The 2017 Trump

Presidency - 6
The First 100 Days
March 20, 2017 – April 4, 2017

See How The Main Stream Media & CIA

Are Trying To Destroy
The United States of America
And The Trump Presidency
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
February 2017
FIRST EDITION
0987654321

2
 CONTENTS
Trump Cuts Us Debt By $98 Billion In First Two Months As Treasuries Dip xxx
FBI Confirms Probe Into Trump’s Alleged Ties With Moscow During 2016 Election Campaign xxx
The Constitutional United States Of America Was Never Formally Abolished. Is It Now Being
Revived? Are We Looking At The Outside Of A Churning Deep State Régime Change? xxx
Comey Confirms FBI Probing Russia-Trump Team Links, Disputes Wiretap Claim
No Evidence Of Collusion Between Trump & Russia
Brian Williams: Could Russia Hearing ‘Dissolve’ Trump Presidency?
NBC Slips, Wonders If Possible Russian ‘Engineering’ Stopped Dear Hillary from Winning?
Comey: "The Russians Concluded Trump Was Hopeless Last August"
Russia Conspiracy Mongering Hits Wall At Congressional Hearing xxx
NY Attorney General Hires Public-Corruption Prosecutor To Target Trump Administration; WSJ
Reports xxx
The Conspiracy Against President Trump xxx
Trey Gowdy Finds Out FBI Director James Comey Won’t Obey The Law, Comey Refuses To Promise
The American People That He Will Investigate Trump Leaks “My Fellow Citizens Are Rethinking
Their Side Of The Equation” xxx
‘Stop Breaking The Law’: Snowden Raises ‘Red Flag’ Over Testimony Of NSA And FBI Chiefs
Rare Public Hearing to Seek FBI,NSA Answers on Trump, Russia, Leaks
Trump Urges Congress, FBI Find Leaker of Classified Info 'Now' xxx
Trump Uses 'POTUS' Account To Tweet FBI Director "Refuses To Deny" Briefing Obama On Flynn
Top Dems' Lobbyists Giving Money To Clinton Team Have Ties To Russia - Reports
‘Washington Vultures Circling Nunes For Seeing No Evidence Of Trump-Kremlin Collusion’
Two Months In Office: The Old, New And Borrowed In Trump's Foreign Policy
Senator Hints That Trump May Resign: "I Think He Is Going To Get Himself Out"
James Comey Just Explained How Establishment Media Legally Creates Fake News
Fox News Pulls Napolitano After His Trump Wiretap Claims
Newt Rips Into Comey, Calls Today's Testimony 'Pathetic'
US Secret Service Laptop Thief Reportedly Knew What He Was Looking For
Fix Is In: Comey Praised DNC-Hired Cybersecurity Firm Even After Botched Report
Donald Trump Will Resign 'Soon', Says Top Democrat Dianne Feinstein
Cuomo Asks If Trump Could Be 'Toxic To His Own Government'
Arnold Schwarzenegger Terminates Donald Trump In 40 Second Twitter Video
First Two Months In Power: Hitler Vs. Trump
“There Is No American Deep State…
YouTuber Affirms F.B.I. Collusion With Dems At Intelligence Hearing
The House Intelligence Committee: Evidence Not Required
The Trump Sellout – Step By Step To Total Collapse
Trump V. Televised Congressional Hysteria
Trump Vs. Fox News On Wiretapping
RT Editor-In-Chief Says US Congress' Pursuit Of Russia-Trump Scandal Topic Funny
Lying Machine NYT Calls Trump A Liar
Hillary Clinton Allies Rip James Comey For Belated Confirmation On Russia Probe
Dozen Most Insane Statements From US Congress’ Hearing On ‘Russian Spying’
NYT Editors Lied Suggesting Sabotage Undermined Hillary’s Campaign
Democrats Hoped To Hurt Trump, But Raised Suspicions Of Obama
Ex-CIA Chief: Trump Should Apologize To Obama For Claims Assessed As False By FBI Director
‘This Just Keeps Happening’: Secret Service Under Investigation Over More Breaches
Trump Watershed Budget
Trump Will Do To Muslims ‘What Hitler Did To Jews,’ Letter Warns
Anti-Trump Propagandist David Brock Suffers Heart Attack
Davos For Democrats – DNC Mega Donors Meet At Mandarin Oriental Hotel To Plot “The Resistance”
House Intel Chair: There Was “Incidental Surveillance” Of Trump And Transition Team Under Obama
Trump Team Communications Captured By Intelligence Community Surveillance, Nunes Says
3
Rep. Nunes To Personally Deliver Post-Election Trump ‘Wiretap’ Proof To W.H. xxx
Serial Plagiarist CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Calls President “Bulls**Ter” Several Times On Air – Trump
Derangement Syndrome Is Real xxx
Intel Drop: Israel Unleashes Wikileaks On Russia, Trump Removal Plotted xxx
Trump Gets “Win” At G-20, As “Anti-Protectionism, Free-Trade And Climate Change Funding”
Commitment Is Dropped xxx
Nunes: "The FBI Is Not Cooperating With Our Investigation Into Trump Wiretapping"
US Spy Agencies Monitored Trump In Late 2016: GOP Lawmaker
Pelosi, Schiff Slam "White House Surrogate" Nunes' "Act Of Diversion & Desperation"
Russiagate And The Democratic Party Are For Chumps
Trump, GOP Leaders Looking For Way To Salvage Healthcare Reform Amid Revolt From Conservatives
Did Acosta Block Trump Sex Crime Arrest? xxx
After Comey Confirmed Trump Investigation, The Question Becomes: Who In The Obama
Administration Ordered It? xxx
Jimmy Breslin On How To Impeach Trump xxx
Democrats Planning To Sabotage Trump Supreme Court Pick Gorsuch Because They’re Afraid He
Might Actually Follow The Constitution xxx
Comey Confirmed The Essence Of Trump’s Tweeted Allegations About Obama “Wire Tapping”
There Won’t Be Another Jimmy Breslin
White House Says The “Deep State” Is Real, And It’s Trying To Undermine Trump
Breaking: Manfort, Trump Campaign Chairman, Was Russian Agent
The FBI Is Seemingly Working Against Trump, Stonewalling Congress On Key Surveillance Details
Gun Owners Of America: Paul Ryan’s Obamacare 2.0 Still Contains Gun Control
Trump Kills UN Climate Change Initiative, Calls It An “Elaborate Hoax”
Fool Me Once ... DNC Ally Crowdstrike Claimed Two Cases Of "Russian Hacking" - One At Least Was Fake
BOMBSHELL: CIA Whistleblower Leaked Proof Trump Under "Systematic Illegal" Surveillance Over Two
Years Ago: FBI Sat On It
The FBI’s Conspiracy Theory Of A Trump/Putin Collusion Has No Clothes
After New Surveillance Claims, Partisan Nets Instead Whine Over Trump’s 'Baseless' ‘Fiction’
Serious Claim: FBI's Comey 'Falsely' Denied Surveillance
Trump & Transition Team Spied On
Loony Liberal Actress Claims London Terror 'May Be' A 'Set Up' By Trump
Sen. John McCain Calls For A “Select Committee” On Russian Interference, Deep State’s Endgame In Sight
Potential 'Smoking Gun' Showing Obama Administration Spied On Trump Team, Source Says
NBC’s Lauer Hopes Russia Investigation Will ‘Mortally Wound’ Trump Administration
Shepard Ambellas Issues Red-Level Warning Over “Russian Narrative” Fiasco
Bob Woodward: Obama Officials Possibly Facing Criminal Charges For Unmasking Scheme
The New New Left’s Calls For Civil War In America
Pelosi: Intel Chairman 'A Stooge Of The President'
Trump’s Ambassador To Israel Is Truly Terrifying
Pro-Biotech Governor Of The Year As Trump Ag Secretary xxx
Tillerson PromisesEndless Imperial Wars
Deep State: Obama Loyalists Continue To Thwart Trump Administration From The Shadows
The Deep State's Dominant Narratives And Authority Are Crumbling
What is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired by DNC has Ties to Hillary Clinton, a Ukrainian Billionaire and Google
‘FBI Director James Comey Must Go’
Alert: Smoking Gun Proving Obama Administration Spied On Entire Trump Team May Soon Be Released
House Set To Vote On Obamacare Replacement Bill After Trump Ultimatum
NSA To Provide "Smoking Gun" Proof Obama Spied On Trump
Surveillance State Goes After Trump
Michael Moore - Anti-Trump Coup Supporter
Unlike Clinton Aides, Trump Advisers Actually Want To Talk To Congress
All Surveillance Of Trump Tower Legal, No Wiretapping - US House Intelligence
General McInerney Says Obama Was 'Heavily Listening To What Was Going On In The Trump Campaign'
ABC, NBC Omit Federal ‘Ruling’ That Trump Is ‘NOT Violating’ Hotel Lease
Trump On What Happens Next: "Obamacare Will Explode"
NYT Editors Support White House Regime Change
Neil Gorsuch Is An Absolute GENIUS Compared To The Idiotic Liberal Senators Questioning Him
Nunes Calls Comey, Rogers, For “Closed Session” After Finding “Concerning Info” In Intel Reports
FBI Director Comey Unexpectedly Shows Up At The White House
4
The Obama Plot To Sabotage Trump
Deep State Obamanation Desperately Resists Trump’s Wrecking Ball (Video)
Roger Stone Declares No Russian Ties Other Than Gucciffer 2.0
House Intelligence Committee Goes To War With Itself Over Russia Investigation
POTUS Trump Disgusted By Congressional Leadership Team (UPDATE)
Judiciary Committee Republicans Ask Intel Chiefs To Hunt Leakers
Trump Signals New Hope For Obamacare Overhaul, Says 'Do Not Worry!'
Trump Has Authority To Issue Revised Travel Ban, Virginia Judge Rules
The Mainstream Media Lied: Trump Was RightAll Along About Obama Administration Surveillance xxx
"They're Like The Praetorian Guard" - Whistleblower Confirms NSA Targeted Congress, The Supreme
Court, & Trump xxx
‘Against US Security Interests’: Moscow Bewildered Over New Sanctions On 8 Defense & Aviation Firms
Nunes: Leaks Against Trump Jeopardize Reauthorization Of Crucial Spying Powers
Trump Approves Environmentally Trumpcare Down But Not Out?
We Have Been Conned And The D.J. Trump Administration And The U.N. Are Directly Responsible
‘Conspiracy That Trump, Putin & Everybody In Universe In Cahoots Starts To Fall Apart’
Trumpcare Postmortems
Trump Is America’s Last Chance Says John Williams
HE DID IT! Famous Liberal ATTACKED Trump, So He DEPORTED HER
Foundation – Fall Of The American Galactic Empire
Pentagon Enjoying Greater Leeway Under Trump
Did The Government Spy On Trump? Of Course. It Spies On All Of Us!
The Disappearance Of Bipartisanship On The Intelligence Committees
Conservative Media Struggles With New Prominence Under Trump
NBC News Signs Former Obama Press Secretary To Provide "Unbiased" Political Commentary
Kushner To Lead New WH Office Focused On Using Business Ideas To Fix Gov't Bureaucracy
Former U.S. Lawmaker: “Deep State” Putting Republic At Risk In Bid To End Trump Presidency
Trump To Sign 'Energy Independence' Order Tomorrow Rolling Back Obama Climate Change Initiatives
Israeli PM Thanks Trump Administration For Supporting Tel Aviv Regime
Trump Asks Why Intelligence Committee Isn't Probing The Clintons
Trump 'Takes Advantageous Position,' Accuses Hillary Clinton Of Russia Ties
Dick Cheney Says Russian Meddling In American Election Could Be Considered 'An Act Of War'
Trump To Take “SWAT Team” Approach To Dismantling Massive Federal Bureaucracy
Trump Signs Order Sweeping Away Obama-Era Climate Policies
Bret Easton Ellis: Barbra Streisand, Lena Dunham Shouldn’t Blame Trump For Their Own ‘Neuroses’
White House Evasive As House Intelligence Committee Grinds To A Halt
Washington On Lockdown
White House Bomb Scare Evacuation ‘After Man Approaches Building Claiming To Have Explosives’
Trump Signs Executive Order Dismantling Obama Environmental Regulations
Trump Dramatically Changes US Approach To Climate Change
DNC Purge: Corrupt Democratic National Committee Fires ALL Staffers
Left-Wing ‘Historian’ Accuses Trump Of ‘Treason,’ ‘Assault’ on Environment
Is THIS What Really Happened Regarding Candidate Trump’s “Wiretaps”?
Federal Judge UPHOLDS Travel Freeze
Crowdstike Revises And Retracts Parts Of Explosive Russian Hacking Report
The Surveillance State Behind Russia-Gate
Foundation & Empire - Is Donald Trump 'The Mule'?
Nets Decry Trump ‘Obliterating’ Obama’s ‘Legacy’ With Clean Power Plan Rollback
Maxine Waters Is Now Directly Attacking Trump Supporters, Questions Their Patriotism In House Floor Rant
Here's The Story Behind Trump's Podesta-Russia Tweet
Trump Calls For Investigation Into The Clintons’ Russian Ties
Game Over: John Podesta Received $35 Million From The Kremlin While Advising Clinton & Obama
Nunes Refuses To Share Intelligence Source With Other Committee Members
‘If Trump Uses Russian Dressing, That’s Russian Connection’ – Spicer To Press As Twitter Explodes
April Ryan: Spicer Attacks ‘Credible’ Media Like Me, While Allowing ‘Fake News’ Peddlers Into WH
Donald Trump And Steve Bannon: Real Threats More Serious Than Fake News Trafficked By Media
Networks Cheer On ‘Fired Up’ Clinton, ‘Back In The Spotlight'
Michael Moore Says Trump Will Cause Human Extinction
PANIC: NYT Melts Down Over Trump ‘Denialists’ ‘Risking The Planet’
Judge Napolitano Returns On Fox News, Stands By Claim Brits Spied On Trump
5
‘Backlash’: ABC, NBC Hype Left-Wing Freak-Out Over Trump Environmental Order
Trump’s Energy Independence EO
Bombshell: Former Obama Official Admits Spying On Trump Team, Rush To Spread Intelligence
If Trump’s Approval Ratings Drop, Americans “May See Staged Terrorist Attack”
Report: Obama Admin Blocked FBI Director’s Offer To Reveal Russian Meddling
Trump’s 2018 Budget: Let The Corporate Games Begin
‘Good Lord, Ladies And Gentlemen!’ Levin Unloads On ‘Smoking Gun’ From Ex-Obama Official On Spying
Breaking: NY Times Outs Nunes, Cites Sources
CNN's Toobin Rants:'Sanctimonious' Comey 'Beat Hillary Clinton'
The Surveillance State Behind Russia-GateWill Trump Take On The Spooks?
Leftists, Dick Cheney, And Hillary Clinton Unite To Peddle Russia Hacking Narrative, Provoke New Cold War
Former Obama Official Stumbles While Trying To Backtrack After Implying Intel Leaks
Hillary And Other Leftists: Sean Spicer Racist And Sexist For Not Taking Reporter April Ryan's Nonsense
Hosts Of Morning Joe Bash Spicer And Question His 'Stability'
Michael Moore: Anti-Trump Coup Supporter
Obama Official Who Hinted At Intel Leaks Now Says She’s Victim Of ‘Fake News’
Ex-Trump Adviser Carter Page Rips 'False Narrative' On Russia Collusion
Nunes “Source” On Surveillance Of President Trump’s Team Was A “Whistleblower-Type,” Paul Ryan Alleges
2 White House Officials Helped Give Nunes Intelligence Reports
Obama Operatives In The EPA Plant Trump Attack In Press Release For Executive Order
Schweizer: There’s More Evidence Of Podesta-Clinton Collusion With Russia Than There Ever Was With Trump
Adam Schiff Is A Traitor To Humanity

Trump Says Mike Flynn SHOULD Ask For Immunity – As He Slams 'Witch Hunt' By 'Media & Dems' For Disgraced
Former National Security Advisor's Legal Nightmare
Trump Trauma
Council To Lt. Gen. Flynn Seeks Assurances “Against Unfair Prosecution” In A “Witch Hunt Environment”
Oligarchy In America

Trump White House Sends Invite To All Intel Committee Members To View Surveillance Docs Proving Team Trump
Was Surveilled, Unmasked

Sean Spicer On Fire! ‘There’s A Clearer Connection To Russia With Hillary Than There Is Trump (VIDEO)
Trump’s NAFTA Reversal Likely Tied To Oil Industry Pressure
'Russiagate' Is Failing And Its Supporters Are Getting Concerned
Trump’s Pick For FDA Attempts To Distance Himself From Big Pharma
Russia Turns On Trump, Blames Him For Relations That Are "Worse Than The Cold War"
Surveillance On Trump Backfires, Russian Collusion False Narrative, Are Markets Topping
'Senate Looking In The Wrong Place' As FBI Influenced US Election - Kucinich
'FBI Never Had Access To DNC Computers, Used Secondary Forensics' - Ray Mcgovern, Fmr CIA Officer
NBC Allows Nancy Pelosi To Spin Conspiracy Theories About Trump

Spicer Skewers Media For Defending Dr. Farkas, Calls Her Public Admissions Of Collecting Intelligence On Trump
'Devastating'

Wikileaks Dumps On CIA: Documents Show Agency Can Disguise Its Hacking
Trump Tells American Firms To Look For China Alternatives Ahead Of First Meeting With Xi
White House Ponders Reorganization After Health Care Debacle
Trump Meets With Former US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice
Trump’s Budget ‘Grave Mistake’: Hillary Clinton

"If True, Does Not Get Much Bigger" Trump Tweets About "Very Well Known" Intel Official Behind Trump
"Unmasking"
Trump Applauds NYT Report Showing Obamacare In Trouble
Bolling: Media In 'Frenzy' Because Trump Doesn't Care What They Think
Meltdown Is Approaching
White House To Disclose Financial Info On High-Level Staff
Trump A Russian Mouthpiece?
CIA Has Tools For Framing Russia, China, Others For Hacks

6
Trump Dumps US 16-Year Plan To Topple Mideast States, Ex-Military Official Says
Leftists Freak After Donald Trump Proclaims National Sexual Assault Awareness Month
Trump Declared War On GOP Establishment But Now Sides With Them In Party Civil War

The Dominoes Are Beginning To Fall - Another 'Swamp Monster' Drained As Former State Department Employee Is
Arrested
Tweeting Again, Trump Pushes Obama Surveillance Story
Trump: If China Doesn't Take Care Of N Korea, 'We Will'
US Ambassador To UN: ‘Trump Never Stopped Me From Beating Up On Russia’
'Heil President Trump': New York Post App Is Hacked On April Fool's Day And Sends Push Notifications Comparing
Donald To A Nazi
Shocker: Financial Docs Reveal A White House Packed With The Super-Rich
Another Democrat Rats On Obama: We’ve Been Spying On Trump Since 2015
Gratuitous Trump Bashing Ignores Hillary’s Crimes
The Week That Perished

SHOCK: Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley Sends Second Letter To FBI Director Comey Asking Why FBI Was Involved
With Paying Research Firm For Trump/Russia Dossier.

Report: High-Level Obama Operative Unmasked Trump Associates During Surveillance, Spread Their Identities For
Political Purposes

Democrats Launch Delusional ‘Moscow Project’ To ‘Uncover The Truth’ About Trump And Russia

OOPS! The Sickening Truth Slips Out On CNN – Now We Know Why They Continue To Push 'The Russian
Boogeyman' Theme!
US Ambassador To The UN Nikki Haley Says There's 'No Question' Russia Meddled In The Election
Schiff Accuses Intel Chair Nunes Of Conspiring With Trump To Distract From Russia Probe
How Obama's White House Weaponized Media Against Trump
BREAKING: Susan Rice Preparing To Take Fall For Illegal Obama Spy Program?
Obama Surveillance Of Trump ‘Much Worse Than Expected’
Susan Rice Ordered Unmasking Of Trump Team In Intel, Bloomberg View Reports

Judge Rules That Donald Trump INCITED VIOLENCE When He Chanted 'Get Em Out Of Here' At Protesters
During Louisville Rally

Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump
Susan Rice Requested To Unmask Names Of Trump Transition Officials, Sources Say
Report: Trump Was Spied OnFor Up To A Year Before Inauguration, Susan Rice Implicated In Unmasking
Susan Rice ‘Unmasking’ Story Once Again Highlights the Worthlessness of Corporate Media
Susan Rice Flashback: ‘I Know Nothing’ About Trump Unmasking
Trudeau To Trump: Drop Dead! (Implications For Gold)
Eli Lake: Susan Rice Requested Unmasking Of People Connected To Trump Transition
Rolling Stone's Taibbi Mocks Liberal Trump-Russia Collusion Obsession
Report: Mike Cernovich Reveals Obama Natl Security Advisor Susan Rice Responsible For Unmasking Trump Team

UPDATE=> CONFIRMED: Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice Requested The Unmasking Of Incoming
Trump Officials

MSNBC: Covering Trump Surveillance Story Helps Russia ‘Undermine’ American Democracy
Fresh Evidence The Russia ‘Scandal’ Is A Team Obama Operation
FBI To Create Special Unit To Investigate "Russian Role" In US 2016 Election
New Huma Emails Uncover Clinton State Dept Plan To Bring NYT Reporter David Brooks To Heel
Eerie Prescience Of Donald Trump
President Trump Officially Signs Resolution To Overturn FCC Internet Privacy Rules

Tucker Carlson: ‘Our Laws Provide No Serious Protection From Being Spied Upon for Political Reasons’ ABC, NBC
Finally Report Rice
Revelation Only To Defend Obama Admin’s Actions

7
CNN Goes On Rampage Against Susan Rice Bombshell, Instructs Viewers To Ignore Story xxx
CNN Partisan Cuomo SpinsSusan Rice Story As ‘Another Fake Scandal’ xxx
Morning Joe Diagnoses President Trump With Mental 'Disorder' xxx
The Real Russiagate: Obama’s Stasi State xxx
ABC, NBC Cover-Up Revelation Susan Rice Ordered Trump Aides Unmasked, CBS Defends xxx
Susan Rice Made ‘Dozens’ Of Requests To Unmask Trump’s Associates xxx
Killing The Conspiracy: Russian Businessman With ‘Ties’ To Trump Tells All xxx
Rice Trump Wiretapping Access Grew After Trump Victories xxx
Protesters Display Massive 'Impeach Trump' Sign At Washington Nationals' Opening Game xxx

8
 Trump Cuts Us Debt By $98
Billion In First Two Months As Treasuries Dip
© Reuters/ Carlos Barria - Business
15:34 20.03.2017(U
US national debt plunged by almost
$100 bln since Trump’s inauguration, as
the new president’s image as
‘unpredictable’ and ‘aggressive’
affected bond market dynamics.
Kristian Rouz – In the first two months of the Donald
Trump presidency, the US national debt has decreased by
$68 bln, or 0.3pc, without any substantial effort from the
new White House administration.
In a rather paradoxical development, the decrease in US
debt in mainly driven by the decline in the value of US
Treasury bonds and gains in benchmark bond yields,
as well as the dollar’s slight devaluation, all motivated
by the uncertainty surrounding the impact of Trump’s
proposed economic policies.
After a $12-billion decrease in US debt in the first month
of the Trump presidency, the burden of indebtedness has
eased further in the second month since the inauguration.
According to data by Gateway Pundit, on 20 January, US
debt was $19,947 bln, whilst on 8 March, the figure
decreased to $19,879 bln. Both publicly held debt and
intragovernmental holdings have posted slight declines
in dollar value.
As of 20 March, US debt stands at $19,849 bln, a decrease
of another $30 bln. Even though the Treasury Department
data indicate the ongoing and continuous accumulation
of US debt, the dramatic dip in the value of US
governmental bonds and the dollar FX rate fluctuations
have produced the
9
‘Trump effect’ to national debt without the new president
actually having undertaken any substantial effort to relieve
the debt pressures yet.
"The massive debt is really a reflection
of the unwillingness of our political leaders
to make any tough decisions or deal
with trade-offs," Maya MacGuineas of the
Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget said. "It has become all too
commonplace to borrow not for productive
investments or for wherever we are in the
business cycle… but because people don't
want to pay the bills and have found it
politically expedient not to do so."
How did such a massive reduction in the US debt happen?
First of all, the election of Donald Trump as US President
of November 8, 2016, was somewhat of a shock (albeit
quite predictable) to financial markets. The benchmark 10-
year US Treasury yield increased from 1.8261pc
on November 7 to 2.1501pc on November 11, and
extended the increase to 2.5pc on March 17. Increases
in Treasury yields typically accompany declines
in Treasury bond value, which have also been supported
by the ongoing selloff of US governmental bonds
by foreign holders.
"Net-net, Treasury flows were neutral
to slightly positive," Gennadiy Goldberg
of TD Securities in New York said.
Trump, having been elected, spooked the markets and
foreign investors, thus contributing to the increase
in natural US interest rates. Besides, the
US Federal Reserve has since twice increased its base
borrowing cost from 0.25-0.5pc in November to the
current 0.75-1.00pc. All these factors have resulted in a
slight erosion of the value of the US national debt.
Ironically, the scary Trump figure has benefitted the fiscal
stance of the US government before any fiscal policy
measures have been announced. Trump himself, however,
seems to be rather comfortable with debt, seeing leverage
as a mere instrument that serves very utilitarian purposes.
 "Yeah, I think – look. I have borrowed,
knowing that you can pay back
with discounts. And I have done very well
with debt. Now, of course, I was
swashbuckling, and it did well for me and it
was good for me and all that. And you
know, debt was sort of always interesting
to me. Now we're in a different situation
with the country. But I would borrow,
knowing that if the economy crashed, you
could make a deal. And if the economy was However, the only merit of Donald in regard to national
good, it was good. So, therefore, you can't debt is that he has influenced – by simply being himself
lose. It's like, you know, you make a deal and saying what he’s been saying – the bond market
before you go into a poker game, and your dynamics in a way that turned out to be beneficial for the
odds are so much better," Trump said in a US fiscal situation. In other words, Trump is changing the
CNBC interview on May 5, 2016. course of US economic development by manipulating his
public image and the perception of him as a political figure
by market participants.
His proposed fiscal stimulus package – including lower
income taxes and greater infrastructure spending – would
inevitably contribute to an increase in US debt in the near- In the long run, however, this approach of his will have
to-medium term. However, in the long run, as suggested to be backed by solid policy measures in order to be
by the Laffer curve model, lower taxes tend to generate efficient. In the medium-term, the Trump administration is
greater tax revenues due to higher business activity and likely to increase borrowing, and the debt will most likely
increases in the tax base. Besides, Trump-proposed pass the $20 trillion threshold sometime in late 2017 –
customs tariffs (or border taxes) would make up for the early 2018. Yet, the subsequent gains in fiscal revenues
loss of some of the internal revenues in the short-term, generated by the expected acceleration in domestic growth,
producing larger longer-term benefits if the policy stands. and border taxation of foreign trade flows, might result
in declines in the overall levels of the US national debt.
Previously, Trump criticized the mainstream media
for failing to report the decrease in US debt under his
presidency thus far.

10
 FBI Confirms Probe Into Trump’s Alleged Ties With
Moscow During 2016 Election Campaign
Published Time: 20 Mar, 2017 15:47Edited Time: 20 Mar, 2017 16:07

FBI Director James Comey © Joshua Roberts / Reuters

Testifying before the House Select Committee on

Intelligence, Comey said the probe is part of the FBI's
counter-intelligence mission, and

"includes investigating the nature of any

links between individuals associated with
the Trump campaign and the Russian
government and whether there was any
coordination between the campaign and
Russia's efforts."

He declined to elaborate, citing an "open ongoing

investigation" which is "classified."

Comey said he is authorized by the Justice Department to

make the disclosure, although the FBI does not typically
discuss or confirm the existence of ongoing investigations.
The US government previously accused Russia of hacking
the Democratic Party's computer networks during the 2016
election, alleging that Moscow was attempting to
"interfere" with the results – an allegation which the
Kremlin has vehemently denied as untrue and baseless.
On Sunday, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin
Nunes reiterated to Fox News that "no evidence of
collusion" between Trump's team and Russia had been
found ahead of the first public meeting on the matter.
Nunes also addressed Trump's allegation that Obama had
wiretapped Trump Tower, stating that no evidence had
been found in that matter either.

For his part, Trump has also said he has no knowledge of
his associates coordinating with Russia during the election.
Trump slammed the investigation in a series of tweets
earlier on Monday, calling the story "fake news" and
alleging that it was "made up" by Democrats.
He went on to say that the "real story" that the FBI and
Congress should be looking into is the leaking of classified
information.
Meanwhile, Comey was also questioned over Trump's
claim that former President Barack Obama ordered
surveillance of the billionaire's communications in Trump
Tower during the campaign.
He stated that he has "no information that
supports" the allegation, adding that any
electronic surveillance must be granted by
the courts, and that "no individual in the
United States can direct electronic
surveillance of anyone."

11
 The Constitutional United States Of America Was Never
Formally Abolished. Is It Now Being Revived? Are We
Looking At The Outside Of A Churning
Deep State Régime Change?
Monday, March 20, 2017
It is difficult to know what to call the country which lies
between Canada and Mexico on the North American
continent.
Some think of it as America; others as the United States;
others as the United States of America. Unconstitutional
lawyers, playing games with capital letters and lower case,
call it other things.
One thing, however, is emerging with new clarity. Since
Thursday 28th March 1861, the de facto government
understood to be running America has been illegal.
28th March 1861 was the day the
Congress of the united States of America
adjourned for lack of a quorum and was
never reconvened.
The Constitutional united States of
America was never formally abolished.
The governance of the country to which the Constitution
applied was simply taken over by prancing actors working
for élite financial interests in Europe. With the exception
of a few patriots, the American people didn't seem to
notice or care. This is still the situation today. The actors
have changed; the illegality of their perceived governance
has not.
America / United States / US / United
States Of America / USA is not a sovereign
and free nation; it is a privately-owned
corporation whose beneficial owners
are old bloodline families and their
supporting syndicates.
Since the 28th March 1861, what is publicly known as
“Congress” has functioned in one of three different ways:
(1) Either as a corporate Board of Directors for private,
mostly foreign-owned and deceptively-named
governmental services corporations, operated by
banking cartels. One of these banking cartels is called
the Federal Reserve. This is the cartel running a
corporation called the “United States of America, Inc.”
Another banking cartel is called the IMF (International
12
Monetary Fund). This runs a corporation called the
“UNITED STATES”.
(2) Or as the government of a legislative democracy calling
itself the United States of America (Minor): American
“states” more often thought of as federal territories and
possessions, for example Guam, Puerto Rico, etc.
(3) Or as a plenary oligarchy ruling the Washington DC
Municipal Government (only).
The President of the variously-named large North
American country thought of as America is the just the
CEO of the federal corporation(s). There are about 39
levels of security clearance above this President,
depending on how the counting of covert black budget
agencies is conducted. This means that there are 39 sets of
projects, facilities, meetings, papers and accounts which
the President knows nothing about and has no access to by
right.
There are, however, such things as "free sovereign and
independent people of the United States"; millions of
them, indeed, living on the North Americal landmass
between Canada and Mexico.
A question is being put. Are these people now beginning to
wake up, restore their lawful government on the land, and
enforce the Organic and Public Law of the country?
There are signs that the Trump presidency may be forcing
the first step of a benevolent and lawful governing
outcome for the American people. This is happening with
the support of the military, and could not (bloodlessly) be
achieved without it.
On Shrove Tuesday, 28th February 2017, President Donald
Trump delivered his first address to a joint session of
Congress. That speech ended with the following words:
"From now on, America will be empowered
by our aspirations, not burdened by our
fears; inspired by the future, not bound by
the failures of the past; and guided by our
vision, not blinded by our doubts."
"I am asking all citizens to embrace this
Renewal of the American Spirit. I am
 asking all members of Congress to join me
in dreaming big and bold and daring things
for our country. And I am asking everyone
watching tonight to seize this moment and
believe in yourselves. Believe in your
future. And believe, once more, in America.
.
13
Thank you, God bless you, and God Bless
these United States."
Odd ending. These United States. As opposed to those
United States? Significant? Or just more expedient
thespian prancing?
 Comey Confirms FBI Probing
Russia-Trump Team Links, Disputes Wiretap Claim
By Judson Berger
Published March 20, 2017
FBI Director James Comey, in an extraordinary House
hearing meant to clear the air on a host of allegations
relating to the 2016 campaign, confirmed publicly for the
first time Monday that the bureau is probing Russian
meddling in the race including possible “links” to the
Trump team – while disputing the president’s claim that
his predecessor wiretapped him.
The FBI director was called to testify alongside National
Security Agency Director Michael Rogers for a public
session of the House intelligence committee. Comey’s
testimony could serve to fuel tensions with the White
House, which maintains there’s no evidence of Trump-
Russia collusion.
Comey was careful in his testimony not to confirm any
details of what the bureau’s Russia investigation has
uncovered or dismissed, saying he could not comment
further since the probe is “open” and “ongoing.”
But he used his opening statement to address head-on the
probe that has been the subject of news reports for months.
He noted while the FBI normally would not confirm
ongoing investigations, he could make an exception for
such “unusual” circumstances.
“I have been authorized by the Department
of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of
our counterintelligence mission, is
investigating the Russian government’s
efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential
election,” Comey said. “That includes
investigating the nature of any links
between individuals associated with the
Trump campaign and the Russian
government, and whether there was any
14
coordination between the campaign and
Russia’s efforts.”
He added that this probe will
“include an assessment of whether any
crimes were committed.”
In response, a senior administration official told Fox News
that “nothing has changed” on their end:
“Senior Obama intelligence officials have
gone on record to confirm there is NO
EVIDENCE of Trump-Russia collusion and
there is NO EVIDENCE of a Trump-Russia
scandal. … We take them at their word.”
The White House also pushed back on Twitter, with the
official @POTUS account used to highlight one section of
the hearing where Rogers and Comey both said they have
no evidence that Russian cyber-actors changed vote tallies
in swing states.
“The NSA and FBI tell Congress that
Russia did not influence electoral process,”
the presidential account tweeted.
Meanwhile, Comey used his appearance to effectively
knock down a series of allegations Trump tweeted earlier
this month about supposed wiretapping conducted against
him by his predecessor.
“I have no information that supports those
tweets, and we have looked carefully inside
the FBI,” Comey said, adding that the same
is true for the Department of Justice.
Asked about Trump’s suggestion that the prior
administration was engaged in McCarthyism, Comey
responded,
“I try very hard not to engage in any isms of
any kind, including McCarthyism.”
He further clarified that “no president” could unilaterally
wiretap anyone.
Rogers also said he’s seen no evidence to support claims
that the Obama administration instructed British
intelligence to spy on the Trump team.
The hearing Monday marked a rare opportunity for top
intelligence and law enforcement officials to speak
publicly on matters that for months have been the subject
of news reports driven by anonymous sources and
speculation. Trump at times has fed the frenzy, namely
with his explosive allegation that the Obama
administration wiretapped Trump Tower and his phones
before the election.
Top lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said before and
during Monday’s hearing that they’d seen no evidence to
support Trump’s charge, and Comey affirmed their claims.
“We know there was not a physical wiretap
of Trump Tower,” Chairman Devin Nunes,
R-Calif., said in his opening statement,
while saying it’s “possible” other
surveillance activities were conducted
against Trump and his associates.
California Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democratic
member on the committee, said definitively Monday that
no evidence was found to support the “slanderous
accusation.”
More broadly, the hearing was meant to address the
allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign and
claims of collusion or coordination between the Trump
campaign and Russian officials. Before Monday, Comey
had not said whether there is an investigation of possible
Trump-Russia connections.
Ahead of the hearing, Trump blasted that narrative as
“FAKE NEWS.” He cited Obama intelligence director
.
15
James Clapper’s recent statement that there was “no
evidence” of Trump-Russia collusion.
Still, Schiff maintains “circumstantial” evidence existed.
He laid out a series of concerns during his opening
statement Monday, detailing a lengthy timeline of contacts
and arrangements Trump associates had with Russian
officials and entities. This included former National
Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s initially concealed
contact with the Russian ambassador and accurate
suggestions from a Trump associate that WikiLeaks last
year would go after Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
In response to Trump’s tweets, Schiff also tweeted
Monday that:
“The intelligence community concluded the
Russians will interfere again. This is why
full investigation is important to country.
Please stop.”
Trump continued to sound off, questioning past contact
between “the Clinton campaign and the Russians,” which a
Clinton spokesman has denied.
Republicans also made a point of pressing Monday’s
witnesses on rooting out those leaking classified
information. Under questioning from Rep. Trey Gowdy,
R-S.C., Comey affirmed that it is a “serious crime” to
disseminate classified information.
Nunes stressed the importance of finding those leaking
classified information so they “can be brought to justice.”
The House Intelligence Committee is one of several
committees looking into Russian influence in the election.
Fox News’ Serafin Gomez contributed to this report.
 No Evidence Of
Collusion Between Trump & Russia
By Stephen Lendman
3-20-2017
Asked by Fox News host Chris Wallace about any
evidence between “Trump world” and Russia on Sunday,
House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R.
CA) said:
“I’ll give you a very simple answer: no,”
adding he’s “up to speed on everything. No
evidence of collusion” was found between
Trump’s campaign and Russia.
On March 8, Circa.com said
“(i)ntelligence sources say that the FBI
investigated a computer tied to Donald
Trump’s business but there’s no evidence
to date that would warrant criminal charges
against any of the president’s associates.”
“(M)onths-long FBI counterintelligence
investigation” found no evidence of
improper ties between Trump and/or his
associates and Russia - no illegal contacts,
financial transactions or encrypted
communications. Nothing!
An unnamed US official was quoted, saying
“I’ve never seen a case so misrepresented
and leaks so damaging to a process that
was meant to be conducted in secret.”
On Monday, FBI director James Comey and NSA head
Mike Rogers will testify before the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence on alleged Russian US
election hacking during the 2015-16 presidential
campaign, along with allegations of Trump ties to Russia.
No evidence proves baseless claims.
None was publicly presented. None
exists.
Yet false accusations persist, a deep state scheme to bash
Russia and delegitimize Trump, wanting him undermined
for the wrong reasons, likely aiming to remove him from
.
16
office by impeachment, conviction, resignation or more
sinister means.
DNC emails were leaked, not hacked,
discussed in previous articles, including a
Sputnik News interview with former UK
ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray.
He explained claims about Russian US election hacking
were fabricated.
“The source of these emails and leaks has
nothing to do with Russia at all,” he said.
“I discovered what the source was when I
attended the Sam Adam's whistleblower
award in Washington,” he explained. “The
source of these emails comes from within
official circles in Washington DC. You
should look to Washington not to Moscow.”
“WikiLeaks has never published any
material received from the Russian
government or from any proxy of the
Russian government. It's simply a
completely untrue claim designed to divert
attention from the content of the material.”
Misinformation and Big Lies repeated enough get most
people to believe them. A GenForward poll published
Friday showed over half of respondents aged 18 - 30
consider Trump illegitimate.
Only 22% approve of him, 62% disapprove. A new Gallup
poll showed his approval at 37%, his lowest showing since
taking office.
He entered office with a 45% approval rating. Relentless
bashing took its toll. His disturbing agenda so far makes it
hard to win support.
He warrants criticism for the right reasons, not the wrong
ones, not for any improper relations with Russia. Nothing
suggests any exist.
 Brian Williams: Could Russia
Hearing ‘Dissolve’ Trump Presidency?
By Kyle Drennen
March 20, 2017 | 2:45 PM EDT
During 9 a.m. ET hour MSNBC coverage ahead of the
House Intelligence Committee hearing on Russian
interference in the 2016 election on Monday, anchor Brian
Williams wondered if the issue may bring down the Trump
administration:
“Could this dissolve everything? Could
this be an existential threat to this
administration, the process that begins
today?”
Chief legal analyst Ari Melber responded:
“It is always possible that an FBI inquiry
can dissolve anything and anyone
because of the massive subpoena,
research, investigative functions of the
bureau and its ability to hand anything over
to the DOJ, or in some cases, depending
on the scenario, to the public, which has
huge ramifications. So the answer is
yes...”
He added:
“...but, of course we are at – what we’ve
been told from the few leaks we have – is a
very early stage in an intelligence gathering
process.”
Minutes later, political analyst Nicolle Wallace chimed in:
“...this White House expects the
headline today to be, ‘White House
cleared of collusion charges with
17
Russia.’ That is simply not going to be
the case.”
She then sang the praises of the committee’s ranking
Democrat:
“I mean, Adam Schiff, there's a great
piece in the Wall Street Journal this
morning, he's been such a measured
voice. He's really the Democrats best
and most effective weapon, if you will,
in terms of probing these questions
about Russian ties...”
During an NBC News special report at the start of the
hearing, Today show co-host Matt Lauer similarly gushed
over Schiff “laying out a very meticulous, detail-oriented
case” on the Trump campaign supposedly colluding with
Russia to impact the election – despite a complete lack of
evidence.
Here are excerpts from the March 20 MSNBC coverage:
9:37 AM ET
(...)
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Ari Melber is here with
us. And, Ari, your area is the law. Could
this dissolve everything? Could this be an
existential threat to this administration, the
process that begins today?
ARI MELBER: It is always possible that an
FBI inquiry can dissolve anything and
anyone because of the massive subpoena,
 research, investigative functions of the
bureau and its ability to hand anything over
to the DOJ, or in some cases, depending
on the scenario, to the public, which has
huge ramifications. So the answer is yes,
but, of course we are at – what we’ve been
told from the few leaks we have – is a very
early stage in an intelligence gathering
process.
And so, I think the key questions that Jim
Comey may answer – they will certainly be
posed – number one, is there an inquiry? If
so, what’s the status of the inquiry. Are you
focused on federal crimes, which is one
reason the FBI looks into things, or are you
focused on intelligence gathering? Which
means there may be important things that
don't reflect any wrongful conduct by
anyone linked to Donald Trump. Two
different ways for them to be involved.
(...)
9:45 AM ET
NICOLLE WALLACE: Comey has become
the most consequential FBI director in a
generation. Republicans feel like Comey is
.
18
there to stay. So even if the White House is
displeased today – and you got a sense
from those tweets, I don't know if they were
sort expectation-setting for Comey, I don’t
know if he was speaking to the media or to
Comey himself – but this White House
expects the headline today to be, “White
House cleared of collusion charges with
Russia.” That is simply not going to be the
case.
I mean, Adam Schiff, there's a great piece
in the Wall Street Journal this morning, he's
been such a measured voice. He's really
the Democrats best and most effective
weapon, if you will, in terms of probing
these questions about Russian ties
because he has stood shoulder-to-shoulder
with his Republican counterpart and his
Republican counterpart has basically
affirmed that there's nothing there on the
wiretap charge and has kept these
questions and the legitimacy of an
investigation into the Russian-Trump team
contacts alive.
(...)
 NBC Slips, Wonders If Possible Russian ‘Engineering’
Stopped Dear Hillary from Winning?
By Curtis Houck
March 20, 2017 | 1:00 PM EDT
All three major broadcast networks offered Monday
morning coverage of the House Intelligence Committee
hearing on Russia and the 2016 election, but it was NBC
that swooned over Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff
(Calif.) and offered a hilarious slip that the Russians may
have prevented their dear Hillary Clinton from winning.
NBC’s special report began with Today co-hosts Matt
Lauer and Savannah Guthrie as Lauer brought in Justice
correspondent Pete Williams, praising Schiff’s opening
statement
“laying out a very meticulous, detail-
oriented case.”
Williams agreed, adding that Schiff
“laid out a number of what he says are
questions about contacts between
Trump campaign officials and Russia
and the question he wants to know is,
was there any collusion.”
Next, Williams offered this glaring slip of how
overwhelmingly Democratic the media is, fretting that the
Russians could have interfered in the election to the point
that they barred Clinton and the Democrats from winning:
Was there any engineering of the work by
the Russians to undermine the election of
Hillary Clinton? What he just said a
moment ago, is could this all be a
coincidence, the answer he said is yes, it
could be, but he said there's equally
information that these contacts are not
19
unrelated. Now, we're told that both the FBI
director and the director of the NSA
Admiral Mike Rogers will have opening
statements.
Later in the morning, NBC brought on supposedly neutral
analyst Jeremy Bash, who worked as an Obama
administration official with Leon Panetta at the CIA and
Department of Defense. Bash dismissed the questions by
Republican members of the committee as purely partisan,
attempting to deflect attention away from Russia toward
news leaks by the intelligence community.
“But again, the Republican strategy
here from the chairman's opening
statement down the Republican side of
the aisle is to distract from the
fundamental issue, which is was there
collusion from the Trump inner circle
and the Russian Federation and this is a
major issue,” Bash hyped.
Bash continued:
This is a foreign hostile power engaging in
a covert campaign to throw the election to
Donald Trump. Adam Schiff, the ranking
member, laid out in a very detailed and
meticulous way what the circumstantial
case is, Comey confirmed and I think a
stunning way the existence of the
investigation, and now the Republican job
on this committee is to talk about other
issues. Leaks and other matters.
Guthrie would admit seconds later that both sides play
politics, but it’s clear that the gist of this discussion was to
paint Republicans as partisan and Democrats as sober
public servants (even though Schiff promulgated the
unsubstantiated dossier pushed by BuzzFeed). This teed up
Bash to reply:
And again, that's another political point that the President
and his allies on Capitol Hill want to press, it's not
something that the NSA director can really address and he
said I'm really not the guy to talk about this. But again, the
core issue here at this hearing is not about wiretapping, it's
really not about leak. It's about those links between the
Trump inner circle and the Russian Federation. Not just
during the campaign but during the transition and the
administration.
Exit question: For those that saw the hearing and how
much Schiff promoted the dossier and the man behind it,
do you think he may as well have talked about the
document's more salacious details?
Here’s the relevant portions of the transcript from the NBC
News Special Report on March 20:
NBC News Special Report
March 20, 2017
10:24 p.m. Eastern
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Two key questions
to be answered potentially. Leading up to
election, was there any collusion between
members of the Trump campaign and
Russian officials? Secondly, is there any
evidence to support the President's claim
that then-President Obama ordered the
wiretapping of Trump Tower? Two hot
button issues all before us this morning.
MATT LAUER: And the hearings begin with
opening statements from Devin Nunes and
now Adam Schiff, who you’re watching
right here and we’ve got Pete Williams, our
Justice correspondent, watching the
proceedings so far. And Pete, as I bring
you in Adam Schiff is laying out a very
meticulous, detail-oriented case.
PETE WILLIAMS: He is. He’s laid out a
number of what he says are questions
about contacts between Trump campaign
officials and Russia and the question he
wants to know is, was there any collusion?
Was there any engineering of the work by
the Russians to undermine the election of
Hillary Clinton? What he just said a
moment ago, is could this all be a
coincidence, the answer he said is yes, it
could be, but he said there's equally
20
information that these contacts are not
unrelated. Now, we're told that both the FBI
director and the director of the NSA
Admiral Mike Rogers will have opening
statements. But, the tension here, Matt and
Savannah, will be how much they can say
in open session. Normally, these
intelligence committee hearings go into
closed session. But the members on both
sides will want as much of this out in public
as possible.
(....)
10:46 p.m. Eastern
JEREMY BASH: Well, this dialogue
between the committee and the NSA
director is really about Mike Flynn, the
former national security adviser. If you’ll
recall, Savannah, he was discussing with
Ambassador Kisylak Russian policy issues
not during the campaign but after the
election during the transition. For
Republicans really to wall off the Trump
administration from any of these critiques
about connections between the Trump
campaign and Russia, they have to
inoculate Flynn because he ended up in
the White House and so, what they’re
saying basically is who gave Mike Flynn's
name to other people in the government
and how did that get leaked to the press?
They want to basically nail somebody
inside government for leaking Flynn's
name.
LAUER: However, even if they get
someone inside government for leaking
that name, how does that, if at all, change
the information that was gleaned from that
surveillance?
BASH: Oh, it doesn't substantively change
it at all, but again, the Republican strategy
here from the chairman's opening
statement down the Republican side of the
aisle is to distract from the fundamental
issue, which is was there collusion from the
 Trump inner circle and the Russian
Federation and this is a major issue, Matt.
This is a foreign hostile power engaging in
a covert campaign to throw the election to
Donald Trump. Adam Schiff, the ranking
member, laid out in a very detailed and
meticulous way what the circumstantial
case is, Comey confirmed and I think a
stunning way the existence of the
investigation, and now the Republican job
on this committee is to talk about other
issues. Leaks and other matters.
LAUER: And by the way, we heard from
chairman Devin Nunes, the first thing he
wanted to hear from both of these
witnesses was if there was Russian
meddling, did it in any way impact votes
.
21
that were cast in several key states that
decided the outcome of the election.
BASH: And again, that's another political
point that the President and his allies on
Capitol Hill want to press, it's not something
that the NSA director can really address
and he said I'm really not the guy to talk
about this. But again, the core issue here at
this hearing is not about wiretapping, it's
really not about leak. It's about those links
between the Trump inner circle and the
Russian Federation. Not just during the
campaign but during the transition and the
administration.
GUTHRIE: Well, we're witnessing the age
old bipartisan Washington practice of trying
to get the focus on to the thing that you
want it to be on.
 Comey: "The Russians Concluded
Trump Was Hopeless Last August"
By Tyler Durden
Mar 20, 2017 3:24 PM
It appears that Russia fell for the same ruse that much of
America, not to mention its press and punditry, was taken
by, at least according to the FBI director: believing US
polls.
During his hearing before the House Intel Panel, FBI
Director James Comey said that the Russians expected
Hillary Clinton to win the presidency over Donald Trump
as of August and September.
“Late in the summer they concluded based on
the polling that a lot of people were reading that
Mr. Trump didn’t stand a chance,” said Comey,
although it was not clear just how the FBI knew
what the Russians "concluded" as of last
summer.
The FBI director's extrapolations then continued:
“let’s just focus on undermining her,” Comey
says of Russian thinking at the time, which
however was also confusing as earlier in his
testimony Comey said "we saw no efforts aimed
at the vote itself."
Comey then disputed the content of a tweet from President
Trump regarding Russia influencing the 2016 presidential
race. At the same time that Comey and National Security
Agency Director Michael Rogers testified to the House
Intelligence Committee about Russian interference in the
U.S. presidential election, the president tweeted a video
from his @POTUS account, saying "the NSA and FBI tell
Congress that Russia did not influence electoral process."
The NSA and FBI tell Congress that Russia did
not influence electoral process.
pic.twitter.com/d9HqkxYBt5
— President Trump (@POTUS) March 20, 2017
22
Responding to a question from Rep. Jim Himes about the
president’s Twitter post that
“The NSA and FBI tell Congress that Russia
did not influence electoral process,” Comey
said: “We’ve offered no opinion, have no view
and have no information on potential impact
because it’s never something we looked at.”
POTUS account tweets falsely that NSA and FBI
testified no influence on electoral process;
testimony was specifically on vote tallying.
pic.twitter.com/fV2OdJWiXg
— NBC Nightly News (@NBCNightlyNews)
March 20, 2017
Comey was then pressed on whether it was
"too far of a logical leap to conclude that the
assertion that you have told the Congress that
there was no influence on the electoral process
is not quite right" to which Comey responded "It
certainly wasn't our intention to say that today."
"Because we don't have any information on that
subject. That's not something that was looked
at."
Comey then again seemed to contradict himself when he
said that
"we saw efforts to penetrate the voter registration
databases."
Five hours after its start, the hearing continues, with
numerous extrapolations, with no actual facts presented, as
the heads of the FBI and NSA redefine "conspiracy
theory."
 Russia Conspiracy Mongering
Hits Wall At Congressional Hearing
Dan Wright
20 Mar 2017

leak that targeted an American citizen. He said leaking

information was a criminal offense that warranted 20 years
imprisonment.

Flynn was caught in an intelligence operation targeting

Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak when they
communicated via phone. A transcript of the intercepted
call was illegally leaked to The Washington Post. In
theory, Flynn’s identity could only have been “unmasked”
FBI Director James Comey testifies at the House Select Intelligence by a select few individuals.
Committee hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential
election. Photo: CSPAN.
One name floated by both Representative Gowdy and
Representative Peter King (R-NY) was former CIA
It was over five hours of odd metaphors, logical fallacies,
Director John Brennan, who has long had an acrimonious
and dark accusations, but the House Intelligence
relationship with Flynn and publicly feuded with President
Committee hearing into Russian interference in the 2016
Trump.
presidential election, starring FBI Director James Comey
and NSA Director Mike Rogers, ended with no substantial
revelations. FBI Director Comey confirmed the bureau was
investigating claims that there had been collusion between
Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russian
The only news was the confirmation of a previously
intelligence services, but he would not go into further
reported FBI investigation, which began in July.
detail and state whether the FBI had found evidence.
While ranking Democrat Adam Schiff (D-CA) and others
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
did their best Joe McCarthy impression, the show was
already said he found no evidence of collusion and former
stolen by Representative Denny Heck (D-WA), who
CIA director and Clinton campaign supported Mike
claimed the entire affair was an “inside job” and that the
Morrell echoed Clapper. Morrell said that while there was
“attack” by Russia was akin to 9/11.
smoke, there was “no fire,” and the Trump campaign did
not collude with the Russians.
Meanwhile, Republicans focused on leaks of classified
intercepts that led to former National Security Advisor
Both Comey and Rogers also said they found no evidence
Mike Flynn’s firing for lying about his communication
that President Obama ever “wiretapped” Trump Tower, a
with the Russian government. Republican committee
wild accusation President Trump made on Twitter weeks
member Trey Gowdy (R-SC) said it was going to be
ago, which he continues to stand by.
harder to reauthorize NSA spying powers in the wake of a
.

23
 NY Attorney General Hires
Public-Corruption Prosecutor To Target Trump
Administration; WSJ Reports
By Tyler Durden
Mar 20, 2017 4:55 PM

Last week, Schneiderman’s office joined Washington

state’s lawsuit against the Trump administration’s revised
immigration order.

“The Trump administration’s continued intent

to discriminate against Muslims is clear,”
Schneiderman said at the time, “and it
undermines New York’s families, institutions
and economy.”

Meanwhile, Scheiderman also led the charge against the

Just days after the controversial dismissal of former
Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara by Jeff Sessions,
(see "Trump Fires US Attorney Preet Bharara After He
Refuses To Quit"), New York state’s attorney general, and
well known Democrat donor, Eric Schneiderman, has
decided to pick up the crusade against the Trump
administration where Bharara left off by announcing the
hiring of his top public-corruption prosecutor, Howard
Master, to focus specifically on issues involving the Trump
administration.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the hiring of Master,
whose title will be senior enforcement counsel, signals
Schneiderman’s continued intent to take on the Republican
president. Eric Soufer, a spokesman for Schneiderman's
office, confirmed Master’s hiring and said he
now defunct Trump University that allegedly defrauded
students and resulted in Trump paying a $25 million
settlement. Below was Schneiderman's full statement on
the settlement.
He is also the AG who notified Donald Trump that his
charitable foundation was violating state law back in
October 2016, convenient timing for such an
announcement, by soliciting donations without proper
certification and ordered the charity to stop its fundraising
immediately...a laughable offense given the many issues
surrounding the Clinton Foundation, which was also based
in New York, that went unrecognized the NY AG's office.
The undrainable swamp will not be defeated...

“will be working on a wide range of civil and

criminal investigations and enforcement
matters, including public corruption, complex
(Schneiderman's full statement
civil litigation” and potentially litigation
against the Trump administration.

On
Of course, for the past year or so Schneiderman
has been the ringleader of a group of
Democratic attorneys general who have
Next Page)
directed both legal challenges and critical
rhetoric toward the president on matters
including his executive orders on
immigration and refugees, climate change
and threats to deport millions of illegal
immigrants, among other issues.

24
.

25
 The Conspiracy
Against President Trump
Paul Craig Roberts
March 20, 2017
March 20, 2017: Listening today to the broadcast of
testimony by FBI Director Comey and National Security
Agency Director Admiral Michael Rogers before the
House Intelligence Committee (an oxymoron) made it
clear that the Democrats, Comey, and Rogers intend
conflict with Russia.
The Republicans, for the most part, were interested to
know how security leaks targeted at Trump Republicans
came from meetings at which only the CIA Director, NSA
Director, and FBI director were present. Of course, they
did not get an answer, which shows how powerless
congressional oversight committees are. Comey repeatedly
said that he could not tell the committee anything, because
it would confirm that a press leak was true. But, he said,
speaking generally and of no specific leak, most leaks
come from “someone who heard something” and passes it
on to the media, which also explains the inaccuracy of
some leaks. In other words, don’t blame us.
The Democrats were out in force to demonize Russia,
Putin, and everyone, especially Trump Republicans, who
speaks to a Russian even if the person is still a private
citizen, as was Gen. Flynn when he recommended to the
Russian ambassador that Russia not respond in kind to
President Obama’s expulsion of Russian diplomats over
Christmas. The Democrats bestowed yet another demonic
title on Putin. In addition to being “the new Hitler,” a
“thug,” and a “Mafia don,” today Putin became a
“tarantula in the center of the spy web.”
The Democrats’ position was that Flynn, by discouraging a
Russian tit for tat, had interfered with the Obama regime’s
policy of worsening relations between the US and Russia.
Some Democrats saw this as treason. Others saw it as
proof that Flynn and Trump are in Putin’s pocket, and still
others see it as even worse.
The Democrats were also very concerned about lobbyists,
if they be Republican, working for Russian interests,
including Tillerson, the Secretary of State. The fact that
every country employs lobbyists and that the lobbyists
don’t always register as foreign agents, such as Israel’s
lobbyists, or if news reports at the time were correct,
neocon Richard Perle who represented Turkey in
Washington.
26
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2003/04/rich
ard_perle_libel_watch_week_4.html
Democrats were also after Gen. Flynn for saying that he
had not received money from the Russian government.
Flynn received a fee for attending the 10th Anniversary
celebration of RT in Moscow. Is RT, a news organization,
the Russian government? Its budget is supported by the
Russian government, but how does this differ from the US
government’s support of the budgets of National Public
Radio, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Voice of
America? Does this mean that everyone who gives an
interview to NPR, Radio Liberty, and VOA is an American
agent in the pocket of the US president? If you attend a
function of one of these organizations, does it make you an
“American agent/dupe”? Will there be a list of these
people?
What the Democrats tried to do today was to criminalize
everyone who works for better relations between the US
and Russia. To be for peace between the nuclear powers is
to be a Russian agent and to be put on a list. The
Democrats insisted that Russia was an enemy out to get us,
and the Democrats had no difficulty getting Comey and
Rogers, both Obama appointees, to agree.
Comey and Rogers said that Russia was the main threat to
the US, was working against our interests, and intends to
harm us. Harming us includes opposing US hegemony and
unilateralism. In other words, if the Russian government
acts in the interests of Russia, the Russian government is
harming the US. From the testimony it clearly emerged
that any kind of opposition to anything Washington does is
against American interests.
Both Comey and Rogers declared, falsely, that Russia had
invaded Ukraine and seized Crimea by force. If Comey
and Rogers are so poorly informed that they believe this,
they are unfit for office. Crimea has been a part of Russia
for 300 years. The population is almost entirely Russian.
When the Soviet Union collapsed and Washington broke it
apart, the Ukraine became independent for the first time in
history. Crimea, which had been transferred by
Khrushchev in 1954 from the Russian Soviet Socialist
Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, was
included in the transfer on the condition that Russia had a
long term lease on the naval base in Crimea.
When Washington’s coup overthrew the democratically
elected government in Ukraine, the Russian populations in
Crimea, and in the new republics of Luhansk and Donetsk,
were attacked and threatened by the neo-nazi elements in
eastern Ukraine that had fought for Hitler against the
Soviet Union. The populations of these areas voted
overwhelmingly to reunite with Russia, from whence they
had come. The votes were fair and open. As Crimea is the
Russian Navy’s Black Sea base, Crimea was already
occupied by Russian forces. For Comey and Rogers to call
this an “invasion” displays either ignorance or a lack of
integrity.
Indeed, the lack of integrity of the FBI, NSA, CIA, and
Obama regime is evidenced by the sustained campaign of
lies, distortions, and targeted “news leaks,” that is, stories
planted on the presstitutes by the intelligence services
about Russian interference in the presidential election. It is
all about protecting the massive military/security budget
and powers. Trump threatened both the budget and the
power when he declared that his policy would be to
normalize relations with Russia. If relations are
normalized, the carefully orchestrated “Russian threat”
disappears. The intelligence services are not willing for
this to happen. The US intelligence services prefer the risk
of nuclear Armageddon to a budget cut.
The Democrats are probably not sufficiently intelligent to
understand that they are fanning the flames of war between
nuclear powers. The Democrats are desperate to find
someone on whom to pin their loss of the election.
Moreover, by pinning it on a conspiracy between Trump
and Putin, they hope to remove Trump from office.
Although Pence, who is a Russophobe, is acceptable to the
military/security complex, the Democrats have hopes of
clearing out Pence as well, as his election resulted from the
alleged conspiracy, and reinstalling themselves in the
White House.
Americans need to understand that the political
competition between the Democrats and Republicans is
over which party gets to collect the money for being the
whore for the One Percent. Traditionally, the party in the
White House gets most of the money, so that is where both
parties want to be.
Michael Morell, a supporter of Hillary Clinton and
President Obama’s last CIA director in an acting capacity,
who was slated to become CIA director under Hillary,
said,
“On the question of the Trump campaign
conspiring with the Russians, there is
smoke, but there is no fire, at all. There’s
no little campfire, there’s no little candle,
there’s no spark. And there’s a lot of people
looking for it.”
.
27
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/clinton-ally-says-smoke-no-fire-
no-russia-trump-collusion-n734176
Morell does believe that it was the Russians who hacked
Hillary’s incriminating emails but not in collusion with
Trump, although the evidence is that they were a leak from
inside the Democratic National Committee by disaffected
supporters of Bernie Sanders.
Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
said on Meet the Press on March 5 that he had seen no
evidence of a Putin-Trump conspiracy when he left office
on January 20.
Listening to Comey and Rogers today, if they are not
working against President Trump, what would classify as
working against Trump? Trump supporters ask why Trump
doesn’t fire these two men who are working to block a
reduction in the dangerous tensions between Washington
and Russia. Are the Democrats, Comey, Rogers, the CIA
and their media whores so stupid that they don’t
understand what it means when the President of Russia
says, “the Americans have destroyed our trust in them?”
Trump doesn’t fire Comey and Rogers, because he cannot
fire them. If he fires them, the Democrats and presstitutes
will explain the firings as proof that Trump is a Russian
agent and is covering up his treason by removing those
investigating it.
Trump is trying to use Twitter to respond to the
orchestrated media assault against him and to achieve
some organization among his supporters, the working class
that elected him. However, Trump cannot even count on
the Republican Party. Most Republicans are also
dependent on political contributions from the
military/security complex, and Republicans know that the
intelligence agencies have all the dirt on them. To fight for
Trump is to expose themselves.
It is undeniable that the CIA controls the media, both in
Europe and in the US. Udo Ulfkotte’s book, Gekauftge
Journalisten, exposed the CIA’s hold on European
journalists when it was published in Germany in 2014. An
English language edition, Journalists for Hire: How the
CIA Buys the News, is due out in May. In the meantime
Joel Whitney’s book, Finks: How the C.I.A. Tricked the
World’s Best Writers, suffices to establish that America’s
most respected journalists drank the CIA’s Kool-Aid “and
thought they were saving freedom” by serving as
propagandists.
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/joel_whitney_cia_propaganda_col
d_war_scheer_intelligence_20170317
People in the West need to understand that if the news they
receive bears on the interests of the US military/security
complex, the news is scripted by the CIA. The CIA serves
its interests, not the interests of the American people or the
interests of peace.
 Trey Gowdy Finds Out FBI Director James Comey Won’t Obey
The Law, Comey Refuses To Promise The American People That
He Will Investigate Trump Leaks “My Fellow Citizens Are
Rethinking Their Side Of The Equation”
By IWB
Published March 20, 2017 · Updated March 21, 2017

appeared to name former President Barack Obama and six

of his administration’s top staffers as the source of leaks
regarding former National Security Advisor Michael
Flynn’s alleged collusion with the Russian government
during the 2016 election.

Trey Gowdy Finds Out FBI Director James Comey Won’t Obey The
Law & He’s Pissed

Trey Gowdy in congress permanent select committee on

intelligence he is on the house intelligence committee on
open hearing on Russian active measures investigation.

Gowdy Points To President Obama And

His Officials As Possible Source Of Flynn
Leaks | Trey Gowdy, questioning James
Comey, appeared to name former
President Barack Obama and six of his
administration’s top staffers as the source
of leaks
Rep. Trey Gowdy, questioning James Comey during a
House Intelligence Committee hearing on Monday,
.

28
 ‘Stop Breaking The Law’: Snowden Raises
‘Red Flag’ Over Testimony Of NSA And FBI Chiefs
Published Time: 20 Mar, 2017 21:25

“How many communications in which at

least one participant is American are held
by the NSA? The question not answered in
Congress today.”

Former US intelligence contractor and whistle blower Edward

Snowden. © Dagens Nyheter / AFP
Edward Snowden has reacted to the
The former NSA contractor commented that the members
testimony from the directors of the FBI and
of Congress asking the questions were conflating legality
the NSA discussing whistleblowers before
and morality, saying that while people who leak
the House Intelligence Committee.
information may be breaking the law what they do is a
moral act.
FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director Michael
Rogers testified before the House Select Committee on
Intelligence on Monday. The questioning largely focused
on allegations of Russian interference in the 2016
presidential election campaign and President Donald
Trump’s accusation that his campaign was spied on by the
Obama administration.

As the directors of two of America’s most prominent

intelligence agencies answered a question about the
leaking of classified information to the press, Snowden
took to Twitter to raise a “red flag” about their testimony.

“Red flag: NSA Director careful to discuss

only who can unmask USP [US persons]
identities in reporting, not who can access Snowden then retweeted a tweet from investigative
collection involving USPs, [US persons]” journalist Carl Bernstein, who uncovered the Watergate
Snowden tweeted. scandal, which read:

29
 “I can state w[ith]/confidence that many
intel members now decrying 'leaks' of
classified info have themselves 'leaked'
classified info knowingly.”

As Congressman Trey Gowdy asked whether journalists

can be prosecuted for reporting on classified information
Snowden said:

"A member of Congress asked the Director
of the FBI if journalists can be imprisoned
for doing their jobs. Worse: Comey didn't
say 'no.'"
Snowden took issue with this statement, responding
“This is simply not true. Even monstrously
unjust sentences (Manning) have been
shown insufficient to deter the next
whistleblower.”
“You want to know how to stop the next
whistleblower? Stop breaking the damn
law,” he concluded.

Comey went on to claim that people can be deterred from

leaking information if they know they could face prison for
doing so.

“This information can be deterred,” he said

“It can be deterred by locking some people
up.”
.

30
 Rare Public Hearing to Seek FBI,
NSA Answers on Trump, Russia, Leaks
By Reuters
March 20, 2017 11:50 am

refusal to appoint a special prosecutor or select committee

to investigate.

FBI Director James Comey speaks during a ceremony to open the

new FBI Boston Field Office in Chelsea, Massachusetts, U.S., March
7, 2017. (REUTERS/Brian Snyder)
WASHINGTON—The directors of the FBI and National
Security Agency will break their public silence on Monday
about investigations into alleged links between Russia and
President Donald Trump’s election campaign at a rare
open congressional intelligence committee hearing.
Representatives Devin Nunes, chairman of the House of
Representatives Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, and Adam Schiff, the panel’s top Democrat,
have called FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director
Admiral Mike Rogers to testify about allegations that
Russia meddled in the U.S. election.
Other congressional committees also are investigating the
matter, mostly behind closed doors. Still, amid a furor over
whether Moscow tried to influence the 2016 presidential
race on Trump’s behalf, lawmakers said they would make
public as much of their probes as possible.
Russia denies attempting to influence the Nov. 8
presidential election.
U.S. National Security Agency Director Admiral Mike Rogers
testifies before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on
foreign cyber threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington on Jan. 5, 2017.
(REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)
Fired
Trump fired his national security adviser, Michael Flynn,
last month, saying Flynn failed to properly brief the
administration about the content of his conversations with
Russia’s ambassador before Trump took office on Jan. 20.
Last week, new information surfaced about more than
$65,000 that Flynn was paid in 2015 by companies with
links to Russia.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a former senator, recused
himself from any investigation related to the presidential
campaign. During his confirmation hearing he said he
didn’t have any contacts with Russian officials as part of
Trump’s campaign. He, however, failed to disclose that, as
senator, he had met with Russia’s ambassador to the
United States, Sergey Kislyak.

Comey and Rogers were not expected to reveal much in Hours before the Monday hearing, Trump tweeted that
public about the investigations, which include information former Director of National Intelligence
that is classified Top Secret and split into different
sections, each of which requires a separate clearance.
“James Clapper and others stated that
there is no evidence Potus (president of
But the hearing could become heated as Republicans the United States) colluded with
balance support for their party’s leaders and Democrats Russia,” and said Democrats were
vent frustration over Republican congressional leaders’ pushing the inquiry because of the
party’s election losses.
31

Clapper said this month there was no evidence of
“collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia in a
January intelligence report concluding Russian
interference in the 2016 election, but
“this could have unfolded or become
available in the time since I left
government.”
Nunes said on “Fox News Sunday” there was no evidence
of collusion.
Both Trump’s fellow Republicans as well as Democrats in
Congress said they were frustrated by what they
considered the intelligence community’s failure to provide
enough information about any contacts with Russia, as
well as Trump’s claim that his predecessor, Democratic
President Barack Obama, ordered a wiretap of Trump
Tower.
Possible Subpoenas
Schiff said he expected Comey to make clear at Monday’s
hearing that Trump’s allegation was unfounded.
“I hope that we can put an end to this wild
goose chase because what the president
said was just patently false,” Schiff said on
NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.
.
32
Nunes said on Fox that he was not aware of any warrant
that would have allowed such a wiretap.
Members of both parties have threatened to subpoena
administration officials or delay confirmation hearings for
Trump’s nominees until their requests for information are
answered.
Many Democrats also are deeply unhappy with Comey for
his handling of an inquiry into Democratic presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server,
especially as he issued statements about it shortly before
Election Day.
When asked what the committee expects from the hearing,
Jack Langer, a spokesman for Nunes, gave a substantial
list.
“We’re expecting directors Comey and
Rogers to shed light on Russia’s active
measures undertaken during the 2016
election campaign, the U.S. government’s
response, the compilation of the
Intelligence Community’s Jan. 6 report on
these events, and on related questions
concerned possible surveillance on Trump
campaign associates and on possible leaks
of classified information,” he said.
The Senate Intelligence Committee has announced a public
hearing for March 30. The witness list, titled
“Disinformation: A Primer on Russian Active
Measures and Influence Campaign,” does not yet
include any government officials.
The House committee will hold a second public hearing on
March 28 with former U.S. officials, including Clapper
and former CIA Director John Brennan.
Epoch Times contributed to this report.
 Trump Urges Congress,
FBI Find Leaker of Classified Info 'Now'
© AFP 2017/ YURI GRIPAS - US
14:18 20.03.2017(updated 16:05 20.03.2017)
US President Donald Trump called on the Congress and
the FBI to probe the leaks of classified information.
"The real story that Congress, the FBI and
all others should be looking into is the
leaking of Classified information. Must find
leaker now!"
Trump has previously repeatedly voiced concern
over unauthorized disclosures of national security
information. He also accused his predecessor Barack
Obama and his employees of the leaks.
The news comes as US House Intelligence Committee
chairman Devin Nunes said on Sunday that there was no
evidence of any links between Russia and the Trump
campaign.
Trump also said that no evidence was found of his alleged
collusion with Russia, adding that the claims are "fake
news."
33
"James Clapper and others stated that
there is no evidence Potus colluded
with Russia. This story is FAKE NEWS and
everyone knows it!" Trump stated
on Twitter.
Trump accused the Democratic Party of fabricating the
allegations of his links to Russia as an excuse "for running
a terrible campaign."
"The Democrats made up and pushed
the Russian story as an excuse
for running a terrible campaign. Big
advantage in Electoral College & lost!"
Trump said.
Earlier in March, the chairman said that the committee
would hold its first hearing to investigate the allegations
of Russian interference in the US 2016 election as well
as connections between Trump, his associates and Russia,
on March 20.
The Russian government has repeatedly denied any
attempts to sway the US election to Trump — an
allegation leveled by the US intelligence agencies
during the final days of former President Barack Obama
administration.
 Trump Uses 'POTUS' Account To Tweet
FBI Director "Refuses To Deny" Briefing Obama On Flynn
By Tyler Durden
Mar 20, 2017 12:43 PM

In a very unusual move, President Trump took time away

from his personal Twitter account to tell the free world -
via @POTUS - that

"FBI Director Comey refuses to deny he

briefed President Obama on calls made by
Michael Flynn to Russia”.

On the bright side, at least there were no typos.

.
34
 Top Dems' Lobbyists Giving Money
To Clinton Team Have Ties To Russia - Reports
© AP Photo/ Charlie Neibergall - US
20:00 20.03.2017
A number of top Democratic party
lobbyists, who managed to amass large
sums for Hillary Clinton's failed
presidential campaign, personally
represent or work at firms that have
represented Russian interests,
Washington Free Beacon news reported
Monday.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — US legislation on the registration
of foreign agents requires that persons acting in the
interests of other states periodically submit information
about their activities, including financial documentation,
to the Department of Justice.
According to the Washington Free Beacon news site,
which gathered such documentation, in the first quarter
of 2016, Tony Podesta, brother of former chairman
of Clinton's campaign John Podesta, received $20,000
from Russia's largest bank Sberbank to
35
"clarify the scope of sanctions imposed
by Executive Order 13660."
This order was signed by then US
President Barack Obama in March 2014
to block "property of certain persons
contributing to the situation in Ukraine."
Podesta, who donated at least $260,000
to Clinton's campaign, was paid $170,000
by Sberbank for his services
throughout 2016.
The website also reported on the cooperation of Manatos
& Manatos with the VTB Group, which main shareholder
is the Russian government. The company, which was
commissioned to study sanctions against the Russian
banking sector, received $17,500 a month for its services.
The contribution of the firm's senior Vice President
Emanuel "Mike" Manatos to the election campaign
of Clinton amounted to $40,000.
Another DC-based lobbying company with ties to Russia
is Capitol Counsel, which cooperated with the Russian
Direct Investment Fund (RDIF). Partners the company
David Jones and Richard Sullivan transferred more than
$1.3 million to the accounts of Clinton headquarters.
The publication took place amid media reports on the
alleged contacts between Donald Trump presidential
campaign and Moscow, a claim denied by both Moscow
and Trump. The first hearing of the US House Intelligence
Committee to investigate the allegations of Russian
interference in the US 2016 election as well as connections
between Trump, his associates, and Russia will take place
later in the day.
 ‘Washington Vultures Circling Nunes For
Seeing No Evidence Of Trump-Kremlin Collusion’
Published Time: 20 Mar, 2017 04:01Edited Time: 20 Mar, 2017 04:02
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin
Nunes © Aaron P. Bernstein / Reuters
House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes is in the
cross-hairs for stating there's “no evidence of collusion”
between Trump’s team and Moscow ahead of what's
expected to be heated public hearings former intelligence
officers, and political analysts told RT.
Nunes stated that “no evidence of
collusion” between President Donald
Trump’s team and Russia has been
found.
The statement to Fox News came just ahead of the first
public hearing on the matter on Monday. Nunes added,
that,
“the one crime we know that’s been
committed” were the leaks to the media
that fueled these speculations.
Nunes' statements may make him a new target for the anti-
Trump section of the US establishment as the latest round
to unravel the “Russian election meddling” saga unfolds, a
former MI5 intelligence officer Anny Machon told RT.
“The Washington vultures are circling this
guy saying that he’s shown that he is
partisan right from the beginning of this
investigation in Congress through to the
announcement today. So I think it is going
to be quite a lot of skepticism about the fact
that this man has spoken out and said that
he has not seen any evidence,” Machon
said.
36
“Now, it is interesting that this man has
actually come out and said it publicly and
put his name to what he is saying as
opposed to the CIA leaks that have been
going on ever since Donald Trump was
elected last November, trying to insinuate
that there were these connections, to say
that there is intelligence to show that there
are these connections without producing
any evidence.”
As the House Intelligence Committee is evenly divided
between Republicans and the Democrats, the upcoming
hearings might be quite heated, Machon believes.
“The Democrats have been very much
backing this idea that’s come out of the CIA
that there is this incredibly close linkage
between the Trump camp and the Kremlin,”
Machon told RT.
Meanwhile, the credibility of the investigation and the
“evidence” it might offer gets more and more
questionable, as new information emerges regarding
dubious methods used by the US intelligence community.
“One needs to remember the disclosures
that were released on WikiLeaks a couple
of weeks ago about Vault 7, which was
about the CIA that has been briefing
against Trump since he won the elections.
The CIA had over the last few years been
accumulating an arsenal of cyberweapons,
which they’ve acquired even from the
Russian hackers,” Machon said.
“So they have this arsenal of
cyberweapons, which can be used to hack
organizations and make it appear that the
Russians have done it, the Russian
fingerprints are on it. Even if there is some
sort of intelligence that appears to point
towards Russians might have hacked the
DNC originally or something like that back
in 2015, it is very difficult to forensicly say
definitively that it was the Russians
because we know that the CIA can play it
being the Russians as well.”
Nunes’ acknowledgement of the lack of any proof appears
believable, as the intelligence community did not even
produce a solid piece evidence of the “hacking” itself let
alone the vague “Russian involvement,” Machon added.
“In fact, I remember when the CIA made
these original claims or leaked these
original claims last year, WikiLeaks said
that the people, who had hacked the DNC,
the people, who had hacked the Podesta
files, were not state actors, it was not a
state player and it was not Russia,”
Machon said.
“We also have evidence from a former UK
ambassador Craig Murray, who said he
was actually given this information by a
disgruntled DNC activist. There is a lot of
information out there that actually
disproves the claims by the Democrats and
by the CIA that the elections were hacked,
the DNC was hacked – there is no
evidence whatsoever.”
Apart from uncovering dubious methods used by the US
intelligence agencies, an investigation into the whole 2016
electoral process should be initiated, writer and
investigator Charles Ortel told RT, adding that the whole
anti-Trump stance is a sign that “swamp is fighting back.”
“In my view, you had an anti-establishment
Republican take on the Republican
establishment, secure the nomination and
then beat the presumed frontrunner.
WikiLeaks and other information now
coming to light would suggest that she was
just put in the role of being the frontrunner,
no matter what the other results may have
shown about support for Bernie Sanders,”
Ortel said. “The media over here were 90
percent for Hillary Clinton, they got all the
polls wrong, all the projections wrong.”
“Trump was lampooned for suggesting that
there were a lot of illegal voters voting for
Hillary Clinton and for Democrats in the
2016 election. I think it’s high time we have
an investigation of that. I think we should
37
have an investigation into the State
Secretary of State report, I believe in West
Virginia and other states, that there’s
evidence that federal agencies may have
interfered in the elections in 2016,” Ortel
added.
The current investigation, however, might be useful too,
but not in the manner the people who initiated it have been
expecting, retired CIA and State Department official
Larry Johnson told RT.
“I think there can be some revelations that
could come out. For example, one
possibility will be some insight into the
document that was released January 1,
that was coordinated on by the FBI, the
CIA and the NSA,” Johnson said.
“I’ve heard, that in fact the first draft of that
document came to exact opposite
conclusion and because it didn’t come to
the right conclusion that it was taken away
from the analysts who were drafting it,
taken up the food chain to the senior
management so that they could shape it to
put in the right point, which is really a total
corruption of the intelligence process.”
“There’s other word, that there may be
some actual documentary evidence that
there have been prior illegal collection on
Donald Trump and his associates that pre-
date him running for president,” Johnson
added.
Double standards and a lack of any correlation between
proclaimed values and reality is a very “dangerous
situation,” according to Johnson, as the modern United
States is resembling an
“old Soviet Union, where you could start
investigating somebody without any proof
or evidence of any wrongdoing
whatsoever.”
“What in the past has been one of the
differences separating Russia from the
 United States, is that in theory in the United
States there had to be some evidence, or
probability, possibility that one had
committed a crime. The state was not
allowed to just unilaterally start
investigating someone because they did
not like their point of view, or they didn’t like
who they were hanging out with. We were
past that now,” Johnson said.
“We’re accusing Russia of being this
corrupt place with authoritarian rulers,
when the United States actually is
behaving according to the very standard
which we claim to condemn.”
.

38
 Two Months In Office: The Old, New And Borrowed In
Trump's Foreign Policy
© AFP 2017/ JIM LO SCALZO / EPA POOL - Politics
11:51 20.03.2017
Two months after his inauguration,
Donald Trump's policies toward Russia,
Europe and the fight against Daesh
remain mostly in the beginning stages.
The White House "has largely failed to
deliver on its pledges" to defeat terrorist
groups in the Middle East and establish
a working relationship with Moscow,
Grigory Dubovitsky wrote for RIA
Novosti.
The Trump team has condensed its foreign policy doctrine
into several short paragraphs. The succinct document
pledges to focus on American interests and US national
security using a peace-through-strength approach and
diplomacy to build a
"more peaceful and more prosperous"
world in which the rejuvenated United
States would become "stronger and more
respected."
The strategy mentions two specific issues which require
Washington's immediate attention, namely international
terrorism and military buildup. President Trump has
repeatedly named fighting against groups like Daesh and
al-Qaeda a high priority, saying that an efficient
counterterrorism strategy could entail working with other
stakeholders to conduct military operations, cut funding
to terrorists and expand intelligence sharing.
Russia has been named as a possible partner in these
efforts, something Moscow has always been open to. Yet
cooperation between the US-led coalition and the Russian
Armed Forces has been relatively limited, while tough
39
rhetoric towards Moscow from some senior members
of the Trump administration has not contributed
to improving relations which went into a deep freeze
following the 2014 foreign-sponsored coup in Ukraine.
Suspended détente between Russia and the United
States
"Certain hopes on a rapprochement
[between Russia and the United States]
have been placed on a meeting
between Russian President Vladimir Putin
and Donald Trump which is unlikely to take
place prior to the G20 summit in Hamburg
scheduled for early July. There are no
specific agreements in this respect at the
moment," Dubovitsky said. "Analysts are
guided by the fact that the first phone call
of the two leaders following Trump's
inauguration was quite positive. However,
there have been no new signals indicating
that Washington is committed
to developing relations with Moscow."
More worryingly, the White House appears to have
readjusted its stance on Ukraine and Crimea, bringing it
closer to that of the Obama administration. In mid-
February, White House spokesman Sean Spicer said that
Trump expected Russia to return the Black Sea peninsula
to Kiev. These comments came after US envoy to the
United Nations Nikki Haley reaffirmed that Washington
did not intend to lift anti-Russian sanctions unless Crimea's
status was reverted.
America's domestic affairs have also been a factor
in determining Trumps foreign policy.
"Some in the United States have been
engaged in looking for 'the Russian trace'
with regard to the [2016 presidential]
election and what Trump described as 'a
witch hunt' with respect to the members
of his team ostensibly linked to Russia.
Michael T. Flynn, Trump's first national
security advisor, was forced to resign
because of that," the analyst explained. "In
 these circumstances it would have been
hard to count on a swift and constructive
cooperation between the two countries
on several pressing issues. Moscow has
largely been sympathetic towards the new
administration due to these challenges.
However, it has expressed certain
disappointment with regard to anti-Russian
rhetoric emanating from Washington."
'No visible changes' in anti-Daesh fight
Donald Trump has been critical of the Obama
administration's approach to dealing with Daesh and
international terrorism. The White House has promised
to devise an efficient strategy to destroy the brutal group
still capable of wreaking havoc in the Middle East and
beyond, but has not unveiled its details yet.
"There are still no visible changes" in this
area, Dubovitsky said. "When it comes
to activities in the Middle East, the new
administration has only made two
decisions. For the first time in years the US
special forces carried out a ground
operation against al-Qaeda in Yemen. One
US soldier was killed and three other
injured in the raid which also claimed the
lives of local civilians. Nevertheless,
Washington still claims that the operation
was successful since they managed
to obtain intelligence data and eliminate
several al-Qaeda leaders."
.
40
The analyst also mentioned that the US administration
decided to deploy additional 400 US troops to Syria. These
forces are meant to help liberate Raqqa, the de facto capital
of Daesh's caliphate. Dubovitsky maintained that this
decision "essentially served as a continuation of Barack
Obama's cautious strategy" since the former US president
was largely opposed to ground operations in the Middle
East, but
"was still forced to deploy special
operations troops to Iraq and Syria."
In addition, the new administration has been unable
to settle the differences between its allies in Syria, the
Kurds and the Turks.
Dubovitsky pointed out that Trump "has
been more preoccupied with resolving
domestic issues" in the United States.
Trump
"has also encountered substantial
resistance from lawmakers and the judicial
branch. For instance, both executive orders
which banned entry to citizens of several
countries in the Middle East and Northern
Africa were blocked by the courts," the
analyst said. "Under these circumstances it
is hard to expect that Trump will soon be
able to achieve a breakthrough and resolve
years-long challenges which the US faces."
 Senator Hints That Trump May Resign:
"I Think He Is Going To Get Himself Out"
Authored By Mac Slavo Via Shtfplan.Com
Mar 20, 2017 5:15 AM

with government expenses… I think those

government expenses should not be
allowed.. we are working on a bill that
will deal with conflict of interest… it’s
difficult…

Videos of Feinstein speaking to what appears to be a local

press pool of reporters and protesters appear below. You
can jump to 1:30 in the first video to listen to Feinstein
discuss Trump’s conflicts of interests,

It’s no secret that there is a concerted or watch from the beginning to hear
effort underway to do everything Feinstein’s response to how her
possible to remove President Donald husband’s firm directly benefited from
Trump from office. bills she voted into law,

From Russian ties to business conflicts of interests, both proving once again that the hypocrisy of socialist
Democrats and Republicans are actively working to find Congressional representatives from California has no
chinks in the President’s armor. bounds…

But for those with hope of change in their hearts, Part 1:

Democrat Senator Diane Feinstein says

there is a possibility that Trump will
eventually remove himself from office
by filing his own resignation.

Speaking to a crowd during a town hall-style Questions

and Answers session, Feinstein was asked how Congress is
going to deal with Trump’s alleged illegal activities:

Journalist: We don’t know what’s happening but we know

that he is breaking laws every day, he’s making money at Part2:
Mar-a-lago, he’s getting copyrights in China, he has
obvious dealings with Russia, the Dakota pipeline…
there’s some many things that he’s doing that are
unconstitutional… how are we going to get him out?

Feinstein:

We have a lot of people looking at this…

Technical people… I think he’s going to
get himself out… I think sending sons to
another country to make a financial deal for
his company and then have that covered
41
 James Comey Just Explained How
Establishment Media Legally Creates Fake News
By DCWhisper
Posted on March 20, 2017
Check out this quote from FBI Director
James Comey’s testimony to Congress
today:
“…It’s perfectly legal for someone
attending a classified briefing to LIE TO
THE PRESS about what they heard in
that meeting. The FBI cannot go out and
correct the record because then they’d
be “commenting on Classified
information…”
The New York Times or the Washington Post, or CNN, etc.,
come out with an anti-Trump story based on “government
sources” which bolster the anti-Trump slant, and/or
.
42
attempts to discredit the Trump White House’s take on
events such as the bogus investigation into links between
Russia and the 2016 Election.
That very scenario has been happening time and time again
and James Comey just admitted to Congress the FBI
cannot come out and correct the record because they would
then be in violation of publicly speaking about classified
information.
The media is protected because it is spinning a lie, and
therefore NOT classified information, even as that lie
becomes fact in the minds of the media’s audience. Once
again, here are FBI Director James Comey’s words on that
very subject as spoken to Congress today:
“…It’s perfectly legal for someone
attending a classified briefing to LIE TO
THE PRESS about what they heard in
that meeting. The FBI cannot go out and
correct the record because then they’d
be “commenting on Classified
information…”
Don’t listen to anything the Establishment Media is telling
you. They are not doing the bidding of truth. Rather, they
are the willing denizens of the lie.
 Fox News Pulls Napolitano
After His Trump Wiretap Claims
By Rebecca Savransky
03/20/17 08:51 PM EDT
Fox News has reportedly pulled Andrew Napolitano from
the air indefinitely after he claimed that a British
intelligence agency wiretapped Trump Tower.
Napolitano, a Fox News analyst, is not scheduled to appear
on the network in the near future, the Los Angeles Times
reported, according to people familiar with the situation.
Last week, Napolitano made the claim that the
Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) was
spying on Trump at former President Obama's behest.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer then quoted
Napolitano's remarks while defending the president's claim
earlier this month that the former president had Trump
Tower under surveillance before the presidential election.
“Judge Andrew Napolitano made the
following statement, quote, ‘Three
intelligence sources have informed Fox
News that President Obama went outside
the chain of command,’ ” Spicer said during
a daily press briefing last week.
"'He didn’t use the [National Security
Agency]; he didn’t use the CIA. ... He used
GCHQ.' "
.
43
GCHQ rejected Napolitano's claim that it helped surveil
Trump for Obama in 2016.
“Recent allegations made by media
commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano
about GCHQ being asked to conduct ‘wire
tapping’ against the then President Elect
are nonsense,” said a spokesman for the
agency, which rarely comments publicly on
its operations.
The president last Friday praised Napolitano during a press
conference as a "very talented legal mind."
"We said nothing," Trump said when asked
about the former judge's claim. "I didn't
make an opinion on it."
"All we did was quote a certain very
talented legal mind who was the one
responsible for saying that on television,"
Trump said.
"That was a statement made by a very
talented lawyer on Fox [News]. And so you
shouldn't be talking to me, you should be
talking to Fox."
Fox News host Shepard Smith also denied Friday that his
network has information validating Napolitano's remark,
saying the network knows of
"no evidence of any kind that the now-
President of the United States was
surveilled at any time in any way."
 Newt Rips Into Comey,
Calls Today's Testimony 'Pathetic'
By The_Real_Fly
Mar 20, 2017 9:19 PM

We all knew the shills at the FBI were 'investigating'

Russian phantoms, hoping to find more nothing. If we
learned anything at all from today's morose testimony by
James Comey it is that he's unwilling to confirm
investigations were underway, or even considered, to
reveal the leakers that keep disseminating sensitive
information to the press. Bear in mind, this is a felony
punishable up to 10 years in ape raping prison, yet no one
seems the least bit interested in who was committing them.
Newt weighed in on the matter which he described as
'idiotic' -- confounded at the juxtaposition of Comey freely
admitting to investing Russian phantoms, but unwilling to
even say he might look into the leaks.
Pray tell me, why?

We can hardly conclude that Comey is a democratic shill,

considering he was instrumental in making Hillbot look
like a literal prisoner one week before the elections -- with
the announcement of his pointless investigation which he
later redacted.

What sort of game is Comey playing anyway? As far as I

can tell, he's a bull in a China shop just making a mess and
a lot of noise -- but doing nothing other than that. Lots of
accusations are flying on both ends, but nothing is ever
revealed or concluded. He's probably the most universally
hated man in America, from both sides of the aisle, yet
there he is shilling away.

How can anyone believe a word coming out of this man's

mouth?

