to
deal with Secretary Tillerson and the
Department of State, not the Department of
 Defense and the United States Army,”
Mattis told the audience to applause.
Fast forward to Tuesday afternoon, when Trump met in the
White House's Situation Room with his top defense
officials, including Mattis, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair
Gen. Dunfort for a briefing and discussion on options to
respond to any North Korean aggression or if
necessary to prevent Pyongyang from threatening the
United States and its allies with nuclear weapons, the
White House said in a statement.

It is not yet known what was discussed during today's
meeting, but comes after Trump warned the world is in the
"calm before the storm". Spokeswoman for the US State
Department Heather Nauert confirmed the Situation Room
meeting in a press briefing this afternoon.
She confirmed North Korea was one of
the topics along with "Turkey and Iran".
The Situation Room – officially named the John F.
Kennedy Conference Room – is used to deal with disasters
and conflicts at home and abroad. It is equipped with
secure communications equipment, and allows the US
President to command the nation’s military across the
globe.

Some have speculated the meeting could have been to

discuss responses to any looming North Korean missile
tests – with fears of a launch on October 18. The US
President has also cryptically said only "one thing" will
work against North Korea and has criticised the past 25-
years of US policy on the Kims.

374
 Empire Destroying Wars Are
Coming To America Under Trump – Part 1
Michael Krieger | Posted Tuesday
Oct 10, 2017 At 1:07 Pm

When I compare who Trump currently has advising him

and who he’s getting closer to, the future looks
increasingly ominous. This is especially true when it
comes to the Iran nuclear deal. Irrespective of what you
think of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense
Secretary James Mattis, these two look like a couple of the
most sane humans on earth compared to some of the others
Trump’s cozying up to. I alluded to this earlier today on
Twitter.

There are a variety of reasons Trump supporters voted the

way they did in November, but one clear message many
found attractive was the idea his administration would be
driven by an “America First” doctrine. America first meant
a lot of things to a lot of different people, running the
gamut from economic populism and immigration, to an
avoidance of barbaric and costly overseas wars. The
economic populism part was the biggest ruse from day
one, a betrayal which (as we had seen under Obama)
became undeniable as soon as he started appointing
The key event I believe will set the groundwork for a
lifelong swamp-dwelling billionaires and Goldman Sachs
coming disastrous confrontation with Iran, is Trump’s
partners to run his administration. Irrespective of who you
highly anticipated announcement that the Iran nuclear
elect, Wall Street runs the empire, as Trump proved once
agreement is against U.S. interests. This wouldn’t
again.
immediately end the deal or lead to new U.S. sanctions,
but it would represent the first step in heading in that
The coming massive pivot when it comes to destructive direction. A direction I believe will ultimately lead to US
wars abroad will take a little longer, but the writing’s been aggression against Iran in a similar fashion as Iraq, except
on the wall for months. I’ve published several posts on the this miscalculation will have even more disastrous
topic, with the most popular one titled, Prepare for consequences for the American empire.
Impact – This is the Beginning of the End for U.S.
Empire. Here’s an excerpt:
Before we go any further, it’s important to understand
what’s going on with regard to Iran and who now has
This is not the sort of thing you see in a Trump’s ear on foreign policy. Let’s start with some color
confident, brave, and civilized nation, from a recent New York Times article:
it’s the sort of stuff you’d expect to see
toward the end. It’s the stuff of craven
President Trump is expected to overrule
war-mongers, of dishonest cowards, of
his top national security advisers and
a totally deranged and very dangerous
decline to certify the Iran nuclear
media. The signs are everywhere;
agreement, according to people who have
imperial decline is set to
been briefed on the matter, a decision that
accelerate rapidly in the coming years…
would reopen a volatile political debate on
Expect more of all the above as the U.S. Iran but is likely to leave in place the
empire enters its most devastating landmark deal negotiated by the Obama
phase of collapse. Think about what it administration.
might mean for you and your family and
By declining to certify Iran’s compliance,
prepare accordingly.
Mr. Trump would essentially kick it to
375
 Congress to decide whether to reimpose
punitive economic sanctions. Even among
Republicans, there appears to be little
appetite to do that, at least for now.
If Trump isn’t listening to Tillerson or Mattis,
who is he listening to?
Congress will have to decide whether to
reimpose sanctions, which could sink the
deal, or use the prospect of that to force
Iran — and the other parties to the deal —
back to the negotiating table to make
changes in the agreement.
That is the approach favored by Senator
Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas,
who has emerged as a leading hard-
liner on Iran and is working closely with
the White House to devise its strategy.
On Thursday, Mr. Cotton met with Mr.
Trump to discuss Iran and other issues.
“Congress and the president, working
together, should lay out how the deal
must change and, if it doesn’t, the
consequences Iran will face,” Mr. Cotton
said in a speech on Tuesday at the
Council on Foreign Relations.
Reimposing sanctions, he said, would be a
“backward-looking step.”
The deal is also contentious inside the
administration. Secretary of State Rex W.
Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis
have both urged Mr. Trump not to back out
of it, in part because that would free Iran to
begin producing uranium and reprocessing
plutonium immediately, not after 13 years,
as is stipulated in the agreement.
But Mr. Trump, after twice certifying the
deal, has warned his aides that he would
not do so again. As a result, the
administration is looking for ways to
claim Iran is in violation of the “spirit” of
the accord, even if it has complied with
inspection criteria. The International
Atomic Energy Agency has said that Iran
was in compliance; when it has found
minor violations, they have been quickly
fixed.
Tom Cotton is as dangerous a war hawk as exists in
America today. In fact, the guy’s such a total lunatic, I’ve
been warning followers on Twitter about him for years.
Since most of you probably aren’t caught up on him,
definitely take a moment to read the following article
published by Alternet in 2015, 10 Horrifying Facts About
GOP Senator Tom Cotton.
We should probably go ahead and update this list as it
didn’t even mention how Cotton claims the U.S. has an
376
“under-incarceration” problem even though it has only 5%
of the world’s population, yet 25% of its prisoners. Seems
like a swell guy.
Jokes aside, Tom Cotton might actually be the most
dangerous person in the entire U.S. Senate (which is
saying a lot), so the fact he’s become so cozy with Trump
on foreign policy is extremely dangerous. Indeed, he’s
become so influential, Politico recently conducted an in-
depth interview with him where he made his positions
quite clear. Here are a few highlights:
This is a moment of truth for President
Trump’s national security team. He is
set to overrule both his secretaries of
State and Defense on the Iran nuclear
deal this week, declaring it no longer in
the U.S. “national interest” in explicit
contradiction to their public position.
And if they don’t like it, Senator Tom
Cotton says, then they should get out.
Cotton, who has personally advised Trump
in recent days about the new Iran strategy
he is set to release this week, stopped
short of saying either embattled Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson or Defense Secretary
Jim Mattis should in fact resign. But his
comments were nonetheless a striking
acknowledgement of the giant rift that has
opened up in the midst of the Trump team
over foreign policy.
The interview with Cotton took place before
this latest explosive twist, but even then it
was clear a new rift of significance was
opening up inside the Republican foreign
policy world. I spoke with Cotton Thursday,
the day after Tillerson’s unusual press
conference to deny press reports he was
considering quitting, and just a couple
hours after Cotton was summoned to
the White House for a private Oval
Office meeting with Trump to discuss
the Iran strategy. In the interview, Cotton
did not really try to paper over the rift or
offer the usual assurances that it would all
be papered over. Instead, when I asked
him directly whether there would be
resignations, Cotton did not say there
wouldn’t be, only that he did not believe
they were “imminent.”
Because Cotton today is one of the few
Senate Republicans who pay close
attention to foreign policy who is still out
there making Corker’s initial case for
engagement with Trump, and he insists it’s
paying off with substantive shifts in Trump’s
thinking on subjects as varied as how to
 deal with Russia and the continuation of I’m glad Nikki Haley came up, as she’s a certified grade-A
the war in Afghanistan. maniac and bloodthirsty neocon. While she’s dangerous
enough at the U.N., there’s talk that she could ultimately
Until now, Trump has shied away from
replace Tillerson as Secretary of State. Any combination of
outright confrontation with the experienced
Cotton and Haley moving into increased prominence
hands he’s hired to oversee his national
within the Trump circle of influence effectively guarantees
security policy. But the Iran deal now
seems to have finally forced a public more disastrous war in the Middle East.
rupture.
Cotton, who has repeatedly consulted
with Trump and other top White House
officials in recent days, appears to be
on the winning side, pushing Trump to
adopt the formula his administration
has now settled on of refusing to re-
certify the Iran deal to Congress but
holding off – for now – asking Congress
to blow it up by imposing new
sanctions. Iran “is on the president’s mind
right now, probably more than anything,”
Cotton says, and he says he believes
Trump will take the step of not certifying as
a way to send “a very important signal to
Congress and to our E.U. plus three
partners and to Iran that this president is
not going to abide by a disastrous nuclear
deal.”
The writing’s on the wall and you can feel free to ignore it
Cotton gave a lengthy address at the at your own risk. Beyond what I outlined in this piece, a
Council on Foreign Relations the same day key question is how will Trump sell the coming conflicts
as Mattis’ testimony taking the opposite to his base, and what will the ultimate implications of the
view – and a link to it was soon tweeted out coming wars be? I plan to address both those things in
approvingly by an Iran deal hardliner inside tomorrow’s post.
the administration, U.N. Ambassador Nikki
Haley.
.

377
 Wife Of Indicted IT Staffer Imran Awan Turns:
"My Husband Committed Fraud Along With Polygamy"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 10, 2017 10:15 PM
Much of what you thought you knew about the events
leading up to the arrest of Debbie Wasserman Schultz's
former, and now indicted, IT staffer Imran Awan just got
upended by a new revelation from the Daily Caller which
reported that his wife, Hina Alvi, filed a lawsuit against
her husband in Pakistan accusing him of fraud. If true, of
course, this would raise questions of whether Alvi might
seek, or already has, an immunity deal with the FBI in
return for additional evidence and/or testimony related to
her husband's misdeeds.
As you may recall, Alvi reportedly fled the U.S. to
Pakistan back in March and was temporarily detained by
U.S. Customs officials when they discovered $12,000 in
unreported cash in her luggage. While moving that
amount of cash is technically a felony, Alvi to was
ultimately allowed to leave the country, presumably to
never return.
That said, Alvi stirred rumors that she may have 'flipped'
last month when she struck a deal with the FBI to return to
the U.S. to appear at an arraignment...rumors that have
seemingly now been confirmed by the Daily Caller.
The indicted husband-and-wife team of former IT aides to
Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz sat directly
across from each other at the defendants’ table in federal
court Friday in Washington, D.C., but refused to look at
each other.
Even as they are co-defendants in a U.S. case, Imran
Awan’s own wife,
Hina Alvi, has become the latest person
to accuse him of fraud, filing papers
against him in Pakistani court on Sept.
13, records obtained by The Daily Caller
News Foundation show. Alvi said Awan
“threatened the complainant of dire
consequences, he also threatened to
harm the lives of family of the
complainant if she intervenes.”
Yet the couple entered and left the court
separately, have different lawyers, and
Awan’s lawyer told the judge that the
husband and wife are staying “in a one-
bedroom apartment and then also a
378
house.” The Pakistani legal papers say
they live in separate towns there, too.
“My husband Imran Awan son of
Muhammad Ashraf Awan, committed
fraud along with offence of polygamy,”
she charges in the papers.
After TheDCNF sent Gowen a copy of a Pakistani news
article mentioning the complaint and asked him for
comment, Gowen said “your story is totally false” and
“clearly part of your Trump agenda.” At TheDCNF’s
request, Wajid Ali Syed, a correspondent for Pakistan’s
Geo TV, then obtained Alvi’s filing in full from the
Pakistani court, and it is posted below.
Meanwhile, within the lawsuit, we also learn that Alvi
apparently only learned of Awan's second marriage over
the summer, a full two years after he was married in
August 2015.
Respondent has contract a second
marriage on 17-08-2015 with one Mst.
Sumaira Shehzadi alias Sumaira
Siddique… without obtaining prior
permission.
Rather he mentioned himself as bachelor in… marriage
certificate,
he falsely declared that he has no wife
or biological children at the time of
contracting second marriage.
This act of the respondent was shocking for the
complainant and she asked the respondent about his
second marriage on which he became furious while
admitting the same and said he has no need to obtain
permission from the complainant.
He further said furiously that the
complainant has no right or power to
restrain him from second and even third
marriage. Furthermore, the respondent
threatened the complainant of dire
consequences,
he also threatened to harm the lives of family of the
complainant if she intervenes into the affairs of the
respondent.
The Pakistani legal motion filed by Alvi states:
“A few months ago I got apprised of the
fact that my husband has contracted
second marriage secretly, fraudulently
and without my consent with Mst.
Sumaira Shehzadi Alias Sumaira
Siddique Daughter of Muhammad
379
Akram r/o Township, Lahore. The
second marriage of my husband is
illegal, unlawful and without
justification.”
“The court has recorded the testimonies of
the applicant and other witnesses,” the
Pakistani news outlet ARY reported.
And here is Alvi's statement as filed along with her lawsuit
in Pakistan:
Of course, if the name Sumaira Siddique sounds familiar at 16, 2015 into telephone threats. Siddique called them again
all it's because she is the woman that the Daily Caller on July 18, 2016
previously reported had filed charges against Awan for
domestic abuse and keeping her locked up in the house and said he kept her there “like a slave.”

"like a slave." Alvi’s lawsuit says he only married Siddique in August

2015.
Last month, TheDCNF published police reports showing
that two women who appeared to be in romantic So, what say you? Just another meaningless twist in a
relationships with Awan, but who were not Alvi, called the truly bizarre case or is Imran about to learn the meaning to
police on him in Virginia. One, Salam Chaudry, said she the saying
“just wanted to leave,” while the second was named
Sumaira Siddique.
"hell hath no fury like a woman
scorned?"
Criminal investigations involving Siddique and Awan in
Virginia took place on Oct. 16, 2015 into assault, and Nov.
.

380
 Bannon On GOP Establishment:
"We're Coming After All Of Them
And We're Going To Win"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 10, 2017 8:35 PM
Last night on the Sean Hannity show, Breitbart executive
chairman and former Trump chief strategist Steve Bannon
doubled down on his previously announced "war on the
Republican establishment" vowing to, among other
things, "challenge every Republican incumbent except
for Ted Cruz" in the upcoming mid-term election cycle.
100%. We are declaring war on the Republican
establishment that does not back the agenda that Donald
Trump ran on and the president of the United States, and
that's the agenda we know that backs the working men and
women...
Karl Rove, Steven Law, these guys should get the joke.
Their donors are coming to us because they are tired of
having their money burned up by trying to destroy people
like Judge Moore. It's a new game in town. We are going
to cut off the oxygen to Mitch McConnell. Mitch
McConnell's biggest asset is the money. We're going to
make it the biggest liability. We're going after these guys
tooth and nail.
They have to understand. There's a basic agenda that
President Trump rand on and won.
He carried states that Republicans
haven't carried in living memory --
Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania.
This agenda works. The American
people voted for it. It's their
responsibility.
There's a coalition coming together. It's
going to challenge every Republican
incumbent except for Ted Cruz.
381
Whether it's Utah, Wyoming, whether it's in Oregon.
These names are all going to come out in the next several
weeks.
In a fiery interview, Bannon also called on Senator Bob
Corker, who recently engaged in what has turned into a
surreal social media battle royale with President Trump, to
resign immediately after describing him as an "absolute
disgrace."
And I tell you what, Senator Corker is an absolute
disgrace. And I agree with Jason Miller, who was the
comms director on our campaign, I think one of the best
comms people around. Jason's on CNN, but he never talks
out of school... on CNN today, he called for Senator
Corker to resign. For the Governor of Tennessee to replace
him with [Congresswoman] Marsha Blackburn, a real
conservative.
If Bob Corker has any honor, any
decency, he should resign immediately.
He should not let those words stand, what
he said about the president of the United
States... By the way, he got out because
he saw what happened in Alabama. If he
wants to -- by the way, he should get
back in because he's going to get
crushed in a primary. He doesn't have
the guts to get in -- he doesn't have the
guts to get back in the race. He should
resign immediately.
Finally, here is Bannon on why the Obamacare repeal
failed...you guessed it, the GOP establishment.
Phil Rucker, yesterday in The Washington
Post, the buried lede was he said there's
only two or three Senators on Capitol
Hill that have President Trump's back.
When you want to talk about why there's no
repeal and replace, why there's no tax
cut, why there's no tax reform, why
there's no infrastructure bill, you saw it
right there. Corker, McConnell that
 entire clique of -- establishment States. And I tell you what, Senator Corker is an absolute
globalist clique on Capitol Hill have to disgrace.
go.
And here is the full clip for your viewing pleasure:
If we need any more proof about what they think, you
heard it tonight. It's an absolute disgrace...

They have total contempt for the

forgotten man. They have total
contempt for the base.

That's what you saw in Alabama. In Alabama when they

came in with Luther Strange, with $32 million to destroy
Judge Roy Moore you saw what the base thought of them.
The base totally rejected him. These people have no
respect for the working men and women in the United
.

382
 New York Times Reveals That
"Russia Ads" Were Mostly Made By Americans
By Tyler Durden
Oct 10, 2017 6:55 PM

The more details that emerge about Russia’s

“sophisticated” efforts to sway the November election in
favor of President Donald Trump, the more ridiculous Sen.
Mark Warner’s aggressive rhetoric sounds. But instead of
fading away, upcoming testimony from Facebook, Twitter
and maybe Google will likely keep the story on life
support for the foreseeable future, especially now that
Congress has succeeded in browbeating all three of the
tech giants mentioned above to admit that Russian agents
were buying advertising or otherwise disseminating
targeted propaganda on their platforms.

In its latest piece exploring the innerworkings of the
Russia-led Facebook campaign to “sow discord” in the
American electorate, the New York Times makes a
stunning revelation - though its implications are clearly
lost on America’s paper of record.
Almost all of the content promoted by the Russia-backed
Facebook groups was created by Americans, much of it by
conservative news websites like the Conservative Tribune.
To wit…
“A New York Times examination of
hundreds of those posts shows that one
of the most powerful weapons that
Russian agents used to reshape
American politics was the anger,
passion and misinformation that real
Americans were broadcasting across
social media platforms.
Still, that hasn’t stopped some academics from implying
that the impression on voters was much more impactful
than the facts would suggest.
“This is cultural hacking,” said Jonathan
Albright, research director at Columbia
University’s Tow Center for Digital
Journalism. “They are using systems
that were already set up by these
platforms to increase engagement.
They’re feeding outrage – and it’s easy
to do, because outrage and emotion is
how people share.”
As has been widely reported, groups that have been
identified by Facebook as being clandestinely created by
Russians reflected a range of political views. For example,
pages that carried pro-Black Lives Matter messages, or
content highlighting discrimination against the US’s
Muslim population

In other words, the Russia groups did little more than
amplify political messages that were already deafeningly
broadcast by the grassroots movement that emerged to
support President Donald Trump during his quest for the
Republican nomination, and later, the presidency.
One of those groups repurposed a video showing New
Yorkers standing idly by while a man in traditional
Muslim garb is harassed by an actor pretending to be a
bully.

Given the small dollar amounts spent on these campaigns,

it’s difficult to imagine that these pages had a measurable
impact on public opinion. In fact, most of the original
sources of content that was repurposed by the Russians
garnered far more views on their own platforms.

383
When the creator of the video found out it had been
“ripped” by one of the Russia-backed pages, he asked that
the video be removed – not because he disagreed with the
framing of the page’s messaging, but because he believed
the page was stealing his views.
Notably, that video – which appeared on the Russian
Facebook page called “United Muslims of America” –
received far fewer views than the creator’s original post.
“The video ends with Mr. Shah pointing out
New York’s hypocrisy: The city claims to be
a “melting pot,” but no one intervened while
he was getting harassed. Mr. Shah’s
original video, posted on YouTube in June
2016, was a viral hit that attracted more
than three million views. A week after he
posted, United Muslims of America copied
the video to its group page without the
original YouTube link, a process known as
ripping. There, Mr. Shah’s video became
the Russian page’s most popular post,
earning more than 150,00 interactions.
Lower in the story, the Times shared an anecdote about a
conservative blogger who inadvertently shared a “fake
.
384
news” story published by one of the Russian pages. When
confronted by the Times, the blogger scoffed at the paper’s
suggestion that he played a role in a nefarious propaganda
campaign.
“I usually publish an article several
times a week, to keep driving the
narrative,” Mr. Swanson said in an
interview. He was not bothered, he said, by
becoming an unwitting cog in the Russian
propaganda machine. “You know we do
the same damn thing over there,” Mr.
Swanson said. “What do you think –
we’re saints?”
In other words, many Americans are seeing right through
Congress and the mainstream media’s characterization of
“Russian interference” as a sophisticated propaganda
campaign targeted at swing state voters.
Given the fact that the overhyped Russia ads are
essentially crudely crafted memes that had already been
widely disseminated on social media, we wonder if Sen.
Mark Warner and Rep Adam Schiff still plan to release the
ads to the public.
 Trump And Mattis Team Up
To Refute NBC Nuke Report, Blast 'Disgusting' Press
By Brooke Singman, Fox News
October 11, 2017
President Trump and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis on
Wednesday publicly refuted an NBC News report that
claimed the commander-in-chief wanted to drastically
increase the U.S. nuclear arsenal, with Trump calling the
press "disgusting."
On the sidelines of a meeting in the Oval Office with
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump slammed
the NBC report that said he sought a “nearly tenfold
increase” in the nuclear arsenal during a summer meeting.
“Frankly, it’s disgusting the press is able to
write whatever it wants to write and people
should look into it,” Trump told reporters. “I
never discussed increasing [the nuclear
arsenal]. That is fake news by NBC, which
gives a lot of fake news recently.”
Trump added that he only wants “modernization” and
“rehabilitation” of the stockpile.
“It’s got to be in tip-top shape,” Trump said.
“I know the capability we have, and it is
awesome. It is massive.”
Trump continued to slam the press for allegedly making up
sources.
“There are no sources,” he claimed.
Mattis issued a brief statement shortly afterward saying:
385
"Recent reports that the President called
for an increase in the U.S. nuclear arsenal
are absolutely false. This kind of erroneous
reporting is irresponsible."
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the NBC
report was "erroneous" and "irresponsible."
(AP)
Earlier Wednesday, Trump openly threatened to go after
the licenses of "NBC and the Networks," as he ratched up
his complaints about "Fake News" -- apparently in
response to the nuclear arsenal report.
“With all of the Fake News coming out of
NBC and the Networks, at what point is it
appropriate to challenge their License? Bad
for country!” Trump tweeted.
He tweeted earlier:
“Fake @NBCNews made up a story that I
wanted a ‘tenfold’ increase in our U.S.
nuclear arsenal. Pure fiction, made up to
demean. NBC=CNN!”
The president's comments reportedly came during a
gathering with national security leaders. NBC reported that
Trump’s comments were in response to a briefing slide
that was presented showing a decrease in U.S. nuclear
weapons since the late 1960s.
“Trump indicated he wanted a bigger
stockpile, not the bottom position on that
downward-sloping curve,” NBC News
reported.
Officials reportedly were surprised by Trump’s suggestion,
but said no expansion in the nuclear arsenal was planned.
A representative for NBC News did not immediately
return a request for comment Wednesday, though MSNBC
host Ali Velshi tweeted that the network "stands by our
reporting."
The president's and the government's power in this area
could be limited anyway. According to the FCC’s own
guidelines, the commission only licenses individual
broadcast stations, not entire “TV or radio networks (such
as CBS, NBC, ABC or Fox).”
386
This isn’t the first time the president has blasted NBC
News' reporting. Just last week, the network reported on
rifts between the president and Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson, claiming Tillerson considered resigning over the
summer and once called the president a “moron.”
Both Trump and Tillerson disputed the report, which had
claimed Vice President Pence even intervened to assuage
Tillerson's concerns.
“My commitment to the success of our
president and our country is as strong as it
was the day I accepted his offer to serve as
secretary of state…There is much to be
done, and we’re just getting started,”
Tillerson said last week. “The vice
president has never had to persuade me to
remain as secretary of state because I
have never considered leaving this post.”
Trump blasted the report as “Fake News.”
Fox News' Lucas Tomlinson contributed to this report.
 NYT Video Editor Caught Bragging
About Slanting Trump Coverage (VIDEO)
Published Time: 11 Oct, 2017 01:46 Edited Time: 11 Oct, 2017 14:04
© Shannon Stapleton / Reuters
A new exposé by Project Veritas has revealed a video
editor for the New York Times lying about his relationship
with former FBI director James Comey, while also
claiming to slant stories against President Donald Trump
on the front page.
James O’Keefe, the founder of Project Veritas released
hidden camera footage of several conversations with Nick
Dudich, the audience strategy editor for NYT Video, as
part of his “American Pravda” video series, which began
with undercover recordings of CNN employees.
In the video, Dudich calls himself the “gatekeeper” for all
the New York Times videos posted online, saying that his
“imprint is on every video we do."
“Any video that goes on Facebook,
YouTube, Instagram – I have a hand in
that,” Dudich said.
When talking journalistic ethics, Dudich is captured
sarcastically making air quotes while he said that he will
387
“be objective” working for the Times before quickly
admitting:
"no I'm not. That's why I'm there.”
According to the New York Times ethical handbook,
employees
“must do nothing that might raise questions
about their professional neutrality or that of
The Times."
“As a journalist, I'm not able to give any
money to any political organization. I’m not
able to volunteer for any political
organization. I'm not able to work for any
nonprofit or charity. Like, there’s a lot of
guidelines and ethics,” Dudich said.
However, before joining the Times, Dudich worked social
media on the 2012 presidential campaign of former
President Barack Obama and the 2016 presidential
campaign of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
When asked how he was able to be politically active and
still work as a journalist, Dudich said that he had to leave
his job at ABC to take a job where he “wasn't deemed a
journalist anymore” in order to work for the Clinton
campaign.
Dudich said he made the sacrifice in order to work against
Trump, who he said was a “threat.”

“I saw the threat and I was like, I want to do

something,” Dudich said. “Trump was a
threat and still is a threat, right?”
“Trump is a threat,” the interviewer
interjects. “He’s a threat.”
“Oh, he’s a threat to everything,” Dudich
added.

At one point, Dudich explains his idea to make Trump

resign or leave office by going after his businesses and his

“dumb f**k of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric.”

"Target that. Get people to boycott going to
his hotels,” Dudich said. “If you can ruin the
Trump brand and you put pressure on his
business and you start investigating his
business and you start shutting it down, or
they're hacking or other things. He cares
about his business more than he cares “I used to be an Anti-Fa punk once upon a
about being President. He would resign. Or time,” Dudich said. “I had fun. They’d start
he'd lash out and do something incredibly s**t, I’m like, I get to hit you. I’m so
illegal, which he would have to." excited.”

For the second half of the video, Dudich talks about his
personal relationship with former FBI Director James
Comey, who he claimed was his godfather.
Dudich said he was worried about the conflict of interest
and didn’t tell anyone at the Times about his relationship
with Comey.
“Well the Comey hearing, I should have
recused myself, but I’m not ever telling
anybody there that I have a tie with that or
else I don’t know if they can keep me on,”
Dudich said.
“Staff members may not write about people
to whom they are related by blood or
marriage or with whom they have close
personal relationships, or edit material
about such people or make news
judgments about them,” according to the
New York Times ethical handbook.
Dudich indicated that he was aware of these rules,
implying that he couldn't talk with Comey because he
would risk losing his job.
Dudich also claimed to be affiliated with the violent leftist
extremist group Antifa and said he punched Nazis.
When asked if he had told ‘godfather’ Comey about being
a member of Antifa, Dudich was reluctant to answer.
“I cannot confirm or deny that question
because there’s a follow up to that question
that I don’t want you to ask,” Dudich said.
“Which is?” the girl behind the camera
asks.
“Did the FBI ask me to do that stuff?”
Dudich responded.
“Oh, and what did you say?” she asks.
“Why do you think I did it?” Dudich
responded.
Dudich said that he was asked to join Antifa in order to
gather intelligence and see what their agenda was and if
they were a threat.
Project Veritas sent their reporters to interview Dudich’s
family, and they denied that Comey was Dudich’s
godfather.
“Yeah, I don’t know why… he’s not James
Comey’s godson, I don’t even know James
Comey,” Dudich’s father, Michael, told the
undercover reporters.

388
When Project Veritas told Dudich they interviewed his
father, he admitted that Comey was not his godfather and
said that he made the lie because it was “a good story.”
"The fact remains that Nick Dudich lies and
he's a gatekeeper at the New York Times,”
O'Keefe said. "And that fact should be
worrisome to the bosses at the paper of
record. Who else are they letting spread
misinformation in their name?”
“recent hire in a junior position,” adding that
he violated “ethical standards and
misrepresented his role.”
“In his role at The Times, he was
responsible for posting already published
video on other platforms and was never
involved in the creation or editing of Times
videos,” Ha said in a statement. “We are
reviewing the situation now.”

O'Keefe said that there will be more videos on the New

York Times coming out soon.

O'Keefe, who founded Project Veritas in 2010 in an effort

to investigate “corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste,
fraud and other misconduct,” has released a number of
controversial undercover videos, including those that have
been allegedly selectively edited to falsely portray people.

In response to the video, a New York Times spokeswoman

Danielle Rhoades Ha said that Dudich was a
.

389
 Trump Wins Again: Supreme Court
Tosses Lower Court’s Ruling Against His Travel Ban
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 11, 2017
The language of the law is very plain: Presidents
have exclusive rights to ban anyone from anywhere for any
reason from coming into the United States
(National Sentinel) Executive Power: Either lower federal
courts throughout the land are filled with jurists who are
either constitutionally ignorant or politically motivated and
frankly, we believe it is the latter.
Because that’s the only explanation for a series of rulings
blocking President Donald J. Trump’s ban on travel to the
U.S. from some terrorism-infested countries, given the
very plain language in federal law and the president’s
constitutional authority to implement foreign and national
security policy.
As reported by the Daily Wire:
So much winning.
President Trump won yet another battle
when the Supreme Court late Tuesday
tossed out an appeals court ruling that
struck down his previous temporary travel
ban targeting eight Muslim-majority nations
that are known terrorist hotbeds.
Even though the ban had already expired
(and been replaced by a new one), the
ruling was a moral victory signifying that
Trump and his administration had been
within the law and the Constitution when
taking action to protect America.
.
390
“In a one-page order, the court acted in one
of two cases pending before the nine
justices over Trump’s travel ban, a case
from Maryland brought by the American
Civil Liberties Union, which sued to stop
the ban contained in a March executive
order,” Reuters reported.
Last month, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy
issued a temporary order blocking a 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals decision that would have limited Trump’s travel
ban.
Kennedy’s ruling allows the Trump administration “to
exclude most refugees from entering the United States
while the Supreme Court considers challenges to its
revised travel ban,” The New York Times reported.
The language of the law is very plain: Presidents
have exclusive rights to ban anyone from anywhere
for any reason from coming into the United States.
What does the relevant statute say? Section 212(f) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 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
impose on the entry of aliens any
restrictions he may deem to be
appropriate [emphasis added].”
That’s about as plain as it gets.
So much winning.
 Defense Secretary James Mattis Disputes
NBC Report Claiming Trump Wanted More Nukes
By Kristina Wong
11 Oct 2017
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on
Wednesday disputed a report by NBC
News that President Trump at a
Pentagon meeting in July said he
wanted to increase the nuclear arsenal
by tenfold.
The statement was a rare move for Mattis, who does not
often publicly comment on news reports.
“Recent reports that the President called
for an increase in the U.S. nuclear arsenal
are absolutely false. This kind of erroneous
reporting is irresponsible,” he said.
President Trump also disputed the report during remarks
before a bilateral meeting at the White House with
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
“No, I never discussed increasing it. I want
it in perfect shape. That was just fake news
by NBC, which gives a lot of fake news,
lately,” Trump said when asked about the
report.
In one of his first acts as president, Trump ordered Mattis
to review the nuclear force, and Mattis this year has toured
391
different military bases associated with the elements of the
nuclear force referred to as the “triad”: land-based
missiles, submarines, and bombers.
The review is still ongoing, but Trump said he did not
want more weapons.
“I want to have [an] absolutely perfectly
maintained — which we are in the process
of doing — nuclear force,” he said.
He said he knew that it was “totally
unnecessary” to have “ten times” more
nuclear weapons, which is what the report
claimed.
“We won’t need an increase,” he said. “But
I want modernization and I want total
rehabilitation. It’s got to be in tip-top
shape.”
The report by NBC News comes after it recently reported
that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called Trump a
“moron” at that same July Pentagon meeting. Tillerson
held a rare press conference to push back against that
report.
Asked if there should be limits on what the press writes,
Trump said,
“No, the press should speak more
honestly.”
“I mean, I’ve seen tremendously dishonest
press,” he said. “And so when they make
up stories like that, that’s just made up.
And the generals will tell you that. And then
they have their sources that don’t exist. In
my opinion, they don’t exist. They make up
the sources. There are no sources.”
NBC News’s latest report was sourced to “three officials
who were in the room” at the meeting.
 O'Keefe Strikes Again, Catches NYT Editors
On Hidden Camera: "Targeting Trump's Businesses,
His Dumb F**K Of A Son"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 11, 2017 5:15 AM

Update: The New York Times has just responded to the

latest Project Veritas bombshell by dismissing the target of
the undercover video, Nick Dudich, as a "recent hire" in a
"junior position" who "misrepresented his role." The NYT
confirmed that it looked as though he had "violated our
ethical standards" and said they're "reviewing the
situation."
Here is the full statement from NYT spokeswoman,
Danielle Rhoades Ha:
Based on what we’ve seen in the Project
Veritas video, it appears that a recent hire
in a junior position violated our ethical
standards and misrepresented his role.
In his role at The Times, he was
responsible for posting already published
video on other platforms and was never
involved in the creation or editing of Times
videos. We are reviewing the situation
now.
All of which sounds like Dudich is about
to find himself without a job...maybe it's
time to do another tour of duty with Antifa?
Dudich considers himself an important player at the New
York Times, telling the Project Veritas Journalist
"my voice is on... my imprint is on every
video we do."
Dudich goes on to explain what he might do to target
President Trump:
"I'd target his businesses, his dumb
fuck of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric...
"Target that. Get people to boycott going to
his hotels. Boycott... So a lot of the Trump
brands, if you can ruin the Trump brand
and you put pressure on his business and
you start investigating his business and you
start shutting it down, or they're hacking or
other things.
He cares about his business more than
he cares about being President. He
would resign. Or he'd lash out and do
something incredibly illegal, which he
would have to."