44
 US Secret Service Laptop Thief
Reportedly Knew What He Was Looking For
© Photo: Pixabay - US
22:45 20.03.2017(Updated 02:43 21.03.2017)
Law enforcement officers are saying
that the person who stole a secret
service laptop on Thursday containing
“highly sensitive” information knew
precisely what they were looking for.
The thief was caught on surveillance video
lifting the computer from the vehicle of a
Secret Service agent, TMZ reported,
after pulling into the agent’s driveway in an
Uber Thursday around 3:00 AM local time.
The culprit has been identified as a man, though the grainy
footage makes it difficult to discern his features. He is
shown exiting his vehicle and heading straight to the
agent’s car, where he removed a backpack containing the
laptop before walking off. The computer reportedly
contained floor plans for Trump Tower and information
regarding the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
45
In a statement, the Secret Service clarified
that the agency’s laptops "contain multiple
layers of security, including full disk
encryption and are not permitted to contain
classified information."
Though some coins and a black bag were recovered later
the thief also made off with several Secret Service lapel
pins, a radio and a passport.
According to Politico, one unnamed official
said the theft lends credence to the notion
of their being a "culture of complacency
among the agents as to the gravitas of the
mission."
This incident comes days after Jonathan Tran was
apprehended by Secret Service 15 minutes after scaling a
fence and landing on the White House premises with a
backpack carrying two cans of mace.
US President Donald Trump was on the
premises when the breach occurred and
applauded the agency’s performance,
saying they did "a fantastic job" engaging
"a troubled person."
Two agents assigned to protect Trump’s eight-year-old
grandson, Donald Trump, III, are still under investigation
after taking pictures with the child while he was sleeping.
 Fix Is In: Comey Praised DNC-Hired
Cybersecurity Firm Even After Botched Report
By Lee Stranahan
20 Mar 2017
Crowdstrike, the cybersecurity company
working for the Democratic National
Committee (DNC), released a report
tying “Russian hacking” to an incident
that never happened, yet even after the
report had been debunked, FBI Director
James Comey still referred to
Crowdstrike as a “highly respected
private company” at a Senate hearing.
Executives from Crowdstrike and Director Comey are both
scheduled to testify in front of the House Intelligence
Committee set for Monday morning at 10 am.
By issuing a still-unrestricted report about an incident that
never happened and then tying it to the alleged Russian
hacks that Democrats claim tipped the elections for Pres.
Trump, the DNC-employed Crowdstrike’s credibility
deserves to be called into question, however, despite
excellent reporting by cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr,
Bloomberg’s Leonid Bershidsky, and Voice of America
reporter Oleksiy Kuzmenko, the media has ignored the
story and continued to cite Crowdstrike’s work… even
after the Ukrainian Defense Ministry issued a statement on
January 6th, 2017 refuting Crowdstrike’s claims.
Even more troubling than the media malfeasance about the
discredited Crowdstrike report, in testimony in front of the
Senate intelligence committee on January 10 – four days
after the Ukrainian DOD denied Crowdstrike’s report —
Director Comey admitted that the FBI had been denied
access to the DNC servers and praised Crowdstrike,
46
without mentioning that they worked for the DNC or that
their recent report had been debunked.
The Crowdstrike report, titled “Use of Fancy Bear
Android Malware in Tracking of Ukrainian Field
Artillery Units“, was issued by the company on December
22, 2016. It’s a slickly produced document, with a
frightening comic book-style cover and plenty of charts
and graphs. Crowdstrike’s villain in the report is Fancy
Bear, which they say is a hacking group controlled by
Russia’s GRU intelligence agency. Crowdstrike itself gave
the group the name Fancy Bear, with ‘Bear’ referring to
Russia and ‘Fancy’ referring to the song Fancy by Iggy
Izalea.
On June 15, 2016 Crowdstrike claimed that Fancy Bear
was behind the DNC hacks in an article title Bears in the
Midst: Intrusion into the Democratic National Committee.
That post came the day after the Washington Post
published an article claiming Russian government hackers
penetrated DNC and stole opposition research on Trump,
quoting Crowdstrike’s co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch,
who is scheduled to testify Monday in front of the House
Intel committee hearing. In that June WaPo article,
Alperovitch seemed unsure on details but pinned the hack
on Fancy Bear:
CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers
got in. The firm suspects they may have
targeted DNC employees with
“spearphishing” emails. These are
communications that appear legitimate —
often made to look like they came from a
colleague or someone trusted — but that
contain links or attachments that when
clicked on deploy malicious software that
enables a hacker to gain access to a
computer. “But we don’t have hard
evidence,” Alperovitch said. The two
groups did not appear to be working
together, Alperovitch said. Fancy Bear is
believed to work for the GRU, or Russia’s
military intelligence service, he said.
In light of his possible testimony Monday, it’s worth
noting Alperovitch’s statements in the June 2016
Washington Post article that there’s no “hard evidence” of
how the hack occurred and that Fancy Bear is “believed to
work” for GRU.
That June WaPo article also quoted Crowdstrike’s
President and former FBI agent Shawn Henry, who is also
scheduled to testify Monday.
“It’s the job of every foreign intelligence
service to collect intelligence against their
adversaries,” said Shawn Henry,
president of CrowdStrike, the cyber firm called in to
handle the DNC breach and a former head of the FBI’s
cyber division. He noted that it is extremely difficult for a
civilian organization to protect itself from a skilled and
determined state such as Russia.
If Henry’s statement to the Washington Post seems more
political than technical, that’s because Crowdstrike was
being utilized by their clients at the Democratic National
Committee to put out a narrative about Russian hacking to
use against the Trump campaign. As later confirmed by a
laudatory piece in Esquire magazine, starting in June 2016
the DNC used Crowdstrike executives Alperovitch and
Henry as part of an anti-Trump publicity plan related to
allegations of Russian hacking:
The DNC wanted to go public. At the
committee’s request, Alperovitch and
Henry briefed a reporter from The
Washington Post about the attack.
The Democrats’ attempts to smear Donald Trump with
allegations of Russian involvement failed to win them the
election and by December the Obama administration was
taking a number of steps to make the incoming president’s
job as difficult as possible. On December 13th, the New
York Times published a major piece pushing the narrative –
without any new definitive technical evidence – that the
Russians were behind
“a cyberespionage and information-warfare
campaign devised to disrupt the 2016
presidential election, the first such attempt
by a foreign power in American history.”
If influential media outlets like the New York Times were
completely sold on the Democrat-promote idea that the
Russian government was behind hacking operations
intended to hurt Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump,
independent technical experts were not so sure. On the
same day that the Times published its piece, cybersecurity
expert Jeffrey Carr wrote that while there was technical
evidence that the Hacker’s may have spoken Russian, that
there
“is also ZERO technical evidence to
connect those Russian-speaking hackers
47
to the GRU, FSB, SVR, or any other
Russian government department.”
Carr continued to eviscerate those claims, such as an
October statement released by the Director of National
Intelligence:
The ODNI/DHS statement’s opening
paragraph ends with their rationale for
placing blame on the Russian government:
“We believe, based on the scope and
sensitivity of these efforts, that only
Russia’s senior-most officials could have
authorized these activities.”
I have no explanation for what the author of that statement
was thinking when he or she composed it. It is, in my
opinion, ludicrous on its face. There is nothing about the
attacks against the DNC, the DCC, high profile email
accounts like Podesta’s, or even election data bases like
those in Arizona and Illinois (that the ODNI/DHS
statement specifically excluded) which preclude them from
being attacked by any individual hacker or hacker team
from anywhere in the world, on their own, and without any
government control or direction.
What could provide the link between the Russian
intelligence agency GRU and Fancy Bear, the group that
Crowdstrike claimed was behind the DNC hack? Enter the
Ukrainian story.
Crowdstrike needed to strengthen the hack’s connection to
the GRU, as Dmitri clearly stated in an interview he did
with PBS on December 22:
…this is why we wanted to produce more
evidence that raises the level of confidence
that we have, even internally, that this is
Russian intelligence agency called the
GRU.
That interview was part of the promotional campaign for
Crowdstrike’s ominous December 22nd “Use of Fancy
Bear Android Malware in Tracking of Ukrainian Field
Artillery Units” report, which claims that it provides
evidence that
“further supports CrowdStrike’s previous
assessments that FANCY BEAR is likely
affiliated with the Russian military
intelligence (GRU)”.
The Crowdstrike report opens with a few key claims about
malware that they say infected tablets, including:
• From late 2014 and through 2016, FANCY BEAR X-
Agent implant was covertly distributed on Ukrainian
 military forums within a legitimate Android application
developed by Ukrainian artillery officer Yaroslav
Sherstuk.
… “This is a hoax to scare everyone and
• Successful deployment of the FANCY BEAR malware
within this application may have facilitated
reconnaissance against Ukrainian troops. The ability of
this malware to retrieve communications and gross
locational data from an infected device makes it an
attractive way to identify the general location of
Ukrainian artillery forces and engage them.
• Open source reporting indicates that Ukrainian artillery
forces have lost over 50% of their weapons in the 2
years of conflict and over 80% of D-30 howitzers, the
highest percentage of loss of any other artillery pieces
in Ukraine’s arsenal.
In other words, Crowdstrike was making a truly shocking
claim: that the Ukrainian military had lost 80 percent of its
D-30 Howitzers due to malware installed by the Russian
hacking group FancyBear that they said is connected to the
GRU.
The Crowdstrike report provided just the connective tissue
that was needed in late December to connect the Russian
government to a shocking example of cyberespionage
affecting the real world, but it had one big problem; it
wasn’t true.
True to form, however, the establishment media simply
took Crowdstrike’s word and failed to fact-check the
report.
Within the day, major establishment media outlets
faithfully promoted Crowdstrike’s tale of Russian hacking
destroying 80 percent of Ukrainian D-30 Howitzers. In
addition to the PBS interview mentioned above, Forbes,
Newsweek, The Inquirer, Reuters, Engadget and others
were echoing Crowdstrike’s claim that this was a major
piece of new proof for the GRU’s involvement in the DNC
hacks.
However, some dissenting voices began to speak up. On
the same day that the report was released, a Bloomberg
article by Leonid Bershidsky was published criticizing the
level of confidence that Crowdstrike was placing in their
new statements. Bershidsky cites several first-hand sources
associated with the Ukrainian military who were criticizing
Crowdstrike’s report:
Yaroslav Sherstyuk, the Ukrainian military
officer who developed the application,
reacted angrily on Facebook to the
CrowdStrike report, saying he never
published the software on any public
forums and encouraging fellow Ukrainian
48
servicemen to keep using the latest version
of his app. Via Facebook Messenger, he
told me that he didn’t believe an infected
version of the app even existed.
make us go back to the old methods of
targeting fire,” he wrote. A CrowdStrike
spokesperson did not respond when I
asked if it had contacted Sherstyuk. He
said it hadn’t.
The spokesperson, Ilina Dimitrova, wrote that
“it is indisputable that the app has been
hacked with Fancy Bear malware — we
have published the indicators related to it
and they have been confirmed by others in
the cybersecurity community.”
CrowdStrike said that it found the infected app
“in limited public distribution on a Russian
language, Ukrainian military forum.”
I doubt anyone in the Ukrainian military would download
software for targeting artillery fire from a forum.
Typically, they obtain it directly from known developers
such as Sherstyuk. If I can contact him directly, so can
Ukrainian artillery officers seeking to improve their
performance in battle.
Hence, it’s hard for me to believe that this infected app —
found somewhere on the internet and likely never used by
Ukrainian soldiers — offers evidence tying the GRU to
APT28.
There was more good reporting the next day when Voice
of America (VOA) reporter Oleksiy Kuzmenko’s article
titled Skeptics Doubt Ukraine Hack, Its Link to DNC
Cyberattack was published. Like Bershidsky he referenced
the developer of the app, who had in a Facebook post
called the Crowdstrike report “delusional.” Kuzmenko also
interviewed a Ukrainian military technical advisor named
Pavlo Narozhnyy, who admitted that tablets had been sent
to the Ukraine’s armed forces, but also made a stunning
statement that directly contradicts the premise of
Crowdstrike’s report.
He told VOA that contacts in the Ukrainian military units
that used the app reported no losses of D-30 howitzers,
which contradicts large battlefield losses referenced in the
CrowdStrike report.
“I personally know hundreds of gunmen in
the war zone. None of them told me of D-
30 losses caused by hacking or any other
reason,” Narozhnyy stressed to the VOA.
Kuzmenko also reported that the equipment statistics cited
in the report had come not from the International Institute
for Strategic Studies (IISS), as Crowdstrike had claimed,
but instead from a pro-Russian propagandist’s blog:
The article is an English translation from a
post first published by Boris Rozhin, a
popular Russian blogger, who covers
Russian military operations under the
moniker “Colonel Cassad” from Russian-
annexed Crimea.
… went down the memory hole.
His posting provides a table, based on what he said was
data from the IISS reports, that shows Ukraine had 369 D-
30 howitzers in 2013 and 75 in 2016. It included links to
Rozhin said were the original IISS studies uploaded to a
Russian torrent site dedicated to pushing pirated software
and movies.
Although the source of the information listed by
CrowdStrike is not the actual website of IISS, CrowdStrike
defended its findings.
With both their sourcing and underlying claim refuted,
Crowdstrike could have at that point admitted that they
were wrong, issued a retraction, and pulled the report.
Given the size of their error and the importance of the
entire topic of alleged Russian hacking to international
affairs, a retraction would not only have been the
responsible thing to do but a necessity for anyone
concerned about presenting the truth.
Instead, Crowdstrike chose to simply ignore the heart of
the criticism and defend themselves, telling VOA in an
email that it
“is indisputable that the app has been
hacked with FANCY BEAR malware — we
have published the indicators related to it
and they have been confirmed by others in
the cybersecurity community.”
Pavlo Narozhnyy remained skeptical even of that claim
and told VOA he would like to see more proof.
The critiques by Bloomberg and VOA were ignored by the
establishment media, however, who had bigger fish to fry a
week later when the Obama administration delivered a
one-two punch on the Russian hacking story.
On December 29, the Obama White House announced
sanctions against Russia over the allegations of hacking,
ordering 35 Russian diplomats to leave the United States.
On the same day, Obama’s DHS and FBI released a joint
49
analysis report (JAR) that they thought would cement the
Russian hacking connection once and for all.
Once again, the lapdog media did its part and acted as
stenographers for the Obama administration on the
‘Russian hacking’ narrative. The New York Times declared
Obama Strikes Back at Russia for Election Hacking,
while the Washington Post trumpeted Obama
administration announces measures to punish Russia for
2016 election interference.
Criticism of the Crowdstrike report from a week earlier
Then on January 3, cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr
posted an article on Medium titled The GRU-Ukraine
Artillery Hack That May Never Have Happened. This was
another devastating critique of Crowdstrike’s report, but
like the VOA and Bloomberg articles, it was ignored by
the establishment media. Carr sums up the Crowdstrike
report by saying:
Crowdstrike’s latest report regarding Fancy
Bear contains its most dramatic and
controversial claim to date; that GRU-
written mobile malware used by Ukrainian
artillery soldiers contributed to massive
artillery losses by the Ukrainian military.
“It’s pretty high confidence that Fancy Bear
had to be in touch with the Russian
military,” Dmitri Alperovich told Forbes.
“This is exactly what the mission is of the
GRU.”
Once again, the establishment media had failed to do basic
technical vetting on the claims of Russian hacking by
Crowdstrike and were exposed by a few brave, lone voices
in the media wilderness.
However, the most devastating rebuttal of Crowdstrike’s
December 22 report came from the Ukrainian Ministry of
Defense itself.
On January 6, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry posted a
denial on their official website, stating flatly that the claim
that 80 percente of D-30 Howitzers had been destroyed by
Russian malware was false. (The following is a Google
Translate version of the Ukrainian information posted by
their defense ministry.)
In connection with the emergence in some media reports
which stated that the alleged
“80% howitzer D-30 Armed Forces of
Ukraine removed through scrapping
Russian Ukrainian hackers software
gunners,”
Land Forces Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
informs that the said information is incorrect .
According Command Missile Forces and Artillery Land
Forces of Ukraine, artillery weapons lost during the time
of ATO times smaller than the above and are not
associated with the specified cause. Currently, troops
Missile Forces and Artillery Army Forces of Ukraine fully
combat-ready, staffed and able to fulfill the missions.
Ministry of Defence of Ukraine asks journalists to publish
only verified information received from the competent
official sources. Spreading false information leads to
increased social tension in society and undermines public
confidence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
As Jeffrey Carr summed it up,
“Not only did Crowdstrike choose to quote
improbably high losses estimated by a Pro-
Russia analyst, we now have confirmation
from Ukraine’s MOD that (1) those figures
were wrong, (2) Crowdstrike’s reason for
the losses were wrong, and (3)
Crowdstrike’s spread of false information
caused harm.”
This produced more crickets from the establishment media
that had used Crowdstrike as the basis of their narrative for
months.
Worse than the obvious media malpractice that left
Crowdstrike’s claims fully debunked, the DNC-employed
group continued to be given praise by embattled FBI
Director James Comey, even after this shocking refutation
by the Ukrainians.
On January 10th, Comey testified before the Senate
Intelligence Committee and made a stunning admission:
despite “multiple requests at different
levels,” the Democratic National Committee
had denied the FBI’s requests to examine
the servers themselves. Instead, the FBI
took the word of Crowdstrike, who Comey
called a “highly respected private
company.”
It bears repeating that this complimentary assessment by
James Comey of Crowdstrike came days after the
Ukrainian military itself had challenged the basic factual
premise of their report from just weeks earlier.
Furthermore, Comey’s January 10th testimony praising
Crowdstrike – who was working for the DNC at the time,
remember – came after the DNC had told Buzzfeed on
January 4th, days before Comey testified, that the FBI had
50
never asked to examine their servers in the first place.
DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker had
said in an email that:
The DNC had several meetings with
representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division
and its Washington (DC) Field Office, the
Department of Justice’s National Security
Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it
responded to a variety of requests for
cooperation, but the FBI never requested
access to the DNC’s computer servers.
This claim by a DNC official that the FBI had never asked
for access to the servers clearly rankled some within the
Bureau because the next day The Hill reported that an
anonymous source not only contradicted the DNC’s claim,
but said that the DNC’s lack of cooperation had caused
severe problems for the investigation:
“The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC
officials the necessity of obtaining direct
access to servers and data, only to be
rebuffed until well after the initial
compromise had been mitigated,” the
official said.
“This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon
a third party for information. These actions
caused significant delays and inhibited the
FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.”
If any of this raised any suspicions for James Comey, he
failed to show it in his January 10th testimony. Instead,
Comey calmly told the Senate committee that while he
would have liked to have the information directly from the
DNC servers, that he was okay with getting the
information from the company that they employed, the
“highly respected” Crowdstrike.
As The Hill reported:
“We’d always prefer to have access hands-
on ourselves if that’s possible,” Comey
said, noting that he didn’t know why the
DNC rebuffed the FBI’s request.
But none of this behavior by the DNC, Crowdstrike, or
James Comey fit the media’s narrative that somehow
Donald Trump was connected to the Russians who had
helped to throw him the election because… something. For
the establishment, the technical details didn’t matter,
Crowdstrike’s connection to the Democrats didn’t matter,
their gross errors and misstatements didn’t matter, none of
it mattered. The media pile-on of Donald Trump would
continue after his inauguration and right through to this
day.
Now, on Monday at 10 am, FBI Director James Comey
and Crowdstrike’s Dmitri Alperovitch and Shawn Henry
are all scheduled to testify in front of the House
Intelligence Committee, and once again Republicans will
have a chance to question Comey and Crowdstrike and
finally bring some clarity to the American people.
51
The only question at this point is whether the House
Republicans will do their duty to the American people to
shed light on the story, or allow the members of the
opposition party – Democrats and the media alike – to
continue to spread disinformation.
 Donald Trump Will Resign
'Soon', Says Top Democrat Dianne Feinstein
Senior Senator On Judiciary Committee Drops Hint She Knows
More Than She Can Say 'Right Now'
Rachel Roberts
Tuesday 21 March 2017 12:20 GMT

“I can’t answer that right now,” she said

Dianne Feinstein hinted she may know more than she can
currently disclose about Donald Trump AFP

Donald Trump is going to “get himself out of office soon”,

a leading Democratic senator has claimed.

Dianne Feinstein suggested the President would quit

before he was potentially forced out of office after anti-
Trump protesters in Los Angeles demanded to know why
more wasn’t being done by Congress to remove him from
office.

“We know he is breaking the law every

day," a protester asked the 83-year-old
political veteran. "He has obvious dealings
with Russia. There’s so many things he’s
doing that are unconstitutional. How are we
going to get him out?”

Hinting she might know more than she is able to let on, Ms
Feinstein, who sits on the House Judiciary
Committee, replied:

“We have a lot of people looking into this. I

think he’s going to get himself out.”
She went on to cite several potential conflicts of interests
surrounding the Trump business empire, but she declined
to say whether she thought the President had done
anything that was worthy of impeachment.
52
Referencing recent trips to Dubai by Mr Trump’s sons,
Donald Jr and Eric, where they opened a new golf club,
she said: “
I think sending sons to another country to
make a financial deal for his company and
 then have that covered with Government
expenses, I believe those Government
expenses should not be allowed.
“We’re working on a bill that would do that
now ... We’re working on a couple of bills
that would deal with conflicts of interest.”

Ms. Feinstein is not the first to suggest the billionaire

tycoon may decide to quit the White House of his own
volition.

Left-wing film-maker and social commentator Michael

Several commentators have predicted Mr Trump will be
Moore – who predicted Mr. Trump would win the election,
impeached at some point, including Allan Litchmann,
went on to incorrectly suggest he could quit before his
dubbed the “Prediction Professor” after he correctly
inauguration.
called every US election since 1984.

Devin Nunes:
Richard Nixon is the only US President in history to have
resigned before his certain impeachment over the
"Let me be clear. We know there was not a
Watergate scandal.
wiretap on Trump Tower"
Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were also
impeached by the House of Representatives but both were
acquitted by the Senate.

53
 Cuomo Asks If Trump
Could Be 'Toxic To His Own Government'
By Jackson Richman
March 21, 2017 | 2:43 PM EDT
On CNN's New Day Tuesday, co-host Chris Cuomo
questioned if President Donald Trump will be able to
overcome attacks on his credibility and the investigations
that surround him and his team. His assertion comes in the
midst of polls placing Trump's approval rating below
40 percent nationwide, with 80 percent of support among
his fellow Republicans.
"But you have to look at what he cares
about right now," Cuomo said. "What he
cares about right now are motivating his
agenda, right? So how much do you
think these attacks on his credibility
and the stain of the investigation, do
you think there's a legit concern that it
could make him toxic to his own in
the government?"
Apparently, Cuomo thinks Trump will be doomed due
to the FBI investigations into whether the Trump campaign
colluded with Russia to hack the Democratic National
Committee through Wikileaks, and his unproven assertion
that former President Barack Obama ordered wiretapping
of Trump Tower during the 2016 election.
Before Cuomo's assumption CNN Legal Analyst
Jeffrey Toobin said,
"You know, there's a word for Donald
Trump. And that word is "President. And
when you're president, you still have a lot
of power...So, you know, I think this is
a bad -- it was a very bad day. This is a
very perilous situation for him."
54
"This is not something any one president
would want. But I think, you know,
the obituaries for the Trump Presidency
should not be written yet, by any means,"
he added.
CNN Justice Correspondent Evan Perez added that in
addition to the Trump administration impatiently awaiting
the results of both intelligence and FBI investigations
related to the Trump team, including whether the campaign
colluded with Russia, the White House has vacancies that
have yet to be filled.
"Now, as part of this, I think one of the most
important parts for the White House and
this president to do is to fill their
administration," Perez said.
"They have so many jobs that they have
not filled, that could help the President
manage all of this. They could get more
competent people in places, including
messaging. You know, there's a lot more
that they can do to try to handle this
situation."
As of February 25, Trump has yet to fill 1,987 vacancies.
Here is the March 21st exchange:
New Day
03/21/2017
6:18:10 AM – 6:23:53 AM [5 min., 43 sec.]
CHRIS CUOMO: The first hundred days. Imagine having to
be subjected, as president of the united States, to the head
of the FBI saying, you're under investigation for any
potential connections to what happened with Russian
interference. And then just to hear the thing you said, that
you were wiretapped by the president, is untrue, from the
head of the NSA and from the director of the FBI.
CAMEROTA: It was a big day.
 CUOMO: That is a tough day. What's it going to
mean? Let's bring back our panel, Evan Perez, Jeffrey
Toobin, Salena Zito, and joining us, presidential historian
Douglas Brinkley. Doug, we need you, because we haven't
really seen anything like this before. You're just a couple of
months in, and you have the sitting president, a
congressional hearing, the director of the FBI saying, yeah,
we've been looking at him since July for this Russia
stuff. And then the head of the NSA says Admiral Rogers,
yeah, the wiretapping stuff he's talking about, we have no
proof of that. The stuff he said about British intelligence,
that's laughable. How big a deal is this?
DOUGLAS BRINKLEY: It's a very large deal. Our country
has a crisis in confidence going on. And people we don't
have confidence in is the trump white house. The very fact
of the matter is yesterday, the FBI and DOJ have said
Donald Trump lied to the American people about
Barack Obama wiretapping. And not only did he call --
said Obama wiretapped, he called President Obama “bad”
or “sick.” He made an ad hominem personal attack on the
former president, which hasn't been helpful. Barack
Obama, incidentally, left office with about a 95%
approval rating with African-Americans. He's an icon in that
community and Trump going to belittle him in such way,
how does that help bring the country together? And the fact
of the matter is that there is a dark cloud hanging over
Donald Trump, over the Russian connections, that's not
going to go away. This whole spring, it might go there this
summer, so there was no trump honeymoon, in fact, it's the
opposite. He has an administration that seems to be
shrinking almost daily. He was at 37 to 9% in the
polls previous to the hearings, and I suppose now he'll be
logging in at around 33%. That means about two-thirds
of the country doesn't think you're doing a good job.
CAMEROTA: Jeffrey Toobin, you agreed that yesterday
had some bombshell revelations. How do you see moving
forward from yesterday?
JEFFREY TOOBIN: You know, there's a word for Donald
Trump. And that word is "President." And when you're
president, you still have a lot of power. Yesterday, he had a
Supreme Court nominee cruise through a first day of
testimony. Neil Gorsuch is probably going to be on the
Supreme Court in 2040. He's got a health care bill that may
yet pass the house of representatives on Thursday. So, you
know, I think this is a bad -- it was a very bad day. This is a
very perilous situation for him. But we have a system where
the President is powerful and the Republican Party is
still completely lined up behind him. You saw that in the
House hearing yesterday. So, yeah, it's definitely bad. This
is not something any one president would want. But I think,
.
55
you know, the obituaries for the Trump Presidency should
not be written yet, by any means.
CUOMO: And those same polls, Salena, show he couldn't
have much better support among Republicans. He's at 80-
some percent, the base is dug in. But you have to look at
what he cares about right now. What he cares about right
now are motivating his agenda, right? So how much do you
think these attacks on his credibility and the stain of the
investigation, do you think there's a legit concern that it
could make him toxic to his own in the government?
SALENA ZITO: Well, I mean, yes. I agree with Jeffrey, it
was a very bad day yesterday. I also agree that he has a
lot of platitudes to still to work with. Politics is all about
geography. While he has a 37% I approval rating
nationwide, if you look at numbers in that poll, it shows rural
and exurb areas, his approval rating is at 55 and
59 percentage points. He still has a lot of political capital to
work with. And I think that what you're going to see this
week is going to be a very busy week, with Gorsuch, with
the health care, and I expect to see him talk a lot, very
strongly about North Korea and just sort of
plow forward. And hopefully leave this segment, at least for
the present time, behind him.
CAMEROTA: And you have so many contacts in the intel
community. What happens now with President Trump's
relationship with the intel community and
particularly Director of the FBI, Comey, now that Comey
came out yesterday and said that the president is making
these false allegations?
EVAN PEREZ: Well, you know, this is one of the
fascinating parts of this story, is actually the fact that the
beginning of the Trump Presidency, there was a lot of focus
as to whether or not Jim Comey was going to keep his
job. And I can guarantee you that after yesterday, he gets
to keep his job. He's going to see this investigation
through. And it is probably unfortunate for the Trump
administration, not something that's going to be hurried
up. It doesn't have a timeline. There's no election
approaching immediately, so the FBI will work through this
methodically. The intelligence community will do the
same. It's going to be an irritant, a constant irritant for
the President. Now, as part of this, I think one of the most
important parts for the White House and this president to
do is to fill their administration. They have so many jobs
that they have not filled, that could help the President
manage all of this. They could get more competent people
in places, including messaging. You know, there's a lot
more that they can do to try to handle this situation.
 Arnold Schwarzenegger Terminates
Donald Trump In 40 Second Twitter Video
By Sam Haysom
March 21, 2017
The ongoing feud between Donald Trump and Arnold
Schwarzenegger doesn't look like it's going to end anytime
soon.
On Tuesday morning, everyone's favourite predator-slayer
shared a Twitter video directly addressing the president.
"Oh, Donald — the ratings are in, and you
got swamped," says Schwarzenegger in
the clip below. "Wow. Now you're in the
thirties?"
"But what do you expect? I mean when you
take away after school programs for
children and meals on wheels for the poor
people, that's not what you call 'making
America great again'. Come on!"
56
"I mean, who is advising you?"
Schwarzenegger continues. "Let me give
you some advice: go to a middle school —
the Hart Middle School, right in
Washington, six miles away from the White
House.
"I'll take you there, so you can see the
fantastic work that they're doing for these
children. Let's do it, huh?"
Schwarzenegger tagged Trump in the tweet, and posted a
link to After-School All-Stars — an organization he
founded with the aim of co-ordinating programs for low
income school children.
Obviously Schwarzenegger is trying to promote his
organisation with the tweet, but we'd be surprised if Trump
doesn't take the bait.
If there's one that the current president loves, it's a good o'l
celebrity Twitter feud.
 First Two Months In Power:
Hitler Vs. Trump
By Stansfield Smith
March 21, 2017
With the hullabaloo about Trump and fascism, it is useful
to review Hitler’s first months in power, to get a sense of a
real fascist regime.
Hitler came to power January 30, 1933, Trump on January
20, making easy a chronological comparison of their lead
ups to power and their first months in power. The
comparison shows how silly and hysterical it is to claim
Trump represents fascism.
Hitler did not take power by entering into the primaries of
a German version of the Republican Party. In complete
contrast to Trump, he built, controlled, and ran under the
banner of his own fascist party. Hitler also created an
armed thug operation, the Brownshirts, to bully
progressive organizations. The Brownshirts numbered
500,000 organized men by late 1932, five times the size of
the German army.
Four parties contended in the German elections in the
summer of 1932: the Nazis, the National Party, the Social
Democrats and the Communists all of which won millions
of votes.
During this election,
“In Prussia alone between June 1 and 20
there were 461 pitched battles in the
streets which cost 82 lives and seriously
wounded 400 men.” “In July, 38 Nazis and
30 Communists were among the 86 dead.”
On July 10, 18 were killed, and on July 17,
“when the Nazis, under police escort,
staged a march through Altona, a working
class suburb of Hamburg, 19 persons were
shot dead and 285 wounded.”[1]
A world of violence and murder between fascists and anti-
fascists, just in the space of six weeks, bearing no
similarity to the few fistfights and the shutting down of a
Trump rally in Chicago during the more than yearlong US
electoral season.
On January 30, 1933, Hitler was appointed Chancellor.
Right after, in Prussia, with two-thirds of the German
57
population, the police force was purged and Nazis replaced
police chiefs. The police were then ordered not to interfere
with the work of the Brownshirts. The February 17, 1933
Nazi police order stated:
“The activities of subversive organizations
are … to be combatted with the most
drastic methods. Communist terrorist acts
are to be proceeded against with all
severity, and weapons must be used
ruthlessly when necessary. Police officers
who in the execution of their duties use
their firearms will be supported by us
without regard for the effect of their
shots….”[2]
Little over two weeks in power, the Brownshirts had been
handed the license to bully, beat, even kill leftists and
Jews. In contrast, the two week old Trump presidency
found its first anti-Muslim executive order blocked by a
judge.
Three weeks in power, 50,000 Brownshirts were made part
of the police. They began unauthorized arrests, broke into
public building and homes and made nightly raids to seize
anti-Hitler opponents. Those seized were typically put in
newly set up “camps.”
On February 24 the Nazis took over the Communist Party
headquarters. Communist meetings were banned, their
press shut down, and their Reichstag (the German version
of the US Congress) deputies arrested. Thus, less than a
month in power, the Nazis had beheaded the militant left.
Here, hundreds of thousands had mobilized around the
country to protest Trump’s actions, unchallenged by any
sort of Trump thugs.
February 27, not a month in power, the Reichstag was
torched, which the Nazis blamed on the Communists. A
vast national witch-hunt ensued. The Nazi’s Emergency
Degree declared:
“Restrictions on personal liberty, on the
right of free expression of opinion, including
 freedom of the press; on the rights of
assembly and association; and violations of
the privacy of postal, telegraphic and
telephonic communications and warrants
for house searches, orders for
confiscations as well as restrictions on
property, are also permissible beyond the
legal limits otherwise prescribed.”[3]
Leaving aside that under Obama and before, the NSA
already had eliminated our right to privacy, in US terms
this decree would mean Trump had abolished the Bill of
Rights and instituted imprisonment without trial before he
had even been president for a month.
By the middle of March, Nazi thugs had rounded up tens
of thousands of political opponents, liberals, Communists
and Social Democrats, put them in camps, tortured them,
and in many cases killed them. This even included
outspoken religious leaders. In Prussia alone, 25,000
Communist, Social Democrat and liberal leaders were
arrested and sent to Nazi camps.
Brownshirt thugs took over town halls, government
offices, newspapers, trade union offices, businesses,
department stores, banks, and courts, removing
“unreliable” officials.
Here in the US, during the same time period, another judge
blocked Trump’s revised anti-Muslim travel ban.
On March 21, Hitler was given a decree to arrest anyone
criticizing the Nazi party, to be tried in military style
courts with no jury and often with no right to defense.
On March 23, still before two months in power — as long
as Trump has been President — the German Parliament
approved the Enabling Act, allowing Hitler to enact laws
by decree.
On April 7 all Jews were dismissed from civil service jobs.
On May 2, after the Nazis had cynically declared May Day
a national holiday, all the trade union offices were
occupied, with their property and funds confiscated, and
trade union leaders arrested and beaten.
By June 1933, there were 2 million Brownshirts, twenty
times the size of the German army, and these
“brown-shirted gangs roamed the streets,
arresting and beating up and sometimes
murdering whomever they pleased while
the police looked on without lifting a
nightstick…. Judges were intimidated; they
were afraid for their lives if they convicted
58
and sentenced a storm-trooper even for
cold-blooded murder.” [4]
July 14 all other political parties were prohibited, and the
fascists could confiscate the property of any organization it
considered anti-Nazi and could summarily revoke
anyone’s citizenship.
That was fascism. Here, a great number of liberal-leftists
call Trump a new Hitler, some even claiming that we live
under a fascist regime. Yet Trump does not possess his
own party, nor an armed fascist militia obedient to him, let
alone one of hundreds of thousands. Trump has not thrown
out the Bill of Rights, wiped out the AFL-CIO, sent his
political opponents to concentration camps. He can’t even
shut down Saturday Night Live. Trump is a billionaire
racist, sexist war-monger out to salvage the US corporate
empire, nothing more, nothing less.
What lies behind this hysteria about Trump fascism?
In almost every presidential election going back
generations, liberal-left Democratic Party supporters label
the Republican candidate with the political swearword
“fascist.” Now it is more shrill. As the Democratic
presidential candidates become more and more openly
corporate stooges these liberal-left “lesser evil” voters
must resort to painting the Republican in extreme terms to
win support for their own candidate. We should just be
very scared, vote Democrat, or we are doomed.
Leftists recognize corporate America owns the two parties,
yet many still vote Democrat. Every four years, we must
first defeat the so-called fascist, then build our movement.
So is the story we are told. This strategy traps us in the
Democratic Party. It has worked effectively for
generations. Not only does it reinforce our domination by
corporate America, but it seriously miseducates people
about fascism.
Needless to say, so long as corporate America has the
liberal-left tied to their two party system, they have no
need for fascism. They need fascism only when their
customary method of rule breaks down, and they face a
very direct threat of losing control to revolutionary forces.
The historic function of fascism is to smash the radicalized
working class and its allies, destroy their organizations,
and shut down political liberties when the corporate rulers
find themselves unable to govern through their charade of
democracy. No such problem here.
We do need to fight Trump, just as we would have with
Clinton, and should have with Obama. But it miseducates
people to paint Trump as qualitatively different. They all
rule for corporate America, all have more or less the same
program of controlling the 99% and making us pay for the
decline of their system.
Notes.
[1] William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 165
[2] Jeremy Noakes and Geoffrey Pridham, Nazism 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader Vol. 1: The Rise to Power, no.87
[3] Jeremy Noakes and Geoffrey Pridham, Nazism 1919-1945: A Documentary Reader Vol. 1: The Rise to Power, no.95
[4] William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 203
.

59
 [Either written by a “shill” or an Idiot!]

“There Is No American Deep State…

It Just Looks Like There Is”
By Kit
Published On March 21, 2017

Last week the New Yorker, and yesterday Salon magazine, are very…interesting. Both are, perhaps, classic cases
published editorials arguing against the very existence of of protesting too much.
an “American Deep State”. The arguments presented

Well, I don’t know about you guys, but I’m convinced.
This article, appearing in the New Yorker on Sunday, sets
out to tell its readers that there is no such thing as an
American “deep state”, repeatedly rubbishing the very idea
whilst – at the same time – making a compelling case for
the exact opposite.
I shall relate it to you in bullet points, for the sake of
brevity:
 In 1970 junior naval officer Bob Woodward, a Yale
graduate and member of the Book and Snake secret
society, goes to the White House Situation room. At
night.

To start off the author, David Remnick, relates a very  Whilst there, he meets a high-up at the FBI named
cheery sounding story about a young man’s transformative Mark Felt, an intelligence veteran and long-time loyalist
journey from junior naval officer to hard-hitting journalist. to J. Edgar Hoover.
60
  For reasons unknown the two men discuss the career
prospects of young Mr Woodward. Mr Felt gives
Woodward advice about pursuing “only employment
that interests him”.
 Later that year Woodward leaves the navy, and applies
for a job at the Washington Post. He doesn’t get it,
thanks to a complete lack of any journalistic
experience. He spends a year working at a minor local
paper instead, before being hired by the WaPo in 1971.
 Throughout this time Woodward and his FBI friend are
in constant contact, Woodward thinking of Felt as a
“career counsellor”.
 Felt confides in Woodward that he sees the Nixon
administration as “corrupt, paranoid, and trying to
infringe on the independence of the Bureau”.
 In 1973 Felt, under the alias “Deep Throat”, leaks
Woodward information on the Watergate break-in, and
– by proxy – brings down the Nixon administration.
How does that story read to you? There are unquestionably
overtones of Operation Mockingbird, right?
Well, not according to Remnick. He tells us the meeting
was accidental, the friendship natural, the career advice
sincere and the leak opportunistic. He asks the rhetorical
question:
Was Deep Throat part of the Deep State?”
As if the only logical answer is “no, of course not”, when
in truth any answer other than “Yes, almost certainly”
shows a level of willful blindness or chronic naivety that
probably merits medication. We are expected to believe
that a young naval officer, with no previous interest or
experience in journalism, takes career advice from a senior
FBI agent after one (accidental) meeting, leaves the navy,
becomes a reporter, and ultimately acts as a key cog in
what amounted to a “soft coup” in the United States. That
is patently absurd.
As I said before, what is presented as a case against the
existence of an American Deep State, makes a very strong
argument for both its existence, and its power.
Next, Remnick provides us with a little history on “Deep
States”:
“Deep State” comes from the Turkish derin
devlet, a clandestine network, including military
and intelligence officers, along with civilian allies,
whose mission was to protect the secular order
established, in 1923, by the father figure of post-
Ottoman Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. It was
behind at least four coups, and it surveilled and
murdered reporters, dissidents, Communists,
61
Kurds, and Islamists. The Deep State takes a
similar form in Pakistan, with its powerful
intelligence service, the I.S.I., and in Egypt,
where the military establishment is tied to some
of the largest business interests in the country.
You see, he’s not arguing that Deep State power structures
don’t exist – he willingly admits that they do – it’s just that
they don’t have them in America. His argument for this is
simple…or at least, it probably would be if he were to
make one. What he actually DOES is simply describe how
deep states work in other countries, and then leave an
ellipsis that’s meant to convey “and of course none of that
is true in the USA”, when in fact – again – it does the exact
opposite.
What he does is supply us a short checklist of qualities
which define a “Deep State”:
1. Clandestine and secretive
2. Involving military and intelligence officers
3. civilians allies
4. Protecting the status quo
5. coups
6. surveillance
7. assassinations
8. ties to big business interests
Does that not sound the least bit familiar to anyone else?
The first two are givens that need no explanation.
Civilian allies? Well, I would imagine that a planted
and/or manipulated journalist would make a good “civilian
ally”. Such a person could be used to “leak” information
that brings down enemies of the Deep State. Or, indeed, to
write clumsy editorials about how the Deep State doesn’t
even exist.
Protecting the status quo.
The protection of “secular order” in Turkey could easily be
translated as the protection of the neo-liberal order in the
United States. It is essentially a program of protecting
those in power from any kind of change. In fact, the way
Remnick writes about this mission, it’s almost as if he is
arguing that the noble ends justify ignoble means. That’s
an interesting subtext to include.
Coups, surveillance and assassinations.
Turkey’s derin devlet was behind only four coups? That’s
a busy morning at the CIA. Surveillance? Well, it has
suited the MSM of late to pretend they didn’t tell us all
about the level of surveillance we operate under every
single day. But we all know. Assassinations? Yes, there
are a few famous examples, and a few not so famous.
Blowing the President’s head off in the middle of a public
square probably counts.
Ties to big business?
Well Eisenhower admitted that, and warned against it,
sixty years ago. Soros Open Society Foundation frequently
collaborates with the State Department, as does the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation. The Pentagon’s ties to
Boeing and Lockheed Martin are well documented, as is
Dick Cheney’s involvement with Halliburton. The list is
endless.
As an eight-point definition of a “deep state”, America’s
power structures certainly seem to stand as a perfect
template.
Now we come to the good part. The part where Remnick is
forced to include a lot of information he’d rather pretend
wasn’t true, because – if he didn’t mention it – he would
open himself up awful lot of correction and/or
ridicule…even more so than he does already.
One does not have to be ignorant of the C.I.A.’s abuses—
or of history, in general—to reject the idea of an American
Deep State. Previous Presidents have felt resistance, or
worse, from elements in the federal bureaucracies:
Eisenhower warned of the “military-industrial complex”;
L.B.J. felt pressure from the Pentagon; Obama’s Syria
policy was rebuked by the State Department through its
“dissent channel”.
You see, there undoubtedly are powerful secretive
intelligence organisations with ties to big business and the
military. Yes, you can point to the uncontested public
record of literally dozens of crimes – both international
and domestic – carried out by these agencies (calling coups
and wars “abuses”, is craven apologist language). Yes, it’s
perfectly true that many Presidents (from both parties)
have faced domestic opposition from these agencies, to
their eventual ruin in some cases. Yes, some of those
President’s – including Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy
– have publicly warned against the influence of these
unelected actors and agencies…but – BUT – that doesn’t
mean America has a “Deep State. Because:
…to use the term as it is used in Turkey,
Pakistan, or Egypt is to assume that all
these institutions constitute part of a
subterranean web of common and
nefarious purpose.
Which begs the response:
“And?”
62
For one thing, David, it’s not to assume that, it’s to reason
that…based on evidence (including all the evidence you
helpfully supply in your article). It was your self-appointed
task to provide a counter-argument to this reading of the
evidence….and you have failed. Miserably.
However, David Remnick is not alone in his ineffectual
assertion that
“there is no deep state, it just looks like there is”.
Further arguments that there are no “secretive military and
intelligence collectives” pushing their agendas through
“civilian allies”, was published in Salon. It is an editorial
on the exact same subject, published on the exact same
day, with almost the exact same title.
The author, Ryan Bohl, argues (in apparent seriousness)
that deep states are definitely real, that Egypt has one, but
that American can’t have one…because America and
Egypt are different.
His assertions that America “doesn’t have a deep state”,
would probably hold more water if he displayed any kind
of understanding of what the term actually means. Instead
he has, in truly Orwellian fashion, redefined the phrase in
order to present a counter-argument…and even then barely
manages to scrape one together.
…a major flaw of the American Deep State
theory is that a deep state needs a weak state to
survive
I’m not sure where Bohl got this statement from. I suspect
he made it up. It means nothing, and is never backed up by
any kind of sources, analysis or evidence. It is a baseless
factoid, invented to allow the author to use the rhetorical
trick of shifting the argument. Having “established” that a
Deep State cannot exist within a strong nation, the author
no longer has to disprove the deep states existence…but
can now focus on proving that America is strong.
Unfortunately for him, he is equally bad at this.
What does a weak state look like? For one, it’s horrifically
ineffective: not a
“I can’t believe they made me wait 45
minutes for my driver’s license when there
were only six people in front of me”
nuisance, but “I can’t believe I had to spend
2 years, $4000, and know an official at the
Ministry of Transport via a relative to get
my license”-style corruption. It is a state
that fails to provide water, electricity,
schools, and roads on a vast scale every
single day.
The logic is obviously terrible. His argument that a deep
state can only exist within weak and corrupt infrastructure?
A completely unjustifiable a priori assumption. One that is
never established with any kind of evidence.
…but let’s suppose, for the sake of argument, that he’s
right – doesn’t America have a failing infrastructure?
Doesn’t America house 20% of all the incarcerated people
on the planet? Aren’t many of these people held in corrupt
private prisons? Aren’t post-industrial cities falling apart?
Didn’t Detroit have no water for weeks at a time? And
didn’t Flint have toxic water? Aren’t there roads and
bridges crumbling? Didn’t New Orleans flood because of
neglected levees? Aren’t their dams crumbling to dust?
Have not Salon themselves published two articles in the
last month about the collapsing American infrastructure?
If a state is labeled “weak” on the quality of its
infrastructure and development, then any objective
observer would have to accept that America is weak. In
many cases it is practically a third world nation. But Bohl
has a response:
It can seem like the United States has a weak state when
you compile the many anecdotes of bad roads, bridges,
schools, water supplies, and other creaky public services.
But this is misleading: just because you know a lot of
stories about a topic doesn’t mean you know anything
about its societal scale.
You see, much like the deep state, it might seem like
America is falling apart…but it’s not really. Just look at
the statistics he cites. Of course, these statistics are
“indexes”, with a secret formula entirely invented by
America-based NGOs who are almost certainly part of the
(entirely fictional) American deep state.
There is also yet another critical argument against an
America deep state: the regular transfer of power.
Another flawed argument. The very theory he is arguing
against is that the elected officials possess very little power
at all, and, as such, power is never transferred. Rather, the
puppet is replaced.
What frustrates Trump and his allies is not a conspiracy of
a CIA/ State Department /journalists/ Democrats/ Obama/
Pentagon cabal, agenda-driven to impose some secret
world order upon the United States. Rather, they are
encountering the hard edges of America’s geopolitical
interests.
You see, it’s not there is a deep state with an agenda, it’s
just that America has concrete, innate “interests” that
cannot be threatened by elected officials without
encountering massive resistance from the agencies whose
job it is to protect these interests.
63
…it is not in America’s interests to align with Russia any
more than it has to, especially under the Putin government.
So long as Russia has an independent foreign policy, it will
be a threat to both NATO and the American-led world
order; only bringing its foreign policy into the American-
led alliance system will end that condition.
It is counter to the unquestioned and never-changing
“interests” of the USA to have friendly relations with
Russia, so naturally if the elected representatives of the
people try to improve those relations, then the CIA/State
Dept./FBI/the media and other unelected bodies will work
together in opposing those plans.
This does not mean America has a deep state.
America having geo-political interests that extend beyond
the power of the people’s elected officials is NOT
evidence of a “deep state”…because? Well…
As the deep state accusations grow, it would behoove
some to visit Egypt, stay a while, and try to get a driver’s
license. That is what a place with a deep state truly feels
like.
…have you ever tried getting a driver’s
license in Cairo?
*
So two…
…wait, did I say two? I meant three four
five six seven.
Seven non-members of the non-deep state are so enraged
by the idea that people might think the totally fake
American deep state might be real, that they accidentally
publish seemingly coordinated attacks on the very idea.
Under very similar titles. All within the same few days.
Citing the same “counter examples” of Egypt and Turkey.
All acting with symmetrical umbrage.
That’s almost as unlikely as bumping into a senior FBI
agent in the White House by chance, taking his off-hand
advice about a career change and then accidentally
breaking the story that results in the FBI’s removal of a
President they perceived as a threat to their influence,
when you think about it.
Nevermind. I’m just paranoid. America doesn’t have a
deep state.
It just sometimes really looks like it does.
 YouTuber Affirms F.B.I. Collusion
With Dems At Intelligence Hearing
YouTuber Claims Monday’s Opening Exchange Between
F.B.I. Dir. Comey And Rep. Schiff Was Scripted
By Staff Writer -
03.21.2017 @1:16 PM EDT
WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) — Ranking Member of
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and F.B.I. Director James
Comey colluded during the intelligence hearing on Capitol
Hill Monday, according to an online report.
“Watch for yourselves as the Congress and
F.B.I. attempt to fool the American public,”
a voice on the “Ron Johnson” YouTube
channel (presumably Ron Johnson himself)
said before playing several outtakes from
Monday’s hearing.
“The Jim Comey con begins right away
with the opening statements. Pay attention
to the manner in which he reads the words
he is about to say,” Johnson said.
64
In his opening remarks, not only does
Comey confirm an “ongoing investigation
into the Trump Administration” as pointed
out by Johnson, but both Comey and Rep.
Schiff appear to be reading from a “script”
during parts of the hearing, Johnston
reported.
The scripting appears to be evident when Rep. Schiff
asked if it were true that Trump Tower was ever
“wiretapped” and Comey could be seen and heard
responding to the question in what appeared to be a
predetermined manner.
“This proves that beyond a doubt that the
F.B.I. was colluding with Democrats. That
Comey and Schiff got together to plan out
this entire exchange,” Johnson said.
“What you are seeing here is a silent coup
— an act of subversion to overthrow the
President of the United States.”
Johnson maintains that the entire Russian investigation
was aimed at covering up what was actually in the Podesta
emails and questions who will actually hold the F.B.I.
accountable.
 The House Intelligence Committee:
Evidence Not Required
By Eric Sommer
March 21, 2017
A series of harsh accusations against Russia was voiced by
members of the U.S. Congressional Intelligence committee
during a widely-reported hearing a few days ago. All of
the accusations assumed – as proven fact – that Russia had
manipulated the U.S. presidential election to subvert
American democracy.
Adam Schiff, the ranking Democratic party member of the
committee, led off with statements such as
“a foreign adversarial power intervened in
an effort to weaken our democracy and to
influence the outcome for one candidate
and against the other.”
He voiced no doubt as to whether this was true, but rather
asked,
“whether the Russians had the help of US
citizens, including people associated with
the Trump campaign.”
Remarkably, neither Schiff’s diatribe nor any of the other
accusations was accompanied by evidence of any kind,
accept for quotes from a previously discredited 25 page
report.
It should not require legal training to note that serious
allegations against the President of the United States, and
against an important foreign leader, require evidence.
Common sense should be sufficient.
65
However, Adam Schiff, the lead speaker in the anti-
Russian diatribes in the hearing, is a trained lawyer and
former government prosecutor. Presumably he, and other
trained lawyers on the Congressional committee are
especially able, due to their vocational backgrounds, and
law school training, to detect gaps in evidence or the
complete absence of evidence.
The fact that trained lawyers did not request evidence for
exceedingly serious allegations against the U.S. President
and a foreign leader, and did not note its absence, did not
happen by chance; it did not slip their minds. They
consciously suppressed the issue of evidence – because
none was available – out of a desire to deceive the
American people into regarding Russia as their enemy.
With U.S.-led NATO military forces massed on Russia’s
borders, the show in the Congressional intelligence
committee had one purpose: To use a concocted story to
bamboozle the American people into accepting that Russia
is somehow their enemy, and that further aggressive moves
which could easily lead to war or even nuclear war, are in
order.
The committee members who put on this show are – and I
emphasize – political criminal seeking to prepare the
American people for yet another foreign war of
aggression. They are enemies of the American people and
of the whole world.
 The Trump Sellout –
Step By Step To Total Collapse
One Down 321,999 To Go
By Jim Kirwan
3-21-2017
Billionaire banker David Rockefeller dies aged 101
https://www.rt.com/usa/381433-banker-david-rockefeller-
dies/
With the first of these global-outlaws now finally dead, the
entire panoply of treasonous obscenities has altered the
mix of the blatant enemies of America, at the top of their
org-chart: Instead of just The Clinton's the Bushes and the
Obama clan, we can now add the entire Swamp, lead by
the Trump Clan if the public is to get a grasp on the scale
of what we've always been up against.
Here's the core of their legacy that
began with a the original Snake Oil
Salesman
Anonymous: US Citizens, This Is What
They Don't Want You To Know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko3KZedco6k&fea
ture=youtu.be
One Hour 10min 39 sec VIDEO
When you listen carefully to who exactly
has been brought into the government
officially, it is impossible not to
understand just how totally the United
States has already been captured.
TRUMP IS THE SWAMP:
.
66
Trump's Jewish Elite MAFIA and The 5 Dancing
Israelis (2017)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcd-yvudYSg
Had the public known about the more
than 70 major banks that Trump is over
the top with: That information could
have been easily seen in his taxes, but
none of that was ever revealed to the
public.
Because of his colossal business
failures, the only way out from under
Trumps debts, was to sell-out his family
and himself to Israel. With this in mind
it's clear why Trump has done what he
continues to do against the people of
the United States and for the Criminal
State of Israel. Trump is a traitor not a
patriot.
24min 03sec. VIDEO
"Trump was chosen by FREEMASONS
ILLUMINATI & JEWS ZIONISTS Has their
third option to deceive people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ccwWh39P2E
This video above is about the direct
influence of the Council on Foreign
Relations, The Rockefeller's and the UN.
We are very near the end of this chapter
in human history, because we are
clearly racing backward to the Seventh
century,while we continue to deny
everything that originally led us from
that barbaric point all the way to the so-
called Twenty-first Century.
kirwanstudios@outlook.com
 Trump V. Televised Congressional Hysteria
By Stephen Lendman
3-21-2017
Americans are ill-governed and ill-served by officials at all
levels of government - federal, state and local.
On Monday, clear evidence showed it. Disgraceful witch-
hunt McCarthyism was on display for viewers tuning in to
see.
Hysterical House Select Committee on Intelligence
members disgraced themselves during tediously long
testimony by FBI Director James Comey and NSA head
Michael Rogers.
Committee members obsessed over nonexistent Trump ties
to Russia, his charges about Obama wiretapping him,
nonexistent Moscow US election hacking, Putin bashing,
and security leaks.
Comey acknowledged an ongoing classified investigation
into alleged Russian interference in America’s presidential
election, saying:
“I have been authorized by the Department
of Justice to confirm that the FBI as part of
our counterintelligence mission is
investigating the Russian government’s
efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential
election.”
“And that includes investigating the nature
of any links between individuals associated
with the Trump campaign and the Russian
government, and whether there was any
coordination between the campaign and
Russia’s efforts.”
“As with any counterintelligence
investigation, this will also include an
assessment of whether any crimes were
committed.”
He offered no further elaboration despite hours of
badgering by committee members to explain more.
The proceedings amounted to orchestrated McCarthyism,
infamous witch-hunt hysteria, a disgusting display.
Russia was demonized for nonexistent US election
hacking. Comey stopped short of suggesting collusion
.
67
between Trump’s campaign and Moscow - because of an
ongoing investigation he’s not at liberty to discuss.
After months of bashing Russia and Trump, no evidence
surfaced of collusion between him, his campaign and
Moscow - or proof of Russian US election hacking. None
exists, yet baseless accusations persist.
Trump addressed Monday’s proceedings via multiple
tweets, saying:
“James Clapper and others stated that
there is no evidence Potus colluded with
Russia. This story is FAKE NEWS and
everyone knows it!”
“The Democrats made up and pushed the
Russian story as an excuse for running a
terrible campaign. Big advantage in
Electoral College & lost!”
“The real story that Congress, the FBI and
all others should be looking into is the
leaking of Classified information. Must find
leaker now!”
“What about all of the contact with the
Clinton campaign and the Russians? Also,
is it true that the DNC would not let the FBI
in to look?”
Last fall Putin asked “is America a banana republic?”
Televised Monday proceedings provided more evidence of
a politically corrupt system too debauched to fix.
Of greater concern is creating pretexts for war on Russia.
House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R.
CA) claimed nonexistent
“pressing threats posed by the Russian
autocrat (sic)” Putin, urging “stronger action
against Russian belligerence.”
Stoking conflict between the world’s top nuclear powers is
madness. Is this where things are heading?
Will neocons infesting Washington risk nuclear
armageddon to satisfy their lust for unchallenged power?
 Trump Vs. Fox News On Wiretapping
By Cliff Kincaid - Editor Of The Aimreport.
March 21, 2017
President Donald Trump is usually a fan of Fox News, but
his opinion may now be changing. Fox News has been
caught misrepresenting its own interview with Rep. Devin
Nunes (R-CA) on the subject of alleged wiretapping of
President Trump, in order to make Trump look bad. The
cable channel also threw one of its own commentators,
Judge Andrew Napolitano, under the bus for highlighting a
possible British role in gathering intelligence on Trump
and his associates.
After having Nunes on the network’s “Fox News Sunday”
show, Fox News claimed that he said
“that phones at President Donald Trump’s
campaign headquarters in midtown
Manhattan were never tapped during last
year’s election campaign, contrary to
Trump’s earlier, unsubstantiated assertion.”
But if you listen to the video clip or read the transcript, that
is not what Nunes really said.
Nunes actually said,
“…the President doesn’t go and physically
wiretap something. So if you take the
President literally, it didn’t happen.” But
Trump has referred to “wiretap” in quotes,
to refer to surveillance. Nunes went on, “I
think the concern that we have is that are—
were there any other surveillance activities
that were used unmasking the names”
(emphasis added).
Unmasking refers to acquiring the name of a U.S. citizen
in a surveillance report, even though that citizen’s personal
68
privacy is supposed to be protected under U.S. law because
he/she was not the target of the surveillance that captured
the conversation. Trump press secretary Sean Spicer said
on Monday,
“Before President Obama left office,
Michael Flynn was unmasked and then
illegally his identity was leaked out to
media outlets, despite the fact that, as NSA
Director [Mike] Rogers said, that
unmasking and revealing individuals
endangers ‘national security.’ Not only was
General Flynn’s identity made available,
Director [James] Comey refused to answer
the question of whether or not he’d actually
briefed President Obama on his phone
calls and activities.”
Nunes explained,
“…the one crime we know that’s been
committed is that one, the leaking of
someone’s name through the FISA system.
That is—that is a crime that’s been
committed.”
At Monday’s hearing, Nunes repeated in his prepared
opening statement,
“…it’s still possible that other surveillance
activities were used against President
Trump and his associates.”
“Other surveillance activities”
The media highlighted FBI Director James B. Comey’s
statement at Monday’s hearing that the FBI and the Justice
Department had “no information that supports” President
Trump’s tweets about wiretapping.
But where could these “other surveillance activities” have
originated? We know that a former British intelligence
agent was involved in gathering “intelligence” against
Trump in the form of the fake “Trump Dossier,” and was
paid by donors associated with the Hillary Clinton
campaign. Parts of that “dossier” were passed on to Trump
by the U.S. intelligence community.
As we note in our special report,
“A Watergate-style Threat to the
Democratic Process,” it is well-known that
the British NSA, known as GCHQ or
Government Communications
Headquarters, collaborates with the NSA.
In fact, a declassified document on the
NSA’s own website confirms NSA/GCHQ
“collaboration” dating back decades. Fox
News senior judicial analyst and
commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano
said his sources confirm there was such an
arrangement in the matter of the
“wiretapping” of Trump and/or his
associates.
Fox News immediately threw Napolitano under the bus.
“Fox News cannot confirm Judge
Napolitano’s commentary,” Fox News
anchor Shepard Smith said on-air. “Fox
News knows of no evidence of any kind
that the now-President of the United States
was surveilled at any time, any way.”
The phrase, “knows of no evidence,” does
not suggest any independent investigation
of his information.
One of Napolitano’s sources, former CIA operative Larry
Johnson, came forward to say,
“I reached out to friends in the intel
community and asked them about the
possibility that a back channel was used to
get the Brits to collect on Trump
associates. My sources said, ‘absolutely.’ I
later confirmed this via a cutout with a
person who is a Senior Intelligence Service
executive in the CIA.”
In the face of this evidence of collaboration, NSA Director
Mike Rogers tried to insist at Monday’s hearing that the
NSA never asked the British to conduct surveillance of
Trump. So why did the intelligence community accept and
circulate the Trump dossier?
In a letter to Comey, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA)
noted that not only was the former British intelligence
agent Christoper Steele
“creating these memos as part of work for
an opposition research firm connected to
Hillary Clinton,”
but that The Washington Post had reported that the FBI
had reached an agreement a few weeks before the 2016
69
presidential election “to pay the author of the
unsubstantiated dossier alleging a conspiracy between
President Trump and the Russians, Christopher Steele, to
continue investigating Mr. Trump” (emphasis added).
Grassley said,
“The idea that the FBI and associates of
the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele
to investigate the Republican nominee for
President in the run-up to the election
raises further questions about the FBI’s
independence from politics, as well as the
Obama administration’s use of law
enforcement and intelligence agencies for
political ends.”
At the House Intelligence Committee hearing on Monday,
Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN) was still quoting from the
discredited Trump dossier.
Although Comey confirmed to the House Intelligence
Committee that the investigation into the Trump
campaign’s alleged relationship with Russian officials
continues, there was no firm commitment to get to the
bottom of the source (or sources) of the leaks to the media
that are designed to damage the Trump administration.
Nunes said his committee wanted to pursue the matter,
saying,
“Numerous current and former officials
have leaked purportedly classified
information in connection to these
questions. We aim to determine who has
leaked or facilitated leaks of classified
information so that these individuals can be
brought to justice.”
As we argued in our column, “Investigate and Prosecute
the Press,” there is a procedure to get to the bottom of at
least one of these leaks. That is, to subpoena Washington
Post columnist David Ignatius, the recipient of the illegal
leak of the classified information naming or “unmasking”
Michael T. Flynn.
Here’s what Ignatius, a known mouthpiece for the CIA,
reported on January 12:
“According to a senior U.S. government
official, Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador
Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29,
the day the Obama administration
announced the expulsion of 35 Russian
officials as well as other measures in
retaliation for the hacking.”
Subsequently, the Post revealed that, in regard to the Flynn
matter, “Nine current and former officials, who were in
senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the
calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss
intelligence matters.”
All of this leaking is illegal, a violation of the Espionage
Act
All of this leaking is illegal, a violation of the Espionage
Act. It is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
Jeff Bezos, the owner of The Washington Post, has a
financial relationship with the CIA and the NSA through
the provision of computer cloud capabilities.
On “Fox News Sunday,” Nunes said that
“still remaining out there is the unmasking
of names and the leaking of names…we
have a lot of surveillance activities in this
country and I think the concern that the
Trump administration has is, you know,
were they actually using surveillance
activities to know what they were up to,
because we know that that happened with
General Flynn. We know that his name was
70
unmasked and we know that it was leaked
out to the press.”
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was unable to get exact figures
from Comey or Rogers on the number of people at these
agencies able to “unmask”—and therefore leak—a name.
Such a number is absolutely vital in any identification of
the leakers.
Comey did admit that the heads of the intelligence
agencies and various Obama White House officials could
have acquired access to unmasked names. But as Spicer
noted at the White House press briefing, Comey would not
talk about any discussions he may have had with President
Obama on the matter.
It looks increasingly like any serious investigation of the
illegal surveillance and leaking will have to be led and
conducted by Rep. Nunes. But in going forward, it appears
that the Fox News Channel has decided not to pursue the
line of inquiry already opened up by one of its own
commentators, Judge Napolitano.
Predictably, there are now demands that Fox News fire its
senior judicial analyst for offering his own informed
opinion based on the facts and his own sources of
information.
 RT Editor-In-Chief Says US Congress'
Pursuit Of Russia-Trump Scandal Topic Funny
© AP Photo/ Dmitri Lovetsky - US
00:24 21.03.2017
RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan
on Monday compared US House of
Representatives intelligence committee
hearings on President Donald Trump's
alleged ties with Russia to spy movies
from the 1970s.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Earlier in the day, the US House
Select Committee on Intelligence heard Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey's testimony
on US intelligence community allegations of US President
Donald Trump's ties to Russia as well as Russia's alleged
attempts to interfere in November's presidential election
by way of organizing compromising leaks to the media.
71
"US intelligence committee hearings are
like a spy movie from the 1970s, naive,
funny, but it's still interesting to see the
ending," Simonyan said in a statement.
During the hearing, Comey admitted to an ongoing FBI
probe into Russia's alleged meddling in 2016 US
presidential election but said there was no evidence that it
impacted the election outcome in any way. The probe
includes following any alleged links between figures active
in Trump's election campaign and the Russian government
and therefore any mutual coordination, according
to Comey.
Trump responded to the hearing by taking to Twitter and
repeating his ridicule of the Russia connection story as
"fake news" peddled by the Democrats.
Russian officials have also repeatedly denied the
allegations of into meddling in US election, calling them
absurd and created to deflect public opinion from revealed
instances of corruption and other pressing domestic
concerns.
 Lying Machine
NYT Calls Trump A Liar
By Stephen Lendman
3-21-2017
In hurling pejoratives around like manhole covers against
targeted nations, groups and individuals, The Times
notoriously lies - especially in vilifying Russia and Trump,
its two favorite targets.
All politicians lie. It goes with the territory - not according
to The NYT, outrageously claiming
“George W. Bush didn’t lie when he said
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and
Obama didn’t lie when he said people who
liked their current health insurance could
keep it. They made careless statements
that proved false.”
Talk about deplorable lying. Obamacare was designed to
deny choice to millions at unaffordable prices.
In the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war, The Times was the lead
instrument of US propaganda, flagrantly breaching
journalistic ethics, featuring daily fake news reports, its
longstanding practice.
It substituted willful misinformation for hard truths, a daily
drumbeat, supporting naked aggression against a
nonbelligerent country based entirely on Big Lies.
In August 1995, Saddam’s son-in-law, Hussein Kamel,
defected to the West. In debriefings, he explained
“(a)ll weapons - biological, chemical,
missile and nuclear - were
destroyed…Nothing remained.”
At the time, the NYT and other US media reported it.
CNN’s Brent Sadler asked Kamel:
“Can you state here and now - does Iraq
still to this day hold weapons of mass
destruction?”
Kamel responded
“(n)o. Iraq does not possess any weapons
of mass destruction. I am being completely
honest about this.”
The Times and other media scoundrels explained none of
this in the run-up to US naked aggression on a
nonbelligerent country threatening no others.
72
The rest is history. The cradle of civilization was raped and
destroyed. Endless violence, chaos and human deprivation
replaced peace and stability.
War on Libya, Syria and Yemen followed, more US
aggression likely planned.
The Clintons, Bush/Cheney and Obama are serial liars.
Trump is a garden variety one like other politicians.
Lying machine NYT claims
“(h)e lies in ways that no American
politician ever has before.”
It cited examples more fiction than factual.
NYT: “Trump sets out to deceive people.”
Fact:
No more than Democrat and Republican
party leaders, along with virtually all other
congressional members - notably Bernie
Sanders, a longstanding con man, guilty of
talking out of both sides of his mouth,
willfully deceiving supporters.
The Times:
“Russia’s interference in the 2016
presidential campaign was an attack on the
United States.”
“It’s the kind of national security matter that
a president and members of Congress
swear to treat with utmost seriousness
when they take the oath of office. Yet now
it has become the subject of an escalating
series of lies by the president and the
people who work for him.”
Fact:
No Russian or any other type hacking
targeted America’s presidential campaign.
Verifiable hard evidence showed DNC
emails were leaked, likely by disgruntled
 party insiders opposed to Hillary’s lawless
agenda. The Times:

Fact: “Our president is a liar, and we need to find

out how serious his latest lies are.”
No Trump campaign collusion with Russia
occurred. Not a shred of evidence suggests All members of Washington’s political establishment lie,
it. Months of FBI investigations uncovered notably bipartisan neocons and media scoundrels like The
nothing. But the accusation refuses to fade Times.
away - nor NYT-led scoundrel media lying.
.

73
 Hillary Clinton Allies Rip James Comey
For Belated Confirmation On Russia Probe
By Cody Derespina
Published March 21, 2017

Once again, James Comey is persona non grata in 'Hillary
Land.'
After the FBI director on Monday acknowledged a
months-long probe into possible links between Russian
operatives and Trump campaign associates, veterans of
Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid sharply questioned why
Comey waited until now -- after their boss lost -- to
confirm it.
Comey had famously aired details of the investigation into
Clinton's private email use as secretary of state, including
an announcement 11 days before the election that the FBI
was revisiting the case, only to close it again.
By contrast, he did not confirm the nature of the
investigation into Russian meddling in the campaign until
his testimony Monday. While Comey shared few details of
the bureau’s inquiry during a lengthy public session before
the House Intelligence Committee, he said the
investigation -- which includes looking at possible Trump
team links -- dated back to July.
During a news conference in July – the same month the
bureau began looking into the alleged Trump-Russia
connection – Comey gave a news conference announcing
the FBI’s recommendation not to prosecute Clinton;
however, during the same statement, Comey also accused
Clinton of being “extremely careless.” Then, in late
October, Comey sent a letter to Congress – which soon
became public – informing some members of possible new
developments in the Clinton email saga. Two days before
the election, however, Comey sent a follow-up letter again
saying that no charges would be sought against the
Democratic standard bearer.
“July ’16: Comey opens investigation of
Trump. Nothing public. July ’16: Comey
closes HRC email, finds nothing – attacks
publicly. Annoying,” tweeted ex-Clinton
adviser Philippe Reines.

“Russia probe that Comey confirmed was,

as best we can tell, in effect before Nov 8.
Fair to ask why he didn’t think voters
deserved to know,” tweeted Brian Fallon,
who formerly served as press secretary for
Clinton, the Democratic presidential
nominee. Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American
Progress and a prominent Clinton ally, took umbrage with
Comey telling Congress on Monday that the bureau

“cannot do our work well or fairly if we just

start talking about it while we’re doing it.”

Tanden replied on Twitter:

“Unless it’s right before an election, then

we can blab away.”
Much of the Clinton staffers' irritation stemmed from what
they viewed as a double standard: Comey was particularly
forthcoming about the investigation into Clinton’s use of a
private server to send and receive classified material and
yet appeared overly cautious about discussing the Trump
probe.

74
After citing a tweet noting Comey sought Department of “I’d rather be an unaffiliated Rikers inmate
Justice approval to discuss publicly the FBI investigation bracing for today’s gang pickup game in
into Trump, Fallon observed it was “an approval he did not the yard than [Press Secretary] Sean
care to obtain in Clinton’s case.” Spicer bracing for today’s briefing.”

Clinton didn’t add to the chorus in her own words.

However, she did retweet the ranking Democratic member
on the intelligence committee, Rep. Adam Schiff, chiding
Trump for several Monday tweets questioning the
direction of the Russia hearings.

“The intelligence community concluded the

Russians will interfere again,” Schiff
tweeted. “This is why investigation is
A consensus quickly formed among left-leaning social important to country. Please stop.”
media users and many in the media that Monday’s hearing
was politically damaging for Trump, leading Reines to
snark:
.

75
 Dozen Most Insane Statements
From US Congress’ Hearing On ‘Russian Spying’
© AP Photo/ Manuel Balce Ceneta - Politics
00:25 21.03.2017(Updated 12:35 21.03.2017)
Monday’s exhausting five-hour
congressional hearing on Russia’s
alleged meddling into the US
presidential election produced quite a
bit of breaking news -- but also
downright crazy statements you’d more
expect to hear from conspiracy
theorists rather than US
Representatives.
1. The Democrats still believe that the
rebuked and discredited “Golden
Shower” dossier is a thing.
In his opening remarks, ranking member of the intelligence
committee Adam Schiff repeatedly cited the infamous
report as it hadn’t long been proved false.
“According to Steele’s Russian sources,
the Trump campaign is offered documents
damaging to Hillary Clinton, which the
Russians would publish through an outlet
that gives them deniability, like Wikileaks.
The hacked documents would be
in exchange for a Trump Administration
policy that de-emphasizes Russia’s
invasion of Ukraine and instead focuses
on criticizing NATO countries for not paying
their fair share – policies which, even
as recently as the president’s meeting last
week with Angela Merkel, have now
presciently come to pass.”
Steele, through Washington-based firm Fusion GPS, was
originally hired by “political opponents” within the
Democratic and Republican parties to investigate Trump,
76
but it has not been revealed exactly who hired him. Steele
sought to share the dossier with the FBI, which took it
seriously, despite the far-fetched allegations, due to the
British agent’s previous work on the FIFA case. It was
revealed this week that the FBI offered him payment
to continue his investigation into Trump and those
around the candidate. The deal with the FBI reportedly fell
through, and Steele continued to dig without payment.
Later, Congressman Joaquin Castro joined Schiff
in quoting the infamous report as fact.
During an event sponsored by the Cipher Brief, an
intelligence web site, former advisor of presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton and former acting CIA Director
Michael Morell declared that there is “smoke, but no fire.”
He also revealed that Steele had paid sources
for information, damaging its credibility.
"And then I asked myself, why did these
guys provide this information, what was
their motivation? And I subsequently
learned that he paid them. That the
intermediaries paid the sources and the
intermediaries got the money from Chris,”
Morell stated. “And that kind of worries me
a little bit because if you're paying
somebody, particularly former FSB officers,
they are going to tell you truth and
innuendo and rumor, and they're going
to call you up and say, 'hey, let's have
another meeting, I have more information
for you,' because they want to get paid
some more.”
2. The FBI admits that there is an active
investigation into the Trump campaign’s
possible links to Russia, despite the fact
that it was the Podesta group that was
actively lobbying on behalf of Russian
entities, and that the Clinton campaign
was openly collecting contributions
from wealthy Russian donors, such
as Roman Abramovich’s wife Darya
Zhukova.
 “I have been authorized by the Department
of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part
of our counterintelligence mission, is
investigating the Russian government's
efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential
election and that includes investigating the
nature of any links between individuals
associated with the Trump campaign and
the Russian government and whether there
was any coordination between the
campaign and Russia's efforts,” FBI Comey also said “yes,” when asked by Representative
Director James Comey told the hearing. Jackie Speier if the nation intends to do harm to the US.
“As with any counterintelligence
investigation, this will also include an
assessment of whether any crimes were
committed.”
3. Both Comey and National Security
Agency Director Admiral Michael
Rogers admit that Russia did not
influence voting process in the US,
shortly after Comey confirmed that
there is still an active investigation.

You would think that would be the end of the

investigation? Nope!

5. Neither Comey nor Rogers could

confirm Trump’s claim that his New
York City tower was wiretapped
during his presidential campaign.

Rogers added that it would be illegal for the NSA to ask

the British GCHQ to wiretap any US citizen. Despite this
claim, we learned from the Snowden revelations that
GCHQ was actively wiretapping US citizens and handing
it over to the American agency. Not only do they practice
4. Both the FBI and the NSA consider
this, they boast about it when they supply the US
Russia their main adversary — at least,
with valuable intelligence information.
this is what their heads said at the
hearing.
In 2013, the Guardian published GCHQ documents that
showed that British intelligence had supplied "unique
Despite President Trump repeatedly declaring that he
contributions" to the US during an investigation of the
hopes to have better diplomatic relations with Russia, both
American citizen responsible for an attempted car bomb
witnesses at the hearing disagreed.
attack in Times Square, New York City, in 2010.

6. Schiff falsely accused Trump’s former

advisor Roger Stone of having
inside knowledge of upcoming Clinton
revelations, despite the fact that

77
 WikiLeaks were actively and publicly
promoting the upcoming leaks.
“In the weeks that follow, Stone shows a
remarkable prescience: ‘I have total
confidence that @wikileaks and my hero
Julian Assange will educate the American
people soon. #Lockherup. ‘Payload
coming,’ he predicts, and two days later, it
does,” Schiff said. “Wikileaks releases its
first batch of Podesta emails. The release
of John Podesta’s emails would then
continue on a daily basis up to election
day.”
WikiLeaks had been very publicly promoting an upcoming
dump for some time prior to Stone’s tweet.
7. Democrats accused Russia
of spreading “fake news” while citing
WikiLeaks and other reports, that turned
out to be 100% authentic.
“While at first, the hacking may have been
intended solely for the collection of foreign
intelligence, in mid-2016, the Russians
‘weaponized’ the stolen data and used
platforms established by their intel services
78
such as DC Leaks, and existing third-party
channels like WikiLeaks, to dump the
documents,” Schiff asserted in his lengthy
opening statement.
8. Meanwhile, the same congressman
actively quoted Washington Post and
New York Times reports that were
officially debunked and confirmed false.
For example, Schiff repeatedly claimed that the Trump
campaign changed the GOP platform to take a more
passive tone regarding Russia and Ukraine. However,
claims about softening anti-Russian rhetoric were quickly
debunked.
“Not only did that language stay in the final
platform — nothing was taken out — it was
actually strengthened, not weakened, as a
result of events at the convention,” the
Washington Examiner reported.
9. Comey demonstrated a mastery
of selective amnesia, claiming that he
could not recall any instances “during
his lifetime” of law enforcement
agencies going after journalists
for publishing classified information.
During the Obama Administration, the Justice Department
went after Fox reporter James Rosen for refusing to reveal
a source. He was even listed by the department as co-
conspirator in the State Department leak case in 2013.
Another Fox reporter, Jana Winter, was also threatened
with imprisonment for contempt of court for refusing
to reveal her sources in the 2012 Aurora mass shooting
investigation.
10. Meetings with foreign diplomats may
land Lawmakers in trouble.
When asked by Representative Brad Wenstrup whether he
is able to meet with an Iraqi or any other ambassador
without fear of falling under investigation, Comey refused
to comment, to the astonishment of the congressman.
“I don't think that's an unrealistic question,"
Wenstrup said, after Comey declared that
he will not give advisory opinions.
11. Some Democrats demanded
to declare “Russian meddling” in US
election an act of war. Representative
Jackie Speier said that Russia is
effectively waging a hybrid war
against the US.
 "I actually think that their engagement was
an act of war, an act of hybrid warfare,"
Speier said.
Comey responded that he would not use the word “war”
to describe the alleged interference, a position with which
Rogers agreed.
"I don't think I would use the word 'warfare.'
I think you would want to ask experts in the
definition of war," Comey replied. "I think
they engaged in a multi-faceted campaign
of active measures to undermine our
democracy and hurt one of the candidates
and hope to help one of the other
candidates."
.
79
12. Providing media outlets with fake leaks is not
illegal.
"If all they’ve done is lie to a reporter, that’s
not against the law,” Comey said
of individuals leaking false information
to media outlets. “Usually it’s people who
act like they know, but don’t really know.
They're not the people who know, they're
one or two hops out and think they know."
Comey explained that they cannot correct fake news,
because then if they do not issue a statement about a story,
the public will assume it is correct.
 NYT Editors Lied Suggesting
Sabotage Undermined Hillary’s Campaign
By Stephen Lendman
3-21-2017
The Big Lie persists. The Times is a lying machine - along
with other media scoundrels refusing to accept Trump’s
triumph last November.
Plenty about his agenda warrants criticism. Claiming
electoral theft is over-the-top sour grapes. He won. She
lost. That should have been the end of it.
Not in a nation where democracy is more fantasy than real,
where Trump haters bash him for the wrong reasons.
In an editorial deplorably headlined “Comey’s Haunting
News on Trump and Russia,” Times editors barely
stopped short claiming Trump campaign collusion with
Russia to
“sabotage Hillary Clinton’s (electoral)
chances” - citing a nonexistent “growing
body of circumstantial evidence…”
They want “criminal prosecutions,” despite
no evidence of criminality, no evidence of
Russia US election hacking, nothing
suggesting the Trump campaign colluded
with Moscow to “sabotage” Hillary.
Accusations and allegations related to these issues are
fabricated. Claims without evidence are groundless.
Legitimate tribunals wouldn’t touch these type cases.
Times editors blasted Trump for calling
allegations of collusion “fake news.”
He’s right!
.
80
They criticized his legitimate right to say the FBI should
focus on investigating classified information leaks.
They’re released to undermine him, wanting him
delegitimized and ousted from office. It’s a serious issue
requiring investigation, holding responsible individuals
accountable for criminal actions.
Times editors: Trump’s “brazen warning shots” about
wanting unacceptable leaks investigated
“do enormous damage to public confidence
in the” FBI.
What utter rubbish! Times editors find new ways to
disgrace themselves, using journalism as a misinformation
tool - what Trump and many others call “fake news.”
Times editors want a special prosecutor appointed to
investigate nonexistent collusion between Trump’s
campaign and Russia.
Nothing out-of-the-ordinary or improper
went on. US government and business
officials interact with their counterparts in
Russia and elsewhere frequently.
These are commonplace regular activities, unrelated to
law-breaking.
Despite no evidence proving it, Times
editors accused Russia of interfering in
America’s election to help Trump defeat
Hillary - a clear example of despicable fake
news by a broadsheet featuring it regularly.
 Democrats Hoped To Hurt
Trump, But Raised Suspicions Of Obama
By Joel B. Pollak
21 Mar 2017
The mainstream media have been doing
a victory lap since the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) and the National
Security Agency (NSA) confirmed on
Monday in testimony before the U.S.
House Intelligence Committee that
President Barack Obama did not wiretap
Trump Tower. But that was already
known.
There was only one new revelation at the hearing, and it
was a bombshell: senior Obama administration officials
could have known the identities of surveillance targets.
One of those targets, retired General Michael Flynn, lost
his job after it was revealed that his conversation with the
Russian ambassador had been monitored, and that he had
discussed sanctions relief, contrary to his early private and
public claims.
Yet Flynn’s identity was never supposed to have been
revealed. The surveillance of the Russian ambassador,
routine though it may have been, yielded classified
information, and the identity of any U.S. citizen swept up
in it should have been redacted.
But Flynn’s name was unmasked and leaked to the media.
Moreover, the New York Times reported on Jan. 19 — with
a front-page, top-of-the-fold headline on Inauguration Day
— that
81
“intelligence reports based on some of the
wiretapped communications had been
provided to the White House.”
And the Times also reported in February that surveillance
of Trump aides suspected of ties with Russia had been
disseminated widely throughout the government, without
privacy protections, by order of the lame duck
Obama administration under newly-relaxed NSA rules,
which the Times had already reported earlier in January.
Monday’s hearing “debunked” Trump’s wiretapping
tweets, but left his underlying claim intact:
that there was surveillance of the Trump
campaign; that the results were shared
throughout the government — even
possibly reaching the Obama White House;
and that intelligence was leaked, illegally,
to the mainstream media.
In an extraordinary exchange with FBI Director James
Comey on Monday, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) explored
what that meant — that Obama aides could have broken
the law:
GOWDY: Do you know whether Director [of
National Intelligence] James Clapper knew
the name of the U.S. citizen that appeared
in the New York Times and Washington
Post?
COMEY: I can’t say in this forum because
again, I don’t wanna confirm that there was
classified information in the newspaper.
GOWDY: Would he have access to an
unmasked name?
COMEY: In — in some circumstances,
sure, he was the director of national
intelligence. But I’m not talking about the
particular.
GOWDY: Would Director [of the Central
Intelligence Agency James] Brennan have
access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s
name?
 COMEY: In some circumstances, yes.
GOWDY: Would National Security Adviser
Susan Rice have access to an unmasked
U.S. citizen’s name?
COMEY: I think any — yes, in general, and
any other national security adviser would, I
think, as a matter of their ordinary course of
their business.
GOWDY: Would former White House
Advisor Ben Rhodes have access to an
unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?
COMEY: I don’t know the answer to that.
GOWDY: Would former Attorney General
Loretta Lynch have access to an unmasked
U.S. citizen’s name? COMEY: In general,
yes, as would any attorney general.
GOWDY: So that would also include Acting
AG Sally Yates?
COMEY: Same answer.
82
GOWDY: Did you brief President Obama
on — well, I’ll just ask you. Did you brief
President Obama on any calls involving
Michael Flynn?
COMEY: I’m not gonna get into either that
particular case that matter, or any
conversations I had with the president. So I
can’t answer that.
Gowdy’s questioning revealed an astonishing list of
potential suspects. And given that the FBI and NSA
testified that there was still no evidence of collusion
between the Trump campaign and the Russian
government, the fact remains that the only crime that is
known to have occurred with absolute certainty was the
leaking of Flynn’s name and the contents of his
conversation with the Russian ambassador.
Democrats hoped to hurt Trump.
Instead, they raised more questions about Obama’s role.
 Ex-CIA Chief: Trump Should Apologize
To Obama For Claims Assessed As False By FBI Director
Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:4AM
Comey’s remarks as well as earlier ones by those in charge
of the investigation made former Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency Leon Panetta speak up, calling on
Trump to “apologize” to his predecessor.
Donald Trump should apologize to his
predecessor, former President Barack
Obama, for claims assessed as false by
FBI Director James Comey, says a
former CIA chief.
The New York billionaire has accused Obama of
wiretapping Trump Tower in the run-up to the 2016
presidential election.
His claims followed an investigation into his ties with
Russia and a possible role Moscow played in his victory.
As part of the investigation, Comey appeared before the
House Intelligence Committee for a hearing on Monday,
asserting that there is no evidence for Trump’s claims.
On March 4, the New York billionaire attacked Obama
(pictured above) on Twitter, claiming that he had "tapped"
his phone ahead of the November 8, 2016 vote.
83
"I have no information that supports those
tweets," Comey told the committee, adding
that the Justice Department also had no
information to back the allegations.
"I think we ought to bring this all to an end.
I think the chairman and the ranking
members of both the House Intelligence
Committee, the Senate Intelligence
Committee essentially said -- that and now
the director of the FBI -- has said that
there's no evidence that President Obama
ordered any kind of wiretapping. I think the
case is closed. The president, you know,
made a false allegation here, and it was not
substantiated. He asked then that there be
an investigation which we've gone through.
That investigation has found that there's no
truth to this allegation,” said Panetta
(pictured below).
“I just think it's time for the president to you
know rise up to the responsibility of being
president of the United States,
acknowledge that he made a mistake,
apologize to President Obama for what he
said, and let's all move on and move on.
Move on to deal with the other critical
issues that are much more important
 issues related to healthcare, issues related
to a new Supreme Court justice, issues
related to the budget, to immigration. I
mean, there are huge issues out there that
we ought to be focusing on. The president
doesn't need this because it impacts on his
credibility as president. And if he's going to
if he's going to lead this nation, he's got to
do everything to try to restore that
credibility."
Probing Trump-Russia ties
Putin helped the real estate tycoon win the White House,
an allegation dismissed both by Moscow and Trump.
"They wanted to hurt our democracy, hurt
her (Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton),
help him. I think all three we were confident
in at least as early as December," Comey
said.
Ahead of the US vote, Trump’s opponent, Clinton, kept
complaining about the Trump campaign’s ties with Russia.

Comey’s appearance before the committee yielded the first

public confirmation that a probe was underway to detect
possible collusion between Trump and Russia.

"That includes investigating the nature of

any links between individuals associated
with the Trump campaign and the Russian
government and whether there was any
coordination between the campaign and
Russia's efforts," said the director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.
FBI Director James Comey (C) exits the hearing room at the
conclusion of a hearing concerning Russian meddling in the 2016
United States election, on Capitol Hill, March 20, 2017 in
Washington. (Photo by AFP)
In a declassified report released in January the intelligence
community concluded that Russian President Vladimir
.
"I think this is a big deal, what Russia did in
this last election, and it's a big deal
because you know, here is an adversary
that directly tried to influence our election
through trying to hack our systems here.
And it's the kind of thing, whether you're a
Republican or Democrat, we can't allow
nations to interfere with our election
process. They're doing the same thing now
in elections in other countries. So it's really
important that we investigate just exactly
what they did, whether there was any
collusion involved, and be able to
investigate that and learn from the lessons
of that investigation," asserted the former
spymaster.

84
 ‘This Just Keeps Happening’:
Secret Service Under Investigation Over More Breaches
Published Time: 21 Mar, 2017 02:24Edited Time: 22 Mar, 2017 12:29

“It's just beyond comprehension,” Chaffetz

said, “especially because it is not the first
time this has happened.”

Last year, Chaffetz faced retaliation while looking into the

Secret Service after two of its agents drove through an
active bomb threat scene investigation. Dozens of agents,
including 11 senior members, gained unauthorized access
to Chaffetz’s own rejected 2003 application to the agency
and leaked it to the press. The Department of Homeland
Security ended up punishing 57 Secret Service agents over
the violations.
Three security incidents at the White House in just over a
week’s time has lawmakers demanding the Secret Service
The recent breach prompted Chaffetz to send a letter to
make “major structural changes.” Heading up the
William Callahan, the acting director of the Secret Service,
investigation is Congressman Jason Chaffetz of Utah, a
saying his committee will investigate the service. In the
familiar foe of the agency.
letter, Chaffetz, who is on the panel that oversees the
service, questioned the agency’s security and requested
Jonathan Tran, 26, scaled several fences at the White surveillance videos from the recent breaches to ensure they
House and went undetected on the grounds for more than would be preserved for upcoming investigations.
15 minutes before the US Secret Service (USSS) was able
to apprehend him on March 10.
The letter suggests that several allegations were not in the
original affidavit from the Secret Service, including the
The USSS released a statement in the days following, fact that Tran triggered several alarms which were ignored,
saying that Tran was able to climb and hop a 5-foot fence and
near the US Treasury Department next to the White House,
then he scaled an 8-foot vehicle gate and another a three-
“may have attempted entry into the
and-a-half foot fence near the East Wing.
building.”
“The men and women of the Secret Service
are extremely disappointed and angry in
how the events of March 10th transpired,”
the statement said.

The agency said they are taking steps to prevent future

breaches, including creating additional posts,
implementing technology enhancements and new response
protocols.

In an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN’s

“The Situation Room” on March 17, House

Oversight Committee Chairman Jason
Chaffetz (R-Utah) said that Tran was even
"able to get up next to the White House,
hide behind a pillar, look through a window,
rattle the door handle." "If true, these allegations raise questions
about whether the agency's security
protocols are adequate," Chaffetz wrote.
85
The letter mentions a bipartisan report from the committee,
which found that
"Over the last 10 years, there have been
143 security breaches and attempted
security breaches at secured facilities
which resulted in an arrest."
“This just keeps happening - again, and
again, and again,” Chaffetz said in an
interview with Fox and Friends, where he
promised that “major structural changes”
will take place at the agency.
Chaffetz recommended splitting up the Secret Service,
with separate teams that would handle cyber missions and
protective detail mission.
Chaffetz also said that there is a bipartisan group exploring
the idea of moving the Secret Service into the Treasury
department, where it was before the Department of
Homeland Security took over that function in 2003.
86
This is the third time the White House has been breached
in an eight-day period.
On Saturday, William Rawlinson, 58, was spotted in a
prohibited area of the North Lawn of the White House at
around 12:40pm. Police say they found Rawlinson behind
an auxiliary security barrier that resembles a bicycle rack,
yelling “nonsensical statements,” according to the
Washington Post.
That same day, Sean Keoughan, 29, was arrested after he
drove up to a White House checkpoint in a car that was
reported stolen in Virginia and told a Secret Service officer
that “there’s a bomb in the trunk” while holding
something in his right hand, according to Reuters.
The Secret Service has also been in the news recently after
an agent had a laptop with sensitive information stolen
from their vehicle, and two agents are currently under
investigation for leaving their post to take selfies with
President Donald Trump’s grandson.
 Trump Watershed Budget
The Trump America First Budget Is A Positive Start On Purging The
Corrupt System Of Much Of The Wasteful Influence
From Several Harmful Agencies.
By Sartre
March 21, 2017
You have never seen an attempt to change direction in the
Federal juggernaut, as outlined in the Trump budget to
revamp discretionary spending. Bob Adelmann of The
New American provides an apt appraisal in Trump’s
“Blueprint” Budget Is a Policy Statement; Real Budget to
Follow. For a full reading of this framework review the
White House document. OMB Director Mick Mulvaney,
has delivered a bold variation from the normal
accommodation to the political careerists and influence
peddlers.
No doubt this America First departure from the status quo
is a shock to the entire composition of elites, radical
factions and pseudo intellectuals, alike. The vehement
hatred for all things Trump, has hit heights previously
unknown in domestic politics. As disappointing as such
hysteria has been, it is not a surprise when one analyzes
the nature of the power political system.
For Trump supporters, voting for a Republican majority in
Congress was billed as the way to reverse the all powerful
and intrusive dictates from the central government.
Reducing funding for programs and agencies was once a
cardinal objective for conservatives. Beyond this simple
goal was the restrained aspiration of balancing the budget
with the definitive goal of reducing the national debt,
having the ultimate purpose of eliminating that debt.
Illustrating the timidity of the weak kneed RINO cowards,
GOP Lawmakers Get Skittish Over Trump Budget Cuts.
87
Now let’s be honest, the country club Republicans are
prisoners of K Street and the corporate globalists. Many
are closet “Never Trump” opposition within the
Republican Party.
What resistance developed during the last campaign cycle
as manifested in Establishment Rule still in Control,
continues in the current Congress. The disconnect between
the hard pressed working class with the privileged ruling
caste of cabal criminals has not been reversed with the
inauguration of Donald Trump to the Presidency. Only the
sheer will of a determined businessman offers any
optimism of what might be possible to achieve.
When asking, Can the Swamp Really be Drained?, the
answer can only be judged against the realities of the self-
induced omnipotent government culture that resists any
restrains on their ability to spend more public money.
While this Trump proposed budget does not reduce the
debt, it is intended not to increase it. This is really a
modest attempt to adjust internal expenditures among
some agencies that have resisted any intrusion into their
fiefdoms of control. Nor is this a perfect allocation in
reductions. The much needed roll back in the State
Department, especially in foreign aid funding is long
overdue. However, as reported in Trump’s budget cuts
State Dept, keeps foreign aid to Israel, shows the
reluctance in including the 800 pound gorilla in sharing the
pain.
“The blueprint released by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) “provides $3.1 billion to meet the security
assistance commitment to Israel, currently at an all-time
high [sic]; ensuring that Israel has the ability to defend
itself from threats and maintain its Qualitative Military
Edge.”
Maintaining sacred orthodox expenditures is an obvious
bridge too far to cross. But when Trump’s Budget Meets
Bipartisan Opposition and Big Sequestration Hurdle, the
prophetic words of Mick Mulvaney, sums up the method
used to compile the budget that the disloyal opposition has
sure intense abhorrence for a pro national president.
“In fact, we wrote it using the president’s
own words,” Mulvaney said. “We went
through his speeches, we went through
articles that have been written about his
policies, we talked to him, and we wanted
to know what his policies were, and we
turned those policies into numbers. So you
have an ‘America First’ candidate, you
have an ‘America First’ budget.”
Increasing the Defense Department by $54 billion cuts
both ways. America First is as much about asserting a
strong national defense, while maintaining a non-
interventionist foreign policy overseas. The perennial
dichotomy that the bipartisan war party defends to the
death has the need to deploy troops to garrison compounds
for expanding the empire. Never is there a reflection, much
less a revamping of the foreign policy that has American
treasure and blood protecting the globalist agenda of
worldwide dominance.
It is a given that the libtards would cry foul when their
favorite social program gets the axe, but why should any
honest advocate for a smaller government and limited
federal governance join the defiance to the Trump budget?
As The Hill writes in Shutdown politics return to the
Senate, the Senator Schumer minority leader is setting the
stage for another pompous threat to obstruct the Trump
administration.
“If Republicans insist on inserting poison pill riders such
as defunding Planned Parenthood, building a border wall,
or starting a deportation force, they will be shutting down
the government and delivering a severe blow to our
economy,” they wrote in the letter.”
This intimidation that comes from a party that refuses to
timely approve Trump appointees to key agency slots can
only offer an obstructionist opposition. So when the
Bleeding Heart Limousine crew of hypocrites want to
trigger a convoluted guilt ridden scare, you should look
them straight in the eye and explain why they are such
frauds.
You can still get to heaven if you support Trump’s
proposed budget nicely describes the proper context.
“Mr. Trump, in his budget, proposes to eliminate the
Community Development Block Grant program, which
partially funds Meals on Wheels. As Scott Shackford at
Reason, wrote, “The big problem here is that ‘We help
fund Meals on Wheels’ is how the government sells the
CDBG program, but how it actually operates in the cities
and communities that get the money is far different. The
CDBG program is chock full of cronyism and corruption
88
and should be eliminated. Much like the corrupt city
redevelopment agencies, what actually ends up happening
is that this money gets funneled by politicians to friends
with connections for various projects that aren’t really
about helping the poor at all.”
So what is the correct analysis and balance that the Trump
administration should strive to achieve? ZeroHedge looks
at Trump’s Budget A First Step Toward De-Politicizing
Science.
“It should go without saying that scientific
research is a vital part of civilized society,
allowing for technological breakthroughs
that dramatically increase the quality of life
for mankind as a whole. It is precisely
because of its great importance that it
should not be politicized by being
influenced by politicians and
government bureaucrats. The inherent
problems of government’s inability to
efficiently allocate scarce resources doesn’t
change when the subject is science, so
government research can suffer with the
same issues of waste, fraud, and abuse
that regularly haunt other programs.
While his proposed budget is a solid first
step toward de-politicizing science,
unfortunately the increase in Pentagon
spending means that military-related
research will continue to enjoy the perks of
government privilege. Resources that could
have been dedicated to serving the wants
and needs of the public will instead be
allocated to building ever more expensive
weapons for the world’s most powerful
military (regardless of its actual
performance).
As long as Trump continues to view the
military-industrial complex as a sacred cow,
he won’t make real progress in draining the
swamp.”
This is the rational assessment, but the Beltway culture
will never allow a serious debate on scaling back the role
the federal government plays in the national economy.
When you have an untouchable technocratic bloc of
bureaucratic power grabbers, entrenched into
unaccountable government agencies, just how is it possible
to clean out unnecessary programs and useless
departments?
The culture of collectivists has burrowed themselves into
the federal money machine, that defraud the taxpayer and
refuse to provide a utilitarian function. Seldom does one
get such clear proof of exactly the hubris from elected
legislators and public officials, who are agents of
maintaining the corrupt political system. If your
representative objects to the proposed cuts in EPA, State,
Agriculture, Labor, HHS, Commerce, Education, HUD
and Transportation Departments; they are part of the crony
establishment cartel.
If the Trump administration is blocked from making these
prudent budget reductions, who and when, will anyone
ever achieve even a modest reform of the deficit addict
disease that has plagued our government for decades?
The “I Love DC” society was defeated in the last
presidential election. Even so, the vast majority of
incumbent legislators were also returned to office. By
89
comparison, few are true Trump allies. Add into this
equation that many of the Trump appointees are dedicated
politicians that are still comfortable with the old ways of
grinding out the sausage of receptacle bribes and favors.
Following the way the GOP puts their imprimatur on this
budget process will disclose to the faithful, just how
difficult it will be for President Trump to domesticate the
vulture scavengers from their feeding habit ways. Mick
Mulvaney has presented a worthy budget that deserves
public support. The Trump America First budget is a
positive start on purging the corrupt system of much of the
wasteful influence from several harmful agencies.
 Trump Will Do To Muslims
‘What Hitler Did To Jews,’ Letter Warns
Sources Confirm Trump A "Holocaust Doubter"
By GPD
March 21, 2017
Protesters comparing Donald Trump to Hitler demonstrate outside
the US embassy in London. (File photo)
Muslims in the US state of Iowa have
called for a hate crime investigation into
a threatening note a mosque has
recently received.
The hand-written note delivered to the Islamic Center of
Des Moines, Iowa, on Sunday warned that Republican
President Donald Trump will do to Muslims “what Hitler
did to the Jews,” reports said on Monday.
The letter, which was signed by “Americans for a Better
Way,” described Muslims as “filthy” and “vile.”
“There’s a new sheriff in town—President Donald Trump.
He’s going to cleanse America and make it shine again,”
read the note. “And he’s going to start with you Muslims.
He’s going to do to you Muslims what Hitler did to the
Jews. You Muslims would be wise to pack your bags and
get out of dodge.”
Dr. Samir Shams, the president of the Islamic Center of
Des Moines, said Muslims must take such notes seriously,
and FBI agents met with members of the mosque and were
assessing the situation.
90
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Executive Director
Nihad Awad (2nd L) speaks alongside CAIR National
Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper (L), attorney Gadeir
Abbas (2nd R) and CAIR Litigation Director Lena Masri (R), about
a lawsuit the organization filed against US President Donald Trump
and his administration, during a press conference at CAIR
Headquarters in Washington, DC, on January 30, 2017. (Photo by
AFP)
Meanwhile, the Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR) called for a hate crime investigation into the
incident.
“Some people are afraid to send their kids
to school, some of my friends take their
hijabs off, some of our friends stop going to
the mosque,” said Esam Boraey, a CAIR
spokesperson.
Jamal Muhammad, a mosque board member, said it was
important for elected government officials to speak against
such hate incidents.
“In this climate, we have to take these
things seriously because it could escalate,”
he told the Des Moines Register.
“Politicians should make statements about
this kind of stuff. It would be good to see
elected officials—whether they’re Democrat
or Republican or what—they should
condemn things like this,” Muhammad
stated.
In a press release, the Council on American-Islamic Figures show that hate crimes have spiked across the US
Relations said that similar hate-filled messages had also since the victory of Trump in last year’s presidential
been sent to other mosques. election.

Trump has been under fire by Muslim and human rights

groups as well as his Democratic rivals and many of his
Republican proponents since he started calling for a “total
and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United
States” during his presidential campaign.

Following his inauguration on January 20, Trump has

twice issued executive orders, banning people from several
Muslim-majority countries, causing widespread protests in
the US and several world cities.

American courts have blocked Trump’s travel ban but the

A participant at a rally in Helsinki, Finland, holds up a poster president has said that he is still trying to find a way to
depicting US President Donald Trump and German dictator Adolf impose it.
Hitler on January 21, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

91
 Anti-Trump Propagandist
David Brock Suffers Heart Attack
Published: March 22, 2017
Founder of Media Matters, and infamous Hillary "attack
dog" and agit-prop specialist, David Brock has suffered
a heart attack, but is expected to make a "swift recovery,"
a senior aide said Wednesday. As The Hill reports,
"David Brock suffered a heart attack while
working in the Washington DC office early
Tuesday," Bradley Beychok, Brock's chief
of staff, said in a statement.
"He was quickly transported to a local
hospital, received prompt medical
treatment, and we are looking forward to
a swift recovery."
"We thank everyone for their well wishes,
and especially want to thank the wonderful
doctors and staff who treated David. We
kindly ask for privacy as he recovers," the
statement added.
Brock, 54, a staunch supporter of Hillary Clinton during
the 2016 presidential campaign, founded the non-profit
liberal media watchdog publication Media Matters for
America in 2004.
As a reminder, in November 2016, Brock created a vast
system of agitation and propaganda was set up in order to
destroy the reputation and the authority of President
Donald Trump as soon as he arrived in the White House.
“This will be THE gathering for
Democratic donors from across the
country to hear from a broad and
diverse group of leaders about the next
steps for progressives under a Trump
Administration,” Brock wrote to the
donors in an email.
92
“What better way to spend inaugural
weekend than talking about how to kick
Donald Trump’s ass?” Brock said.
In order to convince US public opinion of the President’s
insanity – a man who says that he hopes for peace with his
enemies, and wants to collaborate with them in universal
economic prosperity –
one of the greatest specialists of agit-
prop (agitation & propaganda), David
Brock, set up an impressive system
even before Trump’s investiture.
The current campaign is organised in secret by four
associations:
Media Matters is tasked with picking up on Donald
Trump’s mistakes. You read his bulletin every day in your
newspapers – the President can’t be trusted, he got this
or that point wrong.
American Bridge 21st Century has collected more than
2,000 hours of videos showing Donald Trump over the
years, and more than 18,000 hours of other videos of the
members of his cabinet. It has at its disposition
sophisticated technological equipment designed for the
Department of Defense – allegedly not in working order –
which enables it to look for contradictions between their
older declarations and their current positions. It should be
extending its work to 1,200 of the new President’s
collaborators.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
— CREW is a firm of high level lawyers tasked with
tracking anything that could create a scandal in the Trump
administration. Most of the lawyers in this association
work pro bono, for the cause. These are the people who
prepared the case for Bob Ferguson, the Chief Prosecutor
of the state of Washington, against the immigration
decree (Executive Order 13769).
Shareblue is an electronic army which has already
connected with 162 million internauts in the USA. It’s job
is to spread pre-ordained themes, for example:
 Trump is authoritarian and a thief.
 Trump is under the influence of Vladimir Putin.
  Trump is a weak and quick-tempered personality, he’s
a manic-depressive.
 Trump was not elected by the majority of US citizens,
and is therefore illegitimate.
 His Vice-President, Mike Pence, is a fascist.
 Trump is a billionaire who will constantly be faced with
conflicts of interest between his personal affairs and
those of state.
 Trump is a puppet of the Koch brothers, who are
famous for sponsoring the extreme right.
 Trump is a white supremacist and a threat to minorities.
93
 Anti-Trump opposition just keeps growing outside
Washington.
 To save democracy, let’s support the democrataic
parliamentarians who are attacking Trump, and let’s
demolish those who are co-operating with him.
 Overthrowing Trump will take time, so don’t let’s
weaken in our resolve.
Of course, we wonder how long it will be before 54-year-
old Brock's heart attack is blamed on Putin in some
way?
 Davos For Democrats – DNC Mega Donors Meet At
Mandarin Oriental Hotel To Plot “The Resistance”
Michael Krieger
Posted Wednesday Mar 22, 2017 At 11:48 Am
The Daily Beast just published an article previewing what
should be referred to from this day forth as Davos for
Democrats; a big-money infused orgy of wealthy donors
telling their political puppets what to do as they mingle at
one of the most luxurious hotel chains in the world.
Clearly learning absolutely zero lessons from their recent
election pummeling, the Democratic Party is simply
doubling down on its hopelessly failed strategy. Namely, a
focus on more cash, even more donor influence and an
absence of any new or interesting ideas that could actually
get frustrated and struggling American voters excited. The
post referenced below reads like something out of The
Onion and would be downright hilarious if it wasn’t so
pathetic and deranged.
From the article, Democratic Donors Gather in D.C. to
Plot the Resistance:
The Democratic Party’s top officials will
meet with some of their wealthiest donors
in Washington, D.C., this week to plot the
Trump resistance, according to documents
obtained by The Daily Beast.
The chairs of the Democratic National
Committee and the party’s House and
Senate campaign arms will huddle with
activists, operatives, and deep-pocketed
Democratic financiers at a biannual
conference hosted by the Democracy
Alliance, a leading left-wing donor
collaborative at Washington’s ritzy
Mandarin Oriental hotel.
They will discuss strategy for immediate
opposition to President Donald Trump’s
policies, begin laying the groundwork for
Democratic campaigns in next year’s
midterm elections, strategize future efforts
for congressional redistricting, and promote
an agenda focused on the state level,
94
where Democrats still retain some power
and hope to build a model for national
progressive victories. And perhaps most
importantly, map out how to fully fund their
opposition to all things Trump.
The Alliance brings together high-dollar
liberal donors—individuals, labor unions,
and charitable foundations—that pledge to
give at least $200,000 annually to a suite of
left-wing organizations. Through its
“partners,” as the donors are known
internally, the Alliance in 2015 raised $75
million for its supported organizations,
an annual record for the group.
A lot of good that $75 mill did. Encouraging to see the
solution is just throw more donor money at the problem.
Those include the Center for American
Progress, a liberal policy shop that has
turned its 501(c)(4) arm into an anti-Trump
“war room,” and Media Matters for
America, a media-focused rapid response
group that has recently retooled its efforts
toward “fake news” and pro-Trump
disinformation.
Dumb and Dumber.
And on Friday, the Alliance will host what it
describes as “the first in a regular series
of off-the-record dialogues between
progressive political donors and
Democratic Party officials about the
future.”
A regular series of off-the-record meetings between
donors and Democratic officials. You can’t make this stuff
up.
Donors in attendance will include
Michael Vachon, a top aide to billionaire
hedge fund manager George Soros;
health care technology mogul Paul
Egerman; Dallas philanthropist Naomi
Aberly; Susan Sandler, the daughter of
subprime mortgage pioneer Herb Sandler;
 and Ian Simmons, the husband of Hyatt
hotel fortune heiress Liesel Pritzker
Simmons.
The Alliance’s donors have recently had to
step up their financial commitments as the
group retools its mission from policymaking
by way of an allied White House to
opposition to Republican dominance at all
levels of government.
In addition to their annual contribution
thresholds, Alliance partners must chip in
to support the donor collaborative’s
operations. Partner dues increased by
between $5,000 and $10,000 this year to
support the Alliance’s revamped
mission, BuzzFeed News reported in
January.
Long on money, short on ideas. That’s the Demcoratic
Party for you.
on money, redistricting and “channeling energy” (i.e.
manipulating voters), as opposed to ideas. The party has
nothing to offer Americans other than Trump opposition
and Russia conspiracy theories.
The first of those break-out sessions will
plot “strategy and plans to protect the
safety net for low-income families and
individuals.” Among its attendees will be
the director of US Programs for Soros’s
Open Society Foundations.
Perhaps getting the opinions of actual poor people might
be useful, as opposed to listening to the operatives
of billionaires.
That discussion will be held at
Washington’s elite Cosmos Club, whose
members—which have included three
U.S. presidents, two vice presidents,
and 12 Supreme Court justices—
pay annual dues of about $2,000.

That dovetails with recent Alliance strategy, How grassroots of them.

which has focused on reversing dramatic
Democratic losses at the state level ahead Meanwhile, did you watch the clip of Nancy Pelosi being
of the 2020 census and redistricting asked by Anderson Cooper who the leader of the party is?
process. The Alliance considers a
Democrat-friendly round of redistricting
essential to future progressive policy
gains.

A focus on redistricting. Again, no ideas.

Another event, featuring Planned

Parenthood president Cecile Richards, will
examine the “opportunity, spurred by the
enormous energy of ordinary people taking
grassroots action, to oppose the Trump
agenda and how to channel this energy
for a change in the nation’s political
direction, starting with building back power
Obama and Hillary Clinton.
and winning critical state elections in 2017
and 2018.”
This party is an absolute joke, and the
quicker we admit this and create
This article is just so telling about the priorities of the
something else, the better. It hasn’t
donor-controlled Democratic Party. They remain focused
changed, and it’s not going to.
.

95
 House Intel Chair: There Was
“Incidental Surveillance” Of Trump And
Transition Team Under Obama
Rep. Nunes Set To Brief President On Newly
Discovered Surveillance Details
By Joseph Jankowski -
03.22.2017 @3:31 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Just days after FBI director James
Comey shot down Trump’s allegations that his wires were
tapped by president Obama, House Intelligence Chairman
Devin Nunes has come out and told reporters that members
of Trump’s transition team, and possible Trump himself,
were under U.S. government surveillance following
November’s presidential election.
According to Nunes, the surveillance was done legally but
he was concerned considering it had nothing to do with the
FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the
election.
“I have seen intelligence reports that clearly
show that the president-elect and his team
were, I guess, at least monitored,” Nunes
told reporters. “It looks to me like it was all
legally collected, but it was essentially a lot
of information on the president-elect and
his transition team and what they were
doing.”
96
“Details about U.S. persons involved in the incoming
administration with little or no apparent foreign
intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence
community reports,” Nunes said.
The information was “legally brought to him by sources
who thought we should know it,” Nunes added, without
providing much detail.
Nunes also said that “additional names” of Trump
transition officials had been unmasked in the intelligence
reports and that Trump’s communications may have been
collected.
“From what I know right now, it looks like
incidental collection,” Nunes told reporters.
“We don’t know exactly how that was
picked up, but we’re trying to get to the
bottom of it.”
The intelligence chairman said he was heading to the
White House on Wednesday to brief President Trump on
what he has learned. House Speaker Paul Ryan was
apparently briefed on the information Wednesday morning
as well.
This bombshell dropped by the Intel Chair is undoubtedly
going to interject an interesting twist during the upcoming
Intelligence panel set to hold a public hearing next
Tuesday with members of the Obama administration. The
panel will include former Director of National Intelligence
James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan and
former acting Attorney General Sally Yates.
Now all there is to do is brace for the coming Trump tweet
storm.
 Trump Team Communications Captured
By Intelligence Community Surveillance, Nunes Says
By Cody Derespina
Published March 22, 2017

Members of the intelligence community "incidentally
collected" communications from the Trump transition team
during legal surveillance operations of foreign targets, a
top Republican lawmaker said Wednesday afternoon.
House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif.,
said this produced "dozens" of reports which eventually
unmasked several individuals’ identities and were "widely
disseminated."
He said none of the reports he had read mentioned Russia
or Russians and he was unsure whether the surveillance
occurred at Trump Tower -- as President Trump has
suggested. Nunes also was unsure if then President-elect
Trump was captured by the surveillance, which occurred in
November, December and January.
“I recently confirmed on numerous
occasions the intelligence community
incidentally collected intelligence,” Nunes
said.
Democrats quickly criticized him for his comments.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), ranking member of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, released a
statement:
"This afternoon, Chairman Devin Nunes
announced he had some form of intercepts
revealing that lawfully gathered intelligence
on foreign officials included information on
U.S. Persons, potentially including those
associated with President Trump or the
President himself. If accurate, this
information should have been shared with
members of the committee, but it has not
been. ... The Chairman also shared this
information with the White House before
providing it to the committee, another
profound irregularity, given that the matter
is currently under investigation. I have
expressed my grave concerns with the
Chairman that a credible investigation
cannot be conducted this way."
The revelations could at least partially back up some
allegations made by Trump earlier this month, when he
.
tweeted that former President Barack Obama had
"wiretapped" him, though top lawmakers have sharply
disputed those claims. FBI Director James Comey also
testified earlier this week he had no evidence to support
the claims.
Nunes said he told House Speaker Paul Ryan earlier
Wednesday about his findings. He later said he briefed
Trump, calling some of the collection "inappropriate."
Trump commented briefly afterward, saying he felt
“somewhat” vindicated by Nunes’ comments.
"There’s a lot of questions that I think his
statement raises, and that I hope we can
get to the bottom of,” White House Press
Secretary Sean Spicer also said.
He said the NSA had been "very helpful"
during the investigation, however, he was
unsure if "the FBI is going to comply."
Nunes said the surveillance collection was
"legally collected foreign intelligence under
FISA incidental collection." But Nunes said
he was "alarmed" the intelligence "ended
up in reporting channels and was widely
disseminated."
It was previously reported that former National Security
Adviser Michael Flynn was "unmasked" in this way,
however, Nunes said "additional names" were unmasked
as well.
He said he didn't know what foreign intelligence value the
surveillance had
"and why people would need to know that
about President-elect Trump and his
transition team."
Nunes did not identify which foreign targets were under
surveillance.
Asked if he thought Trump was spied on, Nunes replied:
"I'm not gonna get into legal definitions
here, but clearly I have a concern."

97
 Rep. Nunes To Personally
Deliver Post-Election Trump ‘Wiretap’ Proof To W.H.
White House Set To Receive Shocking Info Proving Post-Election
Surveillance Of Trump And Associates
By Shepard Ambellas -
03.22.2017 @3:10 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) — Chairman of the

House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-CA) will
deliver sensitive information to the President at the White
House Wednesday afternoon, information the President
desperately needs to vindicate his wiretap claims which he
blasted out on Twitter several weeks ago.

Nunes, who appeared on the Rush Limbaugh show

Wednesday, claims he has critical information which
shows that President Trump and his associates were, in
fact, being surveilled post-election.

“I recently confirmed on numerous occasions the WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Sean
intelligence community incidentally collected information Spicer addresses the press on Mar. 22, 2017. (The White
about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition. House/YouTube)
Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming
administration, details with little or no foreign intelligence Nunes vows the House Intelligence Committee will
value, were widely disseminated in the intelligence continue to investigate the new lead.
community reporting. And third, I have confirmed that
additional names of Trump transition team members were House Speaker Paul Ryan was briefed on the matter early
unmasked. And fourth and finally, I want to be clear, none Wednesday morning.
of this surveillance was related to Russia or the
investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team,”
Nunes said.

According to the chairman, most of the surveillance took

place in “November, December, and January.”

“This appears to be all legally collected foreign

intelligence under FISA,” he said.

The White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer didn’t offer

much information on the matter during Wednesday’s press
briefing but confirmed that the President is set to receive a
briefing from Chairman Nunes in the latter part of the day.
.

98
 Serial Plagiarist CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Calls President
“Bulls**Ter” Several Times On Air – Trump
Derangement Syndrome Is Real
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017
This is CNN: If you ever doubted that “Trump
Derangement Syndrome” on the far Left is a real thing,
this should put your doubts to rest.
On Saturday during an appearance on Don Lemon’s CNN
program, Zakaria launched into a profanity-laced tirade
against Trump, accusing him of being a liar and someone
who has made his way in the world through deception.
“I think the president is somewhat indifferent to
things that are true of false,” he began. “He has
spent his whole life bulls**ting. He has
succeeded by bulls**ting. He has gotten into the
presidency by bulls**ting. It’s very hard to tell
someone at that point that bulls**t doesn’t work
because look at the results right?”
Host Lemon was at a loss for words, as Zakaria went on
and on, documentarian Mark Dice noted on his YouTube
channel:
Dice also included other examples where Zakaria used
similar language to describe the current president in a way
he would have never described, say, our former president
or a real “bulls**t artist,” Hillary Clinton. (RELATED:
Fake News CNN Insinuates Trump Is Mentally Unstable…
Will They Ever Stop Lying?)
99
Dice, who calls CNN the “Counterfeit News Network”
for its serial publication of fake news about Trump and
Republicans, noted:
“When you’re working in live television or you’re
doing live radio interviews, at some point in your
career, you’re probably going to slip up and
swear, possibly even more than once. It happens
in the heat of the moment,” he said. “But the
clowns at CNN are so upset about President
Trump that now they can’t even stop swearing
when they’re talking about him.”
Dice is correct; this really is unprecedented. The hate on
the part of the Alt-Left establishment media is so palpable
they can’t control themselves any longer.
As for Zakaria, his choice of words and his
characterization of Trump is as ironic as it is hypocritical.
This is a guy who is a serial plagiarist once suspended by
his own network and Time, as reported by the Washington
Post in 2012:
Time magazine and CNN suspended columnist
and TV host Fareed Zakaria on Friday after he
acknowledged that he plagiarized sections of
another writer’s article about gun control.
The Washington Post, which publishes a
separate column by Zakaria on its op-ed page,
said it was reviewing Zakaria’s work for the
newspaper.
 Zakaria has apologized to CNN and Time over In a February 2015 column for Vanity Fair, columnist,
the column, which was published in Time’s author, and one-time host of the television debate show
Aug. 20 issue. “Crossfire” Michael Kinsley took Zakaria to task for
being a serial plagiarist. He wrote that the various charges
But that was far from the only time Zakaria lifted other
people’s work and claimed it as his own. “raise questions about his methods, his
intentions, and his anonymous accusers…”
In November 2014, The Week took CNN to task for
keeping Zakaria on as a host and columnist after three Speaking of Slate, columnist Ben Mathis-Lilley noted in
major publications acknowledged that he plagiarized parts August 2014 that Zakaria appeared to have plagiarized
of his work. entire paragraphs in one of his books, 2011’s “Post-
American World 2.0.”
“It’s been nearly two months since we last took a
look at the plagiarism scandal surrounding And I’ve reported on his literary excesses as well.
Fareed Zakaria, whose many ethical lapses have
been chronicled by the pseudonymous bloggers So needless to say, hearing a serial bulls**ter and word
@crushingbort and @blippoblappo. Since then, thief accuse President Trump, an obviously successful
things have only gotten worse for Zakaria,” with businessman before giving all of it up to become the leader
seven Newsweek columns, one column for Slate of the free world, of the same thing is mighty haughty.
and four Washington Post columns reposted with
editor’s notes essentially acknowledging acts of
Being on the Alt-Left, Zakaria proves once again that
plagiarism, Ryan Cooper wrote. (RELATED:
liberal progressives lack the hypocrisy gene.
CNN Hack Fareed Zakaria Gleefully Celebrates
Mass Death Of White People, Paints Whites As
Suicidal Drug-Addicted Alcoholics Who Deserve
To Be Eliminated)
.

100
 Intel Drop: Israel Unleashes
Wikileaks On Russia, Trump Removal Plotted
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
March 22, 2017
We start with the top story today, which you won’t find
anywhere. Meetings today at the Metropolitan Club in
Washington DC and elsewhere “out of sight” are
proceeding to work out a strategy to declare Donald Trump
“disabled” and unable to continue in office.
“Whenever the Vice President and a
majority of either the principal officers of
the executive departments or of such other
body as Congress may by law provide,
transmit to the President pro tempore of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives their written declaration
that the President is unable to discharge
the powers and duties of his office, the Vice
President shall immediately assume the
powers and duties of the office as Acting
President.”
Section 4, XXV Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified
February 10, 1967 and effectively amending a portion of
Article II, Section 1.
One “attendee” told one of our people in Washington that
there was a concern that Vice President Pence was
“burned” by the FBI during his interview over Mike
Flynn’s Russian contacts, leaving Pence open for
obstruction and conspiracy prosecution. Without this
issue, Trump might already be “perp walked” out of the
White House. Several cabinet appointees have turned on
101
Trump thus far including, and imagine this, Jeff Sessions,
Trump’s Attorney General.
WikiLeaks
For those who follow Russia Today and Sputnik News and
who take Wikileaks seriously, strap yourselves in. For
others who pay attention, this is going to be a bumpy ride
anyway. OK, listen up:
Over the past week, Syria did or didn’t
shoot down an Israeli F15E aircraft using a
Russian BUK 2 missile system. Israel,
after denial after denial, is now acting like
this really happened.
Here is where this is getting out of hand. The Israeli
paper, Haaretz, reported that Putin told Netanyahu to stop
attacking Syria. You see, Israel periodically bombs Syria,
sometimes actually attacking Hezbollah advanced weapons
stockpiles or transport but more often simply aiding ISIS
and al Qaeda against the Syrian Army.
Last weeks shoot down of an Israeli plane was the latter,
an obvious attack on the Syrian Army on behalf of ISIS in
an area where there are no Hezbollah in 250 miles.
After the Haaretz story, Netanyahu announced he was
going to keep bombing Syria anyway and that meetings in
Moscow between the Israeli ambassador there and the
Russian foreign ministry, to discuss these air attacks, may
have gone on in a way nobody guessed. Israel is trying to
convince the world that they are blackmailing Putin and
that he backed down.
Then Israel dealt their Wikileaks card and, combining that
with a probable “fake news” leak through a questionable
Kuwaiti paper, hit the world with the following conspiracy
theories published in YNet News and the Jerusalem Post,
the Israel version of the MSM.
 In this story: (http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-
Conflict/Report-Iran-accuses-Russia-of-giving-Israel-
codes-for-Syrian-air-defenses-484777) Israel claims
Iran has accused Russia of selling them a disabled
 S300 system that could be turned off at any time and
that Russia gave Israel the codes that would allow Iran
to be bombed.
 It further goes on to say that Syria’s air defenses were
sabotaged by Russia as well and that Israel had been
bombing Syria all along with Russian help.
 Then it said that Iran fixed Syria’s missiles and they
fired at (and shot down) an Israeli plane.
There is a good chance that every word of this is a total lie
as it is taken from conspiracy theories spread around
Beirut, Baghdad and Damascus by Israeli agents for years
under a “well poisoning” program.
Then we get to Wikileaks and two stories from YNet News.
Here’s the story:
(http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7
340,L-4196367,00.html)
WikiLeaks: Russia gave Israel Iranian
system’s codes
Document by intelligence company
suggests Israel, Russia contracted deal
several years ago under which Israel
provided Russia with codes for UAVs it
sold to Georgia in exchange for Iranian
aerial defense system codes
WikiLeaks has released an email
exchange between employees of Stratfor,
the US-based global intelligence company,
which reveals Israel and Russia made a
deal to swap access codes for defense and
surveillance equipment.
According to the leaked document, Israel
gave Russia the “data link codes” for
unmanned aerial vehicles that the Jewish
state sold to Georgia, and in return, Russia
gave Israel the codes for Tor-M1 missile
defense systems that Russia sold Iran.
In a document by a Stratfor employee
dated February 2009 she says that she had
met with a “Mexican source/friend” who told
her that Israel and Russia had contracted a
deal several years ago as part of which
Israel provided Russia with codes of UAVs
it had sold to Georgia. In exchange
Moscow provided the Israelis with the
codes for Iran’s Tor-M1 aerial defense
systems.
The document suggests that the deal was
signed before the Russia-Georgia war of
102
August 2008 during which Russian forces
invaded Georgia. At the time it was
reported that Georgia was using Israel-
made weapons.
It can also be understood from the
document that the Georgians had at one
point realized that their UAVs were
compromised and were looking for a
replacement for the Israeli made drones.
The Mexican source also addressed the S-
300 aerial defense systems which Israel
and the West have spent years trying to
dissuade Russia from handing over to
Tehran. The source said that Israel and
Turkey were collaborating very closely in
regards to the system and that since
Russia sold them to Greece – Turkey’s
longtime rival – Ankara has been busy
tryinh to crack their codes.
He added that Ankara shared intelligence
with Israel to make sure it has an edge
over Iran should it get the systems from
Russia.
There are a number of issues here. First of all, Stratfor is
by our estimation a “sockpuppet” organization which like
Israel’s DEBKA, puts out fake news mixed with open
source intelligence as a disinformation operation closely
aligned with InfoWars, Breitbart and Fox News. We have
just conjugated the world “fake.”
The Georgia UAV story is itself outlandish. Israel’s Elbit
UAV’s at the time, and I got to play with these, were
hobby shop material at best. The Georgia gambit by Israel
in 2008 was made possible when George Tenet left the
CIA in 2004. Tenet, whose background on the Middle
East proved poor at best did have the top guy on Georgia
and the region with him, Paul Joyal. I had a chance to
review the war and its outcome with Tenet and Joyal, then
private citizens, whose version of events is frightfully
different than the one WikiLeaks refers to.
You see, and we are only guessing such as we do from
time to time, when an outfit like Stratfor needs to get
information or better expressed “disinformation” into the
mainstream, and knowing Stratfor is not a “big deal,” the
only way they could that is to get themselves “hacked” by
Wikileaks, who can use the phony persecution narrative of
Assange hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy to sell their
otherwise shopworn wares.
What is amazing is that an petty outfit like Stratfor is able
to reprocess crap disinformation from almost a decade ago
into current events through WikiLeaks.
Even more amazing isn’t that Stratfor is being burned by
Israel again as an asset but that Israel is also burning
WikiLeaks as an asset too.
Attempt II
The next story from YNet is even odder:
(http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-
4196367,00.html)
Please note that this story is from 2012 and predates the
5+1 agreement of 2015.
WikiLeaks: Israel destroyed nuclear facilities in Iran
Anti-secrecy group releases email by US-based global
security firm linked to CIA, citing Israeli intelligence
source who claims Israelis destroyed all Iranian nuclear
infrastructure on ground weeks ago Israeli commando
forces destroyed, with the help of Kurdish rebels, all of
Iran‘s nuclear infrastructure on ground, an email by a US-
based global security analysis company released by
WikiLeaks on Monday claims.
In the email, an Israeli intelligence source
was asked about Defense Minister Ehud
Barak’s comment “the more the merrier”
following the mysterious explosion that
killed at least 17 people at an Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Corps base near
Tehran in November 2011.
At the time, Iran claimed the blast was an accident, but US
blogger Richard Silverstein said that Israel was the
mastermind.
“I think this is a diversion. The Israelis
already destroyed all the Iranian nuclear
infrastructure on the ground weeks ago,”
said the Israeli source. “The current ‘let’s
bomb Iran’ campaign was ordered by the
EU leaders to divert the public attention
from their at home financial problems.”
48 hours
According to the email, Russia is one of Israel‘s largest
military partners and India is Israel’s largest client.
It also claimed that in case of a direct conflict between
Israel and Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia would benefit
from an oil price hike. On the other hand, China and
Europe would suffer if such an event were to occur.
103
Explosion that killed 17 at Iranian facility (Photo: Reuters)
According to Israel’s plans, claimed the intelligence
source, an attack on Iran would last 48 hours but would be
so detrimental to the Islamic Republic that it would lead to
the collapse of the Tehran government.
The emails, snatched by hackers, could unmask sensitive
sources and throw light on the murky world of
intelligence-gathering by the company known as Stratfor,
which counts Fortune 500 companies among its
subscribers.
Some of the emails being published “may be forged or
altered to include inaccuracies; some may be authentic,”
the company statement said.
Hackers linked to the loosely organized Anonymous
hackers group said at the beginning of the year they had
stolen the email correspondence of some 100 of the firm’s
employees. The group said it planned to publish the data so
the public would know the “truth” about Stratfor
operations.
WikiLeaks and Anonymous maintain the emails will
expose dark secrets about the company. Stratfor said in its
statement it had worked hard to build “good sources” in
many countries,
“as any publisher of global geopolitical
analysis would do.”
Reuters contributed to this report
Since Reuters was mentioned, I might point out that
Reuters, aided by groups like the White Helmets, has been
fabricating stories out of Syria from day one, aided by the
Syrian Human Rights Observatory, an ISIS front located
over a noodle shop in Coventry, England.
Now for a reality check, from The Atlantic:
“The corporate research firm has branded
itself as a CIA-like “global intelligence” firm,
but only Julian Assange and some over-
paying clients are fooled.
The group’s reputation among foreign policy writers,
analysts, and practitioners is poor; they are considered a
punchline more often than a source of valuable
information or insight. As a former recipient of their
“INTEL REPORTS” (I assume someone at Stratfor
signed me up for a trial subscription, which appeared in
my inbox unsolicited), what I found was typically some
combination of publicly available information and bland
“analysis” that had already appeared in the previous day’s
New York Times. A friend who works in intelligence once
joked that Stratfor is just The Economist a week later and
several hundred times more expensive. As of 2001, a
Stratfor subscription could cost up to $40,000 per year.
It’s true that Stratfor employs on-the-ground researchers.
They are not spies. On today’s Wikileaks release, one
Middle East-based NGO worker noted on Twitter that
when she met Stratfor’s man in Cairo, he spoke no Arabic,
had never been to Egypt before, and had to ask her for
directions to Tahrir Square.
So why do Wikileaks and their hacker source Anonymous
seem to consider Stratfor, which appears to do little more
than combine banal corporate research with media-style
freelance researcher arrangements, to be a cross between
CIA and Illuminati?”
The question hanging out there deserves an answer. When
Wikileaks seemed to be a hammer helping Russia get a
candidate elected who was going to look after their
interests, Russia Today and Sputnik News couldn’t say
enough about Assange. Now that Israel is digging up
Wikileaks crap,coordinated with what to us looks to be a
fabricated or “Trumped up” story from Kuwait, one that
sets Syria and Iran against Russia, pure Netanyahu
masturbation material, perhaps Russia might want to think
again before investing in WikiLeaks counterfeit currency.
With Israel peddling air defense systems to China and
India are using these conspiracy theories about Russia they
created to sell their crap. Then again, when it comes down
to real UAV technology, let’s see where Israel get’s theirs:
From DefenseTech:
“Secret U.S. missile and electro-optics
technology was transferred to China
recently by Israel, prompting anger from
.
104
the U.S. and causing a senior Israeli
defense official to resign.
The head of defense exports for the Israeli
Defense Ministry resigned after a U.S.
investigation concluded that technology,
including a miniature refrigeration system
manufactured by Ricor and used for
missiles and in electro-optic equipment,
was sent to China, according to the Israeli
newspaper Maariv.
Another Israeli news site, Aretz Sheva,
reports the U.S. is concerned the
technology could ultimately find its way to
Iran, which last year sought to buy military
equipment from China for its nuclear
program.
Ricor, on its company website, identifies a
number of defense programs using its
miniature cryo-coolers, including UAVs,
airborne enhanced vision systems, missile
warning systems, hand-held thermal
imagers and thermal weapons sights.
The Maariv report identified the Israeli
defense official as Meir Shalit, and said he
apologized to U.S. officials on a recent
visit.
Israel has a long record of getting U.S.
military technology to China.
In the early 1990s then-CIA Director James
Woolsey told a Senate Government Affairs
Committee that Israel had been selling U.S.
secrets to China for about a decade. More
than 12 years ago the U.S. demanded
Israel cancel a contract to supply China
with Python III missiles, which included
technology developed by the U.S. for its
Sidewinder missiles, The Associated Press
reported in 2002.”
How soon we forget.
 Trump Gets “Win” At G-20, As “Anti-Protectionism, Free-
Trade And Climate Change Funding”
Commitment Is Dropped
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017
Globalists in the U.S., Europe and Asia are most likely
going to be livid after Trump administration officials got a
“win” of sorts for the president’s “America First” trade
agenda.
The U.S. delegation, led by Treasury Secretary Steve
Mnuchin, got into a row early on with the other 19
delegations as talks quickly shifted primarily to trade and,
more to the point, globalization versus protectionism.
The meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany on Saturday came
as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President
Donald Trump met for the first time in Washington, D.C.,
a meeting that was at times obviously uncomfortable. The
principle disagreement, as reported by Zero Hedge, was
the language of the official communique that was released
later in the day. The statement is supposed to be indicative
of how future trade relations between the countries will be
conducted.
Bloomberg reported that globalist (and mercantilist)
powers like Germany and China prefer the existing rules-
based order, but the U.S. delegation insisted that from here
on trade must be “fair,” though that was not initially
defined.
Chinese Finance Minister Xiao Jie said early in the day
that the G-20 ought to be “adamantly against”
protectionism, but that likely had very little influence on
Mnuchin, whose boss was especially critical of trade deals
involving China specifically on the campaign trail. Trump
105
regularly laid blame on previous U.S. administrations for
making “bad deals” with Beijing that were largely, in his
view, one-sided – and given China’s historic trade surplus
with the U.S., it’s hard to argue against Trump’s view.
(RELATED: Paris Climate Talks Considered A Total
Joke Even Among Greenies)
Nevertheless, it is equally understandable why the other
powers – China especially – would want to defend the
existing system – it favors them.
Team Trump, however, is having none of it.
German attempts at compromise so as to appease the U.S.
position, Bloomberg noted, were roundly rejected by a
number of delegations including France, the U.K., Italy,
Brazil and the European Union. The disagreement
stemmed from how best to deal with trade promises from
previous G-20 meetings – an old order Trump wants no
part of.
So, after hours of delays and discussions, finance ministers
ended their discussions without renewing the previous
commitments, long-standing as they were, to free trade and
rejection of protectionism, thanks to Mnuchin’s continued
objections.
Zero Hedge noted further:
This would break with a decade-old
tradition among the finance ministers and
central bankers of the world’s top 20
economies (G20), who over the years have
repeatedly rejected protectionism and
endorsed free trade.
But the new administration in the United
States is considering trade measures to
curb imports with a border tax and would
not agree to repeat the formulations used
by previous G20 communiques, clashing
with China and Europe…
“This is not a good outcome of the
meeting,” a G20 delegate quoted
Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann as
 saying, according to Reuters. Said another
official, who asked not to be named,
“Unless there is a last-minute miracle, there
is no agreement on trade.”
The new communique says:
We are working to strengthen the
contribution of trade to our economies. We
will strive to reduce excessive global
imbalances, promote greater inclusiveness
and fairness and reduce inequality in our
pursuit of economic growth.
Also noted in the Reuters report is that another potential
win for the president is that the communique is devoid of a
.
106
reference, used by the G20 in 2016 on a readiness to
finance climate change, agreed to in Paris in 2015, over
opposition from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. (RELATED:
OMB Director Mulvaney Says Climate Change
Research ‘A Waste Of Your Money’)
While Zero Hedge predicted that the acrimony at G20 and
the removal of “free trade” language from the
communique are likely to create instability in global
markets and uncertainty ahead for the U.S. dollar, I see
something different. Sure, there may be market
fluctuations and uncertainty for a time, but Trump has
made clear that the world’s biggest market – the United
States – will no longer be a dumping ground for the
world’s goods without some reciprocity for American
goods. And over time, that will prove to be a good thing
for the dollar, and for our country.
 Nunes: "The FBI Is Not Cooperating With Our
Investigation Into Trump Wiretapping"
by Tyler Durden
Mar 22, 2017 4:43 PM
The FBI is not cooperating with the House of
Representatives' investigation into the NSA's surveillance
of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, the
chairman of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee,
Devin Nunes said in a press conference on Wednesday
afternoon.
In the aftermath of today's most stunning news report,
namely the confirmation that Trump may have been right
all along following the admission of House Intel
Committee Chair Devin Nunes that the communications of
Trump's aides and the president himself had been
"incidentally" monitored, Nunes held an explosive press
conference outside the White House in which told
reporters that communications from the Trump team were
picked up and disseminated within the government during
the 2016 campaign. Nunes said sources within the
intelligence community presented him with the
information. He spoke to the press after briefing the
administration.
Nunes said that he had briefed the president about his
concerns over the "incidental" collection of data, adding
that the president "needs to know" that these intel reports
exist, and adding ominously that
"some of what I've seen seems to be
inappropriate."
Nunes also said that Trump, others in the transition team
were put into the intelligence report and asked if Trump
should be in these "normal" reports.
But what was perhaps most troubling in Nunes presser is
that in the aftermath of Monday's Congressional hearing
with James Comey in which the FBI director said on the
107
record there had been no surveillance of Trump, is the
House Intel Commission chair's statement that the FBI is
not cooperating with the investigation.
"We don’t actually know yet officially what
happened to General Flynn," Nunes said of
how communications from Gen. Flynn's
calls were leaked to the press. "We just
know that his name leaked out but we don't
know how it was picked up yet. That was
one of the things that we asked for in the
March 15th letter, was for the NSA, CIA,
and FBI to get us all the unmasking that
was done."
"And I'll tell you, NSA is being
cooperative," Nunes continued, "but so
far the FBI has not told us whether or
not they’re going to respond to our
March 15th letter, which is now a couple
of weeks old.”
Nunes also reported that as of now,
he "cannot rule out" President Obama
ordering the surveillance.
Finally, and contrary to earlier media reports,
Nunes clarified that the surveillance was
not related to the FBI's investigation
into possible collusion with Russia. This
surveillance, he emphasized to
reporters, does not "have anything to do
with Russia."
As a reminder, this has been the strawman argument
proposed by much of the liberal media, which has said that
a wiretapping of Trump or his aides, would only confirm
that his relations with Russia were suspect and thus
prompted a FISA warrant.
If Nunes is correct, and Trump was being wiretapped for
reasons having nothing to do with Russia, that entire
narrative falls apart, and the press will now have to spend
the next few weeks building up an entirely new narrative
to "justify" why Trump was being wiretapped on Obama's
watch.
 US Spy Agencies Monitored
Trump In Late 2016: GOP Lawmaker
Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:34PM

An American flag flies from a building across the street from Trump
Tower, March 7, 2017 in New York City. (Photos by AFP)
US spy agencies possibly monitored
then-President-elect Donald Trump and
members of his transition team after the
2016 presidential election but found
intelligence with little value and
irrelevant to the New York billionaire’s
ties with Russia, says a key Republican
from California.
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee
confirmed at a press conference Wednesday that
information had been collected legally and on numerous
occasions but mostly "incidentally" and with "little or no
apparent foreign intelligence value."
The surveillance had nothing to do with allegations that
Russia played a role in Trump’s victory, GOP
Representative Devin Nunes further added.
"I recently confirmed that on numerous
occasions the intelligence community
incidentally collected information about US
citizens involved in the Trump transition,"
Nunes said. "None of this surveillance was
related to Russia or the investigation of
Russian activities or of the Trump team."
.
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin
Nunes (R-CA) speaks to reporters during a news conference at the
US Capitol March 22, 2017 in Washington, DC.
Nunes' committee is probing allegations of Russian
interference in the November 8, 2016 vote.
In a declassified report released in January, the intelligence
community concluded that Russian President Vladimir
Putin helped the New York billionaire win the White
House, an allegation dismissed both by Moscow and
Trump.
Later, the businessman accused former President Barrack
Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower in the run-up to the
election, an allegation dismissed by FBI Director James
Comey during a hearing on Monday.
Information provided to Nunes, however, appear to bolster
Trump’s claims of “wiretapping.”
"It was a lot of information on the
President-elect and the transition team and
what they were doing," Nunes said.

108
 Pelosi, Schiff Slam "White House Surrogate"
Nunes' "Act Of Diversion & Desperation"
By Tyler Durden
Mar 22, 2017 6:14 Pm
It seems Devin Nunes has struck a chord given the level of
rhetoric roaring out of Democrat HQ tonight. After
briefing The White House on the fact that Trump was
"incidentally surveilled" along with his team - somewhat
vindicating the President's tweets - the top Democrat on
the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday that
he has "grave concerns" over Nunes
'impartiality" and Democratic leader
Pelosi exclaimed his comments were an
"act of desperation and diversion" in a
statement.
As The Hill reports, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)
criticized Nunes for his surprise announcement earlier
in the day that he had seen intelligence intercepts that
showed authorities had incidentally gathered information
on members of the Trump transition team during
investigations that the chairman said were not related to
Russia.
"If accurate, this information should
have been shared with members of the
committee, but it has not been," Schiff
said in a statement that criticized Nunes for
a "profound irregularity" in how he had
handled the situation.
"The Chairman also shared this information
with the White House before providing it to
the committee, another profound
irregularity, given that the matter is
109
currently under investigation. I have
expressed my grave concerns with the
Chairman that a credible investigation
cannot be conducted this way," he said.
Of course MSNBC was more than happy to host Schiff to
explain how Nunes is a
"White House surrogate"...
And to raise doubts about his
independence...
And even better, to deny Clapper, Comey,
and everyone else's admissins that there is
no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion and
claim that he has new evidence - "I can't
go into the particulars, but there is more
than circumstantial evidence now"...
Schiff maintained that if Trump and his aides ended up in a
lawfully compiled intelligence report, they were likely not
the subjects of surveillance. Then Schiff issued a statement
for good effect:
"This afternoon, Chairman Devin Nunes
announced he had some form of
intercepts revealing that lawfully
gathered intelligence on foreign officials
included information on U.S. Persons,
potentially including those associated
with President Trump or the President
himself. If accurate, this information should
have been shared with members of the
committee, but it has not been. Indeed, it
appears that committee members only
learned about this when the Chairman
discussed the matter this afternoon with the
press. The Chairman also shared this
information with the White House before
 providing it to the committee, another
profound irregularity, given that the matter
is currently under investigation. I have
expressed my grave concerns with the
Chairman that a credible investigation
cannot be conducted this way.
"As to the substance of what the Chairman
has alleged, if the information was lawfully
gathered intelligence on foreign officials,
that would mean that U.S. persons would
not have been the subject of surveillance.
In my conversation late this afternoon,
the Chairman informed me that most of
the names in the intercepted
communications were in fact masked,
but that he could still figure out the
probable identity of the parties.
Again, this does not indicate that there was
any flaw in the procedures followed by the
intelligence agencies. Moreover, the the
probable identity of the parties. Again, this
does not indicate that there was any flaw in
the procedures followed by the intelligence
agencies. Moreover, the any flaw in the
procedures followed by the intelligence
agencies. Moreover, the unmasking of a
U.S. Person's name is fully appropriate
when it is necessary to understand the
context of collected foreign intelligence
information.
"Because the committee has still not
been provided the intercepts in the
possession of the Chairman, it is
impossible to evaluate the Chairman's
claims.
It certainly does not suggest -- in any
way -- that the President was wiretapped
by certainly does not suggest -- in any
way -- that the President was wiretapped
by his predecessor."
Then Democratic Party leader Nancy Pelosi chimed in
with the following statement:
Pelosi Statement on Intelligence
Chairman Nunes' Meeting with
President Trump
Washington, D.C. — Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
released this statement after Chairman Nunes' comments to
the press following his meeting with President Trump at
the White House:
"The unprecedented comments of
Chairman Nunes are an act of diversion
and desperation.
110
The Chairman's highly irregular conduct with the White
House raises serious questions about his impartiality,
especially given his history as part of the Trump Transition
team. Abandoning any pretense of bipartisanship,
Chairman Nunes raced to the White House and to the press
to perpetuate the Trump Administration's misinformation
campaign.
"The unmasking of legally intercepted
intelligence is often appropriate and
necessary to understand the context of
foreign intelligence information. Chairman
Nunes' actions are disrespectful of Ranking
Member Schiff and the bipartisan
membership of the Intel Committee.
Republicans are grasping at straws
because the FBI Director confirmed that
President Obama did not wiretap President
Trump, and affirmed an investigation of
coordination between the Russians and
individuals affiliated with the Trump
campaign in the election.
"Chairman Nunes is deeply
compromised, and he cannot possibly
lead an honest investigation. Congress
must create a comprehensive,
independent, bipartisan commission to
expose the full truth of the Trump-Russia
connection."
And finally, a Democratic member of the House
Intelligence Committee on Wednesday pushed back on
revelations from the panel's Chairman Devin Nunes (R-
Calif.), saying his claims of incidental U.S. surveillance of
members of President Trump's transition team were
"trumped up."
"If, in fact, this took place, it was
incidental and it was done through what
is legally allowed by the CIA when they
are surveilling foreign persons," Rep.
Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said during an
appearance on MSNBC.
"This could be a lot of theater – it looks
very trumped up to me – but we'll have to
wait and see," she added.
Seems like Mr. Nunes - who we are sure will be
discovered to have had contact with some Russian official
or other very soon - has hit a nerve, smashing yet another
leg out from under the 1-legged stool of the Democrat
narrative.
 Russiagate And The
Democratic Party Are For Chumps
By Paul Street
March 22, 2017
Photo by Mike Maguire | CC BY 2.0
The orange-tinted freakshow that is Donald Trump should
be removed from the White House and sent to some filthy,
rat-infested dungeon with a sentence of Life Without
Twitter. The same goes for the rest of his racist, eco-cidal,
arch-plutocratic, and shockingly Christian Fascist
administration. They should be forced to work sunup to
sundown in a solar panel-making work camp in the
Arizona desert.
But Trump and his team should be defenestrated for what
offenses and with what higher purpose? To put another
dismal dollar Democrat like Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton,
or Barack Obama in power? God no. The neoliberal “free
market” ideology that Democrats have been advancing
every bit as much as (and more effectively than)
Republicans over the last generation and more is how we
got to this horrific Trumpian moment. Corporate power
long ago turned the Democratic Party into a democratically
useless lap-dog of the leading financial institutions, top
multinational corporations, and the vast U.S. military
empire. This depresses and demobilizes much of the
nation’s poor and working class citizenry (or ex-citizenry),
turning millions into non-voters and millions more into
supporters of the ever more rightward, white-nationalist
Republican Party.
At the same time, the reigning neoliberal doctrine shared
by top Democrats and Republicans – “Two Wings Of The
Same Bird Of Prey” (Upton Sinclair, 1904) – has stripped
American government of its capacity and willpower to
carry out positive social and democratic functions.
Neoliberalism starves what the French sociologist Pierre
Bourdieu called “the left hand of the state” – the parts of
111
the public sector that serve the social and democratic needs
of the non-affluent majority. At the same time, it feeds the
regressive and repressive “right hand of the state,” the
parts of government that distribute wealth and power
upward while punishing the working and lower classes and
all who resist the unelected and interrelated dictatorships
of money and empire.
It’s a deadly process on numerous levels. The less the
ruling class relies on the velvet welfare-statist glove of
cooptation to maintain hierarchy, the more it relies on the
iron police-state fist of brute-force repression. With
government famished when it comes to meeting the needs
of any but the wealthy few, moreover, the way is open for
a demagogue to seize upon popular resentments and come
in claiming that he and he alone can fix the nation’s
problems and make it “great again.” When the “normal”
bourgeois institutions and liberal elites are perceived (all
too accurately in many cases) as pathetic and nefarious, a
charismatic, populism-manipulating bully steps into the
vacuum to promise a restoration of lost national greatness.
That was Hitler’s gambit in Germany in the 1930s. It is
one of the big Trump cards Herr Donald played last year.
Now Trump and the nation’s 34 Republican governors get
to wield the ever-expanding powers of the police state in a
nation whose populace has lost faith in nearly every major
U.S. institution but two: the military and the police. It’s a
militarized police-state the Democrats helped create.
Here’s where a “progressive Democrat” often steps in in to
argue that it doesn’t have to be like this because the
Democratic Party can be turned in a winning left and
social-democratic direction.. I’ve been hearing this from
them all my politically cognizant life. It is a naive and
unduly trusting fantasy.
Left-leaning progressives have long been held in disdainful
contempt by Democratic Party elites (I’ve been writing
about this for years) who understand very well that their
first job above all others is to prevent the emergence of any
serious left opposition to ruling class power in the United
States. The foremost duty of the “Inauthentic Opposition
Party” [IOP] (as the late left political scientist Sheldon
Wolin called the Democrats) is to keep real popular
resistance at bay.
The contempt continues to this very day, undaunted by the
electoral collapse of the neoliberal Democrats. The mildly
social-democratic progressivism of war “socialist” Bernie
Sanders must be marginalized at all costs as far as top
Democrats are concerned. So what if Sanders’ brand of
progressivism might be a road to revival and victory for a
party that became even less popular than the widely
loathed Republicans and Trump? As The Guardian’s
Trevor Trimm recently reported:
If you look at the numbers, Bernie Sanders is the most
popular politician in America – and it’s not even close. Yet
bizarrely, the Democratic party – out of power across the
country and increasingly irrelevant – still refuses to
embrace him and his message…instead ,… the
establishment wing of the party continues to resist him at
almost every turn, and they seem insistent that they don’t
have to change their ways to gain back the support of huge
swaths of the country….Politico ran a story just this
week featuring Democratic officials fretting over the fact
that Sanders supporters may upend their efforts to retake
governorships in southern states by insisting those
candidates adopt Sanders’ populist policies – seemingly
oblivious to the fact that Sanders plays well in some of
those states too…The establishment wing of the party
aggressively ran another opponent against Keith Ellison,
Sanders’ choice to run the Democratic National
Committee, seemingly with the primary motivation to keep
the party away from Sanders’ influence…They’ve
steadfastly refused to take giant corporations head on in
the public sphere and wouldn’t even return to an Obama-
era rule that banned lobbyist money from funding the
DNC that was rescinded last year. And despite the broad
popularity of the government guaranteeing health care for
everyone, they still have not made any push for a
Medicare-for-all plan that Sanders has long called for as a
rebuttal to Republicans’ attempt to dismantle Obamacare”
(emphasis added).
But how “bizarre” is this really? The Democrats’ refusal to
take the Sanders path is crazy and stupid only if you think
the Democratic Party’s main jobs are to win elections
and/or advance social justice and democracy. But that’s a
silly thing to believe. The IOP’s most urgent imperative is
to serve corporate and financial power, and that means
keeping even milquetoast social democrats like the F35
Fighter Jet champion Sanders at bay.
Make no mistake: the leadership of the
Democratic Party preferred the “lying
neoliberal warmonger” Hillary Clinton
defeating Sanders (in some very nasty
ways) and then losing to Trump over a
scenario in which Sanders would have
defeated Hillary and then bested (as all the
relevant match-up polls suggested he
would have) Trump.
112
To be sure, the reigning Democrats know that they and the
system they represent have an interest in their party
retaining some electoral relevance and moving beyond
their current pathetic status. Unwilling to embrace the
excessively (for them and their big money backers) left
Sanders “revolution,” they think they can unseat the
orange-haired beast by tying him to the Kremlin with
trumped-up charges based on vague reports from hazy
intelligence sources. They dream that dubious anti-Trump
intelligence missives and liberal corporate media allies can
“fuel…a Russia frenzy…that will,” in Masha Gessen’s
words, “create a dark enough cloud of suspicion around
Trump that Congress will find the will and the grounds to
impeach him.”
But it’s likely that the real Russia card trick will be played
not on Trump but on progressives and liberals. The Russia
charges are unlikely to dethrone Trumpenstein. As Gessen
recently noted in the New York Review of Books,
“He may sacrifice more of his people, as he
sacrificed Flynn, as further leaks discredit
them. Various investigations may drag on
for months, drowning out other, far more
urgent issues. In the end, Congressional
Republicans will likely conclude that their
constituents don’t care enough about
Trump’s Russian ties to warrant trying to
impeach the Republican president.”
Even if Democrats were to succeed in unseating Trump
with the Russia ploy, they would do so at no small
democratic cost. They would set a dangerous new
precedent of intelligence community (CIA) interference in
domestic U.S. politics. They would double down on the
dangerous games of fake news and “alternative facts.”
But the biggest democratic price of Russiagate is already
being paid. The Russia Madness focuses public attention
on something Trump isn’t, a Kremlin tool, rather than what
he really is: an arch-plutocratic pre-fascist racist and sexist
and super-militarist enemy of the poor and working-class
majority. As Gessen reflects on what she calls “the Russia
conspiracy trap”:
“…the Russia allegations will [probably] not
bring down Trump. Meanwhile, while
Russia continues to dominate the front
pages, Trump will continue waging war on
immigrants, cutting funding for everything
that’s not the military, assembling his
cabinet of deplorables… to carry out what
Steve Bannon calls the ‘deconstruction of
the administrative state.’…in his first
speech as attorney general[, Jeff
Sessions] promised to cut back civil rights
enforcement and he has already
abandoned a Justice Department case
against a discriminatory Texas voter ID
 law. But it was his Russia lie that grabbed
the big headlines….Imagine if the same
kind of attention could be trained and
sustained on other issues—like it has been
on the Muslim travel ban…Trump is doing
nothing less than destroying American
democratic institutions and principles by
turning the presidency into a profit-making
machine for his family, by poisoning
political culture with hateful, mendacious,
and subliterate rhetoric, by undermining the
public sphere with attacks on the press and
protesters, and by beginning the real work
of dismantling every part of the federal
government that exists for any purpose
other than waging war. Russiagate is
helping him – both by distracting from real,
documentable, and documented issues,
and by promoting a xenophobic conspiracy
theory in the cause of removing a
xenophobic conspiracy theorist from office”
(emphasis added).
Gessen gives Trump too much detrimental credit. The
“destr[uction of] American democratic institutions and
principles” is a richly bipartisan ruling class project that
has been underway since at least the 1970s. (At the same
time, Gessen must know that the Trump White House
doesn’t wish to dismantle other right-handed state
functions beside the military. Just for one example among
many, it will support the Department of Homeland
Security’s capacity to monitor, infiltrate, harass, and
otherwise repress environmental and social justice
activists.)
Still, Masha Gessen’s main point is well-taken. The
Russian conspiracy scheme is a nasty snare for left-leaning
politicos. It won’t take Trump down but it distracts people
from the real and more substantive crimes and outrages of
the Trump administration.
So, it’s a crazy Democratic strategy, right? Not so fast.
Remember that the issues “Russiagate” pushes to the
margins, including racism, classism, ecocide, and the
undermining of the public sphere, are all problem areas for
.
113
the corporate and imperial Democrats too. The dreary,
dollar-drenched Dems have been deeply complicit with the
Republicans in creating the rightward neoliberal drift of
U.S. policy over the last four-plus decades. It is (never
forget) their first and foremost function (in service to the
nation’s unelected and interrelated dictatorships of money
and empire) to keep left forces and sentiments
marginalized. Russiagate makes perfect sense for
establishment Democrats on numerous levels, including
how it absolves them from guilt for blowing the 2016
elections (because “Russia and Comey did it”) by running
a horrible campaign with a terrible, highly unpopular and
two-faced neoliberal presidential candidate atop their
miserable ticket.
But there’s another and dark question to mull over here.
What if the Democrats were to take a “winning”
progressive and social-democratic path into the 2018 and
2020 elections? It is at the very least questionable that the
Trump-era Republicans would consent to removal through
election. What was the Bannon-TrumPence
administration’s preposterous claim to have won the 2016
popular vote (by as many as 5 million tallies!) but an
advance impeachment of voter repudiations they might
face in coming elections? The steep state-level electoral
barriers posed by rampant Republican gerrymandering and
voter suppression (legal and illegal) are bad enough. They
will be supplemented if necessary by false charges of voter
fraud and the very real prospect of violence (legal and
extra-legal). White nationalist fascists don’t consent to
being removed from office by mere voters. It might seem
like a shocking thing to say, but I don’t see the current
batch of in-power Republicans accepting election results
they don’t like. It’s not how they roll. It’s not what they’re
about. They can only be brought down through a major
popular uprising beneath and beyond the quadrennial
electoral extravaganzas that have long functioned as a
potent method for the marginalization of the citizenry qua
electorate.
Russiagate and the Democrats are for liberal and
progressive chumps. So, perhaps, are elections now.
 Trump, GOP Leaders Looking For Way To Salvage
Healthcare Reform Amid Revolt From Conservatives
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017
Almost immediately after House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-
Wis., introduced the American Health Care Act as the
repeal-and-replace legislation for failing Obamacare, he
realized he had a problem that would not easily be
overcome.
Even before he formally offered up the AHCA, he knew
he’d get little-to-no support from congressional
Democrats. What he likely did not count on or expect was
the amount of vehement opposition he is getting from
members of his own party, especially the more
conservative faction.
Some complained that it was Ryan’s take it or leave it
approach to “selling” the bill. When introducing it to
Congress and the media, Ryan said either Republicans
were going to repeal and replace Obamacare (with his
legislation) or it wouldn’t happen because now is “the
closest we’ve ever come” to fulfilling a key campaign
promise for virtually every Republican member of
Congress (and President Donald J. Trump).
But even Ryan admitted that the AHCA is not the repeal-
and-replace measure that all had hoped for. No, he said,
repeal-and-replace would have to be done in stages
because of the manner in which even a watered-down
measure would have to be passed in the Senate. Budget
reconciliation, which was used to pass the framework of
Obamacare in the first place, only requires a Senate
majority, not the 60 votes normally required to end
filibusters of legislation. And since Republicans control 52
seats, there would be little Democrats could do to stop it.
(RELATED: CBO Was Wrong Over Obamacare Sign-
Ups – Or Half-Right, Depending On How You Look
At It)
Then some Senate Republicans started to bail on the
legislation, but not for the same reasons House
114
Republicans are bailing: Some are defending Obamacare’s
expansion of Medicaid, which is only hastening the day
when that entitlement becomes unsustainable, and to many
a House conservative, that’s the one provision that has to
go (because it’s fiscally unsustainable).
What to do?
As reported by The National Sentinel, the president is
prepared to do his part to make a deal and get a key
campaign promise on the way towards fulfillment:
… President Donald J. Trump seems
convinced that he can get a deal done and
get something passed that, if not loved
universally among Republicans, at least
liked well enough among a majority of
them.
The Washington Examiner noted further:
Speaking at a rally in Kentucky, Trump said
he was ready to work with Republican
leaders who support the bill, but also
lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. Paul
opposes the bill, but Trump said he likes
Paul “a lot.”
“And I look forward to working with him so
we can get this bill passed, in some form,
so that we can pass massive tax reform,
which we can’t do until this happens,”
Trump said.
“So we gotta get this done before we can
do the other,” he explained. “In other
words, we have to know what this is before
we can do the big tax cuts. We gotta get it
done for a lot of reasons, but that’s one of
them.” (RELATED: Trump Introduces A
“Repeal And Replace” Angle For
Obamacare)
Last week, Trump said he had been successful in flipping
some conservative votes during a White House meeting to
discuss the legislation. He said the legislation will boost
“bidding by insurance companies like you’ve never seen
before” to get rates down for consumers, as well as new
designs for health plans that
“nobody’s even thought of … to take care
of people.”
On Tuesday, Trump traveled to Capitol Hill to make a
personal appeal to Republican holdouts, warning them that
either they supported the legislation – which is being
tweaked to satisfy both conservative and moderate
Republicans – or “lose your seat” at the next election,
since the promise to repeal Obamacare was part of what
helped the GOP build on their congressional majorities and
get Trump elected.
115
During a closed-door meeting with the House GOP
conference, Trump reportedly said,
“I honestly think many of you will lose your
seats in 2018.”
“This Thursday we have a chance to repeal
and replace Obamacare, and this time
you’ve actually got someone who will sign
the bill,” Trump told them. “I’m asking for
your vote.”
 Did Acosta Block
Trump Sex Crime Arrest?
By Ann Diener For Veterans Today
By GPD On March 22, 2017
Today, Labor Secretary nominee Alexander Acosta faced
questioning today by Virginia Senator Tim Kaine in
regards to the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case and plea
deal that was negotiated behind closed doors without
victim involvement.
Senator Kaine read from the Washington Post article,
“Labor nominee Acosta cut deal with
billionaire guilty in sex abuse case.”
From the article as read by Senator Kaine,
“There was once a time — before the
investigations, before the sexual abuse
conviction — when rich and famous men
loved to hang around with Jeffrey Epstein,
a billionaire money manager who loved to
party. They visited his mansion in Palm
Beach, Fla. They flew on his jet to join him
at his private estate on the Caribbean
island of Little Saint James. They even
joked about his taste in younger women.
“President Trump called Epstein a ‘terrific
guy’ back in 2002, saying that ‘he’s a lot of
fun to be with. It is even said that he likes
beautiful women as much as I do, and
many of them are on the younger side.’
“Now, Trump is on the witness list in a
Florida court battle over how federal
prosecutors handled allegations that
Epstein, 64, sexually abused more than 40
minor girls, most of them between the ages
116
of 13 and 17. The lawsuit questions why
Trump’s nominee for labor secretary,
former Miami U.S. attorney Alexander
Acosta, whose Senate confirmation hearing
began Wednesday morning, cut a non-
prosecution deal with Epstein a decade
ago rather than pursuing a federal
indictment that Acosta’s staff had
advocated.”
Below is the transcript from the hearing this morning, after
Senator Kaine read the above article and entered it into the
record. Key questions are:
1. As the victim’s testimonies indicate that the crimes
happened over state lines including the states of New
Mexico and New York as well as internationally in the
Virgin Islands and France, why was this case not
refereed to Federal Prosecutors and Federal Court that
would have had jurisdiction?
2. Beyond just the crimes Epstein plead guilty to, the
victims detail how they were used for blackmail
purposes by Epstein. If this is remotely a possibility,
why would this case not have warranted a thorough
Federal Investigation to seek evidence directly tied to
those others who may have been involved in sex with
underage girls, and identify if there was blackmailable
evidence that may pose a risk to national security,
which falls directly under the responsibility of a US
Attorney?
Senator Kaine:
“Can I read one of the statements from the
article, ‘Federal prosecutors detailed their
findings in an 82 page prosecution memo
and a 53 page indictment, but Epstein was
never indicted’ and then there’s a quote,
‘this agreement’ the agreement you
described,’will not be made part of any
public record, the deal between Epstein
and Acosta says,’ then the document was
unsealed as part of a civil suit in 2015.”
Acosta:
 “So, Senator, um, again to address your
question, I can’t discuss the details of the
case but let me take it generally. Um, It is
pretty typical in prosecutions for an
indictment, a draft indictment to be written.
That doesn’t necessarily mean that that
draft indictment is filed because that draft
indictment does not consider often the
strength of the underlying case. And so as
part of any plea, it is not unusual to have
an indictment that says these are all the
places we can go, yet at the end of the day,
based on the evidence, professionals
within a prosecutors office decide that a
plea that guarantees that someone goes to
jail, that guarantees that someone register
generally (unusual broad hand gesture)
and that guarantees other outcomes is a
good thing. And so.”
Is it typical to ignore key individuals involved, including
Ghislane Maxwell who procured the young women for
Epstein and allegedly for his patrons as well and Leslie
Wexner who purchased the New York property where the
alleged criminal activity took place?
These allegations could only have been addressed in a
Federal case which Acosta neglected to pursue.
According to the US Attorney’s Manual Section 9-2.000
link to US Attorney’s Manual Section 9-2.000
“The authority, discretionary power, and
responsibilities of the United States
Attorney with relation to criminal matters
encompass without limitation by
enumeration the following:
“1. Investigating suspected or alleged
offenses against the United States, see
USAM 9-2.010.”
Would blackmail of prominent American politicians be
considered an offense against the United States?
And,
“2. Causing investigations to be conducted
by the appropriate federal law enforcement
agencies, see USAM 9-2.010.”
As this case involves multiple states and countries
wouldn’t Acosta have had to refer it to Federal prosecutors
and investigators?
Here is the transcript starting after Senator Kaine reads the
paragraphs from the Washington Post.
Senator Kaine:
117
“My understanding is that there is a
pending civil lawsuit filed by a couple of the
victims in that case seeking to argue that
they should have been given notice prior to
the plea deal being entered into, is that
your understanding as well?”
Acosta,
“My understanding is that there is a
pending civil lawsuit. The Department of
Justice has defended the actions of the
office in that matter both under President
Bush and President Obama’s
Administrations”
Senator Kaine:
“The opening that I read suggests that you
decided as US Attorney to cut a non-
prosecution deal, that part of that decision
was that non-prosecution deal be held
private not appear in the public record and
there is an allegation that I just read that
you did not pursue a Federal Indictment,
even though your staff had advocated that
you do so. Is that accurate?”
Acosta:
“That is not accurate. Let me address the
um, you know one of the difficulties with the
Department of Justice is that the
Department of Justice does not litigate in
the public record or in the media and
litigates in court.
“Let me set forth some facts. This matter
was originally a state case. It was
presented by a State attorney to the Grand
Jury in Palm Beach County. The Grand
Jury in Palm Beach County recommended
a single count of solicitation not involving
minors, I believe and that would have
resulted in zero jail time, zero registration
as a sexual offender and zero restitution for
the victims in this case.
“The matter, um, was then presented to the
US Attorney’s office. It is highly unusual
and as I was speaking to some of your
colleagues, um, that have been involved in
prosecutions they mentioned that they
don’t know of any cases personally where
a US Attorney becomes involved in a
matter after it has already gone to a grand
jury at the state level.
 “In this case we deemed it to become
involved. We early on had discussions
within the office and we decided that a
sentence. Oh, how should I put this, that
Mr. Epstein should plead guilty to two
years, register as a sex-offender and
concede liability so the victims could get
restitution. And if that were done, the
Federal Interest could be satisfied and we
would defer to the State.
“That was very early on in the case. I say
that because the article goes on to talk
about a view that the US Attorney’s office
was not aggressive enough in this matter.”
Senator Kaine:
“Can I read one of the statements from the
article, ‘Federal prosecutors detailed their
findings in an 82 page prosecution memo
and a 53 page indictment, but Epstein was
never indicted’ and then there’s a quote,
‘this agreement’ the agreement you
described,’ will not be made part of any
public record, the deal between Epstein
and Acosta says,’ then the document was
unsealed as part of a civil suit in 2015”
Acosta:
“So, Senator, um, again to address your
question, I can’t discuss the details of the
case but let me take it generally. Um. It is
pretty typical in prosecutions for an
indictment, a draft indictment to be written.
That doesn’t necessarily mean that that
.
118
draft indictment is filed because that draft
indictment does not consider often the
strength of the underlying case. And so as
part of any plea, it is not unusual to have
an indictment that says these are all the
places we can go, yet at the end of the day,
based on the evidence, professionals
within a prosecutors office decide that a
plea that guarantees that someone goes to
jail, that guarantees that someone register
generally (broad hand gesture) and that
guarantees other outcomes is a good thing.
And so.”
Senator Kaine:
“Was that a consensus decision in your
office?”
Acosta:
“It was a broadly held decision, yes.”
Senator Kaine:
“I’m over my time now Mr. Chair and I’ll, I
may come back to this in the second round.
Thank you.”
Chair to Acosta:
“Do you feel like you have time to
sufficiently answer?”
Acosta:
“Mr., Mr. Chairman I think I have.”
 After Comey Confirmed Trump Investigation, The
Question Becomes: Who In The Obama
Administration Ordered It?
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017
During FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence earlier
this week, Democrats and Republicans on the panel asked
questions that were primarily aimed at forwarding each
party’s agenda.
For Democrats, their priority was establishing that
President Donald J. Trump’s March 4 tweets accusing his
predecessor of ordering his “wires tapped” at Trump
Tower were factually wrong and wholly inappropriate —
Comey said he has “no information” substantiating
Trump’s tweeted allegations. And of course, whatever
Democrats’ priorities are, those are the same priorities of
the wholly discredited liberal Washington media.
For Republicans, they wanted to know if there was any
evidence to the Democrat narrative that “Russia hacked the
election” and was able to actually influence (as in change)
votes on behalf of Trump. Comey said there was no
evidence of that either. And of course, whatever
Republicans’ priorities are, those are what the wholly
discredited liberal Washington media ignores.
But the real story that emerged from the hearings and
Comey’s testimony was his admission that, since July
2016, Team Trump — that is, members of the Trump
presidential campaign — actually has been under
investigation by the Obama FBI and intelligence
apparatus for months before the November election.
(RELATED: Comey Confirmed The Essence Of
Trump’s Claim That The Obama Administration Was
Investigating Him)
119
That means President Obama had to know
that his administration was actively
investigating the presidential campaign of a
rival political figure.
The real question then becomes:
Who ordered the probe?
The FBI works for the Justice Department; was it former
Attorney General Loretta Lynch? Was Obama himself
involved in the process? Because in order for it to happen,
someone with ‘rank’ within the Obama White House had
to order the probe into Team Trump.
But that question seemed to escape members of both
parties on the House Intelligence Committee on Monday.
And yet, it is the most relevant one of all, because
answering it would also go to motive.
As noted by The National Sentinel:
…[T]hat clearly is the next piece of the
puzzle, because it would go a long way
towards explaining whether or not the
probe is politically motivated, as many
suspect that it is given the dearth of
evidence thus far that anyone on Team
Trump, up to and including the president,
had any nefarious relationships with
Russia, Russian banks, or Russian
intelligence.
This question needs to be asked and answered, publicly,
for other reasons, including giving members of the
previous administration and its holdovers (I’m looking at
you, Mr. Comey) the opportunity to explain what led them
to suspect that Team Trump was in cahoots with the
Russian government in the first place. Because based on
prior reporting, nothing – no evidence whatsoever – has
been found to support such suspicions.
And there would have to have been just those suspicions in
order to trigger any FBI counterterrorism probe on national
security grounds, in order to legally conduct the probe.
It is easy to understand why Democrats on the Intelligence
Committee wouldn’t want answers to the question of who
ordered the surveillance – any answer implicates a
Democratic administration. But it is puzzling why no
Republican asked, especially given Comey’s admission
that an investigation not only exists but that it had begun
under the prior administration. (RELATED: Who’s Lying
About ‘Wiretapping’ Trump Tower – The Media,
Congress Or The Intelligence Community?)
Comey, who is most certainly in a position to know the
answer, may have chosen not to reveal it in a public forum,
but certainly, the question could be put to him behind
closed doors. That said, Comey isn’t the only one who
knows.
.
120
There are additional questions that need to be answered as
well, such as, what probable cause existed for the previous
administration to suspect that a major-party presidential
candidate and/or his inner circle had nefarious ties to the
Russian government? Also, how did information regarding
former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, a
private American citizen obviously caught up in U.S.
intelligence surveillance of a foreign diplomat, become
“unmasked” (identified then leaked to the media)? Which
agency was conducting that surveillance, and under whose
authority? And under what authority — FISA court, action
ordered by the president or the attorney general, etc.?
The American people deserve to know.
 Jimmy Breslin On
How To Impeach Trump
By David Swanson
March 22, 2017
The last time a U.S. president faced a strong movement for
impeachment for actual impeachable offenses, one of the
major road blocks was fear that an unpopular vice
president would take his place, and this road block was
removed when Spiro Agnew resigned in the face of
criminal charges of cheating on his taxes.
As every American is aware, including even those who
have never heard of impeachment, the primary problem
with impeaching Trump is the horror of a president Pence.
For a long time I tried to explain to people that this was
stupid. Pence is already running the show. Impeachment is
about placing the executive branch under the rule of law,
not about the trivial matter of what individual holds what
office for a few years. A President Pence with a Congress
that impeaches people would be better than King Donald
with Congress acting as court jesters. Impeachment and
removal from office are two different things. Et cetera. It
doesn’t matter how many reasons you provide, the U.S.
public mayl never support impeachment of Trump as long
as Pence is vice president.
I recommend reading a book by Jimmy Breslin about the
impeachment of Richard Nixon called How the Good
Guys Finally Won. The book is a hagiographic account of
then Majority Leader Tip O’Neill’s role in pushing the
impeachment of Nixon through the Congress. O’Neill does
deserve great praise, in fact. It’s impossible to imagine any
member of Congress fulfilling their oath of office to the
same extent today. While we all know that the
impeachment of Bill Clinton was rammed through
Congress against the will of the people by the House
Republican leadership, it’s perhaps less known how the
House Democratic leadership pushed for the impeachment
of Nixon. Members of Congress who moved to impeach
121
Nixon, including the leadership, moved in response to
public pressure.
Breslin’s book removes activism from the picture and
falsely claims that there were no activist rallies or
demonstrations demanding Nixon’s impeachment. (There
were demonstrations in front of the Capitol with something
we seem to have lost along the way: nude streakers.)
Breslin sees history as shaped by a few great men. But his
book provides some tips and warnings to us, despite its
author’s views. When Congressman Robert Drinan first
introduced articles of impeachment against Nixon, his
party leadership was against it. In Breslin’s account, they
wanted to wait until momentum had built, in order to avoid
badly losing a vote on the House floor, which they thought
would set impeachment back. So, rather comically, the
Speaker, the Majority Leader, and the Whip took turns
guarding the House floor at all times in order to be ready
to table Drinan’s bill should the Republicans call for a vote
on it. They did this up until O’Neill asked Minority Leader
Jerry Ford if the Republicans planed to ask for a vote, and
Ford replied of course not. The Republicans wanted
silence on impeachment, not votes on it. And Drinan’s
effort helped move the issue forward.
Another thing that helped move impeachment forward
against Nixon was the ACLU asking the House to proceed.
Of course, today’s ACLU is not the same organization.
Today the ACLU favors banning torture again and again
and again, each time pretending that it wasn’t already a
felony. But the Center for Constitutional Rights, the
National Lawyers Guild, and a popular movement have
called for impeachment, and who can say the ACLU won’t
come around once impeachment appears likely?
It also helped that Judiciary Chair Peter Rodino issued a
718-page report on impeachment. Nixon’s goons went
after Rodino and tried to tie him to the mafia. An early
vote by Rodino’s Judiciary Committee authorized him to
subpoena any agent of the government and that person’s
papers, public or private. That’d quickly replace all the
chatter about Trump’s tax returns with either Trump’s tax
returns or a new impeachable offense. When Rodino was
given that authority, almost all of Congress and even the
public considered impeachment unlikely if not impossible.
Rodino hired John Doar as special counsel to work on the
impeachment, intentionally choosing a well known and
respected Republican. Then the House voted to give the
Judiciary Committee a million dollars to spend on an
investigation. The vote was 367-51. There were
Republicans who saw no harm in an investigation, who
thought impeachment wouldn’t get anywhere, who thought
Nixon was innocent, but who thought Congress had a role
to play in our system of government and a responsibility to
fill out that role. They also were feeling pressure from their
constituents to do their jobs in this matter.
Today the public pressure is there as well. But Trump’s
guilt regarding emoluments is public knowledge (and
unsubstantiated fantasies regarding Russia are supposed by
Democrats to be public knowledge). But it would be
helpful for the House to vote a fund for an “investigation,”
because it would be part of the proper narrative. As Breslin
stresses, facts and laws matter less than appearances.
It would also make sense to hire a special counsel. Doar
found that when he looked closely at the information
available on Nixon, nothing more was needed to prove his
guilt. With regard to Trump, we already knows this. But
who knows what an intense examination of the facts could
turn up in the way of superfluous evidence? And the
evidence isn’t the point. The point is political plausibility.
As soon as impeachment appeared at all plausible against
Nixon, public pressure for impeachment – even in
Breslin’s account – became intense, and Congress reacted
to it. What helped tremendously was polling. The trick
today is persuading the polling companies to do the polls,
even for money. The few that have been done show the
public about evenly spit on impeaching Trump, numbers
almost certain to move in favor of impeaching Trump
should members of Congress begin pursuing it.
Congress took Nixon to court for refusing to hand over
audio tapes. In that case, a Supreme Court that could have
been expected to back Nixon instead obeyed pressure from
the public and the Congress. In Breslin’s account,
however, Nixon would have been impeached whatever
way the court ruled. The important thing was that the case
was in court.
When the Republicans tried to censure Nixon instead of
impeaching him, the Democrats said no. They knew that
voters would not be satisfied with anything less than
impeachment. That is true again already. Our job is to
make Congress aware of it. As of now, unless a Trump
offense can somehow be tied to Russia and to a claim that
Hillary Clinton “really won,” Democrats in Washington
will have no interest in it. Trump could in fact shoot
someone on Fifth Avenue. It doesn’t matter. He will not be
impeached.
Never mind the whole question of whether future
presidents and vice presidents will be expected to obey any
122
laws. It’s all about elections. The Democrats played this
same game when Reagan was investigated in the Iran
Contra scandal. The Democrats exercised restraint. In the
end, they restrained themselves right into a defeat and
created the Bush dynasty.
But things were handled differently in 1973. The
Democrats made impeachment an issue. In fact, they made
it THE issue. And the polls spoke loudly and clearly to
Congress members of both parties. Some Democrats, such
as Illinois Congressman Dan Rostenkowski, started out
adamantly opposed to impeachment. But they were pretty
easily brought around. The Majority Leader was a
Democrat who saw being a Democrat as something
noticeably different from being a Republican. Tip
O’Neill’s role in the impeachment of Nixon is highlighted
in Breslin’s book:
[O’Neill] came into this room in June with a
new weapon, another mirror, a forty-page
notebook put together by William Hamilton
and Staff, pollsters, for William Welsh of
the American Federation of State, County,
and Municipal Employees. The topic
sentence of the report said,
“In April our study shows 43 per cent will
vote for a Congressman who is inclined to
vote for impeachment; 29 per cent would
vote for a Congressman who would not be
so inclined and 28 per cent feel the
Congressman’s stand on impeachment
would make no difference at this time.”
A further interpretation of the figures showed that
“50 per cent of Republican voters will vote
against a Congressman who is inclined not
to vote for impeachment, while only 7 per
cent of Democrats will vote for a
Congressman who is inclined to vote
against impeachment.”
… O’Neill went right up to Rostenkowski, because
Rostenkowski is Mayor Daley’s play caller with the
Illinois Democrats in Congress. A word from Danny is a
word from the Hall. Deviation? Try Russia, not Cook
County.
“Danny, ol pal, did you see this poll yet?”
Tip O’Neill said.
“What poll?”
Rostenkowski grumbled. He despises polls, but he had to
ask about a poll because he is in politics and he is
supposed to ask about a poll.
 “It shows here that we could pick up as
many as eighty seats the way it’s going
now,” O’Neill said.
“Whew.”
“And it shows here that there is no way for
a Congressman in an urban district to win
an election against anybody if he doesn’t
vote for impeachment.”
“Where does it show that?”
“Here, look. Only seven percent of the
Democrats will vote for a Congressman
who is against impeachment. That means a
Republican could beat a Democrat in a city
if the Republican is for impeachment and
the Democrat is against it. Can you
imagine that? Say, that’s right. You
represent a city, don’t you, Danny?”
O’Neill began to show the poll around. He told Thaddeus
Dulski, who comes from upstate Erie County in New
York, that the poll showed all rural votes being lost to a
Congressman who is against impeachment.
“But you don’t have any farms in your
district,” he told Dulski. Dulski grumbled.
He had a religious belief in the presidency. He also had a
lot of farmers in his district. Out on the House floor, when
O’Neill saw Angelo Roncallo, a Long Island Republican,
he said,
“Hey, Angie, old pal. Geez, but you really
love it down here, don’t you? Angie, I want
you to know something. My door is always
open to you, as you know. And to show you
.
123
how much I think of you, Angie, my door is
still going to be open to you next year when
you’re not going to be in Congress because
of this impeachment.”
O’Neill gave a great, fun laugh. Roncallo laughed with
him but not as much.
Here’s the part where your history teacher says:
Compare and Contrast.
The first thing you’ll notice is that it was all about the
damn elections back then, just the same as it is now. But
somehow the Democrats saw winning the elections as
dependent on doing their jobs, and in fact they won the
biggest victories in many years and have never done as
well since.
The second thing you’ll notice is that just about everything
else was completely different. Elections were losable for
incumbents. The Democrats had started impeachment
proceedings and made it an issue before the polls
compelled them to. The media covered the story. The
polling companies did the polls and published them. A
labor union was pushing impeachment. And a
Congressional leader was lobbying his colleagues in the
direction of impeachment. Those six facts appear today to
have come from some bizarre parallel universe.
Yet, if we are dedicated to saving this republic, we will
endeavor to find a way to substitute for them. We will
recruit pro-impeachment challengers to incumbents. We
will use civil disobedience, media activism, and legal
bribery to lobby Congress as hard as possible to take up
impeachment. We will organize in swing districts and
commission polls in them. We will report the results on
progressive radio and the internet. If we lose now, the
good guys won’t have won much forty years ago.
 Democrats Planning To Sabotage Trump Supreme Court
Pick Gorsuch Because They’re Afraid He Might
Actually Follow The Constitution
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017

history and learned scholars like Plato and Aristotle –

proscribed for all time.

As reported by Townhall:

She did not seem to have much confidence

in the nominee. Feinstein is disturbed by
Gorsuch’s originalism, she argued,
because she believes the concept “ignores
the intent of the framers.”