*** When the undercover journalist asks

Dudich if he could make sure that the anti-
Trump stories make it to the front, he
In the latest of a series of undercover operations targeting
replied, "Oh, we always do."
mainstream media bias, James O'Keefe has just dropped a
new undercover video which takes direct aim at the New
York Times' Audience Strategy Editor, Nick Dudich,

who admits repeatedly to promoting

content that intentionally seeks to,
among other things, damage President
Trump's businesses as a means
towards forcing his resignation.

Here is a brief intro from Project Veritas:

While talking about being objective at the Times, Dudich To our complete 'shock', O'Keefe also learned the Dudich
replies candidly, worked for Hillary's 2016 presidential campaign and
Obama's campaign in both 2008 and 2012...
"No I'm not, that's why I'm here."

392
 In 2016, he was recruited to work for the
Clinton campaign:
"So I have that background, so when
Clinton in 2016... they needed a
volunteer strategist to do video... well,
they needed someone to help them do
video, and how to make it heartfelt, for
Clinton."
He even had to quit his job in journalism in
order to work for the Clinton campaign: "I
had to leave my job at Fusion ABC to
then take a job at Upworthy where I
wasn't deemed a journalist anymore to
be able to work for the Clinton
campaign."
Dudich explains how his activism motivated him to re-
engage in the news business:
"Like, after the Clinton campaign, I'm like,
no I need to get back into news and keep
doing shit because, like, this isn't going to
change."
Bizarrely, Dudich also claims to have joined the Antifa
movement as an undercover agent for the FBI...a request
which he originally said came from his godfather, James
Comey, even though he subsequently retracted that
statement.
Nicholas Dudich also told the undercover
journalist bizarre stories about his
.
393
personal connection to the FBI and his
previous excitement as part of Anti-Fa.
"Yeah, I used to be an Anti-Fa punk
once upon a time." he told the undercover
journalist. "So, I had fun. They'd start
s**t, I'm like, I get to hit you. I'm so
excited."
He also claims that James Comey, former Director of the
FBI, asked him to join Anti-Fa:
"I joined that stuff for them [the FBI]. I
was an asset... So it was intelligence
gathering, seeing if they were [sic], what
their agenda was, whether they're a
threat or not."
"How'd you meet Comey?" asked the
Project Veritas journalist. "He's my
godfather," Dudich explained. "My dad
and mom knew him and his wife for a really
long time."
"Well the Comey hearing, I should have
recused myself, but I'm not ever telling
anybody there [at the Times] that I have
a tie with that or else I don't know if they
can keep me on."
With that intro, here is the complete video:
Why do we feel like it's Dudich whose resignation is
imminent as opposed to Trump's?
 H.R. McMaster Warns: Leaking
National Security Info To Media Is ‘Treasonous’
By Edwin Mora
11 Oct 2017
WASHINGTON, DC — American federal
employees who disclose sensitive or
classified national security information
to the media without authorization are
guilty of a “treasonous” act, warns
National Security Adviser H.R.
McMaster, as the Trump administration
grapples with an unprecedented wave of
national security leaks that have
surfaced since he took office.
During a Tuesday event at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS) to mark the 70th anniversary
of the National Security Council, McMaster also noted that
government employees must strike a balance between
transparency — the American people’s right to know —
and protecting national security information secrets to
ensure the safety of the United States.
McMaster told the CSIS audience:
The real dilemma is that the more people
you can bring in, the more expertise you
can bring in, and bring to bear on a
problem, the better because it gives you
different perspectives, it allows you to
understand better the tools that you can
bring to bear to help solve problems. But in
recent years in particular, the problem with
394
leaks has become a real challenge to
national security, and so I think what’s very
important is that everyone who’s involved
in these policy discussions understand the
sacred trust that is placed in them, and
they realize that speaking to the media
about government deliberations is
treasonous when it involves national
security.
Various U.S. officials, including McMaster, often warn
that record number of leaks under Trump’s tenure have
undermined America’s national security and effectiveness
to deal with threats, but that has not stopped the
unauthorized disclosures that also serve as a source of
information for enemies seeking to attack the United States
and its interests abroad.
In a memo obtained by BuzzFeed in September, McMaster
proclaimed:
The unauthorized disclosure of classified
information or controlled unclassified
United States Government information
causes harm to our Nation and shakes the
confidence of the American people. In this
era of unprecedented unauthorized
disclosures, it is important to take time to
review with your workforce their roles and
responsibilities in safeguarding United
States Government information.
In the latest World Wide Threat Assessment, the U.S.
intelligence community cautioned that leaks would remain
a
“significant threat” for President Trump “in
2017 and beyond.”
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Daniel Coats told
lawmakers in May:
Trusted insiders who disclose sensitive or
classified US Government information
without authorization will remain a
 significant threat in 2017 and beyond. The
sophistication and availability of information
technology that increases the scope and
impact of unauthorized disclosures
exacerbate this threat.
According to a Senate panel, unauthorized leaks of
national security information have already reached a
historic level this year.
The end of the first four months of the Trump presidency,
with the number of leaks at 62, marked an estimated
seven-fold increase from the disclosures under President
George W. Bush (nine) and Barack Obama (eight) during
the same period, reported the Senate Homeland Security
and Government Affairs Committee.
The Senate panel argued the U.S. is facing
“an unprecedented wave” of leaks, noting,
“Under President Trump, leaks are flowing
at the rate of one a day.”
Mired in a seemingly unstopping drip of leaks that could
sabotage some of the president’s policies, the Trump
administration, namely U.S. Attorney General Jeff
Sessions, has already begun cracking down on leakers who
may ultimately face criminal charges.
Sessions vowed to aggressively target both leakers and
journalists in August, a move that has triggered criticism
from First Amendment advocates who argue that reporters
are protected.
395
The AG indicated “that his department has
more than tripled the number of active
leaks investigations compared to the
number pending when President Barack
Obama left office. He said the department
is reviewing guidelines related to
subpoenas of journalists,” revealed the
Associated Press (AP).
“This nation must end the culture of leaks.
We will investigate and seek to bring
criminals to justice. We will not allow rogue
anonymous sources with security
clearances to sell out our country any
longer,” declared the U.S. attorney general,
adding, “No government can be effective
when its leaders cannot discuss sensitive
matters in confidence or to talk freely in
confidence with foreign leaders.”
While journalists argue that the disclosure of classified
information can expose malfeasance, not all reporters have
good intentions in mind.
“Not all leakers are heroic. Far from it.
Different sources have different agendas,
and it’s often difficult to ascertain exactly
what those agendas are,” acknowledged
CNN. “Some leakers may be motivated by
envy, one-upmanship or revenge.”
 Texas Dem Introduces
Articles Of Impeachment, But Doesn't Force Vote
By Bridget Johnson
October 11, 2017
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) calls for the impeachment of President
Trump at his Houston district office on May 15, 2017. (Godofredo A.
Vasquez/Houston Chronicle via AP)
WASHINGTON -- Wearing an America flag tie, a Texas
Democrat today introduced articles of impeachment
against President Trump
"on behalf of the many who have
concluded that enough is enough."
Rep. Al Green said on the House floor that the president
incites
"hate, bigotry, and insidious discrimination"
while introducing the articles that charge
Trump "is fueling an alt-right hate
machine."
"I’m not doing it on behalf of Republicans,
generally speaking, or Democrats,
generally speaking,” he said. "The people
that I reference are Americans."
Green proceeded with his
"intent to raise a question of privilege of the
House... resolved that Donald J. Trump,
president of the United States of America,
has undermined the integrity of his office
with impunity and has brought disrepute on
the presidency with immunity, has betrayed
trust as president to the manifest injury of
the American people, and is unfit to be
president."
396
The congressman accused the president of acting
inappropriately under the
"inane pretext of dispensing political
correctness" to incite "white supremacy,
sexism, bigotry, hated, xenophobia, race-
baiting and racism by demeaning,
defaming, disrespecting, and disparaging
women and certain minorities."
"In so doing, Donald John Trump, president
of the United States of America, has fueled
and is fueling an alt-right hate machine and
its worldwide covert sympathizers,
engendering racial antipathy, LGBTQ
enmity, religious anxiety, stealthy sexism
and dreadful xenophobia perfidiously
causing immediate injury to American
society," Green said.
As evidence, the Texas Dem referred to Trump calling
NFL players who protest racism "son of a bitch" and
tweeting that Puerto Ricans "want everything done for
them"; he noted that Trump didn't make similar statements
about hurricane victims in Texas or Florida. Green said
Trump "disrespected" Islam through his travel ban
targeting a handful of Muslim-majority countries, and
showed bigotry by announcing transgender service
members would no longer be welcome in the military.
Green stopped short of filing a privileged motion, which
under House rules regardless of party leadership would
have forced a vote within a few days, telling Politico the
situation is "very dynamic" but should eventually come up
for a vote after fellow Dems have had time to review the
text.
In a statement submitted for the congressional record,
Green declared,
“I love my country, I salute my flag. I say
the Pledge of Allegiance and I believe in
liberty and justice for all as declared in the
pledge. I also believe that to acquire liberty
and justice for all, some must stand alone."
Few Democrats have publicly supported attempting to
impeach Trump at this point -- House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) says she does not support it -- and
Dem leaders reportedly urged Green to back off.
“I do so knowing that the public has been
led to believe that a president must commit
.
397
a crime to be impeached, which is not true.
If any president persisted with the lie that
'Hitler was right,' he would be, and should
be, impeached not for a crime, but for
betraying his trust as president," his
statement continued. “I do so knowing that
many, of my contemporaries will criticize
my actions. Some will castigate me, others
may desire to do something more dastardly
with hopes of suppressing all embers of
courage that might inflame others to speak
truth to power or the powerful."
“Ultimately, to again quote Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr., I will do that which is
'neither safe, nor politic, nor popular.' I will
do that which is right and let others do what
they may and allow history to judge us all.”
 Trump Threatens To Target Licenses
Of 'NBC And The Networks' After Nuclear Arsenal Report
By Brooke Singman, Fox News
October 12, 2017

Later in the day Wednesday, Trump followed up with

another tweet:

President Trump openly threatened Wednesday to go after

“Network news has become so partisan,
the licenses of "NBC and the Networks," as he ratcheted
distorted and fake that licenses must be
up his complaints about "Fake News."
challenged and, if appropriate, revoked.
Not fair to public!”
“With all of the Fake News coming out of
NBC and the Networks, at what point is it
appropriate to challenge their License? Bad
for country!” Trump tweeted.

The president's comments reportedly came during a

gathering with national security leaders. NBC reported that
Trump’s comments were in response to a briefing slide
that was presented showing a decrease in U.S. nuclear
This was after he challenged the accuracy of an NBC
weapons since the late 1960s.
News report that said he sought a “nearly tenfold increase”
in the nuclear arsenal during a summer meeting.
“Trump indicated he wanted a bigger
stockpile, not the bottom position on that
“Fake @NBCNews made up a story that I
downward-sloping curve,” NBC News
wanted a ‘tenfold’ increase in our U.S.
reported.
nuclear arsenal. Pure fiction, made up to
demean. NBC=CNN!” Trump tweeted
Wednesday. Officials reportedly were surprised by Trump’s suggestion,
but said no expansion in the nuclear arsenal was planned.

398
 This isn’t the first time the president has blasted NBC
News' reporting. Just last week, the network reported on
rifts between the president and Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson, claiming Tillerson considered resigning over the
summer and once called the president a “moron.”

Both Trump and Tillerson disputed the report, which had

claimed Vice President Pence even intervened to assuage
Tillerson's concerns.
A representative for NBC News did not immediately return
a request for comment Wednesday, though MSNBC host “My commitment to the success of our
Ali Velshi tweeted that the network "stands by our president and our country is as strong as it
was the day I accepted his offer to serve as
reporting."
secretary of state…There is much to be
done, and we’re just getting started,”
The president's and the government's power in this area Tillerson said last week. “The vice
could be limited anyway. According to the FCC’s own president has never had to persuade me to
guidelines, the commission only licenses individual remain as secretary of state because I
broadcast stations, not entire “TV or radio networks (such have never considered leaving this post.”
as CBS, NBC, ABC or Fox).”
Trump blasted the report as “Fake News.”
.

399
 Largest Democrat Donor
Steyer Demands Trump Impeachment
By Aly Nielsen
October 12, 2017 2:14 PM EDT
Liberal climate activist Tom Steyer -- the largest Democrat
donor -- wants impeaching President Donald Trump to be
a “defining issue” during the 2018 election.
This week, Steyer sent a letter demanding Congressional
Democrats pledge support to impeaching Trump, The New
York Times reported Oct. 11, 2017. The letter
“represents a significant boost to efforts on
the left to make impeachment a
mainstream political consideration.”
Steyer previously accused Trump of a “traitorous act of
war” when he withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate
Agreement in May, 2017. He also rebranded his Political
Action Committee to fund liberal policies beyond climate
change.
The Times also suggested Steyer may be “considering a
run for Senate.”
Steyer was the largest spender in the 2016 election,
donating more than $91 million to Democrat candidates
and PACs.
Because of that spending, Steyer “may not
be an easy figure for Democrats to ignore,”
The Times pointed out.
Democrats have already set a precedent of following
Steyer. In July, 2016, The Democratic Party Platform
.
400
absorbed Steyer’s personal goal to destroy the U.S. coal
powered energy industry by 2050.
Steyer has long used his deep pockets to project his own
agenda on politicians. He was the largest donor during the
2014 election as well, where he spent more than $74
million attacking the Koch brothers and trying to make
climate change a “top-tier” campaign issue, The Guardian
found.
In the past year, Steyer has signaled he may be expanding
his advocacy to include more left-wing policies than just
climate change. He told Politico in June 2017 he planned
to spend $7.5 million to organize young voters leading up
to the 2018 midterm elections.
Steyer’s NextGen Climate PAC was also rebranded as
NextGen America sometime after mid-July 2017. The
name change signaled a broader focus on liberal agenda
items, and even the website now advertises a “broader plan
of resistance.”
Whereas NextGen Climate had “worked to
prevent damage to our climate by
transitioning to a clean energy economy,”
NextGen America is intends to “step up the
fight for immigration rights, affordable
health care, and core American values.”
Despite his previous environmental lip service, Steyer’s
hedge fund, Farallon Capital Management, profited from
coal investments up until 2014. In a September, 2015,
interview, Steyer tried to claim he first became passionate
about climate change between 2002 and 2004 -- 10 years
before his company divested.
In 2015, Steyer was listed as the “manager” of a solar
power company which could benefit from the climate
lobbying he does. The company, Kilowatt Financial, was
founded in 2011 -- the same year Steyer began directly
attacking the coal industry.
 Consumer Sentiment In U.S.
Unexpectedly Surges To 13-Year High
By Agnel Philip
October 13, 2017, 9:00 AM CDT
U.S. consumer sentiment unexpectedly surged to a 13-year
high as Americans’ perceptions of the economy and their
own finances rebounded following several major
hurricanes, a University of Michigan survey showed
Friday.
Key Takeaways
The jump in sentiment, which was greater than any analyst
had projected, may reflect several trends: falling gasoline
prices following a hurricane-related spike; repeated record
highs for the stock market; a 16-year low in
unemployment; and post-storm recovery efforts driving a
rebound in economic growth.
The advance in the main gauge spanned age and income
subgroups as well as partisan views, according to the
report. Almost six out of every 10 consumers thought the
economy had recently improved in early October, the
university said.
Not all measures in the survey showed big gains: the share
of consumers reporting improved finances held steady at
about half, while the proportion expecting gains in their
financial situation fell slightly to 40 percent.
401
Official’s Views
“While the early October surge indicates
greater optimism about the future course of
the economy, it also reflects an
unmistakable sense among consumers that
economic prospects are now about as
good as could be expected,” Richard
Curtin, director of the University of
Michigan consumer survey, said in a
statement. “Indeed, nothing in the latest
survey indicates that consumers anticipate
an economic downturn anytime soon --
which contrarians may consider a clear
warning sign of trouble ahead.”
Other Details
 83 percent of respondents saw buying conditions for
household durables as favorable, most in more than a
decade; positive vehicle-buying attitudes at 75 percent,
highest since 2004
 Consumers saw inflation rate in the next year at 2.3
percent after 2.7 percent the prior month
 Inflation rate over next five to 10 years seen at 2.4
percent after 2.5 percent in September
 The NSA Has All Of Clinton’s “Lost” Emails… But James
Comey Rejected Them In Order To Obstruct Justice
By Ethan Huff
Wednesday, September 13, 2017
If President Trump’s recent tweets are any indication,
former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director
James Comey isn’t going to be let off the hook for
obstructing justice in his handling of the Hillary Clinton
email scandal. And more than likely neither will Hillary
Clinton herself, as it has now been revealed that the
National Security Agency (NSA) has in its possession all
33,000 of Clinton’s “lost” emails, which are just waiting to
be exposed.
The spy agency had reportedly attempted to hand these
emails over to Comey many months back as part of his so-
called investigation into the critical matter. But Comey
outright rejected them before proceeding to deny a
recommendation that Clinton be prosecuted for her alleged
crimes – a move that, in and of itself, has become a
scandal all on its own.
At almost every turn, Comey made sure to avoid
implicating Clinton in any wrongdoing. Not only did he
reject the emails from the NSA, but he also outright skirted
a proper investigation into Clinton’s situation when he was
caught writing up a decision not to refer her for
prosecution before interviewing several key witnesses.
Multiple reports issued by the Senate Judiciary Committee
in recent weeks reveal that Comey failed to conduct a
proper investigation, even after being offered evidence. He
also lied when he claimed that the FBI had unanimously
decided not to pursue Clinton’s prosecution.
“Conclusion first, fact-gathering second – that’s no way to
run an investigation,” the committee members wrote in
their assessment of Comey’s malfeasance. “The FBI
402
should be held to a higher standard than that, especially in
a matter of such great public interest and controversy.”
President Trump says system that exonerating Clinton
prematurely was ‘rigged’
President Trump decided to chime in on the matter in early
September, once again condemning Comey for his blatant
obstruction of justice. Some had suspected that perhaps the
administration might let Comey off the hook, but now that
the fake Trump-Russia probe has all but completely lost
steam, the President seems to be indicating that justice has
yet to be served.
“Wow, looks like James Comey exonerated Hillary
Clinton long before the investigation was over…and so
much more. A rigged system!” Trump tweeted at 7:56 a.m.
on September 1.
Nearly two weeks later on September 12, the White House
indicated that the Department of Justice (DoJ) “should
certainly look at” prosecuting James Comey, further
suggesting that the matter is far from over. Speaking on
behalf of the administration, White House press secretary
Sarah Sanders argued that Comey’s actions while FBI
director “were improper and likely could have been
illegal.”
She further added that Comey “politicized an investigation
by signaling he would exonerate Hillary Clinton before he
ever interviewed her or other key witnesses,” adding that
“by his own admission, [Comey] leaked privileged
government information.”
Sanders was referring here to Comey’s admission back in
June during a congressional hearing that he authorized a
memo about his conversations with the President to be
leaked to The New York Times. This act in and of itself is
questionable in terms of its legality, not to mention
Comey’s other actions that suggest he’s more concerned
with protecting Hillary Clinton and harming President
Trump than seeking any sort of justice.
It’s now up to Attorney General Jeff Sessions to either take
up the matter or face potential removal from his post, as
was suggested back in July. Since becoming AG, Sessions
has repeatedly commented about his personal hatred of of the previous administration.
cannabis, but has done little to address the glaring crimes
.

403
 Mollie Hemingway Hammers Media
For False Kelly Quitting Stories
By Nicholas Fondacaro
October 13, 2017 1:41 AM EDT
In a surprise appearance at the White House Briefing
Room on Thursday, Chief of Staff John Kelly address the
press to dispel all their rumors (aka news reports) that
claimed he was unhappy in his position and was thinking
about leaving. And in a panel discussion on Fox News
Channel’s Special Report, Federalist journalist Mollie
Hemingway went to town on the media for over-relying on
“unreliable anonymous sources.”
In opening up the discussion on the topic, Anchor Bret
Baier noted just how many reports he saw that insisted
Kelly was on his way out of the White House.
“It was very frustrating for me when he
said that he wasn't quitting today and
the room erupted in laughter as if it
were really funny,” Hemingway lamented.
“They go when they write all these
stories every few days about how he's
quitting and they have the best sources
that he’s quitting and when he denies
that they act like it's funny.”
“It's not funny to have so many stories
based on unreliable anonymous
sources. And the public can't check the
sources,” she exclaimed.
After noting the irony that there were liberal media outlets
that had to actively tell people that they were trustworthy,
she called out their terrible reporting for being a real threat
to the freedom of the press:
And I think it's a huge threat, in addition to
external threats to freedom of the press,
404
there are internal threats and how the
media are handling their job and how
they’re losing their standards and how
they’re breaking the social contract. They
get perks and privileges as part of this First
Amendment agreement and they are not
living up to those standards.
“The standard isn't that a lot of the
stories are true or a lot of them check
out. The standard when you’re in the
truth-telling business is that all of your
stories need to check out,” she added.
“And it becomes very difficult, how does
a general reader or viewer know who to
trust and who not to trust when so many
of the stories turn out not to be true.”
Hemingway did admit that the President might be
overplaying his hand when talked about looking into the
licensing of networks:
There are all sorts of ways to demand
accountability from the press that do not
involve calls for government action. When
Trump is talking about the proliferation of
fake news, the over-reliance on
anonymous sources he's on strong ground.
When he starts calling for government
action, he's on less strong ground.
She also observed how that had led to many in the liberal
media to hyperventilate about Trump being an adversary to
the First Amendment.
And in a rhetorical question to the panel, Baier questioned
how
“after today, how many of these stories
that have been written or done will go
back and say: “Well, we were dead
wrong when we said that he was
frustrated or he's leaving or that XYZ.”
How many do you think will change?”
The obvious answer is not many if any at all.
Transcript below:
Fox News Channel
Special Report
October 12, 2017
6:41:35 PM Eastern
BRET BAIER: Mollie, I don't know how many stories I read or
seen that had anonymous sources describing Kelly on his way
out the door.
MOLLIE HEMINGWAY: Right. It was very frustrating for me when
he said that he wasn't quitting today and the room erupted in
laughter as if it were really funny. They go when they write all
these stories every few days about how he's quitting and they
have the best sources that he’s quitting and when he denies that
they act like it's funny. It's not funny to have so many stories
based on unreliable anonymous sources. And the public can't
check the sources.
I mean, I saw that earlier in the show you had someone from a
different outlet saying ‘no really trust us, our sources are good.’
Well, there’s no way to trust when they contradict information
that’s on the record. And there’s no way to check and hold them
accountable.
And I think it's a huge threat, in addition to external threats to
freedom of the press, there are internal threats and how the
.
405
media are handling their job and how they’re losing their
standards and how they’re breaking the social contract. They get
perks and privileges as part of this first amendment agreement
and they are not living up to those standards.
(…)
HEMINGWAY: The standard isn't that a lot of the stories are true
or a lot of them check out. The standard when you’re in the truth-
telling business is that all of your stories need to check out. And
there have been so many stories about people who are leaving
who don’t leave. And it becomes very difficult, how does a
general reader or viewer know who to trust and who not to trust
when so many of the stories turn out not to be true.
BAIER: But here’s the question: After today, how many of these
stories that have been written or done will go back and say:
“Well, we were dead wrong when we said that he was frustrated
or he's leaving or that xyz.” How many do you think will change?
(…)
BAIER: The flip-side Mollie, the President is tweeting and he has
continued to do this saying: “Network news has become so
partisan, distorted and fake, that licenses must be challenged
and if appropriate revoked. Not fair to public. The fake news is
going all out in order to demean and denigrate. Such hatred."
What about that.
HEMINGWAY: Right, and I mean, this is the flip-side to what
we’re talking about. There are all sorts of ways to demand
accountability from the press that do not involve calls for
government action. When Trump is talking about the proliferation
of fake news, the over-reliance on anonymous sources he's on
strong ground. When he starts calling for government action, he's
on less strong ground. Of course, people also overreact as if
there’s some constitutional right to bandwidth or spectrum, which
is a little bit of an overreaction to that. But he has a strong case
to be made that the media have not been handling their
vocations very well. He oversteps when he calls for government
action.
 Porn King Larry Flynt Offers $10 Million
For Information Leading To Trump Impeachment
By Jim Hoft
Friday, October 13, 2017

Porn King Larry Flynt and Hustler

Magazine is offering $10 million for
information leading to the impeachment
of Donald J. Trump as president.

Flynt will advertise the offer this weekend in the

Washington Post.

In October 2016 Larry Flynt offered $1 million for

recordings of Donald Trump breaking the law or acting in
sexually demeaning manner.

This week he upped his offer to $10 million for

information that will impeach Trump.

406
407
 Judicial Watch Says FBI Has Found
Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Meeting Documents
By Brooke Singman, Fox News
October 14, 2107

President Tom Fitton told Fox News in an

email Friday. “The fact they just ‘found’
them is yet another scandal.”

The FBI initially did not find any documents or records

related to the tarmac meeting, according to an FBI letter
reviewed by Fox News, but in a related case this summer,
the Justice Department recovered email correspondence
regarding the meeting.

“Upon further review, we subsequently

determined potentially responsive
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch said Friday
documents may exist,” the FBI wrote to
that the FBI has uncovered 30 pages of documents related
Judicial Watch in a letter on Aug. 10. The
to the controversial 2016 tarmac meeting between former
FBI wrote that the request had been
President Bill Clinton and former Attorney General Loretta
“reopened” and is “currently in the process
Lynch.
of searching for any responsive material.”
The newly uncovered documents will be sent to Judicial
The tarmac meeting fueled Republican complaints at the
Watch by the end of November in response to a Freedom
time that Lynch had improperly met with the husband of
of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, a spokesman for the
an investigation subject, just before the probe into Hillary
group told Fox News.
Clinton's personal email use was completed with no
charges filed.
Judicial Watch originally filed a FOIA request in July
2016 -- which the Justice Department did not comply with
Fired FBI Director James Comey, in
-- seeking “all records of communications between any
Senate testimony in June, described that
agent, employee, or representative” of the FBI for the
tarmac meeting as problematic.
investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server
use, and all records related to the June 27, 2016 meeting
between Lynch and Bill Clinton. Congressional Republicans have called for a second
special counsel to investigate Comey, Lynch and Clinton.
“We presume they are new documents. We
won’t know what’s in them until we see
them, unfortunately,” Judicial Watch