“It’s a framework on which to build,” she

said. “I firmly believe the Constitution is a
living document that evolves as our country
Our nation’s founding fathers crafted the Judicial Branch
evolves.”
to be the protector of natural, “inalienable” rights
enshrined in the Constitution, and that the U.S. Supreme
Feinstein went on to note that, for example, at the time of
Court would be the final arbiter of laws and rules made by
our founding and the Constitution’s adoption, slavery was
the Legislative and Executive Branches in deciding which
legal and accepted in many parts of the new country. She
of them infringed upon those universally recognized rights.
argued that had the document not evolved over the
centuries, slavery might still be in practice, schools might
But unfortunately for us, one political party doesn’t believe
still be segregated, and the law would not treat women
that should be the role of a Supreme Court justice, and that
equally.
would be the Democratic Party. In fact, one of its long-
serving members just admitted as much.
None of this, of course, stands up to serious scrutiny.
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, in a statement made at
For one, it would be interesting to find out which
the beginning of Senate confirmation hearings for
“originalist” portions of the Constitution Feinstein and
President Donald J. Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee,
other liberal Democrats believe are out of date. Perhaps
Judge Neil Gorsuch, said she is “afraid” that he may be an
that part about guaranteeing free speech, freedom of the
“originalist” – that is, a jurist who believes justices ought
press and the right to assemble peacefully? Or how about
to rule on laws and rules based on our founders’ original
that part where the founders guaranteed our right to self-
intent behind the various articles and amendments passed
defense? Maybe Feinstein and company have fallen out of
at the country’s birth. (RELATED: Agenda 21: The
favor with that little part that guarantees privacy
Constitution Of The New World Order)
protections, or that police can’t simply enter your home or
business on a hunch and without a search warrant
Feinstein, in other words, doesn’t
describing what they’re looking for.
believe that the Constitution should be
interpreted as written, as it was
Maybe Feinstein doesn’t care for the part that protects us
intended to be by the founders.
from self-incrimination, or that ensures prisoners are
treated fairly and not subject to – what does the
She thinks justices ought to apply a legal standard that
Constitution say? – “cruel and unusual punishment.”
considers what Americans today might favor or believe,
Perhaps she no longer cares for the portion of the
not what the wise, sage men who wrote our founding
Constitution that guarantees us a right to fair trial?
document – which was written based on their studies of
(RELATED: America-Hating Liberal Rag The Atlantic

124
Now Publishing Anti-Constitution Propaganda To
Accelerate Destruction Of America)
As for her statements regarding slavery, women’s rights
and segregation, those no longer exist because the founders
designed the Constitution in a way that future generations
would be able to address societal issues like the very ones
she mentioned.
It’s simplistic and sophomoric to suggest that previous
generations of Americans somehow changed the
Constitution to adapt it to the times. Slavery was abolished
via the amendment process; laws were passed by Congress
to address other societal issues; federal bureaucracies were
established by law to fulfill needed functions of
government as they were required.
And so on.
.
125
Feinstein makes it sound as though the
Constitution, as originally written, is no
longer effective at addressing societal
issues. But she’s clearly wrong.
Furthermore, the Constitution protects Americans from
tyranny; without its protections and guarantees, who
among us seriously believes that at some point an
authoritarian “leader” would not have risen to power?
Feinstein’s belief that Supreme Court
justices ought to ignore the Constitution as
it was written is really rooted in her belief
that justices ought to be able to impose
their own political viewpoint on cases.
Gorsuch doesn’t believe that, and that’s why she and other
Democrats want to torpedo his nomination, despite his
obvious qualifications as someone the founders would
approve of.
 Comey Confirmed The Essence Of Trump’s
Tweeted Allegations About Obama “Wire Tapping”
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 22, 2017
The pathetic Washington establishment media was all in a
lather on Monday after FBI Director James Comey told
members of the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence that his agency has “no information” to
support President Donald J. Trump’s tweeted allegations
earlier this month that his predecessor “wiretapped him.”
Lost in the breathless finger-pointing and calls for Trump
to apologize to former President Obama for making the
allegation was the fact that the essential claim that Trump
made – that he and his campaign members were, indeed,
under some form of surveillance – was confirmed by the
FBI director.
Per the Washington Post:
Comey … acknowledged the existence of a
counterintelligence investigation into the
Russian government’s efforts to interfere in
the 2016 election, and said that probe
extends to the nature of any links
between Trump campaign associates
and the Russian government.
Without providing further details, such as when the
investigation began, it’s safe to say that Trump himself
didn’t order it. Let that sink in for a moment: That means
someone in the last administration approved of and then
ordered a “counterintelligence investigation”
into the campaign of a political rival.
(RELATED: Who’s Lying About
‘Wiretapping’ Trump Tower – The Media,
126
Congress Or The Intelligence
Community?)
That ought to scare every single American, to think that
some in our own government think it’s okay to invent a
reason to investigate a rival political campaign.
But wait, you say. How do we know that the Obama
regime had to invent a reason to probe Trump’s campaign
associates?
Let’s examine the evidence or, rather, the lack of it:
 The entire “Russia hacked the election to help Trump”
narrative was invented by the Democrats and spread
as a legitimate accusation by their sycophants in the
establishment press, as the president has said in a
recent tweet.
 The Democrats made up and pushed the Russian story
as an excuse for running a terrible campaign. Big
advantage in Electoral College & lost!
Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017
 Why? Well, because, Russian President Vladimir Putin
supposedly has a grudge against Hillary Clinton, we’re
told. Here’s why that makes no sense.
 The Russia narrative was first hatched by the
Washington Post, which claimed propaganda from
Moscow was filtered through hundreds of “fake news”
sites that favored Trump and cast Clinton in a bad light.
But the story was quickly and thoroughly debunked.
 Democrats claim that Russia hacked the email servers
of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton
herself, then gave the hacked data to Wikileaks. This
information, containing many damning emails, was
then released in a steady stream in the months before
the election. The establishment press has also reported
that some elements within U.S. intelligence agencies
“have concluded” that the Russians gave the hacked
data to Wikileaks.
The problem with the claim, however, is that Wikileaks
founder Julian Assange has repeatedly denied it. In fact,
reports noted that the DNC emails were not hacked at all,
they were downloaded by a DNC staffer and Sen. Bernie By far, the biggest revelation out of
Sanders supporter who was dismayed at the way the party Monday’s testimony by Comey – as well
was rigging the nomination for Clinton. (RELATED: Why as NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers –
The Russian Hack Election Conspiracy Is Complete was that Team Trump is most definitely
Political Buffoonery (VIDEO) under a counterintelligence probe,
which is a national security
 All we’ve heard since Trump won the election are investigation, which necessarily
allegations of Russian involvement by Democrats, not involves search warrants obtained by
proof of Russian involvement, and that’s troubling. the FISA court.
Thus far there has been no definitive proof of
collusion, and by now – given all of the leaks that have There will be more information forthcoming on this, you
already occurred in an attempt to harm Trump’s can bet on it.
presidency – there would have been leaked evidence
proving some kind of relationship between Trump and
the Russians. Where is it?

127
 There Won’t Be
Another Jimmy Breslin
By Dave Lindorff
March 22, 2017
There only was and only will be one Jimmy Breslin, and
after his death last Sunday at 88, he is no more.
Funny, cranky and sometimes boorish, Breslin was a
working class journalist who cared about the working class
and the under and un-employed class and who, despite
achieving wealth and pinnacles of journalistic success,
from a Pulitzer and a Polk award to movie options and
best-selling novels, never forgot his roots.
How many journalists have your read in a major
newspaper or magazine, or heard bloviating on the air,
young or old, who’ve had the courage and fortitude to do
as Breslin did in his old age: finding a refrigerator box and
setting himself up in the dead of winter on a heating grate
on a New York City sidewalk alongside a bunch of other
homeless people so he could write with real understanding
about how they live? That was some column, and provided
a jolting wake-up to New Yorkers who walk by those
boxes every day, usually without a thought to who’s
huddled inside them.
How many have had the courage to call out the likes of
Hillary Clinton when she was a carpetbagger running for
Senate from New York State, for having “blood on her
hands” as she waved to the crowds?
How many have shared his outrage at learning how much
money the Standard Oil Company paid to have a
marketing company develop a new name and logo for the
company, changing Esso to Exxon (that was one of the
funniest of his columns I ever read, full of extraneous Xs
whose value he placed at something like a million dollars
per keystroke after learning what Exxon had paid a naming
firm for its new corporate logo).
128
I’m pretty sure the answer to all these questions is the
same: none.
Breslin did all that and much, much more.
But the problem isn’t, as most obit writers have been
saying, that there aren’t journalists out there who have
Breslin’s sensibility and sensitivity to wrongdoing, if not
perhaps his unique gift for getting close to people who
don’t normally open up to a reporter. There are. It isn’t that
there aren’t journalists out there who are actually writing
the kinds of incisive and eye-opening pieces that Breslin
spent his life writing. There are. It isn’t even that there
aren’t journalists with a similar literary talent. There are.
The problem is that there are no longer any newspapers
whose publishers and senior editors are willing to run such
gritty Establishment-demolishing and icon-attacking
pieces in their columns and on their opinion pages.
Years ago, newspapers ran columns by the likes of Breslin,
Anthony Lewis, Pete Hamill, Mike Royko, Molly Ivens
and Joe Bageant — columns that could leave the reader
fuming, racing for pen and paper or typewriter to knock off
an angry letter to the paper or to a Congressperson,
columns that would have you running to a friend or a
spouse to read it aloud to them, columns that simply made
you think about something or some people you hadn’t
though of before. No more. It’s the rare column in a
mainstream news outlet these days that can elicit outrage,
make the blood boil, or even bring a tear to the eye.
Jimmy Breslin wrote those kinds of columns because he
felt them, chased them down, and was able to write them,
day in and day out, right through 2004, and even later,
after a brief hiatus, into 2011/12, and he was able to do it
because there were papers like the New York Post, the
Daily News and Newsday, that let him do it.
Now newspapers are dumbed down, homogenized and
busy seeking a higher-income, perhaps in the publishers’
minds more easily offended, or jaded, demographic, so
they don’t want the old-style rabble-rousing columnists
ruffling feathers and playing Charles Dickens.
Of course you can find those writers. They’re all over the
internet. You’ll find them here at Counterpunch, and at
sites like ThisCantBeHappening, Consortium News, Z
Magazine, NationofChange.org, and others. The problem
is you have to go looking for them. The beauty of the old
newspapers with their columnists like Jimmy Breslin was
that everyone was confronted by a Breslin or a Royko or
an Ivens when they opened their daily paper. Their
columnists were in your face. You couldn’t avoid them.
And it made huge a difference. Breslin busted up a corrupt
Democratic Party machine with his column. Most
newspapers require an investigative team and a series of
page one articles to accomplish something like that. My
late friend John Hess, managed, with some management
push-back, to do the same kind of thing at the New York
Times, and later as a columnist for a local TV station and
on Democracy Now!, to the New York State horrendously
corrupt nursing home industry.
It’s harder to do that type of writing when newspapers
want to be safe, bland and “objective” on their opinion
pages as well as their news pages, but that’s one of the
prices of the consolidation of the news media.
I remember the day back in 1978 when I got the
explanation from the managing editor at the Daily News in
Los Angeles, where I headed the bureau covering Los
Angeles County government for why an investigative story
I had done hadn’t run. I had put together a piece showing
how the Los Angeles County employee pension fund was
invested in all of the same companies that at the time were
the reason students were occupying state university
administration buildings up and down the state. They were
demanding that their schools’ endowment funds divest
from the list of US companies being boycotted for
supporting apartheid in South Africa. It was a powerful
story because so many of the county’s employees were
African American and supported that boycott, but didn’t
know their own pension fund was violating it
I had initially been led to believe that my piece would be
the front page banner story the next morning, but found it
wasn’t even in the paper at all. This led to a series of
efforts by the editor to change the tone of the piece, first of
all from an enterprise report to one that attributed the story
(falsely) to a county supervisor representing the largely
black Watts area and South Los Angeles. When I
complained about this, I was told that my articles were too
“anti-business.”
I quit what became my last newspaper job, and began
doing investigative pieces for a news program at KCET-
TV, the local PBS affiliate.
.
129
For the last 20 years I’ve been living and working in the
Philadelphia area. Over that time, I’ve submitted dozens of
opinion pieces to the local paper, the Philadelphia Inquirer.
If I remember right, two have been published over that
period. I wouldn’t claim to be a Jimmy Breslin, but I know
I write and report well. I also know that my submissions
have been simply too much “out there” for the obsessively
middle-of-the-road Inquirer to handle. Examples: A piece
decrying the Pennsylvania Corrections Department’s
ongoing and unconscionable refusal to provide proven
treatments for a deadly Hep-C epidemic raging among the
state’s incarcerated population, an article denouncing as a
return to McCarthyism a list published initially in the
Washington Post and then as a page-one story in the
Inquirer labeling some 200 online US news sites as
“purveyors of pro-Russian propaganda,” and an article
saying that the establishment of a Pentagon drone-piloting
station in suburban Horsham, outside Philadelphia, was,
under the international laws of war, turning that
community into a front-line war-zone and a legitimate
target of those being targeted by drones.
I like to think these are the types of columns that Jimmy
Breslin would have written had he been living down in
Philadelphia, instead of in New York.
And I did get them published, but not in a mainstream
newspaper. They ran on this site and were picked up by
many other online sites (some of them on that Washington
Post/Inquirer hit list!).
I’m not sure what the answer is to the death of hard-hitting
columnists like Breslin in the mainstream media. But let’s
not attribute their absence to the dying off of such
impassioned and dedicated journalists. It’s the smarmy
publishers and senior editors of the putrified and
increasingly irrelevant corporate media who are at fault for
their obsessive focus on ratings and “hits” and eyeballs,
and their loss of any commitment to hiring the best
journalists and letting them go at it.
Jimmy Breslin was a force of nature. I’m not sure an editor
could have stopped him from doing anything. They could
suspend him, as Newsday did when he unleashed a racist
and sexist tirade against a Korean-American colleague
when she criticized something he’d written, but they
couldn’t really fire him. He had too big a following in his
native city. But I suspect if he were a young journalist
today trying to get himself a column, Breslin would fare no
better than the rest of us.
RIP Jimmy Breslin…and the US mainstream media.
 White House Says The “Deep State”
Is Real, And It’s Trying To Undermine Trump
By Jason Devaney
Date: March 22, 2017
The White House acknowledged Tuesday there are people
working in the government who are likely part of what has
been called the “deep state” – an inner core of Obama
loyalists seeking to stop the Trump presidency.
During Tuesday’s White House press briefing, Newsmax’s
John Gizzi asked White House press secretary Sean Spicer
about David Horowitz’s new book “Big Agenda” and
130
claims Horowitz has made a “deep state” has been seeking
to undermine President Trump.
“This has been widely repeated on social
media: Does the president himself believe
in this deep state?” Gizzi asked.
Spicer replied:
“I’ve been asked this question before, and
I’ll give you the same answer I’ve given
before. This has been going on since the
country came to be, where people burrow
in after an administration into a civil servant
job.”
He added, ominously,
“But, sure, there are people after eight
years of Obama that found their way into
government, so it should be no huge
secret.”
 Breaking: Manfort, Trump
Campaign Chairman, Was Russian Agent
Manfort Paid Millions To Lobby Against NATO
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
March 22, 2017

 This group took advantage of the infighting in the

Democratic Party and the aftermath of the Tea Party
fiasco in the GOP. Under the firm hand of the
Federalist Society and a Justice Department run
throughout the Obama presidency by what can only be
fairly called “monarchists” the “know nothings” of the
GOP, addicted to payoffs by the drug cartels, who have
owned the GOP since Reagan, are in the process of
legislatively destroying the United States.

 The video below, a recorded conversation with a senior

FBI official, outlines the GOP’s deal with the drug
cartels to run America:

Editor’s note: VT by policy and out of friendship has been

close to Russia and supportive of Russia in Syria and
elsewhere. However, we don’t get paid and certainly don’t
work for the Russian government. We understand why
Russia would want to influence the US and, quite frankly,
we warned Russia that they were dealing with amateurs
and too often criminal elements around Trump who would
embarrass them and misconstrue their efforts.

Our own investigation has revealed this:

 When Congressman Nunes tried to get Admiral Rogers

 Washington has no ability whatsoever to understand
to state the election had not been rigged, he “let the cat
the inner-workings of the Russian government or how
out of the bag.” In Washington, it is common
Putin survives the endless criminal plots against Russia
knowledge that the election was rigged, that Trump
that so easily overcame the US and eventually took
was never elected and that the “electoral victory” was
control under “Trump.”
based on massive voter fraud tied to a highly organized
computer hacking effort using thumb drives and self-
erasing programs. This is known and any efforts to  With Russia’s small and fragile economy, Putin is
expose this, such as simple statistical analysis that unable to deal with Erdogan and Netanyahu as he
shows vote results to be billion to one impossible are would, and he “would” in a most harsh way if he could.
being suppressed by security agencies. The limitations of Russia’s ability to fight a protracted
conflict is well known in Washington and continually
overestimated for profit by the criminal elements that
 Thus far it seems Russia was “set up” by Turkish
loot America’s defense budget like a cookie jar.
intelligence working with Israel and Saudi Arabia as the
“fall guy” for the utterly corrupt gang around Trump and
____________
his “oligarch” friends, a mix of “Kosher-Nostra” and the
centuries old Turkish mob.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald
Trump’s former campaign chairman,

131
 Paul Manafort, secretly worked for a
Russian billionaire to advance the
interests of Russian President Vladimir
Putin a decade ago and proposed an
ambitious political strategy to
undermine anti-Russian opposition
across former Soviet republics, The
Associated Press has learned. The work
appears to contradict assertions by the
Trump administration and Manafort
himself that he never worked for
Russian interests.
Manafort proposed in a confidential strategy plan as early
as June 2005 that he would influence politics, business
dealings and news coverage inside the United States,
Europe and the former Soviet republics to benefit the Putin
government, even as U.S.-Russia relations under
Republican President George W. Bush grew worse.
Manafort pitched the plans to Russian aluminum magnate
Oleg Deripaska, a close Putin ally with whom Manafort
eventually signed a $10 million annual contract beginning
.
132
in 2006, according to interviews with several people
familiar with payments to Manafort and business records
obtained by the AP. Manafort and Deripaska maintained a
business relationship until at least 2009, according to one
person familiar with the work.
“We are now of the belief that this
model can greatly benefit the Putin
Government if employed at the correct
levels with the appropriate commitment
to success,” Manafort wrote in the 2005
memo to Deripaska. The effort, Manafort
wrote, “will be offering a great service
that can re-focus, both internally and
externally, the policies of the Putin
government.”
Manafort’s plans were laid out in documents obtained by
the AP that included strategy memoranda and records
showing international wire transfers for millions of dollars.
How much work Manafort performed under the contract
was unclear.
 The FBI Is Seemingly Working Against Trump,
Stonewalling Congress On Key Surveillance Details
FBI Has Not Responded To Request For Information From Congress
By Alex Thomas -
03.22.2017 @8:50 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Just hours after revealing that
members of the Trump transition team, as well as possibly
the president himself, were under U.S. government
surveillance following the election, House Intelligence
Chairman Devin Nunes dropped another bombshell when
he told reporters outside the White House that the FBI was
not cooperating with his investigation into the wiretap
claims.
After briefing President Trump on the government
surveillance that the establishment media has repeatedly
claimed didn’t happen, Nunes told reporters that sources
within the intelligence community had revealed the spying
but that the FBI had not even responded to a March 15th
letter seeking information about the Trump wiretap claim!
“We don’t actually know yet officially what
happened to General Flynn,” Nunes said in
regards to the leaks that forced Flynn to
resign. “We just know that his name leaked
out but we don’t know how it was picked up
yet. That was one of the things that we
asked for in the March 15th letter, was for
the NSA, CIA, and FBI to get us all the
unmasking that was done.”
“And I’ll tell you, NSA is being cooperative,”
Nunes continued, “but so far the FBI has
not told us whether or not they’re going to
respond to our March 15th letter, which is
now a couple of weeks old.”
Remember, Comey just told Congress that there was no
evidence of any Trump surveillance while also confirming
that his agency has been conducting an investigation into
Trump-Russian ties since at least July 2016. In other
words, he is willing to use the vast resources of the FBI to
investigate discredited attacks on Donald Trump but has so
far been unwilling to give Congress key information that
they have requested.
Can you say cover-up?
As noted above, Nunes made front page news earlier in the
day when he shockingly revealed that the Trump camp was
133
indeed under government surveillance after weeks of
media reports claiming it wasn’t true.
Writing for Intellihub News, Joseph Jankowski wrote,
“Just days after FBI director James Comey
shot down Trump’s allegations that his
wires were tapped by president Obama,
House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes
has come out and told reporters that
members of Trump’s transition team, and
possible Trump himself, were under U.S.
government surveillance following
November’s presidential election.”
“I have seen intelligence reports that clearly
show that the president-elect and his team
were, I guess, at least monitored,” Nunes
told reporters. “It looks to me like it was all
legally collected, but it was essentially a lot
of information on the president-elect and
his transition team and what they were
doing.”
It is also important to note that the same Comey-run FBI
that clearly lied about the Trump surveillance is also
conducting an “investigation” into popular alternative
news outlets in a transparent attempt to stifle anti-
establishment voices by labeling them Russian agents.
As I wrote in a red alert report,
“In a stunning turn of events, the FBI is now
apparently investigating multiple alternative
news outlets for supposed Russian
connections, according to deep state
operatives who gave the information to
McClatchy News in an obvious attempt to
undermine the growing power of the anti-
establishment media.”
“When reading through the piece it
becomes clear that these news outlets are
not actually being targeted because of
Russian connections (there literally is
none) but because they were critical of
 failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton Clearly elements within the FBI are absolutely working
throughout the election which is somehow against the new president in a variety of different ways and
being framed as the work of Russian we can now add stonewalling a Congressional
operatives when in reality it was patriotic investigation to the list.
Americans who were fed up with the open
corruption of the entire Clinton family.”
.

134
 Gun Owners Of America: Paul Ryan’s
Obamacare 2.0 Still Contains Gun Control
By AWR Hawkins
22 Mar 2017
Gun Owners of America (GOA) is
warning that House Speaker Paul
Ryan’s Obamacare 2.o still contains
measures that will allow doctors,
insurance companies, and the ATF to
use medical records to further a gun
control agenda.
GOA points out that it opposed “the original Obamacare”
because it threatened Second Amendment rights and they
are concerned about Ryan’s new healthcare push for the
same reasons.
They stress three changes that are needed.
The first thing GOA points out is that Ryan’s bill
“needs to be amended to prohibit the ATF
from trolling the national health database,
or Medicaid, or any new entitlement
.
135
program for persons with PTSD,
Alzheimer’s, ADHD, or merely ‘anxiety.’”
GOA says the recently repealed Social Security gun ban
allowed such trolling, which opened the door to the ATF
growing the list of the persons prohibited from gun
ownership based on otherwise private information
gathered from health records.
Secondly, GOA says Ryan’s healthcare replacement
“needs to be amended to prohibit insurance companies
from asking about gun ownership.” Such questions result
in an increased insurance rates–“as a result of gun
ownership”–or in the all-out denial of insurance to begin
with.
GOA states,
“Already, New York and California are
considering using gun insurance
requirements to ‘insure’ guns out of
existence.”
Thirdly, GOA wants to see the healthcare bill amended “to
ensure that doctors are not required — or even allowed —
to ask about gun ownership and to enter that information
into a federal health database.” GOA correctly points out
that such a database, if allowed to exist, would become a
“de facto national gun registry.”
GOA stresses the changes that would prevent doctors and
insurance companies from furthering an anti-Second
Amendment agenda are the same changes the gun rights
group sought with the original Obamacare legislation.
 Trump Kills UN Climate Change
Initiative, Calls It An “Elaborate Hoax”
By Baxter Dmitry
March 22, 2017
President Trump has slammed global
warming as an elaborate hoax and
forced the United Nations to stop
making it compulsory for nations to
contribute funding to global climate
change programs.
G20 officials who met on Friday announced that “climate
change is out for the time being” after President Trump
dismantled Barack Obama and Angela Merkel’s old
blueprint for compulsory financial donations to the cause.
Asked about the cut in funding to global climate change
programs, Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s budget director, told
reporters
“we consider that to be a waste of
(Americans’) money.”
“I think the president is fairly
straightforward. We’re not spending money
on that,” he said.
Instead the money is being poured into long-ignored
domestic infrastructure projects, such as the $100 million
Flint water crisis solution granted to Michigan by Trump’s
EPA last week.
136
Reuters reports: Opposition from the United States, Saudi
Arabia and others has forced Germany to drop a reference
to financing programmes to combat climate change from
the draft communique at a G20 finance and central bankers
meeting.
A G20 official taking part in the meeting said on Friday
that efforts by the German G20 presidency to keep the
wording on climate change financing had run into
resistance.
“Climate change is out for the time being,”
said the official, who asked not to be
named.
At their last meeting in July 2016 in the Chinese city of
Chengdu, the G20 financial leaders said they encouraged
all signatories of the Paris Agreement on climate change to
bring the deal into force as soon as possible.
But U.S. President Donald Trump, who took office in
November, has called global warming a “hoax” concocted
by China to hurt U.S. industry and vowed to unpick the
Paris climate accord that is supposed to curb rising
temperatures.
Under the Chinese G20 presidency, finance ministers last
year called on all governments to implement financial
commitments made under the Paris deal in a “timely” way
and promised to continue working on climate finance in
2017.
Trump’s administration on Thursday proposed a 31
percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency’s
budget, as the White House seeks to eliminate climate
change programmes and trim initiatives to protect air and
water quality.
Fool Me Once ... DNC Ally Crowdstrike Claimed Two Cases
Of "Russian Hacking" - One At Least Was Fake
March 22, 2017
The cyber-security company Crowdstrike claimed that the
"Russia" hacked the Democratic National Committee. It
also claimed that "Russia" hacked artillery units of the
Ukrainian army. The second claim has now be found to be
completely baseless. That same is probably the case with
its claims related to the DNC.
Sometime around May 2016 the Democratic National
Committee lost control over its email archives. It claimed
that its servers had been "hacked" by someone related to
Russian interests. DNC emails were published by
Wikileaks and provided that the DNC had worked during
the primaries against its statutes and in favor of one
presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. The DNC chair
was forced to resign over the case.
The DNC had called in Crowdstrike, a company led by a
one Dimitry Alperovich, a Senior Fellow of the NATO
aligned "think tank" Atlantic Council. After a short
investigation Crowdstrike claimed to found intruding
software on the DNC servers that, it says, has been
exclusively used by Russian intelligence services. From
there followed claims that "Russia hacked the U.S.
elections".
When the DNC went public with the Crowdstrike claims
the FBI never requested access to the servers to determine
if a crime had been committed and to detect the culprit.
Access to the servers had been informally denied by the
DNC. The FBI simply followed (pdf), without any own
forensic investigation of its own, the conclusions
Crowdstrike had made.
Imagine that some white guy claims that his house has
been broken in and a large amount of money has been
stolen. He hires a private investigators who says a window
was broken and therefore the crime must have been
committed by those "niggers" down the road. But others
ask if the man hides the money himself, or if the man's son
might have taken it. But the police does not investigate if a
crime has actually happened. It does no forensics at the
crime scene. It does not even check if a window has indeed
been broken. It simply follows the conclusion of the
private investigator and accuses the "niggers". This is what
happened in the DNC case.
137
Month later and in a different case the same Crowdstrike
investigators claimed (pdf) that the artillery units of the
Ukrainian army had had "excessive combat losses" of up
to 80% in their fight with Ukrainian separatists.
Crowdstrike asserted that Russian intelligence hacked an
application used by the Ukrainians to aim their guns. The
hack, it was claimed, enabled well targeted counter-fire
that then destroyed the Ukrainian guns.
The author of the application denied that any such hacking
had taken place. His software was provided only directly
from him to Ukrainian army units. Independent cyber-
security researchers also doubted the claims.
Crowdstrike had based its numbers for
"excessive losses" of Ukrainian artillery
units on statistics collected by the
International Institute for Strategic Studies
(IISS). The IISS now says that its statistic
do not provide what Crowdstrike claimed.
There were no "excessive losses" of
Ukrainian artillery.
VOA first contacted IISS in February to verify the alleged
artillery losses. Officials there initially were unaware of
the CrowdStrike assertions. After investigating, they
determined that CrowdStrike misinterpreted their data and
hadn’t reached out beforehand for comment or
clarification.
In a statement to VOA, the institute flatly
rejected the assertion of artillery combat
losses.
It seems that the whole "Ukrainian artillery hack" claims
by Crowdstrike was simply made up. There was no "hack"
and the claimed damage from the "hack" did not occur at
all. Crowdstrike evidently found a "crime" and "Russian
hacking" where none had happened.
In the case of the DNC hacking Crowdstrike also alleged a
"crime" and "Russian hacking". No hard evidence was
ever provided for that claim, no competent police force
ever investigated the crime scene and serious security
researchers found that the Crowdstrike claims were likely
taken from hot air.
The DNC was likely not hacked at all. Some insider with
access to its servers may have taken the emails to publish
them. On July 10 2016 the DNC IT administrator Sean
Rich was found fatally shot on the streets of Washington
DC. To this day no culprit has been found. The crime is
unsolved. Five Congressional staffers and IT
administrators from Pakistan, some of whom also worked
for the DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, are under
criminal investigation for unauthorized access to
Congressional computers. They had the password of
Wasserman-Schultz and may have had access to the DNC
servers.
Crowdstrike's claims of "Russian hacking"
have evidently been false with regards to
the Ukrainian artillery. Crowdstrike's claims
of "Russian hacking" in the case of the
.
138
DNC have never been supported or
confirmed by independent evidence. There
are reasons to believe that the loss of
control of the DNC's email archives were a
case of unauthorized internal access and
not a "hack" at all.
A company related to a NATO aligned "think-tank", which
is financed by weapon producers and other special
interests, raises allegations against Russia that are quite
possibly unfounded. These allegations are then used by
NATO to build up a public boogeyman picture of "the
Russian enemy". In consequence the budgets for NATO
militaries and the profits of weapon producers increase.
It is a simple racket, but with potentially very bad
consequences for all of us.
 BOMBSHELL: CIA Whistleblower Leaked Proof Trump
Under "Systematic Illegal" Surveillance Over Two
Years Ago: FBI Sat On It
by ZeroPointNow
Mar 22, 2017 10:37 PM
The same day House Intelligence Committee chairman
Devin Nunes gave a press conference disclosing that
President Trump had been under "incidental
surveillance," Attorney and FreedomWatch Chairman,
Larry Klayman, sent a letter to the House Committee on
Intelligence imploring them to pursue the claims and
evidence presented under oath at a Washington DC FBI
Field Office by his client - CIA / NSA Whistleblower
Dennis Montgomery - who Klayman claims "holds the
keys to disproving the false claims... ...that there is no
evidence that the president and his men were wiretapped"
When Montgomery attempted to deliver this information
through the appropriate channels two years ago, the
former CIA and NSA contractor wasn't given the time of
day:
[W]hen Montgomery came forward as a whistleblower to
congressional intelligence committees and various other
congressmen and senators, including Senator Charles
Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee,
who, like Comey, once had a reputation for integrity, he
was “blown off;” no one wanted to even hear what he had
to say.
As a result, Montgomery went to attorney
and FreedomWatch founder Larry Klayman - who then
approached the FBI:
Under grants of immunity, which I obtained through
Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, Montgomery
produced the hard drives and later was interviewed
under oath in a secure room at the FBI Field Office in
the District of Columbia. There he laid out how persons
like then-businessman Donald Trump were illegally spied
upon by Clapper, Brennan, and the spy agencies of the
Obama administration.
Montgomery left the NSA and CIA with 47 hard drives
and over 600 million pages of information, much of
which is classified, and sought to come forward legally as
a whistleblower to appropriate government entities,
including congressional intelligence committees, to expose
that the spy agencies were engaged for years in systematic
illegal surveillance on prominent Americans, including
139
the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices,
156 judges, prominent businessmen such as Donald
Trump, and even yours truly. Working side by side with
Obama's former Director of National Intelligence
(DIA), James Clapper, and Obama's former Director
of the CIA, John Brennan, Montgomery witnessed “up
close and personal” this “Orwellian Big Brother”
intrusion on privacy, likely for potential coercion,
blackmail or other nefarious purposes.
He even claimed that these spy agencies had manipulated
voting in Florida during the 2008 presidential election,
which illegal tampering resulted in helping Obama to win
the White House.
Given the fact that the FBI had Montgomery's testimony
and evidence for over two years, Klayman traveled to
Washington DC last Thursday to meet with Committee
Chairman Devin Nunes in the hopes that he would ask FBI
Director Comey why the FBI hadn't pursued
Montgomery's evidence. When Klayman arrived to speak
with Nunes, he was "blown off" and instead shared his
information with committee attorney Allen R. Souza - who
Klayman requested in turn brief Nunes on the situation.
During my meeting with House Intelligence Committee
counsel Allen R. Sousa I politely warned him that if
Chairman Nunes, who himself had that same day
undercut President Trump by also claiming that there
is no evidence of surveillance by the Obama
administration, I would go public with what would
appear to be the House Intelligence Committee’s
complicity in keeping the truth from the American
people and allowing the FBI to continue its apparent
cover-up of the Montgomery “investigation.”
And, that is where it stands today. The big question: will
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes do his job
and hold FBI Director Comey’s feet to the fire about the
Montgomery investigation?
Klayman has detailed all of this in a NewsMax article,
followed up with an official letter to Chairman Nunes
today, requesting that he question Comey on
Montgomery's evidence. Perhaps this explains Nunes'
impromptu press conference today admitting that Trump's
team was under "Incidental Surveillance" before making
his way to the White House to discuss with the President.
140
So - we know that evidence exists from a CIA / NSA
contractor turned whistleblower, detailing a massive spy
operation on 156 judges, the Supreme Court, and high
profile Americans including Donald Trump. See the letter
below:
141
142
143
 The FBI’s Conspiracy Theory
Of A Trump/Putin Collusion Has No Clothes
Paul Craig Roberts
March 22, 2017
Unable to provide an ounce of evidence that a Trump/Putin
conspiracy stole the presidential election from Hillary
Clinton, the corrupt US “intelligence” agencies are shifting
their focus to social media and to Internet sites such as
Alex Jones and Breitbart. Little doubt the FBI
investigation will trickle down to Glenn Greenwald at The
Intercept, Zero Hedge, the Ron Paul Institute, Nomi Prins,
Naked Capitalism, Lew Rockwell, Global Research,
antiwar.com, and to others on the PropOrNot, Harvard
Library, and Le Monde lists, such as top Reagan
administration officials David Stockman and myself. It is
extraordinary that the FBI is so desperate to protect the
budget of the military/security complex that it brings such
embarrassment to itself. Who in the future will believe any
FBI report or anything a FBI official says?
Those behind this “investigation” understand that it is so
ridiculous that they must give it gravity and credibility.
They selected two reporters, Peter Stone and Greg Gordon,
in the McClatchy News Washington Bureau, who fit Udo
Ulfkotte’s definition of “bought journalists.” Hiding
behind anonymous sources—“two people familiar with the
inquiry” and “sources who spoke on condition of
anonymity”—the presstitutes fell in with the attack on
independent media, reporting that one former US
intelligence official said:
“This may be one of the most highly
impactful information operations in the
history of intelligence.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-
government/white-house/article139695453.html
Wow! A totally ridiculous “investigation” is one of the
most important in history. The implication is that the
Russians are operating through scores or hundreds of
independent media sites to control how Americans vote.
There was once a time in America when people were
skeptical of anonymous sources. It was widely understood
that anyone could tell a reporter anything and that a
reporter could claim an anonymous source whether or not
the source existed. Perhaps it was the Watergate
“investigation” by the Washington Post that gave
144
anonymity credibility. The Post’s reports made it sound
like any sources ratting on Nixon’s perfidy was at risk of
their lives, and the subtle emphasis on risk gave anonymity
credibility.
The real story under our noses is not a
Trump/Putin/independent media
conspiracy to steal the presidential
election. The real story is the totally
obvious collusion between the Hillary
forces, the US print and TV media (with
the partial exception of Fox News), and
the CIA and FBI to steal the Democratic
nomination from Bernie Sanders, the
presidential election from Donald
Trump, and to delegitimize Trump’s
election.
The theft of the nomination from Sanders is precisely what
the leaked Podesta emails show. The totally one-sided
presstitute support for Hillary and full-scale assault on
Trump clearly show the presstitutes participation in the
collusion. The extraordinary lies told in public by Obama’s
CIA Director John Brennan clearly demonstrate the CIA’s
lead in the attempted frame-up of Trump and his team. FBI
Director Comey’s statement the day before the presidential
election that the FBI had once again cleared Hillary of
criminal charges sent the Dow up 371 points and set the
stage for a Hillary election victory.
Why are not any of these hard facts in the news?
Why, instead, do the presstitutes and “intelligence”
agencies report nothing but fake news, supported by
anonymous “sources”? Why is a false reality being
constructed, and the hard facts ignored?
Note another extremely strange feature of our strange time.
Elements of the liberal/progressive/left portray President
Trump as a member of the One Percent operating for the
One Percent against the people and filling his government
up with generals and his budget with more military
spending. Why then is Trump under full-scale assault from
the military/security complex? Why are they working to
contradict, delegitimize and impeach their own agent?
If Americans were a thinking people, or even a people
capable of thought, how could such inconsistent
disinformation dominate public discussion?
What we should be scared about is that
in America today, facts cannot compete
with lies.
The McClatchy story describing a pointless investigation
as one of the most important in history is working its way
through the media. See:
http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-
na-essential-washington-updates-some-right-
wing-sites-under-1490115530-htmlstory.html
http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/21/fbi-probing-
breitbart-infowars-in-russian-influence-
investigation/
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/03/21/fbis-russia-
probe-turns-focus-on-social-media-bots/print/
Are we to conclude that America’s corrupt and disloyal
“intelligence” agencies are a direct threat to democracy,
that they are committed to overthrowing Trump’s
presidency in a “color revolution,” that, unable to provide
any evidence whatsoever for their conspiracy theory of a
Trump/Putin collusion to steal the presidential election, the
“intelligence” agencies have moved on to the discredit the
independent Internet media that are in the way of the
“intelligence” agencies’ control over explanations?
It is a hard fact that the Democrats, US “intelligence,” and
the presstitutes are absolutely determined to control the
explanations given to the American people and the wider
world.
The Agents are out in force, and Neo is nowhere in sight.
The demonization of Russia and the extraordinary level of
tension that the ignorant and foolish Clinton, George W.
Bush, and Obama regimes created with Russia are
disconcerting, indeed, frightening to those, such as myself,
Patrick Buchanan, and Stephen Cohen, who experienced
the long decades of the Cold War. We have never seen
such highly provocative, entirely gratuitous behavior of
one nuclear power toward another as the behavior of the
US toward Russia over the past six presidential terms.
What the Cold Warriors of the time experienced was a
gradual buildup of mutual trust that enabled Reagan and
Gorbachev to end the Cold War and remove the threat of
nuclear Armageddon.
In contrast, the Clinton, Bush, and Obama regimes, the
FBI, CIA, NSA, the New York Times, Washington Post,
CNN, NPR, MSNBC, and the rest of the presstitutes, the
right-wing Republicans, such as Lindsey Graham, John
McCain, and Ben Sasse, the Democratic Party, and the
145
liberal/progressive/left have convinced Russia, in the
words of Russia’s President Putin, that
“we cannot trust the United States.”
This “achievement” of these idiots comprises the greatest
crime humans have committed in their entire history. The
atomic bombs with which the Americans gratuitously
destroyed two Japanese cities are mere pop guns compared
to the thermo-nuclear weapons of today. Some of the
crazed neoconservatives erroneously believe that Russia is
not sufficiently well-armed to respond to US aggression,
but the fact of the matter is that Russia’s strategic weapons
are superior and more powerful than those of the US.
How can it be anything other than a death wish for
European governments to be egging on conflict with
Russia, for women marching not against war but against
Trump for wanting to reduce tensions with Russia, for US
“intelligence” to be totally committed to orchestrating a
“Russian threat” that all but guarantees thermo-nuclear
war? One would think that people would be marching in
favor of reduced tensions with Russia and demanding that
Trump deliver on this promise, not that they would be out
opposing Trump. What is the importance of Identity
Politics compared to nuclear war?
How can Americans, Democrats, Republicans, Greens,
Europeans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and
Japanese contain their outrage against the governments
that are putting the life of the planet at risk for nothing
except the budget and power of the US military/security
complex? Trump is silly to roll back environmental
protections, but this pales in comparison to the
environmental damage of thermo-nuclear war.
How can the left-wing be lost in Identity Politics while the
life of the planet is being put at extreme risk?
Why did CounterPunch recently and suddenly abandon the
working class and peace and take up the cause of the
victim groups of Identity Politics— women, blacks,
homosexuals, lesbians, transgendered, and Muslim
refugees (see Eric Draitser CP, Vol. 24, No. 1), the cause
of the EU and globalism
(see http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/20/brexit-
nationalism-and-the-damage-done/ ) which benefits only
the One Percent, and the demonization of Trump and
Putin? Perhaps it is only a coincidence, but
CounterPunch’s collapse coincides with CP being put on
and removed from the PropOrNot list of Russian
agents/dupes. My columns, for years a welcome feature on
CounterPunch, suddenly ceased to appear. We have had
no explanation from CounterPunch why the site suddenly
gave up on peace and bread.
One might think that the audacity of the lies from the FBI,
CIA, NSA and their media whores would provoke a
powerful response from the liberal/progressive/left and
from European populations, but it hasn’t.
What about Trump himself? Has he been forced to
abandon his goal of normal relations with Russia, as this
article in the Intercept suggests?
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/21/revolving-door-
military/
If not, is Trump filling top Pentagon and Homeland
Security positions with generals and defense contractors in
order to neutralize the military from participating in a
CIA/presstitute coup against him?
146
If Trump is eliminated, with Pence as VP
and the list of appointees provided by
the Intercept, the US government will
pass into the hands of the
military/security complex for the
remainder of its existence.
Is Trump now focused on protecting himself instead of
protecting all of us from a deadly conflict with Russia?
If so, this is the achievement of the US “intelligence”
services, the Democratic Party, right-wing Republicans,
the presstitute media, and the liberal/progressive/left.
If anyone remains to write the history of the Great
Incineration, the identity of those responsible is
completely clear.
 After New Surveillance Claims, Partisan Nets Instead
Whine Over Trump’s 'Baseless' ‘Fiction’
By Scott Whitlock
March 23, 2017 | 12:34 PM EDT

In the wake of explosive new claims from Congressman

Devin Nunes that Donald Trump and aides were surveilled
during the presidential transition, the partisan networks on
Thursday circled back to focus on the President’s
“baseless,” “false,” “fictional” tweets. ABC, CBS and NBC
also questioned the credibility of the House chairman who
brought the information to the President.
Just like Garrett, she did the Democrats a favor:
“But even if Trump was inadvertently
caught in legal surveillance, that's a far cry
from the allegation that his predecessor
illegally wiretapped him.”

On CBS This Morning, Major Garrett opened his report by

reminding,

“For weeks, the White House has fiercely

defended the fiction that President Obama
had Trump Tower wiretapped.” Later, the
journalist underlined, “The President was
asked if he felt vindicated about his false
claim that former President Obama ordered
wiretapping of his Trump Tower phones.”

Later, Jon Karl chided Nunes:

The impact of his actions yesterday of

Chairman Nunes' actions yesterday raise
questions about whether or not his
committee can conduct a bipartisan and
impartial investigation about the Russian
interference in the election. He ran down to
the White House yesterday to brief the
President on what he found.

Downplaying the charge that the intelligence agencies

shared information about Trump and his aides, Garrett
pushed the Democratic agenda:

“The House Chairman of the Committee

overseeing the investigation into Russian
meddling into the 2016 election says he's
found something, just not wiretapping.”

On ABC’s Good Morning America, Cecilia Vega followed

a similar theme, explaining Trump’s reaction to the news:

“The President calling it vindication for his On NBC’s Today, Peter Alexander echoed liberal talking
baseless Twitter claims that President points criticizing Nunes:
Obama wiretapped him.”

147
This morning, both parties tell NBC News they’re stunned
by the head of the House Intelligence Committee making
these public statements about an ongoing investigation.
They argue it doesn't serve the public interest and
undermines confidence in the House Intelligence
Committee and frankly, they say, in the entire process of
independent congressional oversight.
In a separate interview, Matt Lauer hoped that the Russian
investigation will “mortally would” the Trump
administration. And of course, none of these networks
remembered the New York Times headline from January:
“Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.”
A transcript of the CBS segment is below:
CBS This Morning
3/23/17
7:13am ET
CBS GRAPHIC: New Spying Claims: Nunes: Feds May
Have Intercepted Trump Team Talks
CHARLIE ROSE: Conversations held by President Trump
and associates were foreign intercepted by the intelligence
community. Congressman Devin Nunes, the chairman of
the House Intelligence Committee brought that information
to the President and the press before telling his committee.
The unusual move caused concern among Democrats. The
committee's top Democrat questioned if Nunes was acting
as a surrogate for the White House. Major Garrett is at the
White House with calls for an independent investigation.
Major, good morning.
MAJOR GARRETT: Good morning. For weeks, the White
House has fiercely defended the fiction that President
Obama had Trump Tower wiretapped. Then, that change
to “Well, if it wasn’t wiretapping, it was some nasty bit of
surveillance.” Well, now the House Chairman of the
Committee overseeing the investigation into Russian
meddling into the 2016 election says he's found something,
just not wiretapping. House Committee Chairman Devin
Nunes, a member of the President's transition team came
with new surveillance revelations.
DEVIN NUNES: I briefed the President on concerns that I
had.
GARRETT: Nunes told reporters conversations of Trump
transition officials, including possibly the President-elect,
were recorded between November and January.
148
NUNES: On numerous occasions, the intelligence
community incidentally collected information about U.S.
citizens involved in the Trump transition.
GARRETT: The California Republican angered Democrats
by briefing Mr. Trump before the full intelligence
community.
NUNES: The President needs to know that these reports
are out there.
GARRETT: Nunes said an unidentified source showed him
about a dozen intercepted communications. None, he said,
involved Russia. But Nunes fretted that Mr. Trump's name
and others were not redacted as intercepts circulated
within the intelligence community.
DONALD TRUMP: Thank you all very much.
GARRETT: The President was asked if he felt vindicated
about his false claim that former President Obama ordered
wiretapping of his Trump Tower phones.
TRUMP: I very much appreciate the fact that they found
what they found. I somewhat do.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF: This is deeply troubling.
GARRETT: Adam Schiff, the top intelligence committee
Democrat, questioned Nunes's ability to lead the
investigation and insisted there is evidence of collusion
between Russia and Trump officials.
SCHIFF: There is more than circumstantial evidence now.
GARRETT: Republican Senator John McCain joined the
Democrats' call for an independent committee.
SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: No longer does the Congress
have credibility to handle this alone.
GARRETT: The National Security Agency collected these
Trump transition conversations, but Nunes did not ask the
agency for explanation or context. Anthony, experts tell us
that these conversations, these intercepts, would not have
been circulated in the intelligence community if they had
been benign.
 Serious Claim: FBI's Comey 'Falsely' Denied Surveillance
'Orwellian Big Brother' Intrusion On Trump, Other
Citizens In Public And Private Sector
Bob Unruh
March 23, 2017
Larry Klayman
The lawyer who founded Judicial Watch and later
Freedom Watch, Larry Klayman, has sent a letter to Rep.
Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, asking him to look at a
whistleblower’s evidence of
“systematic illegal surveillance on
prominent Americans, again including the
chief justice of the Supreme Court, other
justices, 156 judges, prominent
businessmen such as Donald Trump, and
even yours truly.”
That spying was done, Klayman’s letter contends, by the
FBI.
It’s become a major issue following President Trump’s
assertion that he and Trump Tower were spied upon by the
federal government, and the subsequent denials by
intelligence and law-enforcement officials, including FBI
Director James Comey, who famously cleared Hillary
Clinton on accusations she mishandled classified
information as U.S. secretary of state.
Klayman has been working with Dennis Montgomery, a
former NSA and Central Intelligence Agency contractor
who
“left the NSA and CIA with 47 hard drives
and over 600 million pages of information,
much of which is classified.”
149
Montgomery then
“sought to come forward legally as a
whistleblower to appropriate government
entities, including congressional
intelligence committees, to expose that the
spy agencies were engaged for years in
systematic illegal surveillance on prominent
Americans.”
Explained Klayman:
“Working side by side with former Obama
Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper, who lied in congressional
testimony, and former Obama Director of
the CIA, the equally ethically challenged
John Brennan, Montgomery witnessed ‘up
close and personal’ this “Orwellian Big
Brother’ intrusion on privacy, likely for
potential coercion, blackmail or other
nefarious purposes.”
Trust the government? Maybe you
shouldn’t. Read the details in “Lies the
Government Told You,” by Judge Andrew
Napolitano.
But he said the testimony has been essentially ignored.
Now, however, with the issue pending before Congress,
there even are media reports that appear to substantiate the
general claims that the government has been spying.
The New York Times in January
referenced wiretapping at Trump Tower,
and just this week ABC News
documented that the FBI
monitored Trump Tower.
The report claimed,
“But it was not placed at the behest of
Barack Obama, and the target was not the
 Trump campaign of 2016. For two years
ending in 2013, the FBI had a court-
approved warrant to eavesdrop on a
sophisticated Russian organized crime
money-laundering network that operated
out of unit 63A in Trump Tower in New
York.”
It resulted in the indictments of more than 30 people, ABC
said.
Explained the report:
“The FBI investigation did not implicate
Trump. But Trump Tower was under close
watch. Some of the Russian mafia figures
worked out of unit 63A in the iconic
skyscraper – just three floors below
Trump’s penthouse residence – running
what prosecutors called an ‘international
money-laundering, sports gambling and
extortion ring.'”
Klayman, a Washington watchdog who repeatedly took on
the Clinton political machine to investigate suspicion of
wrongdoing, explained in his letter to Nunes, which was
copied to other members of Congress, that he previously
won a judgment from U.S. District Judge Richard Leon
preliminarily halting the “illegal, warrantless, and massive
surveillance of U.S. citizens and lawful residents” in 2015.
As part of Nunes’ hearing on claims of government
spying, he invited
“anyone who has information about these
topics to come forward.”
Klayman said that is exactly what Montgomery has done.
“There is a myriad of evidence, direct and
circumstantial, of the illegal and
unconstitutional surveillance disclosed to
the FBI by Montgomery,” said Klayman,
describing how his client made an on-
camera interview with the agency about the
misdeeds some time ago.
He said Montgomery
“holds much of the roadmap to ‘draining the
swamp’ of this corruption of our
democracy.”
Montgomery, Klayman said, has information
150
“that the spy agencies were engaged for
years in systematic illegal surveillance on
prominent Americans.”
During Montgomery’s interview with FBI General
Counsel James Baker, under grants of immunity, he
“laid out how persons like then
businessman Donald Trump were illegally
spied upon by Clapper, Brennan, and the
spy agencies of the Obama administration.”
“He even claimed that these spy agencies
had manipulated voting in Florida during
the 2008 presidential election, where illegal
tampering resulted in helping Obama to win
the White House.”
But that interview,
“conducted and videotaped by Special FBI
Agents Walter Giardina and William
Barnett, occurred almost two years ago,
and nothing that I know of has happened
since.”
Klayman wrote that it appears to have been “buried” by
Comey, possibly because
“the FBI itself collaborates with the spy
agencies to conduct illegal surveillance.”
He said he previously visited with a staff lawyer, Allen
Souza, to inform Nunes of questions that needed to be put
to Comey while under oath.
“My expressed purpose: to have Chairman
Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee
ask Comey, under oath, why he and his
FBI have seemingly not moved forward
with the Montgomery investigation while,
on the other hand, the FBI director recently
claimed publicly, I believe falsely, that there
is ‘no evidence’ of surveillance on
President Trump and those around him by
the Obama administration.
“Indeed, there is,” he wrote.
He tells members of Congress that Comey needs to be
grilled during a subsequent hearing, now set for March 28.
He asks Nunes to respond by March 24 to let
“the American people, and Mr. Montgomery
… know where you and the other members
of your committee stand.”
“Do you intend to get at and investigate the
full truth, or as has regrettably been the
 case for many years in government, sweep Carson, Jackie Speier, Mike Quigley, Eric Swalwell,
the truth under the carpet?” Joaquin Castro and Denny Heck.

Other recipients of the letter were Reps. Adam Schiff, Trust the government? Maybe you
Mike Conaway, Peter King, Frank LoBiondo, Tom shouldn’t. Read the details in “Lies the
Rooney, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Michael Turner, Brad Government Told You,” by Judge Andrew
Wenstrup, Chris Stewart, Rich Crawford, Trey Gowdy, Napolitano.
Elise Stefanik, Will Hurd, Jim Hines, Terri Sewell, Andre
.

151
 Trump & Transition Team Spied On
From The Net
3-23-2017
On Wednesday, House Select Committee on Intelligence
chair Devin Nunez (R. CA) issued a statement, saying
“on numerous occasions, the Intelligence
Community incidentally collected
information about US citizens involved in
the Trump transition.”
“Details about US persons associated with
the incoming administration - details with
little or no apparent foreign intelligence
value - were widely disseminated in
intelligence community reporting.”
“I have confirmed that additional names of
Trump transition team members were
unmasked” - their identities revealed, likely
for political reasons.
“To be clear, none of this surveillance was
related to Russia or any investigation of
Russian activities or of the Trump team.”
“The House Intelligence Committee will
thoroughly investigate this surveillance and
its subsequent dissemination to determine:
 Who was aware of it
 Why it was not disclosed to
Congress
 Who requested and authorized
the additional unmasking
 Whether anyone directed the
intelligence community to focus
on Trump associates; and
 Whether any laws, regulations, or
procedures were violated.”
“I’ve asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA,
and CIA to expeditiously comply with my
.
152
March 15 letter, and to provide a full
account of these surveillance activities.”
While no physical evidence of wiretapping Trump Tower
is known, Nunez expressed concern about surveillance
activities on Trump and his associates, including Michael
Flynn, information about his conversations with Russia’s
ambassador to Washington leaked.
Nunez:
“The NSA is…cooperati(ng)” in providing
what it knows about Trump team
surveillance, “so far (not) the FBI…”
Asked if he could rule out Obama administration
involvement, Nunez said:
“No, I cannot.”
The former president is conveniently out of the country in
Tahiti from mid-March to mid-April, not readily available
for comment.
Team Trump’s conversations were recorded, information
from them leaked, Nunez explained.
Trump said he feels “somewhat” vindicated by information
the congressman supplied.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer said if further
information is learned on this, it’ll be shared with
reporters, adding:
“(A)ll of the questions (asked by the media)
are in the presumptive negative towards
us, as opposed to ‘why was this taking
place.’ “
“ ‘Why were people surveilled ostensibly.’
They were involved in the campaign…Why
would someone’s name get put out
there…There’s a lot of questions” needing
answers.
 Loony Liberal Actress Claims
London Terror 'May Be' A 'Set Up' By Trump
By Kristine Marsh
March 23, 2017 | 11:01 AM EDT

In 2015 the actress made headlines when she gave a

politically charged acceptance speech at the Academy
Awards on the fake “pay gap.” The media, of course,
applauded her for days afterwards for championing the
liberal talking point. All three news networks went out of
their way to spread skewed statistics to support the actress’
points. CBS’ Scott Pelley gushed, “She has a point!”
before repeating incomplete data to back up the wage gap
theory.

Arquette followed up this tweet by offering to pay for a

Put this one in the loony lefty bin. Hollywood actress “one-way ticket” to Moscow for the president:
Patricia Arquette, known for winning the best supporting
actress Oscar two years ago, revealed she’s a conspiracy
theorist last night on Twitter. After an Islamic terrorist
killed 4 people and wounded at least 40 others in London
Wednesday, the actress claimed it was all a ruse by
President Trump to distract us from the FBI investigation
into his ties with Russia:

This isn’t the first conspiracy theory the actress believes

about the president. She also tweeted about the
unsubstantiated, but much reported, “dossier” about the
President’s alleged sordid affairs while in Russia as if it
were absolute truth, as well.
So far her tweet hasn’t received that much attention, but
Arquette is certainly a media darling.

153
 Sen. John McCain Calls For A “Select Committee” On
Russian Interference, Deep State’s Endgame In Sight
The Deep State's Endgame Comes Into Focus
By Shepard Ambellas -
03.23.2017 @12:26 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Senator John McCain (R-AZ) told
MSNBC’s Greta Van Susteren that he doesn’t even know
where to begin after House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Devin Nunes delivered proof to the President
Donald Trump at the White House Wednesday afternoon,
which shows that he and his associates were indeed
surveilled in late 2016 – early 2017.
I guess the senior Arizona senator would rather have seen
the committee grab ahold of the evidence first so that the
Deep State could then bury it to advance the Russian
narrative.
It’s safe to say what the ultimate endgame is here — not
only do they want Trump out but they also want to regain
full control over the Corporation of the United States by
eliminating their biggest enemy — the alternative media.
And by “they,” I mean the Deep State.
The information war has intensified and so have the
attacks. Never before have we seen this level of resistance
toward the truth. The corporate mockingbird media’s
rhetoric is at an all-time high.
Make no mistake, the Deep State didn’t list Infowars.com
and Intellihub.com on the PropOrNot Russian propaganda
list for nothing — this came with careful planning.
PropOrNot screenshot
154
Both Infowars’ and Intellihub’s direct contact with the
Trump Campaign in 2016 may have landed the agencies in
hot water with the Deep State, especially after Trump’s
popularity amongst alternative readers helped to thrust him
into the White House.
In the Dec. 7, 2016, article titled Corporate Media
Promotes Call For U.S. Government to Investigate
Intellihub, Other Alternative News Outlets For
Espionage, Intellihub’s Alex Thomas described
PropOrNot’s motives.
“On the group’s website, the organization
has produced what they ironically call, ‘The
List’ which basically smears any news
outlet that doesn’t solely publish
establishment views on U.S. foreign policy
as peddlers of Russian propaganda. Not
stopping at this absurd defamation, the
organization also calls for any website on
their list to be investigated by the
government for espionage and other, ‘bad
business’,” Thomas wrote.
This narrative was injected into the press to run hand-and-
hand with the Trump-Russian narrative which the Deep
State will ultimately use to kill two birds with one stone by
disestablishing the Trump Administration and by taking
out lead forces in the alt-media such as Infowars and
Intellihub.
“That’s right, with their inclusion of
Intellihub on, ‘The List’, PropOrNot is
directly calling for Intellihub’s founder
Shepard Ambellas as well as writers such
as myself to be investigated by the FBI
and DOJ in what one can imagine is in
retaliation for years of direct assault on the
global elite. (Especially for our Guardian
featured reporting on Bilderberg in 2012),”
Intellihub’s Thomas explained.
This is McCarthyism at its finest.
Wednesday, Sen. McCain called for a “select committee”
to investigate Russian interference after the House Intel
Chair met with the President and told MSNBC’s Van
Susteren that it’s a “requirement.”
“This just shows a tremendous chasm
between the two senior members of the
House Intelligence Committee,” McCain
said.
“I would agree to a commission but I would
probably prefer a select committee.”
For all intensive purposes, the Deep State will not stop
advancing the Russian narrative because that is their
current modus operandi which started in 2016 under the
Obama Admin.
On Oct. 18, 2016, I exposed the State
Department’s secret “7th Floor Group”
which operates independently from the
main branches of the U.S. government.
In the article I wrote:
Information contained inside documents
released by the FBI pertaining to Hillary
.
155
Clinton’s email scandal show that there
really is a “Shadow Government” and that
it is based out of the 7th floor of the State
Department H.Q., located at 2201 C Street
NW, which is the Harry S. Truman Building.
“The Secretary’s suite was a Sensitive
Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)
which also had a DSS security detachment
outside of the office. Currently, The 7th
Floor Group meets on Wednesdays and
this includes the Secretary of State John
Kerry, Deputy Chief of Staff Jennifer Tout,
Deputy secretary of State for Management
and Resources, Kennedy, Assistant
Secretary Julia Frifield, and members of
the Office of the Legal Advise,” according
to Wikipedia, and likely refers to the
seventh sub-level of the facility
underground rather than the upper 7th
floor.
This is how they are doing it. The Director of the F.B.I. the
head of the N.S.A., these people, are all part of the deep
state apparatus, a secret sector of government that’s been
hidden from President Trump at Obama’s request before
his departure from the White House.
You see, Obama was privy to the deep
state apparatus through his C.I.A. ties —
he was part of it.
However, President Trump is a civilian and has been kept
in the dark, on a need-to-know basis, ever since his
inauguration and the powers-that-be want to keep it that
way.
Power to the people.
May God help us make America great again.
 Potential 'Smoking Gun' Showing Obama
Administration Spied On Trump Team, Source Says
By James Rosen
Published March 23, 2017
Republican congressional investigators expect a potential
“smoking gun” establishing that the Obama administration
spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the
president-elect himself, will be produced to the House
Intelligence Committee this week, a source told Fox News.
Classified intelligence showing incidental collection of
Trump team communications, purportedly seen by
committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and described
by him in vague terms at a bombshell Wednesday
afternoon news conference, came from multiple sources,
Capitol Hill sources told Fox News. The intelligence
corroborated information about surveillance of the Trump
team that was known to Nunes, sources said, even before
President Trump accused his predecessor of having
wiretapped him in a series of now-infamous tweets posted
on March 4.
The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama
administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of
legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on
President-elect Trump, according to sources.
The key to that conclusion is the unmasking of selected
U.S. persons whose names appeared in the intelligence, the
sources said, adding that the paper trail leaves no other
plausible purpose for the unmasking other than to damage
the incoming Trump administration.
The FBI hasn’t been responsive to the House Intelligence
Committee’s request for documents, but the National
Security Agency is expected to produce documents to the
.
156
committee by Friday. The NSA document production is
expected to produce more intelligence than Nunes has so
far seen or described – including what one source
described as a potential “smoking gun” establishing the
spying.
Some time will be needed to properly assess the materials,
with the likely result being that congressional investigators
and attorneys won’t have a solid handle on the contents of
the documents – and their implications – until next week.
Because Nunes’s intelligence came from multiple sources
during a span of several weeks, and he has not shared the
actual materials with his committee colleagues, he will be
the only member of the panel in a position to know
whether the NSA has turned over some or all of the
intelligence he is citing. However, Fox News was told
Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Rep. Adam
Schiff, D-Calif., had been briefed on the basic contents of
the intelligence described by Nunes.
CIA Director Mike Pompeo is also sympathetic to the
effort to determine, with documentary evidence, the extent
of any alleged Obama administration spying on the Trump
team, sources said.
At a dramatic Wednesday news conference, Nunes
claimed to have seen evidence that members of the Trump
transition team, possibly including the president-elect,
were subjected to “incidental surveillance” collection that
Nunes characterized as legal but troubling.
“What I've read bothers me,” he told
reporters, “and I think it should bother the
president himself, and his team because I
think some of it seems to be inappropriate.”
Schiff blasted Nunes for not coming first to the
Intelligence Committee with the information.
"If accurate, this information should have
been shared with members of the
committee, but it has not been," Schiff said
in a Wednesday statement.
 NBC’s Lauer Hopes Russia Investigation Will
‘Mortally Wound’ Trump Administration
By Kyle Drennen
March 23, 2017 | 11:18 AM EDT
During an interview with Senator John McCain on
Thursday’s NBC Today, co-host Matt Lauer could not
contain his enthusiasm for the idea that the politically-
charged congressional investigation into supposed ties
between the Trump campaign and Russia could somehow
bring down Donald Trump’s months-long presidency: “Do
you think that when all of those shoes drop, that they
may mortally wound this young administration?”
The exchange began with Lauer advancing the Democratic
Party agenda by blasting Republican House Intelligence
Committee Chairman Devin Nunes for daring to publicly
reveal that the then-President-elect or his campaign
associates had been caught up in “incidental” and
“inappropriate” surveillance during the transition:
“Can you explain any reason why
Chairman Nunes would have done what
he did yesterday?...instead of
discussing those reports with members
of his own Intelligence Committee and
the ranking Democratic member, go
right to the press and right to the White
House?”
The reporter followed up with another hyperbolic question
that used the words of the committee’s Democratic ranking
member, Adam Schiff, to accuse to Nunes of undermining
the entire investigation:
You heard what Adam Schiff said. He said,
“The Chairman will need to decide whether
he's the chairman of an independent
investigation into conduct or he's going to
157
be a surrogate to the White House,
because he cannot do both.”
Has Chairman Nunes so damaged the
credibility of the Intelligence Committee
that they should just shut down that
investigation?
Later in the segment, fellow co-host Savannah Guthrie
similarly cited Schiff, touting the liberal lawmaker’s
unsubstantiated claim that
“there is more than circumstantial evidence
of some kind of collusion between Trump
campaign associates and Russia.”
McCain replied that he was “not aware” of that evidence.
Briefly touching on the topic of the GOP’s health care
reform legislation set to be voted on in House Thursday
night, Lauer again channeled left-wing hopes, eagerly
wondering if the effort would fail:
“...it's going to be a tight vote tonight. A,
what's your prediction, will it pass? And B,
if it doesn't pass, how badly does that
damage the President's ability to pass
other aspects of his agenda?”
While Lauer and Guthrie were happy to slam Nunes,
questioning the Republican representative’s credibility and
motives, Democrat Schiff was held up as an objective
source – instead of being dismissed as a partisan shill.
On Monday, MSNBC anchor Brian Williams speculated
the congressional investigation into Russia could
“dissolve” the Trump administration.
Here is a transcript of Lauer and Guthrie’s March 23
questions to McCain:
7:13 AM ET
MATT LAUER: We are joined now by Republican Senator
John McCain. Senator, nice to see you. Good morning.
 SEN. JOHN MCCAIN [R-ARIZONA]: Good morning.
LAUER: You know Washington, you know the role of
oversight that Congress has. Can you explain any reason
why Chairman Nunes would have done what he did
yesterday? Say, “I've seen reports from the intelligence
community on this subject,” and instead of discussing those
reports with members of his own Intelligence Committee and
the ranking Democratic member, go right to the press and
right to the White House?
(...)
LAUER: You heard what Adam Schiff said. He said, “The
Chairman will need to decide whether he's the chairman of
an independent investigation into conduct or he's going to be
a surrogate to the White House, because he cannot do
both.” Has Chairman Nunes so damaged the credibility of
the Intelligence Committee that they should just shut down
that investigation?
(...)
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Senator, the President said, as you
just saw, that he felt somewhat vindicated by this information
that he received yesterday. But let's back up a minute. The
claim that Trump made was that then-President Obama
surveilled him some way before the election at Trump
Tower. What we appear to have learned yesterday is that
Trump or his associates were somehow incidentally caught
up in surveillance after the election. Surveillance that was of
other legal foreign targets. So I ask you, should he feel
vindicated? Is that accusation of wiretapping by President
Obama vindicated?...So this changing nothing?
(...)
158
LAUER: This story of Russian possible connections to
Trump associates during the campaign, you just alluded to
this a second ago. About a week ago you said this, “There's
a lot of aspects with this whole relationship with Russia and
Vladimir Putin that requires further scrutiny.” You went on to
say, “In fact, I think there's a lot of shoes to drop from this
centipede.” Do you think that when all of those shoes drop,
that they may mortally wound this young administration?
(...)
GUTHRIE: And Congressman Adam Schiff, who’s the
Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, has now
said to NBC that there is more than circumstantial evidence
of some kind of collusion between Trump campaign
associates and Russia. Have you seen that evidence? Are
you aware of it? Do you doubt it?
(...)
LAUER: Let me ask you, before I let you go, Senator, about
health care. I know it's happening down the hall from you.
But it's going to be a tight vote tonight. A, what's your
prediction, will it pass? And B, if it doesn't pass, how badly
does that damage the President's ability to pass other
aspects of his agenda?
(...)
MCCAIN: I don't know it's going to turn out, but I do know
this, that ObamaCare as it is, is imploding and it's not
working in Arizona, where premiums are going up over
100%. So we've got to do something.
LAUER: Yeah, but is this the bill to replace it?
(...)
LAUER: Alright, Senator John McCain. Senator, I know how
much you love these early hours so I really appreciate you
getting up and joining us this morning.
MCCAIN: Good to be with you.
 Shepard Ambellas Issues
Red-Level Warning Over “Russian Narrative” Fiasco
Reporter Issues Alert Surrounding The Trump-Russian Situation
By Staff Writer -
03.23.2017 @2:22 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Intellihub founder and editor-in-chief
Shepard Ambellas appeared on YouTube Thursday, issuing
a red-level alert over the “Russian narrative” fiasco.
“We have to fight back.” I need your help.
This is a bigger information war than ever,”
Ambellas said.
The veteran reporter said that he wants to “intensify” his
actions against the “Deep State” before “it’s over.”
Shep believes the “Russian narrative” was designed to not
only dethrone the Trump Administration but take out
prominent alternative media agencies and figureheads.
According to Ambellas, he has experienced some “weird
stuff” happen ever since he had contact with the Trump
Campaign in 2016 when he solicited the campaign for
press passes to a “California rally.”
“I had somebody call up and get a weird message,”
Ambellas said. “Like my phone was transferred to the
State Department or something like that.”
159
In the video, Ambellas talked about just how strange
things have gotten over the past several months and
mentioned the shadowy group PropOrNot as a finger of the
“Deep State apparatus,” as he called it.
‘They want to put away or take out the alternative news
once and for all so that that they will have no competition
— they will then own the entire narrative.’
“They are not going to stop,” Shep said. “They are doing
everything in their power to keep that information from
coming out and they want to regain control because see
they’ve lost control.”
“As Obama was exiting he got together with the State
Department and they formed this secret ‘7th Floor Group‘
which Intellihub reported about. It’s a “shadow
government,” Ambellas said.
“All of these people are part of the C.I.A.-N.S.A. Deep
State apparatus. They are all approved to be in there. They
all know that there is this secret sinister shadow
government running behind the scenes.”
“But the thing is, Trump is just a citizen so he didn’t have
access to all of this. When he became President they kept
him out of all of this, they kept him out of certain briefings
because, you know, the Deep State just does what it wants.
But all and all the Deep State’s lost some of its power […]
but they are still controlling thing, they are still
orchestrating things behind the scenes […] now, their
biggest battle is literally the alternative media.”
Ambellas said he needs support to intensify his efforts to
get the truth out.
 Bob Woodward: Obama Officials Possibly
Facing Criminal Charges For Unmasking Scheme
By Daniel Chaitin (@Danielchaitin7)
3/22/17 9:07 PM
The Washington Post's Bob Woodward warned on
Wednesday that there are people from the Obama
administration who could be facing criminal charges for
unmasking the names of Trump transition team members
from surveillance of foreign officials.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin
Nunes, R-Calif., said earlier that he had briefed Trump on
new information, unrelated to an investigation into Russian
activities, that suggested that several members of Trump's
transition team and perhaps Trump himself had their
identities "unmasked" after their communications were
intercepted by U.S. intelligence officials.
The revelation is notable because identities of Americans
are generally supposed to remain "masked" if American
communications are swept up during surveillance of
foreign individuals.
During an interview on Fox News, Woodward said that if
that information about the unmasking is true,
"it is a gross violation."
He said it isn't Trump's assertion, without proof, that his
predecessor wiretapped Trump Tower that is of concern,
but rather that intelligence officials named the Americans
being discussed in intercepted communications.
.
160
"You can learn all kinds of things from
diplomats gossiping, because that's what
occurs. Under the rules, and they are pretty
strict, it's called minimization. You don't
name the American person who is being
discussed," Woodward said.
He noted that there are about 20 people in the intelligence
community who, for intelligence reasons, can order this
"minimization" be removed.
"But the idea that there was intelligence
value here is really thin," Woodward said.
"It's, again, down the middle, it is not what
Trump said, but this could be criminal on
the part of people who decided, oh, let's
name these people."
He drove the point home, adding that
"under the rules, that name is supposed to
be blanked out, and so you've got a real
serious problem potentially of people in the
Obama administration passing around this
highly classified gossip."
 The New New Left’s
Calls For Civil War In America
Author: Phil Butler
22.03.2017
Not long ago many conservatives predicted an American
“melt-down” if Hillary Clinton won the White House.
Today, the Democrats who are backed by massive
corporate interest, they have our nation on the brink of
civil war. Radical thugs at Berkley and elsewhere openly
attack anyone uttering support for the new president.
Making use of an entitled generation of left extremists, the
globalists make their move on American regime change.
There is a soft coup underway in my country. We’re far
past calling the neo-socialist fanaticism brewing in the
United States by any other name. Donald Trump has been
in office only a few days, but impartial onlookers wonder
at what he could possibly have done to incite such bitter
hatred and violence. When Breitbart editor Milo
Yiannopoulos was prevented from speaking on the
University of California Berkley campus because of a
violent protesters the “strategy” of left wing radicals
became clear. The people behind the Obama-Clinton cabal
intend recreating 1960s tension and chaos. In an ironic
twist, Berkley was a central spot for the 1960s Free Speech
Movement. Today radical liberalism and entitlement are
the only words heard. If something does not change soon,
America will burn.
The editors at the National Review author call these
radicals the “New New Left”, that has been set in motion
since before the new president took office. The anti–Milo
Yiannopoulos riot on February 1 is another chip in a huge
gamble by globalist bent on destroying everything
America once stood for. This is the way conservatives and
moderates see the unrest today. National Review’s Heather
Mac Donald calls our attention to the deep seeded danger
161
of this movement with her condemnation of professors
justifying the anarchy. On those academics’ part she wrote:
“These are the same faculty who defined
speech as “harmful conduct” in their
petitions to the Berkeley administration to
cancel Yiannopoulos’s engagement.”
From a strategy point of view the New New Left had an
easy time stifling constitutional rights these last few
weeks. Berkley is the newest example of cheaply bought
civil unrest and coercion. If George Soros or Google
wanted to fight pro-Trump voices, 100 violent thugs
seeded into an audience already stirred up by Berkley
professors and activists gets the job done pretty well.
Follow up with New York Times editorials and tilted news,
some CNN fake news, and we can expect Kent State to be
repeated soon. Only this time the National Guard may
open fire on the protestors for the wars. For the wars. It’s
important that readers understand what these leftists
support.
The “Womens march”, raging left wing media, Democrats
blocking presidential appointments, major technology
corporations holding special meetings to “handle Trump”,
let me tell you brother’s and sisters – patience is about to
be worn thin. I watch the tenor of all this on social media,
the New New Left is out there threatening people’s kids I
tell you! The constant pressure, the needling and jabbing,
I’ve never seen the likes in 15 years analyzing social
media and digital platforms. The internet is a mirror, a
mirror of later reality in person. Whoever is behind all this,
and there are those running the chaos show, their only
clear goal is an all out civil war to overthrow a dully
elected president. Figuring out who “they” are is not so
difficult. All anyone has to do is look to Wall Street and
the supporters of Obama and Clinton. The “swamp” as
President Trump calls it, is churning over the drain plug
being pulled.
Desperation by those opposed to nationalism and
conservatism in the US has caused a huge miscalculation I
think. Indications of the coming backlash are visible
through notables from Chicago to Hollywood now. The
right side is about to have enough, former Chicago Bears
head coach Mike Ditka called the sports media bent on
turning the Super Bowl in to an anti-Trump demonstration
“assholes” on the popular Bernie & Sid Show radio show.
In an interview with The Guardian the other day, film star
Matthew McConaughey stood up above the silent majority
of Hollywood to basically endorse Trump by suggesting
that Hollywood needs to “embrace” the new president and
look for positives. Actor Morgan Freeman, a Clinton
supporter, was quoted recently as saying;
“I’m holding out hope that Donald Trump
has to be a good president. He can’t not
be. What I see is a guy who will not lose.”
The hate, that visceral hole of dissatisfaction of the
empowered-generation, it’s becoming a whining, crying,
horrible screaming pit of aggression toward anyone not
further satisfying their misery. It’s like the smartphone
makers implanted zombie chips in all the cell phones to
run everybody nutty. Google and Facebook spying,
Microsoft and the Clinton Foundation, Obama dropping a
microphone and the shit heads of California overflow our
country’s cities chanting “hell yeah, that’s so cool”. Good
God we are in trouble.
This story on Paste by Steve Ryan is a caution, a warning
of the deep seeded banality of this New New Left beast.
The bestselling scribe of the book, “Slaying the Tiger: A
Year Inside the Ropes on the New PGA Tour”, turns a
mighty skill with a keyboard or pen into a typical
condescending advocacy of violence. Yes the author veils
the threatening tone as a caution for the “Left” to lay off
violence, but underneath that nuance the “power” these
people feel seethes. The author writes belches forth his
understanding for liberal frustrations:
“The reaction makes sense—for so long,
“liberals” in America have been a party of
capitulation and compromise, and have
been bullied to irrelevance by
conservatives who are morally repugnant
but possess actual balls.”
Ryan goes on to vent his own desire to “punch somebody
in the face”. He takes his readership down, down, down on
the ground where the real “battle” is to be waged,
portraying those propped up with hedge fund and Silicon
Valley billions as helpless, with nobody at all at their
backs. Reading this guy’s bullshit is almost painful, a
pitiful lie laid out like a blanket of caviar on a poisoned
cracker. Anybody who bites is as likely to get killing in a
.
162
civil war. Media in America is owned and anybody knows
that. The bankers and money in the US started this shit
show, and now they employ every idiot or genius sap to do
the bleeding when the time comes. Civil War, get it?
Donald Trump was elected because of the lunatic policies
and the New New Left went too far. I cannot believe how
many people are blind to this fact. We, meaning me and
every other conservative America, were ignored and
marginalized, forgotten by these radicals. In America
being Christian, being conservative, wanting two kids and
a dog and a picket fence was once AOK. Wanting to
believe America stood for traditional values was AOK.
Preferring not to have an LGBT parade down main street
in front of our kids was AOK. And hating, hurting,
ridiculing or assailing people who believed otherwise was
not. This is where the term moderation comes in. Left
meant anything goes, and right meant stuffy and anal
retentive stoicism. Olive branch toting on the one hand,
and gun toting war hawkishness on the other was balanced
by compromise basically. Trump supporters are mainly the
balancers, and this is the only reason there is not already a
bloodbath. It’s time we stood back and looked at who the
extremists are.
Breaking it down, here’s the scoop on America right now.
President Donald Trump was asked a long time ago if he
would ever run for president. He told the reporter asking;
“Only if I see my country going down the tubes.” Well
here he is pushing the “reset” button 150 million
Americans want pushed. Half of America did not believe
or want the policies of Obama. Get it? Half the country
was “all good” with same sex marriage in a church, though
they did not agree. Half of America had no problem with a
proxy war against Russia, with wars all over the world,
even though they felt it was wrong. Half of America could
stand a Wall Street robbery of the American taxpayer,
even though they knew they were being fleeced. But that
half of America could not take any more. That half of
America won’t be beat in the head by people who believe
they are righteous in their empowerment at their expense.
Half of America is not going to be threatened or attacked
much longer. Even the sold out media cannot show Trump
supporters attacking the New New Left – not yet anyway.
If this does not stop soon the Xbox playing liberal arts
freshman bent on more satisfaction and coolness, is going
to come face to face with Billy Bad Ass from some small
ghost town in South Alabama. I see it coming, I know
many of you do too. The New New Left is human in their
desire to “punch somebody in the face”, and so are we.
 Pelosi: Intel Chairman
'A Stooge Of The President'
By Mike Lillis
03/23/17 12:23 PM EDT
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) hammered
the Republican chairman of the Intelligence Committee on
Thursday, saying Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) is simply a
“stooge” for President Trump who can’t be trusted to lead
an unbiased investigation into ties between Russia and the
White House.
Pelosi said Nunes “acted outside the circle of respect” for
his responsibility as Intelligence chairman when he went
Wednesday to the press and the president with new
information surrounding the panel’s probe into Russian
hacking of the 2016 election and possible surveillance of
Trump's team — without telling the other members of the
committee.
“By being a stooge of the president of the
United States,” Pelosi charged, “he has
demonstrated very clearly that there is no
way there can be an impartial investigation
under his leadership on that committee.”
Pelosi, who has called for months for an outside
independent investigation of the Russian hacking and
influence campaign, said Nunes’s actions only accentuate
the need for Congress to create such a panel.
“Chairman Nunes is deeply compromised,
and he cannot possibly lead an honest
investigation,” she charged.
Nunes grabbed headlines Wednesday when he called a
hasty press conference to announce what he characterized
as “alarming” revelations that U.S. spy agencies, “on
numerous occasions,” collected “incidental” information
163
about members of Trump’s transition team as part of
foreign surveillance operations.
The details gathered about those transition members had
“little or no apparent foreign intelligence
value,” Nunes said, and the information
was “widely disseminated in a foreign
intelligence report.”
Nunes stopped just short of accusing the Obama
administration of spying on Trump —
“I guess it all depends on one’s definition of
spying,” he said — but he said he's
"alarmed" by what he's seen.
After the unusual press conference in the Capitol, Nunes
went to the White House to brief Trump on the findings.
Trump, for his part, said he felt partially vindicated for
claims he made earlier in the month that former President
Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower.
Democrats, particularly those on the Intelligence panel,
slammed Nunes as having taken a bipartisan investigation
in a markedly partisan direction.
“Chairman Nunes can either lead this
committee to pursue the truth or choose to
serve as an advocate for President Trump,”
said Rep. Joaquín Castro, a Texas
Democrat who sits on the committee.
Pelosi on Thursday said Nunes’s actions won’t cause the
Democrats to stop participating in the committee's Russia
probe.
“I’m just talking about him. The Democrats
are fully prepared to be unbiased,” she
said.
But Pelosi suggested Nunes had acted at the direction of
Trump, and she was quick to note that the California
Republican was himself a member of Trump’s transition
team — a history that raises “questions about [his] said. “But it was highly unusual, outside the
impartiality,” she said. accepted behavior of a chairman of an
Intelligence, or any, committee.”
“I don’t know if that was a cry for help. Or
let me out of here, or what that was,” Pelosi
.

164
 Trump’s Ambassador
To Israel Is Truly Terrifying
By Josh Alvarez - Washington Monthly
23 March 2017
In keeping with the logic of the Trump era,
Senate Republicans (along with two
Democrats) have hired an arsonist to
prevent a fire. David Friedman, whom
the Senate confirmed today as U.S.
ambassador to Israel, spent most of his
confirmation hearing either apologizing for
or attempting to walk back everything he
has ever said about Israel, Judaism, and
the conflict with Palestinians.
Friedman was Donald Trump’s bankruptcy lawyer during
the president’s Atlantic City debacles. Apparently, in
Trump’s mind, that qualified him to serve as
campaign advisor on Israel and the Middle East. During
the campaign, Friedman contributed commentary to Arutz
Sheva, an extreme right-wing publication based in Israel.
In an August 2016 post, he called for an “end to the two-
state narrative,” which he described as the product of
a U.S. State Department “with a hundred-year history of
anti-Semitism.” Friedman will now be collecting a
paycheck from that evil institution. He continued,
“At this juncture, a Palestinian state is the
last thing the [Palestinian] middle class
wants—they know better than anyone how
corrupt and inept their people are at self-
government.”
According to him, no Palestinians in the West Bank
(he prefers to call them “Arabs of Judea and Samaria”) are
“under any physical threat by the Israeli government.” This
was news to me. I’ve traveled repeatedly to Hebron, where
I’ve seen the barbed wire surrounding the Palestinian part
165
of town and the watchtowers with heavily armed
Israeli soldiers facing toward the Arabs inside.
Friedman has also contributed money to illegal settlements
in the West Bank as well as to the Jerusalem Reclamation
Project, which works to purchase property and settle Jews
in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City and Arab
neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. The goal is obvious:
push all non-Jews out of Jerusalem and “reclaim” the city.
A month before the election, Friedman matter-of-
factly denied the existence of the explicitly anti-Semitic
alt-right. Anti-Semitism, in Friedman’s view, is primarily a
feature of the left.
“There is anti-Semitic sentiment among
Clinton’s supporters,” he said. “The danger
in the U.S. is on the left, not on the right,”
Friedman said. “I’m not saying that there
aren’t neo-Nazis floating around in the
United States, because I’m sure there are.
But the movement we ought to be
concerned about is on the left.”
But Friedman saved the bulk of his vitriol for liberal Jews.
In one post, he equated being a Jewish liberal to a young
Theodor Herzl (the forefather of Zionism) joining the
German fraternity Burschenschaft, which became a
breeding ground for pre-Hitler anti-Semites. Friedman
appears to believe that liberal Jews are not simply
misguided, but are actively seeking to destroy Israel while
falsely proclaiming themselves to be pro-Israel.
There can be no other explanation, in his mind, for the
liberal Israel lobby J Street’s public support of President
Obama’s negotiations with Iran than intentionally
undercutting the Jewish state and betraying true Jews.
Liberal Jews, he wrote, are “worse than kapos,” the Jews
who collaborated with the Nazis in the death camps. They
are “just smug advocates of Israel’s destruction delivered
from the comfort of their secure American sofas—it’s hard
to imagine anyone worse.” Later confronted with his own
words at a conference, Friedman doubled down, saying,
“They’re not Jewish and they’re not pro-
Israel.”

The difference between a mere religious bigot and a true
fundamentalist is that a bigot mostly concerns himself with
the Other—people outside his faith—while a commitment to a two-state solution.) Israel
fundamentalist concerns himself foremost with
rival groups within his faith. Muslim fundamentalists, like
the ones in ISIS, are more immediately concerned with
cleansing their society of Muslims they deem insufficiently
devout than with destroying Christendom or Judaism.
Likewise, for people like Friedman, discussion of the
inferiority of Arabs and Muslims and their coming
subjugation is superfluous. The important thing is to
marginalize the (so-called) Jews who don’t believe that the
establishment of a Jewish theocracy over Greater Israel
will bring redemption and God’s grace.
This is the man the Senate saw fit to entrust with
America’s diplomatic mission in a place already suffering
from a surplus of religious zealots. Despite his apologies,
there is no reason to believe Friedman has
suddenly abandoned his extremism, nor that he would be
under the strict control of the president, who clearly has no
real interest in or moral conviction on the conflict.
The potential impact of Ambassador Friedman would be
tempered if not for the current makeup of the Israeli
government. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is
leader of the Likud Party, which in recent decades has
moved ever further to the right on the traditional Israeli
spectrum. But even Likud has been outflanked by the rise
of the Home Party, which could be considered Israel’s
version of the alt-right. The Home Party is now in a
coalition government with Likud and has enough seats in
parliament to unseat Netanyahu. The defining features of
its platform is the dismantling of secular democratic laws
and institutions, the full annexation of the West Bank (a
one-state solution), and the imposition of Israeli law on
Palestinians, who would be denied full citizenship and
civil rights and forcibly segregated from Israelis. In a
word, apartheid.
It’s with this party that Mr. Friedman most closely
identifies, and his nomination has already further
emboldened its members and sympathizers. A Likud Party
166
minister publicly broke ranks with Netanyahu, declaring
the two-state solution dead and proposing his own Home
Party-esque idea for a one-state solution. Practically
speaking, Netanyahu was never in favor of a two-state
solution and has done everything in his power to nip any
negotiations in the bud. But now we have an ambassador
who will not hold Netanyahu to even a vague rhetorical
commitment to a two-state possibility.
Friedman’s appointment further discredits the Trump
administration’s supposed toughness on Israel regarding
the annexation of the West Bank. At his joint press
conference with Netanyahu last month, Trump faced
Netanyahu and said,
“I would like to see you hold off” on further
settlements. (It was at this same
conference that Trump ended America’s
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman
said he received a direct message from the
Trump administration warning that
“imposing Israeli sovereignty [on the West
Bank] would mean an immediate crisis with
the new administration.”
It appears Lieberman himself did not consider this to be a
credible threat. He met with Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson last week and told him that West Bank
settlements—which are, by definition, imposing Israeli
sovereignty—are not an impediment to peace, and that the
U.S. should leave the United Nations Human Rights
Council and reconsider its support of the United Nations
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.
Friedman’s appointment further undermines Trump’s
public stance. This incoherence on the part of the
administration, combined with a weak State
Department and a growing morass of self-inflicted crises,
is an open invitation for the Israeli right wing to keep
pushing ahead with the settlements, further narrowing the
possibility of ever getting rid of them.
Perhaps the only positive outcome is that Friedman’s
Senate confirmation vote almost entirely fell on party
lines: only two Democrats, Robert Menendez of New
Jersey and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, voted in favor.
Israel is no longer an axiomatic bipartisan issue. This
process was helped along by Netanyahu and the
Republican Party during the Obama administration,
especially when Netanyahu, at the invitation of GOP
congressional leadership, addressed Congress and directly
undermined the sitting president’s foreign policy—an
unprecedented and disgraceful spectacle that Democrats
are unlikely to forget. Perhaps the United States will
become host to the debate about what kind of country
Israel should be, a debate the Israeli government and its
enablers are currently uninterested in having.
On a broader level, Friedman’s appointment further
establishes the conditions for Israel to go down a
potentially irreversible moral path. The current occupation
and creeping land theft is already a crime in slow motion.
But the combination of a radicalized militant government
.
167
with a monopoly on the means for mass violence, a
strident messianic movement in the West Bank, and the
presence of enablers in the West Wing and the American
embassy opens the possibility for even greater sins from
which Israel and the Israeli soul may never recover.
 Pro-Biotech Governor
Of The Year As Trump Ag Secretary
Barbara H. Peterson - Farm Wars
March 23, 2017
There has been a lot of speculation as to the validity of
Donald Trump’s persona in the alternative media as the
President that will save America from the globalists. But is
this true? Or is he simply another pawn in the globalist
game, and we are being manipulated once again to throw
our support behind a puppet of the elite? This question
must be asked or we are going down the same old road,
blinders on, cheering for the elected puppet.
Trump appointed Sonny Perdue to Ag Secretary, and he is
going for his confirmation hearing today, March 23, 2017.
This appears to be a major a win for Monsanto and the
GMO factory since the Biotechnology Innovation
Organization named him their Governor of the Year.
Sonny Perdue is the former Governor of
Georgia. He supports factory farms,
pesticides and genetically engineered
crops. In 2009, he signed a bill into law that
blocked local communities in Georgia from
regulating factory farms to address animal
cruelty, pollution or any other hazard. He
took money from Monsanto and other
pesticide companies for his gubernatorial
campaigns. The Biotechnology Innovation
Organization, a front group for the GMO
industry, named Perdue their 2009
Governor of the Year.
168
https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action
3/common/public/?action_KEY=19679#sthash.PlJsqXjd.d
puf
I think that we have our work cut out for us as our new
President is a biotech supporter:
When asked, “Do you support the use of
biotechnology in food products and oppose
efforts to require mandatory labeling for
foods simply because they contain
ingredients derived from biotechnology?”
Donald Trump reportedly answered: “Yes.”
Now, a series of recent appointments to the
Agricultural Advisory Committee is adding
even more concern to possible pro-GMO
leanings…
Notable appointments are:
Pat Roberts: The architect of the infamous,
recently passed and democracy destroying
DARK Act along with Michigan Senator
Debbie Stabenow.
Charles Herbster: A Nebraska cattle-
breeding company owner as well as the
owner of another company that sells
chemicals and fertilizers, Herbster is the
pick of Trump to chair his Agricultural
Advisory Committee. He’s a major funder
and member of the Ag America steering
committee, joining Monsanto and DuPont
among others.
…Other notables on the list of more than
60 include Rodney Davis, Congressman
from Illinois; who is also the House
Agriculture committee and Subcommittee
Chair of Bio Tech.
The list also includes representatives from
huge soybean, egg and corn producers as
well, most of which utilize GMOs regularly
in the creation of their products.
http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/donald-trump-
unveils-his-agricultural-committee-and-supporters-of-
organic-food-are-not-happy/
Here is a link to the full list of Agricultural Advisor the world with unregulated, unlabeled, untested genetically
appointees. engineered food under the guise of “feeding the world”
with biotechnology.
Get ready, America, because “Making America Great
Again” will most likely include continuing to flood it and
.