408
 Inside The ‘Adult Day-Care Center’:
How Aides Try To Control And Coerce Trump
By Ashley Parker And Greg Jaffe
October 16 At 6:00 AM
In his first month as President Trump’s chief of staff, John F. Kelly
has brought discipline to the White House, sometimes to the
frustration of Trump. (Video: Bastien Inzaurralde/Photo: Bill
O'Leary/The Washington Post)
During the campaign, when President Trump’s advisers
wanted him to stop talking about an issue — such as when
he attacked a Gold Star military family — they sometimes
presented him with polls demonstrating how the
controversy was harming his candidacy.
During the transition, when aides needed Trump to decide
on a looming issue or appointment, they often limited him
to a shortlist of two or three options and urged him to
choose one.
And now in the White House, when advisers hope to
prevent Trump from making what they think is an unwise
decision, they frequently try to delay his final verdict —
hoping he may reconsider after having time to calm down.
When Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) described the White
House as “an adult day-care center” on Twitter last week,
he gave voice to a Trumpian truth: The president is often
impulsive, mercurial and difficult to manage, leading those
around him to find creative ways to channel his energies.
Some Trump aides spend a significant part of their time
devising ways to rein in and control the impetuous
president, angling to avoid outbursts that might work
against him, according to interviews with 18 aides,
confidants and outside advisers, most of whom insisted on
anonymity to speak candidly.
“If you visit the White House today, you see
aides running around with red faces,
shuffling paper and trying to keep up with
this president,” said one Republican in
409
frequent contact with the administration.
“That’s what the scene is.”
The White House dismissed Corker’s suggestion that
administration officials spend their days trying to contain
the president. The point was highlighted last week in an
unusual briefing by White House Chief of Staff John F.
Kelly, who sought to tamp down reports that he was
focused on attempting to control Trump.
“I was not brought to this job to control
anything but the flow of information to our
president so that he can make the best
decisions,” Kelly told reporters. “So, again,
I was not sent in to — or brought in to —
control him.”
Kelly also praised Trump as “a decisive guy” and “a very
thoughtful man” whose sole focus is on advancing
American interests.
“He takes information in from every avenue
he can receive it,” Kelly said. “I restrict no
one, by the way, from going in to see him.
But when we go in to see him now, rather
than onesies and twosies, we go in and
help him collectively understand what he
needs to understand to make these vital
decisions.”
Trump is hardly the first president whose aides have
arranged themselves around him and his management
style — part of a natural effort, one senior White House
official said, to help ensure the president’s success. But
Trump’s penchant for Twitter feuds, name-calling and
temperamental outbursts presents a unique challenge.
One defining feature of managing Trump is frequent
praise, which can leave his team in what seems to be a
state of perpetual compliments. The White House pushes
out news releases overflowing with top officials heaping
flattery on Trump; in one memorable Cabinet meeting this
year, each member went around the room lavishing the
president with accolades.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) on Oct. 8 called the White House “an
adult day care center” after President Trump criticized him on
Twitter. The president hit back on Oct. 10, calling the senator
"Liddle’ Bob Corker." (Video: Bastien Inzaurralde/Photo: Melina
Mara/The Washington Post)
Senior administration officials call this speaking to an
“audience of one.”
One regular practitioner is Treasury Secretary Steven
Mnuchin, who praised Trump’s controversial statements
after white supremacists had a violent rally in
Charlottesville and also said he agreed with Trump that
professional football players should stand during the
national anthem. Neither issue has anything to do with the
Treasury Department.
Former treasury secretary Larry Summers wrote in a
Twitter post, “Mnuchin may be the greatest sycophant in
Cabinet history.”
Especially in the early days of his presidency, aides
delivered the president daily packages of news stories
filled with positive coverage, and Trump began meetings
by boasting about his performance, either as president or in
winning the White House, according to one person who
attended several Oval Office gatherings with him.
Some aides and outside advisers hoping to push their allies
and friends for top postings, such as ambassadorships,
made sure their candidates appeared speaking favorably
about Trump in conservative news outlets — and that
those news clippings ended up on the president’s desk.
H.R. McMaster, the president’s national security adviser,
has frequently resorted to diversionary tactics to manage
Trump.
In the Oval Office, he will volunteer to have his staff study
Trump’s more unorthodox ideas. When Trump wanted to
make South Korea pay for the entire cost of a shared
missile defense system, McMaster and top aides huddled
to come up with arguments that the money spent defending
South Korea and Japan also benefited the U.S. economy in
the form of manufacturing jobs, according to two people
familiar with the debate.
410
“He plays rope-a-dope with him,” a senior
administration official said. “He thinks
Trump is going to forget, but he doesn’t.
H.R.’s strategy is to say, ‘Let us study that,
boss.’ He tries to deflect.”
Sam Nunberg, who worked for Trump but was fired in
2015, said he found him to be “reasonable” but noted that
delaying a decision often helped influence the outcome.
“If [Trump] wanted to do something that I
thought could be problematic for him, I
would simply, respectfully, ask him if we
could possibly wait on it and then
reconsider,” Nunberg said. “And the
majority of the time he would tell me, ‘Let’s
wait and reconsider,’ and I would prepare
the cons for him to consider — and he
would do what he wanted to do.
Sometimes he would still go with the
decision I may have disagreed with, and
other times he would change his mind.”
Of course, the president chafes at the impression that his
aides coddle him or treat him like a wayward teenager.
During the campaign, after reading a story in the New
York Times that said Trump’s advisers went on television
to talk directly to him, the candidate exploded at his then-
campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, chastising his top aide
for treating him like “a baby,” according to “Devil’s
Bargain,” a book that chronicles Trump’s path to the
presidency.
Some aides and advisers have found a way to manage
Trump without seeming to condescend. Perhaps no
Cabinet official has proven more adept at breaking ranks
with Trump without drawing his ire than Defense
Secretary Jim Mattis, who has disagreed with his boss on a
range of issues, including the effectiveness of torture, the
importance of NATO and the wisdom of withdrawing
from the Iran nuclear deal.
The president appreciates how Mattis, a four-star Marine
general, speaks to him candidly but respectfully and often
plays down disagreements in public. A senior U.S. official
said that Mattis’s focus has been on informing the
president when they disagree — before the disagreements
go public — and maintaining a quiet influence.
Unlike his fellow Cabinet secretaries, Mattis has also gone
out of his way not to suck up to the president — a stance
made easier perhaps by his four decades in uniform and his
combat record.
At the laudatory Cabinet meeting this summer, he was the
lone holdout who did not lavish praise on the president.
Instead, Mattis said it was “an honor to represent the men
and women of the Department of Defense.”
Mattis has also worked to get on Trump’s good side by
criticizing the media for putting too much emphasis on his
disagreements with Trump.
“I do my best to call it like I see it,” he told
reporters in late August. “But, right now, if I
say six and the president says half a
dozen, they are going to say I disagree with
him. You know? So, let’s just get over that.”
When he has broken with the president, Mattis has done it
as subtly possible. This month he said it was in America’s
interest to stick with the Iran nuclear agreement — which
Trump called “the worst deal ever” — but voiced the
opinion only in answer to questions from the Senate
Armed Services Committee.
Corker’s quip comparing the White House to a day-care
center on Oct. 8 came in the middle of a feud between him
and Trump, who attacked Corker by tweeting that the
retiring senator “didn’t have the guts” to run for reelection
and had begged for his endorsement. Corker fired back on
Twitter and in a New York Times interview, warning that
Trump was running the White House like “a reality show”
and that his reckless threats against other nations could put
the country “on the path to World War III.”
“I know for a fact that every single day at
the White House, it’s a situation of trying to
contain him,” Corker said, adding later that
most GOP lawmakers “understand the
volatility that we’re dealing with and the
tremendous amount of work that it takes by
people around him to keep him in the
middle of the road.”
Trump seems to hold many Republican lawmakers, and
some members of his own Cabinet, in similarly low regard.
.
411
Several people who have met with Trump in recent weeks
said he mocks other officials in Washington, especially
fellow Republicans.
In a meeting at the White House last month with House
and Senate leaders from both parties, for instance, Trump
upset Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) by cutting a
deal with Democrats. In subsequent days behind closed
doors, the president mocked the reactions of McConnell
and Ryan from the meeting with an exaggerated crossing
of his arms and theatrical frowns.
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich, an informal Trump
adviser, scoffed at the suggestion that Trump needs to be
managed by his advisers as parents would handle an unruly
child.
“He’s the president of the United States.
Period. Is he an unusual president? Sure.
But so was Andrew Jackson, Abraham
Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt,” Gingrich
said. “You guys in the media would have
had a field day with them, too.”
Still, Corker’s comments underscored the uneasy
dichotomy within the West Wing, where criticism of the
president’s behavior is only whispered.
“They have an on-the-record ‘Dear Leader’
culture, and an on-background ‘This-guy-is-
a-joke’ culture,” said Tommy Vietor, who
served as a spokesman for President
Barack Obama. “I don’t understand how he
can countenance both.”
Robert Costa, Damian Paletta and Philip Rucker
contributed to this report.
 How Netanyahu Pulls Trump’s Strings - Even On Russia
It Turns Out That Hillary Clinton Was Partly Correct: President Trump
Is A “Puppet,” But His Puppet Master Isn’t Russian President Putin But
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu
Robert Parry
Mon, Oct 16, 2017
Israel First?
In the final presidential debate of 2016, Hillary Clinton
famously called Donald Trump the “puppet” of Russian
President Vladimir Putin. But what’s increasingly clear is
that Trump has a more typical puppet master for a U.S.
politician – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Since Sept. 18, when the two men met in New York
around the United Nations General Assembly, Netanyahu
has been pulling Trump’s strings on almost every foreign
policy issue. Arguably, the puppet/puppeteer relationship
began much earlier, but I’ve been told that Trump bridled
early on at Netanyahu’s control and even showed a few
signs of rebellion.
For instance, Trump initially resisted Netanyahu’s
demand for a deeper U.S. commitment in Syria by
ordering the shutdown of the CIA operation supporting
anti-government rebels, along with the Trump
administration’s statement that U.S. policy no longer
sought “regime change” in Damascus.
Immediately after that announcement, Netanyahu had
some success in getting Trump to reverse direction and fire
59 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian air base on April 6. The
attack followed what one intelligence source told me was a
staged chemical weapons incident by Al Qaeda operatives
in the rebel-controlled town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib
province, possibly using sarin delivered via drone from a
Saudi/Israeli special operations base in Jordan. Yet,
412
although apparently duped by the subterfuge into the
missile strike, Trump still balked at a complete reversal of
his Syrian policy.
Then, in May, Trump picked Saudi Arabia and Israel as his
first overseas trip as president – essentially following the
advice of his son-in-law Jared Kushner – but I’m told he
came away feeling somewhat humiliated by the over-the-
top treatment that involved him getting pulled into a
ceremonial sword dance in Saudi Arabia and facing
condescension from Netanyahu.
So, over the summer, Trump listened to advice about a
possible major overhaul of U.S. foreign policy that would
have checked Israeli/Saudi regional ambitions, opened
diplomatic doors to Iran, and addressed the Korean crisis
by brokering negotiations between the North and the South
over some form of loose confederation.
There was even the possibility of a Nixon-goes-to-China
moment with tough-guy Trump meeting with Iranian
President Hassan Rouhani and the two countries restoring
diplomatic ties, a process that could have given U.S.
companies a better chance to compete in the Iranian
market.
Those proposed moves had the advantage of reducing
international tensions, saving the U.S. government money
on future military adventures, and freeing U.S.
corporations from the tangle of economic sanctions –
exactly the “America First” strategy that Trump had
promised his working-class base.
However, instead Netanyahu succeeded in pulling Trump’s
strings during their conversations on Sept. 18 in New
York, although exactly how is still a mystery to some
people close to these developments. One source said the
Kushner family real-estate company has exposure to
substantial Israeli financing that could be yanked, although
Jared Kushner’s financial disclosure form only lists a $5
million unsecured line of credit, held jointly with his
father, from the Israel Discount Bank.
Trump also has major pro-Netanyahu donors to his
political war chest and his legal defense fund who are
strong advocates for war with Iran, including casino
tycoon Sheldon Adelson, who has plowed $35 million into
the pro-Trump Super PAC Future 45 and has
publicly called for dropping a nuclear bomb on Iran as a
negotiating tactic. So, Netanyahu had a number of
potential strings to pull.
Going on Rants
Whatever the precise reasons, on Sept. 19, Trump turned
his maiden speech to the U.N. General Assembly into a
war-like rant, personally insulting North Korean leader
Kim Jong Un as “Rocket Man,” threatening to “totally
destroy” his nation of 25 million people, and parroting
Netanyahu’s calls for another regime change project aimed
at Iran.
Most diplomats in the audience sat in stunned silence as
Trump threatened aggressive war from the podium of an
organization created to prevent the scourge of war. The
one notable exception was Netanyahu who enthusiastically
applauded his success in jerking Trump into the neocon
camp.
So, rather than shift U.S. policy away from confrontation,
Trump jettisoned the diplomatic strategy although it
already had dispatched intermediaries to make contacts
with the Iranians and North Koreans. Instead, Trump opted
for the classic neocon approach favored by Netanyahu,
albeit with Trump dressing up his neocon surrender in
some “America First” rhetoric.
The U.N. speech left some of the U.S. intermediaries
scrambling to explain to their contacts in Iran and North
Korea why Trump had repudiated the messages that they
had been carrying. Privately, Trump explained to one
that he just liked to “zigzag” and that the intended end
point hadn’t change.
Some of these tensions surfaced in late September when
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson took the extraordinary
step of announcing the behind-the-scenes contacts with
North Korea during a state visit to China.
“We are probing, so stay tuned,”
Tillerson said. “We ask, ‘Would you like to
talk?’ We have lines of communications to
Pyongyang — we’re not in a dark situation,
a blackout.” Tillerson added, “We have a
couple, three channels open to Pyongyang
… We do talk to them. ,,, Directly. We have
our own channels.”
In reaction to Tillerson’s efforts to salvage the
backchannel initiatives, Trump showed that his obeisance
to Netanyahu and the neocons outweighed loyalty to either
413
his Secretary of State or the intermediaries who had
ventured into dicey situations on Trump’s behalf.
In Twitter messages, Trump belittled the idea of a dialogue
with North Korea, tweeting:
“I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful
Secretary of State, that he is wasting his
time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket
Man.”
“Save your energy Rex,” Trump added,
before slipping in another thinly veiled
threat of a military strike: “we’ll do what has
to be done!”
While on the surface, Trump’s repudiation of Tillerson
might have been viewed as another “zigzag,” it is now
clear that Trump’s “zigzag” explanation was just another
lie. Rather than zigzagging, he is instead following a
straight line marked out by Netanyahu.
Meanwhile, in Syria, Netanyahu seems to have won more
concessions from Trump. The U.S. military appears to
be helping the remnants of Islamist forces still fighting the
government, according to Russian officials. Their
accusation is that the U.S. is secretly aiding the Islamist
terror groups with weapons, tactical advice and aerial
reconnaissance.
In other words, Trump appears to be continuing U.S.
military intervention in Syria – just as Netanyahu desires.
Falling in Line
Trump further showed that he is following Netanyahu’s
marching orders with the extremist speech about Iran on
Friday, essentially repeating all the Israeli propaganda
lines against Iran and burning whatever bridges remained
toward a meaningful diplomatic approach.
Trump’s Iran speech was so ludicrous it almost defies
serious analysis. It ranks with the reckless rhetoric of
President George W. Bush when he pronounced an “axis
of evil,” with the incongruous linking of Iraq and Iran (two
bitter enemies) and North Korea accompanied by Bush’s
bogus claims about Iraq’s WMD and Iraq’s alleged
collaboration with Al Qaeda.
In Friday’s speech, which looked like the handiwork of
John Bolton, one of Bush’s neocon advisers who was seen
entering the White House last week, Trump repeated all
the nonsense tying Iran to Al Qaeda, presumably thinking
that the American people still don’t understand that Al
Qaeda is a fanatical Sunni terror group that targets both the
West and Shiites, the dominant Muslim faith in Iran, as
heretics deserving death.
The inconvenient truth is that Al Qaeda has long been
connected to Saudi Arabia, which has supported these
fanatics since the 1980s when Saudi citizen Osama bin
Laden was supported in his jihad against Soviet troops in
Afghanistan, who were there trying to protect a secular
regime.
Though officially the Saudi monarchy insists that it is
opposed to Al Qaeda, Saudi intelligence has used Al
Qaeda as essentially an unconventional fighting force
deployed to destabilize and terrorize adversaries in the
region and around the world. [For details, see
Consortiumnews.com’s “The Need to Hold Saudi Arabia
Accountable.”]
As the Israelis have developed a de facto alliance with
Saudi Arabia in recent years, they also have expressed a
preference for an Al Qaeda victory in Syria if necessary to
destroy what Michael Oren, former Ambassador to the
U.S. and now a deputy minister under Netanyahu, has
described as the Shiite “strategic arc” running from Tehran
through Damascus to Beirut.
One of the frequent Israeli complaints about Iran is that it
has assisted the sovereign government of Syria in
defeating Al Qaeda and its militant allies (as well as Al
Qaeda’s spinoff Islamic State), which should tell you a lot
about where Netanyahu’s loyalties lie.
A Compromised Media
Yet, as dishonest as Trump’s Iran speech was, the U.S.
mainstream media won’t criticize it as harshly as it
deserves because virtually all the important journalists and
talking heads have swallowed Israel’s anti-Iran
propaganda whole. They have frequently repeated the
canard about Iran as “the world’s chief sponsor of
terrorism” when that title clearly should go to the Saudis
and the Qataris if not others.
The West’s major news outlets also have ingested all the
sophisticated propaganda against the Assad government in
Syria, particularly the claims about chemical weapons
attacks while ignoring evidence that Al Qaeda’s operatives
and their “civil defense” collaborators have staged attacks
with the goal of provoking a direct U.S. military
intervention. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “A New Hole in
Syria-Sarin Certainty.”]
In his Friday speech, Trump also touted one of the earliest
canards about Iranian “terrorism,” the attack by Lebanese
Shiite militants on the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in
1983 killing 241 Americans.
When that attack happened, I was working at The
Associated Press as an investigative reporter specializing
in national security issues. While the precise Iranian role
was not clear, what should have been obvious was that the
414
attack was not “terrorism,” which is classically defined as
violence toward civilians to achieve a political goal.
Not only were the Marines not civilians but the Reagan
administration had made them belligerents in the Lebanese
war by the decision to order the USS New Jersey to shell
Muslim villages. Reagan’s National Security Advisor
Robert McFarlane, who often represented Israel’s
interests inside the administration, was the spark plug for
this mission creep, which killed Lebanese civilians and
convinced Shiite militants that the United States had joined
the war against them.
Shiite militants struck back, sending a suicide truck
bomber through U.S. security positions, demolishing the
high-rise Marine barracks in Beirut. Reagan soon
repositioned the surviving U.S. forces offshore. At the AP,
I unsuccessfully argued against calling the Beirut attack
“terrorism,” a word that other news organizations also
sloppily applied. But even senior Reagan officials
recognized the truth.
“When the shells started falling on the
Shiites, they assumed the American
‘referee’ had taken sides,” Gen. Colin
Powell wrote in his memoir, My American
Journey. In other words, Powell, who was
then military adviser to Defense Secretary
Caspar Weinberger, recognized that the
actions of the U.S. military had altered the
status of the Marines in the eyes of the
Shiites.
(Although this “terrorism” is always blamed on Hezbollah,
the group did not officially come into existence until 1985
as a resistance movement against the Israeli occupation of
Lebanon which did not end until 2000.)
Opposed to Putin
So, Trump is now on the path to wars with both North
Korea and Iran, neither of which Russian President Putin
favors. Putin, who played a key role in helping President
Obama achieve the Iran-nuclear agreement, now sides with
the Europeans in opposition to Trump’s decertification.
Putin also favors a prompt end to the Syrian conflict with
the defeat of Al Qaeda and its allies, and he wants peaceful
negotiations with North Korea over its desire for security
against threatened American aggression. Trump is on the
opposite side of all these Putin priorities.
In other words, not only does the Russia-gate hysteria have
core evidentiary problems – both on the issues
of “hacking” Democratic emails and claims
about suspected “Russia-linked” entities paying for an
infinitesimal number of ads on social media (including
some about puppies and another promoting a critical
documentary about Donald Trump’s golf course in
Scotland) – but Trump is behaving in ways that are
directly contrary to Putin’s desires and interests.
If indeed Clinton were right that Trump was Putin’s
“puppet,” then he would have agreed to negotiations to
address the North Korean crisis; would have accepted
constructive diplomacy toward Iran; and would have ended
all U.S. support for the Syrian militants and encouraged a
quick end to the bloodletting.
Instead, Trump is moving in opposite directions, lining up
with Netanyahu and the neocons, whom some European
allies refer to as “America’s Israeli agents.” Although
dressing up his capitulation to Netanyahu in tough-guy
phrasing, Trump is doing what most U.S. politicians do –
they grovel before Bibi Netanyahu.
.
415
And, if you have any doubts about that reality, you can
watch how often both Republicans and Democrats jump to
their feet when Netanyahu addresses a joint session of
Congress, an honor that he has received three times, tying
him with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.
Those moments of American humiliation – as almost all
535 members of Congress act like puppets on invisible
strings – represent the actual subservience of the U.S.
government to a foreign power. And that power is not
Russia.
President Trump is just the latest American politician to
have his strings yanked by Israeli Prime Minister
Netanyahu.
 Schieffer: Critics Of An 'Independent Press'
Are 'Undermining Foundations Of Democracy'
By Tim Graham
October 16, 2017 1:55 PM EDT
As Nick Fondacaro noted on Sunday, CNN Reliable
Sources host Brian Stelter routinely suggests President
Trump is an “autocrat,” and Trump's blustery tweets that
network news is so distorted they ought to have their
broadcast licenses evaluated put Stelter into Category Five
panic. At the end of his interview with “legendary
journalist” Bob Schieffer on Sunday, he returned to the
topic, and Schieffer suggested people trying to undermine
the credibility of the media are “undermining the
foundations of our democracy.”
That’s how simplistic these liberal thinkers are:
Democracy = the “legacy media.” The First Amendment?
That’s written for the “legacy media.” Anyone who uses
their free speech to criticize them, or use their right to vote
in support of a press-bashing candidate? They’re somehow
autocrats who hate the Constitution. Stelter didn’t find
anyone to push back against his position.
STELTER: And last question for you, Bob,
it's like what we wrestle with almost every
for every week on this program, is how
seriously to take President Trump's tweets?
You know, especially as his tweets about
so-called fake news. How do you approach
it? How much do you do care or read into
all the president's words on Twitter?
SCHIEFFER: Well, I tell you -- all these
attacks on the media, look, at my age, I've
been called everything from a nattering
nabobs of negativity back --
STELTER: Spiro Agnew, yes.
SCHIEFFER: -- in Nixon days -- to a
female hygiene product these days. I don't
416
pay much attention to that kind of stuff. You
know, I've been called all kind of names.
What I do take seriously is when he tries
to destroy the credibility of the media,
an independent press that can gather
information that people can compare to
the government's version of events and
that is what we do. It's as crucial to our
democracy as the right to vote, and
when people try to undermine that, I
think they're undermining the
foundations of our democracy.
Many conservatives have a quick reaction to that: Does
CNN with a Cuomo as anchor really look like an
"independent press"? Does ABC with George
Stephanopoulos as Chief Anchor on the breaking news
really look like an "independent press"? The "revolving
door" between Democratic office-holders and the
"independent press" is an ongoing problem for Schieffer's
(and Stelter's) argument.
They fail to imagine that the conservative media is also
media, and that conservative journalism and press criticism
also represents the First Amendment; also represents a
democratic diversity of voices; and also represents holding
the government accountable.
Conservatives take great exception to the notion that the
Old Media boldly challenges "the government's version of
events" when the president is a Democrat. As Rich Noyes
just replayed, eight years ago the "independent" legacy
media were worrying that "harsh criticism" of Obama was
indecent, racist, and put the president's personal safety in
danger.
Schieffer actually complained – with zero pushback from
Stelter about ahem, Dan Rather and his fake-documents
debacle – that everybody now is a publisher, and amateurs
on the Internet don’t have professional standards for fact-
checking, like, you know, CBS:
SCHIEFFER: [W]hat's happened here is
that now everybody is a publisher. It used
to be, you had at least a barrel of ink and a
printing press to be a publisher. If you've
got a phone now, you were a publisher. But
 are you following the same guidelines
that we're used to the legacy media
following? And that is before you print,
before you go to press, before your
broadcast are you checking it out to
make sure it's true. And in many, many
cases, especially on social media, that's
simply not true and it -- that's what's
making it so hard right now.
.
417
One other rebuttal to Schieffer comparing elite journalism
to the right to vote is obvious: What about when the voters
reject the advice of the media elite? Whether it was the rise
of the Newt Gingrich House majority in 1995 or the
Trump inauguration in 2017, the networks often sound like
The Resistance, lecturing the voters on the mistakes that
they made, and undermining the credibility of the
Republicans who won in a democratic contest. Who is the
democrat and who is the autocrat when the "independent
press" murmurs daily about how the elected president must
be removed from office?
 FBI Has Suddenly “Found” Scores Of Documents Related
To Infamous Tarmac Meeting Between Bill Clinton
And Loretta Lynch
By JD Heyes
Monday, October 16, 2017
“The FBI is out of control.”
That’s the pronouncement of Tom Fitton, president of
Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog organization that is
trying to get to the bottom of Obama-era political
corruption after learning that the FBI does have documents
related to the infamous “tarmac meeting” last summer
between former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney
General Loretta Lynch.
As you may recall, the meeting took place in the midst of
the bureau’s criminal investigation into then-Democratic
presidential nominee Hillary Clinton over her use of a
private, unsecured email server to mishandle top secret,
sensitive intelligence information. It also took place in the
midst of a heated presidential campaign in which, we later
learned, the Obama administration was improperly
surveilling and unmasking Team Trump officials.
As reported by The Daily Caller, the FBI has “found” 30
pages of documents that were related to the June 2016
tarmac meeting, despite the bureau’s earlier claims that no
records regarding the meeting existed.
Lawyers with the bureau revealed the fact that documents
existed after the FBI was hit with a Freedom of
Information Act lawsuit by Judicial Watch:
The FBI had informed Judicial Watch last
October that the bureau did not have any
records related to the June 27, 2016,
418
meeting between Clinton and Lynch. That
encounter, which occurred on the tarmac at
Phoenix’s airport, was significant because
it took place while the Justice Department
was investigating Hillary Clinton’s potential
mishandling of classified information on her
private email account.
Despite the fact that the bureau initially told Judicial
Watch that no such meeting-related documents existed, the
Justice Department, in response to a separate lawsuit filed
by Judicial Watch, revealed that some of its personnel had
been in contact with the FBI regarding the Clinton-Lynch
‘coincidental’ happenstance.
In August, The Daily Caller reported, the DoJ gave up
emails that showed officials exchanging electronic
communications regarding the meeting. Also, on July 1,
2016, Caroline Pakomy, a Justice Department official, told
her colleagues that “FBI is asking for guidance” on the
controversial meeting.
After releasing those documents, the FBI further said that
it had in its possession some additional records related to
the meeting. Attorneys for the bureau told the watchdog
group, “Upon further review, we subsequently determined
potentially responsive documents may exist.”
Fitton called the FBI’s newest disclosure “stunning.”
“It is stunning that the FBI ‘found’ these
Clinton-Lynch tarmac records only after we
caught the agency hiding them in another
lawsuit.
“Judicial Watch will continue to press for
answers about the FBI’s document games
in court. In the meantime, the FBI should
stop the stonewall and release these new
records immediately,” he added.
The FBI, which is now under the control of Trump-
appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions, has until Nov.
30 to hand over the documents. (Related: The NSA has
all of Clinton’s “lost” emails… but James Comey
rejected them in order to obstruct justice.)
Initially, reports claimed the meeting was just by chance.
CNN, which has been extremely biased against Trump,
covered it thusly:
Lynch and Bill Clinton met privately in
Phoenix Monday after the two realized they
were on the same tarmac, an aide to the
former president said. The encounter took
place ahead of the public release Tuesday
morning of the House Benghazi
Committee’s report on the 2012 attack on a
U.S. consulate in Libya.
.
419
At the time, other reports said the two merely discussed
grandkids and golf.
Trump, on the campaign trail, characterized the meeting as
“a sneak” in an interview with conservative talk show host
Mike Gallagher. “You see a thing like this and, even in
terms of judgment, how bad of judgment is it for him or
for her to do this? Who would do this?”
Bill Clinton, that’s who — and/// officials from the corrupt
Obama administration.
It will be interesting to see what the documents further
reveal. Stay tuned.
 Firm Behind "Trump Dossier"
Refuses To Comply With Congressional Subpoena
By Tyler Durden
Oct 16, 2017 8:20 PM
The three co-founders of Fusion GPS, the opposition
research firm responsible for overseeing the creation of the
infamous “Trump dossier”, will refuse to comply with a
subpoena ordered by House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Devin Nunes, according to a letter from their
attorneys originally obtained by Business Insider.
But experts say the argument their
lawyers are using to ask that they be
excused relies on shaky legal grounds,
and is unlikely to hold.
Attorneys from Cunningham, Levy & Muse said in a letter
that, if called to testify, their clients planned to invoke their
first amendment rights to exempt them from answering
questions. The move - which has all the hallmarks of a
stalling tactic –
is the latest attempt by the firm’s
founders, who reportedly were aware
that not all of the allegations contained
in the dossier were credible before
turning it over to the FBI, to forestall
delivering public testimony.
Glenn Simpson, a former WSJ investigative reporter and
one of the firm’s three founders, met privately with the
Senate Judiciary Committee for ten hours over the
summer. Afterwards, a group of senators, including
Democrat Richard Blumenthal, pushed for Simpson’s
testimony to be made public, and the committee is
reportedly still mulling whether to release it.
However, Simpson and his fellow Fusion GPS co-founders
Thomas Catan and Peter Fritsch, plan to invoke
420
constitutional privileges and decline to testify before the
House Intelligence Committee, their attorney wrote in a
letter obtained by Business Insider on Monday.
"We cannot in good conscience do
anything but advise our clients to stand
on their constitutional privileges, the
attorney work product doctrine and
contractual obligations," wrote Fusion
GPS counsel Josh Levy in response to
subpoenas issued earlier this month by the
committee's chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes.
Levy argued that complying with the subpoenas would
violate "the First Amendment rights" of the cofounders
"and would chill any American running for office ... from
conducting confidential opposition research in an
election."
"Should you compel any of our three
clients to appear at the scheduled
deposition, they will invoke their
constitutional privileges not to testify,"
Levy wrote. "Since that will be the case, we
ask that the Committee excuse them from
appearing."
Imprisoned former Pharma CEO Martin Shkreli pled the
fifth – the right against self-incrimination – when he
appeared before a Congressional panel about prescription-
drug pricing in February 2016. At the time, he had been
indicted on eight counts of fraud.
Though he officially resigned from the investigation in
April following his decision to brief Trump and the press
about classified intelligence without first informing his
fellow committee members, Nunes has helped steer the
committee’s inquiry toward “unmaskings” ordered by
Susan Rice and the credibility of the dossier. Many of the
dossier’s most egregious claims – such as one alleging that
the Russian government was in possession of an
embarrassing video of the president – have been debunked.
Levy contended in the letter that Nunes' "unilateral
issuance of these subpoenas violates your recusal and
further undermines the legitimacy of this investigation."
Nunes reportedly issued the subpoenas just 24 hours after
Fusion's counsel met with "majority and minority staff" for
approximately an hour to discuss "a way forward for
voluntary cooperation."
"Based on this Committee’s bad faith
interactions with the undersigned
counsel and its pattern of
unprofessional conduct exhibited
during different points throughout this
investigation, you have left us with no
choice but to advise our clients to
assert their privileges in the face of
these subpoenas," Levy wrote.
Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, told Business
Insider that Fusion’s “novel” legal strategy was unlikely to
succeed.
"That is probably why the attorneys
have emphasized other arguments, like
Nunes' apparent lack of authority to
issue the subpoenas and the fact that
Congress didn't authorize the
investigation he's conducting on his
own," Mariotti said.
"Those arguments have more merit, and
they draw attention to Nunes' zarre
behavior over the past month — including
his subpoenas to the DOJ," he added.
"That said, if the subpoenas issued by
Nunes are valid, then I expect these
individuals will be held in contempt if they
refuse to testify as ordered."
Republican Rep. Mike Conaway, who is now heading the
committee's investigation, reportedly approved Nunes'
subpoenas to Fusion GPS, but House Intelligence
Democrats told BI that they weren’t consulted.
Nunes reportedly turned his attention toward Fusion after
the FBI refused to turn over documents pertaining to the
dossier that were requested by Nunes.
421
The chairman says he’s seeking the
documents to help determine how the
dossier played into the DOJ’s decision
to launch multiple investigations into
Russian interference in the 2016
election – including claims that Russia
colluded with the Trump campaign to
sway the vote in Trump’s favor.
DOJ has maintained that publicly disclosing the
information that Nunes is requesting could compromise an
ongoing investigation.
Last month, Senate Intel Committee Chairman Richard
Burr said the committee’s investigators had “hit a wall” in
their efforts to verify the claims contained in the dossier, in
part because investigators couldn’t convince former British
spy Christopher Steele, the man hired by Fusion to
compile the dossier, to meet with them.
However, CNN later reported that special
counsel Robert Mueller had managed to
interview Steele. While it’s unclear
which, if any, of the claims contained in
the dossier are true, the US intelligence
community opted to omit the allegations
from a crucial report released in
January.
In summary, after months of resisting investigators’
overtures, it looks like the men behind Fusion GPS will
finally be forced to answer some uncomfortable questions
about the role they played in fostering the current climate
of anti-Russia hysteria. We look forward to hearing what
they have to say.
Read The Letter Starting On Next Page
361738857-2017-10-16-Letter-To-Chair-D-Nunes
By Zerohedge On Scribd
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
 Broadcast Networks Push An
Anti-Gun Agenda After Vegas Shooting
Amber Athey
October 16, 2017
ABC, CBS, and NBC gave five times more airtime to
pushing gun control than they did supporting gun rights
after the Las Vegas mass shooting, according to a new
study.
The Media Research Center analyzed all of the statements
about guns the three broadcast networks carried between
Oct. 2 and Oct. 8. In just six days, the networks managed
to favor gun control over gun rights by a 5:1 ratio.
Between the anchors, reporters, guests and soundbites, the
three networks used 30 minutes and 17 seconds to argue in
favor of gun control and used just 6 minutes and 27
seconds to favor gun rights.
Outside of overall arguments for or against gun control,
the networks also spent a whopping 28 minutes and 30
seconds pushing for regulation of bump stocks. One
minute and 47 seconds were given to those opposed to
additional regulations on bump stocks.
439
Combining their words on general firearm use and bump
stocks, ABC, CBS, and NBC spent just short of an hour
across the six day period arguing for some form of gun
regulation.
On “NBC Nightly News,” anchor Tom Brokaw went hard
after the National Rifle Association and encouraged
viewers to “speak up” against the gun rights organization.
“I would say to this audience, and any
audience before which I appear these
days, we are where we are because of the
power of people who wanted these kinds of
guns. And the NRA managed to organize
them and get them as a political force in
America,” Brokaw said. “We’re a long way
away from that Second Amendment in
which we said that a militia is important to
our country….I think that we have to step
up, all of us, and speak up.”
On ABC’s “Good Morning America,” George
Stephanopoulos trashed the White House for “stop[ping]
any debate about gun control before it begins,” while his
coanchor Robin Roberts praised late night comedian
Jimmy Kimmel for “taking a big stand on gun control.”
Overall, NBC was the biggest gun grabber, managing a
10:1 ratio of gun control vs. gun rights. CBS came in
second with an approximately 4:1 ratio, and ABC trailed
with a close to 3:1 ratio.
 Robert Mueller Is An Amoral Legal Assassin:
He Will Do His Job If You Let Him
By Barbara Boyd, Larouchepac.Com
October 17, 2017
Robert Swan Mueller III—the special prosecutor tasked to
take down the President of the United States—is, as his
name attests, a product of elite private schools and
universities. He is uniformly and soberly praised in the
national news media as incorruptible, fair-minded “honest
Bob,” “strait-laced Bobby three sticks.” This image, we
shall show, is a brazenly false, Washington, D.C. public
relations pitch, created for the credulous.
In reality, Robert Swan Mueller III is about as corrupt as
they come, bending and twisting the law every which way
necessary to serve the goals of those who provide him
assignments. The might of the prosecutorial function and
the institutions he serves dictate right for him, rather than
the unbiased pursuit of justice the law envisions for his
vocation. In what he says was a defining moment, Mueller
broke rank, after college, to serve in the Vietnam War as a
Marine. After that he never wanted to do anything but
prosecute. His appointment as special prosecutor caps a
long career in which he has envisioned himself to be a
stern and willing warrior, a dutiful Marine, acting on
behalf of whatever evil scheme his superiors present to
him, and using whatever means seems necessary to
execute it.
Then FBI director Robert Muller testifying in front of the Senate
Judiciary Committee on FBI Operations and NSA Surveillance
programs, June 2013.
In recent weeks, organizers for the LaRouche movement
have been repeatedly told by citizens they meet:
“It looks like President Trump is getting the
‘LaRouche treatment.’”
440
The two men could not be more different in station, or
cultural and intellectual achievement. LaRouche is a
world-historical genius in the mold of Gottfried Leibniz.
But, both men touched what has amounted to the third rail
of American politics after Franklin Roosevelt’s death.
They threatened the post-War Anglo-American British
imperial system. LaRouche did so directly, continuously,
and explicitly by name. Trump has done so implicitly, by
rejecting perpetual war, seeking better relations with
Russia, calling for imposition of Glass-Steagall banking
separation, endorsing what he refers to as the American
System of political economy, and promising massive
infrastructure development and a modern manufacturing
platform for productive jobs.
President Donald Trump and American Statesman Lyndon
LaRouche. Trump photo credit: Gage Skidmore
In both cases, as we shall see, the British explicitly
demanded scalps, based on a perceived threat to them,
most specifically located in the desire for a collaborative
relationship with Russia and an end to the “unipolar”
framework of relationships between nations. In both cases,
a controlled media unleashed an incessant barrage of ugly,
salacious, and defamatory coverage, day-in day-out, to
create the popular conditions for a criminal prosecution.
While there were and are many other players in these
Kabuki dances—compromised and terrorized politicians
and judges, and an intelligence community which
functions as the gendarme of our Orwellian police state—
the blunt instrument chosen for the hit was Robert Mueller.
Along the way, between the two assignments, Robert
Mueller played a hugely significant role in covering up the
Saudi/British role in the murders of almost 3,000
Americans on September 11, 2001, and the wholesale
destruction of the United States Constitution which
followed in its wake—a role which, if thoroughly
examined, constitutes obstruction of justice, among other
crimes.
This dossier will walk you through Mueller’s career based
on what is readily and publicly available. It is a trail of
prosecutorial misconduct, including what former Senator
Bob Graham calls “aggressive deception” of the U.S.
Congress and the public concerning the events of
September 11, 2001, and includes a major role in the
creation of the post-9/11 surveillance state which has
eviscerated and destroyed the Fourth Amendment and the
rest of our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Those who work
inside our modern Leviathan can surely point to other
malfeasance, and we invite you pile on—please, expose it.
You owe no less to your oath to the Constitution of the
United States.
The LaRouche Case—An Attempted Murder and then
a Legal One
On August 27, 1982, a Top Secret letter was sent from the
British government to the FBI. That letter itself remains
classified to this day, but it is clear from the FBI’s
response to it, from its unclassified attachments, and from
subsequent actions, what the British were demanding. On
September 24, 1982, under the subject-heading “Re:
Lyndon LaRouche and the Executive Intelligence
Review,” FBI counterintelligence chief James Nolan
responded to the British demands as follows:“We would
like to reiterate our conclusion that, while many of the
harassment activities of the NCLC and the themes
441
promoted by NCLC publications, such as EIR, are often
propitious to Soviet disinformation and propaganda
interests, there is no direct evidence that the Soviets are
directing or funding LaRouche or his organization. It is
entirely plausible, however, that the Soviets have
developed or may be developing sources within the NCLC
who are in a position to interject Soviet-inspired views into
NCLC activities and publications. It is likely that the
Soviets will attempt to capitalize on or exploit NCLC
sentiments that are parallel to or promote Soviet foreign
policy objectives. At the same time, the Soviets will
probably have to balance the advantages of exploiting the
NCLC with the dangers of being associated with a bizarre
and often unpredictable organization. For your
information, under the domestic security guidelines set
forth by the Attorney General, the FBI does not have an
active investigation of Lyndon LaRouche or the NCLC.”
As we shall see, this is the same British smear, in the same
British speculative language, used to paint Donald Trump
with the “Russian dupe” brush. That allegation, of activity
on behalf of a foreign power, the Russians, unleashed a
full spectrum of intelligence agency weapons from
Constitutional constraints under the Reagan
Administration’s Executive Order 12333 and subsequent
renditions governing classified counterintelligence
activities, particularly the subsequent versions of E.O.
12333 put into place after September 11, 2001.
 Former Hillary Clinton Chief Strategist
Mocks Effectiveness Of Russian Facebook Ads
By P.J. Gladnick
October 17, 2017 1:27 PM EDT

The mainstream media has recently gotten all excited over
the discovery that the Russians purchased $100,000 worth
of Facebook ads during the 2016 election season. Of
course, almost any rational observer would realize that
$100,000 is mere chump change in the grand scheme of
things during a campaign in which many millions were
spent on ads and commercials.
One person who made a very detailed analysis as to the
absurdity of the Russians influencing the U.S. election via
those Facebook ads is quite surprising considering his
background. It is former 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign
chief stragegist Mark Penn who in the October 15 Wall
Street Journal mocked the notion of Russian influence via
Facebook ads in You Can’t Buy the Presidency for
$100,000:
York, California and Texas. Supposing half the ads went to
swing states brings the total down to $22,000.
So from mere chump change the figure really boils down
to laughably minuscule.
Facebook also counted ads as early as June 2015.
Assuming they were evenly spread and we want only those
that ran the year of the election, that knocks it down to
$13,000. Most of the ads did not solicit support for a
candidate and carried messages on issues like racism,
immigration and guns. The actual electioneering then
amounts to about $6,500.
And from laughably minuscule, the total amount goes to
virtually non-existent.