169
 Tillerson Promises
Endless Imperial Wars
By Stephen Lendman
3-23-2017
No US enemies existed anywhere since Nazi Germany,
fascist Italy and imperial Japan were defeated in WW II.
Yet imperial wars rage endlessly, enemies invented to
justify them. Fear-mongering enlists public support. Vital
homeland needs go begging to feed America’s war
machine - benefitting profiteers at the expense of social
justice.
Earlier on Press TV, I explained America wages endless
wars on countries threatening no one, raping and
destroying them, exploiting their people, stealing their
resources, along with enacting police state laws at home,
supporting corporate interests exclusively, public welfare
be damned.
America is the greatest threat to world peace, stability and
security. It’s a sham democracy, waging war on humanity
at home and abroad. The danger of nuclear confrontation is
real, risking mass annihilation.
Hosting a US-cobbled together so-called 68-nation
coalition, established to create the illusion of combating
ISIS, Secretary of State Tillerson addressed visiting
foreign officials at the State Department - dissembling
throughout his remarks, saying:
“Together, we share a resolve to deal ISIS
or Daesh a lasting defeat.”
Fact:
America created and supports ISIS. So do
NATO, Israel, Saudi Arabia and other
regional rogue states.
Tillerson:
“(T)he policy of the United States to
demolish and destroy this barbaric terrorist
organization. That is what we are going to
do.”
Fact:
ISIS remains strong because of weapons,
munitions, funds, training and direction
supplied by America and its rogue allies.
Tillerson:
170
“The great commonality among we who
have gathered today is a commitment to
bringing down a global force of evil…”
Fact:
ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra and likeminded
terrorist groups are symptomatic of pure
evil in Washington, other NATO capitals
and Middle East ones allied with their
rogue agenda.
Tillerson:
“(T)he flow of foreign terrorist fighters into
Syria and Iraq is down 90% over the past
year.”
Fact:
Endless fighting rages in both countries.
Russia is the only major power combating
the scourge America and its rogue allies
support.
Fact:
In recent days, US forces airlifted ISIS
leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to safety from
Mosul, his whereabouts unknown.
Tillerson:
“In Iraq and Syria, our partners on the
ground have liberated 50,000 square
kilometers of territory from ISIS, freeing
nearly two-and-a-half million people in
cities, villages, and towns. Most
importantly, the liberation of all of this
territory has held. ISIS has recovered none
of it.”
Fact:
Since 2014 in Iraq and Syria, US terror-
bombing, aiding anti-government terrorist
fighters, “liberated” thousands of
defenseless civilians of their lives, ravaging
and destroying areas, not freeing them
from the scourge Washington supports.
Fact:
In Syria, government and allied ground
forces, greatly aided by Russian airpower,
liberated Aleppo along with over 500 towns
and villages.
Fact:
America and its rogue allies are part of the problem, not
the solution. Tillerson lied claiming otherwise.
Fact:
With him for Wednesday’s deceptive US-
orchestrated dog-and-pony show was
Obama administration’s-installed Iraqi
puppet leader Haider al-Abadi, serving
American imperial interests, not his own
people.
Fact:
The so-called global coalition to defeat ISIS
is a made-in-America fabrication. The way
to eliminate the scourge of terrorism is by
ending US-led support.
Tillerson pledged endless US involvement in Iraq and
Syria - code language for continued support for endless
war and terrorism.
Tillerson:
“The military power of the coalition will
remain where this fraudulent caliphate has
existed in order to set the conditions for a
full recovery from the tyranny of ISIS.”
.
171
Fact:
Tillerson promised US-led combat troops
will continue occupying Iraq to maintain
control over its imperial trophy.
Fact:
They’ll remain in northern Syria illegally as “invaders,”
what Assad calls them, wanting America’s presence
eliminated from the country.
It’s unclear how Russia intends dealing with this situation.
Conflict resolution is impossible with US forces on the
ground - deployed to support anti-government terrorists,
not combat them.
On Wednesday, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said
“(w)hile other countries are only discussing
the fight against the Islamic State, Russia
has been fighting IS 24 hours a day, every
day.”
'It is not possible to achieve success in the
war against IS (and other terrorist groups)
without broad international cooperation” -
especially with Russia and America having
polar opposite objectives.
Moscow supports Syrian sovereignty, territorial integrity
and the right of its people alone to decide who’ll lead
them.
Washington wants regime change, puppet governance
installed, achieving another imperial trophy.
 Deep State: Obama Loyalists Continue
To Thwart Trump Administration From The Shadows
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 23, 2017
Sources say that so-called Deep State operatives and
functionaries loyal to the former Obama administration
remain in key positions to disrupt President Donald J.
Trump and his agenda, and are working behind the scenes
to do that very thing, the Washington Free Beacon
reported.
These loyalists, sources told the news site, have essentially
one mission in life: To sabotage the Trump administration
at every turn, and most likely in a way that is subtle
enough not to draw too much attention to themselves.
The effort is being led by senior government officials in
key federal agencies who worked under former President
Obama and remain loyal both to him and his agenda.
Included in their acts of subversion are the leaking of
documents and information that portray Team Trump in a
negative light to former Obama administration officials
who then pass the information along to sycophantic
pretend journalists in the discredited Washington
establishment media like the Washington Post and The
New York Times, among a number of others.
(RELATED: White House Says The “Deep State” Is Real,
And It’s Trying To Undermine Trump)
The Free Beacon noted further:
Meanwhile, holdovers from the Obama
administration are working to undermine
the Trump administration’s agenda through
efforts to alter official communications, a
number of administration officials confirmed
172
in conversations with the Washington Free
Beacon.
Several sources with direct knowledge of what is taking
place say what they have seen thus far is unprecedented
sabotage by a former administration to disrupt a duly-
elected follow-on administration, meaning what is
happening goes well beyond removing “W’s” from
computer keyboards, stealing vintage doorknobs and
defacing bathrooms, among other things – as happened
when Clinton staffers left the White House ahead of
George W. Bush’s administration.
The interference and subterfuge that exists in the White
House and the administration today is on another level
completely, and is creating no small amount of angst and
distrust as Team Trump moves in to take control.
The news site first reported a number of incidents earlier
this year, shortly after the new administration began its
transition. Those included additional, but separate, efforts
to subvert CIA Director Mike Pompeo, a former
Republican congressman from Kansas, and former
National Security Advisor Mike Flynn, the latter of whom
we now know was likely improperly “unmasked” by
intelligence leakers after he was placed under surveillance
by the Obama administration, allegedly due to improper
ties to Russia. Both were subjected to leaks in a bid to
damage their credibility.
“We have members of the former
administration at the highest levels who
through their actions after January 20 have
demonstrated their refusal to recognize the
results of the general election,” a senior
administration official told the news site.
“They have pursued, organized, and
managed a comprehensive subversion of
the new administration.”
One incident involved President Trump’s first travel ban.
Shortly before his executive order was to be issued, Trump
administration staffers discovered that it had been
tampered with – purposely changed to ensure its language
was more in line with the Obama administration.
In the hours before the order was to be signed and issued,
officials found language regarding “radical Islamic
terrorism” was removed from the document and replaced
with Obama administration verbiage regarding opposing
violent extremism. Obama, you may recall, was loathe to
describe extremist terrorism using the descriptor “Islamic,”
though such acts were clearly committed on behalf of that
faith.
But perhaps what has bothered Trump administration
officials most is the leaking of information. The leaks have
generated much consternation and concern among the new
occupants of the White House.
“They put landmines everywhere,” one
senior administration official said.
.
173
The subversion is not merely taking
place from within government; it is also
occurring among former Obama staffers
now outside of government, among the
Ben Rhodes, former deputy national
security advisor, and Colin Kahl, a
senior national security adviser to
former Vice President Joe Biden. Both
men have leaked damaging stories
about Trump administration officials to
the media.
Understand that, once again, this kind
of subversion is unprecedented, but it
proves yet again what Left-wing zealots
Barack Obama and those loyal to him
really are.
 The Deep State's Dominant
Narratives And Authority Are Crumbling
Charles Hugh Smith
Thursday, March 23, 2017
This is why the Deep State is fracturing: its narratives no
longer align with the evidence.
As this chart from Google Trends illustrates, interest in
the Deep State has increased dramatically in 2017. The
term/topic has clearly moved from the specialist realm to
the mainstream. I've been writing about the Deep State,
and specifically, the fractures in the Deep State, for years.
Amusingly, now that "Progressives"
have prostituted themselves to the
Security Agencies and the
Neocons/Neoliberals, they are busy
denying the Deep State exists. For
example, There is No Deep State (The
New Yorker).
In this risible view, there is no Deep State "conspiracy"
(the media's favorite term of dismissal/ridicule), just a
bunch of "good German" bureaucrats industriously doing
the Empire's essential work of undermining democracies
that happen not to prostrate themselves at the feet of the
Empire, murdering various civilians via drone strikes,
surveilling the U.S. populace, planting bugs in new
iPhones, issuing fake news while denouncing anything that
questions the dominant narratives as "fake news,"
arranging sweetheart deals with dictators and corporations,
and so on.
The New Yorker is right about one thing--the Deep State is
not a "conspiracy:" it is a vast machine of control that is
largely impervious to the views or demands of elected
representatives or the American people.
174
The key to understanding this social-
political-economic control is to grasp
that control of the narratives, expertise
and authority is control of
everything. Allow me to illustrate how this
works.
The typical politician has a busy daily schedule of
speaking at the National Motherhood and Apple Pie Day
celebration, listening to the "concerns" of important
corporate constituents, attending a lunch campaign
fundraiser, meeting with lobbyists and party committees,
being briefed by senior staff, and so on.
Senior administrators share similarly crowded schedules,
minus the fundraising but adding budget meetings,
reviewing employee complaints and multiple meetings
with senior managers and working groups.
Both senior elected officials and senior
state administrators must rely
on narratives, expertise and
authority because they have insufficient
time and experience to do original
research and assessment.
Narratives create an instant context that "makes sense" of
various data points and events. Narratives distill causal
factors into an explanatory story with an
implicit teleology--because of this and that, the future will
be thus and so.
For example: because Iraq has weapons of mass
destruction (WMD), the future promises the terrible
likelihood (more than a possibility, given Iraqi deployment
of poison gas in the Iraq-Iran War) that America or its
allies will be devastated by Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction. This teleology leads to the inescapable need to
eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction by any means
necessary, and remove the political will to use them by
removing Iraq's leader from power.
Politicos and senior administrators rely
on expertise and authority as the basis
of deciding whether something is
accurate and actionable.
Professional specialists are assumed to have the highest
available levels of expertise, and their position in
institutions that embody the highest authority give their
conclusions the additional weight of being authoritative.
The experts' conclusion doesn't just carry the weight of
expertise, it has been reviewed by senior officials of the
institution, and so it also carries the weight of institutional
authority.
So when the C.I.A. briefing by its experts claims Iraq has
WMD, and the briefing includes various threads of
evidence that the institution declares definitive, who is a
non-expert to challenge this conclusion and teleology? On
what technical basis does the skeptic reject the expertise
and authority of the institution?
We can now define the Deep State with
some precision.
The Deep State is fundamentally the public-private
centralized nodes that collect, archive and curate dominant
narratives and their supporting evidence, and disseminate
these narratives (and their implicit teleologies) to the
public via the media and to the state agencies via formal
and informal inter-departmental communication channels.
By gaining control of the narratives,
evidence, curation and teleology, each
node concentrates power.
The power to edit out whatever bits contradict the
dominant narrative is the source of power, for once the
contradictory evidence is buried or expunged, it ceases to
exist.
For example, the contradictory evidence in the Pentagon
Papers was buried by being declared Top Secret. The
bureaucratic means to bury skeptical (i.e. heretical) views
or evidence are many. Sending the authors to figurative
Siberia is remarkably effective, as is burying the heretical
claims in a veritable mountain of data that few if any will
ever survey.
Curation is a critical factor in
maintaining control of the narrative and
thus of control;
the evidence is constantly curated to best support the
chosen narrative which in turn supports the desired
teleology, which then sets the agenda and the end-game.
The senior apparatchiks of the old Soviet Union were
masters of curation; when a Soviet leader fell from favor,
he was literally excised from the picture--his image was
erased from photos.
This is how narratives are adjusted to
better fit the evidence.
Thus the accusation that "the Russians hacked our
election" has been tabled because it simply doesn't align
with any plausible evidence.
175
That narrative has been replaced with
variants, such as "the Russians hacked the
Democratic National Committee."
Now that this claim has also been shown to be false, new
variants are popping up weekly, with equally poor
alignment with evidence.
The primary claim of each Deep State
node is that its expertise and authority
cannot be questioned.
In other words, while the dominant narrative can be
questioned (but only cursorily, of course), the expertise
and authority of the institutional node cannot be
questioned.
This is why the Deep State is fracturing:
the expertise and authority of its nodes
are delaminating because its narratives
no longer align with the evidence.
If various Security Agencies sign off on the narrative that
"Russia hacked our election" (a nonsense claim from the
start, given the absurd imprecision of the "hacking"--
hacking into what? Voting machines? Electoral tallies?),
and that narrative is evidence-free and fact-free, i.e. false,
then the expertise and authority of those agencies comes
into legitimate question.
Once the legitimacy of the expertise and
authority is questioned, control of the
narrative is imperiled.
The control of the narrative is control of the teleology, the
agenda and the end-game--in other words, everything. If
the institution loses control of the dominant narrative, it
loses its hold on power.
This is why the Deep State is in turmoil--
its narratives no longer make sense,
or are in direct conflict with other nodes' narratives or have
been delegitimized by widening gaps between "definitive" The gap between the narratives and the evidence that
claims and actual evidence. supports them has widened to the point of collapse.

There is indeed a Deep State, but its

control of dominant narratives, and thus .
its source of control and power, is
crumbling.
.

176
 What is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired by DNC has Ties to
Hillary Clinton, a Ukrainian Billionaire and Google
Michael Krieger
Posted Thursday Mar 23, 2017 at 3:42 pm
As usual, the rabbit hole gets much deeper the more you
look.
In yesterday’s post, Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed
Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under Serious Question, I
examined how CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity firm hired
by the DNC to look into its hacking breach, had been
exposed as being completely wrong about a separate attack
it claimed originated from the same group it claimed broke
into DNC systems, and supposedly works for Russia’s
military intelligence unit, GRU. Here’s some of what we
learned:
An influential British think tank and
Ukraine’s military are disputing a report
that the U.S. cybersecurity firm
CrowdStrike has used to buttress its
claims of Russian hacking in the
presidential election.
The CrowdStrike report, released in
December, asserted that Russians hacked
into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in
heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s war
with Russian-backed separatists.
But the International Institute for Strategic
Studies (IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike
erroneously used IISS data as proof of the
intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection
to the CrowdStrike report. Ukraine’s
Ministry of Defense also has claimed
combat losses and hacking never
happened.
The challenges to CrowdStrike’s
credibility are significant because the
firm was the first to link last year’s
hacks of Democratic Party computers to
177
Russian actors, and because
CrowdStrike co-founder Dimiti
Alperovitch has trumpeted its Ukraine
report as more evidence of Russian
election tampering.
Yaroslav Sherstyuk, maker of the Ukrainian
military app in question, called the
company’s report “delusional” in a
Facebook post. CrowdStrike never
contacted him before or after its report was
published, he told VOA.
VOA first contacted IISS in February to
verify the alleged artillery losses. Officials
there initially were unaware of the
CrowdStrike assertions. After investigating,
they determined that CrowdStrike
misinterpreted their data and hadn’t
reached out beforehand for comment or
clarification.
CrowdStrike declined to answer VOA’s
written questions about the Ukraine
report, and Alperovitch canceled a
March 15 interview on the topic. In a
December statement to VOA’s Ukrainian
Service, spokeswoman Ilina Dimitrova
defended the company’s conclusions.
Seems like pretty extraordinary incompetence. Either that,
or something else was potentially at play; namely, a desire
to push the narrative that Russia hacked the DNC,
irrespective of the facts.
The whole things gets even more
disturbing the more you look.
For example, Counterpunch put out a very important
article earlier today on the topic, adding several crucial
nuggets of information.
First there’s this:
The investigation methods used to come to
the conclusion that the Russian
Government led the hacks of
the DNC, Clinton Campaign Chair John
Podesta, and the DCCC were further called
 into question by a recent
BuzzFeed report by Jason Leopold, who
has developed a notable reputation from
leading several non-partisan Freedom of
Information Act lawsuits for investigative
journalism purposes. On March 15 that
the Department of Homeland Security
released just two heavily redacted
pages of unclassified information in
response to an FOIA request for
definitive evidence of Russian election
interference allegations. Leopold wrote,
“what the agency turned over to us and
Ryan Shapiro, a PhD candidate at MIT
and a research affiliate at Harvard
University, is truly bizarre: a two-page
intelligence assessment of the incident,
dated Aug. 22, 2016, that contains
information DHS culled from the
internet. It’s all unclassified — yet DHS
covered nearly everything in wide swaths
of black ink. Why? Not because it would
threaten national security, but because it
would reveal the methods DHS uses to
gather intelligence, methods that may
amount to little more than using Google.”
That’s weird enough, but it gets far stranger. For example:
In lieu of substantive evidence provided to
the public that the alleged hacks which led
to Wikileaks releases of DNC and Clinton
Campaign Manager John Podesta’s emails
were orchestrated by the Russian
Government, CrowdStrike’s bias has
been cited as undependable in its own
assessment, in addition to its skeptical
methods and conclusions. The firm’s CTO
and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is
a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a
think tank with openly anti-Russian
sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian
billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also
happened to donate at least $10 million
to the Clinton Foundation.
In 2013, the Atlantic
ouncil awarded Hillary Clinton it’s
Distinguished International Leadership
Award. In 2014, the Atlantic
Council hosted one of several events with
former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy
Yatsenyuk, who took over after pro-
Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was
ousted in early 2014, who now lives in exile
in Russia.
Recall that the FBI was denied access to the DNC servers
by the DNC itself, and simply agreed to rely on the results
provided by CrowdStrike, which as you can see has ties to
178
all sorts of anti-Russia organizations and individuals. I find
it absolutely remarkable that James Comey head of the FBI
outsourced his job to CrowdStrike.
There remains zero evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.
I repeat, there remains zero evidence that Russia
hacked the DNC.
As cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr noted:
Jeffrey Carr called the FBI/Department
of Homeland Security Report, the only
alleged evidence released by
intelligence officials, released in late
December 2016 a “fatally flawed effort”
that provided no evidence to
substantiate the claims that the Russian
government conducted the hacks,
though that’s what it was purported to
do.
Absolutely remarkable, but there’s more. As TechCrunch
reported back in 2015:
If you need proof that security is a red hot
market these days, how about this
morning’s announcement that
cybersecurity
company CrowdStrike landed a $100
million Series C investment round?
The round was led by Google Capital
with Rackspace, which happens to be one
of the company’s customers also investing.
Existing investors Accel and Warburg
Pincus also participated. Today’s
investment brings the total to-date to $156
million.
Why do I find it interesting that Google was a major
investor in CrowdStrike? Well for one, we know that
Chairman of Alphabet, Inc. (Google’s parent company),
Eric Schmidt, was actively working to help the Hillary
campaign. As I highlighted in the 2015 post,Meet
“Groundwork” – Google Chairman Eric Schmidt’s Stealth
Startup Working to Make Hillary Clinton President:
An under-the-radar startup funded by
billionaire Eric Schmidt has become a
major technology vendor for Hillary
Clinton’s presidential campaign,
underscoring the bonds between Silicon
Valley and Democratic politics.
The Groundwork, according to
Democratic campaign operatives and
technologists, is part of efforts by
Schmidt—the executive chairman of
Google parent-company Alphabet—to
ensure that Clinton has the engineering
talent needed to win the election. And it
is one of a series of quiet investments by
Schmidt that recognize how modern
political campaigns are run, with data
analytics and digital outreach as vital
ingredients that allow candidates to find,
court, and turn out critical voter blocs.
There is also another gap in play: The
shrinking distance between Google and
the Democratic Party. Former Google
executive Stephanie Hannon is the Clinton
campaign’s chief technology officer, and a
host of ex-Googlers are currently employed
as high-ranking technical staff at the
Obama White House. Schmidt, for his
.
179
part, is one of the most powerful donors
in the Democratic Party—and his
influence does not stem only from his
wealth, estimated by Forbes at more
than $10 billion.
According to campaign finance disclosures,
Clinton’s campaign is the Groundwork’s
only political client. Its employees are
mostly back-end software developers with
experience at blue-chip tech firms like
Netflix, Dreamhost, and Google.
Since Democrats seem so obsessed with the saying these
days, “where there’s smoke there’s fire,” and there’s
plenty of smoke here.
 ‘FBI Director James Comey Must Go’
Published time: 23 Mar, 2017 15:15
FBI Director James Comey © Joshua Roberts / Reuters - There is a
long-standing contest in this country between the spying agencies and
Congress and who should oversee who, says investor and writer
Charles Ortel. You can’t appear before Congress and lie to the
American public, he added
President Donald Trump's controversial claim he was
wiretapped before last year's election has been partly
corroborated.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes on
Wednesday said the Trump team was monitored despite
the FBI's claims to the contrary.
“I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions
the intelligence community incidentally collected
information about US citizens involved in the
Trump transition. I want to be clear, none of this
surveillance was related to Russia or the
investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump
team,”said Devin Nunes.
RT: What's your take on this story?
Charles Ortel: I certainly at this stage have to say as
much as I initially liked director Comey of the FBI, he
must go. You can’t go before Congress as he did several
days ago and basically, it seems now, lie to Congress and
lie to the American public. And really the person who
called him out – it was little noticed at the time - is a
freshman Republican named Elise Stefanik from upstate
New York, who asked a simple question and Comey
flubbed: ‘How frequently is the FBI supposed to notify
Congress of these investigations?’ The answer is quarterly.
‘When did this investigation supposedly started on
Trump?’ July of last year. ‘How come this is the first
report we get now in March?’
.
180
I think Comey has little credibility left for the sake of all
that needs to get done in this great country and in the
world. He needs to step down and his deputy Andrew
McCabe as well should step down.
RT: Don’t we need to see some evidence?
CO: Absolutely, what has happened is we have had a
long-standing contest in this country between the spying
agencies and Congress and who should oversee whom.
And how do you settle that up? In the interim, starting at
around 2002 the force of the cyber apparatus has grown to
be so large and so pervasive, that I think the regulatory
system in this country, and in many countries, is not really
up to the task of disciplining these spy agencies and we
have many of these. It seems we have 17 or more in this
country. It is definitely not ok for any one of these spy
agencies to knowingly spy on US citizens. Particularly in
the middle of a presidential campaign. Particularly, if one
or both of them happen to be running for president. And
we really need to understand what actually happened here.
Initially, I wasn’t in favor of going back over spilled milk
in 2016. Now I think we have to. We need to know what
happened in the primaries, in each of the primaries, both
parties, the general election, was there spying, if so, by
whom? Foreigners inside this country, federal against
state, private against both? What was going on? Who is
regulating this? And why can’t we get a straight answer
from the FBI, from these agencies? (James) Clapper
(former Director of National Intelligence) basically had to
admit that he lied to Congress. Now it seems that Comey
may also have lied to Congress.
I think there is a sense across the political spectrum in our
country and many other countries – we don’t like to be
spied upon by our own government. Especially in the US.
That is not something that Americans are comfortable
with, whether they are on the left, the right, independent,
agnostic, whatever. We are not comfortable with it. It may
have been going on, it may be going on, and we have an
absolute right to know whether this spying system is
completely out of control and we have the right to put it
back under the control of people.
 Alert: Smoking Gun Proving Obama Administration
Spied On Entire Trump Team May Soon Be Released
"No Doubt" The Obama Administration Was Spying On Trump Team
By Alex Thomas -
03.23.2017 @8:23 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Congressional investigators expect to
soon receive a “smoking gun” that establishes that the
Obama administration directly spied on the Trump
transition team, as well as possibly the president-elect
himself, by as early as Friday, according to a report by Fox
News James Rosen.
The report claims that classified intelligence which shows
incidental collection of Trump team communications came
from multiple sources and has been seen by committee
Chairman Devin Nunes, further corroborating what the
Congressman already knew even before Trump’s infamous
tweet accusing former president Obama of wiretapping
him.
“The key to that conclusion is the
unmasking of selected U.S. persons whose
names appeared in the intelligence, the
sources said, adding that the paper trail
leaves no other plausible purpose for the
unmasking other than to damage the
incoming Trump administration,” Rosen
revealed late Thursday.
Amazingly, despite the fact that the FBI hasn’t been
responsive to requests from Congress for more
information, the report goes on to claim that the NSA is
expected to provide even more evidence, including a
possible smoking gun, by Friday!
“The FBI hasn’t been responsive to the
House Intelligence Committee’s request for
documents, but the National Security
Agency is expected to produce documents
to the committee by Friday. The NSA
document production is expected to
produce more intelligence than Nunes has
so far seen or described – including what
one source described as a potential
“smoking gun” establishing the spying,”
wrote Rosen.
“The intelligence is said to leave no
doubt the Obama administration, in its
closing days, was using the cover of
legitimate surveillance on foreign
181
targets to spy on President-elect Trump,
according to sources.”
Keep in mind that the establishment media has spent the
last few weeks continually claiming that there is no
evidence that Obama did anything while remaining fully
focused on pushing the discredited claims that Trump
worked with Russia to win the election. Remember, we
already know that the New York Times itself reported on
the wiretap on multiple occasions before backtracking and
claiming that the surveillance itself never happened.
Interestingly, Rosen’s report on an incoming smoking gun
comes at the same time as claims by Freedom Watch
founder Larry Klayman that he is working with a
whistleblower that has a massive amount of evidence
pointing to a large-scale spying operation against
prominent Americans under the Obama administration.
“Former NSA and CIA contractor Dennis
Montgomery has direct evidence of
massive Obama era spying that targeted
prominent Americans throughout the
country, according to a report by Freedom
Watch founder Larry Klayman,” Intellihub
News wrote.
“According to Klayman, as well as multiple
other sources, Montgomery left the
intelligence community with 47 hard drives
and over 600 million pages of information
which he then sought to come forward with
in a legal manner before being stonewalled
at all levels of the government.”
At this point it is unknown if the purported smoking gun
proof of Obama spying on the Trump team is the same
data that Motgomery claims he has or if it is entirely
different proof pointing to the same thing.
While we know an FBI cover-up is currently underway, it
seems that there may be enough patriots within the
intelligence community to reveal what many Americans
already fully believe happened under the previous
administration. The only thing left to do is sit back and
hope the “smoking gun” proof does reveal itself.
 House Set To Vote On Obamacare
Replacement Bill After Trump Ultimatum
Foxnews.Com
Published March 24, 2017
President Trump on Friday told lawmakers still on the
fence over repealing and replacing ObamaCare with
TrumpCare, that voting against the White House-backed
bill is tantamount to voting for Planned Parenthood.
Trump tweeted Friday,
“The irony is that the Freedom Caucus,
which is very pro-life and against Planned
Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they
stop this plan!"
In a bid to coax support from conservatives, House leaders
proposed a fresh amendment repealing Obama's
requirement that insurers cover 10 specified services like
maternity and mental health care.
Lawmakers are expected to vote Friday afternoon.
Conservatives have demanded the removal of those and
other conditions the law imposes on insurers, arguing they
drive up premiums.
The president met with members of the Freedom Caucus
Thursday in an effort to win them over. But the vote was
postponed after administration officials fell short.
182
Trump issued lawmakers an ultimatum Thurday night. He
wants the House to vote Friday on the legislation to begin
dismantling ObamaCare and if it fails,
he is "done with health care,”
and ready to move on to tax reform, a source told Fox
News.
"My understanding is he’s going to get it,"
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer
said on "The O'Reilly Factor."
"We’re hoping to make this the last
anniversary that any American has to suffer
under ObamaCare by instilling a patient-
centric health care system in place, and the
president has made that case to members
throughout the spectrum of the Republican
conference, and tomorrow, it’s time to
vote," he added.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., thinks
it will wrap up by 4:30 or 5 p.m. ET (WATCH FOX
NEWS CHANNEL FOR COMPLETE COVERAGE). If
the bill passes, it will be a monumental achievement for
Speaker Ryan and Trump. But if the bill stumbles,
recriminations will abound.
Trump's demands aren't sitting well with some
Republicans.
Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie tweeted Friday
morning:
"If Exec branch tells Legislative branch
"when 2 vote" "how 2 vote" & "what it will b
allowed 2 work on if vote fails," is that a
republic?"
Republican leaders Thursday canceled a vote after
leadership's attempts to lobby enough votes apparently
failed -- a major setback for Ryan and Trump.
"For seven and a half years we've been
promising the American people that we will
repeal and replace this broken law because
it's collapsing and failing families," House
 Speaker Paul Ryan told reporters after
meeting with Republican leaders.
"Tomorrow we're proceeding."
Trump and Republican leaders had spent much of the day
scrambling to get both moderates and conservatives on
board with the increasingly unpopular legislation.
"We have not gotten enough of our
members to get to yes at this point under
what we have now," House Freedom
Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C.,
told reporters.
Ryan postponed his press conference twice as he worked
with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy R-Calif.,
Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and Chief Deputy
Whip Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., to get enough votes to get
the American Healthcare Act through the House on the
seventh anniversary of ObamaCare's passage.
The House Rules Committee is expected to prep the health
care bill starting at 7am ET Friday.
When asked about the timing of the vote McCarthy told
Fox News the House should be "done in the afternoon" but
said Democrats could delay things.
Meanwhile, Trump met inside the Cabinet room with the
Freedom caucus to try and rally conservatives to the cause.
He also tweeted, urging supporters to call their
representatives to back the bill.
A senior administration official told Fox News after the
meeting with Trump and the conservative group that there
was a deal in the works, but that it was not yet finalized. A
source from the Freedom Caucus later said there wasn't yet
a deal.
"I would say progress is being made, and
that progress should be applauded with the
efforts by the White House to deliver on a
campaign promise, and to lower premiums
for every American from coast to coast and
in between," Meadows said. He also called
.
183
Trump's involvement "unparalleled in the
history of our country."
When asked if this was a loss for the president, Meadows
said:
"Absolutely not."
Earlier in the day, Spicer had expressed confidence that the
White House was would be voted on and would pass.
"It’s going to pass. That’s it," he said at his
daily press briefing.
Spicer also noted that Trump had been making calls past
11 p.m. Wednesday night to try and bring members on
board.
Sources later told Fox News that the White House was
anticipating a vote after midnight, but that was before the
vote was canceled.
House Republicans were due to meet about the around 7
p.m. ET, but there appeared no clear path to pass the bill.
In appealing to conservatives with concessions that include
limiting requirements that plans offer benefits including
maternity and substance abuse care, Republican leaders
risk scaring off moderates. A plan to cut funding to
Planned Parenthood also risked spooking centrist
Republicans.
Meanwhile, Democrats blasted what they saw as
Republicans’ amateurish maneuvering. House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi said it was a "rookie's error" to bring
the legislation to a vote so early, and urged fellow
Democrats to oppose the legislation.
“While Republicans scramble to make
TrumpCare even more destructive, our
Caucus must continue to be fully engaged
today in exposing its disastrous
consequences for the American people,”
she told colleagues in a letter Thursday.
The AHCA would stop ObamaCare’s tax penalties against
Americans who choose not to buy coverage, as well as
cutting the federal-state Medicaid program for low earners.
It would also give tax credits to help people pay medical
bills, while allowing insurers to charge older Americans
more. It would also repeal tax increases on high-earners
and health companies.
 NSA To Provide
"Smoking Gun" Proof Obama Spied On Trump
By Tyler Durden
Mar 24, 2017 5:43 AM

Yesterday, Republican Devin Nunez Nunes held an
explosive press conference outside the White House in
which he told reporters that communications from the
Trump team were picked up and disseminated within the
government during the 2016 campaign.
Not surprisingly, the comments ruffled some liberal
feathers and the mainstream media launched an immediate
smear campaign calling for Nunes to resign his post
immediately.
Now, according to Fox News sources,
congressional investigators expect that
a potential “smoking gun” from the NSA
establishing that the Obama
administration spied on the Trump
transition team, and possibly the
president-elect himself, will be
produced to the House Intelligence
Committee as early as tomorrow.
The intelligence is said to leave no
doubt the Obama administration, in its
closing days, was using the cover of
legitimate surveillance on foreign
targets to spy on President-elect Trump,
according to sources.
The FBI hasn’t been responsive to the House Intelligence
Committee’s request for documents,
President Trump accused his predecessor of having
wiretappedhim in a series of now-infamous tweets posted
on March 4.
The key to that conclusion is the unmasking of selected
U.S. persons whose names appeared in the intelligence, the
sources said,
adding that the paper trail leaves no
other plausible purpose for the
unmasking other than to damage the
incoming Trump administration.
Because Nunes’s intelligence came from multiple sources
during a span of several weeks, and he has not shared the
actual materials with his committee colleagues, he will be
the only member of the panel in a position to know
whether the NSA has turned over some or all of the
intelligence he is citing.
If true, of course, this could put a 'slight' taint Obama's
claim of a "scandal free" eight years in the White House.
***
For those who missed it, here was Nunes's press
conference from yesterday:

but the National Security Agency is

expected to produce documents to the
committee by Friday. The NSA document
production is expected to produce more
intelligence than Nunes has so far seen or
described – including what one source
described as a potential “smoking gun”
establishing the spying.

Classified intelligence showing incidental collection of

Trump team communications, purportedly seen by
committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and described
by him in vague terms at a bombshell Wednesday
afternoon news conference, came from multiple sources,
Capitol Hill sources told Fox News. The intelligence
corroborated information about surveillance of the Trump
team that was known to Nunes, sources said, even before
The FBI is not cooperating with the House of
Representatives' investigation into the NSA's surveillance
of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, the
chairman of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee,
Devin Nunes said in a press conference on Wednesday
afternoon.

184
In the aftermath of today's most stunning news report,
namely the confirmation that Trump may have been right
all along following the admission of House Intel
Committee Chair Devin Nunes that the communications of
Trump's aides and the president himself had been
"incidentally" monitored, Nunes held an explosive press
conference outside the White House in which told
reporters that communications from the Trump team were
picked up and disseminated within the government during
the 2016 campaign. Nunes said sources within the
intelligence community presented him with the
information. He spoke to the press after briefing the
administration.
Nunes said that he had briefed the president about his
concerns over the "incidental" collection of data, adding
that the president "needs to know" that these intel reports
exist, and adding ominously that
"some of what I've seen seems to be
inappropriate."
Nunes also said that Trump, others in the transition team
were put into the intelligence report and asked if Trump
should be in these "normal" reports.
But what was perhaps most troubling in Nunes presser is
that in the aftermath of Monday's Congressional hearing
with James Comey in which the FBI director said on the
record there had been no surveillance of Trump, is the
House Intel Commission chair's statement that the FBI is
not cooperating with the investigation.
"We don’t actually know yet officially what
happened to General Flynn," Nunes said of
how communications from Gen. Flynn's
calls were leaked to the press. "We just
know that his name leaked out but we don't
know how it was picked up yet. That was
one of the things that we asked for in the
.
185
March 15th letter, was for the NSA, CIA,
and FBI to get us all the unmasking that
was done."
"And I'll tell you, NSA is being
cooperative," Nunes continued, "but so
far the FBI has not told us whether or
not they’re going to respond to our
March 15th letter, which is now a couple
of weeks old.”
Nunes also reported that as of now, he
"cannot rule out" President Obama
ordering the surveillance.
Finally, and contrary to earlier media reports,
Nunes clarified that the surveillance was
not related to the FBI's investigation
into possible collusion with Russia. This
surveillance, he emphasized to
reporters, does not "have anything to do
with Russia."
As a reminder, this has been the strawman argument
proposed by much of the liberal media, which has said that
a wiretapping of Trump or his aides, would only confirm
that his relations with Russia were suspect and thus
prompted a FISA warrant.
If Nunes is correct, and Trump was
being wiretapped for reasons having
nothing to do with Russia, that entire
narrative falls apart, and the press will
now have to spend the next few weeks
building up an entirely new narrative to
"justify" why Trump was being
wiretapped on Obama's watch.
 Surveillance State Goes After Trump
Democrats Are So Eager To Take Down President Trump That They Are
Joining Forces With The Surveillance State To Trample The Privacy
Rights Of People Close To Trump, Ex-FBI Agent
Coleen Rowley Tells Dennis J Bernstein.
By Dennis J Bernstein
March 24, 2017
Donald Trump speaking at CPAC 2011 in Washington, D.C
(Flickr Gage Skidmore)
Since Donald Trump’s election, former Special FBI Agent
Coleen Rowley has been alarmed over with how
Democratic hawks, neocons and other associates in the
“deep state” have obsessed over “resurrecting the ghost of
Joseph McCarthy” and have built political support for a
permanent war policy around hatred of Russia.
Rowley, whose 2002 memo to the FBI Director exposed
some of the FBI’s pre-9/11failures, compared the current
anti-Russia hysteria to “the ‘Red Scare’ fear of
Communism” famously associated with legendary FBI
Director J. Edgar Hoover who collaborated with Sen. Joe
McCarthy’s hunt for disloyal Americans in the late 1940s
and early 1950s.
In an interview, Rowley told me that while Trump was
wrong about his claim that President Obama ordered a
surveillance “tapp” of Trump Tower, the broader point
may have been correct as explained by House Intelligence
Chairman Devin Nunes, R-California, who described how
U.S. intelligence apparently picked up conversations by
Trump associates while monitoring other targets.
Dennis Bernstein: A former high-level FBI whistleblower
says Trump is vindicated on his claims of being surveilled
by the previous administration. Joining us to take a close
look at what’s been going on, what’s been unfolding in
Washington, D.C. is Coleen Rowley. She’s a former FBI
186
special agent and division council. She wrote a May 2002
memo to the FBI director that exposed some of the FBI’s
pre-9/11 failures, major failures. She was Time magazine’s
person of the year in 2002. … Help us explain what
chairman Nunes reported in terms of the collecting process
and Trumps innocence or guilt?
Coleen Rowley: I think the Chairman Nunes said
[Wednesday] that Trump was monitored instead of
wiretapped. And these are terms of art that for three weeks
or so, no one has fully understood and so there’s been all
this confusion. Trump, himself, did not understand, and
was clumsy in saying “my campaign was wiretapped.”
Wiretapping itself is almost obsolete. It means tapping into
a wire, that’s the old way, when the way communications
used to go over wires and now they’re digital and they…
Snowden, if you remember, all of the disclosures from
Edward Snowden, and other NSA whistleblowers, there’s
something going on now called collect it all, massive
surveillance. And that is done, there are some targets, but
then lots and lots of Americans are incidentally
monitored… they aren’t monitored but their conversations,
and their phone numbers that they’re dialing and their e-
mails that they’re e-mailing are collected.
And, of course, when Trump was under investigation it
would be natural that they would have some… not his…
not necessarily him personally, but his campaign staff
obviously, that’s going to mean surveillance of those
people.
DB: Now, monitoring, does that mean that Obama was in
fact, surveilling? Is that a good word? Was Trump being
surveilled? Were his claims essentially correct?
CR: I think Trump is vindicated, again he didn’t
understand the terms that he was using. And he did misuse
the term, so when Comey said “No”… that that tweet
about being wiretapped, we have found no evidence of
that.” Comey was able to be honest because a wiretap has
a specific meaning. But, you notice, in five hours Comey
never said that there’s been no surveillance of anyone
connected to the Trump campaign. In fact, he implied the
opposite. He implied that the Trump campaign, some
persons, he didn’t mention names, but some of them have
been investigated since this summer.
Former FBI official Coleen Rowley (second from left) with other
government whistleblowers and/or critics of the Surveillance State,
from left to right: Kirk Wiebe, Rowley, Raymond McGovern, Daniel
Ellsberg, William Binney, Jesselyn Radack, and Thomas Drake by
Kathleen McClellan (@McClellanKM) via Twitter
And, so, obviously that does mean that, for starters, if you
think… remember all of the disclosures from Edward
Snowden and the other NSA whistleblowers, they can
access all of the communications that have already been
collected. That’s for starters, so if you have somebody that
you are now investigating, you can go back into these NSA
databases and say pull up everything on so-and-so. And
I’ve just got to add one more thing, the NSA
whistleblowers including Edward Snowden all warned for
really now for two or three years, we have been warning
the American public that this “collect it all” is really a
recipe for, not only a lack of privacy, but even for hurting
our own democracy.
If you go back to Frank Church, for instance, the reason
the Church committee… well it was because Frank
Church, Senator Frank Church was, himself, under
surveillance by the NSA. And we warned now for two or
three years, that they tell the public
“Don’t worry, you have nothing to hide.
Why would you worry about any of these
NSA… they’re helping us catch terrorists.
And you don’t have anything to hide.”
But, of course, the politicians in Washington are the ones
that have things to hide. They could have conflicts of
interests, there’s all kinds of things going on, certainly just
political opposition, partisanship. So this is always an
ongoing game in Washington, to try to find out dirt about
your opponent, etc. So, they are the ones, actually, who
should have been more aware of how this could be used
against themselves. And yet, they just disregarded these
warnings and told the public “Oh, don’t worry you have
nothing to hide.”
DB: We’ve got Donald Trump vindicated about, in
essence, being monitored, surveilled. without his own
knowledge although I would imagine he should have
known, or assumed. But now that tells us that there has
187
been a lot of information collected and we can now
assume, I guess, that all the… a lot of the communications
from the Trump people, in Washington, also, at Trump
Tower, so even though it wasn’t wiretapped, it was
monitored.
CR: It was collected. And, again, this isn’t necessarily
about Trump personally, just cause it’s not about Obama,
personally ordering. What this is about is if there are even
members of Trump’s campaign staff, or even associates,
that could even be a little bit distant from the actual
campaign, but just associates. It may be that they were the
actual targets. And, still, might be the targets. But, then
incidentally Trump could have ended up being, himself,
intercepted.
I’m going to go back to Martin Luther King, Jr.. Martin
Luther King, Jr., if you understand the microphones in his
hotels. And he was the subject of Title 3 orders. This was
all based on guilt by association. And I think it was simply
a paragraph or two, there was very little probable cause. It
was a paragraph or two alleging that an associate or a
cousin of an associate was a communist. That’s what it
amounted to. And that’s how, then, J.Edgar Hoover was
allowed to go and do all these things in hotel rooms. And,
in the same era, the NSA was actually monitoring Senator
Frank Church.
Legendary FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
We think after all these years that we’ve grown up and
we’ve understood the problems that occurred back then.
And, obviously, history is totally repeating. It may well be
there’s a legitimate investigation of somebody in the
periphery of the Trump campaign, a staffer or somebody
connected, that’s legitimate.
But when they have a “collect it all” motto which they’ve
had now since 9/11. They’ve turned on these monitoring
things, Hayden and others turned them right on, illegally, I
should say, for starters, illegally. And now they have all
this database. And, so, there’s only a couple of ways to try
to protect privacy. And they are supposed to be on their
honor to minimize Americans.
And you now see that this has completely failed in the case
of Flynn and others, because, again, that’s all they have is
on their honor, they say they won’t leak out identities of
Americans if they are “incidentally” collected. And, now,
that doesn’t even apply. And, I would say that the people
who have leaked are not – I’ve said this many times now –
are not what I would term a good whistleblower.
These are leakers who seem to be high level, as opposed to
somebody like Edward Snowden or Chelsea Manning, at a
lower level, who is motivated for the public good. I think
that the leaks that you’ve seen in the past couple of
months, or three months, have actually come from high
levels, top appointees, and political partisanship are the
motivations. They’re not saying this is for the public good.
And, again, this is something we all warned about, the
NSA and our veteran intelligence professionals for sanity
probably have written half a dozen times, about these
problems. And, now it’s just really all happened the way
we predicted and warned about.
DB: Now, we have, sort of, a hundred, almost smoking
guns. I want to ask you Coleen Rowley, as somebody who
has been… worked for the FBI, evaluated information,
collected information, you’re an attorney in this context. In
terms of what we know. Do they got Donald Trump? Is he
owned by the Russians? What have you been able to
confirm?
CR: Well, I don’t think there has… and it’s not just
myself, it’s really most of our veteran intelligence
professionals, retired CIA, retired NSA, we’ve all been
conferring for a while on this. And we have asked, we
actually put out a…memo asking for evidence. Because
it’s just been assertions and innuendoes, and
demonization…
We see a lot of demonization of the Russian T.V. channel.
But we have not seen any actual evidence of Russians…
and there’s a lot of reasons to think that this would be
illogical. Even if, and I would grant that Comey mentioned
this in his testimony, that Putin and other top Russians
hated Hillary Clinton. Well, even if you assume that, that
they didn’t like Hillary Clinton, as much as Donald Trump.
They considered Donald Trump their lesser evil, or
whatever. Even if you think that, why would they take the
risk? Because, at the time Hillary Clinton surprised
everyone by… everyone thought she was going to win. So
it would have been completely illogical for them to have
done these things, to take that kind of a risk, when it was
presumed that she was going to be the next president.
There’s just so many things here that don’t add up, and
don’t make sense.
And yet, and yet, because our mainstream media is owned
by what?…half a dozen big conglomerates, all connected
to the military industrial complex, they continue with the
scenario of that old movie… the Russians are
coming!…the Russians are coming! And unfortunately the
Democrat Party has become the war party, very clearly.
They’re the ones that don’t see the dangers in ginning up
188
this very dangerous narrative of going after Russia, as
meddling, or whatever. And they should ask for, we all
should ask for the full evidence of this. If this is case, then
we deserve to know the truth about it. And, so far, we
haven’t seen anything. Look at that report. There’s nothing
in it.
DB: And, this is the same media who for the last… ever
since Trump claimed that he was wiretapped using the
wrong terminology, these journalists they couldn’t stop
saying
“if he did lie, this is a felony. He did lie. He
did accuse the former president of the
United States…”
So, you’re saying, based on your long experience and
information this was just a confusion of a term of art, and
the idea of the possibility of Trump Towers being under
investigation, this was all incredibly not strange, not crazy,
and totally normal in the context of an investigation.
FBI Director James Comey
CR: Yes, and I again, there could be grounds for legitimate
investigation of the periphery of the Trump campaign,
certain staffers. And you know what, corruption in
Washington, D.C. is quite rampant. And I think many,
many of the politicians if they actually put them under the
microscope they could find… just as you look at foreign
leaders, Netanyahu was indicted for corruption, whatever.
It’s not uncommon to have conflicts of interests, and under
the table deals. That’s very possible.
So, that’s not what our news is saying. Our mainstream
news is saying that, what you said at the beginning, the
Russians own Trump, and basically that this has
undermined our democracy and our electoral process. That
part of it we have seen no evidence of. And, Trump is
partially vindicated, because obviously whether he was
personally targeted, his campaign at least seems to have
been monitored, at least in part.
DB: Were you amazed that, for instance, the FBI director
raised the issue of the Clinton investigation, but not the
Trump investigation?
CR: Well, I’ve been trying to figure that out. Because
back, during … when he went public, he was put into the
spot because Loretta Lynch should have been the one to be
public on these things. But she was tainted because of
having met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac. And so my
explanation was that that Comey shouldered the burden
from Loretta Lynch. He was doing her a favor in a way
because he thought it would look like this is more
independent and more professional coming from the FBI.
Because at the time Loretta Lynch was under a cloud. And
I think that is the explanation for why he was so public at
the time.
And, of course, things have developed… the summer, if
any investigation started during the summer, again, it was
not known. It was probably legitimate if they got some
information in about some act of corruption, or whatever,
it was certainly legitimate. But since this summer what has
happened is this whole narrative has just gone on steroids,
because of the leaks about the Russians, etc. And the fact
that they put out this report, the FBI, the NSA, and the
director of National Intelligence. And I think that that’s the
problem right now is the public just is so confused because
.
189
there has been so much wrong information out there in the
media. And no one knows what to believe.
Actually, to Comey’s credit he did say this a couple of
times that these media accounts are not accurate. And, I
think that, again, we… there’s been a lot of “sources”
anonymous sources which I do not think are
whistleblowers. But these anonymous sources seem to
have come from political operatives, and even higher level
people. I’m guessing some of this came from the Obama
administration appointees, not Obama, of course,
personally.
And, who knows if he knew anything about this, but some
of those prior appointees, I think, when all is said and done
will be seen as the ones, if they can ever uncover this. It’s
hard with anonymous sources. But I think they were
probably the ones leading this. And maybe over time we
can get back to some sanity here without so much of this
planted information, and wrongful leaks. And I, again, I’m
all for whistle blowing. But, I don’t agree with leaks like
Scooter Libby’s where they were actually using the media
to plant false info.
 Michael Moore - Anti-Trump Coup Supporter
By Stephen Lendman
3-24-2017
His irrational anti-Trump rage lost him credibility months
ago. He’s either deranged, a Democrat party plant, funded
by Trump-hating extremists like Soros, prematurely senile,
or all of the above.
Throughout last year’s presidential campaign, he openly
supported war criminal, racketeer, perjurer Hillary. After
her defeat, he called for her to be installed as president
anyway.
Ahead of Trump’s inauguration, he urged disrupting it -
wanting it “block(ed), obstruct(ed),” and otherwise
interfered with to prevent him from becoming president.
He tried bribing Republican electors to defect, saying
“(i)f you vote your conscience…and your
state fines you…I will pay your fine.”
After Trump’s inauguration, he called for him to “vacate”
his office. In mid-February, he tweeted “it appears you are
still squatting in our Oval Office.”
“What part of ‘vacate you Russian traitor’ don’t
you understand? We can do this the easy way
(you resign), or the hard way (impeachment).”
Other multiple tweets said
“(l)et’s be VERY clear: Flynn DID NOT make that
Russian call on his own.”
“He was INSTRUCTED to do so. He was TOLD
to reassure them. Arrest Trump.”
“TRUMP KNEW EVERYTHING. It will all come
out. Along with the rest of Trump’s collusion and
obedience to Putin.”
“This is who Trump named ‘National Security
Advisor.’ A lapdog to the lapdog of Putin. Feeling
secure America? He’s gonna get us all killed.”
He demands “all actions being taken by” Trump’s
administration halted, calling his administration
“illegitimate” - urging his arrest and removal from office if
he won’t voluntarily step down.
.
190
His rants are more delusional and deranged than rational
thinking, making it appear he need psychiatric help. His
latest tirade on Instagram said the following:
“The Democratic Party needs to declare a
National Emergency. For the first time in our
history, the President of the United States and
his staff are under investigation for espionage.”
“This announcement, by the head of the Trump-
friendly FBI, is a shock to our democracy. The
Democratic leadership in the House and Senate
needs to bring a halt to all business being done
in the name of this potential felony suspect,
Donald J. Trump.”
“No bill he supports, no Supreme Court nominee
he has named, can be decided while he is under
a criminal investigation. His presidency has no
legitimacy until the FBI - and an independent
investigative committee - discovers the truth.”
“Fellow citizens, demand the Democrats cease
all business. ‘The American people have a right
to know if their President is a crook.’ Richard
Nixon
Trump and his campaign backers are being investigated for
possible improper links to Russia, not espionage. Since last
fall, FBI efforts uncovered nothing.
No evidence or hint of it suggests anything credible to
uncover. Yet witch-hunt proceedings continue, perhaps
endlessly, part of a diabolical plot to undermine him.
The only justifiable national emergency is over the
urgency to halt US imperial wars, neoliberal harshness,
and growing homeland tyranny - issues Moore and others
like him ignore.
There’s plenty about Trump’s agenda to criticize. Bashing
him for the wrong reasons, gratuitously, or for defeating
Hillary is way out-of-bounds.
Wanting him illegitimately removed from office is the way
banana republics operate.
 Unlike Clinton Aides, Trump Advisers
Actually Want To Talk To Congress
Chuck Ross - Reporter
8:25 PM 03/24/2017

Three former Donald Trump advisers are proactively
offering to testify to the House Intelligence Committee
about Russia, in stark contrast to Hillary Clinton aides who
stymied Congress during investigations into the former
secretary of state’s private email server.
In a letter to the Intelligence Committee shared exclusively
with The Daily Caller, Page said he “would eagerly
welcome the chance to speak with the Committee” in order
to “set the record straight” regarding allegations made
against him.

This week, former Trump advisers Paul Manafort, Roger

Stone and Carter Page all informed the committee of their
desires to testify to the committee.

All three have been identified in news reports as subjects

of an FBI investigation of potential Trump campaign
collusion with the Russian government. In testimony to the
committee earlier this week, FBI director James Comey
confirmed an ongoing investigation but did not name the
Trump associates who are targeted in the probe.

The trio deny colluding with the Kremlin, but news reports
have showed a variety of connections between the aides Paul Manafort, August 17, 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri
and people who work for the Russian government.
Manafort reached out to the Intelligence Committee
Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman, has worked as a through his attorneys on Thursday, chairman Devin Nunes
consultant for a former Ukrainian president allied with announced on Friday.
Vladimir Putin. Page, who served as a junior policy
adviser on the campaign, has business interests in Russia
Stone released an open letter to reporters earlier this week
and gave a speech at a Moscow university in July, while he
saying that he is eager to talk to Congress.
was still with the campaign.
“I am anxious to rebut allegations that I had
Both are named in a dossier compiled by a retired British
any improper or nefarious contact with any
spy alleging coordination between the campaign and
agent of the Russia State based on facts,
Russian government operatives. The dossier is largely
not misleading and salacious
uncorroborated and several inconsistencies in the
headlines,” wrote Stone, who is a longtime
document have been discovered. Nevertheless, Democrats
friend of both Trump and Manafort and who
on the Intelligence Committee, including the ranking
was an informal adviser during much of the
Democrat, California Rep. Adam Schiff, cited it as fact
campaign.
during Monday’s hearing.
Contrast that with Clinton aides who resisted cooperating
Stone has claimed that he communicated through an
with Congress and federal investigators looking into the
intermediary with WikiLeaks, the group that released
potential mishandling of classified information on
Democrats’ emails during the campaign. U.S. government
Clinton’s server.
officials believe that the emails were hacked by the
Russian government.
Bryan Pagliano, the Clinton State Department staffer who
set up the secret email server, infamously ignored a
But the advisers appear eager to explain what they claim is
subpoena from the House Oversight and Government
a massive witch hunt.
Reform Committee to appear at a hearing in September.

191
 State Department, did testify in a closed setting in front of
the House Select Committee on Benghazi. But the pair
refused to talk to the State Department’s inspector general
ahead of a report it issued on Clinton’s server in May.
They also may have given inconsistent statements to the
FBI about when they became aware that Clinton was using
a private email server to store her work related emails.

Former State Department staffer Bryan Pagliano arrives for a closed

hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington Sept. 10, 2015.
(REUTERS/Gary Cameron)

Pagliano also invoked his Fifth Amendment right against

self-incrimination in response to several other
congressional requests to testify. He pled the Fifth during a
Sept. 10, 2015 meeting with the House Select Committee
on Benghazi. He only spoke to the FBI after receiving
limited immunity from prosecution in the case.

Paul Combetta was another person on Clinton’s payroll

who refused to talk to Congress. Combetta worked for
Platte River Networks, the IT company that managed
Platte River Networks technician Paul Combetta appears at a House
Clinton’s server after she left the State Department. The Oversight Committee hearing, Sept. 13, 2016. (Youtube screen grab)
technician lied to the FBI during at least one of his
interviews, but he nonetheless received immunity from the
Mills and another Clinton aide, Heather Samuelson,
bureau to discuss his work on Clinton’s server.
received immunity in exchange for their full cooperation
with investigators.
Combetta appeared at the Oversight Committee hearing in
September but repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment
As for the Trump advisers, the Intelligence Committee has
rights.
not set a date for when their testimony will be heard. A
representative for Manafort did not say whether he would
Other Clinton aides stymied other investigations. Huma speak in a public setting or in private. Nunes said the
Abedin and Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s two closest aides at the decision is up to him.
.

192
 All Surveillance Of Trump Tower
Legal, No Wiretapping - US House Intelligence
© AP Photo/ Evan Vucci - US
18:02 24.03.2017(Updated 18:11 24.03.2017)

"There was no wiretapping of Trump

Tower, that didn't happen," Nunes stated.
"It was all legal surveillance."

US special services were not

wiretapping Trump Tower, "it was all
legal surveillance," the House of
Representatives Intelligence Committee
chairman said.
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Trump Tower was
under legal surveillance and no wiretapping took place, US
House of Representatives Intelligence
chairman Devin Nunes told reporters on Friday.
On March 4, Trump took to Twitter to accuse Obama
of having his Trump Tower headquarters' "wires tapped"
prior to the 2016 presidential election, describing this
as the former administration's "new low. The president
went on to compare the alleged surveillance to
McCarthyism and the Watergate scandal. The claims have
been rejected by Obama's representative.
Committee
.

193
 General McInerney Says Obama Was 'Heavily
Listening To What Was Going On In
The Trump Campaign'
By The_Real_Fly
Mar 24, 2017 8:12 AM

GUILTY of the espionage act.
Lt. Gen. Thomas Mcinerney weighed in on Devin Nunes'
bombshell revelations that said the Trump team were being
spied on by the NSA/CIA -- and it wasn't Russia related.
The whole cover for the surveillance was supposed to be
because Trump had a bunch of Ivans working for him, but
that simply wasn't the case, or the concern, inside the
Obama White House.
McInerney believes when all of the evidence comes out,
Obama will rue the day he decided to spy on Trump.
Moreover, he said the democrats are chimping out and
fabricating a Russian spy novel in order to avoid Trump
.
investigating the Clinton server and how both Hillary and
Obama violated the espionage act, a crime punishable by
heavy fines and up to 10 years in prison.
Section 793(f) of the federal penal code
(Title 18):
With lawful access to highly classified
information she acted with gross
negligence in removing and causing it to be
removed it from its proper place of custody,
and she transmitted it and caused it to be
transmitted to others not authorized to have
it, in patent violation of her trust.

194
 ABC, NBC Omit Federal ‘Ruling’
That Trump Is ‘NOT Violating’ Hotel Lease
By Nicholas Fondacaro
March 24, 2017 | 12:53 AM EDT
Ever since Donald Trump was elected President of the
United States, the liberal media has been harping on the
D.C. hotel that bears his name. The concern is that Trump
is violating the leasing contract of the historic post office
owned by the federal government, which says a public
official cannot profit from the property. But according to a
news brief by anchor Scott Pelley on CBS Evening News
on Thursday, that’s no longer an issue for the President, a
fact that was omitted by both ABC and NBC.
“Today a federal agency ruled that
President Trump's hotel at a historic former
post office building in Washington is not
violating its lease,” reported Pelley. “The
lease prohibits government officials from
profiting from the property, but the General
Services Administration says there is no
violation because the President has
transferred his businesses to his children
and will not get any money from the hotel.”
Being that the decision by the GSA is supported by the fact
that Trump’s sons now run his business, it may put to rest
cries of “conflict of interest.” In addition, it could possibly
mean that Trump is not in violation of the emoluments
clause of the constitution as well.
Suggestions of such impropriety have been a staple of the
liberal media for a while. Back in December on ABC’s
World News Tonight, reporter Brian Ross ambushed
officials from Bahrain and demanded to know if they were
trying to buy favor with the incoming president.
195
“The wealthy kingdom of Bahrain certainly
has good reason to court the incoming
Trump administration,” he declared, “Its
human rights record has been harshly
criticized. Accused of torture, even threats
of rape and other violence against political
opponents.”
The day before his inauguration, ABC’s Cecilia Vega took
issue with the fact that Trump liked to visit the location.
“That new $200 million hotel just a few
blocks from the White House already the
subject of controversy,” she stated, “With
questions swirling about Trump's deep ties
to his brand and family business. So will
these visits continue?”
Three days after the inauguration, Vega hyped that Trump
could be facing a potential lawsuit.
“A liberal watchdog group planning to sue
the President alleging he is violating the
constitution by allowing his businesses like
his new hotel in Washington, D.C. to
accept payments from foreign
governments,” she touted.
And while waiting for Trump to arrive at an inaugural ball
on NBC Nightly News, reporter Katy Tur hammered the
new President for owning the facility:
Donald Trump is enjoying the trappings of
tradition, but so far, his presidency is
anything but traditional. And some ethics
 lawyers and experts argue that at this ABC and NBC did appear to be more intent on the potential
moment, he could actually be in violation of impropriety than CBS was. That could explain why neither
the constitution. That specifically when it of them bothered to report the news that damaged their
comes to his D.C. hotel. Arguably now, the assertions.
crown jewel of the Trump empire. Holding it
could put Trump in violation of the Transcript below:
emoluments clause which says no one
holding public office can take or receive
CBS Evening News
gifts or payments from foreign
March 23, 2017
governments.
6:52:35 PM Eastern

NBC once touted how two active liberals were suing

SCOTT PELLEY: Today a federal agency ruled that President
Trump, claiming the hotel was hurting their wine bar. In
Trump's hotel at a historic former post office building in
his report, justice correspondent Pete Williams noted that
Washington is not violating its lease. The lease prohibits
government officials from profiting from the property, but the
“The owners of the restaurant aren’t asking General Services Administration says there is no violation
for any money in the lawsuit. They want the because the President has transferred his businesses to his
court to order the President to divest children and will not get any money from the hotel.
himself from any ownership of the Trump
hotel.” Since the GSA determined that
Trump’s sons owned the facility it’s unclear
how the suit will go forward.
.

196
 Trump On What Happens Next:
"Obamacare Will Explode"
By Tyler Durden
Mar 24, 2017 9:05 PM
Until then, Trump said that
Putting a positive spin on events, Trump then said that
After the Republican ObamaCare replacement bill failed to
generate enough Republican support to pass a House vote
Friday, President Trump announced his planned path
forward:
"Let ObamaCare explode."
Having insisted there is no Plan B in case the bill failed,
the White House found itself in a situation with no backup
plan now.
"We're going to go back and figure out
what the next steps are," House Speaker
Paul Ryan told reporters at a press
conference just minutes after the shocking
news that the GOP was pulling the bill hit
the wires. Ryan called the failure of his bill
"a setback, no two ways about it." Looking
forward, Ryan said Obamacare is "going to
remain the law of the land until it’s
replaced. We didn’t have the votes to
replace this law. So yeah, we’re going to be
living with ObamaCare for the foreseeable
future."
A disappointed and embarrassed House Energy and
Commerce Committee chairman Greg Walden was blunt
with reporters:
"This bill's done."
In a statement to the media, Trump said that if things get
bad enough, Democrats will come aboard the reform
Trump also said the losers from Friday's failed vote are
effort. At that point, Trump said, it will become possible to
Democrats.
pass a bill even better than Ryan's.
197
"They're going to reach out whenever
they're ready."
"we were very close and it was a very, very
tight margin. We had no Democrat support.
We had no votes from the Democrats.
They weren’t going to give us a single vote
so it’s a very difficult thing to do."
"I’ve been saying for the last year and a
half that the best thing we can do
politically speaking is let ObamaCare
explode," Trump said of the path
forward. "It is exploding right now. Many
states have big problems, almost all states
have big problems. I was in Tennessee the
other day and they’ve lost half of their state
in terms of an insurer. They have no
insurer. And that’s happening to many
other places."
"I was in Kentucky the other day and
similar things are happening," he
continued. "So, ObamaCare is exploding
with no Democrat support. We couldn’t
quite get there with just a very small
number of votes short in terms of getting
our bill passed."
"People will see how bad it is and it's
getting much worse," Trump added. "I said
the other day when President Obama left,
'17, he knew he wasn't going to be here.
'17 is going to be a very bad year for
ObamaCare, very, very bad. You're going
to have explosive premium increases and
your deductibles are so high people don't
even get to use it."
"But we’re very, very close," he said. "And,
again, I think what will happen is
ObamaCare, unfortunately, will explode."
 "The losers are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck "What happened on the floor," she said, "is
Schumer because now they own a victory for the American people."
ObamaCare," Trump said. "They own it,
"I don’t know what else to say other than
100 percent own it. And this is not a
ObamaCare is the law of the land," Ryan
Republican health care, this is not anything
told reporters late Friday. "It’s going to
but a Democrat health care, and they have
remain the law of the land until it’s
ObamaCare for a little while longer until it replaced. We didn’t have the votes to
ceases to exist, which it will at some point
replace this law. So yeah, we’re going to be
in the near future."
living with ObamaCare for the foreseeable
future."
Pelosi did not agree and called today's aborted ObamaCare
repeal a "great day for our country."

198
 NYT Editors Support
White House Regime Change
By Stephen Lendman
3-24-2017
Times editors refuse to accept Hillary’s defeat, continuing
a relentless anti-Trump campaign.
They consider his main offenses triumphing last
November, challenging Obama’s deplorable legacy, and
rhetorically wanting improved relations with Russia -
reasons enough to want him weakened or removed from
office, a shocking indictment of a scoundrel media
supported debauched system.
Trump, with justification, claims he and close associates
were spied on. On Wednesday, House Select Committee
on Intelligence chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (R. CA) said
“on numerous occasions, the Intelligence
Community incidentally collected information
about US citizens involved in the Trump
transition.”
“(N)ames of (his) transition team members were
unmasked,” their identities revealed. Surveillance
was unrelated to Russia, “investigation of (its)
activities or of the Trump team.”
Asked if he could rule out Obama administration
involvement, Nunez said:
“No, I cannot.”
Classified information about Trump and his associates was
leaked, a criminal act, media scoundrels complicit by
reporting what’s prohibited from revealing publicly -
published to undermine his administration.
In response to Nunes’ revelations, Times editors
disgracefully bashed him, calling him a Trump “lapdog,”
adding
“(h)is disclosures…destroyed the credibility of
his committee in investigating Russian
interference in the election, mak(ing) (him) unfit
for the job and should be replaced.”
Fact:
Since America’s intelligence community first
accused Russia of US election hacking, no
evidence was offered proving it. None exists
because no foreign interference in last
.
199
November’s election occurred - not by Russia or
anyone else.
Fact:
Nunes stating what he knows and is permitted to
discuss publicly is part of his job. Times editors
calling him unfit, wanting him replaced, has
nothing to do with him, everything to do with
gratuitous Trump bashing.
His remarks were clear and unambiguous, not
“deliberately vague,” as Times editors claimed -
accusing him running “cover” for Trump’s claim
about Obama illegally surveilling him, saying he
used the term wiretap generically.
Times editors:
“…Nunes may have broken the law by disclosing
classified information, however obliquely.”
Fact:
Nothing Nunes disclosed was improper or illegal.
Americans have a right to know that their
president and associates were spied on by the
nation’s intelligence community - possibly at the
behest of his predecessor, something Times
editors want kept secret if true.
Times editors:
Nunes “used his position to distract attention
from the crucial question of whether Mr. Trump’s
election was aided by collusion with an
adversary.”
Fact:
DNC revelations during the presidential
campaign were leaked, not hacked by Russia or
anyone else.
Fact:
Russia is adversarial toward no other nations.
America bears full responsibility for longstanding
hostility toward its sovereign independence,
wanting pro-Western puppet governance
replacing it - what The NYT never explains,
supporting imperial viciousness.
 Neil Gorsuch Is An Absolute GENIUS Compared To The
Idiotic Liberal Senators Questioning Him
By: Jayson Veley
Date: March 24, 2017
Judge Neil Gorsuch is simply fantastic.
On Tuesday this week, Trump’s Supreme Court nominee
made a reference to Charlie Brown in response to a
question from Senator Diane Feinstein. Making a case for
judicial restrain, Gorsuch said,
“Well senator, that reminded me of, you
know, when Charlie Brown is going in to
kick the ball and Lucy picks it up at the last
second. And that struck me as raising
serious due process concerns, fair notice
and separation of powers concerns. When
a[n] executive bureaucracy can overturn a
judicial precedent without an act of
Congress.”
It’s no surprise that liberals like Senator Feinstein and
Chuck Schumer detest this man with every fiber of their
beings. But to understand this vitriol, one has to
understand who Judge Gorsuch is, and even more than
that, who he isn’t.
In the second presidential debate, Hillary Clinton was
asked a question about her vision for the Supreme Court.
In response, Clinton gave an answer that sounded as
though it was pulled directly off the DNC website.
“I want a Supreme Court that will stick with
Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to
choose, and I want a Supreme Court that
will stick with marriage equality,” she said.
Clinton added that she wanted a Supreme
Court that “doesn’t always side with
corporate interests,” and one that
200
understands that “because you’re wealthy
and you can give more money to
something doesn’t mean you have any
more rights … than anybody else.”
Hillary Clinton (and most other democrats for that matter)
believe that the Supreme Court needs to become an
institution that advances progressivism and continuously
rejects conservative constitutionalism. They want all of the
Justices to take a partisan, one-sided approach to
interpreting the law and applying it to modern day politics.
The only problem with this strategy is that it’s not how the
Supreme Court was originally supposed to operate.
It goes without saying that judges must reject partisan
politics, and if they have their own opinions on certain
issues, those opinions are not supposed to impact decisions
that are made. Judges aren’t supposed to say, “I’m a liberal
so I’m going to rule as one in every case that comes before
me.” Rather, Justices on the Supreme Court need only to
adhere to the United States Constitution and the rule of
law. In other words, there is no room for Democrats or
Republicans in the highest court in the land; there is only
room for strict constitutionalists.
In a memorial tribute to the late Justice Scalia, Gorsuch
said,
“Judges should instead strive … to apply
the law as it is … not to decide cases
based on their own moral convictions or the
policy consequences they believe might
serve society best.”
Indeed, this is the reason why so many conservatives are
so fond of Gorsuch, just as they were fond of Scalia – it’s
not because these men are Republicans, but because they
are constitutionalists.
When compared to the intellectual capacity of the liberal
democrats questioning him, Gorsuch comes across as an
absolute genius.
At one point during the confirmation hearing, Diane
Feinstein explained her concerns about Judge Neil
Gorsuch, and in doing so, made herself look like a fool.
 “I find this originalist judicial philosophy to
be really troubling,” the California senator
said. “I firmly believe the American
Constitution is a living document, intended
to evolve as our country evolves.”
But to say that the Constitution is a “living and breathing
document” is an oxymoron, similar to saying “jumbo
shrimp” or “deafening silence.”
.
201
A nation’s constitution, by definition, is
the foundation it is built upon. It is the
one thing that is supposed to remain the
same, even as society changes around
it. If the Founding Fathers meant for the
Constitution to be changed for political
expediency, what would be the point of
establishing a Constitution at all?
 Nunes Calls Comey, Rogers, For “Closed Session”
After Finding “Concerning Info” In Intel Reports
By Tyler Durden -
03.24.2017 @1:31 PM EDT

Last night we highlighted a Fox News story which

suggested that Devin Nunes expected the NSA to deliver a
“smoking gun” which would prove that the Obama
administration spied on the Trump transition team, and
possibly the president-elect himself, as early as today.

Moments ago, Nunes fanned that speculation by holding

an impromptu press conference announcing that he’ll call
both FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Rogers before
a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee to
discuss topics which

“they couldn’t answer in a public

setting.”

Here is Nunes’s full statement:

And some early takeaways:

Nunes also revealed that President Trump’s former
campaign manager, Paul Manafort, has volunteered to
“There are just questions that we have for
testify before the House Intelligence Committee on his
Dir. Comey and Adm. Rogers probably that
alleged connections to Russia.
they couldn’t answer in a public setting.”
“We thank Mr. Manafort for volunteering
and encourage others with knowledge
of these issues to voluntarily interview
with the committee.”

202
Nunes continues to decline requests from the press to
reveal his sources…
“The lack of a leak investigation is quite
concerning. We need to make sure that
these leaks are being tracked down.”
I have information that indicates
Americans’ names were unmasked
during surveillance.
“Clearly when I see a problem, I’m going to
point it out.”
“Names for sure if they’re picked up in
any incidental collection of any kind,
they should be minimized.”

But did confirm there was “no wiretapping

of Trump Tower; That didn’t happen.”

This follows Nunes’s appearance on Fox News last night in

which he declared he had an obligation to raise issues he’s
discovered about the unmasking of Americans’ names
during serveillance.

@DevinNunes on “incidental” surveillance revelations:

Meanwhile, proving that Nunes may

I had a duty and obligation to tell the
actually be on to something here, WaPo
President.
has quickly called for an immediate
“What I saw had nothing to do with investigation into his behavior.
Russia. This has nothing to do with the
Russia investigation.”
.

203
 FBI Director Comey Unexpectedly
Shows Up At The White House
By Tyler Durden
Mar 24, 2017 2:31 PM

Update: as Reuters' Steve Holland reports, the reason

Comey is at the White House is for "a routine interagency
meeting," per WH official.

And as CNBC adds, around 3pm ET, Comey departed the

White House after his unannounced visit.

***

ABC's Jennfier Hasler reports that FBI Director James

Comey is at The White House and has had no response
from either The FBI or White House as to why..

Interesting timing no doubt after Nunes' press conference

this morning...

"The lack of a leak investigation is quite

concerning. We need to make sure that
these leaks are being tracked down...There
are just questions that we have for Dir.
Comey and Adm. Rogers probably that
they couldn't answer in a public
setting..."

What happens next?

204
 The Obama Plot
To Sabotage Trump
Pat Buchanan
March 24, 2017
Devin Nunes just set the cat down among the pigeons.
Two days after FBI Director James Comey assured us
there was no truth to President Trump’s tweet about being
wiretapped by Barack Obama, the chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee said Trump may have had more
than just a small point.
The U.S. intelligence community, says Nunes, during
surveillance of legitimate targets, picked up the names of
Trump transition officials during surveillance of targets,
“unmasked” their identity, and spread their names around,
virtually assuring they would be leaked.
If true, this has the look and smell of a conspiracy to
sabotage the Trump presidency, before it began.
Comey readily confirmed there was no evidence to back
up the Trump tweet. But when it came to electronic
surveillance of Trump and his campaign, Comey,
somehow, could not comment on that.
Which raises the question: What is the real scandal here?
Is it that Russians hacked the DNC and John Podesta’s
emails and handed them off to WikiLeaks? We have heard
that since June.
Is it that Trump officials may have colluded with the
Russians?
But former Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper and ex-CIA Director Mike Morrell have both said
they saw no evidence of this.
This March, Sen. Chris Coons walked back his stunning
declaration about transcripts showing a Russia-Trump
collusion, confessing,
“I have no hard evidence of collusion.”
But if Clapper and Morrell saw no Russia-Trump
collusion, what were they looking at during all those
months to make them so conclude?
205
Was it “FBI transcripts,” as Sen. Coons blurted
out?
If so, who intercepted and transcribed the conversations? If
it was intel agencies engaged in surveillance, who
authorized that? How extensive was it? Against whom? Is
it still going on?
And if today, after eight months, the intel agencies cannot
tell us whether or not any member of the Trump team
colluded with the Russians, what does that say of their
competence?
The real scandal, which the media regard as a diversion
from the primary target, Trump, is that a Deep State
conspiracy to bring down his presidency seems to have
been put in place by Obamaites, and perhaps approved by
Obama himself.
Consider. On Jan. 12, David Ignatius of the Washington
Post wrote,
“According to a senior U.S. government official,
(Gen. Michael) Flynn phoned Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on
Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration
announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials
… What did Flynn say?”
Now, on Dec. 29, Flynn, national security adviser-
designate, was not only doing his job calling the
ambassador, he was a private citizen.
Why was he unmasked by U.S. intelligence?
Who is this “senior official” who dropped the dime on
him? Could this official have known how many times
Flynn spoke to Kislyak, yet not known what was said on
the calls?
That is hard to believe. This looks like a contract hit by an
anti-Trump agent in the intel community, using Ignatius to
do the wet work.
Flynn was taken down. Did Comey turn his FBI loose to
ferret out the felon who had unmasked Flynn and done him
in? If not, why not?
In today’s Wall Street Journal, Dan Henninger points
anew to a story in The New York Times of March 1 that
began:
“In the Obama administration’s last days, some
White House officials scrambled to spread
information about Russian efforts to undermine
the presidential election — and about possible
contacts between associates of President-elect
Trump and Russians — across the government.”
“This is what they did,” wrote Henninger, quoting the
Times:
“At intelligence agencies, there was a push to
process as much raw intelligence as possible
into analyses, and to keep the reports at a
relatively low classification level to ensure as
wide a readership as possible across the
government — and, in some cases, among
European allies.”
For what benign purpose would U.S. intelligence agents
spread secrets damaging to their own president — to
foreign regimes? Is this not disloyalty? Is this not sedition?
On Jan. 12, writes Henninger, the Times
206
“reported that Attorney General Loretta Lynch
signed rules that let the National Security Agency
disseminate ‘raw signals intelligence information’
to 16 other intelligence agencies.”
Astounding. The Obamaites seeded the U.S. and allied
intel communities with IEDs to be detonated on Trump’s
arrival. This is the scandal, not Trump telling Vlad to go
find Hillary’s 30,000 missing emails.
We need to know who colluded with the Russians, if
anyone did. But more critically, we need to unearth the
deep state conspiracy to sabotage a presidency.
So far, the Russia-connection investigation has proven a
dry hole. But an investigation into who in the FBI, CIA or
NSA is unmasking U.S. citizens and criminally leaking
information to a Trump-hating press to destroy a president
they are sworn to serve could prove to be a gusher.
As for the reports of Lynch-White House involvement in
this unfolding plot to damage and destroy Trump the real
question is: What did Barack Obama know, and when did
he know it?
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The
Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From
Defeat to Create the New Majority.”
 Deep State Obamanation Desperately
Resists Trump’s Wrecking Ball (Video)
By: The Voice Of Reason
Date: March 24, 2017
8 years of an Obama presidency. 8 years of allowing the
Deep State Manchurian Candidate to advance their agenda
of cultural Marxism throughout the United States of
America. 8 years of undermining our country’s very heart
and soul. Of course, their agenda didn’t succeed, because
their chosen candidate Hillary Clinton, didn’t win. And
now that President Trump is determined to purge all the
Deep State insiders from the government, they are fighting
to survive.
In the following video, Right Wing News look at how 8
years of an Obama presidency had a devastating effect on
America’s cultural landscape. By promoting a culture of
permissiveness and promiscuity while degrading
traditional American values, Obama and the Deep State
have influenced a large portion of the American public
away from these values.
With the mainstream media spinning President Trump’s
goals as a direct threat to their lifestyle, these people are
easily turned into unwitting pawns in a much larger battle.
The question is, can such degradation be reversed?
State of the Nation reports:
So many people of good conscience are
trying to figure out what the heck is
really going on these days. Especially
in America, once “the land of the free
and the home of the brave”.
Perhaps the timely understanding of what truly ails the
nation is a good place to start.
207
All of the civil unrest and political
upheaval, racial tensions and religious
strife, gender conflict and class warfare,
financial stress and economic hardship,
foreign entanglements and international
disputes are due to the very same
cause. That cause is the Cultural
Marxism which was quite purposefully
employed in the building of the
Obamanation.
“Cultural Marxism is a branch of western Marxism,
different from the Marxism-Leninism of the old Soviet
Union. It is commonly known as “multiculturalism” or,
less formally, Political Correctness.”
(Source: What is Cultural Marxism?)
In fact, the Obamanation (formerly known as the United
States of America) was painstakingly constructed over 8
disastrous years of Barack Hussein Obama’s illegitimate
presidency.
Obama himself was merely a pawn in
this globalist enterprise designed to
strip the USA of its constitution and its
sovereignty. He was nothing more than
the chief pitchman for the NWO cabal
who dutifully followed every order from
his true masters throughout the Deep
State.
The various agents of Deep State, in turn, take their orders
from the World Shadow Government.
Key Point:
Barack Hussein Obama was a creation of
the Central Intelligence Agency. This is
why he blindly carried out every order
issued by The Company, as the C.I.A. is
known in intelligence circles.
As a creature of that malevolent entity and card-carrying
CIA agent, Obama had absolutely no choice but to carry
out every command given by his handler(s).
The countless crimes committed
against the American people, as well as
against foreign nations, by the C.I.A.,
the Department of State and U.S. Armed
Services occurred because the POTUS
was a purely political pawn.
The profound damage to the international order is readily
apparent; whereas the utter destruction throughout the
USA has escaped the attention of many, even those who
have suffered the most. Such is the extraordinary guile and
furtiveness used to advance Cultural Marxism.
Exactly what did Obama do? The liberal
side of America was literally handed
their Sodom and Gomorrah by King
Barack Hussein Obama over his 8-year
reign.
He basically gave the ultra-liberals and extreme left-
wingers, fake progressives and phony feminists everything
they ever wanted. Same goes for the vast number of
DINOs (Democrats in name only) who populate the ultra-
liberal urban centers of America.
What’s important to understand is that each of these
groups, as well as other segments of the Left, are the
product of a vast social engineering experiment defined by
the most cynical tenets of Cultural Marxism.
As such, much of the Left now preaches
and acts out what might be construed
as a form “hyper-liberalism on
steroids”, which has nothing
whatsoever to do with the original social
philosophy of “Liberalism”.
The rapidly evolving social platform of Cultural
Marxism is actually propped up by the twin pillars of
permissiveness and promiscuity.
It ought to be quite obvious to any objective observer that
it is not true liberalism that cultural Marxists advocate;
rather, it is an overly permissive society and extremely
promiscuous culture that they seek.
208
It is this “overly permissive society and
extremely promiscuous culture” that is
now well-known across the planet as the
Obamanation. Even though he is no
longer in office, the de facto leader of
the Obamanation is Barack Hussein
Obama, now known as the purple
revolutionary BARRY SOETORO,
his nom de guerre.
As POTUS, Obama was the premier purveyor of the
uniquely American brand of Cultural Marxism being
aggressively promoted across America and beyond. As a
carefully coiffed Manchurian Candidate, Obama was
educated and trained, mentored and guided by some of the
top cultural Marxists of our era. As a matter of historical
fact, Obama was a poly sci major at Columbia University,
the American home of Cultural Marxism as advanced by
the Frankfurt School that was
“associated in part with the Institute for
Social Research at the Goethe University
Frankfurt”.
Only with this correct understanding
can one make sense of the current
chaotic and unruly state of affairs
throughout the USA. The unrelenting
and ubiquitous implementation
of Cultural Marxism is why it’s so very
crazy out there.
Subsequently, the Left has proven, post Trump’s election,
that it will not give up their long anticipated and hard-
fought Sodom And Gomorrah. Obama quite methodically,
and cynically, gave it to them… and they are determined
not to lose it, especially under a Trump presidency.
Everyone’s version of “Sodom and
Gomorrah” is different
New York City = Sodom
Los Angeles = Gomorrah
Some folks want the LGBTQ agenda to
be fully enacted everywhere in the 50
states, regardless of any other
considerations. They want the
government to pay for their sex
changes, breast enhancements and
penis enlargements. They also want
Uncle Sam to fund their abortions and
contraception, refills of Viagra and
Addyi, among many other highly
dubious uses of the public purse.
Some folks want to do their recreational drugs uninhibited
(especially marijuana), irrespective of the ill effects on
their families and friends, businesses and companies,
churches and communities, etc. They want to be able to do
their drugs anytime, anywhere without consideration of the
many and profound societal consequences of such rampant
drug use.
Other people want all the free handouts
that the government will give them.
Anything that they can get for nothing
is theirs for the taking, so they believe
and they want. “Living off the
government tit” is all they care about,
and all they know how to do. Once enjoyed for a decade or
two, they will not give it up easily.
Then there are those who want their sex, drugs and rock
‘n’ roll—24/7. These are the “perpetual teenagers” who
are all play and no work. Their “main man” was Obama
(he was so cool always going on vacation somewhere neat
and lookin’ laid back). There was Obama for 8 long
catastrophic years forever smiling and showing his big set
of chops in every photo-op, as though he had not a care in
the world.
They also knew that Obama did and
sold crack cocaine as a teenager and
young adult, as well as visited the gay
bath houses in Chicago as a U.S.
Senator.
The ultra-libs, incidentally, think that’s so cool in this age
of extreme sexual promiscuity. They think:
“Even the ex-prez did ‘everything’, so can
I”, as he most likely still does ‘everything’.
The White House is lit up in rainbow colors in
commemoration of the Supreme Court’s ruling to legalize
same-sex marriage on Friday, June 26, 2015, in
Washington.
This is the very crux of the problem.
The Left, and all who are allied with them, will simply not
give up their Sodom and Gomorrah no matter what. You
know how it is: once you get sometime that you really
treasure, you don’t ever want to let it go. Well, they have
fought for decades establishing this overly permissive
society and they refuse to let it go. Once well acclimated
to an extremely promiscuous culture, the cultural Marxists
knew that those addicted would not surrender it without a
HUGE fight.
That fight is not real well known yet as
the Purple Revolution.
This was the very hook which drew so many to the current
leader of the ongoing Purple Revolution—Barry
209
Soetoro.[2] First TPTB fastidiously fabricated a cult of
personality around Obama that has put to shame all similar
schemes—throughout modern history! Then, as POTUS,
Obama made sure that he indulged the addictions and other
weaknesses of every single vulnerable demographic within
the electorate. In so doing, he put to use his only skill set
as a rabble-rousing ‘community organizer’ to pander to the
many addictions and fixations, compulsions and
obsessions of the left wing of the political spectrum.
By aggressively promoting the LGBT
agenda like no other leader in post-
modern history, Obama effectively
created the single most powerful
political force in America as well as the
world-at-large.
The stealthy and unlawful approval of gay marriage by the
SCOTUS is just one example of his numerous and often
transparent cultural Marxist initiatives. The normalization
of trangendering is another, as even the VA was ordered to
pay for sex change operations for the nation’s vets.
Key Point:
It should be noted that the motion picture
and TV programming industries ought to be
included under this heading. Both forms of
media are directly responsible for the
relentless mind control programming
(MCP) which has taken place since the
very first movies and TV series. As long as
there have been television commercials,
Corporate America has likewise conducted
their nonstop MCP.
Because the Baby Boomers grew up with these media
since their infancy, they have been exposed to massive
amounts of predictive programming, political propaganda,
subliminal suggestions and many other clandestine
techniques. It is the liberal elites, especially, who are
notorious for their endless propagation of so much pap and
piffle, sometimes referred to as cultural pablum. All of
these powerful tools of Cultural Marxism serve the
immediate goals of Deep State, as well as the long-term
objectives of the New World Order.
The long list of immoral and depraved
actions, which were undertaken by the
Obama Administration, is literally
endless and will never be known in its
entirety. Because of this reality, the
establishment of the Obamanation has
seen the irreparable tearing of the social
fabric of America. Hence, it may very
well be the case that the American
Republic is destined to experience a
 21st century version of the Old
Testament’s Sodom and Gomorrah
The only reason for such an eventuality would be the utter
depth and breadth of the inescapable Obamanation.
Even the formidable wrecking ball of
Donald Trump may not be able to
sufficiently destroy the 3rd millennium’s
Sodom and Gomorrah so that the
American people can reclaim their
sovereignty, both individual and
national.
In other words, it appears that the very foundation of the
Republic has been shifted irreversibly by the multi-decade
conspiracy meticulously carried out by the domestic and
foreign agents of Cultural Marxism.
SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK ‘N’ ROLL
By properly understanding the primary
strategies and tactics of Cultural
Marxism it will be much easier to at
least arrest its continuous
manifestation.
A retrospective analysis of American social trends during
the 1950s, 60s and 70s provides the perfect historical
context. The British Invasion of the early 1960s, in
particular, shows how the cultural Marxists executed their
many nefarious plots to debase Western civilization. The
unintended benefit, of course, is that many a Beatnik and
Baby Boomer were awakened by the Rock ‘n’ Roll
Revolution triggered by the British rock groups and their
American counterparts. Much of their music was pro
peace and anti war, as it was consciousness raising and
mind expanding.
Many on the Right have been really
scratching their heads wondering how
the Liberals have become certified
crazymakers. Particularly after many of
them helped shut down the Vietnam
War, why would they ever vote for an
inveterate warmonger like Hillary
Clinton. The whole lot of them have
become mentally retarded and/or
hopelessly irrational. Others are
downright unreasonable and/or utterly
ridiculous.
The whole world has seen the American Left collectively
lose their ability to apply human reason, just as common
sense has completely fled their thoroughly corrupt
reservation of political correctness. Virtually anyone who
still enjoys sound mental faculties understands that the
210
ultra-liberals were the real crazies who ran the asylum
under Obama.
But, really, how did it get to this point?
Answer: Sex, Drugs and Rock ‘n’ Roll!
We’re Making America Great Again…
But Politics is Still CRAZY!
Many on the Left never gave up their drugs. Whether those
drugs are marijuana or LSD, crack cocaine or crystal meth,
black heroin or psilocybin mushrooms, many still do them
both on Main Street and Wall Street and anywhere in
between. Likewise, many of those who were able to ween
themselves off these dangerous drugs simply started doing
pharmaceutical or nutraceutical drugs. Others migrated
back to alcohol and cigarettes, as well as to other socially
accepted drugs like sugar and caffeine. As they became
inexorably imprisoned by these various addictions, many
found superficial pleasure and eventually withdrew into
the new comfortable space created by Cultural Marxism.
Therefore, without any doubt, it is the
pervasive scourge of drug abuse which
has profoundly compromised the minds
of so many Baby Boomers as well as
their older Beatnik brothers and sisters.
Not only are many still entranced by some the more
negative music from the rock ‘n’ roll era, they still
subscribe to the notion of free sex. While much of that
inspiring rock ‘n’ roll music actually seeded the hippie
consciousness that shut down the Vietnam War, there was
a very deliberate scheme to push the “free love” meme
(really just unlimited sexual freedom) throughout that
musical era. Consequently, the unparalleled and
cataclysmic sexual liberation of a whole generation is what
really served to transform America into the land of
debauchery.
As the old saying goes, when the sexual
mores are universally perverted, the
whole society will inevitably collapse.
Quite unfortunately, some of those urban societies will
actually crash and burn like Sodom and Gomorrah did in a
New York City 9/11 moment or Los Angeles earthquake.
Welcome to the calamitous result of the pre-planned
agenda of Cultural Marxism.
_______________________________________________
Special Note:
It’s quite well known by military generals down through
the ages that drugs have always been used to whip up the
troops into a frenzied hysteria of killing and bloodlust.
Depending on the specific drugs being used, these folks
can be turned into head-chopping, crucifying Daesh
terrorists as seen throughout the Northern Levant.
(CAPTAGON: Tons Of Amphetamine Smuggled Into
Syria To Fuel ISIS Terrorism) Or, they might be the
chain-smoking soldiers who fought World War II not
knowing that their specially manufactured cigarettes were
spiked with powerful mind-altering chemicals.
What’s the point? The ultimate goal of
cultural Marxists is not too unlike the
communist Bolsheviks who fomented
the banskter-engineered Russian
Revolution.[3] That terrible civil war
occurred exactly 100 years ago. And, it
has often been said that the USSA
would follow in the footsteps of the
USSR… … …unless We the People
become aware of the treacherous
conspiracy of Cultural Marxism–post
haste.
_______________________________________________
Trump cannot do this alone
.
211
The political Left will simply not permit
President Trump to wreck their
Obamanation.
Nor will the Left ever vacate their Sodom and
Gomorrah…and there are many more than just New York
City and Los Angeles. San Francisco and Seattle, Chicago
and Detroit, Philadelphia and Boston, Baltimore and
Washington DC, New Orleans and Miami, Atlanta and
Charlotte, Houston and Denver, Portland and Austin, are
just a few other sanctuary cities which have become
havens for illegal aliens and liberal snowflakes seeking
protection from sunlight, lest they melt into their godless
oblivion.
Candidate Trump often said that the
Trump movement was not his; that it
belonged to all the Trumpsters as well
as all other people with conscience.
The people are the very heart of the movement, Trump
said, and he was merely a lightning rod, as well as the
spearhead. As the tip of the spear, he knew that he would
get blunted, as he has every single day since July of 2015.
 Roger Stone Declares
No Russian Ties Other Than Gucciffer 2.0
Best-Selling Author Under F.B.I. Investigation After
Creating Big Impact With New Book
By Staff Writer -
03.24.2017 @3:51 PM EDT

FORT LAUDERDALE, Flor. (INTELLIHUB) —

Republican political operative and author Roger Stone has Stone is a frequent guest on the highly-popular Alex Jones
found himself under a magnifying glass in recent weeks Show and was even the subject of a recent assassination
after a piece in the New York Times suggested that he was scare in which he was poisoned but may not have received
a Trump-Russia cutout under F.B.I. investigation. the full, possibly fatal, dose indented by his attackers.