Americans worried about Russia’s

I have 40 years of experience in politics,
influence in the 2016 election have seized
and this Russian ad buy, mostly after
on a handful of Facebook ads—as though the election anyway, simply does not
there weren’t also three 90-minute debates,
add up to a carefully targeted campaign
two televised party conventions, and $2.4 to move voters.
billion spent on last year’s campaign. The
danger is that bending facts to fit the
Russia story line may nudge Washington It takes tens of millions of dollars to deliver meaningful
into needlessly and recklessly regulating messages to the contested portion of the electorate.
the internet and curtailing basic freedoms. Converting someone who voted for the other party last
time is an enormously difficult task. Swing voters in states
like Ohio or Florida are typically barraged with 50% or
Good point, Mark. In fact, the Democrats have already
more of a campaign’s budget. Try watching TV in those
called upon the FEC to regulate online political ads as a
states the week before an election and you will see how
result of the revelation about this chump change
jammed the airwaves are.
"bombshell."
It will be interesting if special counsel Robert Mueller and
Analyzing the pattern of expenditures, and doing some
his team of Democrat donor investigators attempt to make
back-of-the-envelope math, it’s clear this was no devilishly
the case for supposed Russian collusion with the Trump
effective plot. Facebook says 56% of the ads ran after the
campaign based on those Facebook ads that had no real
election, reducing the tally that could have influenced the
election effect. If they do, it will be a very significant
result to about $44,000. It also turns out the ads were not
indicator of their desperation to find a crime which so far
confined to swing states but also shown in places like New
has not made an appearance.
.

442
 Great Again: Economy Booming Under Trump
As Wall Street, Consumer Confidence SOAR
By JD Heyes
Monday, October 16, 2017
It appears to be morning in the U.S. once again as
President Donald J. Trump’s policies continue to “Make
America Great Again.”
Despite all of the opposition the president is getting —
from the Party of No (a.k.a. the Democratic Party),
#nevertrump Republicans, the Marxist media and Left-
wing academics, the country is experiencing an economic
and fiscal revival, as evidenced by the meteoric rise of the
stock market and Americans’ confidence in their futures.
A series of reports Friday underscored the renaissance. As
CNBC reported, Wall Street reached new record highs
early in the trading day:
The Nasdaq composite advanced 0.2
percent to 6,605.80 and notched intraday
and closing records.
The S&P 500 finished 0.1 percent at
2,553.17 and hit an all-time intraday high,
with information technology and materials
leading advancers.
The Dow Jones industrial average closed
30.71 points higher at 22,871.72. The 30-
stock index also hit an intraday record.
Bank of America’s shares jumped 1.5 percent on earnings
that were better than expected. Similarly, Netflix shares
rose 1.9 percent, crossing the $200 threshold for the first
time to an all-time record as investors bought up stock
ahead of the company’s earnings report due out next week.
443
“People are generally expecting a strong
earnings season,” said Tom Martin, senior
portfolio manager at Globalt, in an interview
with CNBC.
“The good news is the number of
companies currently beating estimates, and
the margin by which they are doing so, is
running at a clip well above what these
same 31 companies have recorded, on
average, over the past three years,” said
Nick Raich, CEO of The Earnings Scout.
“We’ve had three good quarters in a row for
earnings if you go back to the fourth
quarter of 2016,” added Ernie Cecilia, CIO
at Bryn Mawr Trust. “Last quarter, we also
saw an improvement in revenue growth as
it moved ahead of its long-term trend,
which is a positive.”
The markets aren’t just for “rich people,” mind you, which
is what makes the Trump-era rise so significant. Tens of
millions of ordinary Americans with 401K’s and other
savings-and-retirement accounts also see their net worth
rise when the markets rise, and that’s a great thing for their
future.
All of this winning that Trump promised us on the
campaign trail is having a positive effect on consumer
confidence as well. As reported by Bloomberg Markets, a
University of Michigan survey found that U.S. consumer
sentiment “unexpectedly” surged to a 13-year high “as
Americans’ perceptions of the economy and their own
finances rebounded following several major hurricanes.”
The media outlet noted further:
The jump in sentiment, which was greater
than any analyst had projected, may reflect
several trends: falling gasoline prices
following a hurricane-related spike;
repeated record highs for the stock market;
a 16-year low in unemployment; and post-
storm recovery efforts driving a rebound in
economic growth.
“While the early October surge indicates
greater optimism about the future course of
 the economy, it also reflects an
unmistakable sense among consumers that
economic prospects are now about as
good as could be expected,” Richard
Curtin, director of the University of
Michigan consumer survey, said in a
statement. “Indeed, nothing in the latest
survey indicates that consumers anticipate
an economic downturn anytime soon —
which contrarians may consider a clear
warning sign of trouble ahead.” (Related:
After GOP liars failed to repeal
Obamacare, Trump will gut the law with
executive orders.)
Now mind you, there are going to be plenty of people who
continue to deny that Trump has had anything to do with
this. But as The National Sentinel points out, the president
.
444
has dramatically cut regulations, rules and government
bureaucracy — all of which has had a drain on the
economy — while reintroducing competition, reforming
Obamacare through executive actions, and generally doing
all he can to get the Washington Swamp off the backs of
Americans and the U.S economy. Taken together, these
and other actions, such as pushing for major tax cuts for
job creators, has had an overall cumulative positive effect.
“As in the past, committed Leftists in
academia, the media and on Capitol Hill
will credit everything and everyone except
the president of the United States. But you
can bet your assets if markets and
consumer confidence were down he’d
get all the blame,” the site noted.
You know that’s true.
 SHOCKER: FBI Had Evidence Of
Clinton-Russian Collusion Over Uranium Deal
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 17, 2017
The Trump administration doesn’t need another special
counsel for this scandal; it already has the evidence
(National Sentinel) Criminal Conspiracy: It turns out
there was some collusion going on after all between
members of the U.S. government and Mother Russia. But
it wasn’t Trump’s administration.
It was Obama’s. And the dirty dealer was none other
Hillary Clinton.
Surprise, surprise.
As reported by The Hill, the FBI turned up evidence of
collusion, racketeering, bribery and payoffs between
Russian nuclear company interests tied to President
Vladimir Putin and the Clinton Foundation way back in
2010, but the politicized “Justice” Department under
Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch sat on
the information and did nothing about it. And of course, as
president, Barack Obama was an accessory to the
conspiracy:
Before the Obama administration approved
a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow
control of a large swath of American
uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial
evidence that Russian nuclear industry
officials were engaged in bribery,
kickbacks, extortion and money laundering
designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic
energy business inside the United States,
according to government documents and
interviews.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S.
witness working inside the Russian nuclear
445
industry to gather extensive financial
records, make secret recordings and
intercept emails as early as 2009 that
showed Moscow had compromised an
American uranium trucking firm with bribes
and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court
documents show.
They also obtained an eyewitness account
— backed by documents — indicating
Russian nuclear officials had routed
millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to
benefit former President Bill Clinton’s
charitable foundation during the time
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on
a government body that provided a
favorable decision to Moscow, sources told
The Hill.
The racketeering scheme was conducted
“with the consent of higher level officials” in
Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the
kickbacks, one agent declared in an
affidavit years later.
Rather than bring immediate charges in
2010, however, the Department of Justice
(DOJ) continued investigating the matter
for nearly four more years, essentially
leaving the American public and Congress
in the dark about Russian nuclear
corruption on U.S. soil during a period
when the Obama administration made two
major decisions benefitting Putin’s
commercial nuclear ambitions.
Remember, there’s a “special counsel” out there — Robert
Mueller — who has been tasked by the Deep State to
investigate Trump’s “collusion” with Russia “to steal the
election from Hillary Clinton.”
That’s a hoax. It’s always been a hoax.
Which means that Russia wanting Trump, and not Clinton,
to win in November is also a lie, because doesn’t it have to
be? Why would Putin want a U.S. presidential candidate to
win who promised to pursue policies that were not in
Putin’s or Russia’s best interests? And wouldn’t Putin
have all the dirt on Clinton, virtually guaranteeing four or
even eight years of U.S. policy that benefits Moscow and
not the American people?
The Trump administration doesn’t need
another special counsel. All that needs to
happen is for Attorney General Jeff
.
446
Sessions to use the evidence the FBI
already has and start issuing arrest
warrants.
He can begin with the most corrupt, criminally
investigated presidential contender in U.S. history: Hillary
Clinton.
 Busted! James Comey
Headed To Prison
By Gary Mcintyre
Posted October 17, 2017
Hillary Clinton had the audacity to suggest that ex-FBI
boss James Comey cost her the presidency.
But it’s becoming clear that Comey bent over backwards
to keep Clinton out of prison.
And by the time the dust settles, Comey may end up taking
her place.
A shocking document just released by the Federal Bureau
of Investigation is raising serious questions about whether
Comey perjured himself before Congress in June.
And if he did, Comey could be facing up to 5 years in
federal prison.
Comey and the FBI spearheaded an investigation last year
into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to
handle classified material during her tenure as Secretary of
State.
Last July, just days after interviewing Clinton, Comey
called her actions “extremely careless” but said they did
not amount to a prosecutable offense.
More importantly, Comey testified before Congress in
June that he did not make a decision on Clinton’s case
until she had been interviewed.
Now, that’s looking more and more like a lie.
The FBI just released a heavily redacted document that
seems to show that Comey began drafting his statement on
the Clinton email investigation on May 2, 2016, months
before Clinton and several other key witnesses were
interviewed.
In fact, the May document seems to have been used to help
craft the eventual statement Comey gave to the public in
July.
Rumors of the draft statement – and Comey’s allegedly
premature decision-making – began surfacing in August,
.
447
and the document was referenced in communications
among FBI personnel.
GOP Senators Charles Grassley and Lindsey Graham
wrote a letter to current FBI Director Christopher Wray
demanding to know if the document exists.
And now we know it does.
The May draft document may directly contradict
statements Comey made under oath to Congress.
Former House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz
had previously said that if Comey lied about when he
decided to not bring charges against Clinton, he could be
facing federal perjury charges.
Those charges can carry a sentence of up to 5 years in
prison.
The legislative director for government watchdog group
Judicial Watch also added that lying about the timeline
would put Comey in “grave legal danger.”
Prosecutions for perjury are rare, because it can be difficult
to prove that someone knowingly lied. But the draft
document from Comey may be a tough piece of evidence
to ignore.
Worse, Comey has made enemies for himself all over
Capitol Hill. Democrats believe he cost Clinton the
presidency… Republicans are angry that he didn’t
prosecute her… and President Trump actually fired Comey
earlier this year.
Comey may first get a chance to return to Congress and
explain himself – whether he wants to come or not.
As South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said,
“He’s coming back, one way or another.”
Just don’t be surprised if he pleads the Fifth.
 Oh, SNAP! Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s
‘Travel Ban’ Tweet Just BLEW UP In Her Face
By Sarah D.
Posted At 6:41 Pm On October 17, 2017

This afternoon, Debbie Wasserman Schultz spoke out

against Trump’s latest effort at a so-called “travel ban”:

Debbie’s disgust prompted a valid question from tweeter

@hale_razor:

Oh, snap! She walked right into that one.

pic.twitter.com/BbcGLusCY4
— Rosie/New Account
(@smallroundbrown) October 17, 2017

448
 Trump Meets Tsipras, "Evil" Awkwardness Follows
By Tyler Durden
Oct 17, 2017 5:44 PM

Besides the traditional and quite forgettable exchange of will not allow our country, the United States of America,
diplomatic pleasantries during the first meeting between to be taken advantage of by countries all over the world."
President Trump and Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras
on Tuesday, there were two remarkable highlights.

The first was that Trump said his administration had

informed Congress of a potential arms sale to update
Greece's F-16 aircrafts. "This agreement to strengthen
the Hellenic Air Force is worth up to 2.4 billion U.S.
dollars and would generate thousands of American
jobs," Trump said during his joint press conference with
visiting Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, whose
nation just two years ago was bailed out for the third time.
The unspoken question, of course, is where would the
insolvent Greek nation, which lacks the funds for basic
social services and struggles under Troika-imposed
austerity, obtain the $2.4 billion needed to feed its people
buy US F-16 jets.

The second moment was more memorable, not to mention

awkward.

Speaking to reporters, Tsipras said that he and Donald

Trump had a “productive” meeting on Tuesday and that he
didn’t feel threatened by the U.S. “I want to confirm that
the meeting we had was very productive, and not a Then again, Trump had already managed to pour some salt
moment did I feel threatened any time” Tsipras said into Tsipras wounds with his very first words in the
through a translator at the White House, with Trump presser, when instead of addressing Tsipras, Greece or the
standing at his side. “I saw that there is a fertile outlook meeting, Trump instead pointed out that the Dow Jones
here in order to set aside any differences that we may have had just crossed 23,000, and then trolled the Greek PM,
and find common ground." telling him he hopes Greece could soon also enjoy all time
highs in its stock market. Which, as shown below, is
hardly imminent...
It's what prompted the response, however, that was the
punchline: a reporter casually asked Tsipras, "You said of a
Trump presidency 'I hope we will not face this evil' and
I'm wondering if after spending time with the president you
had changed your mind.

Before Tsipras could respond, a smirking Trump

interjected. "I wish I knew that before my speech." And
just like that the price on those F-16 doubled in price.

Trump refused to hold a grudge, and after Tsipras

answered, added that “a number of countries were a little
bit nervous at the beginning, and I have very good
relations with the leaders of virtually every nation I’ve
dealt with. The reason they were concerned is because I
.

449
 Trump Warns Mccain: 'Be
Careful Because At Some Point I Fight Back'
By Dan Merica, CNN
Updated 1:29 AM ET, Wed October 18, 2017
Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump, hours after
Sen. John McCain delivered a speech that repudiated the
President, warned the Arizona Republican to "be careful"
because at some point he will "fight back."
McCain, while accepting the Liberty Medal in
Philadelphia on Monday night, warned the United States
against turning toward
"half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked
up by people who would rather find
scapegoats than solve problems."
The speech was a repudiation of Trump, who the Arizona
Republican has long feuded with, and the worldview that
catapulted him to office.
Trump told Chris Plante of "The Chris Plante Show" on
Tuesday that he heard the criticism and warned McCain to
be careful.
Sen. John McCain warns against 'spurious nationalism' in Liberty
Medal speech
450
"He was taking shots at you again
yesterday," Plante said. "You heard what
he said yesterday, Sen. McCain?"
"Yeah, well I hear it. And people have to be
careful because at some point I fight back,"
Trump said. "I'm being very nice. I'm being
very, very nice. But at some point I fight
back, and it won't be pretty."
Responding to Trump's threat, McCain bluntly told
reporters Tuesday:
"I've faced far greater challenges than this."
McCain and Trump's feud has dated back years, ever since
the then-2016 candidate said the senator wasn't a war hero
because he was captured in Vietnam.
"He is not a war hero," Trump told pollster
Frank Luntz in 2015.
"He is a war hero," Luntz interjected.
"He is a war hero because he was
captured," Trump said, cutting him off. "I
like people that weren't captured, OK? I
hate to tell you. He is a war hero because
he was captured."
Donald Trump questions if McCain is a war hero 01:45
The feud continued throughout the 2016 campaign, with
McCain regularly faulting the Republican standard bearer
for comments he made on the campaign trail. McCain
withdrew his support for Trump when the "Access
Hollywood" video was made public, showing the 2016
Republican nominee bragging about sexually assaulting
women.
Both Trump and McCain won re-election, but their feud
continued, with the Arizona senator casting a deciding vote
against the Republican health care plan.
The act of defiance stung Trump.
"Sen. McCain, you mean the one who
voted against Obamacare?" Trump asked,
rhetorically, during a sweeping August
news conference. "You mean Sen. McCain
.
451
who voted against us getting good health
care?"
This public back-and-forth contributed to McCain's speech
Monday, where he was honored by Democrats and
Republicans alike for a lifetime of service. McCain was
diagnosed with brain cancer earlier this year.
The Arizona senator and his party's 2008 presidential
nominee described that "half-baked, spurious nationalism"
as "unpatriotic as an attachment to any other tired dogma
of the past that Americans consigned to the ash heap of
history."
 Trump Loses $600mn In Personal
Wealth During First Year Of Presidency
Published time: 18 Oct, 2017 10:31 Edited time: 18 Oct, 2017 11:58

his training courses in real estate, asset management,

entrepreneurship and wealth creation were a fraud.

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates topped the list for the 24th
straight year with an estimated fortune of $89 billion, up
$8 billion from 2016.

The net worth of America's 45th president has shrunk by $600

million over the last twelve months, according to Forbes magazine.

Nearly a year after a win over Hilary Clinton and moving

to the White House, Donald Trump dropped to number
248 in the magazine’s ranking of the wealthiest
Americans, falling 92 positions.

The magazine puts Trump's current net worth at $3.1

billion.

According to Forbes, the decline of the

president’s fortune was caused by “a tough
New York real estate market, a costly
lawsuit and an expensive presidential
campaign.”

Trump’s real estate portfolio is seen as the most significant Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos was ranked number
contributor to the drop. Some golf properties owned by the two for the second year with a net worth of $81.5 billion,
president have also declined in value. up $14.5 billion.

“Values of several Manhattan properties,
particularly those on or near Fifth Avenue,
have dropped, shaving nearly $400 million
off his fortune,” Forbes reports.
Trump reportedly spent $66 million on his campaign and
$25 million settling a claim against Trump University that
.
Investor Warren Buffett held onto the third spot with a
$12.5 billion increase in his fortune estimated at $78
billion.
All in all, the fortunes of the wealthiest Americans total at
least $2.7 trillion compared to $2.4 trillion a year ago.

452
 Senate Launches Probe Into Russian
Nuclear Bribery Case That Netted Clintons Millions
by Tyler Durden
Oct 18, 2017 1:45 PM
As the media continues to lose their collective minds over
$100,000 worth of Facebook ads allegedly purchased by
Russians during the 2016 election, the Senate Judiciary
Committee has finally decided they're going to take a look
into a shady Russian deal that handed Putin 20% of
America's uranium reserves, was approved by the Obama
administration during an ongoing FBI investigation into
charges of bribery, extortion and money laundering by the
Russian buyer and netted the Clintons millions of dollars
in donations and 'speaking fees." Here's more from The
Hill:
The Senate Judiciary Committee has
launched a full-scale probe into a
Russian nuclear bribery case,
demanding several federal agencies
disclose whether they knew the FBI had
uncovered the corruption before the
Obama administration in 2010 approved
a controversial uranium deal with
Moscow.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the committee chairman,
gets his first chance to raise the issue in public on
Wednesday when he questions Attorney General Jeff
Sessions during an oversight hearing.
Though the hearing was scheduled for other purposes,
aides said they expected Grassley to ask Sessions
questions about a story published in The Hill on Tuesday
that disclosed the FBI had uncovered evidence showing
Russian nuclear officials were engaged in a racketeering
scheme involving bribes, kickbacks and money laundering
designed to expand Russian President Vladimir Putin's
atomic energy business on U.S. soil.
"It has recently come to the
Committee’s attention that employees of
Rosatom were involved in a criminal
enterprise involving a conspiracy to
commit extortion and money laundering
during the time of the CFIUS
transaction," Grassley wrote in one such
letter addressed to Sessions.
"The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in
the United States were under criminal
investigation as a result of a U.S.
intelligence operation apparently
around the time CFIUS approved the
Uranium One/Rosatom transaction
453
raises questions about whether that
information factored into CFIUS’
decision to approve the transaction," the
chairman added.
As we pointed out last summer when Peter Schweizer first
released his feature documentary Clinton Cash, the
Uranium One deal, as approved by the Obama
Administration, netted the Clintons and their Clinton
Foundation nearly $150 million in donations and 'speaking
fees' from Uranium One shareholders and other Russian
entities.
Russian Purchase of US Uranium Assets in Return for
$145mm in Contributions to the Clinton Foundation - Bill
and Hillary Clinton assisted a Canadian financier, Frank
Giustra, and his company, Uranium One, in the acquisition
of uranium mining concessions in Kazakhstan and the
United States. Subsequently, the Russian government
sought to purchase Uranium One but required approval
from the Obama administration given the strategic
importance of the uranium assets.
In the run-up to the approval of the deal
by the State Department, nine
shareholders of Uranium One just
happened to make $145mm in donations
to the Clinton Foundation. Moreover,
the New Yorker confirmed that Bill
Clinton received $500,000 in speaking
fees from a Russian investment bank,
with ties to the Kremlin, around the
same time.
Needless to say, the State Department approved the deal
giving Russia ownership of 20% of U.S. uranium assets
Now, thanks to newly released affidavits from a case that
landed one of the Russian co-conspirators, Vadim Mikerin,
in jail, we learned just yesterday that not only was the
Obama administration aware the Russians' illegal acts in
the U.S. but it may have also been fully aware that
"Russian nuclear officials had routed
millions of dollars to the U.S. designed
to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s
charitable foundation during the time
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served
on a government body that provided a
favorable decision to Moscow."
Per The Hill:
Before the Obama administration
approved a controversial deal in 2010
giving Moscow control of a large swath of
American uranium, the FBI had gathered
substantial evidence that Russian
nuclear industry officials were engaged
in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and
money laundering designed to grow
Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business
inside the United States, according to
government documents and interviews.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working
inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive
financial records, make secret recordings and intercept
emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had
compromised an American uranium trucking firm with
bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.
They also obtained an eyewitness account
— backed by documents — indicating
Russian nuclear officials had routed
millions of dollars to the U.S. designed
to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s
charitable foundation during the time
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served
on a government body that provided a
favorable decision to Moscow, sources
told The Hill.
And guess who ran the FBI's investigation into this
particular Russian plot?
As The Hill noted, the Mikerin probe
began in 2009 under Robert Mueller,
now the special counsel in charge of the
Trump case, and ended in late 2015
under the controversial, former FBI
Director James Comey who was relieved
of his duties by President Trump.
Ironically, when the DOJ finally arrested
Mikerin in 2014, following 5 years of
investigations in a massive international
bribery and money-laundering scheme,
rather than publicly celebrate, they
seemingly swept it under the rug. In
fact, there was no public release
454
concerning the case at all until a full
year later when the DOJ announced a
plea deal with Mikerin right before labor
day.
Bringing down a major Russian nuclear corruption scheme
that had both compromised a sensitive uranium
transportation asset inside the U.S. and facilitated
international money laundering would seem a major
feather in any law enforcement agency’s cap.
But the Justice Department and FBI
took little credit in 2014 when Mikerin,
the Russian financier and the trucking firm
executives were arrested and charged.
The only public statement occurred an
entire year later when the Justice
Department put out a little-noticed press
release in August 2015, just days before
Labor Day. The release noted that the
various defendants had reached plea
deals.
By that time, the criminal cases against Mikerin had been
narrowed to a single charge of money laundering for a
scheme that officials admitted stretched from 2004 to
2014. And though agents had evidence of criminal
wrongdoing they collected since at least 2009, federal
prosecutors only cited in the plea agreement a handful of
transactions that occurred in 2011 and 2012, well after the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States’s
approval.
The final court case also made no
mention of any connection to the
influence peddling conversations the
FBI undercover informant witnessed
about the Russian nuclear officials
trying to ingratiate themselves with the
Clintons even though agents had
gathered documents showing the
transmission of millions of dollars from
Russia’s nuclear industry to an
American entity that had provided
assistance to Bill Clinton’s foundation,
sources confirmed to The Hill.
So, what if James Comey really was looking out for
Hillary all along?
 .

455
 Trump Says Only TV Is Worse Than 'Dying' US
Newspapers And Magazines
© REUTERS/ Joshua Roberts - US
09:52 18.10.2017(Updated 11:59 18.10.2017)

May 2017 saw Trump tweeting about the catchphrase

"sources say" used by the "fake news" media.

The US President has again quipped at his country's "fake In late February 2017, Trump claimed that the "fake news"
news" reporters. media pose a threat to the United States.

In his Tuesday's tweet, Trump pointed the finger at the
news teams of the three original US television networks,
as well as its oldest 24-hour cable news channel.
He did not elaborate on any specific report by these media
outlets.
The remarks came a week after Trump blamed NBC News
for allegations about his ordering an increase in the US'
nuclear arsenal.
Earlier that month, an array of US and international media,
including the New York Times, CNN, Los Angeles Times,
Hill, Politico, BuzzFeed, Daily Mail, BBC, and New York
Daily News were blocked from a briefing held by White
House spokesman Sean Spicer.
The US television networks NBC, CBS and ABC were all
founded in the 1940's, reach almost all US households and
have hundreds of affiliates. CNN was founded by Ted
Turner in 1980.

456
 Lefty Glenn Greenwald Slams
Liberal Media For ‘Extreme Groupthink’
By Nicholas Fondacaro
October 18, 2017 12:25 AM EDT
In a Tuesday appearance on Fox News Channel’s Tucker
Carlson Tonight, the progressive journalist and co-founder
of The Intercept Glenn Greenwald spoke with Carlson
about the media’s fixation with the Russia story and how
they got so many things wrong. And in the process,
Greenwald called out the liberal media for being a self-
gratifying echo chamber where consequences for false
reporting no longer apply but benefits flow.
Greenwald pointed out how the media was eager to publish
any “inflammatory” information pertaining to the Russia
investigation no matter how often they “turn out to be
totally false.” And with absolutely no consequences from
their employer or colleagues.
“They get enormous benefits when they
publish recklessly,” he added. “They get
applause on social media from their
peers, they get zillions of retweets, huge
amounts of traffic, they end up on TV.
They get applauded across the
spectrum because people are so giddy
and eager to hear more about this
Russia and Trump story.”
He lamented about how there were almost no
repercussions for their false reporting because their peers
just pretend it didn’t happen and moved onto the next
sensationalist article. And according to Greenwald, there
were far greater upsides to reckless reporting than
downsides:
And when their stories get completely debunked it just
kind of -- everybody agrees to ignore it and everyone
moves on and they pay no price. At the same time, they’re
feeling and pleasing their sources by publishing the
457
sources that the sources want them to publish. So there's
huge amounts of career benefits and reputational benefits
and very little cost when they publish stories that end up
being debunked, because the narrative they are serving as a
popular one, at least within their peer circles.
“Gosh, that’s so dishonest,” Carlson
exclaimed. “I think all of us and journalism
have gotten things wrong, I certainly have.
And you feel bad about it, you really do and
there's a consequence.” “Do you really
think there's that level of dishonesty in the
American press,” he asked his guest.
“I think what it is more than dishonesty
is a really warped incentive scheme
bolstered by this very severe groupthink
that social media is fostering in ways
that we don't yet fully understand,”
Greenwald argued.
Greenwald followed up by noting that many journalists
were no longer out in the field anymore, which was to be
expected since many newspapers closed down their state
house operations in favor of national reporting over the
decades.
“They're sitting on Twitter talking to one
another and this produces this extreme
groupthink where these orthodoxies
arrive in deviating from them or
questioning them or challenging,
believe me, results in all kinds of
recrimination and scorn,” Greenwald
explained.
And when it came to the media’s rush to publish leaked
information that undermined Trump’s administration,
Greenwald observed a suspicious trend:
“We know that there are a huge number
of people inside the government who
are willing to leak … and yet there have
been no leaks so far showing any
evidence of that kind of collusion,
leading one to wonder why that is.”
 the sense of that formulation that they’re being manipulated. I
think at best what you can say for them; they are willingly and
eagerly being manipulated.

Because what you see is over and over

they publish really inflammatory stories
that turn out to be totally false and what
happens in most cases? Nothing. They
get enormous benefits when they
publish recklessly. They get applause
on social media from their peers, they
get zillions of retweets, huge amounts
Transcript below: of traffic, they end up on TV. They get
applauded across the spectrum
FNC because people are so giddy and eager
Tucker Carlson Tonight to hear more about this Russia and
October 17, 2017 Trump story.
8:30:56 PM Eastern And when their stories get completely
debunked it just kind of -- everybody
TUCKER CARLSON: It's been 49 weeks and counting since the agrees to ignore it and everyone moves
2016 election, the hunt is still on for proof of Russian meddling. on and they pay no price. At the same
Did Putin get Trump elected? We still don't know. We did recently time, they’re feeling and pleasing their
speak though to progressive journalist Glenn Greenwald, who sources by publishing the sources that
was at the press is replacing good reporting with inaccurate the sources want them to publish. So
scandal-mongering. Watch this. there's huge amounts of career benefits
and reputational benefits and very little
[Cuts to Video] cost when they publish stories that end
up being debunked, because the
narrative they are serving as a popular
TUCKER: So Glenn, just to get to the facts of this story, it is
one, at least within their peer circles.
conclusively shown that the story about the 21 voting systems
being hacked is untrue, correct?

GLENN GREENWALD: It's false in two ways, one is that several

of the states included in the list, such as Wisconsin, California,
and Texas, said that the websites that the Homeland Security
Department cited had nothing to do with voting systems, they are
entirely unrelated.

And it's false in a second way, which is

a lot of the stories, in fact, most of them
said that Russia try to hack into the
voting systems when in fact even
Homeland Security can only show that
what they did was scan those computer TUCKER: Gosh, that’s so dishonest. I think all of us and
systems, which is basically casing journalism have gotten things wrong, I certainly have. And you
something to say for vulnerabilities and feel bad about it, you really do and there's a consequence. Do
made no attempt to actually hack into you really think there's that level of dishonesty in the American
them. So, it was false on various levels. press?