Stone admits although he did have contact with the On Tuesday Stone was quoted telling Infowars that he
Russian hacker Gucciffer 2.0 on one occasion, he has no
other ties to Russians and defiantly didn’t interfere with “relishes the opportunity to face his
the election. accusers.”

“Mudslinging, telling part of the story but
not all of the story. It’s McCarthyism,”
Stone told the Miami Herald.
“You just wake up one day and a bunch of
congressmen are kicking your balls across
the field,” the author said.
The Senate Intelligence Committee warned Stone to
preserve any information that may pertain to the
investigation.
Roger Stone’s latest book titled “The Making Of The
President 2016: How Donald Trump Orchestrated A
Revolution” is rated 4.5 out of 5 stars and is available on
Amazon.

212
 House Intelligence Committee
Goes To War With Itself Over Russia Investigation
CBS News
March 24, 2017, 12:26 PM
House Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes
(R-CA) and Ranking Member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speak with
the media about the ongoing Russia investigation on Capitol Hill in
Washington, D.C., U.S. March 15, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P.
Bernstein - RTX315V0
In consecutive press conferences on Friday, House
Intelligence committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) and
ranking member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) took their fight
over the investigation into President Donald Trump’s ties
to the Russian government public once again.
In a Tweet Friday morning, Schiff said Nunes had
cancelled a public hearing with former Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA director
John Brennan, and former acting Attorney General Sally
Yates.
Schiff then said in a press conference that he and Nunes
had agreed to have the hearing be public, and accused his
Republican counterpart of “cutting off public access to
information.”
“I think this is a serious mistake,” Schiff
said.
Schiff theorized that Nunes had decided to cancel the
hearings due to “strong pushback” from the White House.
213
He also called for an independent commission to handle
the investigation comparable to the one that investigated
the 9/11 attacks.
The Democrat was also fiercely critical of Nunes for his
assertion that some administration officials had their
communications swept up through “incidental collection”
by intelligence agencies. Nunes was heavily criticized for
the disclosure, which he did not share in advance with
Schiff or other Democrats on the committee. Nunes later
apologized to Schiff for the dust-up.
Still, according to Schiff, no one else on the committee --
Republican or Democrat -- has seen the evidence that
Nunes referred to.
“All of us are essentially in the dark,” Schiff
said.
Schiff also said Nunes’ decision to brief the White House
on the matter was “wholly inappropriate” and casted
“grave doubts into the ability to run a credible
investigation and the integrity of that investigation.”
Earlier Friday, Nunes made news of his own at a press
conference by announcing that former Trump campaign
manager Paul Manafort would testify before the
committee.
Nunes said Manafort had volunteered to be interviewed.
Manafort was in charge of Mr. Trump’s campaign from
April until August of last year. Mr. Trump, who was
trailing far behind in polls at the time, accepted Manafort’s
resignation after numerous stories surfaced of his
involvement with a pro-Russian party in Ukraine.
The relationship between Mr. Trump, his associates, and
the Russian government is currently the focus of an FBI
counterintelligence investigation, and is also being
investigated by the Senate and House intelligence
committees.
It is not clear if Manafort’s interview with the committee
will be conducted in public, although Schiff said it should
be.
Mr. Trump had earlier claimed, without evidence, that
Trump Tower had been wiretapped by the Obama
administration. The president’s allies had pointed to
Nunes’ claim as proof that the president was correct in his
214
assertion, although Nunes said Friday that no wiretapping
of Trump Tower had takes place.
Schiff, meanwhile, said that Nunes assertion, even if true,
offered no validation of the president’s claim.
 POTUS Trump Disgusted
By Congressional Leadership Team (UPDATE)
By Dcwhispers
Posted On March 24, 2017
Today members of Congress will cast
their votes for or against the House-
proposed Obamacare overhaul
legislation. The Paul Ryan bill is a
confusing, contradictory thing, largely
beholden to the pharmaceutical industry
that has donated so generously to his
political career. (These same large
annual donations apply to other
members of the current GOP leadership
team in the House and Senate as well.)
The vote will be close and the ordeal
has given Mr. Trump his first real taste
of the deep-rooted, self-serving
dysfunction that is Washington D.C.
While improvements to the Ryan bill have been cobbled
together via input from other members of Trump and
considerable effort via Trump White House
representatives, it remains something far less than the sum
of its parts from a party that has been promising voters a
repeal and replace alternative to Obamacare for seven
years – and winning elections because of that promise.
Mr. Trump has publicly given the bill support likely out of
a sense of duty that this is for now the best he can get
while trying to herd this mewling flock of Congressional
cats. Behind the closed doors of the Oval Office, though,
he is said to be disgusted by the GOP leadership that has
revealed itself to be devoid of the very thing that title
demands – leadership.
Via the The New York Times ;
215
“…He said ruefully this week that he should
have done tax reform first when it became
clear that the quick-hit health care victory
he had hoped for was not going to
materialize on Thursday, the seventh
anniversary of the act’s passage, when the
legislation was scheduled for a vote.
Two of his most influential advisers —
Stephen K. Bannon, his chief strategist,
and Gary D. Cohn, the National Economic
Council director, who had a major role in
pushing the bill — came to agree, and did
not like the compromise that was emerging.
So on Thursday night, Mr. Trump delivered
an ultimatum.
He dispatched his budget adviser, Mick
Mulvaney, to a conference of House
Republicans and told them they had to vote
on Friday. And if the bill fails, he said, Mr.
Trump will move on.”
Mr. Trump knows Obamacare is a disaster. So do
Republicans. And though they won’t admit it publicly, so
too do Democrats. The President wanted a “rip the band-
aid off quick” approach. Instead, due largely to the
complicated machinations of House Speaker Paul Ryan, a
version of Obamacare Light was pushed forward which
angered the more conservative wing of the party. (And, it
is said, many within the Trump White House who couldn’t
believe how inept Ryan was proving to be.)
Hoping to salvage some version of reform, Trump went
into negotiating mode, spending hours each day personally
reaching out to members of Congress from both parties to
garner support. He remained cordial with Senator Rand
Paul, among the most vocal opponents of the RyanCare
bill, and according to some, indicated privately to the
Kentucky senator that the bill was in fact a “pile of sh*t”
but that at this point, something was better than nothing,
and more work could continue on improving the original
version as the year went on.

The New York times indicated that Mr. Trump’s son-and-
law and close adviser, Jared Kushner, wanted the President
to back away from the Ryan proposal altogether soon after
it was announced. Kushner knew it was a mess, knew it
did too little while pitting conservative Republicans
against moderates, and would stall the Trump agenda.
It appears Mr. Kushner was right.
Trump is left today trying to push an 11th hour success for
what is, an already less-than-successful bit of legislation
that will get further trampled when it is shipped off to the
Senate side. Even if he pulls off this messy partial political
victory in the House, it has left a very sour taste in his
mouth.
Donald Trump is one who is willing to forgive, but he
never forgets. He is learning a great deal about how things
.
216
don’t work in D.C. Paul Ryan is a big reason for this
dysfunction. Ryan appears to be doing what some very
deep pockets sent him back to D.C. to do: Stall the Trump
agenda until 2020 when they can be rid of him.
———————————–
UPDATE: House Speaker Paul Ryan traveled to the
White House today to inform President Trump the
RyanCare legislation lacked the votes for passage in the
House. Mr. Trump is said to have shrugged off the failure
while with Mr. Ryan, and then quickly reached out to
media to indicate Obamacare will fail of its own accord
soon which will in turn force Democrats to have to make a
deal. That might be true, but today’s failure is a significant
setback for the Trump agenda as it has dominated the
efforts of both the White House and deeply divided
Republicans in Congress. At the very least, it is a
particularly dark mark against Speaker Ryan who is now a
wounded Speaker with declining leverage among his own
caucus.
Look for the President to now quickly pivot to two issues
he is now even more motivated than ever to see succeed –
tax reform and the border wall. Apparently, he is already
working the phones on those issues this evening. For Mr.
Trump today has been hard lesson. It will be interesting to
see if he’s a quick learner.
 Judiciary Committee
Republicans Ask Intel Chiefs To Hunt Leakers
By IWB
Published March 24, 2017 · Updated March 26, 2017
A trio of House Judiciary Committee
Republicans on Friday demanded that U.S.
intelligence officials take steps to find the
people who are leaking classified
information about President Trump.
“Congress, as the people’s representative
body, has the responsibility to ensure
proper measures are being taken to
prevent any unauthorized disclosures of
classified information,”
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob
Goodlatte, R-Va., wrote in a letter that was
also signed by Trey Gowdy of South
Carolina and Louie Gohmert of Texas.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gop-judiciary-
committee-ask-intel-chiefs-to-hunt-leakers/article/2618389
Link to the letter:
https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/2042_001.pdf
A portion of the letter:
Our Committee seeks several results with
this letter. First, we ask you to openly
dispel, if inaccurate or false, accusations of
widespread illegal surveillance. Second, we
encourage you to publicly describe the
value of Section 702 in thwarting terrorist
plots. Members of Congress and the public
need to fully understand the utility of the
program as well as the procedures in place
to ensure Section 702 operates within the
confines of the law and the Constitution.
Finally, we ask you brief us on any efforts
made by your agencies to identify those
who feloniously disseminate classified or
otherwise legally protected information and
bring them to justice. “Unnamed
government sources” leaking confidential
information, whether the information is
accurate or not, is detrimental to our
national security and cannot be tolerated.
217
Congress, as the People’s representative
body, has the responsibility to ensure
proper measures are being taken to
prevent any unauthorized disclosures of
classified information.
Thank you for your attention to these
important matters.
Sincerely,
Bob Goodlatte
Chairman
House Judiciary Committee
Trey Gowdy
Chairman
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
Homeland Security, & Investigations
Louie Gohmert
Vice-Chairman
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
Homeland Security, & Investigations
http://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?Doc
umentID=845
Larry Klayman mentioned that he had talked to Bob
Goodlatte in his letter:
A few months ago, given FBI’s seeming
inaction in conducting a bona fide timely
investigation of the treasure trove of
information Montgomery had produced and
testified to, I went to Chairman Bob
Goodlatte of the House Judiciary
Committee, as I had done earlier with
Senator Grassley, since Montgomery had
revealed that judges had been spied upon,
and asked his staff to inquire of Director
Comey the status of the investigation. I
have heard nothing back from Goodlatte or
his staff and they have not responded to
recent calls and emails.
 .

218
 Trump Signals New Hope
For Obamacare Overhaul, Says 'Do Not Worry!'
By Joseph Weber
Published March 25, 2017

2010 health care law would implode amid increasing costs

and few options for Americans.

Still, his tweet Saturday suggested a potential willingness

to work on a bipartisan plan on overhauling ObamaCare --
albeit a scenario in which Democrats come to the GOP-
controlled Congress to work together on improvements.

President Trump hinted Saturday that overhauling

ObamaCare is still alive, perhaps through a bipartisan deal,
following the effort’s dramatic and seemingly terminal
failure a day earlier.

“ObamaCare will explode and we will all

get together and piece together a great
healthcare plan for THE PEOPLE,” Trump
tweeted. “Do not worry!” Ohio Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan on Saturday seemed
open to such discussions, acknowledging that ObamaCare
indeed has problems, including too few tax credits for poor
Trump tweeted after House Speaker Paul Ryan on Friday Americans to help them pay for the insurance.
cancelled the final vote for the ObamaCare replacement
bill, upon concluding he didn’t have enough votes despite
the chamber’s GOP majority. “ObamaCare is not perfect. We need to fix
things” he said on Fox News’ “Fox &
Friends.” “This is all fixable if we sit down
“We’re going to be living with ObamaCare as reasonable people.”
for the foreseeable future,” the Wisconsin
Republican said afterward, making clear
that neither he nor Trump intend to Louisiana GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy told Fox News'
introduce new legislation. "America's News Headquarters" on Saturday that he agrees
with Trump's tweet, suggesting a bipartisan effort.
Meanwhile, Trump appeared to already be turning his
attention to tax reform and returning to his plan to allow
ObamaCare to continue -- with the expectation that the
.

219
 Trump Has Authority To Issue
Revised Travel Ban, Virginia Judge Rules
Published Time: 24 Mar, 2017 21:31Edited Time: 25 Mar, 2017 11:03
A federal judge in Virginia has ruled in support of
President Donald Trump's latest travel ban for people from
six Muslim-majority countries. The ruling comes a week
after two federal courts decided against the ban.
In a decision hailed by the White House, US District Court
Judge Anthony Trenga ruled Friday that the revised travel
ban could go forward, seeing the latest version as
markedly different from the Trump administration's initial
effort. The first version of the travel ban was the subject
of negative rulings in federal court last month, most
recently in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle,
Washington.
Signed on March 6, Trump's second travel-ban executive
order placed a 90-day suspension on the issuance of visas
to citizens of the six nations – Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan,
Syria and Yemen – and all refugee admissions into the US
for 120 days.
"The substantive revisions reflected in [the
second order] have reduced the probative
value of the President’s statements to the
point that it is no longer likely that Plaintiffs
can succeed on their claim that the
predominate purpose of EO-2 is to
discriminate against Muslims based on
their religion and that EO-2 is a pretext or a
sham for that purpose," Trenga wrote.
The new executive order includes "detailed
justification," Trenga added, that is "based
on national security needs, and enjoining
the operation of EO-2 would interfere with
the President’s unique constitutional
responsibilities to conduct international
relations, provide for the national defense,
and secure the nation."
220
A major issue with the first, failed executive order related
to Trump's repeated campaign pledge to pursue a "Muslim
ban" as president. In his Friday opinion, Trenga called the
first version of the travel ban
"a facially discriminatory order coupled with
contemporaneous statements suggesting
discriminatory intent." Yet the revised
version was amended enough for Trenga's
approval.
"The President has unqualified authority to
bar physical entry to the United States at
the border," Trenga wrote.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer applauded the
decision, as did the US Department of Justice.
"We’re pleased with this ruling, which found
that the plaintiffs had no likelihood of
success on the merits of their claims,"
Spicer said Friday during the daily press
briefing. "We’re confident that the
president’s fully lawful and necessary
action will ultimately be allowed to move
forward through the rest of the court
system."
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the plaintiff
in the case, said they would appeal Trenga's ruling.
"Fortunately, his decision doesn't alter the
previous injunctions already blocking what
we call the Muslim Ban 2.0,"
CAIR's Ibrahim Hooper said, according to
Politico. He added: "We look forward to the
4th Circuit and the Supreme Court
weighing in on the matter and we believe
that ultimately the Constitution will prevail."
Last week, a federal judge in Hawaii issued a temporary
restraining order against the travel ban's implementation.
Judge Derrick Watson ruled that the plaintiffs, who argued
that the ban discriminated on the basis of nationality and
was motivated by anti-Muslim animus,
"have met their burden of establishing a
strong likelihood of success on the merits
of their Establishment Clause claim."
"The illogic of the government's contentions
is palpable. The notion that one can
demonstrate animus toward any group of
people only by targeting all of them at once
is fundamentally flawed," Watson wrote.
Since that ruling, Watson has received death threats and is
now under 24-hour federal protection from the US
Marshals Service.
On March 16, US District Judge Theodore Chuang ruled
against the executive order, calling Trump's statements
about Muslims "highly relevant," even though the second
ban does not include the first ban's preference for religious
minorities among refugees attempting to enter the US.
221
"Despite these changes, the history of
public statements continues to provide a
convincing case that the purpose of the
Second Executive Order remains the
realization of the long-envisioned Muslim
ban," said Chuang, who is based in
Maryland.
Chuang granted a nationwide preliminary injunction,
though he did not block the entire order. He said national
security did not appear to be the main purpose of the ban.
"The fact that the White House took the
highly irregular step of first introducing the
travel ban without receiving the input and
judgment of the relevant national security
agencies strongly suggests that the
religious purpose was primary and the
national security purpose, even if
legitimate, is a secondary, post hoc
rationale," Chuang wrote.
The federal government has appealed Chuang's ruling, but
it has not appealed the temporary restraining order levied
by Watson in the Hawaii decision.
 The Mainstream Media Lied: Trump Was Right
All Along About Obama Administration Surveillance
Establishment Press Colluded With Democrats To Cover-Up Surveillance
By Alex Thomas -
03.25.2017 @1:09 AM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Since the moment President Trump
released his now infamous Tweet accusing Obama of
wiretapping him, the establishment media has done
everything in their power to continually attack the White
House while claiming that there is absolutely no evidence
of any surveillance.
That line of disinformation was destroyed this week after
multiple reports confirmed that the entire Trump team was
most likely under surveillance, conducted while Obama
was the president, right up until the day of the
inauguration.
The media manipulation on this topic has gotten so blatant
that a highly respected liberal law professor has even
joined the argument, publishing a column in The Hill that
not only confirms that Trump was right all along but also
takes the mainstream media to task for purposefully
misrepresenting Trump’s original Tweet and the
subsequent clarifications by the White House.
Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest
Law at George Washington University Law School, starts
out his column by comparing the entire fiasco surrounding
the president and Twitter to a new Stephen King sequel
before getting to the absolutely key point that the press has
.
222
willfully ignored what President Trump meant in his
Tweets in the first place. Keep in mind that in doing the
mainstream media has been able to continually lie about
the Obama administration surveillance.
Noting the stunning announcement by House Intelligence
Chairman Devin Nunes that he had evidence of the Trump
transition team being spied on, Turley skillfully destroys
the establishment media for their reaction.
“Yet, when this disclosure was made by the chair
of the House Intelligence Committee, CNN and
other news outlets immediately proclaimed that it
did not prove anything about the Trump
allegations — again emphasizing that he said
Obama “wiretapped” Trump’s phone, wrote
Turley.
“That is like saying that an alleged victim is not to
be believed because he said that some “second
story man broke into my home” when the
evidence showed that there was no second story
on the house and the burglar entered through an
open window. The point is whether Trump
campaign staff were subject to surveillance
under the Obama administration.”
This may seem like an elementary explanation and that is
because it is.
Outlets like CNN were aware of what Trump
actually meant and purposefully
misrepresented the entire thing in their never-
ending quest to take down the president. It
really is that simple.
Yes Donald Trump and his team were spied on and yes
this happened when Barack Obama was the president.
Period, end of story.
 "They're Like The Praetorian Guard" - Whistleblower
Confirms NSA Targeted Congress, The
Supreme Court, & Trump
Authored By Chris Menahan Via Informationliberation.Com
Mar 25, 2017 11:25 PM
NSA whistleblower William Binney told Tucker Carlson
on Friday that the
NSA is spying on "all the members of
the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Congress, both House and
Senate, as well as the White House."
Binney, who served the NSA for 30 years before blowing
the whistle on domestic spying in 2001, told Tucker he
firmly believes that Trump was spied on.
"They're taking in fundamentally the
entire fiber network inside the United
States and collecting all that data and
storing it, in a program they call Stellar
Wind," Binney said.
"That's the domestic collection of data on
US citizens, US citizens to other US
citizens," he said. "Everything we're
doing, phone calls, emails and then
financial transactions, credit cards,
things like that, all of it."
"Inside NSA there are a set of people
who are -- and we got this from another
NSA whistleblower who witnessed some
of this -- they're inside there, they are
targeting and looking at all the members
.
223
of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, Congress, both House and
Senate, as well as the White House,"
Binney said.
"And all this data is inside the NSA in a
small group where they're looking at it. The
idea is to see what people in power over
you are going to -- what they think, what
they think you should be doing or planning
to do to you, your budget, or whatever so
you can try to counteract before it actually
happens," he said.
"I mean, that's just East German,"
Tucker responded.
Rather than help prevent terrorist attacks, Binney said
collecting so much information actually makes stopping
attacks more difficult.
"This bulk acquisition is inhibiting their
ability to detect terrorist threats in
advance so they can't stop them so
people get killed as a result," he said.
"Which means, you know, they pick up
the pieces and blood after the attack.
That's what's been going on. I mean
they've consistently failed. When
Alexander said they'd stop 54 attacks and
he was challenged to produce the evidence
to prove that he failed on every count."
Binney concludes ominously indicating the origin of the
deep state...
"They are like the praetorian guard, they
determine what the emperor does and
who the emperor is..."
Who's going to stop them?
 ‘Against US Security Interests’: Moscow Bewildered Over
New Sanctions On 8 Defense & Aviation Firms
Published Time: 25 Mar, 2017 20:34Edited Time: 26 Mar, 2017 09:19
Russia’s Foreign Ministry has said it is “bewildered and
disappointed” over new US sanctions targeting eight
Russian companies, including defense firms and pilot
training academies, which the State Department claims
engage in “proliferation” activity with Iran, North Korea
and Syria.
While the restrictions will cause “no serious problems”
for Russia, they undermine the fight against global
terrorism, which Washington has been claiming is its
priority, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s spokeswoman
Maria Zakharova said in a statement posted on Facebook.
“This step runs counter to the statements
we hear from Washington that emphasize
the fight against terrorism, in particular in
Syria, where it has gained a foothold. On
the contrary, it is completely at odds with
such declarations and undermines the
prospects of setting up comprehensive
multilateral cooperation to destroy Islamic
State [IS, formerly ISIS,ISIL] and other
terrorist groups that pose a threat to all
countries, including the US,” Zakharova
said.
“Washington again does the bidding of
those who made a consistent destruction of
Russia-US cooperation their main priority.
These people have long been searching for
enemies in the place where they don’t
really exist. Such an approach does not
obviously meet the security interests of the
US,” Zakharova said.
.
224
The Russian companies have been sanctioned by
Washington over their alleged engagement in nuclear
proliferation activity with Iran, North Korea and Syria, a
source in the State Department told RIA Novosti on
Saturday.
The sanctions have been introduced as a result of regular
assessments, as required by US law, the source said,
adding that the measure is not connected to wider
economic restrictions put in force since 2014 over the
situation in Ukraine and Crimea.
Companies such as Rosoboronexport and Aviaexport, as
well as several aviation training centers and academies,
have been included on the new US sanctions list, RIA
reported.
On Friday, the Trump administration announced sanctions
on 30 foreign companies and people from 10 countries
accused of engaging in nuclear proliferation activity.
"These determinations underscore that the
United States continues to regularly impose
sanctions under existing authorities, as
warranted, against entities and individuals
that engage in proliferation activity with
Iran, North Korea, and Syria," the State
Department said in a statement.
Apart from Russia, entities from China, North Korea and
the United Arab Emirates have been sanctioned, with the
restrictions to stay in effect for two years.
The 11 entities, largely from China, were sanctioned
"specifically for transfers to Iran's missile
program," the State Department said.
Nineteen more companies or people have
been accused of having "transferred to, or
acquired from, Iran, North Korea, or Syria
goods, services, or technology... or other
items that could make a material
contribution to the development of
weapons of mass destruction or missile
proliferation."
 Nunes: Leaks Against Trump
Jeopardize Reauthorization Of Crucial Spying Powers
By David M. Drucker (@Davidmdrucker)
3/25/17 1:00 AM
Rep. Devin Nunes said Thursday that Republicans'
concerns about intelligence leaks targeting President
Trump are jeopardizing congressional reauthorization of
crucial government surveillance tools.
Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
allows the National Security Agency to monitor telephone
communications and Internet data generated by foreign
nationals.
It is valued by national security experts for its ability to
scoop up vast sums of information that can be used to spy
on American adversaries and identify terror plots. But it
can also incidentally scoop up Americans who speak with
foreign nationals. Including, potentially, a newly elected
president and his associates.
Nunes, the House Intelligence Committee chairman and
California Republican who supports re-authorizing "702"
before it expires at year's end. But he said its fate is in
doubt.
"Right now, there's not the votes for it,"
Nunes told the Washington Examiner. "I
don't know where you would find 218 votes
today to reauthorize 702."
The congressman said that the existence of what he
believes was improper monitoring of Trump and his
transition team leading up to the president's Jan. 20
inauguration is giving them pause. This led to what may be
the illegal unmasking and leaks of communications of
Trump transition officials who were swept up in otherwise
legal surveillance of foreign nationals.
225
Democrats and Republican civil libertarians typically have
qualms about 702 and have voted against the provision in
the past. Although limited to collecting intelligence on
foreigners, they believe Americans get caught up in those
sweeps in violation of the Constitution, and that the
information is abused.
But most Republicans in the House and Senate in the past
could be counted on to provide the votes to keep the
program alive, influenced by the memory of the Sept. 11,
2001, terrorist attacks and the ongoing threat of domestic
terror strikes. Plus, Republicans often emphasize,
surveillance is prohibited without a warrant granted by a
FISA court.
"Clearly we have to get it reauthorized.
That's why I think it's good the NSA is
being very forthcoming and they're working
with us closely," Nunes said, adding that it
would be "very damaging" to U.S. national
security if 702 lapses.
The House Intelligence Committee is investigating
Russian meddling in the 2016 election, which Democrats
believe could uncover that Trump associates colluded with
Russian operatives to defeat Hillary Clinton.
As a part of that inquiry, and of more concern to
Republicans, the committee is examining unauthorized
intelligence leaks of Trump associates. On Monday, the
panel questioned FBI Director James Comey and NSA
Director, Admiral Mike Rogers, about both topics in an
unusual public hearing.
 Trump Approves Environmentally
Destructive Keystone XL Pipeline
From Stephen Lendman
3-25-2017

Supplying America’s energy needs at the expense of
environmental destruction is a bad tradeoff.
Trump ignored certain adverse consequences of his
actions. In February, he approved completion of Dakota
Access Pipeline (DAPL) construction, endangering sacred
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe ancestral land, water and
wildlife habitat, along with communities, farmland and
other sensitive areas.
On Friday, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
Thomas Shannon announced Trump’s authorization to
construct the Keystone XL pipeline (KXL), a project
Center for Biological Diversity executive director Kieran
Suckling calls “disastrous.”
Trump’s hyperbole ill-serves him. Calling KXL an
“incredible pipeline” ignores certain disaster it’ll cause.
Saying the project is “a great day for American jobs and a
historic moment for North America and energy
independence is a bald-faced lie on three-counts.
Greenpeace called Trump’s authorization a signal,
showing Washington
“is moving backwards when it comes to
climate and energy.”
Along with other environmental groups, it vowed to keep
challenging the project. Earth Justice called approving its
construction the
“latest in a string of decisions ignoring
facts, public opinion and the law.”
Its vice president of litigation for climate & energy Abigail
Dillen said Trump’s
“decision defies all logic, not to mention the
wishes of 75% of Americans who want our
leaders to regulate climate pollution.”
Its president Trip Van Noppen said Earth Justice
“will be working overtime in the courts to
hold President Trump and his
administration accountable under our
nation’s laws, which protect Americans’
right to a clean and healthy environment.”
.
KXL is a hugely controversial 1,661-mile Alberta, Canada
to Port Arthur, TX pipeline, intended to transport dirty tar
sands oil - what shouldn’t be produced in the first place.
The danger lies in pipeline construction and use passing
through environmentally sensitive areas in six states. They
include waterways and the Ogallala Aquifer.
It’s one of the world’s largest, supplying about 30% of
America’s irrigation ground water - a vital natural
resource.
Friends of the Earth said KXL
“will carry one of the world’s dirtiest fuels:
tar sands oil.” Its route “could devastate
ecosystems and pollute water sources, and
would jeopardize public health.”
It’ll double America’s dirty tar sands oil supply.
Environmental toxicity will increase exponentially. Big Oil
wants it. So do Republicans and many Democrats.
Environmentally destructive TransCanada Corp. will build
it - notorious for spill-prone construction.
It promised its Keystone I pipeline would leak at most
once every seven years. In year one, it leaked 12 times,
once a month on average, unprecedented in US pipeline
history.
NASA scientist James Hansen called KXL
“a fuse to the largest carbon bomb on the
planet.” All pipelines spill. Avoidance is
impossible. Large-scale environmental
damage is too great a price to pay.
Clean air, water and soil are far more precious to humanity
than any amount of oil or other fossil fuels.
KXL construction assures environmental contamination.
It’s just a matter of how severe. Serving Big Oil’s interests
harms the heath and welfare of ordinary people.
KXL will transport the dirtiest oil on the planet. It’s hard,
expensive and energy-sensitive to produce.
It’ll kill more jobs than it creates. It isn’t in the national
interest, just profiteers standing to benefit.
Trump is their ally. He’s no friend of the earth or millions
of ordinary Americans.

226
 Trumpcare Down But Not Out?
From Stephen Lendman
3-25-2017
On Friday, one of Trump’s signature domestic programs
was defeated, at least for now.
Acknowledging defeat, House Speaker Paul Ryan said
“Obamacare is the law of the land.” It’ll
remain so “for the foreseeable future…until
it’s replaced,” suggesting AHCA’s Friday
defeat isn’t the end of the story, what’s next
yet to be decided.
A scheduled Friday House vote was cancelled because of
too much GOP opposition to overcome. Democrats
unanimously rejected it.
Ahead of what happened, Trump tweeted
“(a)fter seven horrible years of ObamaCare
(skyrocketing premiums & deductibles, bad
healthcare), this is finally your chance for a
great plan!”
Enactment of Trumpcare would have been nightmarish for
most US households. In mid-March, the Economic Policy
Institute said
“99% of Americans…win if the GOP health
plan fails.”
Its original and revised versions offered bare bones
coverage at higher cost for most Americans, including
onerous deductibles and co-pays - low income households,
the poor and elderly harmed most.
Instead of providing healthcare on the basis of need,
Obamacare made it dependent on the ability to pay,
Trumpcare more nightmarish if enacted into law.
The president blamed Democrats for not
“giv(ing) us a single vote,” adding the “best
thing we can do, politically speaking, is let
Obamacare explode. It’s exploding right
now…Almost all states have big problems.”
They’d be far bigger under his plan, a deplorable scheme
to deny millions of Americans vital healthcare because
predatory costs are more than they can afford.
227
Trump saying in the wake of his legislative defeat
“(w)e have big, ambitious plans to improve
people’s lives” is utter rubbish.
They include tax cuts for business and the rich, increased
defense spending when major cuts are needed, endless
wars of aggression in multiple theaters, deregulation
stripping away consumer protections, wasting billions on
border wall construction, and other policies benefitting
America’s privileged class at the expense of most others.
Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) called
the American Health Care Act (AHCA - Trumpcare)
“slash and burn” coverage.
PNHP president Dr. Carol Paris said his plan if enacted
“would have pushed millions more
Americans off their health insurance,
sending the rates of medical bankruptcy
and preventable deaths skyrocketing.”
AHCA’s failure presents an opportunity for Congress to
replace Obamacare with sustainable and equitable
universal single-payer coverage, PHNP stressed.
Along with others for healthcare coverage the way it
should be, PNHP intends a National Day of Action on
Saturday, April 8 in Washington.
Similar actions are planned in a dozen or more US cities
nationwide to enlist public support for single-payer
coverage serving everyone equitably - unrelated to the
ability to pay.
Trump’s promise to provide affordable healthcare for
everyone was a Big Lie. Calling nightmarish AHCP
“wonderful” alone proved it.
Poorly regulated US marketplace medicine caused today’s
healthcare crisis - putting profits above vital care,
especially when most needed.
As long as Republicans and Democrats continue defending
the indefensible, Americans will continue being oppressed
by pay or die healthcare.
 DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE
An Honest Discussion of Politics, Religion,
and all Kinds of Things we are not Supposed to Talk About.
VOL 2: 44th EDITION
URGENT EMERGENCY SPECIAL EDITION
We Have Been Conned And The D.J. Trump
Administration And The U.N. Are Directly Responsible
Saturday, March 25, 2017
This last Thursday night I listened to a very disturbing
revelation from a woman who worked with a United
Nations Refugee Resettlement Program; indeed she sat in
on meetings in which the future of highly infectious,
Muslim Sub Saharans was determined. She could no
longer remain silent and neither can we afford to be silent
on this. She spoke with an interviewer named, Josh Tolley.
The interview was presented by Doctor Patricia Doyle in
conversation with Jeff Rense on the Rense Radio Network.
I made copious notes. The information you are about to
read is going to blow your mind. You will become
extremely concerned, frightened even. If you do not take
immediate action to prevent what is coming at us in
NORAM, we are also going to lose our home land to a
very dark future in which our children and grand children
will suffer horribly. Pay attention now.
The ‘Refugees’ are NOT legitimate refugees and they are
NOT VETTED. They are mostly young men aged 18 - 45.
There are very few women and children coming in. Only
3% are Christians from the Congo; these are sponsored by
Christian churches and of a different calibre and have
paper work. Most of those other mostly male refugee
creatures have absolutely NO paper work. They are simply
identified by American government officials as: F.U.N.U.
Full Name Unknown. They also have no medical
certifications whatsoever, can not, or barely speak English
and very many of them are carrying communicable
diseases such as: H.I.V./AIDS, Tuberculosis, (TB),
Leprosy, Small Pox, Monkey Pox, etc., plus bugs: lice,
ticks, you name it. I saw a video of a Negroid chap’s hair
in the Calais Jungle which was literally crawling with
bugs, hundreds of them; thousands even. The footage only
showed what was crawling on the front of his scalp. I
literally cringe when recollecting that footage recently in a
You Tube. Do you realize that H.I.V and TB are air borne
diseases and VERY easily communicated to others?
NOBODY IS CLEANING THE AIR PLANES AND
OTHER TRANSPORTATION VEHICLES IN
WHICH THESE CREATURES ARE MOVED
ABOUT FROM THE DARK CONTINENT TO
WHERE THEY ARE DROPPED OFF. Airlines
normally do not clean the cushions and blankets very
much. Ear buds are often time not cleaned and simply
repackaged. FACT. It is one of the reasons I no longer
travel with commercial airlines or busses. I do not go on
people soup excursions at sea, albeit you can’t get on a
228
cruise ship if you have had a fever the night before
boarding. Cruise lines practice extreme vetting and still
have problems at sea with viruses, bacteria, and bugs.
Now, many of you who still rely on public transportation
had better be wearing haz mat suits with double filtered
breathing masks.
Who is Bringing in These Disease Riddled Savages and
Why Rex Tillerson’s U.S Department of State! Hence, this
entire scenario is being carried out under the auspices of
the State Department and the United Nations directives for
the distribution of what amounts to the human sewage of
Africa into White Nations in order to decimate and
hopefully erase all vestiges of our glorious White Cultures.
It has happened before in NORAM when the red skinned
Asiatics came to this continent and wiped the White
People off the face of the land mass many moons ago.
The REFUGEES are NOT refugees, but an INVASION
FORCE coming to kill all Christians, White People in
general, and anyone else who has no immunity from the
diseases and bugs those vermin are carrying; no different
from the infected rats Jews brought to Venice in those
horrible times of the Black Plague in Europe which began
in the 14th Century and wiped out 1/3 of the European
people.
Now Jews are at it again.
Pay attention.
Refugees are BIG MONEY. And, where there is big
money to be made, you will always find Jews. In this case,
Jewish agencies are organizing in greater numbers since
the government fully funds their set up. The Jewish owned
agency is paid, $2500 per creature for pick up at the
airport, for example. These agencies are paid handsomely
to find everything the vermin require to set up life in North
America, from housing to: Instant Green Card, Medical
Aid Plan, and a U.S. passport! They get a passport. In
Canada similar things are taking place; where I have to
jump through hoops and pay a lot of money just to prove
my citizenship in order to get a Canadian Passport renewed
and yet I have lived here for 56 years! Same goes for
Americans. American and Canadian citizens now stand in
the back of the line while human filth, reeking to high
heaven, a plethora of bugs, viruses, and bacteria creeping
and crawling about on their clothes and in their bodies are
given First Class Treatment. That human sewage is even
given Cash upon arrival. When the government agent
giving out the money was questioned, she replied it was to
cover gasoline costs, which is strange since the refugees do
not have automobiles when they arrive. Now, listen to this
to get your blood boiling: The medical agents accessing
the scum are told to give them permanent disability status
so they will have Social Security for life! The refugees
are reclassed as, CLIENTS. Our own people suffer and
those contagious human fungi get Social Security for life
on our dollars. Since they breed like fruit flies it won’t be
long and we will all be broke and destitute living in a
fourth world slum in our own country; many of us dying
horribly from exotic diseases or being chopped up by some
frenzied Muslim Mob.
The scum of the planet is brought into the country at
NIGHT!!! It is claimed that is to save money since it
supposedly costs less to fly at night. BULLLLLLLLLL
SHIIIIIIIIITTTTTTTTT!!! They are brought in by night
so few people see them arriving in their glorious Islamic
filth and corruption. There are often time no interpreters at
the airport and no medical screening. The human rats are
quickly scuttled off with a Jewish agency’s van to some
undisclosed location; essentially being dumped on
people’s doorsteps. ‘Here you go. Here is you allotment of
disease riddled Islamic retards for you to look after whilst
they breed like the flies they are.’ The Jewish agencies are
notified by the State Department regarding what is coming
and how many to expect. The entire operation is being
done UNDERCOVER because it is an invasion and Jews
are behind it, yet again we see one of their nefarious
You are Free to Copy This Information.
229
schemes unfolding. Remember, D.J. Trump has
surrounded himself with Azkenazi Jews, right into his very
family and he has acknowledged that he is a Mason; a
nefarious, secretive Jewish invention intended to help
bring about their New World Order.
“We are being set up for our own
destruction.” - J. Rense
Apparently lots of state governors do not know what is
being done to their states with this nefarious, secret
infestation. If they say NO, then the Wilson Fish Program
by passes state sovereignty and the refugee program is
completely taken out of the state’s hands and placed into
the hands of a third party; one of those entities such as
Catholic Social Services and the proliferating Jewish
agencies. Again, I repeat: The Refugees Are a Money
Maker, oiy vey. Some people have suggested we simply
turn off the tap. If we do that, then the chimp hybrids will
burn our cities down.
Donald J. Trump promised during the election campaign to
deal with the refugee/migrant question so he temporarily
bans travel from six Muslim countries. Whoopee do. The
human sewage is still coming in droves and we have been
largely disarmed and are not allowed to protect ourselves.
Trump has stabbed us in the back it seems. ADVOCATE
NOW! STOP THE INVASION!
Trump can stop all of this with the stroke of a pen.
DEMAND IT!!!!!!!! Demand it NOW!!!!!! .
 ‘Conspiracy That Trump, Putin &
Everybody In Universe In Cahoots Starts To Fall Apart’
Published Time: 25 Mar, 2017 16:13
Public opinion in the US is changing, as a lot of
Americans, especially those who supported Trump, see
what somebody has called
“Trump derangement syndrome beginning
to merge with Putin derangement
syndrome,” said former US diplomat Jim
Jatras.
Earlier this week, the FBI confirmed it’s investigating
alleged collusion between Donald Trump’s presidential
campaign team and the Russian government to influence
the outcome of the US presidential election.
Jim Jatras joined RT America’s Simone Del Rosario to
discuss what is known about the investigation so far and
how to interpret Americans’ changing attitudes towards
Russia.
RT: Is it getting hotter for Russia or are things starting to
cool off?
Jim Jatras: I think things are starting to cool off. Look, if
you watch that House Intelligence Committee hearing,
there were two completely different hearings going on.
The Republicans wanted to know what was going on with
the leaks – these are criminal activities and the FBI is
supposed to investigate when they have evidence that a
crime has been committed. And we know the crime was
committed. The FBI refused to confirm they were
investigating this. Meanwhile, they did confirm they are
looking into collusion which, if it occurred, might be a
crime, might not be a crime. They do not have evidence
that a crime has taken place. So I think they are chasing
something that very well may not be there. And I think
people are starting to catch on to that.
230
RT: How do you see public opinion changing in the US?
JJ: I think something rather strange is going on, that a lot
of Americans – especially those who did support Trump –
see what somebody has called “Trump derangement
syndrome beginning to merge with Putin derangement
syndrome” – this whole fantastic conspiracy that Trump
and Putin and Marine Le Pen and everybody else in the
universe are in some kind of cahoots with each other. And
as that falls apart, I think people are beginning to say –
especially on the conservative side of the American
political spectrum – “there’s nothing to this here. Maybe
the stuff they are saying about Russia and about Putin is a
bunch of lies too.”
RT: An annual poll by Gallup, which was released in
February, showed that Americans’ unfavorability of
Russia is 70 percent – that’s the highest since 1989.
Around 28 percent of the respondents said their overall
opinion about Russia was “favorable,” while two percent
had no opinion. What do you make of those results?
JJ: It’s interesting to break down those results into parties
and terms. The bulk of the negative opinion is on the left
of the American political spectrum; on the right it’s much
more balanced, it’s virtually 50/50. [It’s] even more
positive towards Russia among younger conservatives. It’s
hard to say what accounts for all of this. Part of this I think
is skepticism about all this conspiracy blather about
Trump, but I think part is that some people are starting to
figure out that Russia is not communist any more, that in
many respects it’s a very traditional, very conservative
country. I can remember when I was at the State
Department years and years ago, the only thing that my
progressive colleagues liked about Russia was its
progressive ideology. Ever since Russia dropped
communism, they don’t like it any more. There is
something going on in American opinion, and we don’t
know fully what it is.
RT: Collusion allegations aside, have you seen the Trump
administration act favorably toward Moscow?
JJ: No. But I think part of the reason is because there’s
this whole witch-hunt mentality going on here and
especially in the MSM. There has been no movement
.
231
toward any kind of grand deal... On the other hand, what
we have seen are some practical steps, military steps on the
ground in Syria. And that’s really a good place to start
with. General [Joseph] Dunford met with his Russian and
Turkish counterparts earlier this month. It looks like the
Russians and the Americans are beginning to coordinate
airstrikes on Al-Qaeda in Idlib, Syria. So maybe there are
some moves in that direction, especially as the offensive
[against ISIS in Raqqa] builds up. But it’s being kept
relatively quiet.
 Trumpcare Postmortems
By Stephen Lendman
3-26-2017
House failure to pass Trumpcare wasn’t an administration
Waterloo, but it complicates its plans for tax cuts,
infrastructure spending and other issues.
Healthcare savings by repealing and replacing Obamacare
were counted on to help finance Trump’s other major
programs.
Friday’s defeat cost him political capital and momentum.
His touted dealmaking prowess failed its first major test.
What’s ahead won’t get easier. His legislative agenda
sustained a major body blow.
Plans called for repealing and replacing Obamacare,
followed by comprehensive tax reform (largely benefitting
business and privileged elites), then creation of a $1
trillion infrastructure program, a thinly veiled privatization
scheme.
Things aren’t going as planned. Trumpcare’s defeat
complicates things. On Friday, House Speaker Paul Ryan
said
“tax reform (now is) more difficult.”
Most Republicans want it to be revenue neutral, not easily
achieved without help from Trumpcare savings.
Ryan proposed taxing imports as a possible solution. If
imposed, a trade war could follow, along with higher
consumer prices. Hard-pressed retailers oppose the idea.
232
Ahead of Friday’s outcome, New York magazine said
Trumpcare’s failure would be “a stinging defeat” for the
president, worse for Paul Ryan - “who has all but staked
his Speakership on passing this bill.”
Chief White House strategist Steve Bannon could emerge
“the big winner” from Friday’s outcome. He’s “been
waging war against Ryan for years.” Trumpcare’s failure
may be his best chance to “topple” him and advance his
own agenda.
While publicly supporting the measure, he
“talked it down…privately…in recent days,”
unhappy because it “d(idn’t) drive down
costs, (was) written by the insurance
industry,” and didn’t go as far as he wished
to “deconstruct the administrative state.”
The dust is still settling from Friday’s defeat. Trump’s
dealmaking prowess failed him. Ryan’s Speakership
powers couldn’t enlist enough GOP support for the new
administration’s first major legislative test.
Maybe more key defeats will follow. Ahead, ordinary
people won’t benefit from administration and
congressional policies exclusively serving America’s
privileged class at their expense.
It’s the same whether Republicans or Democrats are in
power - a bipartisan conspiracy against equity and justice
for all.
 Trump Is America’s
Last Chance Says John Williams
By Greg Hunter
March 26, 2017
Economist John Williams says President Trump has to do
something fast and big to turn the faltering U.S. economy
around. Williams explains,
“You are seeing the economy slow down.
Some people are recognizing that. The
Fed’s statement a week or two ago . . .
many analysts consider that dovish. The
Fed knows what’s going on here. They are
trying to get rates up a little, but they have
a circumstance that they are not out of the
woods with the banks. What they are
hoping for is maybe the Trump
Administration is going to bail them out and
stimulate the economy.”
Williams says
“The banks are still not healthy. . . . The
Fed is still fighting the battle it effectively
lost in 2008. Mr. Trump has several
problems. One is the economy. One is the
long term budget deficit, and the third is the
Federal Reserve. The Fed lost control of
the system. The system effectively
collapsed. They haven’t been able to bring
it back to normal.”
Would Donald Trump simply default on the U.S. debt if
countries around the world dump U.S. Treasury bonds?
Williams says,
“That would be an act of default. You don’t
want to do that. What Trump needs to do is
address the long term solvency issues of
the United States. Then he can convince
233
people that, yes, we are going to be able to
handle this, and at the same time, take
action to stimulate the economy. That
could be very bullish for the dollar
fundamentally. . . . If they want this to work
and save the system, and Mr. Trump will
come out of this with his face on Mount
Rushmore if he does, he’s got to turn the
economy. To do that, he needs to increase
government spending in areas that would
help stimulate the economy. He’s got to
cut taxes, and that is in the works in some
form. As part of the process, there very
likely will be a widening of the budget
deficit, which could kill the dollar and kill
people holding Treasuries.”
Williams says Trump must address the “long term
solvency of the United States.” Williams goes on to say,
“If he does this, the rest of the world will
say, boy, they brought things under control,
and they would be happy to own the
Treasury bonds. I don’t know if this can be
done, but this is what you got to do.”
If Trump does not succeed, Williams says,
“The problem will be with the dollar. If the
system is not brought under control, the
rest of the world is going to dump the
dollar. . . . The underlying fundamentals
have not changed. The U.S. dollar is, in
the long term, insolvent. What has
changed here is that there is a chance that
the Trump Administration can correct it. As
far as I can see, this (Trump) is the last
chance to correct it.”
Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with Economist
John Williams, founder of ShadowStats.com.
(There is much more in the video interview.)
 HE DID IT! Famous Liberal
ATTACKED Trump, So He DEPORTED HER
March 26, 2017
Liberals have been doing whatever they want for close to a
decade in this country without repercussion. Well, that just
changed, all thanks to President Trump.
Rasmea Odeh has become famous for her attacks against
President Trump. She was one of the organizers for the
Women’s March that blocked roads to protest his
inauguration.
Now, she has been deported due to her
sordid past, via The Daily Caller.
Rasmea Odeh has pleaded guilty to “unlawful procurement
of naturalization,” and she will be removed from the
country as part of plea deal to avoid jail time. The charges
were laid because Odeh neglected to mention that she was
a convicted terrorist during her immigration procedure.
Odeh’s case had been at a standstill since 2014, but it only
took our new president a few weeks to get her, and her
anti-American garbage, out of our country for good!
This “feminist’s” rise as a liberal sensation was obvious.
She is the whole leftist package: both an illegal alien and a
terrorist.
Odeh was convicted by the Israel government for charges
of terrorism for the role she played in a series of bombings
in Jerusalem and at the British embassy in 1969, which
resulted in the deaths of two students and many more
injuries.
234
She was released from prison ten years later through a
prisoner exchange. She decided to move to America in the
mid 1990s, and she was granted citizenship by 2004, but
she did not disclose her earlier terrorism conviction.
This is the sort of person the left idolizes. Her deportation
and the surrounding trial has rallied activists on the left to
protest the removal of a convicted terrorist from our lands.
These leftists are so obtuse they cannot understand that
they are being taken advantage of by a terrorist. This
woman Odeh claims to be a victim to gain sympathy even
though she aided in the deaths of innocent people.
Now, Odeh has the chance to experience the freedoms the
Muslim world offers women. She is being deported to
Jordan — where protests like the Women’s March would
never be allowed without serious consequences. As a
woman, her word will be worth half that of a man’s — and
she will likely be treated like property rather than a
celebrity.
Perhaps liberals will start a process of thoroughly vetting
their idols, but we doubt it. The next time the left places a
terrorist on a pedestal, we could end up with more on our
hands than unruly protests — lives could be lost!
Was Trump right to deport this woman? Please share
this story on Facebook and tell us because we want to hear
YOUR voice!
 Foundation – Fall Of The American Galactic Empire
By Jim Quin
March 26, 2017
“The fall of Empire, gentlemen, is a
massive thing, however, and not easily
fought. It is dictated by a rising
bureaucracy, a receding initiative, a
freezing of caste, a damming of curiosity—
a hundred other factors. It has been going
on, as I have said, for centuries, and it is
too majestic and massive a movement to
stop.” – Isaac Asimov, Foundation
I read Isaac Asimov’s renowned award winning science
fiction trilogy four decades ago as a teenager. I read them
because I liked science fiction novels, not because I was
trying to understand the correlation to the fall of the
Roman Empire. The books that came to be called the
Foundation Trilogy (Foundation, Foundation and Empire,
and Second Foundation) were not written as novels;
they’re the collected Foundation stories Asimov wrote
between 1941 and 1950. He wrote these stories during the
final stages of our last Fourth Turning Crisis and the
beginning stages of the next High. This was the same time
frame in which Tolkien wrote the Lord of the Rings
Trilogy and Orwell wrote 1984. This was not a
coincidence.
The tone of foreboding, danger, dread, and impending
doom, along with unending warfare, propels all of these
novels because they were all written during the bloodiest
and most perilous portion of the last Fourth Turning. As
the linear thinking establishment continues to be
blindsided by the continued deterioration of the economic,
political, social, and cultural conditions in the world, we
have entered the most treacherous phase of our present
Fourth Turning.
That ominous mood engulfing the world is not a new
dynamic, but a cyclical event arriving every 80 or so years.
Eight decades ago the world was on the verge of a world
war which would kill 65 million people. Eight decades
prior to 1937 the country was on the verge of a Civil War
235
which would kill almost 5% of the male population. Eight
decades prior to 1857 the American Revolution had just
begun and would last six more bloody years. None of this
is a coincidence. The generational configuration repeats
itself every eighty years, driving the mood change which
leads to revolutionary change and the destruction of the
existing social order.
Isaac Asimov certainly didn’t foresee his Foundation
stories representing the decline of an American Empire
that didn’t yet exist. The work that inspired Asimov was
Edward Gibbon’s multi-volume series, The Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire, published between 1776 and
1789. Gibbon saw Rome’s fall not as a consequence of
specific, dramatic events, but as the result of the gradual
decline of civic virtue, monetary debasement and rise of
Christianity, which made the Romans less vested in
worldly affairs.
Gibbon’s tome reflects the same generational theory
espoused by Strauss and Howe in The Fourth Turning.
Gibbon’s conclusion was human nature never changes, and
mankind’s penchant for division, amplified by
environmental and cultural differences, is what governs the
cyclical nature of history. Gibbon constructs a narrative
spanning centuries as events unfold and emperors’
successes and failures occur within the context of a
relentless decline of empire. The specific events and
behaviors of individual emperors were inconsequential
within the larger framework and pattern of historical
decline. History plods relentlessly onward, driven by the
law of large numbers.
Asimov described his inspiration for the novels:
“I wanted to consider essentially the
science of psychohistory, something I
made up myself. It was, in a sense, the
struggle between free will and determinism.
On the other hand, I wanted to do a story
 on the analogy of The Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire, but on the much larger
scale of the galaxy. To do that, I took over
the aura of the Roman Empire and wrote it
very large. The social system, then, is very
much like the Roman imperial system, but
that was just my skeleton.
It seemed to me that if we did have a
galactic empire, there would be so many
human beings—quintillions of them—that
perhaps you might be able to predict very
accurately how societies would behave,
even though you couldn’t predict how
individuals composing those societies
would behave. So, against the background
of the Roman Empire written large, I
invented the science of psychohistory.
Throughout the entire trilogy, then, there
are the opposing forces of individual desire
and that dead hand of social inevitability.”
Is History Pre-Determined?
“Don’t you see? It’s Galaxy-wide. It’s a
worship of the past. It’s a deterioration – a
stagnation!” – Isaac Asimov, Foundation
“It has been my philosophy of life that
difficulties vanish when faced boldly.” –
Isaac Asimov, Foundation
The Foundation trilogy opens on Trantor, the capital of the
12,000-year-old Galactic Empire. Though the empire
appears stable and powerful, it is slowly decaying in ways
that parallel the decline of the Western Roman Empire.
Hari Seldon, a mathematician and psychologist, has
developed psychohistory, a new field of science that
equates all possibilities in large societies to mathematics,
allowing for the prediction of future events.
Psychohistory is a blend of crowd psychology and high-
level math. An able psychohistorian can predict the long-
term aggregate behavior of billions of people many years
in the future. However, it only works with large groups.
Psychohistory is almost useless for predicting the behavior
of an individual. Also, it’s no good if the group being
236
analyzed is aware it’s being analyzed — because if it’s
aware, the group changes its behavior.
Using psychohistory, Seldon has discovered the declining
nature of the Empire, angering the aristocratic rulers of the
Empire. The rulers consider Seldon’s views and statements
treasonous, and he is arrested. Seldon is tried by the state
and defends his beliefs, explaining his theory the Empire
will collapse in 300 years and enter a 30,000-year dark
age.
He informs the rulers an alternative to this future is
attainable, and explains to them generating an anthology of
all human knowledge, the Encyclopedia Galactica, would
not avert the inevitable fall of the Empire but would reduce
the Dark Age to “only” 1,000 years.
The fearful state apparatchiks offer him exile to a remote
world, Terminus, with other academic intellectuals who
could help him create the Encyclopedia. He accepts their
offer, and sets in motion his plan to set up two
Foundations, one at either end of the galaxy, to preserve
the accumulated knowledge of humanity and thereby
shorten the Dark Age, once the Empire collapses. Seldon
created the Foundation, knowing it would eventually be
seen as a threat to rulers of the Empire, provoking an
eventual attack. That is why he created a Second
Foundation, unknown to the ruling class.
Asimov’s psychohistory concept, based on the
predictability of human actions in large numbers, has
similarities to Strauss & Howe’s generational theory. His
theory didn’t pretend to predict the actions of individuals,
but formulated definite laws developed by mathematical
analysis to predict the mass action of human groups. His
novel explores the centuries old debate of whether human
history proceeds in a predictable fashion, with individuals
incapable of changing its course, or whether individuals
can alter its progression.
The cyclical nature of history, driven by generational
cohorts numbering tens of millions, has been documented
over centuries by Strauss & Howe in their 1997 opus The
Fourth Turning. Human beings in large numbers react in
a herd-like predictable manner. I know that is
disappointing to all the linear thinking individualists who
erroneously believe one person can change the world and
course of history.
The cyclical crisis’s that occur every eighty years matches
up with how every Foundation story centers on what is
called a Seldon crisis, the conjunction of seemingly
insoluble external and internal difficulties. The crises were
all predicted by Seldon, who appears near the end of each
story as a hologram to confirm the Foundation has
traversed the latest one correctly.
The “Seldon Crises” take on two forms. Either events
unfold in such a way there is only one clear path to take, or
the forces of history conspire to determine the outcome.
But, the common feature is free will doesn’t matter. The
heroes and adversaries believe their choices will make a
difference when, in fact, the future is already written. This
is a controversial viewpoint which angers many people
because they feel it robs them of their individuality.
Most people don’t want to be lumped together in an
amalgamation of other humans because they believe
admitting so would strip them of their sense of free will.
Their delicate sensibilities are bruised by the unequivocal
fact their individual actions are virtually meaningless to
the direction of history. But, the madness of crowds can
dramatically impact antiquity.
“In reading The History of Nations, we find
that, like individuals, they have their whims
and their peculiarities, their seasons of
excitement and recklessness, when they
care not what they do. We find that whole
communities suddenly fix their minds upon
one object and go mad in its pursuit; that
millions of people become simultaneously
impressed with one delusion, and run after
it, till their attention is caught by some new
folly more captivating than the first.” –
Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular
Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Many people argue the dynamic advancements in
technology and science have changed the world in such a
way to alter human nature in a positive way, thereby
resulting in humans acting in a more rational manner. This
alteration would result in a level of human progress not
experienced previously. The falsity of this technological
theory is borne out by the continuation of war, government
corruption, greed, belief in economic fallacies, civic decay,
cultural degradation, and global disorder sweeping across
the world. Humanity is incapable of change. The same
weaknesses and self- destructive traits which have plagued
them throughout history are as prevalent today as they ever
were.
237
Asimov’s solution to the failure of humanity to change was
to create an academic oriented benevolent ruling class who
could save the human race from destroying itself. He
seems to have been well before his time with regards to
creating Shadow Governments and Deep State
functionaries. It appears he agreed with his contemporary
Edward Bernays. The masses could not be trusted to make
good decisions, so they needed more intellectually
advanced men to guide their actions.
“The conscious and intelligent manipulation
of the organized habits and opinions of the
masses is an important element in
democratic society. Those who manipulate
this unseen mechanism of society
constitute an invisible government which is
the true ruling power of our country. We are
governed, our minds are molded, our
tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely
by men we have never heard of. This is a
logical result of the way in which our
democratic society is organized.
Vast numbers of human beings must
cooperate in this manner if they are to live
together as a smoothly functioning society.
…In almost every act of our daily lives,
whether in the sphere of politics or
business, in our social conduct or our
ethical thinking, we are dominated by the
relatively small number of persons…who
understand the mental processes and
social patterns of the masses. It is they
who pull the wires which control the public
mind.” – Edward Bernays – Propaganda
In Part Two of this article I will compare and contrast
Donald Trump’s rise to power to the rise of The Mule in
Asimov’s masterpiece. Unusually gifted individuals come
along once in a lifetime to disrupt the plans of the existing
social order.
 Pentagon Enjoying
Greater Leeway Under Trump
AFP
March 26, 2017
Convoy of US armoured vehicles drives near the village of Yalanli, on
the western outskirts of the northern Syrian city of Manbij (AFP
Photo/DELIL SOULEIMAN)
Washington (AFP) - The Pentagon under President Donald
Trump is enjoying greater freedom to run its wars the way
it wants -- and not constantly seek White House approval
on important decisions.
Many in the military appreciate this increased autonomy,
but critics charge it is raising civilian death rates, puts the
lives of US troops at greater risk and leads to a lack of
oversight of America's conflicts.
Nowhere has the shift been more visible than in the fight
against the Islamic State group in northern Syria, where
under Barack Obama even minor tweaks to US plans
underwent exhaustive White House scrutiny.
Since Trump's inauguration, the Marine Corps has brought
an artillery battery into Syria, and the Army has moved in
hundreds of Rangers, bringing the total number of US
forces there to almost 1,000.
Commanders are weighing the possibility of deploying
hundreds more, and the Pentagon this week announced it
had provided artillery support and choppered local forces
behind enemy lines in a bid to seize a strategic dam.
The greater leeway marks a departure for the National
Security Council (NSC), which coordinates foreign and
military policy and implements the president's national
security agenda.
238
Under Obama, the NSC oversaw just about every aspect of
America's wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, with then
Pentagon chief Ash Carter was kept on a short leash.
Trump, conversely, has repeatedly deferred to his defense
secretary, Jim Mattis, on military moves.
Mattis, a retired general, has delegated expanded
authorities to his battlefield commanders.
"Jim Mattis has been given the latitude to
conduct military operations in the way he
sees best," Pentagon spokesman Chris
Sherwood said.
- '30-something year olds' -
The United States is fighting IS in Iraq and Syria and the
Taliban in Afghanistan "by, with and through" local forces
backed by US and allied air power.
That overall strategy hasn't changed, but commanders now
have greater discretion to move troops and equipment
around.
Troop increases were especially sensitive for Obama, who
campaigned on a promise to end America's Middle East
wars and not put US boots on the ground.
Senator John McCain, who heads the Senate Armed
Services Committee, was a frequent critic of what he calls
NSC micromanagement.
The veteran lawmaker said he favors battlefield
commanders getting greater latitude.
"We don't have to ask the 30-something-
year-olds for permission to respond to an
attack in Afghanistan," he said.
McCain's congressional counterpart Mac Thornberry
described a visit he made to Afghanistan under Obama,
when he overheard a call from an NSC staffer asking how
much fuel was in the planes on the tarmac.
 "The level of micromanagement was
incredible, and of course by the time you
work your way through the NSC process
your target has moved," he said.
- Hands off -
Trump has also faced criticism for his hands-off approach,
especially after he approved a special operations raid in
Yemen that went horribly wrong, leading to the death of a
Navy SEAL, multiple civilians including children and a
crashed helicopter.
Though the White House insisted the raid yielded vital
intelligence and was a "successful operation by all
standards," critics said the military had been rash to
execute the mission.
Observers are also calling into question whether the
Pentagon is allowing civilian casualties to mount.
Military officials vehemently deny this and stress that
civilian safety is a top priority in approving any strike.
Airwars, a London-based collective of journalists and
researchers, said Friday it had become so overwhelmed
tracking civilian deaths allegedly caused by US and
coalition planes that it has stopped tracking Russian
strikes.
"The decision to temporarily suspend our
Russia strike assessments has been a very
difficult one to take," Airwars director Chris
Woods said.
"Moscow is still reportedly killing hundreds
of civilians in Syria every month. But with
coalition casualty claims escalating so
.
239
steeply -- and with very limited Airwars
resources -– we believe our key focus at
present needs to be on the US-led
alliance."
The Pentagon has acknowledged at least 220 civilians have
been unintentionally killed since operations to defeat IS
began in late summer 2014. Airwars estimates the real
number to be more than 10 times that.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring
group said a coalition air strike early Tuesday killed 33
displaced civilians near the town of Al-Mansura west of
Raqa.
A US defense official stressed that any extra deaths are a
result of fighting occurring in more densely packed urban
areas, such as Mosul in Iraq and around Raqa in Syria.
"I know for a fact that there is no change in
civilian casualties tolerance," the official
said.
General Thomas Waldhauser, who heads the US Africa
Command, said Friday he hopes the White House will
loosen restrictions for operations in Somalia, where the US
is targeting Shebaab militants.
"It allows us to prosecute targets in a more
rapid fashion," he said, stressing new
authorities would not come at the expense
of civilians.
"The cardinal rule in these types of
engagements is to not make more enemies
than you already have," Waldhauser said.
"We are not going to turn Somalia into a
free-fire zone."
 Did The Government Spy On Trump?
Of Course. It Spies On All Of Us!
By Ron Paul
Published: March 27, 2017
There was high drama last week when Rep. Devin Nunes
announced at the White House that he had seen evidence
that the communications of the Donald Trump campaign
people, and perhaps even Trump himself, had been
“incidentally collected” by the US government.
If true, this means that someone authorized the monitoring
of Trump campaign communications using Section 702 of
the FISA Act. Could it have been then-President Obama?
We don’t know. Could it have been other political enemies
looking for something to harm the Trump campaign or
presidency? It is possible.
There is much we do not yet know about what happened
and there is probably quite a bit we will never know. But
we do know several very important things about the
government spying on Americans.
First there is Section 702 itself. The provision was passed
in 2008 as part of a package of amendments to the 1978
FISA bill. As with the PATRIOT Act, we were told that
we had to give the government more power to spy on us so
that it could catch terrorists. We had to give up some of
our liberty for promises of more security, we were told.
We were also told that the government would only spy on
the bad guys, and that if we had nothing to hide we should
have nothing to fear.
We found out five years later from Edward Snowden that
the US government viewed Section 702 as a green light for
the mass surveillance of Americans. Through programs he
revealed, like PRISM, the NSA is able to collect and store
our Internet search history, the content of our emails, what
files we have shared, who we have chatted with
electronically, and more.
240
That’s why people like NSA whistleblower William
Binney said that we know the NSA was spying on Trump
because it spies on all of us!
Ironically, FISA itself was passed after the Church
Committee Hearings revealed the abuses, criminality, and
violations of our privacy that the CIA and other
intelligence agencies had been committing for years. FISA
was supposed to rein in the intelligence community but, as
is often the case in Washington, it did the opposite: it
ended up giving the government even more power to spy
on us.
So President Trump might have been “wiretapped” by
Obama, as he claimed, but unfortunately he will not draw
the right conclusions from the violation. He will not see
runaway spying on Americans as a grotesque attack on
American values. That is unfortunate, because this could
have provided a great teaching moment for the president.
Seeing how all of us are vulnerable to this kind of
government abuse, President Trump could have changed
his tune on the PATRIOT Act and all government attacks
on our privacy. He could have stood up for liberty, which
is really what makes America great.
Section 702 of the FISA Act was renewed in 2012, just
before we learned from Snowden how it is abused. It is set
to expire this December unless Congress extends it again.
Knowing what we now know about this anti-American
legislation we must work hard to prevent its renewal. They
will try to scare us into supporting the provision, but the
loss of our liberty is what should scare us the most!
 The Disappearance Of Bipartisanship
On The Intelligence Committees
By Melvin Goodman
March 27, 2017
There is a political myth in Washington that the Senate and
House intelligence committees, unlike other congressional
committees, have been bipartisan and fair minded in their
handling of political matters. Now that the chairman of the
House intelligence committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA)
has gone rogue by providing sensitive exculpatory
intelligence documents to the President of the United
States, the subject of a committee investigation, we are
told that the intelligence committee can no longer be
considered bipartisan. Well, we learned 25 years ago that
the congressional intelligence committees were as
politicized as any committee on the Hill.
The congressional intelligence committees were created in
1977 following recommendations of the Church and Pike
committees that investigated crimes committed during the
Vietnam War by the Central Intelligence Agency, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Security
Agency. These crimes included illegal domestic spying in
violation of U.S. law throughout the war. The intelligence
committees were given responsibility for oversight of the
intelligence community, which had been in the hands of
the Senate and House Armed Services Committees from
1947 until 1977.
Needless to say, there was very little oversight during that
period. When CIA director Allen Dulles needed
something from the Congress, for example, he went to the
offices of Senator Richard Russell (D-GE), the chairman
of the armed forces committee, where they drank bourbon
together, and made sure the CIA got what was needed.
241
According to one member of the Senate committee,
Senator Leverett Saltonstall (R-MA),
“There are things that my government does
that I would rather not know about.”
Following the crimes of Iran-Contra in the 1980s, the CIA
finally received a statutory Inspector General (IG) to
conduct oversight within the CIA. Statutory IGs were
created at most government agencies in 1978 as part of the
post-Vietnam reform process, but the CIA was exempted
from the law. The Church Committee favored a statutory
IG for the CIA, but the Carter administration bowed to
pressure from the CIA and refused to support the proposal.
Senate intelligence committee chairman, David Boren (D-
OK), and CIA director William Webster opposed the
creation of a statutory IG ten years later, but a bipartisan
efforts led by Senators John Glenn (D-OH) and Arlen
Spector (R-PA) finally convinced President George H.W.
Bush to support the legislation. President Bush, a former
CIA director, reluctantly signed the law and used the
signing ceremony to warn against the compromise of
sensitive information as a result of the new Office of the
Inspector General. Bush then dragged his heels for more
than a year before naming a statutory IG.
The end of the Senate intelligence committee’s reputation
for bipartisan objectivity ended during the confirmation
hearings for Robert M. Gates, who was nominated to be
director of the CIA by President George H.W. Bush in
1991. For the first time since the creation of the
intelligence committees, the confirmation process was
partisan and politicized. The chairman of the Senate
committee, Senator Boren, angered many members of the
committee when he personally guaranteed Gates’s
confirmation to White House aide C. Boyden Gray. When
confirmation was threatened by the extensive evidence of
Gates’s politicization of intelligence while serving as
Deputy Director of Intelligence and Deputy Director of the
CIA, the White House instructed Republican members of
the Senate intelligence committee to “go to the mat” for
Gates. The leading Republican staffer on the committee,
John Moseman carried out his assignment, with no
Republican voting against Gates.
The leading Democratic staffer on the committee, George
Tenet, eventually became director of the CIA. Tenet
immediately placed Moseman on the director’s executive
staff. In December 2002, it was Tenet who guaranteed that
it would be a “slam dunk” to provide another Bush
administration with the intelligence to justify the invasion
of Iraq.
Just as there has been little external oversight of the CIA
over the past twenty-five years, internal oversight by the
.
242
CIA’s Inspector General has virtually disappeared.
Former President Barack Obama was responsible for
weakening the role of the IG throughout the intelligence
community, which made it more difficult to ensure the
integrity and efficiency of government operations.
President Obama also make sure that there was no IG in
place at CIA during much of his two terms in office.
In view of the partisan nature of the congressional
intelligence committees and the decline in the role of the
IGs throughout the intelligence community, it is obvious
that only a select committee or an independent commission
can investigate the possibility of collusion between Russia
and the Trump administration in sabotaging Hillary
Clinton’s presidential candidacy. In view of the increased
evidence of numerous contacts between Trump campaign
officials and Russian operatives as well as the efforts to
cover up these contacts, it is essential to create an
independent commission. Even Senator John McCain (R-
AZ) believes that “no longer does the Congress have
credibility to handle this alone.”
 Conservative Media Struggles
With New Prominence Under Trump
By Jonathan Easley
03/27/17 06:00 AM EDT
Conservative media outlets have suffered through a
tumultuous few weeks punctuated by infighting and public
controversy, underscoring the difficulty some are having
adjusting to the new levels of attention and scrutiny that
comes with their elevated status in the age of Trump.
GOP majorities in Congress and Donald Trump’s
presidency have been a boon for conservative media,
which has benefitted from increased access to
Washington’s power brokers and a White House that has
gone out of its way to accommodate outlets that were once
considered fringe.
But the transition from the edges of the media to its center
can be difficult. Conservative media’s mainstream peers
have greeted them with suspicion and hostility, often eager
to highlight the newcomers’ stumbles or question their
legitimacy.
In interviews with nearly a dozen key figures in
conservative media, right-leaning reporters and editors
spoke about their relative youth and inexperience and the
need to professionalize and move on from the
sensationalism that initially helped them attract readers.
They see their challenge as one that mirrors what the
Republican Party as a whole is experiencing, as it makes
the transition from being the opposition party to the party
in power.
“I think there is a bit of an existential crisis,”
said Lucian Wintrich, a 28-year-old gay
conservative provocateur who is moving to
Washington to be the White House
correspondent for the Gateway Pundit blog.
“We’re having some growing pains as we
try to expand our reach and become more
mainstream and less sensationalist in our
writing and journalism. It’s an interesting
transition. You have publications that
historically have not had much oversight
suddenly needing to reevaluate how they
do things.”
The millennial-focused conservative website Independent
Journal Review suspended three staffers last week,
243
including creative director Benny Johnson — a former
BuzzFeed reporter who had been a high-profile hire for the
young outlet — for publishing a conspiracy theory about
President Obama. The controversy provoked one of the
site’s reporters to resign in frustration over the direction of
the company.
Also last week, Breitbart News investigative reporter Lee
Stranahan quit the publication after going public with his
frustrations with the site’s political editor, Matthew Boyle,
who has greater editorial control now that former chairman
Stephen Bannon has become Trump’s chief White House
strategist.
Meanwhile, Glenn Beck’s website, The Blaze, suspended
one of its top personalities, the unapologetically pro-
Trump booster Tomi Lahren, for announcing on “The
View” that she supports abortion and for criticizing anti-
abortion conservatives.
And Fox News yanked one of its top legal experts, Andrew
Napolitano, after he alleged that a British intelligence
agency had wiretapped Trump Tower at Obama’s request.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer repeated the
claim during a press briefing, resulting in international
backlash.
The errors and turmoil have frustrated some on the right,
who warn that the mainstream press and the left will seize
on every misstep in an effort to delegitimize conservative
outlets.
“Conservative media has always been held
to a higher standard than liberal media, and
as conservatives we have to live up to that
higher standard,” said Matthew Continetti,
the editor-in-chief of the Washington Free
Beacon. “When we don’t, it not only
undermines our work as journalists, but
also the conservative project as a whole.”
Tensions between the mainstream press and right-wing
media outlets have spilled into the open in recent weeks.
State Department reporters cried foul when only one outlet
— the conservative I.J. Review — was allowed to travel
abroad with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. The I.J.
Review instructed its reporter, Erin McPike, not to tweet or
write daily news reports. She focused instead on a single
feature story they could be packaged as an exclusive.
Reporters excluded from the trip were furious that McPike
didn’t act as their eyes and ears by filing incremental news
stories or pool reports.
And Wintrich, the Gateway Pundit correspondent who
once ran a group for young gay men called “Twinks 4
Trump,” was accosted in the White House briefing room
and called a racist by a Fox News Radio reporter who
berated him in front of the press corps.
“If you’re legacy media and have been
trading on that access for decades, when
the new guy comes in and gets your
access, it’s enraging,” said Sean Davis, a
co-founder of The Federalist. “I don’t buy
that this is about conservative outlets
making errors or not knowing what they’re
doing. This is legacy outlets acting like an
entitled monopoly or a cartel when
someone new comes in and does the job
better than they do.”
Still, many conservative media players interviewed by The
Hill acknowledged that adjusting to the brighter spotlight,
coupled with the gravity of covering the White House, has
been a challenge.
“A lot of them aren’t ready for prime time,”
said John Ziegler, a Trump critic who spent
20 years in conservative media but left his
radio show last year after he grew weary of
battling his pro-Trump audience.
“A lot of so-called conservative media is
like the dog that caught the car and now
they don’t know what the hell to do. They’re
completely confused because they’ve
never been in this situation before.”
Many are rushing to “professionalize” or “institutionalize”
their operations.
Some conservative outlets have never before been in the
rotation for White House pool duty. Their reporters are
learning on the fly as they follow the president around the
country to file reports for the benefit of the entire press
corps, in what has traditionally been the domain of
nonpartisan outlets.
Breitbart has applied for its first permanent congressional
credentials, a process that opens the outlet to new scrutiny
about its investors. In order to get the credentials, Breitbart
244
had to disclose that the conservative billionaire Robert
Mercer, a major Trump backer, is a part owner.
These outlets are also facing editorial challenges over how
to cover a political landscape that is dominated by like-
minded conservatives.
“It was a lot easier under Obama, when
you could just hate on everything he did,”
said one source who works in conservative
media but requested anonymity.
And covering Trump, who is not a traditional conservative
and who is viewed as reckless and dangerous by some in
his own party, presents a unique challenge.
“Trump has added a new dynamic to
conservatism,” said Ben Shapiro, a former
Breitbart editor who now runs the Daily
Wire, another conservative news site.
“Politics used to exist on a right-left X-axis.
Now we've added a pro-Trump, anti-Trump
Y-axis. And that's throwing everything into
turmoil.”
Indeed, the way these outlets cover Trump is often itself
news — especially if the story is coming from Breitbart.
Under Boyle’s stewardship, Breitbart has steadfastly
backed Trump, even as the president whipped support for
an ObamaCare replacement bill that the outlet has tried to
sink. As they have long done, Breitbart cast GOP
leadership as the villains in the drama.
That editorial decision has been controversial and is one of
the criticisms Stranahan, the site’s former investigative
reporter, made as he unleashed a litany of frustrations with
Breitbart’s direction.
“Bannon was such a visionary and when he
left it was significant,” Stranahan said. “It is
still a good company. But there is a
difference between being a good company
and a disruptive one. When Steve left, it
was a big deal.”
Still, Breitbart’s impact on the political landscape remains.
They lobbied hard to doom the GOP healthcare bill,
making themselves instrumental in shielding Trump from
political damage while setting Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.)
up for defeat. Boyle is one of only a handful of reporters to
score an Oval Office interview with Trump.
But access can have its downsides. Breitbart scored an
exclusive interview on Facebook Live with White House
press secretary Sean Spicer minutes after a judge blocked
Trump’s travel ban — a much-watched scoop that was
undermined by the broadcast’s poor production values and
awkward camera angles.
Even as these tensions play out in public, though,
conservatives argue that the growing pains are a good
problem to have. They believe that conservative media can
appeal to a growing audience frustrated with the
mainstream press.
.
“This is healthy. These outlets are earning
their battle scars,” said one editor at a
conservative outlet. “These are the key
moments every outlet needs to survive and
get to the next stage. It sucks now, but we’ll
get there.”

245
 NBC News Signs Former Obama Press Secretary To
Provide "Unbiased" Political Commentary
By Tyler Durden
Mar 27, 2017 1:40 PM

On its 'Today Show' earlier this morning, NBC revealed from 2014-2017," reads a memo from
that it has signed former Obama White House press NBC News President Noah Oppenheim
secretary Josh Earnest as a political analyst. Earnest is and MSNBC President Phil Griffin.
expected to provide political commentary on NBC and
MSNBC.

And, in an hilarious welcoming statement,

the Today Show's Savannah Guthrie
warned Earnest that he would now have
to disavow himself of his political bias
to provide impartial political
analysis...just before inviting him to take
shots at Republicans.
"White House Press Secretary under
President Obama we're pleased to
announce is joining us a political
analyst."
"Now you have to wear your analyst hat,
not your Democrats hat."
"And looking at what happened, what
transpired over the last few weeks on
healthcare, who is to blame?"
"A native of Kansas City, Josh graduated
from Rice University with a degree in
political science and policy studies. With
his wealth of experience and insight, Josh
will be a great addition to our roster of
contributors and will be an asset for our two
networks as we continue to cover the White
House, Congress and politics beyond the
Beltway."
Earnest follows in a long line of former
press secretaries going from the White
House to network and cable news
Earnest also made an appearance this morning on the cable outlets.
news network known for its militant dedication to
impartiality, MSNBC. Jay Carney and Robert Gibbs, who also worked for
Obama, were hired after leaving the White House by CNN
Meanwhile, The Hill notes that Earnest is just one of many and MSNBC, respectively.
Obama press secretaries to accept handsome salaries
providing "impartial" political analysis at NBC and CNN Earnest, 42, will work out of NBC's Washington bureau.
over the years.
We would like to be among the first to welcome Josh
"Josh recently completed a ten-year run Earnest to his new position as the official mouthpiece of
with President Obama, most recently Obama's opposition party...sorry Harwood, position filled.
serving as White House Press Secretary

246
 Kushner To Lead New WH Office Focused On Using
Business Ideas To Fix Gov't Bureaucracy
Published March 27, 2017
Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and senior
adviser, will be tapped to lead a new White House office
that will effort to use business solutions to fix “government
stagnation”, a senior White House official told Fox News
Sunday.
"We can confirm we are making an
announcement tomorrow to establish the
White House office of American Innovation
and look forward to sharing additional
details," the official said.
The office will be filled by former business executives and
seeks to bring in new thinking to Washington,
the Washington Post reported. The Post first reported that
Kushner would head the new office.
“We should have excellence in
government,” Kushner said. “The
government should be run like a great
American company. Our hope is that we
can achieve successes and efficiencies for
our customers, who are the citizens.”
Trump told the newspaper that the office would focus on
fixing “government stagnation.” It will have the authority
to overhaul federal bureaucracy and fulfill campaign
promises – such as reforming health care for veterans and
fighting opioid addition. Kushner would report directly to
Trump.
247
Kushner hopes to bring in aggressive, nonideological
views into team and he seeks talent from inside and
outside Washington. The Post reported that the office is
focused primarily on technology and data and is working
with Apple chief executive Tim Cook, Microsoft founder
Bill Gate, Salesforce chief executive Marc Benioff and
Tesla chief executive Elon Musk.
Some of the tech giants have openly criticized Trump’s
policies but insist they are eager to help the administration
with its issues.
“I’m hopeful that Jared will be collaborative
with our industry in moving this forward.
When I talk to him, he does remind me of a
lot of the young, scrappy entrepreneurs
that I invest in in their 30s.” Benioff told the
Post.
This effort has been developing since shortly after the
inauguration, the official said.
Trump's daughter Ivanka, who is married to Kushner and
has a West Wing office but no official job, will get
involved on issues she is focused on, such as workforce
development.
Fox News’ Serafin Gomez and the Associated Press
contributed to this report.
 Former U.S. Lawmaker: “Deep State”
Putting Republic At Risk In Bid To End Trump Presidency
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 27, 2017

this day, as well as leaks from inside government. Also,

there was talk of impeaching Trump even before he took
office, though there is no evidence Trump has committed
any “high crimes or misdemeanors,” which are the primary
constitutional standards to begin impeachment
proceedings.

The former GOP lawmaker and author of the book, “In

Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and
Security,” clicked off the opposition’s actions since the
Nov. 8 election:

A former U.S. congressman from Colorado and one-time
GOP presidential contender says the Deep State is putting
the republic at risk by routinely undermining President
Donald J. Trump in a bid to unseat him.
Former Rep. Tom Tancredo, in a column for Breitbart,
wrote that the incessant leaking of information and top
secret intercepts is contributing to the “unraveling of the
fabric of constitutional government, and only a fool can
believe it will end well.”
Tancredo, who ran unsuccessfully for the presidency in
2008, then twice for the governorship of Colorado,
adamantly suggests that the leaking by the Deep State is
being done purposely to harm Trump and his
administration, with the end goal being his dismissal from
office. Those in and out of government, “feel justified in
using ‘any means necessary’” to meet and defeat Trump’s
agenda, while removing him from office.
“Every day sees more evidence of a desire
not only to block his policies but to drive
him from office,” Tancredo wrote. “While it
does not yet rise to the level of an
organized conspiracy, it does raise serious
issues of constitutional fidelity.” (RELATED:
Deep State: Obama Loyalists Continue
To Thwart Trump Administration From
The Shadows)
Tancredo noted that the Deep State began undermining
Trump almost immediately following the November
election. Protests and street marches were organized
quickly, followed by a series of lawsuits that continue to
— Just as in the 2000 election after Vice
President Al Gore won the popular vote but
the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that, based
on available ballot data, George W. Bush
won the electoral vote, the Alt-Left, aided
by the Deep State, began to claim Trump’s
victory was not legitimate. Trump lost the
popular vote to Hillary Clinton, though only
because of the state of
California otherwise, Trump’s victory would
have been overwhelming. Because of this,
the narrative became, Trump’s victory is
illegitimate, though the Constitution
recognizes electoral vote majorities, not
simple majorities (for the very reason that
one or two large states should not decide
the outcome of presidential contests).
— When that narrative began to falter, the
Deep State and its allies in Washington
and in the media began to push another
false narrative, one that claimed: “Russia
hacked the election” to help Trump and
hurt Clinton, after Team Trump colluded
with Moscow. Elements of that bogus claim
continue to be echoed today.
— Next followed the organized legal
resistance to Trump’s very constitutional
and very legal travel ban executive orders,
with the opposition judge-and-court
shopping, filing their suits to stop the orders
from taking effect in politically friendly
jurisdictions (like those where Obama-
selected judges preside).

248
These efforts are born mostly from shock and disbelief that
Trump actually beat Clinton, after the discredited
Washington media told the country for a year he couldn’t
win. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
But Tancredo also notes a much more dangerous element
to all of this:
The active, wanton effort to subvert
legitimate presidential orders and actions,
which will have long-term negative effects
on our country if allowed to continue.
Most dangerous of all is the U.S. intelligence community’s
involvement in this Deep State activity. Tancredo notes
that when the “Russia-Trump collusion” narrative first
began, it was based in large part on intelligence, though as
we have since learned, the leaked information was
intended to sow doubts about Trump’s legitimacy, not
prove he did anything wrong (because there is no evidence
to suggest he did). (RELATED: The intelligence
community’s ‘spy revolt’ with the Trump
249
administration is a PSYOP designed to perpetuate the
military-industrial complex)
“This involvement of intelligence agencies
and the FBI in politically-inspired
investigations – and the subsequent
leaking of information gathered in the
surveillance – puts into question the
President’s ability to trust the information
provided to him by those agencies,”
Tancredo wrote. “And THAT, my friends,
can seriously impair his ability to manage
national security policy and any
international or terrorism-related crisis that
occurs.”
Without a doubt, Trump’s rise and ascension to the White
House has upended the globalist order, and they are not
amused by it. As similar movements percolate and gain
more traction in Europe, expect even more desperation on
the part of the Deep State to take out Trump and destroy
the populism that brought him to power.
 .
Trump To Sign 'Energy Independence'
Order Tomorrow Rolling Back Obama
Climate Change Initiatives
By Tyler Durden
Mar 27, 2017 10:15 PM

Coming off a brutal Trumpcare defeat, delivered by

members of his own party no less, Trump has decided to Speaking with George Stephanopoulos over the weekend,
return to a strategy of progressing his policy initiatives EPA Chief Scott Pruitt said that, among other things,
through executive order. Trump's forthcoming executive order would

As such, tomorrow President Trump is "address the past administration's effort to

set to sign a sweeping new order aimed kill jobs across this country through the
at promoting domestic oil, coal and clean power plan."
natural gas by reversing much of "This is about making sure we have a
Obama's efforts to address climate pro-growth and pro-environment
change. approach to how we do regulation in
this country.
The order is expected to lay out a broad blueprint for the
For too long, over the last several years,
Trump administration to dismantle the architecture that
we've accepted the narrative that if you're
Obama built to combat Climate Change, which Trump
pro-growth, pro-jobs you're anti-
argued throughout the 2016 campaign season only serves environment and that's just not where
to kill 1,000s of energy jobs in the U.S.
we've been in the country.

Obama’s Clean Power Plan was designed to cut carbon And the executive order is going to
dioxide emissions from electricity by 32% by 2030 address the past administration's effort
compared to 2005 levels and resulted in the collapse of the to kill jobs across this country through
coal industry, including several large bankruptcies. That the clean power plan."
said, the initiative has been in legal limbo since the
Supreme Court stayed it while it was reviewed by a federal
appeals court. The Trump administration now is expected
ask that court to put the matter on hold to allow it time to
revise or undo the measure -- an action environmentalists
have vowed to challenge. Per Bloomberg:

Trump’s executive order also is set to

revoke six specific directives from his
predecessor, including Obama’s broad
strategy for paring emissions of
methane released from oil and gas
operations. Among other things, Trump's new executive order will
Other Obama directives targeted for repeal give the heads of various federal agencies broad authority
include one on climate change and national to suspend, revise or rescind the policies that could burden
security, as well as a pair of directives from the production or use of domestic energy resources.
June 2013 that laid out his climate plans.
The removal of the Clean Power Plan It also will toss out two Obama-era
could halt coal’s decline as a source of directives that gave consideration of
electricity during the next two decades, climate change a prominent role in
federal rule making.
according to projections from the Energy
Information Administration. More coal use
would mean less natural gas use, EIA said.
250
One advised government agencies to factor climate change
into environmental reviews, such as those governing where
oil drilling should take place. The other, called the “social
cost of carbon,” is a metric reflecting the potential
economic damage from climate change that was used by
the Obama administration to justify a suite of regulations.

The order also is set to include a targeted assault on a

handful of specific Obama-era regulations.

It will require the Interior Department to

lift a moratorium on the sale of new coal
leases on federal land

and compel the EPA to review, and, “if appropriate,” begin

proceedings to suspend, revise or rescind regulations
designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power
plants.

And just like that, the lawyers of the Natural Resources

Defense Council were just guaranteed millions of dollars
of incremental fees...we can't only assume, at this point,
that Eric Holder is getting his 'fair share.'

But energy isn't the only focus, Trump will also be signing
4 other initiatives aimed at relaxing land-use rules from the
Bureau of Land Management, Education Department rules
on school accountability and a 'blacklisting' rule that
required federal contractors to disclose labor violations as
part of their bidding procedures.

251
 Why FBI Can’t Tell All On Trump, Russia
Russ Baker, C. Collins And Jonathan Z. Larsen
March 27, 2017

Russian gangsters — connected to

Putin.

The same facts suggest that the FBI

knew or should have known enough
prior to the election to justify informing
the public about its ongoing
investigation of potentially
compromising relationships between
Trump, Putin, and Russian mobsters —
even if it meant losing or exposing a
valued informant.