TUCKER: So, you and I don't agree on a lot of issues but I think GREENWALD:
we share the same concern about this story, and that is that
American journalists are being manipulated for whatever reason I think what it is more than dishonesty is
by the intelligence community in the United States, and I'm a really warped incentive scheme
wondering why after years of having this happen to American bolstered by this very severe groupthink
journalists, they are allowing this to happen again. that social media is fostering in ways
that we don't yet fully understand.
GREENWALD: Well, that's the thing I would refrain that a little
bit. I don't actually think so much that journalists are the victims in
458
Most journalists these days are in congressional committees or at
zoning board meetings or using shoe leather reporting.
They're sitting on Twitter talking to one
another and this produces this extreme
groupthink where these orthodoxies
arrive in deviating from them or
questioning them or challenging,
believe me, results in all kinds of
recrimination and scorn.
And embracing them produces a sort of in-group mentality where
you are rewarded, and I think a lot of it is about that kind of
behavior.
TUCKER: That is really deep. You live in a foreign country, I'm
not on social media, maybe we have a little bit of distance from
this, where do you think the story is going? What's the next
incarnation of this?
GREENWALD:
Well, the odd part about it, and about
the inpatients that journalists have in
trying to just jump to the finish line is
.
459
that there are numerous investigations
underway in the city, including by
credible investigators.
Including Senator Burr and Warner and the Senate Intelligence
Committee, which most people seem to trust and certainly Robert
Mueller, who’s armed with subpoena power and everyone is
really eager to lavish with praise.
We are going to find out presumably one way or the other soon
enough. One thing that is so odd to me, Tucker, is that this is
been going on now for a year, this accusation that the Trump
administration or the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians
to hack the DNC and John Podesta’s email. And we know that
there are a huge number of people inside the government who
are willing to leak, even at the expense of committing crimes in
order to undermine Trump, and yet there have been no leaks so
far showing any evidence of that kind of collusion leading one to
wonder why that is. So, I hope that everybody is willing to wait
until the actual investigation reveals finally the real answers. But
it doesn't seem that will be the case.
TUCKER: Bravery is when you disagree in public with your
peers. And by that definition you are a very brave man.
460
 BOMBSHELL: Obama’s Politicized FBI Shelved Evidence
The Russians COLLUDED With The Clintons To Secure
Controversial Uranium Deal
By JD Heyes
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
While American taxpayers shell out millions of dollars for
“special counsel” Robert Mueller to investigate a hoax —
that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to “steal the
election” from Hillary Clinton — the White House has a
full-blown case of real collusion between the Putin
government and the Clinton Foundation that it should be
pursuing.
As reported by The Hill, in the months before the Obama
regime approved a hugely controversial deal that gave the
Kremlin control over one-fifth of the United States’
strategic uranium reserves — the principal element in the
construction of nuclear weapons — the FBI had collected a
substantial amount of evidence that Russian nuclear
industry officials “were engaged in bribery, kickbacks,
extortion and money laundering designed to grow
Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United
States.”
The site noted further:
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working
inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive
financial records, make secret recordings and intercept
emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had
compromised an American uranium trucking firm with
bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.
In addition, agents obtained an account by an eyewitness
that was substantiated by documentation that Russian
nuclear actors routed millions of dollars to the U.S.
specifically to benefit Bill and Hillary Clinton’s
461
‘charitable’ foundation while the latter was serving as
secretary of state, and on a government body that gave a
thumbs-up to the deal.
In an affidavit some years later, one FBI agent would
declare that the racketeering scheme occurred “with the
consent of higher level officials” in Russia, who then
“shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks.
But instead of bringing charges immediately in 2010,
Obama’s corrupt Department of Justice, then led by former
terrorist-defending Attorney General Eric Holder, dragged
its feet for another four years under the guise of
‘continuing the investigation.’ During that time, the
American people were clueless to the treachery that had
taken place, even as Hillary Clinton rose in the ranks of
her equally corrupt Democratic Party to become its
presidential nominee.
During the four-year stint, the Obama administration made
two key policy decisions that benefited Putin’s commercial
nuclear objectives, per The Hill. The first came in October
2010, when the State Department under Clinton and other
agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment
approved unanimously the sale of Uranium One, a
Canadian mining company, to Russia’s state nuclear
company Rosatom, which gave Moscow control over 20
percent of U.S. strategic reserves.
When Trump brought this deal up on the campaign trail
last year, a spokesman for Clinton’s campaign said she had
nothing to do with the review and approval (which we
know now was BS).
Then in 2011, the Obama regime approved Rosatom’s
Tenex subsidiary’s sale of commercial uranium to U.S.
nuclear power plants, in partnership with the United States
Enrichment Corp. Before that time, Tenex could only sell
reprocessed uranium to U.S. plants that had been harvested
from old Soviet nuclear weapons under a previous
agreement. (Related: Comey’s FBI ‘Clearing’ Of Hillary
Clinton May Seal Donald Trump’s Victory.)
“The Russians were compromising American contractors
in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion
threats, all of which raised legitimate national security
concerns. And none of that evidence got aired before the
Obama administration made those decisions,” said a
person who worked in an interview with The Hill. The
source spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of
retribution by U.S. or Russian officials.
The controversy over the sale began in 2015 after the
release of a book by author Peter Schweitzer and a story by
The New York Times detailing how millions of dollars
flowed to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton’s
pockets as the uranium deal progressed.
The Obama regime and the Clintons have all denied any
wrongdoing, saying there was never any collusion or
evidence of criminal activity.
462
The FBI, as well as the Energy Department, both beg to
differ. Documents reviewed by The Hill “show the FBI, in
fact, had gathered substantial evidence well before the
committee’s decision that Vadim Mikerin — the main
Russian overseeing Putin’s nuclear expansion inside the
United States — was engaged in wrongdoing starting in
2009.”
This is the real collusion as it relates to the last election
cycle, not the myth that Mueller is investigating. That’s
merely a concocted distraction by the Deep State to
ensnare Trump and keep the heat off the real criminal
actors.
The president should instruct Attorney General Jeff
Sessions to appoint a real special counsel to get to the
bottom of this. Crimes have been committed, and people
need to go to jail over them.
 Almost Half Of Voters Believe
Media Makes Up Stories About Trump, Poll Reveals
By Kristine Marsh
October 18, 2017 10:42 AM EDT
More bad news for the liberal media.
According to a poll conducted by Politico and Morning
Consult, nearly half of American voters distrust the
media’s reporting on President Trump and his
administration. Not only that, but they believe journalists
deliberately fabricate stories about Trump. More
surprising, it’s not just Republicans or Trump supporters
who believe this.
The staggering results published
Wednesday morning in Politico, reveal
that while 76 percent of Republicans
believe the media makes up stories about
Trump, a whopping 44 percent of
independent voters, and 1 in 5
Democrats also believe the media lies in
their reporting on Trump.
These numbers contradict the media’s narrative that
Trump’s battle with the media only influence his base. It
seems the media’s constant negative reporting on the
president has taken it’s toll on independents and some
Democrats as well.
This poll comes on the heels of Trump telling conservative
radio host Chris Plante his very same suspicions about the
credibility of the media:
“Actually, dishonesty in the media is one of
the things that surprised me the most. I
thought after I won, the media would
become much more stable and much more
honest. They’ve gone crazy. CNN is a joke.
NBC is a total joke. You watch what they
report, it bears no relationship to what I’m
463
doing. But the media is absolutely
dishonest — and frankly, I’ve never seen
anything quite like it,” he told Plante in an
interview Tuesday morning.
Trump also tweeted on Tuesday,
“So much Fake News being put in dying
magazines and newspapers. Only place
worse may be @NBCNews, @CBSNews,
@ABC and @CNN. Fiction writers!”
It seems that almost half of voters agree with the president.
This isn’t the only poll this year that reveals
Americans increasing distrust of the media.
Back in June, two polls revealed similar
results. A Rasmussen poll found “76
percent of Republicans and 51 percent
of voters not affiliated with either major
political party believed most reporters
are biased against the president” while
24 percent of Democrats agreed the
media held an anti-Trump bias.
Another poll from Yougov.com revealed that while 85% of
Republicans believed the media’s reporting was influenced
by who funds or owns them, 1 in 2 Democrats also
believed the media was partial to its financial backers.
More importantly, the YouGov pollsters found that
“the general public sides more with
Republicans than it does with
Democrats on the topic of media bias.”
In September, Gallup reported that only
one-third of Americans believed the
media gets its facts straight.
The poll also reveals the sharp divide between Republicans
and Democrats on the issue of media bias, that has
increased dramatically in the past 19 years. When Gallup
asked voters this same question in 1998, both parties were
pretty evenly split in agreement that the media got their
facts straight, but now it’s mostly Republicans who believe
the media is biased, proving that the media has an even
stronger left-leaning bent now.
 DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE
An Honest Discussion of Politics, Religion, and all Kinds of Things we are not Supposed to Talk About.
VOL 2: 70th. EDITION You are Free to Copy This Information.
We’ve Had Enough.
It’s Time To Act
October 18, 2017
Enough is enough. We have had it with those Jewish
Manure Spreaders. We have had it with those despicable
perverts; those pedophiles; those Satanic Monsters. We
are sick and tired of the disgusting malfeasance perpetrated
by the likes of Hillary and Bill Clinton. We are no longer
willing to tolerate the likes of Harvey Weinstein and
Jeffrey Epstein. Huma Abedin and that pecker head
appropriately named, Weiner. Jews. They are all Jews!
And they have again let the Jew out of the bag and now,
because of the wild card they never foresaw, or so it
seems, the Internet has brought Jewish horror directly in
our faces from many angles. We knew immediately about
the Jewish hand involved in the mass shooting of
conservative country music fans in Las Vegas. ISIS, the
FBI, the CIA; all of those alphabet agencies; ATF, FEMA,
you name it; all of them are directed by Jewish entities and
they are all complicit in TREASON and MASS
MURDER. Remember, Israel’s Mossad is heavily
involved in the death of freedom on 9/11.
Mass murder comes easy to Jews. Hillary laughs over it.
Ted Bundy murdered more than 35 young, lovely Gentile
girls. He was a Jew. Jeffrey Dahlmer was a Jew and so was
the Son of Sam. Did you know that most serial killers in
North America are Jews. You can Google that, if the
information has not been removed yet because Jews do not
like their crimes to be visible. Indeed, they are admonished
by their holiest of holy books, the Talmud, that if they
want to commit a crime to do it away from one’s home
town but go somewhere else to commit the deed. Through
deception so the Jews commit their foul deeds; they openly
admit it and now it is time to say, we have had enough and
it is high time the perpetrators of destruction are rounded
up, tried, and creatures such as Hillary Clinton be hung by
the neck until dead, dead, dead. As for God having mercy
on her soul, it is not possible because she killed her soul a
long time ago. In fact, I have a suspicion. Since Jews are
the Sons of the Devil and the Spawn of Satan, they can
never develop a soul in the first place and hence there is
nothing there for God to have mercy on. Jews no longer
deserve our mercy, either. We have had it with their
schemes and their, in our faces, chutzpah.
Enough is enough. We can no longer tolerate the lies of
the Jews justifying three millennia of cheating, stealing,
and mass murder of non Jews; those of us whom they call,
‘animals in human skin.’ We can no longer tolerate their
filthy hands in our public schools. We can no longer accept
their role in nefarious schemes which place our children in
464
danger. Indeed Jews still sacrifice Gentile Children. Have
you never wondered where do all those missing children
go? Thousands and thousands of children go missing every
year, never to return to their happy homes. Many children
end up as sacrificial victims of the Jewish blood lust. It is
all in the open now. The Jews have finally overstepped
whatever line was drawn and we have had it with their
inhuman behaviour. They served it up with John Podesta
and his band of slavering demons at their grimy little pizza
shops. We know all about it. Indeed, it is no secret any
longer. Your Talmud is revealed. You are the kings of
mayhem and self admitted destroyers of all that is sacred
and of value. You are indeed what Jesus of Nazareth called
you; ‘The Children of Satan and the Sons of the Devil.’
Madeline Albright, another bride of Satan, a Jew, and a
disgusting fat pig; ugly as a Golda Meir; a bulbous nosed
terrorist and one of the founding manure lumps of the
Carbuncle called, Israel; a Jewish criminal haven for
murderers, thieves, rogues, carpetbaggers, war mongers,
and pornographers, ought to be dangling beside Hillary.
Dianne Feinstein and her scam artist husband; both of
them Jews, also would look just fine, gently swaying in the
breeze. Before they go, they can watch the likes of
Michael Chertoff and Rahm Emmanuel being given a short
drop from the men’s gallows where Henry, the Jew,
Kissinger; a horrible bloated useless eater was already
rolled out to the end of his rope.
Jews with dual citizenships in Congress and the Senate
have to be deported to somewhere; perhaps an island in the
middle of the sea because we have had enough of their war
mongering for the sake of Israel. We have had enough of
Jewish wars consuming our young men and women in
their Talmudic meat grinders. We are no longer willing to
tolerate the Diabolical madness of the Jews. Those who
have committed sedition, treason, murder, must be hung by
their Kosher necks and removed from the living with
extreme prejudice; the same prejudice they practice against
everyone who is not Jewish. Calling us, ‘animals in human
skin,’ is something we take great exception to. We are no
longer tolerating your filth and corruption, you Jews; you
Spawn of Satan.It is time to begin the terrible work. It is
time to expel the Jews from all positions of power and
control exactly like so many other brave nations have done
once the Jew was out of the bag.
Hillary must be hung by her scrawny neck for what she has
done. Hillary Clinton must be the poster girl here in
NORAM, just as that foul Jew, a homely, sour faced angel
of death, Angela Merkel must be the poster cunt for
Europe. Whilst in Europe, Tony Blair must be found and
stretched good and slowly. Once he has finished grinning,
the entire Jewish infestation in Windsor Castle has to be
addressed with extreme prejudice because they have
committed so much that is just plain evil. They sanction
the Jewish infestation known as Rothschild to bankrupt
entire nations with fiat money not worth the paper it is
printed on. In the British Commonwealth the head of the
Jewish queen, Lizardbreath II is printed on all the paper
and base metal tokens which are worth less every year;
eating up the wealth of the Gentiles and rendering them all
deeper and deeper in debt and ever more poor; their
circumstances diminishing by the year and shortening lives
as a result of the stress and pressure people endure just to
pay their onerous rents; often time to Jewish landlords who
have no mercy because Jews are admonished to show no
mercy to Gentiles and to kick them when they are down.
Jews who own the revenue agencies, such as the Canada
Revenue Agency are taught to shut Gentiles down just
before Christmas when it will hurt the most. That was
admitted to me by a bloated retired revenue agent. Taxes
are legal plunder.
Hillary must be hung. It has to start with someone and her
smirking, Jewish face has to go. We have had enough. We
can no longer tolerate creatures such as her grinning and
waving at us as if nothing is wrong and her crimes are
.
465
nothing substantial. Well, we at DtRH have had enough
and so have many others. There is a critical mass coming
and the Jews will soon be completely exposed and not one
Gentile will be left who does not know who is the enemy
of all life on Earth and will point a firm finger directly at
those vermin the Jews and will applaud when one of the
foulest of them is hanged by her neck on an appropriate
gallows in front of the White House.
When the show begins it must be broadcast to the world
via every medium possible. Of course the media will have
been wrested away from the Jews who now control it and
use it to spread their lies and cover up their crimes; crimes
such as the shooting in Las Vegas and the evaporation of
neighborhoods with directed energy weapons. Only
terrorists such as Jews control such weapons and use them
against Gentiles without batting an eye. Remember they
dropped BigBoy. Well, we have had enough and it is time
for Karma to bite the Jew in his Khazarian arse.
It is time to shout, enough is enough from the
mountaintops. It is time to put an end to the Jewish
malfeasance and remove them all to an island in the South
Atlantic where we fed up Gentiles can surround the place
with our navies and keep the Jew safe and contained. Jews
such as Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel, Janet Reno,
Chertoff and Company, when ALL OF THOSE JEWS
have been removed we will see Justice returned to our
planet. Also, remember the Muslims.
 Stock Market Added $5.2 Trillion
In Value Since Trump’s Election
Market’s Post-Election Enthusiasm For Trump's Policies Continues
By Emel Akan, Epoch Times
October 18, 2017 9:45 Am Last Updated: October 18, 2017 2:11 Pm

As of the morning of Oct. 18, only 52 companies have

announced their results, with 81 percent beating profit
forecasts, according to FactSet.

“The percentage of companies beating

earnings estimates and revenue estimates
are running above the five-year average,”
said John Butters, senior earnings analyst
at FactSet.

However, the U.S. insurance sector is expected to be a

drag on the overall growth of third-quarter earnings, due to
People walk by the New York Stock Exchange in the Financial
District of Manhattan on June 26, 2017. (Benjamin Chasteen/The the effects of hurricanes.
Epoch Times)
If companies continue to beat analysts’ estimates, a 6
Positive economic indicators, coupled with the pro-growth percent earnings growth for the third quarter can be
policies of President Donald Trump, have fueled business achieved despite the weather impact, Butters said.
sentiment and investor confidence after the presidential
election. Wall Street analysts are expecting double-digit growth in
the last quarter of this year, as well as the first two quarters
The Dow Jones Industrial Average has soared more than of 2018, according to FactSet.
25 percent since November, hitting the 23,000-mark for
the first time on Oct. 17. It is the index’s fourth milestone
this year.

Other indices, including the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq

Composite, also posted all-time highs in September and
October.

“The U.S. has gained more than 5.2

trillion dollars in Stock Market Value
since Election Day! Also, record
business enthusiasm,” Trump wrote in a
tweet on Oct. 16.

Corporate earnings, a big catalyst for the stock market,

have made a strong comeback this year. Companies within
the S&P 500 reported more than 10 percent growth in both
the first and second quarters. It was the first time the index
recorded two consecutive quarters of double-digit growth
since 2011, according to FactSet, a data-gathering firm.
Surge in Confidence
As the third-quarter earnings season gets underway, U.S.
corporations have started to report solid results, beating
estimates. Trump’s policies, including deregulation, tax cuts, and
infrastructure investment, have raised business optimism
and hence encouraged companies to invest and hire more.
466
The U.S. economy grew more than 3 percent in the second
quarter, buoyed by business investments and consumer
spending.
“Our country and our economy cannot take
off like they should unless we transform
America’s outdated complex and extremely
burdensome tax code,” said Trump at The
Heritage Foundation’s annual President’s
Club Meeting on Oct. 17.
The tax reform plan by the Trump administration proposes
to cut the corporate tax rate by 40 percent.
Tax cuts may boost the corporate earnings by more than 10
percent, according to a report by Goldman Sachs.
“Although many details remain unclear, the
White House plan as proposed could boost
2018 S&P 500 adjusted earnings by 12
percent,” stated the report.
“In addition to the direct earnings benefit,
the combination of corporate and personal
tax reform could spur faster economic
growth.”
The U.S. economy added on average 172,000 jobs per
month between November and August, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics. In September, however,
employment dropped by 33,000 due to the effects of
hurricanes on the leisure and hospitality sector. It was the
first monthly decline in seven years.
467
Despite the negative jobs number, the
unemployment rate dropped to 4.2
percent, the lowest rate in 16 years.
According to a Business Roundtable survey conducted
among CEOs, 87 percent of the CEOs identified the
existing U.S. tax code as the most important drawback for
the U.S. economy. In an earlier survey, 76 percent of
company leaders said they would hire more people if tax
reform were successfully implemented.
Consumer sentiment has also surged to record highs,
beating estimates, according to the University of
Michigan’s monthly survey. The index of consumer
sentiment jumped to 101.1, the highest level since the start
of 2004.
“The data indicate a robust outlook for
consumer spending that extends the
current expansion to at least mid-2018,
which would mark the 2nd longest
expansion since the mid 1800s,” wrote
Richard Curtin, the survey’s chief
economist, in a note.
“While the early October surge indicates
greater optimism about the future course of
the economy, it also reflects an
unmistakable sense among consumers that
economic prospects are now about as
good as could be expected.”
 Donald Trump Didn't Create Danger
Of Presidential Dictatorship, He Inherited It
James Bovard, Opinion Columnist
Published 11:05 A.M. ET Oct. 18, 2017 | Updated 8:05 P.M. ET Oct. 18, 2017
Those who denounce Trump's
constitutional depredations and anti-
democratic pronouncements are
clueless about the real threat.
Americans nowadays have a bad attitude towards
presidents. Many people are denouncing Donald Trump as
a dictator. But the real problem in this nation is the
dictatorial illiteracy that has allowed modern presidents to
commandeer far too much power.
Trump’s saber rattling, rude outbursts and rancorous
tweets have spooked folks far and wide. But most
Americans are not sufficiently informed on recent history
to recognize where Trump poses dire threats beyond the
usual Washington machinations. Most citizens are unaware
that both political parties have perennially championed
bureaucratic aggrandizement over civil liberties.
Many of the experts who have condemned Trump are also
clueless about how far federal control has stretched. Yale
professor Samuel Moyn and Oxford professor David
Priestland recently declared in a New York Times op-ed
that “there is no real evidence that Mr. Trump wants to
seize power unconstitutionally, and there is no reason to
think he could succeed.”
But violating the Constitution is practically the job
description for modern presidents. It was George W.
Bush’s White House, not Trump, that asserted a
“commander-in-chief override” entitling presidents to
ignore the law and the Bill of Rights. Congress utterly
failed to thwart that outrageous claim.
Presidents have amassed vast authority because they are
judged on their rhetoric and purported goals, not on their
468
constitutional fidelity. Former president Barack Obama’s
drone assassinations of U.S. citizens were non-issues
because observers think he “meant well.” When Obama
decided to bomb Libya in 2011, his appointees made it
clear that he'd ignore the War Powers Act of 1973, enacted
to prevent presidents from launching wars on their whim.
When a federal judge ruled in May 2016 that the Obama
administration’s consumer subsidies under the Affordable
Care Act violated the Constitution, the decision was almost
completely ignored — perhaps because Obama’s
illegalities were progressive. When President Trump ended
the subsidies, he was denounced for trampling
congressional prerogatives.
Much of the response to Trump is akin to a novice cable
weather reporter who treats each morning’s sunrise as a
shocking development. Sen. John McCain, R-
Ariz., responded to Trump’s media bashing by warning,
“That's how dictators get started.” By this standard,
practically every president since Thomas Jefferson has
been a dictator in the making.
Trump is being denounced as a dictator for rescinding
Obama’s executive decrees. Nothing frightens some
Trump opponents more than his withdrawal from the Paris
climate accord. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio
denounced that decision as “an immoral assault on the
public health, safety and security of everyone on this
planet." But Obama chose not to submit that agreement for
ratification to the Senate. As The Times noted, Obama
relied on “bureaucratic bulldozing rather than legislative
transparency,” issuing nearly 50% more “major
regulations” than the Bush administration.
Many Trump opponents are not opposed to dictators per
se; they simply want different dictates. Trump was widely
denounced because his Justice Department refuses to
compel every public school in the nation to make special
bathroom and locker room accommodations for self-
proclaimed transgender kids. But the Constitution did not
grant the federal government jurisdiction over gender
identity.
The news media bear much of the blame for Americans’
dictatorial illiteracy. None of Trump’s actions yet rivals
the odiousness of the Military Commissions Act of 2006,
which retroactively legalized torture and gutted habeas
corpus. There was little uproar at the time thanks to
blasé headlines such as this Washington Post gem: “Many
rights in U.S. legal system absent in new bill.”
Whitewashing torture was of no more significance than
Congress creating a wool subsidy.
POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media
People who are clueless about past oppression are unlikely
to effectively resist new abuses. If people never perceived
or complained about the power grabs of the prior three
presidents, they have scant standing to bewail Trump. This
is especially true of top officials in previous
administrations who set perilous precedents that Trump
could exploit.
Trump, like recent presidents commanding armies of
enforcement agents with sweeping prerogatives, is a threat
to our rights and liberties. His recent comments endorsing
police roughing up arrestees were appalling by any
standard. Luckily, Trump’s blather cannot negate local,
state and federal laws against such abuses. On the other
hand, Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ campaign to revive
the drug war and asset forfeiture poses a far more direct
peril.
.
469
The sheer amount of punitive power possessed by the
federal government is one of the best gauges of potential
tyranny. Do we really need 4,000 federal criminal laws and
300,000 regulations with criminal penalties to punish
wayward citizens?
As Benjamin Constant wrote in 1815,
“It is in fact the degree of force, not its
holders, which must be
denounced. ... There are weights too heavy
for the hand of man.”
Unfortunately, many Trump opponents will never make an
adverse inference against arbitrary power because they
seek to put government itself back on a pedestal.
Trump won the election last year in part because he
promised to “make America great again.” But America
will not be great again until people expect and tolerate far
less from presidents. And only illiterates believe that
toppling Trump is the only “dictator insurance” that
America needs.
 Fusion GPS Founders Plead The Fifth At House
Intelligence Hearing Regarding Questions Over
BOGUS “Trump Dossier”
By JD Heyes
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
I’ll just come out and say it: On most occasions, whenever
a suspect pleads his or her Fifth Amendment right against
self-incrimination when being questioned under oath, that
generally means they’ve got something to hide. It doesn’t
necessarily mean guilt, just that they’re hiding something
that would make them look bad if they responded to the
questioning.
As reported by The Daily Caller, two co-founders of
Washington, D.C.-based opposition research firm Fusion
GPS, which commissioned a former British spy to produce
the infamous (and totally discredited) “Trump dossier,”
involved the Fifth during appearances before the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on
Wednesday, according to a source who spoke to the
website on condition of anonymity.
The Fusion GPS founders — Peter Fritsch
and Thomas Catan — pleaded the Fifth “to
every question asked of them,” said the
source.
Earlier this month the intelligence panel sent subpoenas to
Fritsch, Catan and a third partner, Glenn Simpson, in order
to discuss their link to and involvement with the bogus
dossier which the FBI reportedly used to justify
investigations into Trump’s campaign last year. The
dossier was compiled by Christopher Steele, a former
British spook who has since disowned it.
470
House Intelligence Committee members had been
forewarned that the session would be unproductive.
Fusion’s lawyers sent a letter to Rep. Devin Nunes, R-
Calif., the panel’s chairman, informing him that all three
partners — former Wall Street Journal reporters, all —
would not cooperate with lawmakers. The letter cited First
Amendment protections and agreements regarding
confidentiality.
The panel had every reason to call Fusion’s partners to
appear. Previous reports noted that the firm was working
on behalf of an ally of Hillary Clinton a year ago in June
when Steele was hired to probe any of Trump’s personal
and/or business dealings with Russia.
The investigation produced a 35-page document chock full
of wild claims and unsubstantiated salacious charges
regarding Trump himself and some of his campaign
officials. In addition to some politicians, the FBI has also
used it to justify an investigation into alleged “collusion”
between Trump and Russia to “steal the election” from
Clinton. (Related: FBI’s Comey made inconsistent
statements about Trump ‘dossier’.)
The Daily Caller noted further:
Congressional Republicans have
questioned the FBI’s decision to rely on the
dossier given that its most sensational
allegations have not been proved. They are
also interested in who hired Fusion.
But alas, no one is talking. Yet, anyway.
For their part, Fusion’s attorneys blasted the panel and
Nunes in particular for issuing the partners’ subpoenas.
“No American should have to experience
today’s indignity,” railed attorney Josh Levy
after the Wednesday session. “No
American should be required to appear
before Congress simply to invoke his
constitutional privileges.”
Well, yeah, they should have to appear if they’re
subpoenaed. What’s more, why are Fusion partners
protected from “indignity” after imposing it on Trump and
his campaign staff with their BS “dossier?”
The fact is there is smoke here, and it’s likely being caused
by a great big fire that is smoldering just below the
surface. Here are some other key facts and findings
regarding this case:
 Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who held a
controversial meeting with Donald Trump, Jr., last year
during the campaign, has publicly dismissed the
dossier as “cheap gossip.”
“When I read some parts of this ‘dossier’ in
the media I laughed,” Veselnitskaya said.
“What kind of idiots does one have to take
Americans for to think that they can believe
that stupid and incompetent [and] absurd
[dossier]?”
How does Fusion enter into this? As Fox News reported:
Last month, CEO of Hermitage Capital Bill
Browder testified before a Senate
committee that Veselnitskaya orchestrated
a “smear campaign” against him as part of
an effort to fight anti-Russia sanctions,
working with the firm Fusion GPS and co-
founder Glenn Simpson.
Fusion was the same company behind the
anti-Trump dossier.
This detail was swiftly picked up by
President Trump and his allies, who
pointed to the alleged Fusion-Russia
connection as proof Moscow was actually
working against him in 2016 despite
“collusion” claims.
— Steele himself has said the dossier is bogus and has
publicly criticized Buzzfeed for publishing it in its entirety.
.
471
In April he admitted that none of what he put in the dossier
had been verified, and he lashed out at the Internet news
site for publishing it — after scores of establishment media
outlets passed on it last year as it made its rounds in the
Washington-NYC media corridor because nobody could
substantiate any of it.
The Washington Times noted:
In a court filing, Mr. Steele also says his
accusations against the president and his
aides about a supposed Russian hacking
conspiracy were never supposed to be
made public, much less posted in full on a
website for the world to see on Jan. 10.
 What’s more, Buzzfeed is being sued over its
publication of the dossier by XBT Holdings, a Cyprus-
based company owned by Russian tech magnate
Aleksej Gubarev. The ex-spy accused Guvarev’s
company of hacking the Democratic National
Committee’s computers with pornography and bugging
devices.
 As for punishment, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., an ally of
the president, said he believes someone should “go to
jail” over the leaking of the dossier. “I think it’s
unseemly that people in our intelligence community,
the CIA director, is out there giving press conferences,
criticizing the incoming president — I think that’s
inexcusable and I would not have anybody in the CIA
that’s publicly criticizing the president,” Paul told CNN’s
Wolf Blitzer in January, just days before Trump was
inaugurated.
“There’s only a few people who could have
leaked this information,” he said. “A leak
like that is so significant if it came from the
intelligence community, they should go to
jail. If it came from the Obama
administration, they should go to jail. You
cannot allow the leaking of classified
documents, particularly when it goes to
someone’s character.”
 NBC: Will Military Leaders ‘Tackle’ Trump,
‘Lock Him in a Room’ to Prevent War?
By Kyle Drennen
October 19, 2017 11:20 AM EDT
Interviewing former CIA Director John Brennan on
Thursday’s NBC Today, co-host Matt Lauer seemed to
suggest that military leaders would launch a coup d’etat
against President Trump in order to prevent nuclear war
with North Korea. In response, the Obama administration
official didn’t discount the notion.
“Over the summer, the President said
that he would unleash ‘fire and fury’ on
North Korea....is this a president who
doesn’t understand the gravity and the
seriousness of that issue?,” Lauer asked
early in the exchange. Brennan warned: “I
think his comments have been rather
provocative, and it has served to increase
tensions, not to de-escalate them.”
Fellow co-host Savannah Guthrie fretted: “...you said at a
forum last night that you thought the chances of some kind
of military conflict with North Korea had now risen to
either 1 in 4 or 1 in 5, so 20-25% chance that that could
happen. Is that because of North Korea’s actions, because
of the U.S.’s actions and rhetoric, or both?” Ranting
against the President, Brennan declared:
I think it’s a combination of the two.
I think the caustic and bellicose
comments that are coming out of
Washington, and Mr. Trump on his
tweets, really has led to an escalation in
tensions.
And I’m concerned that there could be some type of clash
between South Korean and North Korean forces that could
escalate.
472
Following Brennan’s dire prediction, Lauer raised the
possibility of Trump being physically restrained and
detained in the event of a conflict:
Well, let me ask you this, and I almost feel
weird asking you this, but you’ve read the
same stories that I’ve read.
You know the key players around the
President in Mattis and in McMaster and
John Kelly. The stories are going
around out there that if the President
inches closer to some kind of a nuclear
confrontation with North Korea, that
those guys are gonna do something.
They’re going to lock him in a room,
they’re gonna tackle him.
You’re smiling, but these are the stories
that are out there. And that they will
prevent him from carrying out any action
that would cause that. How do you – is
that all nonsense?
Brennan seemed to confirm Lauer’s outlandish scenario:
“No, I think the military leaders...know
the risks of escalation. They know just
how dangerous the situation is and I think
they are governors on the President’s
instincts to continue to try to intimidate
and bully.”
Lauer pressed:
“You’re technically not answering the
question. Would they take some action
to prevent the President from carrying
out an order?” Brennan replied: “The
President has unilateral authority to be able
to authorize military action....Secretary
Mattis can either try to talk him out of it,
disagree with it, carry it out, or not.”
The morning show anchor touted:
“Because in July you said it is the
obligation of some executive branch
officials to refuse to carry out some of
 those orders that are inconsistent with what
this country is all about.” Brennan
explained that he was referring to “the firing
of [former FBI Director] Jim Comey,” and
worried: “We are a country of laws, and
sometimes I feel that Mr. Trump feels that it
is Trump’s laws that trump others.”
7:05 AM ET
MATT LAUER: John Brennan served as director of the CIA under
President Obama. He joins us exclusively now. Director Brennan,
it’s really nice to have you here. Thank you very much.
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Good morning, sir.

Guthrie wondered:
“If you’d been in your old job and you
had been given an order that you
thought was dangerous to this country,
would you have flouted an order?”
After saying that he would have resigned over a
presidential order to resume waterboarding of terror
suspects, Guthrie urged:
“Do you think Mattis and Kelly and
Dunford and McMaster would be willing
to do the same if circumstances warrant
it?”
He assured her:
“They are patriots, all of them. And they
understand the gravity of the situation.
They understand the gravity, and I don’t
believe Mr. Trump does.”
Wrapping up the softball interview, Lauer teed up Brennan
to slam the President one last time:
JOHN BRENNAN: Good morning, Matt. Good morning,
Savannah.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Fmr. CIA Director Speaks Out;
Brennan on Trump, North Korea & Nat’l Security]
GUTHRIE: The reason this whole subject of condolence calls is
coming up is because we lost four American service members in
Niger. Senator McCain has said he wants more information about
what exactly happened. Is there anything about the
circumstances, as they’re known publicly right now – where these
soldiers were operating, the conditions under which they were
operating, the fact that one of them apparently was left behind –
is there anything that raises questions in your mind?
BRENNAN: Well, the United States military has been involved in
providing assistance to a lot of counterterrorism forces, military
forces, particularly in the Sahel, where terrorist groups reside.
There are questions about why they were so far forward with the
Niger military. Because going into those places, it really makes it
difficult to help the group if they are ambushed. And it seems like
they were ambushed by a larger group. So I know that Secretary
Mattis and others are going to be looking into the details of this
and how the approval process, you know, were made. But there
are questions about what was going on.