Photo credit: James Hughes / NY Daily News via Getty Images ***
Reporters: Jonathan Z. Larsen is the former editor of The It will take an agency independent of the Federal Bureau
Village Voice, whose reporting team included the late of Investigation (FBI) to expose Donald Trump’s true
Wayne Barrett and Robert I. Friedman. These people and relationship with Moscow and the role Russia may have
the paper produced many of the important early played in getting him elected.
investigative reports on Donald Trump and on the mob.
Larsen is now a senior editor and board member of
Director James Comey recently revealed in a congressional
WhoWhatWhy. Russ Baker, a former investigative reporter
hearing for the first time that the FBI “is investigating …
for The Village Voice, is Editor-in-Chief of WhoWhatWhy.
the nature of any links between individuals associated with
C. Collins is a WhoWhatWhy reporter.
the Trump campaign and the Russian government and
whether there was any coordination between the campaign
*** and Russia’s efforts.”
The Federal Bureau of Investigation However, a two-month WhoWhatWhy investigation has
cannot tell us what we need to know revealed an important reason the Bureau may be facing
about Donald Trump’s contacts with undisclosed obstacles to revealing what it knows to the
Russia. Why? Because doing so would public or to lawmakers.
jeopardize a long-running, ultra-
sensitive operation targeting mobsters
Our investigation also may explain why the FBI, which
tied to Russian President Vladimir Putin
was very public about its probe of Hillary Clinton’s
— and to Trump.
emails, never disclosed its investigation of the Trump
campaign prior to the election, even though we now know
But the Feds’ stonewalling risks that it commenced last July.
something far more dangerous: Failing
to resolve a crisis of trust in America’s
Such publicity could have exposed a high-value, long-
president. WhoWhatWhy provides the
running FBI operation against an organized crime network
details of a two-month investigation in
headquartered in the former Soviet Union. That operation
this 6,500-word exposé.
depended on a convicted criminal who for years was
closely connected with Trump, working with him in
The FBI apparently knew, directly or
Trump Tower — while constantly informing for the FBI
indirectly, based upon available facts,
and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and being legally
that prior to Election Day, Trump and
protected by them.
his campaign had personal and
business dealings with certain
Some federal officials were so involved in protecting this
individuals and entities linked to
source — despite his massive fraud and deep connections
criminal elements — including reputed
252
to organized crime — that they became his defense
counsel after they left the government.
In secret court proceedings that were later unsealed, both
current and former government attorneys argued for
extreme leniency toward the man when he was finally
sentenced. An FBI agent who expressed his support for the
informant later joined Trump’s private security force.
In this way, the FBI’s dilemma about revealing valuable
sources, assets and equities in its ongoing investigation of
links between the Trump administration and Russian
criminal elements harkens back to the embarrassing, now
infamous Whitey Bulger episode. In that case, the Feds
protected Bulger, a dangerous Boston-based mobster
serving as their highly valued informant, even as the serial
criminal continued to participate in heinous crimes. The
FBI now apparently finds itself confronted with similar
issues: Is its investigation of the mob so crucial to national
security that it outweighs the public’s right to know about
their president?
Jack Blum, a former senior Senate investigator and one of
America’s foremost experts on white-collar financial
crime, sums up the complexity — and the urgency — of
the situation:
“What makes this investigation especially
difficult is that it will lead into the complex
relations between the counterintelligence
operations of the FBI and its criminal
investigative work,” says Blum.
“Further, it is likely other elements of the
intelligence community are involved and
that they have ‘equities’ to protect. Much of
the evidence, justifiably, will be highly
classified to protect sources and methods
and in particular to protect individuals who
have helped one or another of the agencies
involved.”
Photo credit: FBI
253
“I Can’t Go into Those Details Here”
In his March 20 testimony before the House Intelligence
Committee, FBI Director James Comey said that he could
not go into detail about its probe into the Trump
administration’s Russian connection.
If he had, we might have learned that, for more than three
decades the FBI has had Trump Tower in its sights. Many
of its occupants have been targets of major investigations,
others have been surveilled, and yet others have served as
informants. One thing many of them have in common is
deep ties to organized crime — including the Russian
mafia.
Felix Sater fits all of these categories. A convicted felon,
Sater worked in Trump Tower, made business deals with
Donald Trump through Sater’s real estate firm, Bayrock,
cooperated with the FBI and CIA and was subsequently
protected by the DOJ from paying for his crimes. And the
Moscow-born immigrant remains deeply linked to Russia
and Ukraine.
Based on documents examined by WhoWhatWhy, it is
possible to draw certain conclusions that help connect the
dots between Trump, the FBI, Russia and the mob.
The resulting picture is not a pretty one for Donald Trump.
However, because of its efforts to neutralize the
organization of perhaps the world’s most powerful mobster
— a man considered a serious national security threat —
the Bureau might just have compromised its own ability to
provide to Congress or inform the American public about
all of the ties that exist between Trump, his presidential
campaign and the regime of Vladimir Putin.
Further, Trump’s business association with Sater and
Bayrock may have put the president’s financial interests at
substantial risk, including possibly millions of dollars in
fines, penalties, or other damages, should civil or criminal
misconduct be proven in court or otherwise resolved if
claims were triggered. Anyone who knew of Trump’s
jeopardy in this matter would have enormous leverage
over the Trump operation.
The government’s kid-glove treatment of Sater is partially
explained in those long-suppressed legal documents, which
reveal that the mobbed-up businessman was perceived by
the authorities to be extraordinarily cooperative and useful.
Legal filings on Sater’s behalf state that he “reported
daily” to the FBI for many years.
Sater agreed to assist the US government on issues of
national security and organized crime. His activities were
first revealed in a lawsuit brought by a former employee of
Sater’s real estate firm, Bayrock. While working with
Trump, Sater’s name became “Satter” publicly —
presumably with the knowledge if not the encouragement
of the FBI. This distanced Satter the businessman, and his
partners, from Sater the criminal.
Attorneys representing the plaintiff spent years untangling
the financial machinations of Bayrock — which they
allege involve hundred of millions of dollars in claims
arising from, among other things, money laundering and
fraud.
They also sought to expose the government’s awareness of
— even complicity in — Sater’s activities.
Their efforts to unseal court documents, including Sater’s
legal history, have been met with a concerted pushback by
DOJ lawyers, mischaracterizations of the case record, and
even — according to the attorneys — anonymous death
threats.
Felix Sater could not be reached for comment.
A Stunning Discovery
The story of Donald Trump’s business dealings with a
Russian mobster might never have come out were it not for
a Bayrock employee stumbling upon Sater’s cooperation
agreement with the FBI, among other sensitive
information, that had inadvertently been left accessible.
That employee sought out attorney Fred Oberlander, who
combed through the documents. Over time, Oberlander —
who was instructing undergraduates at Yale University in
computational physics and computer science from age 18
— began to deconstruct the byzantine financial structure
that was Bayrock, which allegedly hid a range of crimes,
including massive-scale money laundering from sources in
the former Soviet Union.
On February 10, 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit, in Manhattan, instructed Oberlander, in a
secret order, not to inform the legislative branch of the
United States government what he knew about Felix Sater.
(That order remains under seal, but a federal judge has
unsealed a redacted version.)
Apparently, the appellate court was persuaded that the
unusually broad order was justified on the merits, but the
254
lawyers opposing Sater found the imposed remedy
extraordinary.
“Our being ordered to not tell Congress
what we know may well be the first and
only hyper-injunction in American history,”
asserts Oberlander’s own attorney, Richard
Lerner. “If there are others who have been
scared silent by judges who wish to nullify
Congressional and public oversight, we
may never know. That is frightening.”
Characters Out of a James Bond Movie
Preventing the Russian mafia from expanding its foothold
in the United States has been one of the Bureau’s top
priorities. In fact, it might be the FBI’s most important
function apart from its role in the fight against terrorism.
The Russian mob has a breathtaking and underappreciated
reach. It is so powerful that FBI Agent Peter Kowenhoven
told CNN in 2009 that Semion Mogilevich, its “boss of
bosses,” is a strategic threat, and a man who “can, with a
telephone call or order, affect the global economy.”
US authorities came to see Mogilevich, who is described
as close with Putin, as not only a danger to the financial
system but a potential threat to world peace. He had access
to stockpiles of military weapons and even fissionable
material, snapped up as the Soviet Union fell apart.
His rumored ability to deliver the makings of weapons of
mass destruction to the highest bidder — as well as his
experience in smuggling opium from Afghanistan —
would take on the very highest importance after 9/11,
when European intelligence sources reported that al-Qaeda
representatives had contacted Mogilevich in search of
nuclear material.
The Russian mob should also not be confused with a mere
crime syndicate. It is an organization comprised of state
actors, oligarchs, and specific groups of individuals
working collectively with the authority of the Russian
government — a “mafia state.” At times, it is difficult to
tell where the mob ends and the government begins.
To some, the Russian mob brings to mind the globalized
villains of a James Bond movie, who want everything and
will stop at nothing.
Robert I. Friedman, a former colleague of the authors of
this article at The Village Voice, drew the ire of
Mogilevich for his reporting on the Russian mafia. The
“boss of bosses” put a $100,000 price on Friedman’s head
soon after the publication of one of his fearless exposés of
Mogilevich, and the FBI suggested that he stop reporting
on the topic. (Friedman died in 2002, at the age of 51, of a
rare blood disease he was said to have contracted on a trip
to India.)
Enter Trump
Right from the earliest days of Trump Tower, in 1983,
some of the choicest condominiums, including those in the
10 floors immediately below the future president’s own
triplex apartment, went to a rogues gallery of criminals and
their associates.
Granted, the construction and gambling industries have
long been bedeviled by connections to organized crime. It
may have been impossible for Trump to have avoided
those ties altogether. Nevertheless, according to many
news stories and public records, Trump has repeatedly
been linked to organized crime figures and their associates.
Donald Trump and Roy Cohn, October 18, 1984. Photo credit:
Bettmann Archive / Getty Images
To be sure, nouveau riches of all stripes were attracted to
the Trump “glamour” and might well have had difficulty
gaining approval of traditional condo or coop boards.
Nonetheless, Trump must have known that many of his
occupants were problematic — and likely to draw the
attention of law enforcement.
Tower occupants have included:
255
 Verina Hixon, a close friend of John A. Cody, New
York’s concrete union boss, living in six units just below
Trump’s triplex. Cody, with ties to the Gambino crime
family, was later sentenced to five years in prison for
racketeering. Trump and Cody reportedly helped Hixon
with a loan so she could pay for the units.
 Robert Hopkins, who was arrested in his suite for
ordering a mob murder of a gambling competitor.
Hopkins would eventually be convicted of running a
massive gambling ring, partly from Trump Tower, an
operation that occasioned what was perhaps the first of
many wiretaps in the building. Trump appeared in
person at the closing on the apartment, where,
according to our Village Voice colleague Wayne
Barrett’s 1991 Trump biography, Hopkins sat at the end
of a conference table counting out $200,000 in cash. (It
was mob lawyer Roy Cohn who introduced Hopkins to
Trump.)
 Sheldon and Jay Weinberg, an enterprising father-
son duo: The father was masterminding the biggest
Medicaid fraud known at the time; the son was later
indicted on grand larceny and insurance fraud. The
Weinbergs rented directly from Trump three
condominiums he had kept for himself.
 David Bogatin purchased five apartments on the 62nd
floor while running a massive tax avoidance scandal
involving commercial gasoline sales. Bogatin had ties
with Italian and Russian mobsters. He would later flee
to Poland and set up a highly successful chain of banks
there before being extradited to the US, where he
ended up in the maximum-security state prison in
Attica, NY.
 Joseph Weichselbaum, Trump’s helicopter pilot,
convicted of drug trafficking on three occasions.
 Glamorous international art dealer Helly Nahmad, then
34, who lived in a sprawling apartment in Trump Tower
(and according to some accounts owned the entire 51st
floor), was later convicted and served five months of a
one-year sentence for running an illegal gambling
operation. He helped orchestrate super-high-stakes
card games that sometimes were played in Trump
Tower and “catered to billionaires, Russian oligarchs,
Hollywood stars, and pro athletes,” including Leonardo
DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Tobey Maguire, and Ben
Affleck. Also convicted were Vadim Trincher and his
sons Eugene and Ilya; the Trinchers had apartments in
Trump Tower too.
Of course, living in Trump Tower by no means suggests
any sort of criminality or association between or among
the residents. Still, the list is impressive.
But even in this company, one man stands out. Not
surprisingly, he is from the former Soviet Union.
Spying on Trump Tower — Since 1983
When the Soviet Union was breaking up in the early
1990s, Mogilevich (AKA “The Boss of Bosses,” AKA
“The Brainy Don”) suborned a Russian judge to spring a
ruthless and canny lifetime criminal from a Siberian
prison. His name was Vyacheslav “Yaponchik” Ivankov.
Vyacheslav Ivankov and Semion Mogilevich (inset) Photo credit:
Alchetron (public domain) and FBI / Wikimedia
Four months later, in March 1992, Ivankov arrived in the
United States to organize a new criminal network. He
would take the disparate elements of already-established
Russian-speaking criminals and use them to create a
sophisticated, well-managed operation that could launder
funds and generate cash flow as part of a transnational
network. But authorities had no idea where he was.
“And then,” recounted a former FBI agent
in Robert I. Friedman’s book Red Mafiya,
“we found out he was living in a luxury
condo in Trump Tower.”
The moment the Feds spotted him, he vanished again, only
to resurface later in an Atlantic City casino: Trump’s Taj
Mahal.
Thus, by the early 1990s, both the arrival of Russian
organized crime in the US and the strange attraction of
Trump properties for Russian mobsters were on the
Bureau’s radar.
FBI activity in Trump Tower dates back to soon after it
was built, in 1983. Around that time, the Bureau put
electronic surveillance in the building with a tap on the
phone of the above-mentioned Trump Tower resident
Robert Hopkins, a Lucchese crime family associate, who
was eventually arrested in the Tower for ordering a
murder.
FBI interest in Trump Tower continued through the 1990s,
when the Bureau, working closely with US prosecutors at
the Eastern District (which includes Brooklyn), began to
focus on the business operations of a man with ties to
Mogilevich: the aforementioned Felix Sater.
256
At about the same time, Trump found himself in a bind
with his commercial lenders, who kept his public mystique
alive while in essence secretly stripping him of control of
his casinos and putting him on an “allowance,” as they
tried to salvage what they could from the wreckage of his
disastrous business decisions. They retained the Trump
name on his most iconic properties, based on the cold
calculation that his “brand” might still help draw
customers.
Трамп и его деньги (Trump and his Money)
As Trump lost access to traditional lines of credit, his
desperate need for financing led to sources that are murky,
at best, including monies traceable back to the former
Soviet Union — a circumstance that may explain Trump’s
refusal to release his tax returns.
According to two pages of Trump’s 2005 tax returns,
purportedly sent anonymously to reporter David Cay
Johnston, Trump appeared to make an enormous amount
of money that year — earning more than $153 million,
which put him into a tiny class of super-rich Americans,
probably numbering in the dozens.
Trump’s windfall seems to have developed around the
same time that investors from countries of the former
Soviet Union started opening the cash spigot.
Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch with FBI Director James
Comey (left), and US Attorney Preet Bharara at a press conference on
March 24, 2016. Photo credit: FBI
A 2013 indictment of the illegal high-stakes card games’
organizers, brought by US Attorney Preet Bharara, alleged
not only high-stakes illegal gambling and the laundering of
approximately $100 million dollars, but also extortion, as
ring members used threats and force to strip ”money and
property” from clients.
One of the operation’s leaders, Alimzhan “Taiwanchik”
Tokhtakhounov, an alleged international crime boss and
admitted friend of top Mogilevich lieutenant Vyacheslav
“Yaponchik” Ivankov (who, as noted, was found living in
Trump Tower at one point), managed the ring from afar;
he could not legally enter the US as he was already wanted
on charges of trying to bribe ice-skating judges at the 2002
Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City. Tokhtakhounov
has often been tied to Boss of Bosses Semion Mogilevich.
Bharara, whom Trump recently fired — after accepting the
resignations of other US attorneys left over from the
Obama administration — is not the only big name who
was involved in investigating the goings-on in Trump
Tower. Former US Attorney General Loretta Lynch also
played a part. Lynch, first a prosecutor and then the US
Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, would have
had knowledge of an FBI operation that involved Sater, the
Russian mobster-turned-cooperating-witness.
While Sater has recently been the subject of some news
coverage — his name came up during the March 20 House
Intelligence Committee’s public hearing on Russia, when
Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) asked FBI Director James
Comey about him — no thorough exploration of the
Bureau’s dealings with this key informant has been
published.
Until now.
The information below is based on an extensive
exploration of those dealings, and of previously
unexamined and unpublished legal documents, which the
government has sought to suppress.
The picture that emerges goes to the heart of the many
questions raised about Trump’s relationship to Putin’s
Russia in the weeks before and after the presidential
election.
Efforts to try to get this information to the public appear to
have been aggressively blocked by the DOJ because it
would potentially expose their own operations — both
those that have been effective and others that have not.
***
Felix Sater had been on the Bureau’s radar since the mid-
1990s, when they were investigating Russian mob–
affiliated financial scams.
Very soon after Semion Mogilevich associate
“Yaponchik” Ivankov arrived in the US, in 1993, Sater,
together with an Italian mob associate named Salvatore
Lauria, and others, had taken over a firm called White
Rock and created a criminal brokerage whose only purpose
was to fleece investors and launder money.
It excelled at “pump and dump” scams, a practice in which
stock prices are artificially inflated, then sold to
unsuspecting investors — especially targeting elderly and
unsophisticated buyers with high-pressure cold-calling
tactics. White Rock included members and associates of
four of the five major New York City organized crime
families, including the nephew of mobster Carmine “the
Snake” Persico and the brother-in-law of Gambino hit man
257
Sammy “the Bull” Gravano, as well as Russian criminal
elements.
The Art of the (Double) Deal
Although shuttering Sater’s operation was considered a
great success, authorities soon decided they could leverage
it to get even bigger fish. Thus, they cut a deal with Sater,
seemingly to help them go after the Russian-speaking mob,
and its “Brainy Don,” Semion Mogilevich.
Instead of serving jail time, Sater became a highly valued
FBI informant. Using unnamed connections, Sater
arranged to locate some Stinger missiles that Osama bin
Laden had supposedly placed on the market — an older
model that could be used to shoot down commercial
airliners.
Immediately after September 11, 2001, Sater received a
call from the chief of a new section in the FBI who wanted
to talk to him about Stingers, according to Salvatore Lauria
in The Scorpion and the Frog, co-authored with journalist
David S. Barry. Months later, Sater joined Bayrock — the
real estate development company with offices in Trump
Tower — and he was soon partnering in business deals
with Donald Trump himself. This raises some interesting
questions: Did Sater take the job at Bayrock at the FBI’s
direction? Indeed, was Sater’s business relationship with
Trump at the FBI’s behest?
One thing is certain: Bayrock became one of the most
important links between Trump and big-money sources
from the former Soviet Union.
Donald Trump, Bayrock partner Tevfik Arif, and Felix Sater attend the
Trump Soho Launch Party on September 19, 2007 in New York. Photo
credit: Mark Von Holden / WireImage
The firm was founded by Tevfik Arif, a former
Communist Party functionary in the Soviet republic of
what is now Kazakhstan. Arif had formed another entity
called Bayrock in Moscow in 1989, during the very last
years of the Soviet Union.
Many Soviet functionaries transitioned to successful
careers in market capitalism with the help of friends in
high places: those with access to resources could make
enormous profits by pilfering the moribund Soviet state,
and such funds were best laundered and moved abroad for
safekeeping and investment. Real estate was generally
seen as a stable investment.
During the five years Sater worked at Bayrock, he traveled
throughout the former Soviet Union, ostensibly looking for
real estate sites to develop with the Trump Organization —
while also allegedly laundering hundreds of millions of
dollars in illicit funds from mysterious sources in the
former Soviet Union. And all the while he was working as
an informant for the FBI.
Soon after joining Bayrock (about late 2001 to early 2002),
he effectively took control of it — while of necessity
hiding that fact from its lenders and clients. Sater was the
firm’s Chief Operating Officer, and according to assertions
in a lawsuit filed by a former Bayrock employee, by 2006
he owned more than 63% of the firm.
Sater’s dominant role came despite the fact that he was a
felon. Because of the services he was providing to the US
government, this information was withheld from banks and
others with whom Bayrock signed contracts, including
condominium buyers.
The Trump organization lent its name to Bayrock projects
in Toronto, Florida, Arizona, and in New York City, in the
chic SoHo neighborhood; the SoHo project was the only
Bayrock development into which the Trump Organization
actually put up any equity. Most of the Bayrock-affiliated
projects failed, though, leaving a trail of angry investors as
well as a string of lawsuits and countersuits. According to
legal depositions, most of the projects that Sater worked to
develop overseas — necessitating trips to Russia, Poland,
and Ukraine (including numerous trips to Crimea) —
never seemed to get off the drawing board.
Sater and Trump sometimes traveled together. In
September 2005, Trump and apparently Sater flew along
with his wife Melania to Colorado, where Sater talked to a
local reporter about possible Trump-Bayrock development
projects in Denver.
The real estate tycoon and the undercover mobster were
close enough that, according to his deposition testimony,
Sater could simply walk up a flight of stairs to Trump’s
office and stop in for an impromptu chat. Indeed, Sater and
the Trump clan grew so close that in February 2006, at the
personal request of Donald Trump, the mobster joined his
children Ivanka, Donald Jr., and his son’s wife Vanessa in
Moscow to show them around, according to his deposition
testimony. While he was in Moscow he emailed a
journalist about possible Trump-Bayrock developments in
Denver, in which he indicated he was with Don Jr.; a few
days later Sater is alleged to have called one of the partners
at the Arizona project and threatened to have him “tortured
and killed,” according to later court filings.
258
Sater’s tenure at Bayrock might have lasted longer, had
The New York Times not “outed” his criminal past in 2007.
Yet a few years later, after Sater had left Bayrock, he could
still be found in Trump Tower. But now he was apparently
working directly for Trump himself, with an office,
business cards, phone number and email address all
provided by the Trump Organization. The cards identified
him as a “Senior Advisor to Donald Trump.”
Today, Trump claims to have trouble remembering Sater.
“Trump was asked about Sater in
depositions related to other cases in 2011
and 2013. In the first, Trump acknowledged
that he used to speak with Sater ‘for a
period of time.’ Yet in the second, Trump
said, ‘if he were sitting in a room right now,
I really wouldn’t know what he looked like,’”
Mother Jones reported.
In early December 2015, Trump still seemed unclear when
asked by an Associated Press reporter about Sater. “Felix
Sater, boy, I have to even think about it,” he said. “I’m not
that familiar with him.” Ivanka and Don Jr. also later said
that they had no memory of being with him in Moscow.
FBI agent Leo Taddeo definitely did not “have to think
about it.” Taddeo had worked in the Italian and Russian
organized crimes sections of the New York FBI office and
had directly witnessed the ramifications of the arrival of
“Yaponchik” Ivankov in 1992 — and the influence of
Mogilevich — in the Russian-speaking community, New
York financial markets, and beyond. He rose to be the
head of the Russian organized crime section — and was
one of Sater’s FBI handlers. Taddeo testified on Sater’s
behalf at his sentencing, praising his “extraordinary”
cooperation and stressing how “capable,” “important,” and
“effective” he was.
During the years when Trump and Bayrock pursued their
joint projects, the Trump SoHo was planned, designed and
funded, and ground was broken for it.
So Bayrock, of which Sater came to own a majority, and
the Trump Organization, headed by the future president
himself, did several high-profile deals together and had
offices close by each other in Trump Tower, and yet the
current president claims that he is “not that familiar with
him.”
There are a number of possible reasons why Trump has
had to tread lightly around the issue of Sater. Aside from
what Trump might have known about Sater’s back-channel
connections to the Russian government or organized
crime, their joint projects also pose enormous financial risk
to Trump.
If he or anyone around him — such as other Trump
Organization executives, accountants and lawyers — had
knowledge of Sater’s criminal past and yet entered into
contracts with him and Bayrock, Trump and his company
would then be liable for hundreds of millions of dollars —
and possible jail time.
Why?
Because parties to bank loans and investment contracts
must confirm that no owner or manager has been convicted
of fraud, and if that confirmation is false, anyone who
knew of the fraud is potentially liable. The same would be
true even if someone learned about Sater’s criminal status
after signing the contract but continued with it.
Thus, if Trump knew Sater was a convicted felon but did
business with him anyway, he, the Trump Organization,
and anyone within the company who knew of it could face
substantial penalties or fines. This might especially be true
for the Trump-Bayrock projects, as so many of them ended
terribly, with multiple lawsuits across many states.
However, the information of Sater’s past financial
criminality was officially hidden because his legal docket
in the White Rock/State Street case was kept secret (owing
to his continuing “cooperating witness” status). For this
reason, even after performing due diligence, someone
entering business agreements with Sater would find no
evidence of his criminal past.
Ukraine: The Big Prize
The FBI’s failure to fully expose Trump’s Russian
connection before the election seemingly emboldened the
entire Trump team — from the president to his former
campaign manager to his “bulldog” personal lawyer —
along with Sater, to take actions that can be seen to have
benefited Putin. Nowhere is this more true than with
Ukraine.
This former Soviet republic is central to Putin’s dream of
restoring Russia to its Cold War-era greatness and
protecting its borders. Annexing Crimea from Ukraine was
a huge victory for him. Holding on to that strategically
important region and maintaining access to it by
controlling eastern sections of Ukraine itself are vital to
Putin’s ambitions.
259
Other crucial strategic issues concerning Ukraine include
its desire to join NATO, seen by Russia as a huge threat.
There is also the matter of a pipeline that brings natural gas
from Russia through Ukraine into fuel-hungry Europe,
importantly Germany. Mogilevich was later named as the
secret majority owner of the Ukrainian stake in a
mysterious intermediary company, half-owned by Russian
energy giant Gazprom. (Mogilevich, as well as Sater’s
father, who has been identified as part of the Mogilevich
organization in a Supreme Court petition, both hail from
Ukraine. Mogilevich’s lawyer denied that his client had
any connection to the company.) While questions swirled
about the deal, Sater, then serving as an FBI informant,
traveled to Ukraine and Russia — ostensibly searching for
properties to develop with the Trump Organization.
For his part, candidate Trump didn’t even acknowledge
that Russia had annexed Crimea or engaged its military in
Eastern Ukraine, when the issue came up early in the
presidential campaign.
“Just so you understand. [Putin] is not
going to go into Ukraine, all right?” Trump
said in an interview shortly after he was
nominated — before being corrected on the
facts.
Trump’s platform chairman J. D. Gordon reportedly had
met with the Russian ambassador during the convention. In
an interview with CNN’s Jim Acosta, Gordon said he had
advocated the softening of the GOP platform language on
Ukraine — a softening that Trump himself had advocated
earlier in the year at a meeting with Gordon. Gordon’s
later comments seem to walk that assertion back, but the
GOP platform was changed.
Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort at the 2016 Republican
National Convention. Photo credit: Disney | ABC Television Group /
Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0)
At that time, Trump Tower resident Paul Manafort was
still running the campaign — until he was forced out
because of his ties to former Ukrainian President Viktor
Yanukovych and other powerful forces sympathetic to
Russia. But Manafort’s connections to Russia ran even
deeper than suspected back then.
On March 22, the Associated Press reported that Manafort
had been paid the astonishing sum of more than $10
million a year in the 2000s by Russian oligarch Oleg
Deripaska, a close Putin ally, to implement a plan that
would “greatly benefit the Putin Government.”
Stranger still, just last month, Trump associates Sater and
Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, lobbied
then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn with a
scheme to lift sanctions on Russia, imposed after it seized
Crimea. They delivered a proposed “peace plan” for
Ukraine that infuriated the country’s current prime
minister. The proposal would have advanced the ambitions
of a pro-Russian politician whose movement Manafort
helped shape
It turns out that, like so many other figures in this story,
Cohen has his own substantial Ukrainian ties. After
graduating from what is considered by many to be a third-
tier law school, Cohen became a personal injury lawyer.
He married a woman whose parents are Ukrainian, and his
brother, also a lawyer, married a woman whose father rose
from humble Ukrainian roots to become a billionaire.
Much Less Than Six Degrees of Separation
While all this high-stakes maneuvering between the US
and Russia over Ukraine was unfolding, the DOJ and FBI
were hard at work to prevent the Sater-Trump story from
becoming widely known.
WhoWhatWhy has learned that a number of key law-
enforcement figures associated with Sater’s role as a
government informant have continued protecting him —
which has inevitably helped to keep under wraps the
criminal goings-on in Trump Tower. One of these figures
even went on to work for Trump.
FBI Special Agent Gary Uher not only investigated
(alongside fellow Agent Leo Taddeo) the early “pump and
dump” case that originally snared Sater, he also apparently
served as one of Sater’s handlers. After Uher retired from
the Bureau’s New York office in 2011, he went into the
private security business with another former FBI agent, in
a firm named XMark — which became one of a small
army of private security firms that guarded Trump during
the presidential campaign. (Neither Uher nor Taddeo
responded to requests for comment.)
In fact, both XMark and Uher personally began receiving
payments from the campaign as soon as Trump announced,
in June 2015. Uher’s name surfaced in the press a handful
of times, sometimes in allegations that he roughly handled
protestors at Trump rallies. Yet until now, no one has
pointed out that before he went to work for Trump, Uher
ran Sater.
It is not clear how Trump and Uher would have even
known each other were it not for the man both knew in
260
common — the man Trump was consistently vague about
during the campaign — Felix Sater.
As for Taddeo, in July 2016, as talk of possible efforts by
the Kremlin to help Trump’s campaign continued to pick
up steam, the Washington Post ran a story that
downplayed the possibility and quoted the ex-agent, now
in the private sector:
“This is not Putin trying to help Trump,’’ he
said.
The article identified Taddeo as “a former FBI special
agent in charge of cyber and special operations in New
York”.; it did not tell readers he had been Sater’s former
FBI handler when Sater worked with Trump.
Left to right: XMark partners Ed Deck and Gary Uher accompany
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump with his private
security director, longtime Trump Organization employee Keith
Schiller, after delivering an address in Birch Run, Michigan, August
11, 2015. Photo credit: Bill Pugliano / Getty Images
The paths of other central characters in the case are also
curious.
Two of Loretta Lynch’s colleagues at the Eastern District
US Attorney’s office, Leslie Caldwell and Kelly Anne
Moore, left government service to join the law firm of
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, and both represented Sater at
his 2009 sentencing hearing. Caldwell returned to
government work in late 2013 when she was tapped to
serve as Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal
Division — the number three position at the Justice
Department.
Moore is still at Morgan Lewis. That firm was hired post-
election by Trump to sort out ethical issues concerning
possible conflicts of interest — which considering this
history takes on a whole new meaning. (Neither Caldwell
nor Moore responded to requests for comment.)
Trump’s announcement that he had retained Morgan Lewis
as ethics counsel was clearly meant to blunt calls for
disinvestment or use of a blind trust for the oversight of his
businesses. Curiously, on the same day that Trump made
the announcement, the Moscow office of Morgan Lewis
was named “Russia Law Firm of the Year” for 2016 by an
industry association.
By entrusting Morgan Lewis with addressing his conflicts
— and presumably demanding confidentiality agreements
in the process, as is his practice — was Trump insulating
himself from the release of information that would reveal
the true nature of his financial relationship with Sater,
Bayrock, and others?
Such revelations — which could have exposed Sater’s
criminal history, his interactions with Trump, the full
scope of Bayrock’s financial arrangements with the Trump
Organization, and perhaps the true source of Bayrock’s
financing — all would be covered by attorney-client
privilege.
With so many players and so many layers of involvement,
getting to the bottom of Trump’s Russian connection is a
Herculean task. And there is one further complication.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice
Department’s Criminal Division, July 21, 2016. Photo credit: The
Justice Department / YouTube
The Trump-Sater-Mogilevich-Putin saga, with its
intertwining domestic and international threads, is almost
certainly a battleground for powerful elements in the US
intelligence complex. Even unravelling one thread — the
FBI’s “running” of Felix Sater as an informant — is a
challenge at every level. The FBI historically has been
riven by internal battles over priorities and strategies —
and the Bureau has waged fierce turf wars with other
intelligence agencies, notably the CIA.
Why We Need an Independent Investigation
To sum up, WhoWhatWhy’s investigation suggests that the
FBI, in using an informant with a strong connection to
Trump and alleged ties to Russian mobsters — including
one deemed a national security threat by the US — has
seemingly tied its own hands in investigating the president.
This makes it difficult for the Bureau to pursue the
president’s long-running proximity to mobsters, including
gangsters from the former Soviet Union, and to those with
261
close connections to the Russian president and oligarchic
elite.
This in part could explain the FBI’s odd behavior and the
confusing back and forth on what the government knows
about Russia’s interventions in the 2016 election.
In this complex tale, it is sometimes hard to keep focused
on the most important connections. The FBI used Sater in
high-value projects; perhaps to help take down the Brainy
Don Mogilevich, who takes us straight to Putin. That
connection is so sensitive as to be deadly. Indeed after
Ivankov, Mogilevich’s lieutenant and Trump Tower
resident, publicly discussed Mogilevich’s close ties to
Putin, he was gunned down by a sniper on a Moscow
street.
At the end of 2015, the Justice Department’s criminal
division, headed by Leslie Caldwell — the former Eastern
District prosecutor and later Sater’s attorney — removed
Mogilevich from the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted list, an
extremely rare occurrence. Suspects are usually removed
from the list for only two reasons: arrest or death.
FBI wanted poster for Semion Mogilevich, 2009. Photo
credit: FBI and Zscout370 / Wikimedia
Donald Trump has been a big Putin fan for years. This has
been a subject of speculation and derision, but it has not
gone further than that.
Given how close Trump was with Sater, and Sater with the
FBI, and the fact that the FBI was working to thwart
Mogilevich (who was close to Putin), the big question is
this: Why is this president’s unusual enthusiasm for the
Russian leader, and Russia in general, not already a formal
topic of urgent inquiry?
Something doesn’t add up.
Whatever it is, we need to know. And, as this article
demonstrates, the FBI, for a variety of reasons, is not likely
to tell us the whole story.
And, it should be pointed out, what is vitally important to
the public interest is not always what the Bureau considers
a crime. That is why the role of independent investigators,
including, notably, journalists, is so vital. Jack Blum, the
former senior Senate investigator and leading expert on
white-collar financial crime, stresses the gravity and
urgency of the situation:

“However complicated an investigation

might become, it goes to the heart of our
democracy and it must go forward. This
Photo credit: Donald Trump / Twitter Tweet 1 and Tweet 2
time, unlike other investigations, including
***
the Kennedy assassination, CIA-Chile, and
Iran-Contra, it has to go to the heart of the
Related front page panorama photo credit: Adapted by
matter no matter how long it takes and no
matter how shocking the conclusions.” WhoWhatWhy from FBI seal (Andy L / Flickr – CC BY
2.0), Vladimir Putin (President of Russia), Semion
Mogilevich (Mark Nilstein / Getty Images), Felix Sater
(591J / Wikimedia – CC BY-SA 4.0) and Donald Trump
(Gage Skidmore / Flickr – CC BY-SA 2.0).

262
 Israeli PM Thanks Trump
Administration For Supporting Tel Aviv Regime
Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:15PM

Netanyahu also thanked Trump over a recent US budget

request that “leaves military aid to Israel fully funded.”

While addressing AIPAC on Sunday, US Vice President

Mike Pence said that Trump is “serious” about moving the
American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem al-Quds.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American

Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference in
Washington, DC, on March 2, 2015. (Photos by AFP)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin

Netanyahu has thanked the government
of US President Donald Trump for its
support of the Tel Aviv regime.
US Vice President Mike Pence speaks in from of a photo of his
Netanyahu also thanked the new US administration over grandfather's home in Ireland and a census document during a Saint
its choice for Washington’s new ambassador to Israel, Patrick's Day breakfast at the Naval Observatory March 16, 2017 in
while addressing the annual American Israel Public Affairs Washington, DC.
Committee (AIPAC) convention via video link on
Monday. During his campaign, Trump promised Netanyahu that he
would recognize Jerusalem al-Quds as Israel’s undivided
Since taking office in January, Trump’s increased support capital.
for Israel has emboldened the Tel Aviv regime to intensify
anti-Palestinian activities such as settlement expansions. In early December, then US President Obama renewed a
Trump’s predecessor Barack Obama often clashed with the presidential waiver ordering the US embassy in Israel to
Israeli premier. remain in Tel Aviv, despite facing pressure by Congress
and Israel.
Last week, the US Senate confirmed Trump’s
controversial pick of David Friedman to be America’s The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) has warned
ambassador to Israel. the US against the relocation of the embassy, saying that
doing so would fuel extremism in the region and kill all
“Israel is committed to working with
chances for a solution to the conflict.
President Trump to advance peace with the
Palestinians and with all our neighbors,”
Netanyahu said, noting that Palestine must
recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
.

263
 Trump Asks Why Intelligence
Committee Isn't Probing The Clintons
By Tyler Durden
Mar 28, 2017 5:19 AM

Following a day of drama involving the Chair of the House
Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, who has been under
constant onslaught by Democrats ever since his disclosure
last week that Trump had indeed been the object of
surveillance, and whose Democrat peer at the Intel panel,
Adam Schiff, on Monday night called for Nunes to recuse
himself, moments ago Trump waded into the news cycle
when he asked on Twitter why the House Intelligence
Committee is not investigating the Clintons for various ties
of their own to Russia. He then slammed the ongoing anti-
Russian witch hunt, saying "the Russia story is a hoax."
“Why isn't the House Intelligence
Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary
deal that allowed big Uranium to go to
Russia, Russian speech, money to Bill, the
Hillary Russian ‘reset,’ praise of Russia by
Hillary, or Podesta Russian Company.
Trump Russia story is a hoax. #MAGA!”
Trump wrote in two tweets Monday night.
questions about whether the White House could have been
was the source of the intelligence Nunes reviewed.
Democratic lawmakers have now called on Nunes to
recuse himself from the committee’s probe into Russia’s
interference in the United States presidential election.
Nunes on Monday evening said the chairman would not
step aside from the investigation.
The republican lawmaker has claimed that his findings had
no relevance to the Russia probe, even as the committee
examines the unmasking and leaking of surveillance
information as part of that investigation.
***
In a follow up tweet, Trump took another stab at the House
Freedom Caucus, who he said snatched "defeat from the
jaws of victory" - following Friday's failure to repeal and
replace plan for ObamaCare. That followed a Sunday
tweet in which he said the conservative House Freedom
Caucus, along with the Club for Growth and Heritage
Action for America, had “saved” Planned Parenthood and
ObamaCare.

Finally, Trump brought it full circle, touching on Friday's

failure to repeal Obamacare, saying "the Democrats will
make a deal with me on healthcare as soon as ObamaCare
folds - not long. Do not worry, we are in very good shape!
Trump's rhetorical questions come amid a news cycle
which as discussed on various occasions today has focused
on the Republican chair of the Intel Committee, Nunes,
who is under fire for briefing Trump about classified
material he reviewed last week without sharing the
information with committee Democrats. On Monday it was
revealed that Nunes had secretly visited the White House
grounds one day before announcing incidental surveillance
of President Trump’s transition team. His visit raised

264
 Trump 'Takes Advantageous Position,'
Accuses Hillary Clinton Of Russia Ties
© REUTERS/ Jim Lo Scalzo/Pool - Politics
17:37 28.03.2017(Updated 18:07 28.03.2017)
On Monday, United States President Donald Trump took
to Twitter, calling on the bipartisan House Intelligence
Committee to launch a probe into possible links between
Hillary Clinton and Russian affairs.
"Why isn't the House Intelligence
Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary
deal that allowed big Uranium to go
to Russia, Russian speech money to Bill,
the Hillary Russian 'reset,' praise of Russia
by Hillary, or Podesta’s Russian
Company?" Trump asked.
He added:
"Trump Russia story is a hoax."
265
This is not the first time Trump has accused his former
Democratic rival in the presidential election of having ties
with Russia.
In a campaign rally in 2016, he said:
"Hillary Clinton gave them 20 percent of our
uranium – gave Russia for a big payment."
In turn, during the presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton
repeatedly accused Trump of being related to the Kremlin.
After the election, an investigation has been launched
into Moscow’s alleged interference in the electoral
process. Russia has denied the allegations, saying it never
meddles in other nations’ domestic affairs.
In an interview with Radio Sputnik, Nikita Danyuk, deputy
director of the Center for Strategic Research and Prognosis
at RUDN University, commented on the current situation
in the US.
"I think that the current situation bears
much resemblance to what was happening
in the mid-20th century; so-called neo-
McCarthyism. Any relations with Russia or
Russian companies are regarded as a
betrayal of national interests. This is a toxic
situation. Anti-Russian hysteria has been
so much inflated in the US, so now even
reasonable arguments are neglected,"
Danyuk pointed out.
However, the expert noted that despite all allegations
against Trump, few people really believe he has
connections with Moscow.
 "Initially, Trump was in a defensive
position. I think it is helpful for him to a
certain extent. Many understand hysteria
about Trump and his Russia ties are not
normal. In this context, Trump is an
advantageous position. He sees that his
opponents cannot come up with evidence,"
he said.
.
266
"On the one hand, Trump brought up a
good case [about Hillary Clinton’s alleged
ties with Russia]. On the other hand, it is
highly unlikely that any evidence to that
effect will be found. This is just media
rhetoric," Danyuk concluded.
 Dick Cheney Says Russian Meddling In
American Election Could Be Considered 'An Act Of War'
By The_Real_Fly
Mar 28, 2017 1:19 AM

Congratulations democrats!
This is the moment in your life when you come to realize
you've become one and the same as everything you've
always hated about humanity. You and Dick Cheney,
professional neocon war monger, are in agreement that
Russia waged war against America this past election, by
way of hacking into John Podesta's email box and then
providing that information to Wikileaks to publish and help
humiliate an already beleaguered democratic party.
as high as 4 million since the wars began after 9/11). Total
treasury expenditure from the American pleb is in excess
of $5 trillion -- but it's probably more. Some might say
Dick Cheney is the single worst human to walk the face of
the earth since Pol Pot.
Nevertheless, he's in agreement that Russian's actions
against our 'democratic process', one that was overtly
rigged against Bernie Sanders, proven in the Wikileaks,
was an act of war.

Bear in mind, the black hats in the CIA have yet to actually Fall in line little ducks, poor fat little
prove to the American people an actual connection ducks, and sign up your kids to fight in
between Wikileaks and the Russian government. The only the coming Moscow offensive -- to
evidence they've publicly provided us with is laughable defend the honor of John "Pizza map"
circumstantial evidence -- backed up and supported by a Podesta.
sundry of unnamed sources deep from within our
intelligence apparatus. But we should strongly consider
going to war with a super nuclear power -- because
strategically -- that's the best way to end this charade of
humanity once and for all.

But here's Dick Cheney, the man who started it all -- war
in the middle east -- which has cost the lives of at least 1.3
million people (some estimate the total deathtoll could be

267
 Trump To Take “SWAT Team”
Approach To Dismantling Massive Federal Bureaucracy
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 28, 2017
President Donald J. Trump’s goal of repealing and
replacing the disastrous Obamacare health “reform” law
may not happen as soon as he would have preferred, but
the president isn’t going to waste any time sulking about it.
Instead, over the weekend Trump announced the creation
of a new office aimed at paring back and dramatically
restructuring the so-called fourth branch of government –
the federal bureaucracy.
As reported by The Washington Post, the administration on
Monday announced the formation of the White House
Office of American Innovation, which has been put in
place to overhaul the bureaucracy in order to allow it to
function more effectively and efficiently, like a business.
Led by his son-in-law Jared Kushner, the office is seen
within the administration as a “SWAT team of strategic
consultants,” the Post noted, which will “be staffed by
former business executives and is designed to infuse fresh
thinking into Washington” and “float above the daily
political grind” which has, to this point, thwarted any
serious bureaucratic reforms. (RELATED: Another
Promise Fulfilled: Trump Signs Executive Order
Slashing Burdensome Regulations
“All Americans, regardless of their political
views, can recognize that government
stagnation has hindered our ability to
properly function, often creating
widespread congestion and leading to cost
overruns and delays,” the president said in
268
a statement to the Post. “I promised the
American people I would produce results,
and apply my ‘ahead of schedule, under
budget’ mentality to the government.”
Legitimate efforts to pare back the expansive federal
bureaucracy – what chief White House strategic Steve
Bannon has described as the “administrative state” – in
recent administrations have been non-existent. President
Obama not only perpetuated the fourth branch of
government, he greatly expanded Executive Branch
authority by pushing his big government agenda through
the various federal agencies, especially the EPA, FDA, and
IRS.
His predecessor, George W. Bush, also massively
expanded the size and scope of the federal government.
Following the 9/11 attacks, Congress and the White House
passed legislation creating the gargantuan Department of
Homeland Security, which combined existing federal
agencies and created new ones like the Transportation
Security Administration.
The last serious attempt to roll back government occurred
during the Reagan administration, and while he succeeded
on some levels, even he couldn’t get rid of entire federal
agencies – like the Department of Education which, when
he came into office in January 1981, had only been in
existence for a few years.
The formation of this new office is in line with Trump’s
earlier actions to curb federal rules and regulations. In
January, shortly after taking office, he signed an executive
order requiring federal agencies to get rid of two
regulations for every new rule written and implemented.
This came after Trump ordered a freeze on all federal
hiring, with the exception of the military and national
security positions. (RELATED: Trump’s Economic Plan:
No ‘Death Tax’, Less Business Tax, And Fewer
Regulations)
The new office also makes sense given Trump’s previous
statements regarding federal regulations. He has said he
would like to do away with 75 percent of regulations
currently on the books, and more if it can be done
responsibly.
 “It’s clear as can be that they intend to
reduce the level of regulation,” said James
Gattuso, a senior fellow in regulatory policy
at the conservative Heritage Foundation, of
the Trump administration, MSN reported.
“If successful, it would be the first time in a
generation,” since Ronald Reagan was in
the White House that the federal regulatory
burden was cut substantially he added,
commenting on Trump’s previous executive
actions.
As the Post noted, Kushner is setting up his new office as
“an offensive team” comprised of aggressive ideas devoid
of ideology that can literally transform the way
269
government operates. He seeks to attract talent from within
and outside of government and to be linked with the
business, philanthropic and academic communities.
“We should have excellence in
government,” said Kushner in a West Wing
interview with the Post. “The government
should be run like a great American
company. Our hope is that we can achieve
successes and efficiencies for our
customers, who are the citizens.”
Included in the new office’s efforts are reforming the
chronically troubled Veterans Affairs, and battling opioid
addiction, which has evolved into a nationwide crisis.
 Trump Signs Order Sweeping
Away Obama-Era Climate Policies
By Valerie Volcovici And Jeff Mason | WASHINGTON
Tue Mar 28, 2017 | 2:48pm EDT

"I cannot tell you how many jobs the

executive order is going to create but I
can tell you that it provides confidence
in this administration’s commitment to
the coal industry," Kentucky Coal
Association president Tyler White told
Reuters.

Trump signed the order with EPA Administrator Scott

Pruitt, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, Energy Secretary
Rick Perry and Vice President Mike Pence by his side.

U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on
Tuesday to undo a slew of Obama-era climate change
regulations that his administration says is hobbling oil
drillers and coal miners, a move environmental groups
have vowed to take to court.
U.S. presidents have aimed to reduce U.S. dependence on
foreign oil since the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s, which
triggered soaring prices. But the United States still imports
about 7.9 million barrels of crude oil a day, almost enough
meet total oil demand in Japan and India combined.

The decree's main target is former President Barack

Obama's Clean Power Plan that required states to slash
carbon emissions from power plants - a critical element in
helping the United States meet its commitments to a global
climate change accord reached by nearly 200 countries in
Paris in 2015.

The so-called "Energy Independence" order also reverses

a ban on coal leasing on federal lands, undoes rules to curb
methane emissions from oil and gas production, and
reduces the weight of climate change and carbon emissions
in policy and infrastructure permitting decisions.
U.S. President Donald Trump holds up an executive order on 'energy
"I am taking historic steps to lift independence,' eliminating Obama-era climate change regulations,
restrictions on American energy, to during a signing ceremony at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) headquarters in Washington, U.S., March 28, 2017.
reverse government intrusion, and to REUTERS/Carlos Barria
cancel job-killing regulations," Trump
said at the Environmental Protection
While Trump's administration has said reducing
Agency headquarters, speaking on a stage
environmental regulation will create jobs, some green
lined with coal miners.
groups have countered that rules supporting clean energy
have done the same.
The wide-ranging order is the boldest yet in Trump’s
broader push to cut environmental regulation to revive the
The number of jobs in the U.S. wind power industry rose
drilling and mining industries, a promise he made
32 percent last year while solar power jobs rose by 25
repeatedly during the presidential campaign. But energy
percent, according to a Department of Energy study.
analysts and executives have questioned whether the
moves will have a big effect on their industries, and
environmentalists have called them reckless. 'ASSAULT ON AMERICAN VALUES'

270
Environmental groups hurled scorn on Trump's order,
arguing it is dangerous and goes against the broader global
trend toward cleaner energy technologies.
"These actions are an assault on American
values and they endanger the health,
safety and prosperity of every American,"
said billionaire environmental activist Tom
Steyer, the head of activist group NextGen
Climate.
Green group Earthjustice was one of many organizations
that said it will fight the order both in and out of court.
"This order ignores the law and scientific
reality," said its president, Trip Van
Noppen.
An overwhelming majority of scientists believe that human
use of oil and coal for energy is a main driver of climate
change, causing a damaging rise in sea levels, droughts,
and more frequent violent storms.
But Trump and several members of his administration
have doubts about climate change, and Trump promised
during his campaign to pull the United States out of the
Paris climate accord, arguing it would hurt U.S. business.
Since being elected Trump has been mum on the Paris deal
and the executive order does not address it.
Christiana Figueres, former executive secretary of the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change who helped broker the Paris accord, lamented
Trump's order.
.
271
"Trying to make fossil fuels remain
competitive in the face of a booming clean
renewable power sector, with the clean air
and plentiful jobs it continues to generate,
is going against the flow of economics,"
she said.
The order will direct the EPA to start a formal "review"
process to undo the Clean Power Plan, which was
introduced by Obama in 2014 but was never implemented
in part because of legal challenges brought by Republican-
controlled states.
The Clean Power Plan required states to collectively cut
carbon emissions from power plants by 32 percent below
2005 levels by 2030.
Some 85 percent of U.S. states are on track to meet the
targets despite the fact the rule has not been implemented,
according to Bill Becker, director of the National
Association of Clean Air Agencies, a group of state and
local air pollution control agencies.
Trump’s order also lifts the Interior Department's Bureau
of Land Management's temporary ban on coal leasing on
federal property put in place by Obama in 2016 as part of a
review to study the program's impact on climate change
and ensure royalty revenues were fair to taxpayers.
It also asks federal agencies to discount the cost of carbon
in policy decisions and the weight of climate change
considerations in infrastructure permitting, and reverses
rules limiting methane leakage from oil and gas facilities.
(Additional reporting by Timothy Gardner; writing by
Richard Valdmanis; Editing by Mary Milliken and Jeffrey
Benkoe)
 Bret Easton Ellis: Barbra Streisand, Lena Dunham
Shouldn’t Blame Trump For Their Own ‘Neuroses’
Ellis Says “Childish Meltdowns” By Liberals Are Ruining
His Dinners Out And Even Hurting His
Relationship With His Boyfriend
Tim Molloy
March 28, 2017 @ 12:09 PM
Fullscreen
Bret Easton Ellis says “childish meltdowns” by Hollywood
liberals who still can’t accept Donald Trump’s win are
ruining his dinners out with friends — and even hurting his
relationship with his boyfriend.
In a 35-minute monologue on his latest podcast, the
“American Psycho” author says coastal elites who
embrace the anti-Trump “resistance” are testing his
patience. He talked about a ruined night out at Spago’s,
and another dinner spoiled by a millionaire who was
furious about “patriarchy.” He also called out Lena
Dunham, Barbra Streisand and Meryl Streep.
“You can dislike the fact that Trump was
elected, yes, definitely, and yet still
understand and accept ultimately that he
was elected this time around. Or you can
have a complete mental and emotional
collapse and let the Trump presidency
define you, which I think is absurd. … If you
are still losing your s— about Trump, I think
you should probably go to a shrink and not
let the bad man that was elected define
your self-victimization and your life. You
are letting him win.”
“Barbra Streisand says she’s gaining
weight because of Trump. Lena Dunham
272
says she’s losing weight because of
Trump. Really? You’re blaming the
president for your own problems and
neuroses?” Ellis said.
He also wondered why Meryl Streep used her Golden
Globe speech in January to talk about Trump.
“Instead of talking about all the filmmakers
she had worked with and who had passed
away in the last two years — Michael
Cimino, Mike Nichols, Nora Ephron, or
especially what it was like playing Carrie
Fisher in “Postcards From the Edge,” since
Fisher had died just two weeks earlier,
Streep used this moment to go on an anti-
Trump rant for 10 minutes on national TV,
instead of eulogizing her friend — again,
reinstating the moral superiority of the left
and ignoring aesthetics in place of
ideology,” Ellis said.
He later added:
“For some reason I started thinking about
the cost of Meryl Streep’s gown at the
Golden Globes and the $30 million
apartment she had recently put on the
market in Greenwich Village.”
Ellis said one of the “morally superior wealthy people”
who ruined a recent dinner with friends by complaining
about white male patriarchy lives in a penthouse on the
Upper West Side — “and probably has a net worth of $10
million dollars.”
“Liberalism used to be about freedom but
now is about a kind of warped moral
authority that is actually part of the moral
superiority movement. This faction of the
left is touchingly now known as ‘The
Resistance.’ Oh yes, the resistance. What
 is this resistance? There are posters all
over my neighborhood in West Hollywood
urging me to resist, resist, resist,” he said.
“But some of us, who did not vote for
Trump, and who located exactly who he
was decades ago … some of us have been
wondering: Resist what, exactly? And who
is telling us to resist whatever? The people
who voted for the candidate who lost — I’m
supposed to listen to them? Is this a joke?
… Well I’m certainly resisting the childish
meltdowns I’ve been witnessing at dinners
and on social media and on late night TV
and too many times in my own home.”
Ellis said his own boyfriend has relapsed into a struggle
with opiates since Trump’s rise.
“What was happening to my boyfriend was
also reflective of the epidemic of moral
superiority that has engulfed and is now
destroying, eating alive, the American left. I
cannot count the time my boyfriend has left
the house since the election his hair long
and tousled, he hasn’t shaved in months,
and he’s addicted to three things besides
opiates: Russian conspiracies discussed
on Reddit, Rachel Maddow detailing
Russian conspiracies, and Final Fantasy
15,” Ellis said.
The author said he didn’t vote in the presidential election
because his state, California, wasn’t in contention. But he
stressed that he is no fan of Trump’s, and that Trump was
the hero of Patrick Bateman, the sociopathic antihero of
“American Psycho.”
“A long time ago in a country far, far away I had made
Trump Patrick Bateman’s hero in ‘American Psycho,'”
Ellis said. “I had researched the odious business practices,
273
the lying, Roy Cohn as his mentor, the hideous racism.
Followed his trajectory. I had done my homework. You do
not need to remind me. I know it all.”
Ellis also said Trump and his fellow disruptors are
successfully “blowing up fixed ideas about what is
presidential and what is not how campaigns should be run
or not, how social media should be used to reach voters or
not.”
“This is what leveled the press and made them look like
some kind of old-school anachronism, unable to
understand the new playbook that the disruptors had
devised,” Ellis added. “Taking Trump literally was about
as useful as complaining about the Kardashians. … The
way the press the coverage of this election was an absolute
moral disaster for our country.”
Ellis said he did have one dinner that wasn’t ruined
recently — a night out in West Hollywood, where he was
shocked to learn the entire table was voting for Trump. He
said he tweeted about it, and was retweeted thousands of
times, including by Trump himself.
“One of the women at that dinner texted me the next day
and said she laughed when she saw the tweet. But she also
warned: Don’t tell anyone who it is,” Ellis said. “Her
business was Hollywood-based, and who knows what
could happen in this climate? People were way too
hysterical, and it’s just not worth it to defend your beliefs.”
He said the recent dust-ups over conservative sociologist
Charles Murray appearing at Middleburg College —
and liberal commentator Van Jones’ offering mild recent
praise for Trump — show that liberals are going too far to
stifle dissent.
“It’s time to get up, pull on your big-boy pants, and have a
stiff drink at the bar,” Ellis said. “Because in the end, we
share only one country.”
 White House Evasive As House
Intelligence Committee Grinds To A Halt
By Tom Lobianco, Sara Murray And Manu Raju, CNN
Updated 4:41 PM ET, Tue March 28, 2017
Washington (CNN)The Trump administration is refusing to
provide details Tuesday to who signed House Intelligence
Chairman Devin Nunes into offices on White House
grounds, as the House investigation into Russia's
interference in the US elections is stalled, the victim of a
partisan showdown.
All meetings of the House Russia investigators were
canceled this week shortly before the top Democrat, Rep.
Adam Schiff, said Nunes must recuse himself in order for
the investigation to continue.
Schiff also said Tuesday that he wants Republicans to
agree to reschedule a pair of hearings that had been set for
today -- including one where former acting Attorney
General Sally Yates was expected to testify about
communications between former Trump National Security
Adviser Michael Flynn and Russian ambassador to the US
Sergey Kislyak -- before agreeing to move forward with
their investigation.
"We are recommending that they schedule
two hearings -- the hearing with directors
(FBI Director) James Comey and Rogers,
as well as the open hearing which they
originally canceled. So we hope that they
will except that invitation and we can
continue to move forward," Schiff told
reporters Tuesday. "The White House
today said that they want Sally Yates to
testify, so let her testify. I think it will be
hard now for the chairman to explain why
he won't permit her to come testify."
Nunes, however, told CNN Tuesday
morning he was "moving forward" with the
274
investigation and said he won't recuse
himself.
"It moves forward just like it was before,"
Nunes told reporters.
It's a monumental shift from where House investigators
planned to be Tuesday, interrogating a trio of former
Obama administration officials in a public hearing. But last
week's hearing -- the first and so far only public hearing of
the House Russia investigation -- sparked a wildfire of
partisan fighting after Comey confirmed he is investigating
possible coordination between President Donald Trump's
campaign aides and Russian officials.
The ensuing days saw Nunes brief Trump privately on new
information of potential surveillance of Trump's aides
before telling Democrats on the investigation. Nunes then
apologized to Democrats, but the following day he
canceled Tuesday's public hearing, saying he wanted to
hear from Comey and National Security Agency Director
Mike Rogers in private, prompting outrage from
Democrats.
Nunes said Tuesday he formally invited Comey to testify
again, though he did not specify any details on timing.
A Republican House Intelligence Committee source
defended the decision to try and move the Comey and
Rogers hearing behind closed doors, saying Democrats are
trying to kill the investigation.
"We just had 100 questions where Director
Comey said that he couldn't answer in that
setting, so you think the next step this week
would be then 'OK, we'll come down and
answer the questions in the closed
session,'" the source said. "But from what I
understand, we were not able to agree to
have that done."
Asked to weigh in on calls for Nunes to recuse himself, the
Republican source responded,
"That's horses---."
The news Monday that Nunes met his source on White
House grounds sparked the latest round of partisan
fighting, which has left investigators unable to continue
right now.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer dismissed
accusations that the White House was being evasive on the
specifics of Nunes' visit but refused to provide details on
who signed the California Republican into White House
grounds, as would be required protocol.
The White House on Tuesday also rejected allegations that
it sought to prevent Yates from testifying the House
committee's investigation.
"The White House has taken no action to
prevent Sally Yates from testifying and the
Department of Justice, specifically told her
that it would not stop her and to suggest
otherwise is completely irresponsible,"
deputy press secretary Sarah Sanders said
in a statement to CNN.
The statement came after The Washington Post reported
that the Trump administration sought to block Yates'
testimony before Congress.
Even before Monday's stunning split, Democrats and
Republicans said they were having a hard time agreeing on
how to move forward in their investigation, unable to
agree on which key witnesses to bring in. That split was
punctuated by announcements from three key figures at the
center of the FBI investigation -- former Trump campaign
chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump adviser Roger
Stone and former Trump foreign policy aide Carter Page --
that they would gladly testify before House investigators.
In private, Republicans have accused Democrats of
"grandstanding" -- using Nunes trips to the White House as
a means to kill an investigation that they say is unlikely to
.
275
turn up any smoking guns of collusion between the Trump
campaign and Russian intelligence. Democrats,
meanwhile, have accused Nunes of attempting to "suicide
bomb" his own investigation because they are convinced
the evidence of collusion is there.
In a highly symbolic move Monday, after Nunes canceled
a planned committee meeting, House Intelligence
Republicans and Democrats still met in the same,
classified briefing space in the Capitol where they
typically meet but they gathered separately, plotting their
own game plans.
Democrats believe Nunes is too close to the White House
to lead a thorough investigation into Russia -- including
ties between the Trump camp and Russian officials -- an
assertion firmly rejected by the GOP.
"I don't think he can just recuse himself and
still chair the committee," Rep. Jackie
Speier, a Democrat on the panel, told
CNN's Chris Cuomo Tuesday on "New
Day." "I think that the writing is on the wall.
It might make a good spy novel. It doesn't
make a good investigation."
Comey and Rogers opted not to brief the panel amid the
furor within the committee over how to proceed with its
investigation.
The full committee typically meets at least twice a week
and it's uncertain if those meetings will be rescheduled.
This story has been updated to reflect breaking news.
CNN's Jeremy Diamond and Eugene Scott contributed to
this report.
 WASHINGTON ON LOCKDOWN
White House Bomb Scare Evacuation ‘After Man
Approaches Building Claiming To Have Explosives’
A Secret Service Official Says An Explosive Ordinance Team Was On The
Scene This Morning To Examine The Package About A
Block From The White House
By Emma Lake, Guy Birchall And Mark Hodge
28th March 2017, 3:33 Pm
Updated: 28th March 2017, 7:19 Pm

THE White House was dramatically placed on lockdown

while President Trump was inside after a “suspicious
package” was discovered.

A suspect was arrested as Secret Service agents cleared all

media and visitors from the North Lawn and eagle-eyed
snipers were spotted roaming the Presidential property.

EPA - The Secret Service locked doors as the Press Corps were
issued with a Shelter in Place warning

The man reportedly approached an officer half a block

from the White House and made a ‘suspicious’ comment
while holding a package.

Cops detained the suspect and seized the package.

US Secret Service - Police are pictured arresting the suspect outside
the White House
A security perimeter was established near the White House
grounds, but officials say all other West Wing activity is
proceeding normally and now all road restrictions relating
to the incident have been lifted.

An official with the U.S Secret Service said: “Secret

Service investigating suspicious package near White
House grounds. Road closures in effect.”

Journalist Andrew Feinberg had earlier tweeted:

“White House on lockdown at 10:25am for

a ‘suspicious package’ per Secret Service
Uniformed Division office.”
Getty Images - A Secret Service officer patrols the north lawn at the
White House in Washington

276
 The lockdown was instigated just hours before the
morning press briefing with Sean Spicer.

The service’s official Twitter account posted a picture of a

car with the statement:

“Suspicious package investigation

continues; suspect in custody!”

Journalist Trey Yingst tweeted that the man allegedly

arrested by agents had a warrant out for his arrest and a
bomb robot was being sent out to investigate the package.

Fox News reports that the male suspect was outside the
grounds when he told officers he had a bomb in his bag.

Roads around the building were also closed, according to

NBC reporter Peter Alexander.

Some members of the White House Press Corps appear to

have been locked inside the press room as the Secret
Service investigate.

They were issued with a “shelter in place” warning which

has now been lifted.

The Secret Service later said it had established a security

perimeter and that members of the public and the media
Getty Images - President Donald Trump was reportedly inside the
were being moved to a safe distance. White House during the bomb scare

A Secret Service official says an explosive ordinance team

was on the scene this morning to examine the package near
the White House.

The investigation comes after two recent fence-jumping

incidents at the White House.

A California man was charged with jumping the fence

while carrying two cans of Mace and a woman from
Washington state got tangled up in her shoelaces trying to
Getty Images - Members of the White House Press Corps stand
behind the locked door of the briefing room at the White House jump the barrier last week.

Getty Images - Doors were locked while the investigation, which is

still ongoing, proceeded eventually leading to the arrest of a man

.
277
 Trump Signs Executive Order
Dismantling Obama Environmental Regulations
By Jacqueline Alemany CBS News
March 28, 2017, 3:00 PM
President Trump signed a sweeping executive order on
Tuesday to begin the process of dismantling environmental
regulations implemented under the Obama administration
to aggressively fight climate change.
Mr. Trump hailed it as
“the start of a new era in American energy
production”
in remarks before signing the Energy Independence
executive order at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). His order aims to unwind the core of President
Obama’s 2013 Climate Action Plan.
The order “directs the EPA to suspend,
revise, or rescind the Clean Power Plan.”
The Clean Power Plan limits carbon emissions at coal-
fired power plants.
Mr. Trump’s executive order also lifts the moratorium on
federal coal leasing, rescinds restrictions on hydraulic
fracking, and eliminates the National Environmental
Policy Act, a set of guidelines for agencies to consider
climate change into their decision making process.
“My administration is putting an end to the
war on coal -- going to have clean coal,
really clean coal,” Mr. Trump declared.
The executive order also mandates that every agency
conduct a 180-day review that identifies all regulations and
rules that “impede” energy production. Mr. Trump plans to
use the reports to craft his administration’s “America
First” energy blueprint to serve what the administration
calls the “twin goal” of protecting the environment and
278
strengthening the economy by promoting energy
production.
The president said the order would
“reverse government intrusion” and “cancel
job-killing regulations.”
The senior administration official said Mr. Trump aims to
“strengthen the nation’s energy security by
reducing unnecessary regulatory obstacles
that restrict the responsible use of domestic
energy resources.”
Critics argue that Mr. Trump’s anti-climate change
initiatives that resist transitioning from coal and gas to
clean energy will in fact hurt the economy.
“The best way to protect workers and the
environment is to invest in growing the
clean energy economy that is already
outpacing fossil fuels, and ensuring no one
is left behind,” Michael Brune, the
executive director of the Sierra Club, wrote
in a statement. “At a time when we can
declare independence from dirty fuels by
embracing clean energy, this action could
only deepen our dependence on fuels that
pollute our air, water and climate while
making our kids sicker.”
During the Trump administration’s review of President
Obama’s Clean Power Plan, the White House is also
rolling back the federal regulation of methane emissions
from the oil and gas industry.
The senior White House official said that the president and
the administration accept the scientific view of climate
change but they disagree with the Obama administration
over policy prescriptions.
There is no mention of the Paris Agreement on climate
change, from which Mr. Trump has previously said he
would withdraw. Roughly 200 countries agreed to the
climate plan that cuts greenhouse gases, but the senior
administration official says that they have not made a final
decision on the matter.
 Trump Dramatically Changes
US Approach To Climate Change
By Dan Merica, CNN
Updated 3:19 PM ET, Tue March 28, 2017
Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump signed a
sweeping executive order Tuesday at the Environmental
Protection Agency, which officials said looks to curb the
federal government's enforcement of climate regulations
by putting American jobs above addressing climate
change.
The order represents a clear difference between how
Trump and former President Barack Obama view the role
the United States plays in combating climate change, and
dramatically alters the government's approach to rising sea
levels and temperatures -- two impacts of climate change.
Trump said during the signing that the
order will "eliminate federal overreach" and
"start a new era of production and job
creation."
"My action today is latest in steps to grow
American jobs," Trump added, saying his
order is "ending the theft of prosperity."
A White House official briefed on the plan said Monday
the administration believes the government can both "serve
the environment and increase energy independence at the
same time" by urging the EPA for focus on what the
administration believes is its core mission: Clean air and
clean water.
More important than regulating climate change, the official
said, is protecting American jobs.
"It is an issue that deserves attention," the
official said of climate change. "But I think
the President has been very clear that he is
279
not going to pursue climate change policies
that put the US economy at risk. It is very
simple."
Tuesday's order initiates a review of the Clean Power Plan,
rescinds the moratorium on coal mining on US federal
lands and urges federal agencies to "identify all
regulations, all rules, all policies ... that serve as obstacles
and impediments to American energy independence," the
official said.
Specifically, the order rescinds at least six Obama-era
executive orders aimed at curbing climate change and
regulating carbon emissions, including Obama's November
2013 executive order instructing the federal government to
prepare for the impact of climate change and the
September 2016 presidential memorandum that outlined
the "growing threat to national security" that climate
change poses.
"The previous administration devalued
workers by their policies," the official said.
"We are saying we can do both. We can
protect the environment and provide people
with work."
The White House official went on to argue that the best
way to protect the environment is to have a strong
economy, noting that countries like India and China do
less to protect the environment.
"To the extent that the economy is strong
and growing and you have prosperity, that
is the best way to protect the environment,"
the official said.
The executive order also represents the greatest fears
climate change advocates had when Trump was elected in
November 2016.
"These actions are an assault on American
values and they endanger the health,
safety and prosperity of every American,"
Tom Steyer, the president of NexGen
Climate, said in a statement. "Trump is
deliberately destroying programs that
create jobs and safeguards that protect our
air and water, all for the sake of allowing
 corporate polluters to profit at our
expense."
Andrew Steer, CEO of the World Resources Institute, said
that the executive order shows Trump is
"failing a test of leadership to protect
Americans' health, the environment and
economy."
Some environmental advocates have already said they plan
to take legal action against the Trump administration.
But as much as Democrats and climate advocates will
decry it, Trump's executive order follows the President's
past comments about climate change. Though Trump told
The New York Times during the election that he has an
"open mind" about confronting climate change, he also
once called it a hoax.
"The concept of global warming was
created by and for the Chinese in order to
make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,"
Trump tweeted in November 2012.
"I will also cancel all wasteful climate
change spending from Obama/Clinton,"
Trump said in October 2016.
On Tuesday, ahead of the signing, White
House press secretary Sean Spicer
declined to say whether Trump still
believes climate change is a hoax.
"He does not believe ... that there is a
binary choice between job creation,
economic growth and caring about the
environment," Spicer said. "That's what we
should be focusing on."
The changes, the official said, do not mean the Trump
administration will not look to protect the environment any
longer, the official said, but when pressed about the human
impact on climate change and Trump's beliefs, the official
was reluctant to say whether all government officials in the
Trump White House believe humans cause climate change.
"I think there are plenty of rules on the
books already. We will continue to enforce
that provide for clean air and clean water.
.
280
And that is what we are going to do," the
official said. "The President has been very
clear that he wants the EPA to stick to that
basic core mission that Congress set out
for it."
The changes also reflect the view of EPA Administrator
Scott Pruitt, who routinely sued the organization he now
leads during his time as the Attorney General of
Oklahoma. In an interview with CNBC earlier this month,
Pruitt argued incorrectly that carbon dioxide isn't the
"primary contributor" to climate change, a comment that
goes against most scientific research.
This executive order is also an attempt by the Trump
administration to make good on its promise to bring more
coal jobs back. The official said that Obama's regulations
"were not helpful" to the coal industry and these reversals
are the President honoring "a pledge he made to the coal
industry."
"We are going to put our coal miners back
to work," Trump said at a March 2017
event in Kentucky. "They have not been
treated well, but they're going to be treated
well now."
He added:
"The miners are coming back."
On Tuesday at the EPA, Trump welcomed a group of
miners that attended the signing and said the order was
"putting an end to the war on coal."
It is unclear whether Trump's order will actually bring
back coal jobs, in part, because of market forces like the
rise of clean energy that are already putting pressure on the
coal industry.
Robert Murray, the CEO of Murray Energy, told CNN in
January that coal employment "can't be brought back to
where it was before the election of Barack Obama"
because of market pressure.
This story has been updated.
CNN's Jeremy Diamond contributed to this report.
 DNC Purge: Corrupt Democratic
National Committee Fires ALL Staffers
DNC Cleaning House After Election Loss
By Alex Thomas -
03.28.2017 @9:11 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — New Democratic National Committee
Chairman Tom Perez has asked the entire staff of the DNC
to turn in their resignation letters amid major party turmoil
after November’s stunning defeat, according to a report by
NBC News.
The report claims that sources have revealed that shortly
after Perez was elected as party chairman, an adviser for
disgraced outgoing DNC Interim Chair Donna Brazile
asked every employee to submit a letter of resignation by
April 15.
“A committee advising Perez on his
transition is now interviewing staff and
others as part of a top-to-bottom review
process to decide not only who will stay
and who will go, but how the party should
be structured in the future,” reported NBC
News.
Despite claims by some in the party that this is normal, we
are clearly seeing a response to not only the Democrats
losing the election but also controversy within the party
after it was revealed that most of the DNC worked against
Bernie Sanders in the primary.
Noting that 2016 was one of the most difficult years ever
for the party, the NBC report continued,
“It began with accusations that the DNC
favored Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders
in the Democratic primary, continued with
the wrenching exposure of hacked emails
and the abrupt resignation of former chair,
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and
concluded with the shocking defeat of its
.
281
presidential nominee and a divisive race for
the new party chairman.”
Keep in mind that the so-called “accusations” are in reality
absolute fact and that is was not only Schultz who worked
against Sanders as it was also revealed by Wikileaks that
Brazile herself had given the Clinton campaign questions
that were going to be asked at a CNN town hall.
After months of denial, Brazile admitted the mistake while
blaming the Russians for the entire fiasco.
Clearly we are seeing a major shakeup within the
Democratic Party and when you consider Perez’s ties to
the establishment it only makes sense that this is a purge of
the pro-Sanders wing of the party.
Remember, some within the DNC openly rebelled against
the party elite after it was revealed that they had been
working against Sanders, even going as far as holding a
vote to abolish the super delegate rule. Although the vote
failed, 58 delegates voted for it.
As we reported at the time,
“Though a stinging defeat for those who
campaigned in favor of the rule change,
spearheaded largely by Bernie Sanders
delegates and progressive advocacy
groups, supporters took solace that
because more than one-quarter of the
committee voted ‘yes’ they will able to
introduce a minority report during the full
convention next week and demand a floor
vote.”
 Left-Wing ‘Historian’ Accuses
Trump Of ‘Treason,’ ‘Assault’ on Environment
By Kyle Drennen
March 28, 2017 | 5:05 PM EDT
Appearing on MSNBC’s 3 p.m. ET hour on Tuesday under
the guise of being a “presidential historian,” left-wing
pundit Douglas Brinkley accused President Trump and his
associates – without evidence – of committing an act of
“treason.” He went on rant that the President’s new
executive order rolling back onerous Obama-era
environmental regulations was “an assault on the public
lands.”
Anchor Kate Snow started off the discussion by inviting
Brinkley to elaborate on recent comments he made to the
Washington Post about the administration betraying the
country:
“You told the Washington Post last
week that, quote, ‘There’s a smell of
treason in the air,’ when it comes to this
[Russia] investigation. Why did you say
that and has anything changed about
your view in the last week?”
He was eager to double down on his incendiary and
unsubstantiated claim:
Well, you know, a lot of people are
afraid to use the T-word, treason, but in
the end, that's what people are
investigating.
People talk about collusion with Russia, we’re talking
about whether there are people that worked in the Trump
campaign who meddled in an American election....
282
you’re working for somebody who’s an
adversary of ours, like Russia. That's
treason.
Snow then played a soundbite from minutes earlier of
Trump announcing an executive order “lifting job-killing
restrictions on the production of oil, natural gas, clean
coal, and shale energy.” She turned back to Brinkley and
referenced his new book on the environmental record of
Franklin D. Roosevelt:
“...if FDR were around today, what would
he think of that?”
Brinkley launched into a lengthy tirade:
He’d be aghast at it, as would Theodore
Roosevelt, and anybody who loves
conservation and the environment. I mean,
this idea of – Donald Trump shopping
this idea of clean coal, that’s like
alternative fact. That's like “happy
poison.” There’s no such thing as clean
coal. We’ve been trying to wean ourselves
off it for a while, and for good reasons.
Smoke stack industries of America are
choking people. We have respiratory
illness in this country.
We’re trying to march forward in the 21st
Century to keep our rivers and lakes and
our landscape as FDR wanted it, as part of
our rightful heritage.
And this is just an assault on the public
lands. We’ve seen it with Ronald
Reagan, under James Watt in his first term
as Secretary of Interior, and Watt went
down in flames. Here you have Donald
Trump beginning a process of trying to
gut the budget of the EPA by 33% and
shop it as jobs and clean coal.
Hoping to get her guest to slam Trump one more time,
Snow wrapped up the exchange by lobbing another
softball to Brinkley:
 “The New Deal happened in the first 100
days [of FDR’s administration], right?
Refresh our memory of what happened in
that first 100 days and how does that
compare to what we’ve seen so far in
Donald Trump’s first 100 days?”
Brinkley sneered:
“Well, on a 1 to 10 scale, FDR’s 100
days was a 10 and Donald Trump’s is a
zero.”
Talking to the Post on March 20, Brinkley went further,
absurdly declaring that Trump had
“the most failed first 100 days of any
president.” “I don’t know how it can get
much worse,” he added.
Oh really? Well, the Civil War started in the first 100 days
of Abraham Lincoln’s administration. President William
Henry Harrison was dead for 70 of his first 100 days after
passing away just 30 days into his presidency. Perhaps an
“historian” should know that.
Here is a full transcript of the March 28 segment:
3:08 PM ET
KATE SNOW: I want to turn over now to Douglas
Brinkley, who’s an historian who’s with us, and get into
a little bit of a deeper discussion about all this. You’ve
got a new book out right now Douglas, right? Full
Heritage: Franklin D. Roosevelt and The Land of
America. A lot of interesting stuff in that book that I
want to talk to you, because I feel like it's relevant to
the day and the moment in history that we’re in – you’re
nodding along – that we’re in right now.
I want to start, though, with what we were just talking
about, and that is the Russia investigation. You told the
Washington Post last week that, quote, “There’s a smell
of treason in the air,” when it comes to this
investigation. Why did you say that and has anything
changed about your view in the last week?
DOUGLAS BRINKLEY: Well, you know, a lot of people
are afraid to use the T-word, treason, but in the end,
that's what people are investigating. People talk about
collusion with Russia, we’re talking about whether there
are people that worked in the Trump campaign who
meddled in an American election. And our free and fair
elections are the heart and soul of our democracy.
And the very fact that on the day that I said that, FBI
director Comey is saying that the President of the
283
United States is under a federal criminal investigation. It
was stunning news, it remains stunning news. And we
don't want to try and act like that’s the new normal. If
there’s ever any evidence that any American citizens
are working to undermine the U.S. government or
undermine our electoral system, it's a serious cause.
And what that is, is you’re not working against America
and you’re working for somebody who’s an adversary
of ours, like Russia. That's treason.
SNOW: I want to talk a little about your book. And as I
said, it's interesting that we're talking to you today,
because as you write, a lot of President Franklin
Roosevelt’s work was focused on the environment, on
conservation, and we just had President Trump signing
that executive order. If I can, I want to play a little bit
more of what the President said about why he was
signing that order to reverse environmental regulations.
DONALD TRUMP: And we’re going to have safety,
we’re going to have clean water, we’re going to have
clean air. But so many are unnecessary and so many
are job-killing. We’re getting rid of the bad ones.
One after another, we are keeping our promises and
putting power back into the hands of the people. First,
today's energy independence action calls for immediate
reevaluation of the so-called Clean Power Plan.
Perhaps –
[APPLAUSE]
Perhaps no single regulation threatens our miners,
energy workers, and companies more than this
crushing attack on American industry.
Second, we are lifting the ban on federal leasing for
coal production.
Third, we are lifting job-killing restrictions on the
production of oil, natural gas, clean coal, and shale
energy.
And finally, we are returning power to the states where
that power belongs. States and local communities know
 what is best for them. They understand it. They get it.
They’ve been doing it for a long time. It was taken away
from them and not handled well. And they are the ones
that we should now, and will now, empower to decide.
My action today is the latest in a series of steps to
create American jobs and to grow American wealth.
SNOW: Doug Brinkley, if FDR were around today, what
would he think of that?
BRINKLEY: He’d be aghast at it, as would Theodore
Roosevelt, and anybody who loves conservation and
the environment. I mean, this idea of – Donald Trump
shopping this idea of clean coal, that’s like alternative
fact. That's like “happy poison.” There’s no such thing
as clean coal. We’ve been trying to wean ourselves off
it for a while, and for good reasons. Smoke stack
industries of America are choking people. We have
respiratory illness in this country.
We’re trying to march forward in the 21st Century to
keep our rivers and lakes and our landscape as FDR
wanted it, as part of our rightful heritage. And this is just
an assault on the public lands. We’ve seen it with
Ronald Reagan, under James Watt in his first term as
Secretary of Interior, and Watt went down in flames.
Here you have Donald Trump beginning a process of
trying to gut the budget of the EPA by 33% and shop it
as jobs and clean coal.
284
SNOW: I want to draw one more time on your role as a
historian and FDR, because in his first 100 days there
was a lot done. The New Deal happened in the first 100
days, right? Refresh our memory of what happened in
that first 100 days and how does that compare to what
we’ve seen so far in Donald Trump’s first 100 days?
BRINKLEY: Well, on a 1 to 10 scale, FDR’s 100 days
was a 10 and Donald Trump’s is a zero. FDR in his
beginning of the New Deal as president created, for
example, this one program, Civilian Conservation Corp.
From 1933 to 1942 unemployed men were hired a
dollar a day and planned 3 billion trees all across
America to green the country. FDR started the process
of creating 800 state parks in his first days in office. He
created things like the Tennessee Valley Authority to
start doing hydro water conservation projects. So it was
an extremely advanced and fertile period, the early
New Deal. In fact, the whole idea of a hundred days
rating is because FDR got an A-plus and everyone else
is kind of compared to him.
SNOW: Doug Brinkley, always good to have your
perspective. Thanks so much.
BRINKLEY: Thank you.
SNOW: And the new book, by the way, is Rightful
Heritage: Franklin D. Roosevelt and The Land of
America.
 Is THIS What Really Happened
Regarding Candidate Trump’s “Wiretaps”?
By Catherine J. Frompovich
March 28, 2017
“Stop the presses,” as they used to say in the old days,
“for this one!”
Is the letter written by Freedom Watch’s Chairman and
General Counsel Larry Klayman, Esq., real news or fake
news? That’s something everyone in the USA ought to be
entitled to know the legally correct answer to and, as the
familiar colloquialism goes, “where the bodies are
hidden,” e.g., the real facts of what happened!
Here is the four-page letter Attorney Klayman wrote to
Chairman David Nunes, Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Attorney Klayman was so insistent that the Chairman and
that Committee received his incriminating letter, he sent it
several ways: Facsimile, Federal Express and Mail.
What could be so important about information Klayman
was presenting? Remember he’s a licensed attorney, who
is subject to legal sanctions for his inappropriate actions,
so for him to go out on a limb with the information he
presented truly is ‘earth shaking’ not only for him and his
career, but also for those involved who are the perpetrators
of Klayman’s allegations and apparent proofs.
Since my computer ‘censors’ won’t permit me to copy and
paste any part of Klayman’s letter, I refer readers to
paragraph 2 on page 1.
Paragraph 1 on page 2 offers some interesting insights:
Regrettably, neither Chairman Nunes nor
anyone else on the Committee raised the
285
serious questions I suggested be posed to
FBI Director Comey at the hearing on
March 20, 2017. In the interests of justice
and a full hearing of the important issues
before it, these questions must be asked in
open session at the subsequent hearing
now scheduled for March 28, 2017.
Indeed, Chairman Nunes has asked that
persons with important and relevant
information come forward. That is exactly
what whistleblower Dennis Montgomery
has done, through me, his undersigned
counsel.
In the following paragraphs on page 2,
Attorney Klayman goes on to elaborate
what whistleblower Montgomery has as
documentation: “47 hard drives and over
600 million pages of information”
Montgomery left the NSA and CIA with
which, according to Klayman, “expose that
the spy agencies engaged for years in
systematic illegal surveillance on prominent
Americans, again including the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court, other
justices, 156 judges, prominent
businessmen such as Donald Trump, and
even yours truly.”
On page 3, paragraph 2, Attorney Klayman states:
It was there that Montgomery laid out how
persons like then businessmen Donald
Trump were illegally spied upon by
Clapper, Brennan, and the spy agencies of
the Obama administration. He even
claimed that these spy agencies had
manipulated voting in Florida during the
2008 presidential election, where illegal
tampering resulted in helping Obama to win
the White House.
In paragraph 4 on page 3, Attorney Klayman alleges:
It would appear the FBI’s investigation was
‘buried’ by FBI Director Comey, perhaps
because the FBI itself collaborates with the
 spy agencies to conduct illegal
surveillance.
And further down in paragraph 7,
My [Klayman’s] expressed purpose: to have Chairman
Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee ask Comey,
under oath, why he and his FBI have seemingly not moved
forward with the Montgomery investigation while, on the
other hand, the FBI Director recently claimed publicly, I
believe falsely, that there is ‘no evidence’ of surveillance
on Donald Trump and those around him by the Obama
administration. Indeed there is.
Attorney Klayman ends his legally-challenging letter to the
Committee and its Chair with this admonition, which is
indicative of the swamp that exists within the halls of
Congress and Washington, DC, federal agencies:
286
Do you intend to get at and investigate the full truth, or as
has regrettably been the case for many years in
government, sweep the truth under the carpet?
Applause, applause, and kudos to Attorney Klayman and
whistleblower Montgomery!
Where is the real fake news and media on this one? Why
aren’t they knocking on Attorney Klayman’s door for
interviews, especially 60 Minutes and the networks nightly
news anchors? What’s truly wrong with letting people
know the depth and scope of the illegalities government
agencies are undertaking upon unassuming citizens in the
USA? If this were happening in some foreign country,
wouldn’t it be headline news? Maybe not, because this all
could be part of the cabal’s New World Order takeover
plan so many politicians are clandestinely involved with.
Readers, please do your homework, then demand
accountability and transparency from Congress, federal
agencies and judges.
 Federal Judge UPHOLDS Travel Freeze
By: Robert Law
Legislative Update: 3/28/2017
A federal judge in Virginia has refused to block the revised
national security executive order, delivering an important
win to the Trump administration. On Friday, Judge
Anthony Trenga, from the Eastern District of Virginia,
rejected a challenge to the travel freeze brought by
Palestinian activist Linda Sarsour, who is represented by
attorneys from the Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR). Unlike the previous challenges in Washington
state, Hawaii, and Maryland, Judge Trenga properly
applied the law—rather than making policy from the
bench—and denied Ms. Sarsour’s motion for a temporary
restraining order (TRO) against the travel freeze from
countries that are hotbed for terrorism and the temporary
freeze on all refugee admissions. (Sarsour v. Trump; see
FAIR Legislative Update, Mar. 21, 2017) Although
Trump’s Justice Department has not yet appealed the
Hawaii ruling (which blocked both the travel freeze and
the refugee freeze), it has appealed the Maryland ruling
(only the travel freeze) and the Fourth Circuit Court of
Appeals will hear arguments on May 8. (See Washington
Examiner, Mar. 23, 2017)
In a 32 page opinion, Judge Trenga demonstrated the
proper role of the judiciary while ruling that the plaintiffs
are not likely to succeed on the merits of their statutory or
Constitutional claims. The court correctly found that
President Trump has the authority under the Immigration
and Nationality Act (INA) to issue the executive order
under Section 1182(f), rejecting the claim that Section
1152 prohibits the president from denying entry to a
particular nationality.
287
“The Court also has substantial doubts that
Section 1152 can be reasonably read to
impose any restrictions on the President’s
exercise of his authority under Sections
1182(f) or 1185(a). Under those sections,
the President has unqualified authority to
bar physical entry to the United States at
the border,” the judge wrote. (Sarsour v.
Trump) “There is nothing in the legislative
scheme to suggest that Congress intended
Section 1152 to restrict the exercise of the
President’s unqualified authority under
Section 1182(f) with respect to a
completely distinct aspect of the
immigration process.” (Id.) Using similar
(proper) legal reasoning, Judge Trenga
rejected the Establishment Clause and
Equal Protection claims. (Id.)
Although the travel freeze is still blocked by the TROs
imposed by the judges in Hawaii and Maryland, this
favorable ruling has created a split in the courts making it
highly likely the Supreme Court will hear the case at some
point. The Trump administration praised the victory, with
a Justice Department spokeswoman saying they are
“pleased with the ruling.” (The Hill, Mar. 24, 2017)
“As the Court correctly explains, the
President’s Executive Order falls well within
his authority to safeguard the nation’s
security,” Sarah Isgur Flores said. (Id.)
 Crowdstike Revises And Retracts
Parts Of Explosive Russian Hacking Report
Michael Krieger
Posted Tuesday Mar 28, 2017 At 3:53 Pm
Last week, I published two posts on cyber security firm
CrowdStrike after becoming aware of inaccuracies in one
of its key reports used to bolster the claim that operatives
of the Russian government had hacked into the DNC.
This is extremely important since the
DNC hired CrowdStrike to look into its
hack, and at the same time denied FBI
access to its servers.
Before reading any further, you should read last week’s
articles if you missed them the first time.
“Credibility of Cyber Firm that Claimed
Russia Hacked the DNC Comes Under
Serious Question”
“What is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired by
DNC has Ties to Hillary Clinton, a
Ukrainian Billionaire and Google”
[Both articles are here earlier in this book.]
Now here are the latest developments courtesy of Voice of
America:
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has
revised and retracted statements it used
to buttress claims of Russian hacking
during last year’s American presidential
election campaign.
288
The shift followed a VOA report that the company
misrepresented data published by an influential British
think tank.
In December, CrowdStrike said it found evidence that
Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app,
contributing to heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s
war with pro-Russian separatists.
VOA reported Tuesday that the International Institute for
Strategic Studies (IISS), which publishes an annual
reference estimating the strength of world armed forces,
disavowed the CrowdStrike report and said it had never
been contacted by the company.
CrowdStrike was first to link hacks of
Democratic Party computers to Russian
actors last year, but some cybersecurity
experts have questioned its evidence.
The company has come under fire from some
Republicans who say charges of Kremlin meddling in the
election are overblown.
After CrowdStrike released its Ukraine report, company
co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch claimed it provided added
evidence of Russian election interference. In both hacks,
he said, the company found malware used by “Fancy
Bear,” a group with ties to Russian intelligence agencies.
CrowdStrike’s claims of heavy Ukrainian artillery losses
were widely circulated in U.S. media.
On Thursday, CrowdStrike walked back
key parts of its Ukraine report.
The company removed language that said Ukraine’s
artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers,
which used aiming software that purportedly was
hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to
20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the
figures to IISS.
Finally, CrowdStrike deleted a statement
saying “deployment of this malware-
 infected application may have
contributed to the high-loss nature of
this platform” — meaning the howitzers
— and excised a link sourcing its IISS
data to a blogger in Russia-occupied
Crimea.
In an email, CrowdStrike spokeswoman Ilina Dmitrova
said the new estimates of Ukrainian artillery losses
resulted from conversations with Henry Boyd, an IISS
research associate for defense and military analysis.
She declined to say what prompted the contact.
Dmitrova noted that the FBI and the U.S. intelligence
community have also concluded that Russia was behind
the hacks of the Democratic National Committee,
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and
the email account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s
campaign manager.
Here’s the problem. Yes, the FBI has agreed with
CrowdStrike’s conclusion, but the FBI did not analyze the
DNC servers because the DNC specifically denied the FBI
access. This was noteworthy in its own right, but it takes
on vastly increased significance given the serious errors in
a related hacking report produced by the company.
289
As such, serious questions need to be asked. Why did FBI
head James Comey outsource his job to CrowdStrike, and
why did he heap praise on the company? For instance,
back in January, Comey referred to CrowdStrike as
a “highly respected private company.”
In a hearing with the Senate Intelligence
Committee Tuesday afternoon outlining the
intelligence agencies’ findings on Russian
election interference, Comey said there
were “multiple requests at different
levels” for access to the Democratic
servers, but that ultimately a “highly
respected private company” was
granted access and shared its findings
with the FBI.
Where does all this respect come from considering how
badly it botched the Ukraine report?
Something stinks here, and the FBI needs to be held to
account.
 The Surveillance State Behind Russia-Gate
By Ray Mcgovern And Bill Binney
March 28, 2017
Exclusive: Amid the frenzy over the Trump team’s talks
with Russians, are we missing a darker story, how the
Deep State’s surveillance powers control the nation’s
leaders, ask U.S. intelligence veterans Ray McGovern and
Bill Binney.
The White House in Washington, D.C. (Flickr Gage Skidmore)
Although many details are still hazy because of secrecy –
and further befogged by politics – it appears House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was
informed last week about invasive electronic surveillance
of senior U.S. government officials and, in turn, passed
that information onto President Trump.
This news presents Trump with an unwelcome but
unavoidable choice: confront those who have kept him in
the dark about such rogue activities or live fearfully in
their shadow. (The latter was the path chosen by President
Obama. Will Trump choose the road less traveled?)
What President Trump decides will largely determine the
freedom of action he enjoys as president on many key
security and other issues. But even more so, his choice
may decide whether there is a future for this constitutional
republic. Either he can acquiesce to or fight against a Deep
State of intelligence officials who have a myriad of ways
to spy on politicians (and other citizens) and thus amass
derogatory material that can be easily transformed into
blackmail.
This crisis (yes, “crisis” is an overused word, but in this
highly unusual set of circumstances we believe it is
appropriate) came to light mostly by accident after
President Trump tweeted on March 4 that his team in New
York City’s Trump Towers had been “wiretapped” by
President Obama.
290
Trump reportedly was relying on media reports regarding
how conversations of aides, including his ill-starred
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, had been
intercepted. Trump’s tweet led to a fresh offensive by
Democrats and the mainstream press to disparage Trump’s
“ridiculous” claims.
However, this concern about the dragnets that U.S.
intelligence (or its foreign partners) can deploy to pick up
communications by Trump’s advisers and then “unmask”
the names before leaking them to the news media was also
highlighted at the Nunes-led House Intelligence
Committee hearing on March 20, where Nunes appealed
for anyone who had related knowledge to come forward
with it.
That apparently happened on the evening of March 21
when Nunes received a call while riding with a staffer.
After the call, Nunes switched to another car and went to a
secure room at the Old Executive Office Building, next to
the White House, where he was shown highly classified
information apparently about how the intelligence
community picked up communications by Trump’s aides.
The next day, Nunes went to the White House to brief
President Trump, who later said he felt “somewhat
vindicated” by what Nunes had told him.
The ‘Wiretap’ Red Herring
But the corporate U.S. news media continued to heckle
Trump over his use of the word “wiretap” and cite the
insistence of FBI Director James Comey and other
intelligence officials that President Obama had not issued a
wiretap order aimed at Trump.
President Donald Trump being sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017. (Screen
shot from Whitehouse.gov)
As those paying rudimentary attention to modern methods
of surveillance know, “wiretapping” is passé. But Trump’s
use of the word allowed FBI and Department of Justice
officials and their counterparts at the National Security
Agency to swear on a stack of bibles that the FBI, DOJ,
and NSA have been unable to uncover any evidence within
their particular institutions of such “wiretapping.”
At the House Intelligence Committee hearing on March
20, FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Michael
Rogers firmly denied that their agencies had wiretapped
Trump Towers on the orders of President Obama.
So, were Trump and his associates “wiretapped?” Of
course not. Wiretapping went out of vogue decades ago,
having been rendered obsolete by leaps in surveillance
technology.
The real question is: Were Trump and his associates
surveilled? Wake up, America. Was no one paying
attention to the disclosures from NSA whistleblower
Edward Snowden in 2013 when he exposed Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper as a liar for denying
that the NSA engaged in bulk collection of
communications inside the United States.
The reality is that EVERYONE, including the President,
is surveilled. The technology enabling bulk collection
would have made the late demented FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover’s mouth water.
Allegations about the intelligence community’s abuse of
its powers also did not begin with Snowden. For instance,
several years earlier, former NSA worker and
whistleblower Russell Tice warned about these “special
access programs,” citing first-hand knowledge, but his
claims were brushed aside as coming from a disgruntled
employee with psychological problems. His disclosures
were soon forgotten.
Intelligence Community’s Payback
However, earlier this year, there was a stark reminder of
how much fear these surveillance capacities have struck in
the hearts of senior U.S. government officials. Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York told
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Trump was
“being really dumb” to take on the intelligence
community, since
“They have six ways from Sunday at
getting back at you.”
Maddow shied away from asking the logical follow-up:
“Senator Schumer, are you actually saying
that Trump should be afraid of the CIA?”
291
Perhaps she didn’t want to venture down a path that would
raise more troubling questions about the surveillance of the
Trump team than on their alleged contacts with the
Russians.
Similarly, the U.S. corporate media is now focused on
Nunes’s alleged failure to follow protocol by not sharing
his information first with Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking
Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
Democrats promptly demanded that Nunes recuse himself
from the Russia investigation.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York.
On Tuesday morning, reporters for CNN and other news
outlets peppered Nunes with similar demands as he walked
down a corridor on Capitol Hill, prompting him to suggest
that they should be more concerned about what he had
learned than the procedures followed.
That’s probably true because to quote Jack Nicholson’s
character in “A Few Good Men” in a slightly different
context, the mainstream media “cannot handle the truth” –
even if it’s a no-brainer.
At his evening meeting on March 21 at the Old Executive
Office Building, Nunes was likely informed that all
telephones, emails, etc. – including his own and Trump’s –
are being monitored by what the Soviets used to call “the
organs of state security.”
By sharing that information with Trump the next day –
rather than consulting with Schiff – Nunes may have
sought to avoid the risk that Schiff or someone else would
come up with a bureaucratic reason to keep the President
in the dark.
A savvy politician, Nunes knew there would be high
political cost in doing what he did. Inevitably, he would be
called partisan; there would be more appeals to remove
him from chairing the committee; and the character
assassination of him already well under way – in The
Washington Post, for example – might move him to the top
of the unpopularity chart, displacing even bête noire
Russian President Vladimir Putin.
But this episode was not the first time Nunes has shown
some spine in the face of what the Establishment wants
ignored. In a move setting this congressman apart from all
his colleagues, Nunes had the courage to host an award
ceremony for one of his constituents, retired sailor and
member of the USS Liberty crew, Terry Halbardier.
Rep. Devin Nunes, R-California.
On June 8, 1967, by repairing an antennae and thus
enabling the USS Liberty to issue an SOS, Halbardier
prevented Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats from sinking
that Navy intelligence ship and ensuring that there would
be no survivors to describe how the Israeli “allies” had
strafed and bombed the ship. Still, 34 American seamen
died and 171 were wounded.
292
At the time of the award ceremony in 2009, Nunes said,
“The government has kept this quiet I think
for too long, and I felt as my constituent, he
[Halbardier] needed to get recognized for
the services he made to his country.” (Ray
McGovern took part in the ceremony in
Nunes’s Visalia, California office.)
Now, we suspect that much more may be learned about the
special compartmented surveillance program targeted
against top U.S. national leaders if Rep. Nunes doesn’t
back down and if Trump doesn’t choose the road most
traveled – acquiescence to America’s Deep State actors.
Ray McGovern served as a CIA analyst for 27 years
and conducted one-on-one briefings of the President’s
Daily Brief under Ronald Reagan from 1981 to 1985.
Bill Binney was former Technical Director, World
Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA and co-founder
of NSA’s SIGINT Automation Research Center before
he retired after 9/11.
 Foundation & Empire - Is Donald Trump 'The Mule'?
Authored By Jim Quinn Via The Burning Platform Blog
Mar 28, 2017 11:05 PM

In Part One of this article I analyzed the similarities of They pondered whether Trump’s arrival
Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy to Strauss & Howe’s on the scene represented The Mule’s
Fourth Turning, trying to assess how Donald Trump’s advent during the decline of the Galactic
ascension to power fits into the theories put forth by those Empire.
authors.
Trump’s numerous enemies would love to portray him as
Now I will compare Trump to the most an evil mutant freakish warlord, bent on using his
interesting character in Asimov’s persuasion powers to mislead the populace into doing his
classic – The Mule. bidding. I don’t necessarily see Trump as The Mule, but as
a disrupting factor, disturbing the best laid plans of the
The Mule establishment and helping reveal the hidden agendas of the
Deep State.
“A horse having a wolf as a powerful and
dangerous enemy lived in constant fear of
his life. Being driven to desperation, it
occurred to him to seek a strong ally.
Whereupon he approached a man, and
offered an alliance, pointing out that the
wolf was likewise an enemy of the man.
The man accepted the partnership at once
and offered to kill the wolf immediately, if
his new partner would only co-operate by
placing his greater speed at the man’s
disposal. The horse was willing, and
allowed the man to place bridle and saddle
upon him.
The man mounted, hunted down the wolf,
and killed him. “The horse, joyful and
relieved, thanked the man, and said: ‘Now
that our enemy is dead, remove your bridle
and saddle and restore my freedom.’
Seldon’s science of psychohistory was outstanding at
“Whereupon the man laughed loudly and
predicting the behavior of large populations but worthless
replied, ‘Never!’ and applied the spurs with
in trying to predict what an individual might do. The
a will.” – Isaac Asimov, Foundation
emergence of the Mule, a mentalic mutant with an acute
telepathic ability to modify the emotions of human beings,
I had not thought about the Foundation Trilogy for could not have been predicted by the Seldon Plan, focused
decades, until someone recently mentioned it in a comment as it was on the statistical movements of vast numbers of
on my website. peoples and populations across the galaxy.