“Real quickly, based on what you know

about the situation in Iran, if the President
rips up that Iran nuclear deal, does he risk,
in the short term, owning a nuclear Iran?”
Brennan predictably agreed: “I think he
runs the risk of escalated tensions in the
Gulf that could redound to our detriment
and to potential risk to U.S. military in the
region.”

One topic that was completely ignored in the five-minute

segment was the recent bombshell revelation of a Russian
bribery plot being uncovered by the FBI before the Obama
administration approved a nuclear deal with Moscow.
That scandal wasn’t mentioned because the NBC hosts
were too busy imagining an overthrow of the current
president.
The biased exchange was brought to viewers by Downey,
Subaru, and Burlington.
Here is a full transcript of the October 19 interview:
473
LAUER: Let me ask you about North Korea. Over the summer,
the President said that he would unleash “fire and fury” on North
Korea. At the U.N. he said if we’re forced to defend ourselves or
our allies he’ll have no choice but to “totally destroy” North Korea.
He said his Secretary of State Mr. Tillerson should stop wasting
his time in negotiating. As you hear those things, based on what
you know about that situation, do you think this is the President
being that tough negotiator that he promised his supporters he
would be, or is this a president who doesn’t understand the
gravity and the seriousness of that issue?
BRENNAN: I think it’s both. I think he’s trying to demonstrate that
he is tough, and he’s trying to intimidate opponents. But at the
same time, he is not experienced at all in international
brinkmanship and on these issues. So I think his comments have
been rather provocative, and it has served to increase tensions,
not to de-escalate them. And I’m hoping that Rex Tillerson is
gonna be able to continue some of his efforts to try to address
these issues behind the scenes.
GUTHRIE: It’s interesting because you said at a forum last night
that you thought the chances of some kind of military conflict with
North Korea had now risen to either 1 in 4 or 1 in 5, so 20-25%
chance that that could happen. Is that because of North Korea’s
actions, because of the U.S.’s actions and rhetoric, or both?
BRENNAN: I think it’s a combination of the two. I think the
caustic and bellicose comments that are coming out of
Washington, and Mr. Trump on his tweets, really has led to an
escalation in tensions. And I’m concerned that there could be
some type of clash between South Korean and North Korean
forces that could escalate.
LAUER: Well, let me ask you this, and I almost feel weird asking
you this, but you’ve read the same stories that I’ve read. You
know the key players around the President in Mattis and in
McMaster and John Kelly. The stories are going around out there
that if the President inches closer to some kind of a nuclear
confrontation with North Korea, that those guys are gonna do
something. They’re going to lock him in a room, they’re gonna
tackle him. You’re smiling, but these are the stories that are out
there. And that they will prevent him from carrying out any action
that would cause that. How do you – is that all nonsense?
BRENNAN: No, I think the military leaders, current and former,
Mattis, Kelly – also Joe Dunford, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
– they know the risks of escalation. They know just how
dangerous the situation is and I think they are governors on the
President’s instincts to continue to try to intimidate and bully.
LAUER: You’re technically not answering the question. Would
they take some action to prevent the President from carrying out
an order?
BRENNAN: The President has unilateral authority to be able to
authorize military action. That order goes through Secretary
Mattis. Secretary Mattis can either try to talk him out of it,
disagree with it, carry it out, or not.
LAUER: Because in July you said it is the obligation of some
executive branch officials to refuse to carry out some of those
orders that are inconsistent with what this country is all about.
474
BRENNAN: And I was talking about the context of some – like
the firing of Jim Comey and the efforts by Mr. Trump and others
to try to, I think, delay and to put obstacles in the way of some of
the investigations that are underway. I think that has to go
forward. We are a country of laws, and sometimes I feel that Mr.
Trump feels that it is Trump’s laws that trump others.
GUTHRIE: If you’d been in your old job and you had been given
an order that you thought was dangerous to this country, would
you have flouted an order?
BRENNAN: I’d have to make a decision. Like if I was asked to
renew waterboarding, I would have said, “No, I’m not going to do
it and you’re going to have to fire me.” That would have been
plain and simple for me.
GUTHRIE: Do you think Mattis and Kelly and Dunford and
McMaster would be willing to do the same if circumstances
warrant it?
BRENNAN: It all depends on the circumstances. They are
patriots, all of them. And they understand the gravity of the
situation. They understand the gravity, and I don’t believe Mr.
Trump does.
LAUER: Real quickly, based on what you know about the
situation in Iran, if the President rips up that Iran nuclear deal,
does he risk, in the short term, owning a nuclear Iran?
BRENNAN: Well, he certainly has another issue and another
problem. He also alienates a lot of our partners and allies that
were part of that agreement. And I think he runs the risk of
escalated tensions in the Gulf that could redound to our detriment
and to potential risk to U.S. military in the region.
LAUER: Will you stay for the next hour?
[LAUGHTER]
LAUER: We have a lot to talk to you about.
GUTHRIE: Sir, thank you.
LAUER: John, thank you so much, great to have you here.
BRENNAN: Thank you, appreciate it.
GUTHRIE: Appreciate it.
 Trump: Russian Uranium Deal
"Is The Biggest Story That Fake Media
Doesn't Want To Follow"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 19, 2017 7:45 AM
As we reported yesterday, as the media continues to lose
their collective minds over $100,000 worth of Facebook
ads allegedly purchased by Russians during the 2016
election, the Senate Judiciary Committee has finally
decided they're going to take a look into a shady Russian
deal - first profiled here last summer - that handed Putin
20% of America's uranium reserves, was approved by the
Obama administration during an ongoing FBI investigation
into charges of bribery, extortion and money laundering by
the Russian buyer and netted the Clintons millions of
dollars in donations and 'speaking fees."
Recall that on Wednesday it was reported that the Senate
Judiciary Committee launched a full-scale probe into a
Russian nuclear bribery case, demanding several federal
agencies disclose whether they knew the FBI had
uncovered the corruption before the Obama administration
in 2010 approved a controversial uranium deal with
Moscow. Sen. Chuck Grassley, the committee chairman,
gets his first chance to raise the issue in public on
Wednesday when he questions Attorney General Jeff
Sessions during an oversight hearing.
"It has recently come to the Committee’s
attention that employees of Rosatom were
involved in a criminal enterprise involving a
conspiracy to commit extortion and money
laundering during the time of the CFIUS
transaction," Grassley wrote in one such
letter addressed to Sessions.
"The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in the
United States were under criminal
investigation as a result of a U.S.
475
intelligence operation apparently around
the time CFIUS approved the Uranium
One/Rosatom transaction raises questions
about whether that information factored into
CFIUS’ decision to approve the
transaction," the chairman added.
Fast forward to this week when thanks to newly released
affidavits from a case that landed one of the Russian co-
conspirators, Vadim Mikerin, in jail, we learned on
Tuesday that not only was the Obama administration
aware the Russians' illegal acts in the U.S. but it may have
also been fully aware that
"Russian nuclear officials had routed
millions of dollars to the U.S. designed
to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s
charitable foundation during the time
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served
on a government body that provided a
favorable decision to Moscow."
It gets better:
in an unexpected twist, the FBI's
investigation into this particular Russian
plot began in 2009 under none other
than Robert Mueller, now the special
counsel in charge of the Trump case...
and ended in late 2015 under the
controversial, former FBI Director
James Comey who was relieved of his
duties by President Trump. "Surprisingly"
when the DOJ finally arrested Mikerin in
2014, following 5 years of investigations in
a massive international bribery and money-
laundering scheme, rather than publicly
celebrate, they seemingly swept it under
the rug. In fact, there was no public
release concerning the case at all until a
full year later when the DOJ announced a
plea deal with Mikerin right before labor
day.
***
Putting all that together, it is not difficult to see why the
story has gotten precisely zero mainstream media coverage
in the past 48 hours, or past year for that matter.
But not the president... Upon waking up on Thursday,
Trump immediately went on twitter to slam the "Fake
media" for not following the Russian uranium deal, and
once again accused both Obama and the Clintons:
"Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton
help and Obama Administration
knowledge, is the biggest story that
Fake Media doesn't want to follow!"
We expect that now that Trump plans on making a daily
twitter spectacle of this particular Russian involvement,
the DOJ and FBI may have no choice but to reopen the
investigation, with potentially adverse consequences for
Mueller, Comey, including perhaps Clinton and Obama.
In a separate tweet on Thursday, Trump said he thought
there is enough to support in the Senate to pass its 2018
budget resolution, a key step toward tax reform, but added,
"who knows?"
476
"Republicans are going for the big Budget
approval today, first step toward massive
tax cuts. I think we have the votes, but who
knows?" he tweeted.
Later on Thursday, the Senate is scheduled to vote on the
budget resolution bill, which is a crucial step before the
Republicans formally work towards a tax reform package
by the end the year. Currently, the GOP control 52 seats in
the Chamber and with Mississippi’s Cochran off due to
sickness, there is a slimmer margin of error to pass this
resolution which seeks to authorize a deficit increase of
cUS$1.5trn over the next 10 years. That said, with the late
backing of Senator Collins from Maine, the bill is expected
to pass before the weekend and ahead of it going on to the
next (tougher) phase, which includes drafting the tax bill
and getting it through the committee and the full Senate.
If Republicans pass the budget resolution, they can utilize
a legislative tool called reconciliation that would allow
them to move tax legislation through the Senate on a
simple majority vote. Otherwise, tax reform would need 60
votes, which would make the GOP proposal's passage
much less likely as it would need to pull support from all
Republican lawmakers as well as some Democrats.
 Obama Admin ‘Threatened’ FBI Informant in
Russia/Uranium/Clinton Scandal, Nets Censor
By Geoffrey Dickens
October 19, 2017 11:07 AM EDT
“An American businessman who worked for
years undercover as an FBI confidential
witness was blocked by the Obama Justice
Department from telling Congress about
conversations and transactions he
witnessed related to the Russian nuclear
industry’s efforts to win favor with Bill and
Hillary Clinton and influence Obama
administration.”

The businessman’s attorney, Victoria Toensing, revealed

that when he tried to bring the story to light, via a 2016
On Wednesday, The Hill reported that a key FBI informant lawsuit,
involved in the investigation of the
Clinton/Russia/Uranium scandal was threatened by the “the Obama Justice Department threatened
Obama administration and warned not to publicly disclose him with loss of freedom. They said they
details. Also, at a Senate hearing that same day, Attorney would bring a criminal case against him for
General Jeff Sessions promised that the Justice Department violating an NDA.”
would take “appropriate action” in response to the new
information.

So how much time have the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC)
networks devoted to the growing story this week? As of
Thursday morning, a grand total of ZERO seconds.

The complete network blackout even drew the attention of

President Trump, who on Thursday tweeted:

“Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton help

and Obama Administration knowledge, is
the biggest story that Fake Media doesn't The scandal has been covered extensively on Fox News.
want to follow!” Host Tucker Carlson opened his October 18 show with the
latest revelations:

HOST TUCKER CARLSON: “We have spent nearly a year

looking for a Russian scandal. For months it’s been basically the
only thing anyone in Washington talked about. Many people were
certain it would end in impeachment and prison terms....Well, it’s
finally happened, we have a Russian scandal, but instead
approving collusion between the Trump campaign and the
government of Vladimir Putin, this one reveals deep wrongdoing
in the Obama administration, and it’s real. We’ve known for
several years that Russian money was flowing to the Clinton
family and the foundations during the exact same period the
Obama administration approved the Russian acquisition of 20
percent of this country’s strategic uranium reserves.
According to the October 18 story by John Solomon and
Alison Spann:

477
But now new reporting from The Hill newspaper reveals that as
early as 2009, the FBI was investigating secret Russian efforts to
get the deal done by bribing Americans. And yet, somehow the
public, and even key officials whenever told about that
investigation, as they made the decision to allow the deal to go
forward. At least one American businessman says he directly
witnessed Russian efforts to convince the Clintons to approve
that deal.
The businessman says he was blocked from publicly telling
Congress what he knew because he was ordered to remain silent
by Eric Holder’s Justice Department. It’s a remarkable story and
potentially a very significant one. Peter Schweizer originally
broke this story in a book called Clinton Cash, he’s been
covering it ever since and he joins us now. Peter, thanks for
coming on.
AUTHOR PETER SCHWEIZER: Tucker, thanks for having me.
CARLSON: So, this is a kind of confusing cover to the story. The
person who apparently has first-hand evidence that the Russian
government tried to get the Clintons to support the deal has been
prevented from speaking even to Congress, how can that be and
what’s the justification for that?
SCHWEIZER: Well, that’s a great question, Tucker. What we
know, apparently based on the reporting is that he has been put
.
478
under a gag order by the Department of Justice and has been
told that if he speaks about this publicly, not only will he face
financial penalties in the form of a fine, that he could actually go
to jail, that his liberty would be at risk, which is mystifying to me. I
mean, why do we not want to know the details about this? That's
what’s so troubling, is it reeks of cover-up. It just stinks. There’s
no other word for it.
CARLSON: As a legal matter, how can the Justice Department
from a previous administration told the Congress of the United
States, elected officials that they can't talk to an American citizen
about allegations of bribery that put our national security at risk?
How does that work?
SCHWEIZER: Well, it really shouldn’t work and can’t work and
what I mean is the Department of Justice today under President
Trump, Attorney General Sessions, could tomorrow come back
and say we are removing this gag order, that we believe that
there’s a compelling national interest to know. We want this
individual to testify before Congress. We want the public to know
exactly what went on. So, this is not something that’s
unbreakable, but it just simply takes a request from the
Department of Justice to remove that gag order. If that gag order
is not removed, I think it’s doubtful this businessman will want to
go public, because he doesn’t want to be put in legal jeopardy.
 Trump Blasts 'Fake Media' For Ignoring
Russia Uranium Deal Sealed 'With Clinton Help'
By Judson Berger, Fox News
Octrober 19, 2017
President Trump on Thursday accused the “Fake Media”
of ignoring new details about the 2010 approval of a
controversial uranium deal with a Russian company, amid
scrutiny of potential “conflicts of interest” for Hillary
Clinton and the Obama administration.
“Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton help and Obama
administration knowledge, is the biggest story that Fake
Media doesn't want to follow!” Trump tweeted.
A day earlier, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman
Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, vowed at a public hearing to “get
to the bottom of this issue.” This was as The Hill reported
that the FBI had evidence as early as 2009 that Russian
operatives used bribes, kickbacks and other dirty tactics to
expand Moscow’s atomic energy footprint in the U.S. --
yet the Obama administration approved the uranium deal
benefiting Moscow anyway.
Trump on Thursday also took another Twitter swipe at the
firm behind the controversial anti-Trump dossier, after
Fusion GPS officials took the Fifth during an appearance
on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.
“Workers of firm involved with the
discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th.
Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the
Dems (or all)?” he wrote.
The president and his allies occasionally have cited both
the dossier – a salacious document whose origin is
shrouded in mystery, but linked to a company that
allegedly did business with Russian figures – and the
uranium deal to counter allegations of Trump-Russia
collusion, effectively arguing Democrats have links to
Moscow, too.
479
As for the Russia company probe, The Hill reported
overnight that Grassley is seeking permission to interview
the FBI informant who helped agents uncover the
corruption. His lawyer Victoria Toensing told The Hill that
the informant was prevented from disclosing certain
information to the courts and Congress after signing a
nondisclosure statement and was threatened by Justice
officials when he tried to reveal some information in a
lawsuit last year.
Grassley on Wednesday released a series of letters he fired
off last week to 10 federal agencies, addressing his
concerns in detail and raising the question of whether the
committee that approved the uranium transaction was
aware of the FBI probe. The Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States (CFIUS) included then-
Secretary of State Clinton.
The deal in question, which was previously reported,
involved the 2010 approval of a partial sale of Canadian
mining company Uranium One to Russia’s Rosatom
nuclear company. The U.S. was involved because the sale
gave the Russians control of part of the uranium supply in
the U.S.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, left,
and ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., look to
Attorney General Jeff Sessions as he testifies before the Senate
Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday,
Oct. 18, 2017. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster) (Copyright 2017 The
Associated Press. All rights reserved.)
Grassley wrote in his letters that he’s not “convinced” by
previous “assurances” that there were no unresolved
national security concerns. Grassley, in his hearing
remarks and letters, raised two key issues.
It had been previously reported that figures tied to the
transaction gave donations to Bill Clinton and his family
foundation, but Grassley wrote that he has learned
additional details about a $500,000 fee the former
president got from a Russian investment bank for a June
2010 speech. He wrote that the bank’s senior officers
include former Russian intelligence personnel, and sources
had described the company as an “extension” of the
Russian government.
As noted in The Hill, the feds did eventually go after
Vadim Mikerin, a Russian nuclear industry official, in
connection with the investigation. He was later sentenced,
in 2015, to 48 months in prison in connection with money
laundering allegations.
But Grassley wants to know whether the committee that
approved the transaction was aware of the ongoing
criminal probe at the time.

“Notably, in the same month as the Clinton When details of the Uranium One deal first emerged in
speech, Uranium One and Rosatom 2015, Clinton’s campaign downplayed the allegations.
notified CFIUS of the Russian
government’s intent to acquire 20 percent
"No one has produced a shred of evidence
of the United States’ uranium assets. The
that Hillary Clinton ever took action as
next month, in July 2010, Renaissance
Secretary of State in order to support the
Bank reportedly assigned Uranium One a
interests of donors to the Clinton
‘buy’ rating, a move that would principally
Foundation," a spokesman said at the time.
benefit its Russian investors,” Grassley
"To suggest the State Department, under
wrote. “The donations raise concerns about
then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue
potential conflicts of interest for Secretary
influence in the U.S. government's review
Clinton and the Obama administration.”
of the sale of Uranium One is utterly
baseless.”
Further, Grassley raised concerns about the FBI probe into
“corruption and extortion” involving employees of a
Fox News' Brooke Singman contributed to this report.
Rosatom subsidiary dating back to 2009 – before the 2010
approval.
.

480
 Papers Filed To Disbar James Comey
Following "False Testimony To Congress"
By Tyler Durden
Oct 19, 2017 10:18 AM
Ty Clevenger, the "crusading lawyer" who has been trying
for months to get Hillary and several members of her
campaign staff disbarred in every jurisdiction from Little
Rock, Arkansas to New York, has now set his sights on a
new target: Former FBI Director James Comey.
According to the Washington Times, Clevenger filed a bar
grievance in New York this week accusing Comey of lying
to Congress and destroying potential evidence in the
Clinton email scandal, in a process that could end up
costing him his law license.
Ty Clevenger filed the grievance in New
York, where Mr. Comey was a former
U.S. attorney and is licensed to practice
law.
Mr. Clevenger said Mr. Comey’s testimony to Congress
that he did not predetermine the outcome of the FBI’s
probe into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is
belied by revelations this week that he in fact started
drafting an exoneration months before even speaking with
Mrs. Clinton.
“Insofar as Mr. Comey gave materially
false testimony to Congress, it appears
that he violated Rules 1.0(w), 3.3(a)(1),
and 8.4 of the New York Rules of
Professional Conduct,” Mr. Clevenger
wrote.
481
Clevenger also asked to renew grievances in New York
against former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, saying
that Comey’s claim that she tried to pressure him to
downplay the Clinton probe should subject her to scrutiny.
As you may recall, Clevenger is also the
lawyer who convinced Maryland judge Paul
Harris Jr. to order the Maryland state bar to
investigate former Hillary aides David
Kendall, Cheryl Mills and Heather
Samuelson for their efforts in allegedly
helping Hillary "destroy evidence."
A Maryland judge ordered the state bar to open an
investigation Monday into the three lawyers who helped
former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to delete her
private emails.
Circuit Judge Paul F. Harris Jr. said the
complaints lodged against David E.
Kendall, Cheryl Mills and Heather
Samuelson were “egregious” and said
the state bar couldn’t brush them aside by
calling them “frivolous.”
“There are allegations of destroying
evidence,” Judge Harris said at a hearing
Monday morning, where he said the state’s
rules require the bar to conduct
investigations no matter who raises the
complaint, and can’t brush accusations
aside.
“I just think this is a rather easy
decision at this point,” he said. “The
court is ordering bar counsel to
investigate.”
So what say you? Is this all a waste of time or are the
Clintons the only ones who can perpetually avoid
punishment for their scandals?
 Morning Joe Attacks Trump For Drawing
Attention To Blackout Of Clinton-Uranium Scandal
By Chris Reeves
October 19, 2017 12:05 PM EDT
On Thursday’s Morning Joe, after days of ignoring The
Hill’s latest reporting confirming an extensive racketeering
scheme organized by Russian government officials that
appeared to directly benefit Bill and Hillary Clinton, the
show finally decided to cover the story. However, instead
of getting worked up about unethical or possibly illegal
Clinton-Russian collusion, hosts Joe Scarborough and
Mika Brzezinski, along with Democratic Senators Tim
Kaine and Michael Bennet, attacked Trump for tweeting
about the new revelations and accused him of undermining
American democratic institutions.
After bringing on the Democrats to discuss their latest
single-payer health care effort in Congress, Brzezinski
ended the interview by turning the conversation towards
Trump’s latest tweet at that time:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I’m curious, Senator
Tim Kaine, for the second morning in a row
the President is starting his day with tweets
about Hillary Clinton, your running mate.
He fired off another tweet just minutes ago
writing:
“Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton help
and Obama Administration knowledge, is
the biggest story that Fake Media doesn't
want to follow.” What do you think, what do
you make of this sort of yearning
obsession with Hillary Clinton?
SEN. TIM KAINE [D-VA]: You know, Mika
[trails off, chuckling].
BRZEZINSKI: It's sad, but also a little
frightening at this point.
482
SEN. KAINE: It i-, it i-, look, there's a
moral vacuum in the White House right
now,-
BRZEZINSKI: Really.
SEN. KAINE: -and when the President
feels under pressure on other issues, he'll
revert back to attacking Hillary or bragging
about the size of the inauguration crowd.
And you know, the thing that's sad about all
of these instances, whether it's this or
whether it’s the dust up yesterday with the
family of this poor soldier that was killed in
Niger is, you know, what we're seeing is
that Americans elected somebody
promising greatness when there was no
evidence of goodness. And we’re re-
learning a very, very painful lesson which
is: there can't be greatness without
goodness. But that's what's lacking right
now.
BRZEZINSKI: [inaudible, talked over by
Joe]
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, no doubt
about it. It's old saying [sic], America is
great because America is good, and when
it ceases being good, it will cease to be
great. But I am curious though, Senator
Kaine, do you ever wake up any mornings
with an instinct or an urge to tweet about
Mike Pence?
[Senators laugh raucously]
SCARBOROUGH: Because, after all, you
ran against him eleven months ago, and
I'm just wondering if-
SEN. KAINE: My support group here
[pointing at Sen. Bennet].
SCARBOROUGH: -you have some of the
same urges, yeah, have some of the same
urges that Donald Trump has?
SEN. KAINE: You know, no. I mean, I have
my vices, but the desire to tweet early in
the morning is certainly not on my vice list.
[panelists laugh]
SCARBOROUGH: Well, it, it, it-
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET [D-CO]: [jumps
into convo] I would say though, that this
attack, this daily attack on edited
content, on curated content, on the
leading journalists and leading news
outlets in this country by this president
is something the American people
cannot stand for. The democracy [sic]
cannot work if people lose faith in
journalism,
SCARBOROUGH: [interjecting] Yeah.
SEN. BENNET: -and the President knows
that which is why he starts every day
attacking the leading journalists in this
country. We can't stand for it.
So, instead of directly addressing The Hill’s
troubling new discoveries about the
Clintons’ seemingly corrupt dealings with
Russian government officials, Morning Joe
and their guests immediately pathologized
Trump, attacked his moral character, and
accused him of harming America’s core
institutions, specifically the press. Senator
Bennet’s claim that “democracy cannot
work if people lose faith in journalism” was
particularly odd in light of his and Kaine’s
refusal to discuss the important
journalistic work that Trump was
indirectly referring to. Apparently,
unquestioning faith in journalism is only
valuable when reporters aren’t casting an
ominous shadow over the most prominent
Democratic politicians of the past three
decades.
Even though the Senators had to go after their final
remarks, Scarborough was not done playing armchair
psychologist:
Yeah, well you know, he, of course, I want
to thank you guys for being with us. And
Mika, he tweeted, of course, about this this
morning because it was covered on "Fox
and Friends" which, of course, he watches
as well as this show, apparently, if you
judge his tweets. But he does not get
briefings, he does not get regular
briefings, his briefings come from
watching, you know, watching cable
news. And that is, that is, as somebody
that works in that profession, that is
truly frightening. I know a lot of people
who work in cable news, and, you know,
you don't want to get your White House
483
briefings from Mike Barnicle or me. But
think about this fact, though, that here we
are eleven months after the election.
Election’s over. He's still attacking the
opponent that he won with the electoral
votes. I guess he's still angry that he
lost the popular vote by over three million
votes. But we have over 70% of Americans
afraid of a war, a possible nuclear war.
We’ve got one sixth of the economy
hanging by a thread. We have health care
reform going down the drain. We have the
President trying to pass a budget. We have
the senators and the congressmen trying to
get a fix on tax reform. We’ve got all of
these things going on. We've got an Iran
nuclear deal, again, hanging in the
balance. We've got a “dreamers” deal
hanging in the balance. We’ve got all of
these things ahead of us, and the
President is tweeting about a political
opponent from a year ago. It’s, it is
inexplicable.
Actually, Joe, it has a really simple
explanation: a big report just came out
this week about the Clinton-Uranium
scandal and President Trump wants the
liberal media to cover it more. This is not
hard to grasp.
Of course, Joe and Mika couldn’t end the segment without
taking another opportunity to call for Trump’s removal
from office:
BRZEZINSKI: I’m just telling you, if this guy worked for a small
company in the Midwest, he'd be dragged out. There’d be an
intervention.
SCARBOROUGH: He would, he would, he would be fired. If, if
the guy was a CEO at a-
BRZEZINSKI: [interrupting] Because he'd be threatening the
company.
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. If the guy was anything. If he worked in
a church. If he worked in a synagogue. If he worked in a small
business. If he worked in a mid-size business. If he worked in a
large corporation. If he were the coach of a football team, a high
school football team,-
BRZEZINSKI: [interjecting] He’d be out.
SCARBOROUGH: -he would be fired. And yet, here he is, the
President of the United States, and people in my former party
won't even stand up to him other than Jeff Flake and one or two
others.
 Taxpayer-Funded PBS AND NPR
Can't Locate A Clinton-Russia Story
By Tim Graham
October 19, 2017 3:56 Pm Edt
In a shock to no one, the liberal networks funded by
taxpayers -- PBS and NPR -- have so far ignored the
emerging new stories on the emerging new investigative
stories on Russian involvement with the Clintons and the
Obama administration. A Nexis search finds nothing there.
PBS and NPR have hammered on Russia over the last two
days, but only as it deals with the Trump angle.
On Tuesday night's All Things Considered, NPR aired a
four-minute interview with Yahoo reporter Michael Isikoff
highlighting his finding that Russian social-media trolls
were instructed to watch the overwrought TV series House
of Cards to familiarize themselves somehow with
American politics. He focused on a troll shop in St.
Petersburg, and the focus is all on foiling the Clintons, not
enabling them:
MICHAEL ISIKOFF: This is the troll farm
that was placing thousands of ads on
Facebook, spending upwards of $100,000
to influence the American election. That's
what Facebook has concluded. So the
messaging described by this former troll
who went by the name of Maksim is very
consistent with what American intelligence
officials have said the Russians were
doing.
The messaging was to denigrate Hillary
Clinton, focus on her wealth, on the past
scandals of our husband's
administration or her private email
server to stoke resentment among
certain quarters of the American
electorate.
484
Maksim describes placing messages aimed at the religious
community, talking about gay rights, talking about threats
to the Second Amendment. And he says the goal was to
turn the American people against their government.
In two stories on Wednesday, NPR focused on what
Democrats wanted to ask Attorney General Jeff Sessions
in a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. On
Morning Edition, Russia was their Exhibit A of juicy
news, when it dealt with Team Trump:
STEVE INSKEEP: Okay, so let's talk about
what they might talk about if Sessions
proves willing to talk about it. What are
some of the key issues that they're going to
be discussing?
CARRIE JOHNSON: Well, first of all,
Russia. Remember at his confirmation
hearing, Jeff Sessions went out of his way
to deny contacts with Russians during the
campaign last year when he was a
surrogate for President Trump. It turned out
The Washington Post reported Sessions
had at least two meetings with Russians
during that period last year. Sessions
eventually had to supplement his
testimony.
There are still some open questions about whether he
might have had a third contact with Russians last year.
And what is the nature of his communication with Special
Counsel Robert Mueller, who's investigating Russian
interference in last year's election?
The attorney general of the United
States could be a witness in a criminal
investigation. Think about that, Steve,
it's pretty remarkable.
On Wednesday's All Things Considered, the Sessions
hearing covered many subjects, but NPR anchor Mary
Louise Kelly told listeners "the one that came up again and
again was Russia." Reporter Ryan Lucas said Democrats
pushed Sessions on the Comey firing, and then again on
Sessions meetings with the Russians during the campaign:
RYAN LUCAS: They also pressed Sessions about his previous
statements regarding his own contacts with the Russians during
the 2016 campaign when he served as a top foreign policy
adviser to then-candidate Trump. In one particularly heated
exchange, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken recounted what he
described as Sessions' shifting statements on his Russia
contacts.
AL FRANKEN: First it was, I did not have communications with
Russians, which was not true. Then it was, I never met with any
Russians to discuss any political campaign, which may or may
not be true. Now it's, I did not discuss interference in the
campaign, which further narrows your initial blanket denial about
meeting with the Russians.
LUCAS: Sessions pushed back. He accused Franken of being
unfair and willfully misinterpreting his statements. And the
attorney general once again denied any wrongdoing.
JEFF SESSIONS: Well, let me just say this without hesitation -
that I conducted no improper discussions with Russians at any
time regarding a campaign or any other item facing this country.
Wednesday night’s PBS NewsHour offered the same Democrat
Party take:
485
HARI SREENIVASAN: Attorney General Jeff Sessions insisted
he never lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee about his
conversations with the Russian ambassador during the
presidential campaign. At a hearing today, he bridled at
Democratic Senator Al Franken’s accusation that he’d — quote
— “moved the goalposts” on the nature of his discussions.
Sen. AL FRANKEN: First it was, I didn’t have communications
with Russians, which wasn’t true. Then it was, I never met with
any Russians to discuss any political campaign, which may or
may not be true. Now it’s, I didn’t discuss interference in the
campaign.
JEFF SESSIONS: Well, let me just say without hesitation, that I
conducted no improper discussions with the Russians at any time
regarding the campaign or any other item facing this country.
HARI SREENIVASAN: Sessions has recused himself from the
Justice Department’s investigation into Russia’s election
meddling.
One can only hope that President Trump's tub-thumping
today on Twitter and in front of the cameras might rouse
the taxpayer-funded networks into covering more than the
preferred Democratic National Committee narrative.
 US Preparing For
North Korea's 'Final Step'
Nicole Gaouette
Updated 9:04 AM ET, Fri October 20, 2017
Washington (CNN)CIA Director Mike Pompeo said the
United States has to act as if North Korea is on the verge
of being able to strike it with a missile and act accordingly
-- and that President Donald Trump is ready to do so.
"From a US policy perspective, we ought to
behave as if we are on the cusp of them
achieving that objective," Pompeo said
Thursday at a security forum held by the
Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
"They are so far along in that, it's now a
matter of thinking about how do you stop
the final step."
"Whether it happens on Tuesday or a
month from Tuesday, we're in a time where
the President has concluded that we have
a global effort to ensure that [North Korean
leader] Kim Jong Un does not obtain that
capacity," Pompeo continued.
Pompeo is among a number of former officials who have
been signaling the increased possibility of a slide into
military confrontation with North Korea over its refusal to
back down from its nuclear program.
The CIA chief spoke at the forum shortly before national
security adviser H.R. McMaster, who also said the
President wasn't prepared to accept a nuclear Pyongyang.
The Trump administration comments came a day after
former CIA Director John Brennan put the chances of
military conflict with North Korea as high as 20% to 25%.
The isolated Asian nation conducted its sixth and most
powerful nuclear test in September, claiming it had
486
detonated a miniaturized hydrogen bomb that could be
mounted on a missile. It's also been steadily working on its
missile capabilities, firing 22 missiles during 15 tests from
February to mid-September.
Even as other countries have urged caution, dialogue and
reciprocal confidence-building measures, Trump has
belittled the North Korean leader as "rocket man,"
dismissed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's efforts to
broker a diplomatic solution, and hinted that he is ready to
take military action.
Asked at Thursday's event about the threat posed by North
Korea, McMaster said that Trump will not accept a nuclear
North Korea that threatens the US, putting the
administration in a "race" to resolve the increasingly tense
standoff before it devolves into a military confrontation.
"He's not going to accept this regime
threatening the United States with nuclear
weapons," McMaster said. "There are
those who would say, well, why not accept
and deter. Well, accept and deter is
unacceptable."
"So this puts us in a situation where we are
in a race to resolve this short of military
action," McMaster said. "Everybody knows
it. We all know it. ... Our allies and partners
know it. China knows it. Russia knows it."
Brennan, speaking Wednesday night at Fordham
University School of Law, stressed that, "there really is no
good military solution to this issue."
"A 1 in 4, 1 in 5 chance"
"The prospects for military conflict on the
Korean Peninsula are greater than they
have been in several decades," he said. "I
don't think it's likely or probable, but if it's a
one in four, one in five chance, that's too
high." Asked if that's the rating he'd give for
the chances of conflict, he said, "Yeah, I
guess I would."
Brennan sketched out a scenario in which, "some kind of
limited military engagement that would result in some
deaths, that could then quickly trigger some retaliatory
strikes that could escalate." On top of that "conventional
scenario of escalation," he reminded the crowd that North
Korea has finely honed cyber capabilities.
"So I think we have to be mindful here that
there are a number of scenarios here that
could lead to an escalation that we really
need to be trying to avoid," Brennan said.
Trump isn't helping on that score, he said.
"You have two leaders of the two major
protagonist countries that are hurling these
broadsides back and forth, and they have a
lot of personal political face involved in it,"
he said.
"I don't agree that the tack that Mr. Trump
has taken is a constructive and productive
.
487
one," Brennan said, calling the references
to "Rocket Man" and other insults
"irresponsible."
McMaster praised Trump's handling of the crisis, saying
that the President's leadership had created the possibility of
an
"unprecedented level of international
cooperation on the issue."
He also praised Tillerson's efforts to increase international
pressure on North Korea, which has moved some countries
to cut diplomatic relations with Pyongyang, expel its
ambassadors and in some cases, ban North Korean guest
workers. North Korea, meanwhile, has said it won't be
willing to talk to the US until it ensures it has missile and
nuclear capabilities.
CNN's Zachary Cohen contributed to this report
 US Envoy To UN Ratchets Up
Anti-Russian Rhetoric: ‘Election Meddling’ Was Warfare
Published Time: 20 Oct, 2017 01:45 Edited Time: 20 Oct, 2017 09:45
FILE PHOTO US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley ©
Mike Segar / Reuters
The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, has raised the
stakes in Washington's war of words against Russia,
describing its unproven “meddling” in the 2016 election as
“warfare,” just as the head of the CIA said it had no effect
on the vote.
"When a country can come interfere in
another country’s elections, that is
warfare," Haley declared during a
conference held by the George W. Bush
Institute in New York City.
Election meddling, according to Haley, is
Russia's "weapon of choice and we have to
make sure we get in front of it."
And it's not just the US the Kremlin is waging war against,
Haley said. It's "everywhere," she claimed, without
bothering with specifics.
“We didn’t just see it here. You can look at
France and you can look at other countries.
They are doing this everywhere.”
Russia's supposed interference with the 2016 US
presidential election has been the subject of a massive
investigation by Washington lawmakers and intelligence
agencies, which has produced no proof to date. This has
never stopped US officials from treating it like a given
fact, however, something that, according to Haley,
"everybody knows" happened.
As Nikki Haley was issuing her warlike
remarks, CIA director Mike Pompeo said
the “meddling” has had no effect on the
US election whatsoever.
488
"The intelligence community's assessment
is that the Russian meddling that took
place did not affect the outcome of the
election," Pompeo said at a public event,
responding to a question from NBC News.
The CIA, however, scrambled to backtrack on its director's
words, with spokesman Ryan Trapani saying:
"The intelligence assessment with regard to
Russian election meddling has not
changed," according to NBC. In fact, per
the January report, there hasn't been any
assessment "of the impact that Russian
activities had on the outcome of the 2016
election."
'Somebody lost to Trump, and now
Russia is to blame'
Nikki Haley's new radical take on the "Russian meddling"
narrative seems to fit the description of the ongoing anti-
Russian hysteria called out by Russian President Vladimir
Putin.
“Somebody lost the election to Mr. Trump –
the whole blame was pinned on Russia,
and frantic anti-Russian hysteria unfolded.
Any failure is linked to Russia. Look for
Russian trail in any issue,” Putin said at the
Valdai Forum in Sochi on Thursday.
The Russian embassy in Washington DC has issued its
own comment.
"In their insinuations about Russia's
'interference' in the 2016 US presidential
elections, American politicians know no
restraint. One fresh example is the US
ambassador to UN, Nikki Haley. She has
essentially accused Russia of initiating
'warfare' against the US last year."
The embassy statement has reiterated Russia's attempts to
return relations to normal, based on equality and mutual
respect. Since November 2015, it said, Moscow has
suggested holding bilateral consultations on cyber threats,
but Washington hasn't shown readiness for that.
 "We would like to remind our colleague
Nikki Haley," the statement concludes,
"that those who interfered in the US
elections, and in the most overt and
unceremonious way, should be sought
amid officially-declared allies and friends.
They campaigned for the Democratic
candidate and voiced worries over the
Republican candidate's possible coming to
power. The facts are there. It suffices to
look at last year’s newspapers or go on the
Internet."
‘Beating war drums is best way to
attract attention’
Haley’s rhetoric is driven by her ambition and is merely an
attempt to draw attention to her persona as a potential
replacement for Rex Tillerson, Brian Becker, Director at
Anti-War Answer Coalition, told RT.
“She is trying to draw attention to herself,
and what is the better way to draw attention
to yourself than to beat the drums of war,”
he said, noting that while Hailey is clearly
exaggerating the tone of her remark fits
perfectly in the war-mongering line of the
current US administration.
“You have the United States’ government
vomiting up war rhetoric constantly,
including by the chief US diplomat Nikki
Hailey. It’s a disgrace,” Becker said.
While Haley didn't come with any new-found proof to
back her claims, Washington's own interference in other
countries’ affairs is “well-documented,” and has long
become a “playbook for the US,” Becker argued.
“The United States wins the Oscar every
year for meddling in other peoples’
elections, no other government has a track
record like this,” he said.
Becker went on to that the US casually
“overthrows the governments when people
elect people that the United States doesn’t
like,”
.
489
referring to the coup orchestrated by CIA in Iran in 1953
and in Guatemala in 1954 as some of the examples.
Haley is “one of the strongest voices within
this administration against what Donald
Trump said he wanted to do: to improve
relations with Moscow to push for very
militant, war-like policy on North Korea and
Iran,” former US diplomat Jim Jatras told
RT.
He added that Haley is providing
“the kind of advice that, if Mr. Trump
follows it, would lead his administration
to be as much of a failure as George W.
Bush's one.“
The strong language used by Haley might be an attempt by
her to save face with the US political establishment, but it
also reveals her lack of belief in the administration of
which she is part, said Jennifer Breedon, an anti-terrorist
expert and legal analyst.
Haley’s comment is “very problematic” since it sharply
contradicts the US president’s stance on the alleged
Russian interference, a topic typically not on the agenda of
a UN ambassador.
“She is a part of his administration as the
UN ambassador, and what she really did
what just sidestep and try to go into these
talking points, casting blame and casting
doubt on our electoral process unlike her
boss, President Trump has been trying to
do,” Breedon said, adding that this sows
discord in the Trump administration.
In any case, Haley can be certain the US media will have
her back, Breedon said.
“The US media is generally always going to
be behind that, they have been obsessed
with it, namely CNN and MSNBC, so they
are not going to hold her accountable, they
are going to agree with her.”
 Did John McCain Provide
The Infamous 'Trump Dossier' To Buzzfeed?
By Tyler Durden
Oct 20, 2017 10:40 PM

After nearly a year of cogitating, no one in the media,

usually a fairly leaky institution, has been able to figure
out who exactly who provided the infamous "Trump
Dossier" to BuzzFeed which was published on January 10,
2017 and promptly debunked within approximately 35
seconds.
As the Daily Caller points out today, less than a handful of
people had access to the dossier before it made its way to
BuzzFeed:
John McCain, David Kramer (a former
State Department official and an associate
of McCain), then FBI Director James
Comey and Fusion GPS (the creator of
the document).
McCain was asked whether he was BuzzFeed’s source
after the Republican’s office declined to answer direct
questions on the matter.
As a reminder, here is a recap of the timeline leading up
the dossier's BuzzFeed debut.
McCain and Kramer, a former official at
the McCain Institute, were first told
about the dossier in November, during a
conversation with Sir Andrew Wood, a
former British spy and associate of
Steele’s. McCain then dispatched
Kramer to meet with Steele in London
on Nov. 28.

Fusion GPS has since admitted under oath that they did not
share the document with BuzzFeed which basically just
leaves John McCain (and/or his associate) or James
Comey.
Asked about the dossier recently, an irritable, and perhaps
defensive, McCain lashed out at a Daily Caller reporter
(seemingly a new trend for McCain of late) saying only
"I don’t know why you’re digging this up
now."
In addition to McCain and Steele, opposition research firm
Fusion GPS had the dossier, as did David J. Kramer, a
former State Department official and an associate of
McCdoain’s.
Steele, who operates Orbis Business Intelligence in
London, has revealed in the London lawsuit that he
allowed Kramer to view the dossier but did not provide
him a copy. He said that an “arrangement” was later made
for Fusion to provide a copy of the dossier to McCain
through Kramer.
McCain then provided a copy of the
document to Comey during a Dec. 9
meeting.
Four days after McCain met with Comey,
Steele would produce the final memo of
the dossier, the one that was provided
to BuzzFeed and which included the
allegations against Gubarev.

One person who was provided a copy of the salacious

document, written by former British spy Christopher
Steele, is Arizona Sen. John McCain. But McCain, who
has already acknowledged providing an early version of
the dossier to former FBI Director James Comey, denied
this week that he also gave a version to BuzzFeed, which
published it on Jan. 10.

“I gave it to no one except for the

director of the FBI. I don’t know why
you’re digging this up now,” McCain said
during a testy exchange with The Daily
Caller on Wednesday.
490
 Steele sent the final memo to Fusion
with instructions to pass a hard-copy to
Kramer and McCain. It is unclear how the
dossier was disseminated after that. Fusion
has not said whether it disseminated the
final version of the dossier to anyone
outside the company.
The denials by Steele, Fusion and McCain that they were
BuzzFeed’s sources leaves just a few posibilities, including
Kramer.
Kramer has not responded to multiple requests for
comment about his handling of the dossier or whether he
gave it to any news outlets. He has not talked on the record
to any reporters since being identified in the controversy.
Of course, the identity of BuzzFeed’s source is significant
for two reasons. First, because a Russian tech executive,
Aleksej Gubarev, was accused in the document of hacking
into DNC computers to dig up dirt on Hillary during the
2016 campaign. And second, but certainly not least,
because it could shed light on whether someone in Trump's
own party or, and perhaps even more disturbing, within the
FBI ordered a "political hit" on the newly elected - if
wildly unpopular (at least on the DC circuit) - president.
Gubarev’s attorneys have said they want to find out if
BuzzFeed’s source provided any warnings or qualifications
about the allegations made in the dossier. If so, the lawyers
are likely to argue that BuzzFeed was negligent and
careless in publishing the document.
BuzzFeed, which has apologized to Gubarev, has defended
its decision to publish the dossier, noting that its article
unveiling the Steele memos explicitly stated that the
memos had not been corroborated. The website also said
that the dossier was newsworthy because Comey had
briefed President Trump on its allegations during a
meeting on Jan. 6.
On top of its importance to the lawsuit, the identity of
BuzzFeed’s source is of widespread interest because of the
possibility that a government official disseminated the
uncorroborated document to the media, possibly as a hit
job on Trump.
And then, of course, there is the issue of who ordered the
dossier in the first place...

It is a central question in a lawsuit filed against the media

outlet by Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian tech executive
named in the dossier. Gubarev is identified by name in
Steele’s Dec. 13 memo. In it, Steele alleges that Gubarev
was recruited under duress by the FSB, Russia’s
intelligence agency, and that he used his companies to
infiltrate the computer systems of the Democratic National
Committee.
.

491
 CIA Promises To Become More
“Vicious” As Trump And Deep State Join Forces
Written By Carey Wedler
October 20, 2017 At 12:07 Pm

foreign intelligence to keep America safe.

Period. Full stop.”

After establishing the necessity of espionage (a practice

the CIA has bungled in the past), he shared his particularly
disturbing perspective on the CIA’s approach to ‘keeping
America safe’:

“The second thing you must know is that

the CIA, to be successful, must be
aggressive, vicious, unforgiving, relentless
— you pick the word. We must every
(ANTIMEDIA Op-ed) Any remnants of the notion that
minute be focused on crushing our
Donald Trump is an enemy of the Deep State and ruling
enemies and providing unfair advantage for
establishment were put to rest over the last two weeks as
our diplomats, our military and our
CIA Director Mike Pompeo echoed the Trump’s foreign
president.”
policy rhetoric and proudly bragged about having the
president’s support, passionately advocating the use of
“aggressive” and “vicious” tactics. Pompeo not only insisted that the CIA’s success depends
on aggression and viciousness but he also openly
advocated American exceptionalism to the extent that he
On Thursday, Pompeo spoke at the Foundation for the
was willing to create an unfair advantage, which implies
Defense of Democracies forum, sounding the alarm on
breaking rules or subverting justice to get ahead. This
North Korea’s nuclear capabilities. Though he
statement came in a speech where he also claimed the CIA
distinguished between the county’s capacity to produce a
adheres to the constitution, plays by the rules, and serves a
single weapon versus an entire arsenal, he stressed the
country rooted in “deeply moral” values.
need to halt the country’s weapons’ ambitions altogether
(like Trump and the media, he ignored the reality the North
Korea has expressed its openness to negotiation). Despite these platitudes, on Thursday, Pompeo expressed
his intention to further radicalize the CIA:
Pompeo also stressed the need for Pakistan to aid in the
fight against the Taliban, which has thrived in Afghanistan
despite the U.S.’ military presence there for sixteen years
and previous troop increases.

More telling, however, were Pompeo’s remarks at the

University of Texas-Austin last week when he spoke
bluntly about the aggressive power he believes the CIA
should wield.

The CIA published the prepared remarks in full.

Opening with the topic of “espionage,”

which Pompeo described as “the art and
science of running assets and stealing
secrets,” he stressed that this was the core
of the agency’s activities and asserted it
was all done in the name “of collecting

492
 “We’re going to become a much more
vicious agency,” he said.
It is not immediately clear how the CIA could possibly
be more vicious than it has since its inception, toppling
democratically elected governments; installing brutal
dictators; imposing ‘vicious’ torture techniques against
captives not charged with crimes; infiltrating the news
media to manipulate the American public’s perception of
reality; forcing mind-altering drugs on innocent people to
learn how to control them; infiltrating domestic activist
movements (including black rights and anti-war groups);
importing Nazi scientists; and arming radicals in schemes
that ultimately put the United States in more danger.
Pompeo appeared to justify his opinion that the CIA must
be more ruthless with his perception that the agency acts
“with a sense of duty, purpose, and
righteous resolve,” claiming last week
“we’re a lot more effective because of it.”
While speaking in Texas, he also focused in on a
longstanding CIA tradition — demonizing Iran.
In keeping with the CIA’s subversion of the Iranian
government — its very first mission was toppling the
country’s democratically elected leader and reinstalling an
autocratic monarch — Pompeo attempted to demonstrate
the agency’s moral righteousness by calling out the Middle
Eastern country’s Revolutionary Guard. Claiming their
purpose is to “perpetuate tyranny,” Pompeo claimed Iran is
the largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world.
In 2017, there is little debate over whether Saudi Arabia, a
U.S. ally, is repressive (as Pompeo claims Iran is) and a
source of radical, extremist ideology that contributes to the
spread of terrorism. There is also evidence to suggest the
Arab government funds ISIS. Though Iran’s oppressive
regime undoubtedly supports some terror groups, these
practices are eclipsed by the Saudis’. Further, in addition
to supporting the Saudis’ radical, autocratic regime, the
U.S. (the CIA in particular) is directly responsible for the
.
493
Iranian government it claims supports terrorism; that
government rose to power amid the 1979 revolution that
rejected the CIA-installed Shah.
Nevertheless, Pompeo’s vilification of Iran served to
justify his belief that
“[W]hen espionage is done right—when it’s
most successful—it’s inherently
aggressive, relentless, and risky,” he also
claimed.
He also enthusiastically praised Donald Trump, boasting
that
“whenever we’ve discussed the challenges
the Agency is facing, he has given us what
we need, whether it’s funding, authorities,
or policy guidance.”
Despite some Trump supporters’ misguided beliefs he
would be an “anti-war” president, he has continued wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan at the expense of civilians, saber
rattled against North Korea and Iran (to his ‘credit,’ he has
long-criticized Iran), advocated regime change in Syria,
and given free reign to the military to conduct its
operations.
Though Trump expressed brief opposition to the agency
when it circulated narratives about Russia’s role in the
election, it is clear the president amounts to nothing more
than a cog in the establishment’s machine — like every
other president before him.
In fact, in the Trump era, it appears the CIA will continue
its longstanding business as usual, wielding brutal tactics
and selling them to the public as vital to keeping them
safe.
Tellingly, for all of Pompeo’s talk of American principle
and morality, he never once mentioned freedom — opting
instead to fearmonger and offer security.
 UPDATE: YouTube Deletes Maxine Waters
Promise To ‘Go And Take Out Trump’
By Kyle Olson
October 20, 2017
EDITOR’S NOTE: YouTube has deleted
the original video of Waters’s appearance.
Another version has been embedded here
and will be visible until it is removed, too.
It’s been only four months since Rep. Steve Scalise was
shot by a Bernie Sanders fan, but did one of his colleagues
advocate violence against the president of the United
States?
The one-note impeachment minstrel Maxine Waters
promised a group that benefits “homeless LGBTQ youth”
that she will “take out” the president — and the liberal
audience wildly applauded.
Appearing recently at the Ali Forney Center gala in New
York City, it only took Waters 27 seconds before she
slammed Trump.
“Wow, what a moving evening this is,”
Waters began on October 13 in a clip
posted Friday.
“I’m sitting here listening, watching,
absorbing, thinking about Ali even though I
never met him. And with this kind of
inspiration, I will go and take out Trump
tonight,” she said as the crowd roared in
approval and Waters pumped her fist.
Just two days later, Waters continued to rant about Trump,
this time at a Los Angeles AIDS walk.
494
Waters took the stage in front of Los Angeles City Hall on
Sunday and quickly turned the event into a platform to
push her personal political agenda.
She congratulated APLA Health for meeting online
fundraising goals and briefly outlined the progress made to
control the AIDS epidemic, then quickly pivoted to Trump
and Republicans in Congress.
“We face unprecedented challenges today
in our struggle against HIV and AIDS and I
want you to know those people in
Congress on the opposite side of the aisle
from me control every branch of our federal
government,” Waters said. “And we have,
unfortunately, an unstable, erratic person in
the White House.”
“We don’t know what this president will do,
or say, or tweet from one day to the next.
Don’t forget, this is not a political event, but
I’m heading toward impeachment,” Waters
said with a snicker.
“Another challenge we face today is
Republicans’ determination to repeal the
Affordable Care Act, commonly known as
Obamacare,” Waters continued.
“Without Obamacare, insurance companies
will once again be able to deny care to the
people living with HIV and other pre-
existing conditions. Furthermore, without
Obamacare states like California that
 expanded Medicaid will not be able to
cover low-income adults living with HIV.
“And so, the House Republicans’
Obamacare repeal bill which passed the
House in May will cut $100 billion from
.
495
Medicaid and cause 23 million Americans
to lose their health insurance,” the 79-year-
old career politician said.
“So far, the Senate has been great. It has
refused to pass the bill.”
 What Do Hillary, Uranium One, And An FBI Bust Of A
Deep Cover Russian Spy Network Have In Common?
By Tyler Durden
Oct 20, 2017 5:40 PM

In 2010, shortly after Hillary Clinton assumed her position agents to Moscow in a hastily arranged,
as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, the FBI lopsided deal with Putin.
broke up a deep-cover Russian spy ring that had been
operating in the U.S. for decades. The operation, code It all happened as the uranium deal was in play: An
named "Ghost Stories," was a huge bust for the FBI that arrangement to provide Moscow’s state Rosatom nuclear
handed the U.S. intelligence community 10 highly trained, agency with 20 percent of American uranium capacity,
deep-cover, Russian spies presumably with immensely with $145,000,000 to pour into the Clinton Family
valuable insights into Russia's covert operations in the Foundation and its projects.
homeland. All of which is why its so confounding that
Hillary, as Secretary of State, "worked so feverishly" to For the Clintons, the FBI’s biggest counterintelligence bust
retun them all to Moscow posthaste rather than exploit in history couldn’t have come at a worse time.
their intelligence value to the fullest extent possible.
The day the FBI arrested the Russian
As the Daily Caller points out today, the FBI's bust
agents, on June 28, 2010, the day before
couldn't have come at a worse time for the Clintons as it
the secretary of state’s husband, Bill
came literally the day before Bill Clinton delivered a
Clinton, was to give a speech in
$500,000 speech in Moscow on behalf of a Russian bank Moscow. A Kremlin-connected
with an interest in securing approval of the controversial investment bank, Renaissance Capital,
Uranium One deal...oh the tangled webs... paid the former president $500,000 for
the hour-long appearance.
For a decade, the FBI ran an operation
called Ghost Stories to monitor and rip
apart a deep-cover Russian agent
network. Ghost Stories tracked a ring
Russian spies who lived between
Boston and Washington, D.C., under
false identities.

It was one of the FBI’s most elaborate and successful

counterintelligence operations in history.

Under the code name Operation Ghost Stories, the FBI had
been working the ring for a decade. Its targets had
burrowed in along the Acela Corridor between Boston,
New York, and Washington DC. They lived normal daily
lives as Americans to attend universities, run businesses,
marry, and conceive and raise children to infiltrate society
and subvert government institutions. One of the SVR
agents had stolen the identity of a six week-old Canadian
baby who had died in 1963. That prompted the Ghost
Stories code name. The ring inspired the FX network’s
television series, “The Americans.”
After the FBI arrested 10 of the spies in
June, 2010, Secretary of State Clinton
worked feverishly to return the Russian
Making Clinton's decision to expel the captured spies even
more confounding, was evidence that Hillary was perhaps
one of the biggest targets of the Russian spy operation as
agent Lidiya Guryeva, or Cynthia Murphy as she was
known in her fake American life, tracked her daily
movements and even moved to Washington D.C. along
with Hillary in 2009.
From New York, SVR agent Lidiya
Guryeva had Clinton in her sights.
Guryeva had a real-life job, under the
assumed name Cynthia Murphy, as vice

496
 president of a high-end tax services
company in lower Manhattan.
Guryeva’s prime targets, FBI evidence and later news
reports show, were Clinton and no fewer than five
members of her inner circle.
Guryeva was far more important than a fellow agent would
become the most famous member of the spy ring. The
publicity would go to Anna Vasilyevna Kushchenko, who
after her arrest would be become a glamourous spy
princess under her married name, Anna Chapman.
While the FBI’s unclassified information
is vague, it is clear that Guryeva’s target
was an early Obama administration
member from New York who handled
foreign policy after having run for high-
level public office. Clinton is the only
person fitting that description.
Clinton became secretary of state on January 21, 2009.
Two weeks later, on February 3, Guryeva sent an
encrypted message to the SVR’s Moscow Center. The
agent reported “several work-related meetings” with a
New York-based “financier” who was “prominent in
politics,” an “active fundraiser” for a major political party
whose name the FBI redacted, and “a personal friend” of
an Obama cabinet official whom the FBI did not publicly
identify. Guryeva told her bosses that she would seek to
use that personal friend to “provide” inside information on
American foreign policy and the White House, and invite
her to major political events.
Guryeva and her husband would sell
their New Jersey house and follow
Clinton to the nation’s capital. There,
she could get a job with a Washington, DC-
based company or policy shop. A tasking
message dated October 18, 2009, from
Moscow Center sought agents to seek out
information “unknown publicly but revealed
in private by sources close to State
Department, Government, major think
tanks.”
As the FBI told the court, “the SVR requested information
on the U.S. position with respect to a new Strategic Arms
Limitation Treaty, Afghanistan, and Iran’s nuclear
program.” Moscow Center specifically asked Guryeva for
intelligence concerning “approaches and ideas” of what the
FBI called “four names of sub-cabinet United States
foreign policy officials, omitted,” meaning that all four
were deputies to Secretary Clinton whose identities had
been redacted.
Hillary Clinton was mining Kremlin cash for her personal
benefit while secretary of state, at the exact time Putin’s
497
SVR spies were targeting her and penetrating her inner
circle. She had every personal motivation to make the spy
problem disappear and deny that she had been a target.
Of course, given that the Clintons were on the verge of
securing a windfall of donations for their "Clinton
Foundation," which came shortly after the Uranium One
deal was completed just a few months later, among other
Russian-based schemes to enrich her friends and family
(described below), it seems Hillary was forced to choose
between exploiting an intelligence treasure chest of
information for the benefit of the country at large or
covering up yet another scandal that would potentially
disrupt her family's personal self-enrichment schemes...
Clinton pledged at Foggy Bottom to “reset” relations with
the Putin-controlled regime. She blamed the former
George W. Bush administration for the bad feelings.
To the Kremlin’s relief, she opposed
what would become the Magnitsky Act
to sanction Russian criminal oligarchs
and regime figures. Weeks into her
tenure as secretary, she told Russian
television, “our goal is to help
strengthen Russia.”
She immediately used her position as
America’s top diplomat to pour Russia-
related money into her family
foundation. One of her earliest acts as
secretary of state was personally to
authorize the State Department to
arrange for 28 American tech CEOs and
venture capitalists – 17 of them Clinton
Foundation donors – to visit a Russian
high-tech hub called Skolkovo.
With Skolkovo, the SVR doesn’t need to steal when it can
arrange legal purchases. The US military calls Skolkovo
“an overt alternative to clandestine industrial espionage.”
The Skolkovo visit, which reportedly began as a Clinton
Foundation initiative, occurred in May, 2010, a month
before the arrests.
Four days before the FBI would break up the ring, on June
24, Obama personally met with his Russian counterpart,
Dmitry Medvedev, to coordinate billions of dollars in deals
with Kremlin-affiliated businesses. Putin held power
behind the scenes as prime minister, between his terms as
president.
...guess which path she chose...
Clinton didn’t want leverage. She
wanted the issue to go away. She toiled
feverishly to get the 10 Ghost Stories
spies back to Moscow as quickly as
possible.
She accepted whatever Putin would give her to pass off as
a face-saving swap.
She folded America’s strong hand of cards. The US had
ten relatively young, highly trained Russian spies in
custody with immense, fresh knowledge of SVR statecraft.
A normal secretary of state would bide her time and get the
best deal.
The State Department coordinated
quickly with the Kremlin to return the
spies in a lopsided swap over a busy
Fourth of July weekend, when few in
Washington were paying attention.
In return, the US accepted an SVR officer who had been
an American double agent, an open-source researcher
.
498
whom Amnesty International considered a political
prisoner, a Russian military intelligence colonel who spied
for the British, and an elderly ex-KGB man from Soviet
times whom not even a Communist court convicted of
treason.
All of which, as the Daily Caller notes, raises several
questions: Precisely what did the FBI know about Russia’s
spy service targeting Hillary Clinton and her inner circle?
Why did Clinton deny through spokespersons that she had
been a Russian target? Why did she work so feverishly to
get the spies out of the United States and back to Russia?
Why has the FBI leadership not been more vocal in touting
one of its greatest counterintelligence successes ever? And
why did nobody in the FBI leadership raise this issue
during the 2016 Russian election meddling controversy?
 ALERT: Trump Issues Urgent
Warning To America, Please Listen
Benjamin Welton
October 21, 2017
President Donald Trump has made a name for himself as
someone who is not afraid to voice uncomfortable truths.
Recently, Mr. Trump took on Great Britain and its problem
with crime.
On his Facebook page, President Trump wrote,
“Just out report: ‘United Kingdom crime
rises 13% annually amid spread of
Radical Islamic terror.’ Not good, we
must keep America safe!”
As with everything President Trump says, the mainstream
media was quick to denounce him, and claim that his
statement is factually wrong.
The media has consistently claimed that President Trump
and Republicans are wrong and “Islamophobic” for saying
that certain European cities have “No-Go Zones” where all
non-Muslims are encouraged to avoid.
Just this week, Sweden’s centrist Moderate Party proposed
sending in the Swedish Army into several high-crime areas
in Stockholm’s suburbs.
“It is absolutely necessary to do something,
because these gangs are like cancerous
tumours in our country, and it is urgent. My
absolute belief is that we, the nation of
Sweden, must declare war on criminal
gangs,” said Moderate Party member
Mikael Cederbratt.
Most criminal gangs in Sweden are of foreign origin, with
African and Arab Muslims.
Not too long ago, the media excoriated Donald Trump for
saying that Sweden is an example of what America
shouldn’t do in regards to law enforcement and
immigration. The mainstream media here said that nothing
is wrong in Sweden, a nation sometimes referred to as a
“moral superpower.”
499
The uncomfortable truth for liberals is that Sweden is the
“rape capital” of the West, and has seen a dramatic spike
in grenade attacks on police officers and emergency
services personnel.
2017 alone has seen a 550-percent rise in hand grenade
attacks. Most of these attacks have occurred in the very
same “No-Go Zones” that the media once said do not exist
at all.
As for Great Britain, the country has seen a sharp uptick in
terror attacks lately, from the suicide bombing at the
Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, to the various
vehicular assaults in London.
Despite what Labour Party officials like London Mayor
Sadiq Khan say, Britain’s growing Muslim population is
radicalizing, and is not interested in assimilating.
A bombshell report released last year by Channel 4 in the
UK found that twenty-three-percent of British Muslims
want Sharia law in the UK, eighteen-percent said that they
believe homosexuality should be illegal, and forty-seven-
percent said that they feel it is “unacceptable” for a gay
person to be allowed to teach.
Europe has no-go zones. Do you think they’re coming to
the US?
The left-wing press in the UK tried to put a positive spin
on these findings by saying that a majority of British
Muslims feel like they belong in the UK, but it’s hard to
dispute the fact that seventy-eight-percent of British
Muslims would like to assimilate into the UK only as long
as Islamic schooling and Islamic teaching was supported
or left alone by the state.
Islamic teaching runs counter to Western traditions, so this
offer is a poisoned apple. President Trump is right to warn
America about the problems associated with increased
Muslim immigration.
 Liberals Love Trump's Tax Plan
(When Told It's Bernie's)
By Tyler Durden
Oct 21, 2017 6:00 PM

President Donald Trump's proposal for comprehensive tax plan they loved was actually President
reform was almost immediately dismissed as heartless and Trump’s.
impractical by his political opponents.
How did they react?

Enjoy...

But Campus Reform wondered what

would some of those opponents think if Additionally as MishTalk's Mike Shedlock
they were told the same plan was being writes, unsurprisingly, Students Despise
proposed by someone they adore - Obama Policies...When Credited to
Senator Bernie Sanders? Trump.

To find out, we headed to George Washington University In anticipation of the 100-day mark of Donald Trump's
to ask students their opinions on Trump’s new tax plan. presidency, Campus Reform asked students at George
WIthout much explanation, the students immediately made Mason University to evaluate some of the president's
clear their distaste for the plan. accomplishments.

“It’s not the most efficient, nor beneficial to The students predictably blasted things
the general populus,” said one student like the "Apology Tour" and stimulus
when asked her opinion of Trump’s plan. package, even comparing them to Nazi
policies, at least until learning that they
“It’s better for the upper class than anyone
were actually accomplished during
else,” added another.
President Obama's first 100 days.
After watching student after student
express their disapproval of the plan,
we then asked those same students
what they thought of Senator Bernie
Sanders’ new tax plan.

Immediately, they expressed excitement and support after

hearing the details of the plan.

The only problem for them? There was

no tax plan for Senator Sanders. The

500
What's Going On To be fair, we do not know the percentage of students who
did not fall for the traps.
1. These students are so brainwashed by mainstream
media they respond to the person, not the idea. However, I strongly suspect the vast
2. More fundamentally, the students know nothing of majority of the students (and most likely
current events or they would not fall for these the average person on the street, not
types of gotchas. just students) would tend react to the
person, not the issue.
.

501
 The NYT Obsesses
Over Nonexistent Russian US Election Hacking
By Stephen Lendman - stephenlendman.org
10-21-2017
No evidence suggests last year’s US presidential election
or any others were hacked, by Russia or anyone else - at
the federal, state or local levels.
Plenty of evidence shows election-rigging in America is
longstanding, foreign powers uninvolved.
The most notorious example was in 2000 - five right-wing
Supreme Court justices annulling the electoral college and
popular vote, anointing GW Bush president, depriving Al
Gore of the office he won.
In 2004, John Kerry defeated Bush. Election rigging gave
the illegitimate incumbent a second term.
Historian Robert Caro called Lyndon Johnson’s 1948
senatorial primary win “brazen thievery.” Without it, he’d
have lost and likely never become president.
Countless other examples of US electoral fraud date from
the early 19th century, democracy in America pure
fantasy.
US elections are exercises in deception, especially for the
nation’s highest office, aspirants vetted to assure they’ll
continue dirty business as usual, promising one thing,
delivering continuity - Trump Exhibit A, his agenda polar
opposite his campaign pledges.
America’s debauched political system needs addressing,
not phony accusations of Russian hacking. Not a shred of
evidence proves it.
Yet the NYT and other media scoundrels keep beating this
dead horse - to their disgrace.
The Times:
“As Washington ignores the danger, state
election officials have finally begun facing
up to the threat of Russian hackers and
other troublemakers infiltrating the
American voting process in the midterm
and presidential elections.”
502
Fact:
No evidence suggests the credibility of any
of the above claims. America’s deplorable
electoral process needs cleaning up
internally, not from any external threats.
So-called “stern warnings” of hacking by “federal security
experts” are phony. No “blatant (Kremlin) intrusion”
occurred last year or earlier.
Nothing “cries out” for protecting America’s electoral
system from foreign interference. State officials believing
Russia poses a threat are brainwashed by US intelligence
community and media scoundrel lying.
The Times:
“The situation cries out for national
leadership as the elections approach. But
voters can’t expect help from President
Trump.”
“Nor are congressional Republicans any
help, bent as they are on nonexistent voter
fraud as a more credible challenge than
Kremlin hackers.”
“Now that the states are accepting that the
threat is real, they must work all the harder
to protect the voting machinery that
underpins the public’s confidence in
democracy itself.”
As usual, The Times is wrongheaded and duplicitous.
Voter fraud and other election rigging tactics are real, not
nonexistent Russian hacking.
America wasn’t founded as a democracy, just the illusion
of a will of the people system.
Privileged ones run things for their own self-interest, the
only ones served, no others - things more abysmal and
dangerous today than ever.
 Gold Star Family Releases Audio
Of Trump Phone Call That Totally DESTROYS
Another Left-Wing Lie
By JD Heyes
Saturday, October 21, 2017
The widow of a U.S. soldier who was killed in
Afghanistan has released an audio recording of a consoling
phone call she received from President Donald J. Trump
that puts the lie to the latest disgusting Left-wing attack on
the commander-in-chief.
“I am so sorry to hear about the whole
situation,” Trump can be heard telling Gold
Star widow Natasha De Alencar, who lost
her husband, Army Staff Sgt. Mark R. De
Alencar. “What a horrible thing, except that
he’s an unbelievable hero.”
“Thank you,” she replied, as reported by
The Daily Caller. “I really, really appreciate
it. I really do, sir.”
In addition, the president offered her the opportunity to
come visit him at the White House if she ever makes it to
Washington, D.C.
“If you’re around Washington, you come
over and see me in the Oval Office,” Trump
said. “You just come over and see me
because you are just the kind of
family…this is what we want.”
Continuing, Trump said,
“Say hello to your children and tell them,
‘Your father, he was a great hero’ that I
respected. Just tell them I said, ‘Your father
was a great hero.’”
503
The commander-in-chief noted further that fellow soldiers
who served with De Alencar praised him as well, saying he
“was…just an amazing, an amazing
guy…and that he’s a great hero.”
The audio of the call was released after Trump was
attacked by another Gold Star family and Democratic Rep.
Frederica Wilson of Florida, who accused him of being
“insensitive” when he called to console the widow of U.S.
Army special forces Sgt. La David Johnson.
As reported by Natural News:
Wilson said that Trump was ‘dismissive’ of
Johnson’s widow, Myeshia, saying that her
husband “knew what he signed up for”
when he enlisted, adding that “when it
happens it hurts anyway.”
“Yes, the statement is true,” said Johnson’s
mother, Cowanda Jones-Johnson. “I was in
the car and heard the full conversation. Not
only did he disrespect my son,” she said,
but also the soldier’s father and his widow.
Trump immediately pushed back, saying she was lying
about what he had said and that he had “proof” of it. After
the charge, he tweeted that Wilson,
“totally fabricated what I said to the wife of
a soldier who died in action (and I have
proof).”
Others have come to the president’s defense, including
Craig Gross, whose son was Cpl. Frank Robert Gross, told
CNN that Trump’s “words are basically being taken and
misconstrued.”
“President Trump is doing a lot of good
things as far as Gold Star families are
concerned,” Gross said. “I believe that if
you interviewed him personally, one on
one, you would find that he is very, very
empathetic and very compassionate, not
 only toward Gold Star families but also in
regards to our active duty.”
White House Chief of Staff John Kelly also came to the
president’s defense while slamming the vileness of the
allegations made by Wilson — who, up until now,
virtually no one in American knew outside of her little
Florida district.
“There’s no perfect way to make that phone
call,” Kelly said. “If you’ve never worn the
uniform, if you’ve never been in combat,
you can’t even imagine how to make that
call but I think he very bravely does make
those calls.”
.
504
He told reporters at a news conference Thursday that he
had even advised the president not to make the phone calls
just because they were so difficult. However, he said
Trump wanted to do so because he believes it’s the right
thing to do.
“He said to me, ‘What do I say?’ I said to
him, ‘Sir, there’s nothing you can do to
lighten the burden on these families,” Kelly
said.
Once more, another disgustingly dishonest Democrat,
aided and abetted by the same disgustingly dishonest
legacy media (CNN comes immediately to mind) have
concocted yet another lie to smear this president…and it
doesn’t matter one bit to them that they’re using the loss of
American soldiers just to score cheap political points.
 Rep. Maxine Waters Says She
Wants To 'Take Out' Trump
By Joseph Weber, Fox News
October 22, 2017

Waters' most recent comment about Trump, as reported

first by The American Mirror, comes just a few months
after a gunman opened fire on congressional Republicans
as they practiced for a charity baseball game, severely
wounding House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La.

Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, a leader in the resist-

Trump movement, recently told a New York audience that
she will “take out” the president, a video posted online last
week shows.

“Wow, what a moving evening this is,”

Waters is heard saying in the video of an
Oct. 13 event at the Ali Forney Center in
New York City.
“I’m sitting here listening, watching,
absorbing, thinking about Ali even though I
never met him. And with this kind of
inspiration, I will go and take Trump out
tonight,” the California lawmaker said as
the crowd cheered.
Waters has suggested several times in past months that
Trump should be impeached, most recently over his
argument that NFL players should stop kneeling for the
national anthem, a movement started in protest of police
mistreatment of African-Americans.
.
Democratic Rep. Al Green, Texas, also threatened to try to
impeach Trump.
Earlier this month, he withdrew at the last minute an
attempt to force the entire chamber to take a preliminary
vote on the issue.
Though the effort would unlikely get a final vote in the
GOP-controlled House, any such vote would be politically
messy for any member, including Democrats who are
trying to develop the message for the 2018 midterms
beyond one merely opposing Trump, which has been
unsuccessful for them.

505
 Did Maxine Waters
Just Threaten Trump’s Life?
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 22, 2017

Maxine Waters should be ashamed of herself but that

would require her to have two things she lacks: Class and a
“I’m sitting here listening, watching,
conscience
absorbing, thinking about Ali even though I
never met him. And with this kind of
inspiration, I will go and take Trump out
tonight,” she said as the crowd roared and
the lunatic Waters pumped her fist.

Noted The American Mirror:

Just two days later, Waters continued to

rant about Trump, this time at a Los
Angeles AIDS walk.
(National Sentinel) Political Violence:
Waters took the stage in front of Los
Angeles City Hall on Sunday and quickly
It’s only been four months since a Left-wing
turned the event into a platform to push her
kook and huge supporter of Sen. Bernie
personal political agenda.
Sanders shot and nearly killed Republican
House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of
Louisiana, and now another far-Left
Democrat appears to have threatened the
safety of President Donald J. Trump.

In a speech to a group that benefits “homeless LGBTQ

youth,” impeachment parrot Rep. Maxine Waters of
California promised to “take out” the president, to the wild
applause of the equally deranged audience, The American
Mirror reported.

“We face unprecedented challenges today

in our struggle against HIV and AIDS and I
want you to know those people in
Congress on the opposite side of the aisle
from me control every branch of our federal
government,” Waters said. “And we have,
unfortunately, an unstable, erratic person in
the White House.”
“We don’t know what this president will do,
or say, or tweet from one day to the next.
Don’t forget, this is not a political event, but
I’m heading toward impeachment,” Waters
“Wow, what a moving evening this is,” said, laughing.
Waters began on October 13 in a clip
posted Friday.
506
 “Another challenge we face today is
Republicans’ determination to repeal the
Affordable Care Act, commonly known as
Obamacare,” Waters went on.
Now, let’s play a little game called “switcharoo.” Imagine,
if you will, an elderly white congressman ranting about
“taking out” a black president — say, like, one named
Obama.
Can you even imagine the outrage from the Left?
Of course you can, because you’ve seen this movie time
and time and time again. The blatant hypocrisy is enraging.
507
Unless and until the Trump administration and
Republicans begin taking such threats seriously, they will
continue to be made by politicians on the Left whose
rhetoric will only inspire more violent action action them.
This isn’t cute anymore. It isn’t funny. And it isn’t going
to lead to anything good.
Maxine Waters should be ashamed of
herself but that would require her to have
two things she lacks: Class and a
conscience.
Shame, too, on the voters who keep putting her in office.
 Trump: Fake News Claims 'Finally Sinking In'
By Brandon Carter
10/22/17 08:32 AM EDT

A Politico/Morning Consult poll released last week found

that 46 percent of voters think the media fabricate reports
about Trump and his administration.

Just 37 percent of voters disagree and another 17 percent

are undecided.

Seventy-six percent of Republicans think the media

fabricate stories about Trump, while just 20 percent of
Democrats agree and 65 percent of Democrats disagree.

President Trump early Sunday said media organizations The poll was conducted after Trump went after media
have “lost cred,” pointing to a recent poll that found almost companies in a series of tweets, saying that their broadcast
half of voters think the media make up stories about him. licenses should be challenged and potentially revoked.

“It is finally sinking through. 46% OF "Network news has become so partisan,
PEOPLE BELIEVE MAJOR NATIONAL distorted and fake that licenses must be
NEWS ORGS FABRICATE STORIES challenged and, if appropriate, revoked,"
ABOUT ME. FAKE NEWS, even worse!” Trump wrote on Twitter. "Not fair to public!"
Trump tweeted. “Lost cred.”
Trump also called reporters at some news networks
“fiction writers” in a tweet last Tuesday.

508
Congresswoman Maxine Waters Promises Cheering Crowd
That She Will “Go And Take Out Trump” As DNC
Chairman Calls Him The Most “Dangerous
President Ever”
Alex Thomas
October 22nd, 2017
During an appearance at the Ali Forney Center gal in New
York City, Congresswoman and “impeachment minstrel”
Maxine Waters promised a roaring crowd that she would
“take out” the president that very night – a statement that
has left many wondering if this was a direct threat on
President Trump’s life or whether it was some sort of sick
joke. (especially in the wake of Rep. Steve Scalise being
shot by a liberal).
Waters made the promise to the group, which benefits
homeless LGBTQ youth, amid the backdrop of violence
against conservatives and the mainstream media literally
picking apart every single thing Trump says or does for
any hint of something to attack him over. Its safe to
assume they won’t be doing the same after Waters
disgusting remarks.
“I’m sitting here listening, watching,
absorbing, thinking about Ali even though I
never met him. And with this kind of
inspiration, I will go and take out Trump
tonight,” Waters stunningly said.
Amazingly, according to a report in The American Mirror,
YouTube quickly deleted the original video showing
Waters remarks. The above video was uploaded as a
replacement and could be deleted by the left-wing
company at any time.
At the same time that a high-profile Democratic
Congresswoman is openly joking(?) about taking out the
president, the head of the Democratic Party is ramping up
the rhetoric against him as well, telling a DNC committee
509
gathering that Trump was the most dangerous president
ever while urging his fractured party to unite against all
things Donald Trump.
“We have the most dangerous president in
American history and one of the most
reactionary Congresses in American
history,” Democratic Chairman Tom Perez
said during his speech.
Perez also labeled Trump an “existential threat” with no
apparent worry that his words could be taken, along with
those by Waters and other liberals in the media, as
ammunition for a crazy leftist to once again attack
Congress or even the White House.
Perez’s comments come as he reorganizes the DNC to
better serve establishment candidates, pushing out several
prominent Bernie Sanders supporters while pretending the
shuffle was about diversity when in reality it was a
transparent move to make sure he can control who the
party supports for president in 2020.
Going back to liberals seemingly embracing violent
rhetoric against the president, it is important to keep in
mind that the mainstream media themselves are also
directly complicit in this move towards violence as they
have either contributed to the vicious rhetoric or refused to
call out those that have.
One can only hope that another attack doesn’t actually
happen. If it does, we know who to blame.
 Neo-Con Traitors, Trumpian
Deception, And The Israeli Agenda
By Patrick J. Mcshay
10-22-2017
"To refuse the obligations of international
leadership and our duty to remain the last
best hope of earth for the sake of some
half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked up
by people who would rather find
scapegoats than solve problems, is as
unpatriotic as an attachment to any other
tired dogma that Americans consigned to
the ash heap of History" - John "Traitor"
McCain
"It's a big Club and we're not in it. The table
is tilted folks, the game is rigged, and
nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to
care. And that's what our owners want. It's
what they count on. They want us willfully
ignorant". - * George Carlin
Traitor McCain forgets that it was those spurious
nationalists that rightly said invading Iraq for Israel was a
horrible idea. I suppose he thought invading Iraq was part
of our "obligation of international leadership." The Iraqis
would beg to differ Mr. McCain. Those crazy nationalists
won't soon forget the phony evidence cooked up by
McCain's handlers in Tel Aviv to deceive our nation into
an illegal war. They won't forget disgraced former General
Colin Powell's fabricated yellowcake uranium speech at
the UN and they won't likely forget the little Eichmanns
that made up the "Project For A New American Century"
that planned the war for Bibi Netanyahu years before 911.
You might remember some of the authors of this long-
planned war in Iraq. There was Dick Cheney, Donald
Rumsfeld, and Jeb Bush to name just a few. History won't
likely forget McCain's support for the unconstitutional and
illegal Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act
that gutted the Bill of Rights.
What "tired dogma" is he referring to? Is he talking about
our precious American sovereignty that he thinks so little
of? When he said, "We have a moral obligation to
continue our just cause", did he mean arming terrorists in
the Middle East? Traitor McCain was more responsible for
the rise of ISIS than any other single person on the planet.
The fact that this despicable human stain is still in a
position of power should send chills through every
American.
Unbelievably, Traitor McCain was giving his recent
speech in Philadelphia while receiving The National
510
Constitution Center's Liberty Medal in recognition of his
decades of service. This vile, belligerent, warmongering
little bully who has broken promise after promise to the
people of the State of Arizona and to America should
spend his remaining years apologizing to his constituents
for his years of lying and his disappointing leadership.
I don't recall McCain ever criticizing Obama the way he
has whined about Trump. Obama took some time off from
his highly lucrative speech-making to stump for candidates
in New Jersey and spoke about the 'unnamed former reality
star turned politician' who has "time and time again
attempted to divide us". This from a president who divided
us every time he opened his mouth.
Russian scandals only get attention in the media if Donald
Trump is involved, and if it makes him look bad. They
aren't interested in covering the Obama/Hillary Clinton
deal to sell 20% of our county's Uranium to Russia. Peter
Schweizer, the author of Clinton Cash said that as the
Uranium deal was coming together The Clinton
Foundation received more than $145 Million from the 9
shareholders in the Uranium Company that was sold to the
Russians as this deal was being put together. These
donations were never declared publicly and were hidden
by the Clintons.
This blatant pay for play should result in a long prison
sentence. Instead, we get a special prosecutor to waste
millions of taxpayer dollars looking for a non-existent
Russian/Trump connection. So the question is why is the
Trump Administration protecting Hillary Clinton but are
OK with Paul Manafort being raided by a SWAT team at
the crack of dawn? Is Hillary Clinton above the law?
Trump's attorneys would have to say yes.
Deep State cover-ups are not uncommon at this level of
government. Thousands of documents that were sealed
away since John Kennedy was assassinated we no doubt
hiding an even larger cover-up than most conspiracy
theorists already have uncovered. No one who has
performed even the most superficial investigation into
Kennedy's assassination believes that Lee Harvey Oswald
acted alone, yet every year the corporate-owned and
controlled news media will report the same old tired lies
with a straight face and we roll our eyes and get on with
our lives.
These sealed documents that hold so much truth and so
many government secrets and lies are due to be released
very soon and Trump has said he will make a
determination soon on whether he will unseal them. The
CIA is urging him to keep them sealed so don't hold your
breath.
Tom Fitton, the President of Judicial Watch, a watchdog
on government corruption, has accused Trump
administration appointees of continuing to cover up crimes
committed by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and many
others in that administration.
Fitton has said that their attorneys have been battling
Trump Administration attorneys in Jeff Sessions' Justice
Department who are, in effect, protecting Hillary and
Obama. Fitton says they have filed dozens of lawsuits
since Trump took office and can't believe Sessions is
working so hard to cover for these criminals. This is
getting no coverage in the media.
Just recently 2800 emails were recovered from Huma
Abedin's computer and Sessions' Justice Department has
refused to release them. Why? This story appears to be off
limits - No one in the media will report on it. It reminds
me of the Iran Contra hearings where it was revealed the
American CIA, the U.S. Military, the Governor of
Arkansas, and a number of high-level officials that went
all the way to the Vice President of the United States were
involved in a massive Cocaine drug smuggling operation.
The media went into cover-up mode and the public never
learned details of the Cocaine operation.
The CIA was actually using street gangs like the Crips and
Bloods to distribute the drugs that fueled the Crack
Cocaine explosion in the 1980's. Gary Webb won a
Pulitzer for breaking the blockbuster story the rest of the
media ignored and then attacked Webb relentlessly until he
was blacklisted from working and later suicided with 2
bullets to his brain.
The public still looks at accusations of government drug
smuggling as a conspiracy theory. Why do you suppose
Loretta Lynch was questioned behind closed doors today
about her tarmac meeting with Bubba? The same reason
Bush and Cheney were interviewed behind closed doors
during the 911 investigation cover-up. The public is not
allowed to see the crimes of the elite because these people
are above the law and will never pay a price for their
crimes.
This week, George Bush "the Dumber" was rolled out by
his globalist controllers to read a speech, obviously written
by someone else, criticizing Trump, extolling the virtues of
open borders, illegal immigration humility, patience,
freedom and enough "why can't we all just get along"
Bullshit to choke 5 Afghani goat herders at Guantanamo.
This from the guy who is responsible for killing over a
million people. He read that teleprompter like a second
grader reading a second language. Poor George, I doubt
he understood any of it anyway.
511
He's been holed up in a room like a mental patient these
past few years painting bad portraits of disabled soldiers,
who for some reason don't seem to understand that Mr.
Bush and his warmongering cabinet lied us into an illegal
war over a sovereign nation that posed no threat to the
United States. These liars have lost any moral authority
they arrogantly thought they possessed. You can't lead as a
nation when everyone on the planet hates you. Sociopaths
like Traitor McCain and dopey W don't get it and never
will.
Worse, they sell the lie to an ignorant and distracted public
that our troops are fighting for our freedoms. Nothing
could be further from the truth. Traitor McCain, George W
Bush, Barack Obama, and the Clintons have made this
world a more dangerous place and our freedoms have
continued to evaporate since 911. This government
continues to spy on all of us illegally and says it is for our
own good. You know, because of the war on terror. Do
you still buy this nonsense?
Flamboyant Congresswoman Frederica Wilson D-Fla, who
dresses like a colorful Rodeo Clown and reminds me a
little of Weezy on the "Jeffersons", exploited the death of
an Army Green Beret Sgt. La David Johnson when she
accused Trump of disrespecting Johnson's widow, and then
accused Retired Marine General John Kelly of racist
remarks because she didn't understand a term he used. I
know Trump says some really boneheaded things but I
don't believe he would disrespect a Veteran's widow on a
condolence call.
It did give the Congresswoman the opportunity, with the
camera's eye on her all week, to show America that she has
a matching cowboy hat for every goofy outfit in her closet.
This woman is an embarrassment to Congress. It's no
wonder people hate politicians. This woman believes she is
a "rock star", as she said this week. She dresses and acts
like a game show host. We need serious people in these
positions, not someone whose goal is to make a
grandstanding spectacle of themselves at the expense of
others.
Most Americans probably don't even know that over a
million people have been killed and trillions spent on this
phony war on terror that sent our economy into a tailspin
from which we may never recover. But hey the Stock
Market is at an all-time high so let's pretend that we aren't
in the middle of a retail bloodbath and a Stock Market
bubble that most experts say is about to pop.
The market has been rising to record highs and most have
no idea why. The Investment Watch Blog points out that
the Central banks have been printing currency in heaps and
piles and handing it out to corporations all over the World.
Retail Inventories are up, sales are down and companies
are borrowing big bucks to buy up their own stock to drive
up the value. Shopping malls are ghost towns so it's not
difficult to predict how that will turn out.
This pervasive tactic has no precedent in our history. The
Central banks plan to roll back liquidity and they intend to
roll back $1 trillion dollars in the US over the next 12
months. Anyone paying attention knows that would be a
disaster. They can't raise rates much more without causing
major problems. 5000 retail stores are closing by the end
of this year. Thousands closed last year and the year
before. Rising vacancies and the inevitable mortgage
delinquencies will create a big problem in the commercial
real estate market. This should be good news for Gold and
Silver that have been manipulated and undervalued for
years.
If nothing else, Trump has proven that he will be an
obedient warmonger for Israel. With Neo-Con Nikki Haley
and a Coterie of compliant Generals who are equally sold
out to Israel's plans to redesign the borders of the Middle
East, don't look for the US to get out of Syria anytime
soon. The US is taking a lot of credit for the demise of
ISIS, except no one but the American people are buying it.
Putin has accused the US and it's allies of funding and
supporting ISIS and the rest of the World understands
what's going on. John McCain has egg all over his face
over the Syrian debacle. Nikki Haley scolded Iran on
Wednesday and said the UN Security Council has allowed
Iran to get away with violations and it must stop. Someone
should tell this ignorant Israeli puppet that no country
ignores and violates more UN Security Council resolutions
than Israel.
No one was a bigger cheerleader for terrorism in Syria
than John McCain. Whenever you hear of atrocities and
murders of Christians, Priests, and missionaries, you can
always point a finger at John McCain. Christians and
Muslims coexisted peacefully in Syria for decades. That all
changed when the US, at John McCain's urging, began
funding terrorist groups in Syria.
He was also behind the Civil War in Libya where the US
armed vicious terrorists that roamed the country murdering
innocent civilians. Obama and Hillary Clinton were right
.
512
there supporting this disgraceful policy. Benghazi was a
gun-running operation arming terrorists. Americans should
be ashamed. They would be if any of them were to ever
learn the truth through this sea of disinformation.
Anyone who takes the time to read the policy paper, "A
Clean Break" written in 1996 by the aforementioned Neo-
Con Project for A New American Century 5 years before
911, will find that US foreign policy has been dictated by
Israel for a long time and the war in Iraq was being
planned years before 911. This is a plan for Israeli full
spectrum dominance over the Middle East. It is a newer
version of Oded Yinon's Plan written in 1982 for a Greater
Israel that would stretch from The River of Egypt up to the
Euphrates, which includes large chunks of several
countries including Syria and Lebanon.
Trump's decision to exit the Iran nuclear deal is really bad
news. Bibi is no doubt ecstatic to have a president in the
Oval office as easily led around as the Neo-Con patsy
George W. Bush. The people surrounding the President are
all sold out to Israel. Nothing good will come from it. They
hate us and we pretend not to know.
E-mails confirm Bill Clinton met with
Russian President Vladimir Putin just
before the Uranium One deal was finalized.
Right after his half-million dollar speech to
a Russian Bank.
At least 16 gun control bills have been filed in Congress
since the false flag shooting in Las Vegas.
By the time the American people realize that the war on
terror was designed for them to be the final victim, it will
be too late.
Patrick J. McShay
George Carlin- "The Big Club".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUaqFzZLxU
 Limbaugh: ‘Obvious’ Trump Is Succeeding
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On October 22, 2017
Despite the fact that every day is a battle for Trump, he is
the one who keeps coming out on top
(National Sentinel) Political Agendas:
Talk show giant Rush Limbaugh took some
time to just absorb the opposition —
Democrats, RINOs, the media —
surrounding President Donald J. Trump’s
administration thus far and came up with a
singular conclusion: Trump is winning, and
it’s patently obviously that he is winning
when you look at all the evidence.
“The Democrats are having to circle the
wagons in ways in which they have been
hoping and praying Trump would have to,”
Limbaugh observed Thursday.
“When you take a day off and you look at
all of this — and all I did was absorb it
without having any outlet to comment on it
— it is obvious who’s coming unglued
here,” he said. “And it’s obvious who’s
losing their cookies. And it’s obvious who’s
becoming unhinged.”
Despite the fact that every day is a battle for Trump, he is
the one who keeps coming out on top.
“They’ve fired every weapon they’ve got
with every bit of ammo they’ve got, and
nothing is getting rid of Trump,” Limbaugh
noted.
.
513
“Nothing is really derailing the Trump
agenda other than some recalcitrant
Republicans.”
Despite it all, the Trump agenda is moving ahead. Also,
Limbaugh noted, Trump’s detractors have yet to impact his
base.
“After almost a year now of lies from the
deep state and leaks that were treated as
gospel by the drive-by media, they’ve got
nothing,” he said, referring to the various
investigations into hoaxes like ‘Russian
collusion.’
“They can’t find any Russians that anybody
can find who colluded with anybody, other
than the ambassador who had lunch every
day with everybody,” he continued.
And because they’ve yet to ‘indict’ Trump on anything
substantial, the Alt-Left and the perpetually angry
Democrats are now attempting to portray him as ‘unfit’ for
office.
“So they have moved directions to ‘Trump
is nuts, Trump is unhinged, Trump is
insane.’ It shows up now in every
commentary,” he said. “It’s all day, just like
the Russia stuff was. It’s all day on
PMSNBC and it’s all day on CNN.”
“He doesn’t appear to be disturbed,
bothered, upset. He doesn’t appear to be
deranged,” Limbaugh said. “He exhibits
none of the characteristics that the drive-by
media says with their associates.”
“Millions of people do not think Trump is
nuts … or anything of the sort,” he said.
But those same people do think his detractors are.
 ‘We Don’t Need You On This’:
Trump Says US Can Pressure Iran Without EU’s Help
Published Time: 22 Oct, 2017 19:39
U.S. President Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas / Reuters
Donald Trump said the EU would have supported US
sanctions on Iran if he was insistent. But, according to the
US president, he allowed Germany and France to keep
making money with Tehran as America was capable of
putting pressure on Iranians on its own.
When asked by Fox News if Europe is going to support his
new strategy on Iran, Trump replied by saying that he has
really warm relations with French and German leaders.
“They’re great friends of mine. They really
are. I get along with all of them, whether it’s
Emmanuel [Macron] or whether it’s Angela
[Merkel]... I really like those people,” he
said.
As for the Iranian issue, Trump stressed:
“I told them [the EU]: ‘Just keep making
money. Don’t worry about it. We don’t need
you on this.”
He expressed the belief that Europe was reluctant to back
his anti-Iranian push for purely economic reasons.
“When Iran buys things from Germany and
from France” it allows them to earn “billions
of dollars,” Trump said, adding that “when
.
514
they [the Iranians] buy those things, it’s a
little harder for those countries to do
something.”
However, the US president concluded by saying:
“Would they [the EU] do it if I really was
insistent? I believe they would.”
In mid-October, Trump announced that he wouldn’t certify
that Iran was complying with the landmark nuclear deal it
reached in 2015 with the administration of then-US
President Barack Obama and five other world powers –
Russia, France, Germany, China and the UK.
He said that the US Congress had 60 days to decide if the
US should reinstate sanctions against Tehran, and warned
that the accord may be terminated if
“we are not able to reach a solution
working with Congress and our allies.”
Other restrictions were also introduced, including branding
the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist
organization. The new US policy on Iran was praised by
Saudi Arabia and Israel, but received condemnation from
the other signatories to the nuclear accord, including those
in Europe.
EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the
Iranian deal was not a “bilateral agreement” and that it
could not be terminated by any single country.
The UK, France and Germany issued a
joint statement, stressing that the nuclear
accord was in their “shared national
security interest” and adding that they
“stand committed” to the deal and “its full
implementation by all sides.”
 Why Are President Donald Trump’s
Appointees Protecting The Clintons?
Posted By Bradlee Dean
Date: October 22, 2017
(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
“If Hillary Clinton is not brought to justice,
then America is doomed.” -Live feed
The above statement may sound over the top or extreme in
many different ways, yet it is true.
History teaches us just that. Ask countries in the past who
refused to bring corrupt politicians to justice and you will
discover, without fail, that they were destroyed. If you
leave corrupt politicians to do what they will, without
suffering the consequences of breaking the laws (I John
3:4), you will simply add strength to tyranny.
To put it into perspective, look at what President Thomas
Jefferson stated:
“The two enemies of the people are
criminals and government, so let us tie the
second down with the chains of the
Constitution so the second will not become
the legalized version of the first.”
Taking it to the present, we recently heard Newt Gingrich
say that the way to resolve the problem of corruption is to
“Start putting a few people in jail, you’ll see the leaks dry
up dramatically (Isaiah 56).”
Clearly, Scripture teaches us in Isaiah 26:9 that “…when
Thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the
world will learn righteousness.” Also read Isaiah 51:4.
515
Yet, Americans fail to do so, and what they do is draw the
seat of violence nigh unto themselves.
“Ye that put far away the evil day, and
cause the seat of violence to come near.” -
Amos 6:3
Furthermore, it is inscribed on government buildings
throughout America in stone. On one, Moses holds the
two tablets of the Law (Exodus 20) with the inscription:
“Justice the Guardian of Liberty”
The reason this is happening is because the American
Church (78% claim to be Christians -1 John 2:4) has been
taught by the hirelings (John 10:12), who occupy the
pulpits in this country, that they have no business in
judging right from wrong. How ridiculous!
Maybe they should try that next time they break speeding
laws. Just rip up the ticket, throw it at the police officer’s
feet, and tell him “Who are you to judge me?” See how far
that gets them!
I say, “Twist not Scripture, lest you be like Satan.”
It amazes me how Americans give a pass to corruption as
if to suggest that the politicians are above the law.
“…they overpass the deeds of the wicked:
they judge not the cause…” (Jeremiah
5:28)
Didn’t the representatives of “We the People” put their
hand on the Bible swearing to uphold the laws found in our
Constitution? YES THEY DID!
“They are waxen fat, they shine: yea, they
overpass the deeds of the wicked: they
judge not the cause…” (Jeremiah 5:28)
This was Jeremiah preaching to a people that fell under the
judgments of God.
America, 8 months ago a new president was sworn in. If
you remember, for a long period of time on the campaign
trail, you were promised that he was to bring forth a
“special prosecutor” to deal with “Crooked Hilary.”
Donald Trump at this point has done nothing, worse yet he
told Americans that, “We owe her a major debt of
gratitude.” That’s the opposite of what he promised to do
(Matthew 23:3).
Judicial Watch recently reported the following:
A Judge Forces the State Department to
Open Up on Clinton Emails
This week United States District Judge
James E. Boasberg ruled that the
Department of State must make public a
FBI declaration detailing its efforts to
retrieve the former secretary of state’s
government emails (Judicial Watch, Inc.
v. Rex Tillerson (No. 1:15-cv-00785).
Statement regarding the decision:
We’re happy with the ruling, but it is
unbelievable we’re being opposed by
Trump appointees in the State and Justice
Departments on the Clinton email issue.
President Trump ought to be outraged his
appointees are protecting Hillary Clinton.
The State Department should initiate action
with the Justice Department – and both
agencies should finally take the necessary
steps to recover all the government emails
Hillary Clinton unlawfully removed.
Here is the background.
On April 30, 2015, we sued former
Secretary John Kerry after the State
Department failed to take action on a
letter we sent to Kerry “notifying him of the
unlawful removal of the Clinton emails and
requesting that he initiate enforcement
action pursuant to the [Federal Records
Act],” including working through the
Attorney General to recover the emails.
After initially being dismissed by the district
court, our lawsuit was revived on
appeal by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit on December
27, 2016. The Federal Records Act states
that an agency head “shall” initiate an
action through the Attorney General when
he becomes aware of any unlawful removal
of agency records.
While at the State Department, Clinton
conducted official government business
using an unsecure email server and email
accounts. Her top aides and advisors also
used non-“state.gov” email accounts to
conduct official business.
The Trump administration defended the
handling of the email matter by the Obama
administration and filed two
declarations from the FBI trying to justify
the State Department’s refusal to follow the
law and refer to the Clinton email issue to
the Justice Department.
As the decision notes, the second FBI
declaration is non-public and was filed in
camera and ex parte with the court. Judge
Boasburg rejected the State Department’s
arguments that the FBI declaration be
withheld to protect grand jury secrecy:
“After reviewing the document in camera,
the Court concludes it largely rehashes
information already made public, thus
obviating any need for secrecy.”
Meantime, transcripts reviewed by the
Senate Judiciary Committee reveal that
former FBI Director James Comey began
drafting an exoneration statement in the
Clinton email investigation before the FBI
had interviewed key witnesses.
Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator
Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism,
requested all records relating to the drafting
of the statement as the committee
continues to review the circumstances
surrounding Comey’s removal from the
Bureau.
The senators wrote to the FBI: “Conclusion
first, fact-gathering second—that’s no way
to run an investigation. The FBI should be
held to a higher standard than that,
especially in a matter of such great public
interest and controversy.”
And so should a president be held to his promises to a
people that entrusted him to represent them in the first
place.
Remember, “The people of these United States are
the rightful masters of both congresses and courts, not to
over-throw the Constitution, but to over-throw the men
who pervert that Constitution,” according to the Preamble
to the US Constitution. Amen!

516
517