293
 The Mule was the unpredictable variable
in the equations of history and the
greatest threat to the Seldon Plan.
He disrupts the inevitability of the continued evolution of
the First Foundation and potential early ending of the Dark
Age. The Mule, through telepathic manipulation, defeats
and takes over the Foundation’s growing empire, which
has become increasingly control-oriented and out-of-touch
with the outer planets in its rapidly expanding realm of
influence.
There are certainly parallels between Trump’s arrival on
the scene and The Mule’s psychohistory defying disruption
of Seldon’s Plan.
The Mule was described as a freak and
the subject of derision. This fueled his
ambition to take over the galaxy.
I believe Trump decided he was going to be president on
April 30, 2011 during the Correspondence Dinner at the
White House when Obama unrelentingly mocked and
derided him in front of the corrupt Washington power
establishment. This public ridicule from an empty suit
community organizer president, who never worked a real
day in his life, angered Trump to his core and propelled
him to seek and win the presidency.
The Mule enters the scene disguised as
a clown named Magnifico Giganticus.
Over time, he uses his psycho-manipulative abilities to
sway the masses to his side and eventually takes over the
galaxy. When Trump announced his candidacy, it was
taken as a public relations stunt to further his faltering
reality TV career. He has a magnificent gigantic ego. His
persona was that of an irascible self-made billionaire with
an enormous ego and hunger for the spotlight. He was the
butt of many orange hair and orange skin jokes.
For the most part, he went along with the joke, as any
publicity is good publicity when you are selling yourself as
294
a brand. He put his name on buildings, Chinese made
clothing, scam universities, and just about anything that
would produce a buck. He became more famous for his TV
show The Apprentice, and his tag-line “You’re Fired”,
than for the billion dollar real estate empire he had built.
Like The Mule, Trump used the GOP
establishment’s disdain and
underestimation of his persuasion
abilities to capture control of the party
from the out of touch elitist party hacks.
At the outset of his candidacy I was among the libertarian
minded skeptics who didn’t take him seriously. I found
him entertaining, but didn’t think he had the gravitas to be
president. I liked his rhetoric about not interfering in
foreign conflicts, protecting our borders, enforcing the rule
of law, repealing the disastrous Obamacare law, and his
relentless trashing of the left wing mainstream media and
Washington establishment.
I wasn’t a big fan of his bloviating about inconsequential
matters. As time passed I began to realize he was probably
the Grey Champion of this Fourth Turning and the
regeneracy towards the next phase would be his
unexpected election to the highest office in the land.
He was the only person capable of
destroying the fetid pustule known as
the Deep State.
The Mule’s tormented childhood of alienation, combined
with his mental ability to alter human emotions led to his
desire for power, in order to exact revenge upon the human
race which caused him so much pain. Trump’s childhood
was no walk in the park, but it was far from being tortured.
His father did send him to military school at the age of 13
to instill some discipline in him. It does seem like his drive
to succeed was spurred by a desire to prove himself to his
father and be more successful than his old man. Unlike
The Mule, his motivation is not revenge motivated, unless
you consider it revenge upon Obama for the abuse he
withstood during that dinner.
The Mule had the mental capabilities to turn antagonists
into followers, converting feelings of animosity into those
of intense loyalty. He could also stimulate feelings of
pervasive fear and panic among his enemies. He used the
subtle influence of the subconscious to conscript
individuals to his cause. The Mule used his mental powers
to disrupt Seldon’s plan by invalidating his assumption no
single individual could have a quantifiable impact on
historical trends predicted by his theory of psychohistory.
The Mule is a Grey Champion-like
character rising to power at a crucial
time in history as the disruptive factor
to the best laid plans of over-confident
 elitists. The Mule uses his extraordinary
cerebral abilities to conquer the
unprepared and over-confident
Foundation.
Trump has been underestimated every
step of the way for the last two years.
He has thrown sand into the gears of the political
establishment, made up of both parties, and controlled by
Deep State players used to getting their way. Trump was
able to use his powers of persuasion to overcome the left
wing media propaganda and motivate a large swath of
disaffected Americans to come over to his side. The never
ending barrage of misinformation and fake news spewed
by the Deep State controlled media ignores the fact he
won 53% of the white women vote, along with huge
numbers of union workers from blue collar states like
Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Indiana.
As documented during the campaign by Scott Adams,
Trump’s phenomenal power of
persuasion overcame all obstacles
thrown in his way by the crooked
establishment.
He had no support from the GOP power players, was
despised and ridiculed by the horribly corrupt Democratic
establishment machine, scorned and mocked by the fake
news corporate media, and undermined by the surveillance
apparatus at the behest of the rancid resentful reprobate
occupying the oval office. Their pure unadulterated hatred
for the man resulted in them becoming blindsided and
baffled by his tactics, strategy, and Svengali-like ability to
draw huge crowds of normal Americans in flyover
country.
Trump has disrupted the ongoing Deep State capture of
our political, economic, financial, social, and cultural
systems as a once in a lifetime figure destined to govern
during a time of domestic disorder, global upheaval, civil
295
chaos and ultimately war on a grand scale. The looting and
pillaging campaign of the ruling class, disguised as free
market capitalism and democracy, has been put at risk by
an uncontrollable unpredictable outsider who doesn’t act
according to their Plan.
The staged violent response by the
billionaire funded left wing faux
anarchists, fake news Russian
conspiracy propaganda, and
NSA/CIA/FBI campaign to discredit
and/or overthrow the Trump presidency
is the kind of response you would
expect from a dangerous threatened
animal backed into a corner.
The establishment will not relinquish control without a
bloody drawn out fight to the finish.
Since we know Asimov modeled the trilogy on Gibbons’
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, there has
been much conjecture as to who The Mule represented. He
has historical parallels with Attila the Hun, Tamerlane,
Charlemagne and Roman Emperor Augustus. Based on the
historical time frame in which he was writing (1941 –
1950), I think it is safe to assume he modeled some of The
Mule’s traits after Adolf Hitler. His disturbed childhood,
trauma during the First World War, hypnotic ability to
manipulate the emotions of the German people, boldness
in attacking his perceived enemies, and attempt at world
conquest, parallels much of The Mule’s story.
When I try to find parallels to our current situation and the
role Trump is playing, I see the Foundation trilogy in a
different light. Isaac Asimov was an intellectual. He had a
PhD in biochemistry and was a life-long member of
Mensa. He was a university professor for most of his life.
Academics believe in theories and academic mumbo
jumbo, as we can see from decades of academics running
the Federal Reserve, destroying our currency and forcing
millions into economic servitude.
Hari Seldon is an intellectual who creates the Foundation,
made up of other academic intellectuals. Then he sets up a
Second Foundation of even more talented intellectuals as a
backup plan in case the Foundation fails. The true ruling
powers on this planet always have a backup plan. You
never know whether the leaders or organizations you
support are really part of a bigger plan you have not
considered. Keeping the populace off-balance, confused,
and seeking unseen enemies is just part of the plan.
The inevitable decline of the Galactic
Empire was entirely predictable by
Seldon, as every empire in world history
has ultimately declined.
I also don’t see Seldon and his ensemble of elitist
intellectuals as the saviors of the universe. I see The
Foundation as the Washington and Wall Street elite who
are the face of the establishment – Pelosi, Schumer, Ryan,
McConnell, Yellen, Dimon, Blankfein, Immelt, Gates,
Buffet, etc.
The Second Foundation was hidden in
plain sight, operating in the shadows,
unknown to the masses, and controlling
the galaxy from behind the curtain. They
were the Galactic Deep State.
The Seldon Plan smells like a current
day Soros Plan.

Whether the Roman Empire was ruled by a despot, wise Wealthy, highly educated, egotistical, hubristic, evil
man, or idiot, it continued its centuries long decline from snakes who believe they are the smartest men in the world
glory to destruction. Empires are created by fallible men operate behind the scenes as the invisible government,
whose failings, weaknesses, and desires never change. manipulating the mechanisms of society and pulling the
John Adams foresaw the future of an American Empire wires controlling the public mind. Soros, along with other
two centuries before it became an empire. The American shadowy smug billionaires, are not fans of populism.
Empire is in the process of committing suicide and a single
individual, no matter how bold and resolute, will not be
able to save it from its inevitable destruction. They believe they are entitled to run the
world as they choose, with no input or
resistance from the ignorant masses.
“I do not say that democracy has been
more pernicious on the whole, and in the
long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. With the basket of deplorables rising up and electing
Democracy has never been and never can Trump, the Deep State players are now openly fighting
be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; back and revealing their warped thought process. Elitist
but while it lasts, it is more bloody than billionaire Ray Dalio recently revealed his populism fears
either. … Remember, democracy never and those of his fellow billionaires. He doesn’t consider
lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and himself a common man.
murders itself. There never was a
democracy yet that did not commit suicide.
It is in vain to say that democracy is less
vain, less proud, less selfish, less
ambitious, or less avaricious than
aristocracy or monarchy.
It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears
in history. Those passions are the same in
all men, under all forms of simple
government, and when unchecked,
produce the same effects of fraud,
violence, and cruelty. When clear
prospects are opened before vanity, pride,
avarice, or ambition, for their easy
gratification, it is hard for the most
considerate philosophers and the most
conscientious moralists to resist the
temptation. Individuals have conquered
themselves. Nations and large bodies of Populism is a political and social
men, never.” – John Adams, The Letters phenomenon that arises from the
of John and Abigail Adams common man, typically not well-
I don’t see Trump as an evil Mule educated, being fed up with 1) wealth and
character in this Shakespearian tragedy, opportunity gaps, 2) perceived cultural
as it progresses towards its ill-fated threats from those with different values in
denouement. the country and from outsiders, 3) the

296
 “establishment elites” in positions of power,
and 4) government not working effectively
for them. These sentiments lead that
constituency to put strong leaders in
power. Populist leaders are typically
confrontational rather than collaborative
and exclusive rather than inclusive. As a
result, conflicts typically occur between
opposing factions (usually the economic
and socially left versus the right), both
within the country and between countries.
These conflicts typically become
progressively more forceful in self-
reinforcing ways.
In other words, populism is a rebellion of
the common man against the elites to
some extent, against the system. The Dalio, Soros and their fellow billionaires see populism as a
rebellion and the conflict that comes with it threat to their wealth, power, and control of the world. But,
occur in varying degrees. Sometimes the it’s much ado about nothing.
system bends with it and sometimes the
system breaks. Whether it bends or breaks It’s like jockeying for the best seat on
in response to this rebellion and conflict the Titanic as it sinks into the frigid
depends on how flexible and well ocean depths of the Atlantic.
established the system is. It also seems to
depend on how reasonable and respectful The American Empire is in shambles and no one can
of the system the populists who gain power
reverse its course at this point. I’ll address that distressing
are. Classic populist economic policies situation in Part Three of this article.
include protectionism, nationalism,
increased infrastructure building, increased
military spending, greater budget deficits,
and, quite often, capital controls.
.

297
 Nets Decry Trump ‘Obliterating’ Obama’s ‘Legacy’
With Clean Power Plan Rollback
By Nicholas Fondacaro
March 28, 2017 | 10:19 PM EDT

that “This is not an executive order, this

is a declaration of war.”

Who the United States was going to war with over the
striking down of the Clean Power Plan was never
explained, but then again that’s kind of how fake news
works.

The NBC reporter had a big smile on her face as she said
that the White House was

“bracing for a fierce fight with

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump signed an executive environmental groups already
order that stripped the Environmental Protection Agency’s promising to block President Trump's
ability to continue with President Obama’s Clean Power environmental agenda in court.”
Plan and the Big Three networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC)
went nuts.

“After suffering defeat in Congress in

his promise to replace ObamaCare,
President Trump returned back to the
executive order route today to try to
deliver on another major campaign
vow,” whined anchor Lester Holt at the
start of NBC Nightly News, “It’s a jobs
move that like the health care gamut
entails shredding another major piece of
the Obama legacy.”
“As President Donald Trump struggles Again, Welker failed to explain what legal standing those
to find his footing in an attempt to show groups would have in court. Especially since, as reported
strength today by obliterating his by Major Garrett on CBS Evening News,
predecessor's record on the
environment,” reporter Kristen Welker
“In 2016, the Supreme Court blocked Mr.
exclaimed after Holt handed it off to her.
Obama's Clean Power Plan after more
than 20 states complained it exceeded
Welker’s report dipped into climate alarmism as she federal law.”
proclaimed that the elimination of the Clean Power Plan
harmed national security.
So, how can the removal of the Clean Power Plan, which
was also an executive order, be stopped when it was
“And tonight, environmentalists already ruled unconstitutional by the highest court in the
decrying the executive order, saying land?
combatting climate change is key to
protecting the planet, the economy, and
Despite CBS being the only network to share that fact,
even national security,” she reported.
they too came down hard on the President’s order.
She followed that up with a clip of
Democratic Senator Ed Markey asserting

298
 “His order would allow coal mining on
federal lands, permit the oil industry to
release more methane, and would allow
more carbon pollution from power
plants that burn coal,” complained CBS
anchor Scott Pelley while sounding
disgusted, “Mr. Trump said all of this is
intended to put American miners back
to work.”
ABC’s World News Tonight (as did the other networks)
cast doubt on Trump’s claims that coal mining jobs would
come back.
“But the White House doesn't know
exactly how many new mining jobs will
come out of this executive order,” said
Cecilia Vega, “Environmentalists say the
President is overselling the revival of
jobs in a declining industry.” She then
touted that “Fewer than 75,000 coal
mining jobs remain in the U.S. By
comparison, there are more than
650,000 renewable energy jobs.”
ABC anchor David Muir book ended the segment by
seemingly trying to set up the coal mining families for
disappointment:
But the White House was pressed today. Just how many
jobs do they think this move today will create and will coal
jobs really come back in big numbers for those families
who heard the promise? … so many coal mining families
heard those promises during the campaign from then-
candidate Donald Trump. White House Press Secretary
Spicer was asked:
“How many jobs this new executive order
would create?” How did he answer?
It’s true that jobs in the coal industry had been declining
for a long time. But there is a major difference between the
market naturally deciding to move away from the use of
coal based on the completion and the heavy hand of
Government squashing the completion of its clean energy
pet project. There was no mention of how Obama’s sacred
“legacy” resulted in power plants being shut down and the
skyrocketing prices for electricity that immediately
followed.
Transcript below:
NBC Nightly News
March 28, 2017
7:01:24 PM Eastern
LESTER HOLT: Good evening. After suffering defeat in
Congress in his promise to replace ObamaCare,
299
President Trump returned back to the executive order
route today to try to deliver on another major
campaign vow, bringing back a dying coal industry.
It’s a jobs move that like the health care gamut entails
shredding another major piece of the Obama legacy,
in this case, regulations meant to protect the environment.
Tonight, the President's actions are sparking celebration
in coal country, outrage from environmentalists, and big
questions of whether some of those jobs can ever come
back. NBC’s Kristen Welker has details.
[Cuts to video]
KRISTEN WELKER: As President Donald Trump
struggles to find his footing in an attempt to show
strength today by obliterating his predecessor's
record on the environment. A move he says will
create jobs.
...
WELKER: The reality, federal data shows mines have
been losing jobs for decades under both parties.
Right now, there are less than 75,000 coal jobs
compared to more than 650,000 jobs in renewable
energy, which can be less expensive to produce. The
shift on display in Michigan, where Jerry Anderson
CEO of the state's largest electric company says
cheap natural gas is good for business.
JERRY ANDERSON: We’re going to build natural gas
renewables for the foreseeable future.
WELKER: And tonight, environmentalists decrying the
executive order, saying combatting climate change is
key to protecting the planet, the economy, and even
national security.
ED MARKEY: This is not an executive order, this is a
declaration of war.
[Cuts back to live]
WELKER: The administration couldn't say how many
jobs today's actions could create, but is bracing for a
 fierce fight, with environmental groups already HOLT: All right. Kristen walker, thank you.
promising to block President Trump's environmental
agenda in court. Lester.
.

300
 Maxine Waters Is Now
Directly Attacking Trump Supporters, Questions
Their Patriotism In House Floor Rant
Waters Has Gone Off The Deep End
By Alex Thomas -
03.28.2017 @6:04 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — Fresh off ludicrously claiming that
aspects of the discredited Trump dossier are “absolutely
true”, crazed Democrat Maxine Waters is at it again, this
time questioning the patriotism of the tens of millions of
Americans who voted for Donald Trump.
Speaking on the House floor Monday night, Waters went
on yet another unhinged anti-Trump rant, making clear that
she has absolutely no respect for the president and
predictably attempting to frame the narrative around race.
“Mr. Speaker, my position against this
president and his administration is clear. I
oppose this president. I do not honor this
president. I do not respect this president,”
Waters said.
“African-Americans have struggled and
fought historically, many African-Americans
have paid a huge price fighting for justice
and equality in this country, have died for it.
I don’t have to call the names of Martin
Luther King and all the others. We have
paid a price, we have fought.”
In an obvious attempt at race-baiting, Waters continued her
rant by implying that fighting against Trump is a racial
issue that is about protecting American democracy when in
reality anti-Trump forces have for months openly talked
about subverting the will of the American people and
unilaterally removing Trump from office.
301
She then went on to directly question the patriotism of tens
of millions of Americans whose crime is apparently voting
against the hard-left agenda.
“But guess what? Despite the fact that
America has not always been there for us,
we’ve always been there for America. We
have fought in America’s wars. We have
suffered discrimination, we have suffered
isolation and undermining. But we stand up
for America, oftentimes when others who
think they are more patriotic, who say they
are more patriotic, do not,”
Waters continued.
“When we fight against this president, and
we point out how dangerous he is for this
society and for this country, we’re fighting
for the democracy. We’re fighting for
America. We’re saying to those who say
they’re patriotic but they’ve turned a blind
eye to the destruction that he’s about to
cause this country, You’re not nearly as
patriotic as we are.”
Remember, this is the same congresswomen who recently
took to MSNBC to transparently lie to the American people
by spreading falsehoods about the dossier on Donald
Trump that was published by BuzzFeed and subsequently
discredited throughout the media.
As I reported at the time,
“Crazed Democrat Maxine Waters is at it
again, this time spreading direct lies on the
liberal propaganda outlet MSNBC where
she ludicrously claimed that disinformation
in the Buzzfeed dossier was “absolutely
true”.
Its also important to note that Waters has openly admitted
that her job in Congress is not to represent her constituents
but rather to take out the elected president.
.

302
 Here's The Story
Behind Trump's Podesta-Russia Tweet
By Tyler Durden
Mar 28, 2017 8:51 PM
President Trump took to Twitter this morning to remind
Americans that the "It was Russia" stone-throwers on the
left may have been living in Russia-funded glass-houses
after all...
The story behind this Podesta-Russia link is explained in
full gore by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog; dot
connectors, Twitter diagram creators and newly minted
Russia-conspiracy sleuths from sea to shining sea take
note.
Since anything connected to Russia is
now considered treasonous, I’ve got a
great story for you to sniff out.
It relates to John Podesta, but somehow I
doubt you’ll be interested in this one…
The Daily Caller reports:
John Podesta, former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton’s 2016 national campaign
chairman, may have violated federal law by
failing to disclose the receipt of 75,000
shares of stock from a Kremlin-financed
company when he joined the Obama
White House in 2014, according to the
Daily Caller News Foundation’s
Investigative Group.
303
Joule Unlimited Technologies — financed
in part by a Russian firm — originally
awarded Podesta 100,000 shares of stock
options when in 2010 he joined that board
along with its Dutch-based entities: Joule
Global Holdings, BV and the Stichting
Joule Global Foundation.
When Podesta announced his departure
from the Joule board in January 2014 to
become President Obama’s special
counsellor, the company
officially issued him 75,000 common
shares of stock.
The Schedule B section of the federal
government’s form 278 which — requires
financial disclosures for government
officials — required Podesta to “report any
purchase, sale or exchange by you, your
spouse, or dependent children…of any
property, stocks, bonds, commodity futures
and other securities when the amount of
the transaction exceeded $1,000.”
The same year Podesta joined Joule, the
company agreed to accept 1-Billion-
Rubles — or $35 million — from
Rusnano, a state-run and financed
Russian company with close ties to
President Vladimir Putin.
Anatoly Chubais, the company CEO and
two other top Russian banking
executives worked together with
Podesta on the Joule boards. The board
met six times a year.
Ron Hosko, a former FBI assistant director
said because of the Kremlin backing, it was
essential Podesta disclose the financial
benefits he received from the company.
“I think in this case where you’re talking
about foreign interests and foreign
involvement, the collateral interest with
these disclosure forms is put in the
forefront of full disclosure of any foreign
interest that you may have,” he told
TheDCNF in an interview.
The existence of the 75,000 shares of
Joule stock was first revealed by the
 Government Accountability according to Senate lobbying disclosure forms. His firm
Institute report issued last year. received more than $24 million in fees in 2016, much of it
coming from foreign governments, according to the
But Podesta didn’t pocket all the shares.
nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Correspondence from Podesta to Joule
instructed the firm to transfer only 33,693
shares to Leonidio Holdings, a brand-new
entity he incorporated only on December
20, 2013, about ten days before he entered
the White House.
Leonidio is registered in Delaware as a
limited liability corporation. Podesta listed
the address of his daughter, Megan Rouse,
in the incorporation papers. His mother and
father also appear to be co-owners of
Leonidio.
TheDCNF made multiple inquiries to OGE ...
and received no reply. TheDCNF inquiries
to Mr. Podesta were not returned. Regular readers will recall that the Sberbank-Podesta
relationship goes back many years.
That's not the end of the story though,
Sberbank was the lead financial
as John Podesta's brother, Tony, institution in the Russian deal to
confirmed Russia's largest bank had purchase Uranium One,
hired the Podesta Group to lobby for an
end to sanctions... owned by one of Bill Clinton’s closest friends, Frank
Giustra. Giustra and Bill Clinton lead the Clinton-Giustra
Russia's largest bank, Sberbank, has confirmed that it hired Enterprise Partnership, an integral part of the Clinton
the consultancy of Tony Podesta, the elder brother of John Foundation.
Podesta who chaired Hillary Clinton's presidential
campaign, for lobbying its interests in the United States Consider if any or all of the above had taken place among
and proactively seeking the removal of various Obama-era any of the Trump administration - what would have
sanctions, the press service of the Russian institution told occurred? How villified would the offender have been? As
TASS on Thursday. Mike Krieger concludes, personally, I doubt any of the
above is a huge deal, and I certainly don’t think Podesta is
"The New York office of Sberbank CIB working for Vladimir Putin under the table.
indeed hired Podesta Group. Engagement
of external consultants is part of standard However, just imagine the hysteria if the
business practices for us," Sberbank said. above narrative could’ve been
connected to anyone in Trump’s orbit.
Previously, The Daily Caller reported that Tony Podesta
was proactively lobbying for cancellation of a range of It would’ve been plastered on the front page of The
anti-Russian sanctions against the banking sector. In Washington Post and The New York Times with headlines
particular, he represented interests of Sberbank and was like, “More Financial Ties Emerge Between Those in
paid $170,000 for his efforts over a six-month period last Trump’s Orbit and Putin.”
year to seek to end one of the Obama administration’s
economic sanctions against that country. Naturally, you won’t see this story hyped
because it doesn’t fit the corporate
Podesta, founder and chairman of the media narrative, and the narrative is all
Podesta Group, is listed as a key they care about.
lobbyist on behalf of Sberbank,
.

304
 Trump Calls For Investigation
Into The Clintons’ Russian Ties
By Jerome Hudson
28 Mar 2017
President Donald Trump took to Twitter
Monday evening and asked why aren’t
congressional lawmakers probing the
various deals, transactions, and
connections former President Bill
Clinton and former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton have to Russia.
“Why isn’t the House Intelligence
Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary
deal that allowed big Uranium to go to
Russia, Russian speech,” read Trump’s
first tweet, which was followed by,
“…money to Bill, the Hillary Russian
“reset,” praise of Russia by Hillary, or
Podesta Russian Company. Trump Russia
story is a hoax. #MAGA!”
Why isn't the House Intelligence Committee
looking into the Bill & Hillary deal that
allowed big Uranium to go to Russia,
Russian speech….
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
March 28, 2017
…money to Bill, the Hillary Russian "reset,"
praise of Russia by Hillary, or Podesta
Russian Company. Trump Russia story is a
hoax. #MAGA!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
March 28, 2017
305
Trump’s assertion that then-Secretary of State Clinton
“allowed big Uranium to go to Russia” and Bill Clinton’s
high-dollar “Russian speech” were allegations
first reported by The New York Times (NYT) and based on
research from the NYT bestseller Clinton Cash, authored
by Breitbart News Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer.
The facts found in Clinton Cash, reported by the NYT, and
deemed accurate by establishment media reveal
how Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State coincided with
the influx of tens of millions of dollars from foreign
sources into the Clinton Foundation which resulted in
favorable actions for Russia’s government.
Indeed the Clinton Foundation had received millions in
donations from several investors in Uranium One, a
Canadian-based company in which a majority stake was
sold to Russia’s nuclear energy agency, Rosatom, in a
lucrative deal needing approval from Clinton’s State
Department and eight other federal agencies.
“The sale gave the Russians control of
one-fifth of all uranium production capacity
in the United States,” The New York
Times confirmed.
The “deal,” as Trump points out, refers to how donations
to the Clinton Foundation from executives of Russian-
owned Uranium One had exceeded $145 million,
according to the New York Times. In fact, those Clinton
Foundation donations from uranium investors spiked just
as the deal for Russia’s Rosatom to secure Uranium One
was being finalized.
A troublesome series of undisclosed donations came from
former Uranium One chairman Ian Telfer.
Telfer made four foreign donations totaling $2.35
million to the Clinton Foundation while the uranium deal
was being negotiated. However, the Times noted,
“those contributions were not publicly
disclosed by the Clintons, despite an
agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the
Obama White House to publicly identify all
 donors. Other people with ties to the
company made donations as well.”
“We made mistakes, as many
organizations of our size do, but we are
acting quickly to remedy them,” The Clinton
Foundation admitted at the time.
But Hillary Clinton’s failure to disclose the millions in
donations her family foundation received from Teller was
a direct violation of the Memorandum of Understanding
she signed with the Obama administration promising to
disclose all foreign donations during her tenure
as Secretary of State.
.
306
More troubling still, was the $500,000
speech Bill Clinton delivered in Moscow
that was paid for by “a Russian investment
bank that had ties to the Kremlin” at the
time of the Uranium One deal, the New
Yorker confirmed.
“Why was Bill Clinton taking any money
from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his
wife was Secretary of State?” asks the
liberal publication.
Trump’s calls for a federal investigation into the Clintons’
Russia ties come amid a partisan push to link the President
and his aides to Russian influence-peddling and collusion
during the presidential campaign.
 Game Over: John Podesta Received
$35 Million From The Kremlin While
Advising Clinton & Obama
Zeiger - Daily Stormer
March 28, 2017

I don’t know if he violated federal law.

But really, it doesn’t even matter at this point.

The reality is plain for all to see: the Democrats are guilty
of far worse than even what they’re accusing Trump.

This is literally the “big lie” phenomenon at work here.

Wow, if I didn’t know any better, I’d say there was some
hypocrisy at play here.

The gig is up, fam.

It’s over.

After spending the last six months accusing Trump of

being a Russian agent, there is basically no way the
democrats can live this down.
This is always how Jews have operated.

Joule Unlimited Technologies — financed in part by a

Russian firm — originally awarded Podesta 100,000
shares of stock options when in 2010 he joined that board
along with its Dutch-based entities: Joule Global Holdings,
BV and the Stichting Joule Global Foundation.

When Podesta announced his departure from the Joule

The Daily Caller:
John Podesta, former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton’s 2016 national campaign
chairman, may have violated federal law
by failing to disclose the receipt of
75,000 shares of stock from a Kremlin-
financed company when he joined the
Obama White House in 2014, according
to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s
Investigative Group.
board in January 2014 to become President Obama’s
special counsellor, the company officially issued him
75,000 common shares of stock.
The Schedule B section of the federal government’s form
278 which — requires financial disclosures for
government officials — required Podesta to
“report any purchase, sale or exchange by
you, your spouse, or dependent
children…of any property, stocks, bonds,

307
 commodity futures and other securities Russia was investing money in John Podesta’s company,
when the amount of the transaction and he was advising Hillary Clinton to sell uranium to
exceeded $1,000.” Russia. Quid pro quo.
Podesta’s form 278 Schedule B is blank
regarding his receipt of any stock from
any company.
Liberals and conservatives alike tell
TheDCNF Podesta should have
disclosed the stock.

Dis nigga can’t catch a break, can he? Pizzagate, and now
this.

This must be used as the rallying point for a major counter-

offensive.

Trump needs to completely take back control of the

narrative, never again going with the fake news story about
Russia “hacking the election.” Every time the subject is
Good question. brought up, his team needs to strike back hard and remind
everyone about Podesta’s Russian ties and the incredible
hypocrisy at play here.
Trump cleverly planted the seeds for all this during his
campaign, when he mentioned to the people that Hillary
had sold large amounts of Uranium to Russia. He didn’t Are you tired of winning yet?
harp on it. But now everything is going to “click” in
people’s minds.
.

308
 Nunes Refuses To Share
Intelligence Source With Other Committee Members
By Tyler Durden
Mar 28, 2017 5:06 PM
In the latest bizarre twist surrounding the Devin Nunes
story involving "mysterious" sources at the White House,
who disclosed to the republican chair of the House
Intelligence Committee that the NSA had been surveilling
Trump and/or members of his team, Nunes said on
Tuesday he will not share - even with other members of
his panel - the source that gave him the intelligence
reports which indicated President Donald Trump and his
associates may have been ensnared in incidental
intelligence collection.
Asked by a Fox News reporter whether he would inform
the other committee members about who gave him the
reports he viewed on the White House grounds last week,
Nunes said:
"We will never reveal those sources and
methods."
In other words either Nunes is concerned that the source
might be in jeopardy should his ID be revealed to members
of his own committee, or the source - as some have
suggested - is the White House itself, or there is some even
more troubling explanation why the House Intel Chief has
taken it on himself to be the sole gatekeeper to the critical
information.
In any case, on Monday Nunes told Bloomberg he would
make his information available to other members of the
committee by the end of the week, so we eagerly look
forward to that.
.
309
Meanwhile, after numerous Democrats including Chuck
Schumer and his colleague at the House Intel Committeee,
Adam Schiff, had called on Nunes to recuse himself from
the Russian investigation, the first Republican to join the
Democrats, emerged when Rep. Walter Jones told The Hill
that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes
should "absolutely" recuse himself from his panel's
investigation into Russia's meddling in last year’s election.
Jones, a member of the House Armed Services Committee
who frequently bucks leadership, is the first Republican in
Congress to call on Nunes to step aside.
"How can you be chairman of a major
committee and do all these things behind
the scenes and keep your credibility? You
can't keep your credibility," Jones said just
off the House floor.
“If anything has shown that we need a
commission, this has done it by the way he
has acted. That's the only way you can
bring integrity to the process. The integrity
of the committee looking into this has been
tainted."
Jones is the only Republican co-sponsor on a measure
from Reps. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) and Eric Swalwell
(D-Calif.) that would establish an independent commission
to probe Russian interference in the U.S. election.
Nunez on Tuesday brushed aside calls to recuse himself,
asking why he should.
 ‘If Trump Uses Russian Dressing, That’s Russian
Connection’ – Spicer To Press As Twitter Explodes
Published Time: 28 Mar, 2017 23:56Edited Time: 29 Mar, 2017 06:29
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer caused a stir on
social media after he got into a heated exchange with
veteran journalist April Ryan over the 'perception problem'
facing the Trump administration.
It's not the first time that President Trump’s spokesperson
has been the focus of attention as his clash with Ryan, who
is American Urban Radio Networks’ White House
correspondent, went viral on Twitter.
Ryan, who has been in her role since Bill Clinton’s second
term, began asking a question about the various
controversies facing the White House before Spicer
interjected.
“Two and a half months in, you’ve got this
[Sally] Yates story today, you’ve got other
things going on, you’ve got Russia, you’ve
got wiretapping,” she started. “No, we don’t
have that,” objected Spicer.
310
“I’ve said it from the day I got here until
whenever that there is no connection.
You’ve got Russia. If the president puts
Russian dressing on his salad tonight,
somehow that’s a Russian connection,”
Spicer said. The quip instantly spawned a
raft of Twitter jokes about the unglorified
sauce.
Ivan the K™ @IvanTheK1d
Russian dressing joke from Sean Spicer.
Lettuce pray for him.
John Iadarola @johniadarola1d
I felt we should investigate Trump's illegal
actions, but then Sean Spicer made his
"russian dressing" joke so I guess I'll back
off now.
Chelsea Handler @chelseahandler1d
Spicer said if Trump puts Russian salad
dressing on his salad, somehow that’s a
Russian connection...as if Trump has ever
eaten a salad
Richard @forcepsbaby1d
Russian dressing was invented in New
Hampshire. It has nothing to do with
Russia.
Nebojša Malić @NebojsaMalic1d
I was looking at #Russiandressing at the
grocery store last night, and today Spicer
brings it up. Coincidence? Clearly Russian
conspiracy!
Josh Billinson @jbillinson1d
Sean Spicer just killed it with that Russian
dressing joke he totally hasn't been
rehearsing in his bathroom mirror for three
weeks
Add your name @monicarooney1d The dialogue between Ryan and Spicer escalated as Ryan
expressed her disapproval of the press secretary’s answers.
@adamed he's always Putin Russian
dressing on his salad
“You’re shaking your head. I appreciate it,”
Spicer said sarcastically. “At some point,
Glenn Thrush @GlennThrush1d April, you’re going to have to take no for an
answer with respect to whether or not there
"Somehow if the president puts Russian
was collusion,” he continued.
dressing on his salad there's a connection
to Russia." -- Instant Spicer classic.
The acrimonious exchange continued when Spicer took
issue with Ryan’s refusal to accept his responses.
emptywheel @emptywheel1d
Everyone knows Russian dressing goes on “I’m sorry, please stop shaking your head
Reubens, not salad. What kind of cover-up again," he said sparking another avalanche
is Spicer trying to pull? of tweets.

311
 April Ryan: Spicer Attacks ‘Credible’ Media
Like Me, While Allowing ‘Fake News’ Peddlers Into WH
By Kristine Marsh
March 29, 2017 | 1:05 PM EDT
On Wednesday’s New Day on CNN, hosts Chris Cuomo
and Alisyn Camerota threw a pity party for reporter April
Ryan, commiserating with her about how unfairly Trump
treats the “credible” media, after her testy exchange with
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer Tuesday.
Ryan laughably denied she wanted to be the story, after
coming on national television to defend herself. She went
on to bash conservative and independent media in press
briefings as peddlers of “fake news” that shouldn’t be
given media credentials.
Cuomo and Camerota first asked Ryan what she thought
when Spicer “wagged his finger and shook his head” at
her. “Disbelief,” she responded, gloomily.
RYAN: Disbelief. I was just asking a
question, trying to get an answer and I
found myself trying to defend myself. But,
you know, I'm a reporter just trying to get
answers and it was a simple question….
And as an administration is calling us the
enemy of the people, I guess we saw some
of that thought process yesterday.
Cuomo sympathized with Ryan, saying she was
“allowed” to shake her head “whenever
she wanted.”
He then blasted Spicer’s “bogus” answer to Ryan and
asked her if she thought the response was “different” than
one he’d give to a reporter who didn’t look like her.
312
Ryan brought up the white, female Politico reporter who
was called an “idiot” by Spicer in a tweet over the
weekend.
RYAN: We are the press who is under
attack. We are under attack by this
administration. It is about discrediting
credible media. And, you know, at this
point, I happen to be a black woman, but
I'm part of the press. So this is -- I guess
this is part of a series of two women this
week who have been in the news over
something with the press secretary.
Eagerly, Camerota asked if she felt Spicer was sexist to her
or other women. Ryan responded by saying it certainly
seemed that way.
RYAN: I’m going to watch more so
closely….[I]t's showing a pattern, at
least this week. But, yeah, I mean, they
have made attacks on the press. I am
saying overarching the attacks on the
press have happened but now I'm
looking more closely thinking about
what you're saying at the issue of
women.
However, the funniest part of the interview was when
Ryan claimed she didn’t “have an agenda” and didn’t want
to “become” the story.
CAMEROTA: [I]s there something on a
deeper, more personal level happening
now?
RYAN: That's a tough one, and I want to
believe that what Mike McCurry said, the
former Press Secretary for Bill Clinton. He
said there is a friendly adversarial
relationship. I believe the friendly piece is
gone now, as you said, Alisyn. It is getting
personal, but it should never get
personal in that room. It should be
about the issues. I have no agenda, you
know, calling people out. If you get
personal, it could go back and forth for
 days and not about the issues. It is about and those journalists who are in there
the issues. This is the White House. This is covering this president and other
the home, the workspace of the President presidents.
of the United States, the leader of the free
world. People want to know what he's
thinking, what he's doing. I cover all things
presidential. It is not about me. If it
becomes about me, it is a sad day. And
for any other reporter, it is about the issue
for the American people. We cover the
President of the United States for the
American people. It is not about us. It is
about you, the people. It is turning into a
different day. During the interview, Cuomo also brought up Ryan’s
exchange with Trump a few months ago that made
Ryan says this, after coming on national television to headlines, where Trump asked if Ryan could “set up a
defend herself, and after gleefully tweeting and retweeting meeting” with members of the Congressional Black
at least 19 tweets of other reporters, in less than 24 hours, Caucus. Cuomo repeated the media charge of “racism!”
praising her for standing up against the so-called racist and trying to get Ryan to elaborate more on that.
sexist attack.
CUOMO: I wonder if this would have
Ryan ended the interview by taking a shot at the media happened to somebody who looked like me
that’s allowed into the White House press briefings now. instead of April in that exchange. Do you
see that one as different with the
RYAN: Now, when it comes to fake president?
news, oh, yeah, there's some fake news
organizations out there reporting on
them. Also supporting some of the spin
that's offered from this White House and
maybe other White Houses. But I will tell
you this, too, as well. In that room that I
have been sitting in for 20 years and to
see it recently, you just wonder about
some of the people that are coming in
the room now. Are they really
journalists or are they spectators
posing as journalists?
There is a lot of stuff going on in that room
now and in this mosh that we call reporting
at the White House right now. The dynamic
has changed, but there is fake news out
there, but I am going to say those who While the media obsessed about this response by Trump,
have covered the White House who are it’s not exactly a secret that Ryan is friendly with the CBC.
covering credible, credential journalists She admitted as such during that same press conference
who come there every day are doing their and a 30-second Google image search shows her walking
jobs and I'm telling you it's a fight. And it and talking with CBC member Elijah Cummings, in an
should not be this way. But they -- I'm image from her own website.
telling you. I stand by the First Amendment
.

313
 Donald Trump And Steve Bannon:
Real Threats More Serious Than Fake News
Trafficked By Media
By Jeffrey Sommers
March 29, 2017
Photo by Michael Vadon | CC BY 2.0 St. Petersburg, Russia.
The United States faces a threat. The danger is potentially
existential. Imagine a force that could take the United
States into ruinous wars with major powers.
Simultaneously, this same threat promises to erode the
cultural, regulatory, scientific and social infrastructure
upon which the United States’ future prosperity depends.
That’s precisely what the US faces under the presidency of
Donald Trump, with the grey cardinal figure of Steve
Bannon directing policy. The threats posed by Trump and
Bannon are both domestic and foreign, and are deadly
serious.
On the foreign policy front, Steve Bannon is a military
buff. Many are, including myself. The difference,
however, is that most who are fascinated by war become
repulsed by the reality of it as adults. Not so with Bannon,
an impulsive figure with a documented history of violent
spousal abuse. China’s footprint in the South China Sea
and Indian Ocean is big and will get bigger. The good
news is that China sees stability and mutually beneficial
trade as the keys to its power. Essentially, this is an
extension of the Middle Kingdom strategy present during
the Ming and Qing Dynasties. That said, China is returning
to its historic role as the world’s greatest power. It is
becoming increasingly assertive in areas historically part
of China (e.g., the South China Sea), yet is largely
disinterested in imperial projection of hard power.
Moreover, it has taken the lesson from the former Soviet
Union that over investment in the military and Khrushchev
adventurism abroad are the paths to ruin rather than
stability. Yet China will not tolerate being policed by the
314
United States. China will defend its national interests, and
as its power grows, will not kowtow to US military power
projected in the South China Sea. War with China,
however, is neither inevitable nor desirable, as Bannon
asserts on the former and by implication suggests with the
latter. China wants trade, not war. A true “America First”
policy would not militarily confront China, but would
challenge it on the terrain of meeting its obligation to
international labor agreements.
Furthermore, Trump and Bannon see Islamic
fundamentalism as an existential threat to the US.
Concerns regarding Iran should not be discounted, yet the
wrong responses, including overreactions, can cause more
harm than not. Bannon, a naval officer during the Iran
hostage crisis under the Carter administration, still sees
Iran as a direct threat to the United States. This view is
shared by Sen. John McCain, who only half-jokingly in the
past called for bombing Iran. Iran represents a challenge to
Saudi (Wahhabi) dominance in the Middle East. It
supports Syria’s Alawite Shia government as an ally that
can host its natural gas transit pipeline to the European
Union. Moreover, through Hezbollah, Iran supports
opposition to Israel. While Iran clearly is no friend to the
United States, over time, its mullahs have morphed into
“mullahgarchs,” whose interests have become anchored as
much in the desire to become rich by controlling key
sectors of Iran’s economy as they are in imposing religious
law and sponsoring Islamic revolution. Furthermore, its
burgeoning youth have become increasingly secular in
outlook, while increasingly frustrated with a “revolution”
that failed to deliver prosperity or personal fulfillment.
Iran’s youth are arguably the Middle East’s Islamic
population most favorably disposed toward the United
States. If the United States backed off from rhetoric
suggesting Iran was a potential target of possible US
military action, its theocracy would increasingly lose
legitimacy at home. In short, the United States should not
play the villain from central casting that Iran uses to
legitimize its domestic rule.
Meanwhile, Trump and Bannon’s wish for de-escalation of
tensions with Russia is eminently sensible, albeit possibly
arrived at for the wrong reasons. Whether the proposed
détente was desired in order to dilute possibilities for
thermonuclear conflict (a decidedly good reason), or to
have an ally in “war on terror,” or because of some alt-
right vision of Russia as a white Christian power that
would be a US ally in war with China or Iran is unknown.
Regardless, this one decent Trump/Bannon foreign policy
objective already looks to have been sacrificed on the altar
of the New Cold War.
President Trump and Steve Bannon’s ramped up military
spending is not merely warmed over Reagan-era military
Keynesianism. Increased military spending under Trump is
revenue neutral under today’s Republican austerity
economics. Trump and Bannon’s preparations for real war
are paid for by gutting the cultural, scientific, regulatory
and social infrastructure upon which our country’s future
prosperity and stability depends. Slashing of social
programs represents a reprise of Bourbon Monarch (“if
they have no bread let them eat cake”) responses to
poverty by GOP austerians overstuffed from their all-you-
can-eat buffet of tax cuts. Meanwhile, public funding for
the arts and humanities is already miniscule. Trump and
Bannon’s proposed budget would return us to a medieval
state where they are almost entirely funded by rich patrons,
whose tastes will dictate content. Furthermore, gutting the
.
315
Environmental Protection Agency is ill advised.
Regulators, already stretched thin, struggle to inspect leaky
oil pipelines. Particularly troubling are the proposed cuts to
science. Real threats, such as a future influenza bug, or
other viruses emerging from rapidly eroding rainforests,
are very real and could kill millions. Medical research and
public health infrastructure are essential for engaging these
real dangers. Moreover, our future prosperity depends on
the innovations born from basic research, which, in the
US, is mostly publicly funded. Public funding of basic
research delivered the internet, microprocessor chips for
personal computers and most of the technology in our
iPhones. Gutting research spending means the next
disruptive innovations enhancing productivity and
transforming our economy will likely not be created.
These potential “hot wars” on China and Iran, along with
wars on culture, science, the environment and the poor can
be ill afforded. There is a decidedly strong threat to the
United States, however, it resides (when not at Trump
Tower or Mar-a-Lago) at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue more
than it does abroad.
 Networks Cheer On
‘Fired Up’ Clinton, ‘Back In The Spotlight'
By Kristine Marsh
March 29, 2017 | 10:23 AM EDT
She may have lost the election but that doesn’t mean the
media doesn’t still hang on her every word. After Hillary
Clinton made a surprise appearance before an audience in
San Francisco attending a diversity conference Tuesday
night, the networks couldn’t get enough. ABC, NBC and
CBS all devoted time to Clinton’s speech March 29,
playing several clips where she bashed the White House
for its handling of health care, diversity and other issues.
ABC’s Good Morning America offered the most excited
coverage, Wednesday morning. Anchor Robin Roberts
opened the report hyping Clinton was “back in the
spotlight” in a “rare public appearance” last night.
White House correspondent Cecilia Vega followed up,
gushing that Clinton came out “swinging” with some
“tough talk” for her old opponent.
Playing several video clips of Clinton’s
speech, Vega noted she was “not holding
back, cheering the failure of the
Republican health care bill.”
ABC covered every one of Clinton’s liberal talking points,
from the health care bill, to a lack of women in Trump’s
.
316
cabinet, to “calling out” Spicer as “patronizing” for his
response to reporter April Ryan.
ABC ended its report excitedly wondering aloud if this
meant that Clinton would be coming back to politics. Vega
reported that she asked an aide to Clinton, but only heard
back that Clinton was a woman who wasn’t
“going to stand by and watch other
women be bullied, insulted and
demeaned.”
"I will leave it to you guys to read those tea
leaves," Vega added.
Over on NBC’s Today, a full report and news brief
highlighted Clinton’s speech. Anchor Matt Lauer
introduced the first report, excitedly noting a
"fired up" Clinton was “breaking her
silence” and “taking on the new White
House.”
Reporter Peter Alexander followed up with clips of
Clinton “slamming” Trump in a “politically-charged
speech,” on health care and defending April Ryan.
Alexander showcased Clinton “sharing her mantra” of
“Resist, insist, persist, enlist,” to the crowd, with a
standing ovation.
CBS’ This Morning was the least biased of the three,
offering just under a minute of coverage that was
straightforward in tone. Anchor Gayle King noted Clinton
speaking out against the Republican health care bill, before
CBS played a short video clip. The other moments touted
by ABC and NBC were not shown or mentioned by CBS.
 Michael Moore Says
Trump Will Cause Human Extinction
Chris Menahan - Informationliberation
March 29, 2017

It's incredible we somehow managed to survive

before these regulations were put in place a few years
ago.
Liberal propagandist Michael Moore said Tuesday
afternoon on Twitter that President Donald Trump Right-wingers mocked Moore's stupid comments on
will cause the Twitter:

"extinction of human life on earth."

"Historians in the near future will mark

today, March 28, 2017, as the day the
extinction of human life on earth began,
thanks 2 Donald Trump," Moore tweeted.

Moore was angry Trump repealed a host of Obama-

era job killing regulations.

"Trump has signed orders killing all of

Obama's climate change regulations. The
EPA is prohibited henceforth from focusing
on climate change," Moore said in a follow-
up tweet.

317
 .

318
 PANIC: NYT Melts Down
Over Trump ‘Denialists’ ‘Risking The Planet’
By Scott Whitlock
March 29, 2017 | 1:50 PM EDT
The New York Times on Wednesday offered a collective
freak out, devoting no less than four articles to how the
“denialists” in the Trump administration are “risking the
planet” by rolling back Barack Obama’s climate
regulation. That amounted to almost 4000 words.
Jettisoning any pretense of objectivity, the liberal paper
included this biased headline: “Climate Change
Denialists in Charge.” Writer Coral Davenport warned,
“Climate Denial Starts At The Top.”
Calling skeptics “deniers” is the type of loaded term that
the New York Times would never throw around when it
comes to liberal causes. Are pro-abortion liberals life-
deniers? In an op-ed, the paper warned of coming doom:
“Only 10 weeks into his presidency, and at great risk to
future generations, Donald Trump has ordered the
demolition of most of President Barack Obama’s policies
to combat climate change by reducing emissions from
fossil fuels.”
The paper described it as an “assault” and then shifted to
Trump’s “ignorance":
Perhaps most important, Mr. Trump’s
ignorance has stripped America of its hard-
won role as a global leader on climate
issues.
The unsigned editorial moved to “madness”:
Are there ways to avert this madness? Yes.
Mr. Trump’s orders will not take effect right
.
319
away. The E.P.A. will need a year or longer
to develop a replacement for the Clean
Power Plan.
"Demolition, “assault,” “ignorance,” “madness.” The
Times on Wednesday reads like an angry e-mail that
someone accidentally sent to the whole office.
But that wasn’t enough, the front page article by Mrs.
Davenport and writer Alissa J. Rubin sounded
apocalyptic:
President Trump, flanked by company
executives and miners, signed a long-
promised executive order on Tuesday to
nullify President Barack Obama’s climate
change efforts and revive the coal industry,
effectively ceding American leadership
in the international campaign to curb
the dangerous heating of the planet.
Tom Friedman was no less worried. The headline for his
op-ed sneered, “Trump Is a Chinese agent.” The liberal
columnist raged:
Trump took his Make China Great
campaign to a new level on Tuesday by
rejecting the science on climate change
and tossing out all Obama-era plans to
shrink our dependence on coal-fired power.
Trump also wants to weaken existing
mileage requirements for U.S.-made
vehicles. Stupid.
He mocked,
“So you tell me that Trump is not a Chinese
agent. The only other explanation is that
he’s ignorant and unread.”
In total, the Times devoted 3938 words to the climate freak
out. Yet, in February, only two percent of Americans
mentioned global warming as one of the pressing issues
facing the country. Maybe there’s a reason people think
the liberal New York Times is out of touch?
 Judge Napolitano Returns On Fox News,
Stands By Claim Brits Spied On Trump
Published: March 29, 2017
Fox News' legal analyst Andrew "Judge" Napolitano
returned to the air on Wednesday morning, nine days after
the network benched him when President Donald Trump
cited the Fox talking head as the source of claims that
Barack Obama used British intelligence to wiretap him.
Napolitano refused to change his story saying he stood by
his claim about spying on President Donald Trump that got
him benched by the network on March 21 for an indefinite
period.
Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com
“I stand by my statement on surveillance,”
Napolitano told Bill Hemmer.
According to Deadline, Napolitano was there to talk about
a Fox News report that the FBI allegedly wired a staffer of
former Illinois Congressman Aaron Schock, who has been
charged with fraud and corruption. But first, Hemmer
asked Napolitano about that Obama/Brit intel wiretap
claim he first made on Fox & Friends. Napolitano said that
was his story and he was sticking to it.
“And the American public needs to know
more about this rather than less because of
a lot of the government’s surveillance
authorities will expire in the fall and there
will be a great debate about how much
authority we want the government to have
to surveil us.”
“We’ll see how the story plays out,”
Hemmer said, noncommittally.
“I think a lot more is going to come,”
Napolitano responded..
His return raises the question as to why Fox News benched
Napolitano in the first place.
Following the joint press conference between Trump and
Merkel, in which the president cited Napolitano's
allegation, Fox News reacted immediately saying it
.
320
“cannot confirm Judge Napolitano’s
commentary; Fox News knows of no
evidence of any kind that the now
President of the United States was
surveilled at any time in any way. Full
stop,”
Shepard Smith said on the network’s air moments after
Trump gave his don’t-look-at-me response to the German
reporter.
Previously, a spokesperson for British PM Theresa May
had called the claims “ridiculous” saying “they should be
ignored and we’ve received assurances that these
allegations will not be repeated” by the White House,
which may explain why Trump pointed the finger at Fox.
It was White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer who
initially got the ball rolling, the day before Trump’s
Merkel photo-op, admonishing reporters for their coverage
of Trump’s Twitter rant about Obama-ordered wiretaps on
Trump Tower. To make his case, Spicer read from a
prepared list of reports he said support Trump’s claims,
including one from a Fox News Channel broadcast.
“On Fox News on March 14, Judge Andrew
Napolitano made the following statement:
Three intelligence sources have informed
Fox News that President Obama went
outside the chain of command…He didn’t
use the NSA, he didn’t use the CIA, he
didn’t use the FBI, he didn’t use the
Department of Justice. He used GCHQ…
the initials from the British intelligence
spying agency. By having two people say
to them the president needs transcripts of
conversations involving candidate Trump
he’s able to get it and no American
fingerprints on it.”
 ‘Backlash’: ABC, NBC Hype
Left-Wing Freak-Out Over Trump Environmental Order
By Kyle Drennen
March 29, 2017 | 12:30 PM EDT
Whenever liberals get upset about something, its almost a
guarantee that the broadcast networks will do a story
channeling their fears. That was the case Wednesday
morning, as ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s
Today seized on left-wing environmental activists being in
hysterics over President Trump’s executive order rolling
back excessive environmental regulations imposed by the
Obama administration.
At the top of GMA, substitute co-host and World News
Tonight anchor David Muir proclaimed:
“President Trump under fire. The new
backlash over his executive order
rolling back President Obama’s climate
policies.”
In a report that followed minutes later, correspondent Mary
Bruce breathlessly cited an unhinged statement from
liberal opponents of the action:
“But this morning, environmentalists
are vowing to fight it. One group
describing it as the single biggest attack
on climate action in U.S. history,
period.”
On the Today show, correspondent Peter Alexander read
from the same script:
“This morning, President Trump is
facing new backlash over his move to
erase President Obama’s efforts to
combat climate change.”
321
His report featured a soundbite of Democratic
Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey ranting:
“This is not an executive order, this is a
declaration of war.”
Apparently that wasn’t enough, though, as
Alexander followed up by reciting an
outlandish quote from the media’s
favorite eco-warrior, Al Gore:
“...describing this executive order, in his
words, as a, quote, ‘Misguided step
away from a sustainable carbon-free
future for ourselves and generations to
come.’”
During a report in the 8 a.m. ET hour, fellow
correspondent Hallie Jackson fretted “Environmental
advocates and some Democrats appalled” by the change in
policy.
CBS This Morning only offered a 21-second news brief on
the topic, with co-host Norah O’Donnell offering this
straightforward description of the order:
The President signed an order yesterday that eliminates
numerous restrictions on coal and other fossil fuels in an
effort to boost domestic energy production. The order
fulfills Mr. Trump’s campaign pledge to roll back the
Obama administration’s climate change policies.
In a later brief in the 8:30 ET half hour, fellow co-host
Charlie Rose did tout pressure on Trump to maintain
current climate agreements:
The Financial Times reports that ExxonMobil urges the
Trump administration not to quit the Paris climate treaty.
A letter from the oil giant last week calls the deal an
effective way to address the risk of climate change.
President Trump began rolling back Obama-era
regulations on fossil fuels yesterday. He made a campaign
promise to pull the United States out of the treaty.
On Tuesday’s evening newscasts, anchors and
correspondents were aghast that Trump was “obliterating”
Obama’s environmental “legacy.”
Here are excerpts from the March 29 morning show
coverage on ABC and NBC:
GMA
7:00 AM ET
DAVID MUIR: Also this morning, President Trump under
fire. The new backlash over his executive order rolling
back President Obama’s climate policies.
(...)
7:06 AM ET
MARY BRUCE: And this morning, the White House is
facing challenges on another front. The President
yesterday signing an executive order to roll back
President Obama’s climate change record with the hopes
of reviving the coal industry. But this morning,
environmentalists are vowing to fight it. One group
describing it as the single biggest attack on climate action
in U.S. history, period.
ROBIN ROBERTS: And Mary, the President is saying that
executive order is going to create jobs. Do we have any
idea how many they say will be saved?
BRUCE: No, we don't, Robin. The White House insists
that this action will create jobs, but they won’t say exactly
how many. Now, those opposing environmentalists say
the White House is overselling it. There are currently
fewer than 75,000 remaining coal jobs in the U.S. But by
comparison, there are more than 650,000 renewable
energy jobs. Robin?
ROBERTS: Alright, Mary, thank you.
(...)
.
322
Today
7:08 AM ET
(...)
PETER ALEXANDER: This morning, President Trump is
facing new backlash over his move to erase President
Obama’s efforts to combat climate change.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Trump and Climate Change;
Signs Exec Order Tossing Obama’s “Clean Energy” Plan]
SEN. ED MARKEY [D-MA]: This is not an executive order,
this is a declaration of war.
ALEXANDER: The President vowing to jumpstart the
economy while rolling back environmental regulations.
DONALD TRUMP: My administration is putting an end to
the war on coal.
ALEXANDER: Mr. Trump ordering a review of the “Clean
Power Plan” that restricts carbon emissions and no longer
requiring the government to consider carbon emissions in
future policy decisions.
During the campaign, President Trump told the New York
Times he has a, quote, “open mind” about climate change.
Though in the past, as you may know, he had called it a
hoax. We're also hearing from the former Vice President
Al Gore, who is now weighing in, describing this
executive order, in his words, as a, quote,
“Misguided step away from a sustainable
carbon-free future for ourselves and
generations to come.”
(...)
 Trump’s Energy Independence EO
By Stephen Lendman
3-29-2017
America already is energy independent.
According to the American Petroleum Institute, it has
enough oil and natural gas reserves alone to provide US
energy needs for many decades to come, along with vast
amounts of coal.
So why was an energy independence EO issued?
 It has nothing to do with “promot(ing) clean and safe
development of our Nation’s vast energy resources,”
nothing about assuring “affordable, reliable, safe,
secure, and clean” electricity, nothing to do with
“promot(ing) clean air and clean water,” nothing about
environmental safety, as claimed.
 It has everything to do with unrestrained profit-making,
consumer rights and ecosanity ignored.
 It orders elimination of regulations and other actions
“potentially burden(ing) the development or use of
domestically produced energy resources, with
particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear
energy…”
NYT editors blasted the EO for the wrong reason, claiming
it “risks the planet” by “demoli(shing) most of (Obama’s)
policies to combat climate change.”
It “repudiate(s)” the so-called 2015 Paris Climate
Agreement without formal US withdrawal, pledging
greenhouse gas reductions - without fulfillment.
Serious Paris COP21 discussions among hundreds of
representatives from 196 UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) countries were dead on
arrival.
They fell short of a whimper, let alone a bang,
environmental and other civil society groups hoped for.
Meaningful results were absent - impossible to achieve
because America and its key allies refused to address a
.
323
potentially catastrophic future problem without
constructive action taken now.
Friends of the Earth International (FEI) accused America
and other
“(r)ich countries (of) mov(ing) the goal
posts” to serve their monied interests -
calling the Paris agreement “a sham.”
Hype and deception substituted for vitally needed tough
measures. America and other rich countries refused to cut
their fossil fuel use enough to matter.
Tokenism won’t prevent an inevitable eco-disaster without
meaningful action to prevent it - not forthcoming in Paris,
no prospect in the foreseeable future.
Thousands of environmental activists protested in Paris,
their numbers stretching over two km - from the Arc de
Triomphe to the city’s business district.
At the time, media scoundrels lied, claiming
a historic breakthrough deal, promising a
green future, The New York Times among
them, praising what didn’t happen.
No meaningful change in fossil fuel use
was agreed on, nothing addressing climate
change or planetary pollution.
Dirty business as usual prevailed, no
historical ecological triumph.
Times editors justifiably criticized Trump’s Tuesday EO.
Providing misinformation about the Paris agreement
destroyed the arguments it made.
Ecosanity depends on replacing fossil fuels and nuclear
energy with clean, green, renewable alternatives - along
with eliminating all other harmful to human
health/environmentally destructive toxins.
Humanity’s survival depends on it.
 Bombshell: Former Obama Official Admits
Spying On Trump Team, Rush To Spread Intelligence
Obama Administration Rushed To Spread Disinformation
By Alex Thomas
03.29.2017 @10:56 PM EDT

(INTELLIHUB) — Barack Obama’s former Deputy urged them to seek to gain access to
Assistant Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas has them.”
admitted that the Obama administration spied on the
Trump team and then rushed to spread the intelligence to
colleagues on the Hill while simultaneously covering up
where it came from.

The stunning admission, revealed during an appearance on

MSNBC, appears to confirm that the Obama administration
did indeed conduct surveillance on Trump, a fact many
already believe after reports in the New York Times that
cited the wiretapping.

As the Conservative Treehouse reported,

“It would appear Ms. Farkas was so caught
up in the discussion, she didn’t quite realize
the significant admissions she was making
about the Obama administration spying on
Donald Trump’s team and generating
classified intelligence for Ms. Farkas (and
others) to spread to Capitol Hill politicians.
MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski recognized the
‘oh-snap’ admission and tried to play it
off,… but by then it was too late.”
“Sometimes when a person is deep inside
an echo-chamber of like-minded
ideologues, they might not realize what
they’re saying is rather revealing to those
on the outside. That’s the set up for former
Obama administration official Evelyn
Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of
Defense) appearing on MSNBC and
admitting first hand knowledge the Obama
administration spied on candidate and
president-elect Donald Trump’s transition
team to gather “intelligence” for political
use.”
“Evelyn Farkas has stated freely on TV
that she and a group of associates from
the Obama Administration went to
congressional staffers who did not have
access to these COMINT products and
“I was urging my former colleagues and,
frankly speaking, the people on the Hill, it
was more actually aimed at telling the Hill
people, get as much information as you
can, get as much intelligence as you can,
before President Obama leaves the
administration,” Farkas admitted.
“Because I had a fear that somehow that
information would disappear with the senior
people who left, so it would be hidden away
in the bureaucracy … that the Trump folks
– if they found out how we knew what we
knew about their – the Trump staff dealing
with Russians – that they would try to
compromise those sources and methods,
meaning we no longer have access to that
intelligence,” she continued.
“So I became very worried because not
enough was coming out into the open and I
knew that there was more. We have very
good intelligence on Russia. So then I had
talked to some of my former colleagues
and I knew that they were trying to also
help get information to the Hill.”
From this admission as well as other correlating reports, it
is safe to say at this point that Farkas and others in the
Obama administration were part of a large-scale
disinformation campaign that included spreading the fake

324
Russian narrative to Democrats in various positions within “is funded by the governments of Latvia
the government. and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World
Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor
It is also important to note that Farkas is now a member of Pinchuk.”
the globalist Atlantic Council. The group has repeatedly
attempted to start a new Cold War with Russia and as Paul
Watson noted,
.

325
 If Trump’s Approval Ratings Drop, Americans
“May See Staged Terrorist Attack”
Claire Bernish - The Free Thought Project
March 29th, 2017

The country is indisputably on edge.

Editor’s Comment: It is perhaps inevitable

Assurances to drain the swamp resulted in flooding the
that a large scale terror attack will once
void with bankers and corporate elite of the same ilk — if
again hit the United States. The need to
differing political stance — as the previous administration.
manipulate events, and seize upon tragedy
Others — such as The Wall, or the mass deportation of
and crisis is inherently built into the system,
improperly-documented immigrants and criminals, or the
and it has long been a stepping stone to
wonky, derogatorily-termed Muslim Ban — only loosely
greater power and control.
follow what Trump championed in the run-up to the
If President Trump cannot achieve the election.
things he needs to, or if his backers and
powers behind the throne desire it so, there And then there’s Obamacare.
could be flashpoints and events that will
change the narrative over night. As
Resentment the president might indeed fail to overhaul
President Obama’s former WH Chief of
Washington’s political establishment now rumbles at a
Staff Rahm Emanuel explained it, “You
slow boil around the nation — even among members of
never let a serious crisis go to waste. And
Trump’s adopted GOP — and that could be treacherous,
what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to
admonished illustrious academic, Professor Noam
do things you think you could not do
Chomsky, in an interview with AlterNet editor-at-large,
before.” Nothing could be more obvious.
Jan Frel.
Beware and stay on guard. Something big
could be coming soon. Asked whether the president’s support base will continue
Noam Chomsky: If Trump Support Drops, backing each new measure or admit he hasn’t lived up to
expectations, Chomsky explained,
US May See ‘Staged Terrorist Attack’
“I think that sooner or later the white
With President Trump’s approval rating sinking below
working-class constituency will recognize,
even the nadir of presidential favorability, it stands to
and in fact, much of the rural population will
reason only a paucity of the billionaire’s campaign pledges
come to recognize, that the promises are
have been addressed as originally promised — and
built on sand. There is nothing there.
although typical for modern U.S. presidents, his base has
begun to grow weary of hollow vows. “And I think that sooner or later the white
working-class constituency will recognize,
and in fact, much of the rural population will

326
 come to recognize, that the promises are
built on sand. There is nothing there.”
But it’s what the itinerant political analyst added that
should send chills down the collective American spine:
“I think that we shouldn’t put aside the
possibility that there would be some
kind of staged or alleged terrorist act,
which can change the country
instantly.”
Since September 11, 2001, just about any act of violence
that could be pawned off on terrorism has been, so the idea
an event would be manufactured — rather from scratch, or
opportunistically — to distract from the mess that is
Washington and garner emotional support for unpopular
military operations not only isn’t unrealistic, it’s happened
before.
Consider the Vietnam War.
Granted, the national political climate leaned toward the
opposite side of the aisle over half a century ago, but the
U.S. government tends only to recycle and repurpose
methods proving efficacious — and the Gulf of Tonkin
was one such operation.
Because the Gulf of Tonkin incident — which fomented
U.S. involvement in Vietnam — never actually happened.
“On 2 August 1964,” wrote U.S. Navy Lt.
Cmdr. Pat Paterson for Naval History
Magazine in 2008. “North Vietnamese
patrol torpedo boats attacked the USS
Maddox … while the destroyer was in
international waters in the Gulf of Tonkin.
There is no doubting that fact. But what
happened in the Gulf during the late hours
of 4 August — and the consequential
actions taken by U.S. officials in
Washington — has been seemingly
327
cloaked in confusion and mystery ever
since that night.”
Documents declassified and released in 2005 and 2006
evince the Maddox hadn’t come under attack at all — and
officials scrambled to assess the situation and opportune
exploding chaos to their advantage.
To President Lyndon Johnson, that meant the signing of
the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution — the legislative catalyst
for full involvement in Vietnam.
However, despite signing the resultant resolution, even the
president had no legitimate reason to believe the second
attack on the Maddox had ever occurred, as Johnson
candidly admitted to then-press secretary Bill Moyers one
year after the attacks,
“For all I know, our Navy was shooting at
whales out there.”
The Gulf of Tonkin incident occupies no unique spot in
governmental manipulation of the populace — nor does
the U.S. stand alone in States employing false flag events
and deftly-crafted outcomes from organically occurring
incidents.
But, as Chomsky points out, growing ambivalence with the
Trump administration’s multitudinous disappointments
and failures in just the first few months — coupled with an
abysmal approval rating, 36 percent, worse than the
absolute rock bottom experienced by either Bill Clinton or
Barack Obama throughout the duration of their
administrations — the timing seems ripe for a convenient
mishap to lure the disaffected back to the fold.
Whether or not the famed academic’s prognostication
comes true has potentially months to play out — but in the
meantime, it would be prudent to examine any
questionable events to discern fact from propaganda —
and to be wary of unsubstantiated statements from
unnamed officials.
 Report: Obama Admin Blocked
FBI Director’s Offer To Reveal Russian Meddling
Chuck Ross - Reporter
9:32 PM 03/29/2017
FBI Director James Comey planned to write an op-ed early
last summer making the case that Russia was meddling in
the U.S. election, but other top Obama administration
officials vetoed the idea.
That’s according to a report from Newsweek magazine.
“The White House shut it down,” one
source told the magazine of Comey’s op-ed
offer. “They did their usual — nothing.”
The revelation, if accurate, would appear to suggest that
the Obama administration did not take Russia’s meddling
in the presidential campaign as seriously as many
Democrats would have liked.
Comey, who took over the FBI in 2013, proposed the op-
ed during a meeting in June or July in the situation room of
the White House in which Sec. of State John Kerry,
Attorney General Loretta Lynch, National Security
Advisor Susan Rice and Sec. of Homeland Security Jeh
Johnson were also present, according to Newsweek.
“He had a draft of it or an outline. He held
up a piece of paper in a meeting and said,
‘I want to go forward, what do people think
of this?'” a source with knowledge of the
meeting told Newsweek of Comey.
According to Newsweek’s source, Comey’s op-ed would
have laid out some of the evidence showing that the
.
328
Kremlin was attempting to influence the presidential
election. The Obama administration would not make a
similar public accusation until Oct. 7, when the Office of
the Director of National Intelligence and the Department
of Homeland Security alleged that Russia was involved in
cyber attacks against Democrats.
The piece, which likely would have been placed at an
outlet like The New York Times, would not have revealed
anything about an investigation into possible ties between
the Russian government and Trump campaign. Comey said
earlier this month that the FBI opened that probe in early
July.
The other Obama administration officials opposed the
idea, Newsweek reports, because they preferred a more
coordinated message.
“An op-ed doesn’t have the same stature, it
comes from one person,” Newsweek’s
source said.
Democrats have blamed the Obama administration for
failing to address Russian meddling early enough in the
campaign cycle. Comey has been one of the biggest targets
for criticism, largely because of his public involvement in
the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email
server.
 Trump’s 2018 Budget:
Let The Corporate Games Begin
Barbara H. Peterson
Farm Wars
March 30, 2017
Sculpture of Augustus (63BC-14AD), first Emperor of Rome and
Grand-Nephew of Julius Ceasar. He defeated Mark Antony and
Cleopatra and gained control over the empire.
After reading the 2018 White House budget, I find that
there are some key points in it that we should all be aware
of:
Support for industry’s development of
public lands; support for vaccine delivery
for hundreds of millions of children; support
for IRS enforcement; and elimination of a
program that helps low income people get
heating assistance.
Read it for yourself:
“Strengthens the Nation’s energy security
by increasing funding for DOI programs
that support environmentally responsible
development of energy on public lands and
offshore waters. Combined with
administrative reforms already in progress,
this would allow DOI to streamline
permitting processes and provide industry
with access to the energy resources
America needs, while ensuring taxpayers
receive a fair return from the development
of these public resources.” (Translation:
public lands will be more open to “energy”
development such as oil, gas and uranium
mining.)
“Provides sufficient resources on a path to
fulfill the $1 billion U.S. pledge to Gavi, the
329
Vaccine Alliance. This commitment helps
support Gavi to vaccinate hundreds of
millions of children in low-resource
countries and save millions of lives.”
(Translation: All of that pre-election rhetoric
about vaccine safety? Forget about it. Gavi
is a Bill and Melinda Gates baby that
intends to vaccinate the world.)
“Preserves key operations of the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) to ensure that the
IRS could continue to combat identity theft,
prevent fraud, and reduce the deficit
through the effective enforcement and
administration of tax laws. Diverting
resources from antiquated operations that
are still reliant on paper-based review in
the era of electronic tax filing would
achieve significant savings, a funding
reduction of $239 million from the 2017
annualized CR level.” (Translation: Since
the IRS will be focusing on getting rid of
paper and going electronic, we can save
money there.)
“Eliminates the discretionary programs
within the Office of Community Services,
including the Low Income Home Energy
Assistance Program (LIHEAP: link inserted
by author) and the Community Services
Block Grant (CSBG), a savings of $4.2
billion from the 2017 annualized CR level.
Compared to other income support
programs that serve similar populations,
LIHEAP is a lower-impact program and is
unable to demonstrate strong performance
outcomes. CSBG funds services that are
duplicative of other Federal programs, such
as emergency food assistance and
employment services, and is also a limited-
impact program.” (Note: I doubt that the low
income people who receive assistance
paying their heating bills would consider
this a low impact service.)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb
/budget/fy2018/2018_blueprint.pdf
The question on everyone’s mind about the current
President should be:
Is he working with the globalist conspirators
or against them?
When did we start worshiping the almighty dollar so much
that only those with billions can aspire to be President?
When did we start declaring that President of the United
States is akin to a Roman Emperor, so we should bow
down and trust him completely? What happened to critical
thinking?
Where is the real alternative media and why the deafening
silence when questioning the new President’s motives?
Shouldn’t we be beating the streets, trying to find out the
truth? Why are we buying what comes out of any
billionaire’s mouth without asking a single question?
Since President Trump’s appointees appear to be littered
with people that have ties to big oil and gas, drug
companies and biotech interests, I, for one, doubt that
someone with such globalist corporate leanings could
actually be working for the little guy and is about to take
down the New World Order (NWO), but who am I? I’m
not one of the “alternative” media moguls who are
peddling his legitimacy like drugs on a street corner in
.
330
New York, collecting the wages of a paid assassin,
boondoggling the public for gain, counting on the people’s
desperate need for a “savior.”
I’m just one of the countless underpaid, overworked
drones well on down the ladder from the leaders of
corporate America, who count their billions and run the
country, wield power like it is their natural born right, and
throw useless eaters away like used toilet paper.
If President Trump really is “on our side” as projected by
his avid supporters, why are his actions looking more and
more like a big business takeover?
And just what is going to happen if/when people who
swallowed the bait, hook, line and sinker start realizing
that they have been duped by those whom they trusted to
tell them the truth, who were only looking to increase their
hits, clicks and ratings? Will those hanging on the wrong
end of the fishing pole still attempt to justify the dissonant
actions that they see with their own eyes and completely
throw away their values in order to keep from facing
reality?
Are we looking at a mass-produced cognitive dissonance
so complete that only a few will be able to see through it?
 ‘Good Lord, Ladies And Gentlemen!’ Levin Unloads On
‘Smoking Gun’ From Ex-Obama Official On Spying
By Curtis Houck
March 30, 2017 | 3:39 PM EDT
On Wednesday night, our friends at The Right Scoop
chronicled conservative talk radio host and CRTV
personality Mark Levin ripping into former Obama
Administration official Evelyn Farkas and the liberal
media for censoring Farkas’s “smoking gun” admission
that the Trump team were in fact surveilled.
“This is amazing to me. Is it not amazing
to you, Mr. Producer? This is stunning
to me. This is an Obama Administration
official. This is everything I’ve said and
we also know....Ladies and gentlemen,
do we or do we not need to get to the
bottom of the Obama Administration’s
use of intelligence agencies,” Levin
explained.
For those that need a refresher or haven’t seen what Farkas
let slip, here’s what she told MSNBC’s Morning Joe on
March 2 [emphasis mine]:
Well, I was urging my former colleagues,
and — and frankly speaking, the people on
the Hill, it was more actually aimed at
telling the Hill people, get as much
information as you can, get as much
intelligence as you can, before
President Obama leaves the
administration because I had a fear that
somehow that information would
disappear with the senior [Obama]
people who left, so it would be hidden
away in the bureaucracy — that the
Trump folks — if they found out how we
knew what we knew about their — the
staff — Trump staff dealing with
Russians — that they would try to
compromise those sources and
methods, meaning we no longer have
access to that intelligence. So, I became
very worried because not enough was
coming out into the open and I knew that
there was more. We have very good
intelligence on Russia, so then I had talked
to some of my former colleagues and I
knew that they were trying to also help get
information to the Hill.
331
She added that “people are worried” about the Russia
investigations and the Trump Administration so “[t]hat’s
why you have the leaking.”
Going back to Levin, he exclaimed: “Good Lord, ladies
and gentlemen. These are at least some fingerprints.”
Levin read out loud the Farkas quote before nothing that
“she’s more than a witness” in this matter of Obama
team surveillance but rather “a perpetrator” since she’s a
political appointee:
What do we have here? They have intelligence
information, they said, on the staff — the Trump’s staff’s
dealings with Russians. I’m quoting this. That they would
try to compromise those sources and methods. So, they had
sources. They have methods. They had intelligence
information on Trump’s staff’s [sic] quote, unquote
“dealings” with Russians. She’s a deputy assistant
secretary at defense.
Nothing how “she wanted it shared” across the Obama
Administration, the charismatic conservative unleashed:
This is a smoking gun. Not in every particular but in
enough particulars. Evelyn Farkas needs to be a witness in
front of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.
She also needs to be interviewed by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and I’m sure the press will stalk her.
Levin minced no words when it came to the media, calling
out ABC’s Brian Ross and MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough
(among others) with this line:
“Now, I want to play this one more time
because this being swept under the rug
by the statist, pretorian guard media.
This is a big deal. This is a big deal.”
Once viewers reheard Farkas’s March 2 disaster, Levin
ruled:
This is amazing to me. Is it not amazing to you, Mr.
Producer? This is stunning to me. This is an Obama
Administration official. This is everything I’ve said and we
also know. Again, this has nothing to do with Nunes and
what was revealed to him, which was a big deal too.
Ladies and gentlemen, do we or do we not need to get to
the bottom of the Obama Administration’s use of
intelligence agencies and the intelligence apparatus and the
.
federal government and the use of the intelligence
information. This — this lady can’t take it upon herself to
reveal information, but look at the information she had.
One more time, she worked at the Defense Department.

332
 Breaking: NY Times Outs Nunes, Cites Sources
Criminal Leaks Fuel Mainstream Media Attacks Against Trump
Kit Daniels Infowars.Com
March 30, 2017

associates were also identified by name in

the reports.”
“Normally, intelligence agencies mask the
identities of American citizens who are
incidentally present in intercepted
communications.”

Two White House officials provided

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the
chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee, with intelligence reports
showing that President Trump and his
team were swept up in foreign
surveillance by US spy agencies, claims
the New York Times.
“Several current American officials
identified the White House officials as Ezra
Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for
intelligence at the National Security
Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who
works on national security issues at the
White House Counsel’s Office and formerly The Times likely got their information from moles leaking
worked on the staff of the House information from inside the White House which President
Intelligence Committee,” the Times Trump has described as a criminal act.
reported on Thursday. “A White House
spokesperson declined to comment.” And the mainstream media has been targeting Nunes ever
since he pointed out there was “no evidence of collusion”
The Times said Nunes was asked to meet the officials in a between President Trump’s team and Russia on the night
secure location at the White House where people with of the presidential election, which of course went against
security clearances could view classified reports. the establishment narrative of “Russian election meddling”
being used to undermine Trump’s presidency.
“The real issue, Mr. Nunes has said, was
that he could figure out the identities of “Nunes’ acknowledgement of the lack of any proof
Trump associates from reading reports appears believable, as the intelligence community did not
about intercepted communications that even produce a solid piece evidence of the ‘hacking’ itself
were shared among Obama administration let alone the vague ‘Russian involvement,'” said former
officials with top security clearances.” the MI5 intelligence officer Anny Machon.
report added. “He said some Trump
.

333
 CNN's Toobin Rants:
'Sanctimonious' Comey 'Beat Hillary Clinton'
By Brad Wilmouth
March 30, 2017 | 11:16 PM EDT

As CNN's Jeffrey Toobin appeared as a panel member on
Wednesday's CNN Tonight, the network's senior legal
analyst was wound up with anti-Republican sentiments as
he derided Republican Rep. Devin Nunes as either
"clueless" or "corrupt," whined that "sanctimonious" FBI
director James Comey "beat Hillary Clinton," and
dismissed talk of the Clinton Foundation accepting money
from Russia as "talk radio nonsense."
During a panel segment where conservative CNN political
commentator Andre Bauer was outnumbered 5-1, host Don
Lemon wondered,
"Does Nunes have any credibility left?"
After the Washington Post's Sally Quinn
laughed and replied, "No," Toobin took aim
at Nunes as he cracked: "I think there are
three possibilities -- that Nunes is clueless,
that he is corrupt, or he's both. And those
are the only three possibilities."
of Hillary Clinton on the eve of the election. The idea that
he somehow was unaware he's so unaware of the political
implications of his work. What a bunch of nonsense that
was.
Bauer burst out laughing at Toobin's over the top liberal
bias and quipped:
"He saved her from jail."
Earlier in the show, as the subject of the Clinton
Foundation receiving contributions from Russians, Lemon
wondered:
"But I don't understand what the Clinton
Foundation and any of that has to do --
Jeffrey?"
Toobin griped:

It's just like, you know, talk radio nonsense

to try to distract attention away from what's
going on with the actual President of the
United States as opposed to the candidate
who lost. But, you know, look, apparently
that's going to be the Republican talking
point here.

Below is a transcript of relevant portions of the

Wednesday, March 29, CNN Tonight:

10:09 p.m. ET
Liberal CNN political analyst Carl Bernstein then chimed
in:
DON LEMON: But I don't understand what the
Clinton Foundation and any of that has to do --
"No. And Republicans should stop
Jeffrey?
defending him. That's the important thing."
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL
After a commercial break, Lemon played a clip of Comey
ANALYST: It's just like, you know, talk radio
from a recent speech in which he praised the FBI's
nonsense to try to distract attention away from
behavior as politically neutral. After the clip concluded,
what's going on with the actual President of the
Toobin immediately began ranting:
United States as opposed to the candidate who lost.
But, you know, look, apparently that's going to be
What a bunch of sanctimonious nonsense. You know, the Republican talking point here.
there's the guy who beat Hillary Clinton by breaking
Justice Department policy and announcing investigations
334
 The key mystery here is you have an acknowledged
Russian attempt to sway the election to Trump. You
have all these Trump campaign efforts to ingratiate
themselves with Russia, whether it's Jared Kushner
or Jeff Sessions or Michael Flynn. All of them seem
to be going out of their way to help one leader in the
whole world -- Vladimir Putin.
Now, the question, which is very much unanswered
at this point, is whether those two stories connect in
any way. Was this attempt to get Russia, you know,
to ingratiate ourselves with Russia, related to
Russia's attempt to defeat Hillary Clinton. I don't
know. but it certainly seems worthy of investigation.
(...)
LEMON: Does Nunes have any credibility left?
SALLY QUINN, WASHINGTON POST
CONTRIBUTOR: Well, here's -- (laughs) -- no. The
answer to that question is, he has no credibility.
LEMON: Do you think he has any credibility or not?
I'm going to ask the panel. Let me ask, and then I'll
get back to you. Do you think he has credibility or
not?
TOOBIN: I think there are three possibilities -- that
Nunes is clueless, that he is corrupt, or he's both.
335
LEMON: Yeah.
TOOBIN: And those are the only three possibilities.
LEMON: Carl, does he have any credibility left?
CARL BERNSTEIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST:
No.
LEMON: Kirsten Powers?
BERNSTEIN: And Republicans should stop
defending him. That's the important thing.
(...)
JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: Most people are
wearing glasses that filter the world according to
side. And this is a challenge that I face when I
testify in front of Congress -- and it's not a criticism
of Congress. It's -- they see facts as to how it will
affect "my side. How does that argument affect my
side?" And when counter people -- and I'm just one
of 37,000 that are like this at the FBI -- who never
consider side, it's confusing.
TOOBIN: What a bunch of sanctimonious
nonsense. You know, there's the guy who beat
Hillary Clinton by breaking Justice Department
policy and announcing investigations of Hillary
Clinton on the eve of the election. The idea that he
somehow was unaware --
ANDRE BAUER, CNN POLITICAL
COMMENTATOR: He saved her from jail.
TOOBIN: -- he's so unaware of the political
implications of his work. What a bunch of nonsense
that was.
 The Surveillance State Behind Russia-Gate
Will Trump Take On The Spooks?
William Binney And Ray Mcgovern
March 30, 2017
Although many details are still hazy because of secrecy –
and further befogged by politics – it appears House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was
informed last week about invasive electronic surveillance
of senior U.S. government officials and, in turn, passed
that information onto President Trump.
This news presents Trump with an unwelcome but
unavoidable choice: confront those who have kept him in
the dark about such rogue activities or live fearfully in
their shadow. (The latter was the path chosen by President
Obama. Will Trump choose the road less traveled?)
What President Trump decides will largely determine the
freedom of action he enjoys as president on many key
security and other issues. But even more so, his choice
may decide whether there is a future for this constitutional
republic. Either he can acquiesce to or fight against a Deep
State of intelligence officials who have a myriad of ways
to spy on politicians (and other citizens) and thus amass
derogatory material that can be easily transformed into
blackmail.
This crisis (yes, “crisis” is an overused word, but in this
highly unusual set of circumstances we believe it is
appropriate) came to light mostly by accident after
President Trump tweeted on March 4 that his team in New
York City’s Trump Towers had been “wiretapped” by
President Obama.
Trump reportedly was relying on media reports regarding
how conversations of aides, including his ill-starred
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, had been
336
intercepted. Trump’s tweet led to a fresh offensive by
Democrats and the mainstream press to disparage Trump’s
“ridiculous” claims.
However, this concern about the dragnets that U.S.
intelligence (or its foreign partners) can deploy to pick up
communications by Trump’s advisers and then “unmask”
the names before leaking them to the news media was also
highlighted at the Nunes-led House Intelligence
Committee hearing on March 20, where Nunes appealed
for anyone who had related knowledge to come forward
with it.
That apparently happened on the evening of March 21
when Nunes received a call while riding with a staffer.
After the call, Nunes switched to another car and went to a
secure room at the Old Executive Office Building, next to
the White House, where he was shown highly classified
information apparently about how the intelligence
community picked up communications by Trump’s aides.
The next day, Nunes went to the White House to brief
President Trump, who later said he felt “somewhat
vindicated” by what Nunes had told him.
The ‘Wiretap’ Red Herring
But the corporate U.S. news media continued to heckle
Trump over his use of the word “wiretap” and cite the
insistence of FBI Director James Comey and other
intelligence officials that President Obama had not issued a
wiretap order aimed at Trump.
As those paying rudimentary attention to modern methods
of surveillance know, “wiretapping” is passé. But Trump’s
use of the word allowed FBI and Department of Justice
officials and their counterparts at the National Security
Agency to swear on a stack of bibles that the FBI, DOJ,
and NSA have been unable to uncover any evidence within
their particular institutions of such “wiretapping.”
At the House Intelligence Committee hearing on March
20, FBI Director Comey and NSA Director Michael
Rogers firmly denied that their agencies had wiretapped
Trump Towers on the orders of President Obama.
So, were Trump and his associates “wiretapped?” Of
course not. Wiretapping went out of vogue decades ago,
having been rendered obsolete by leaps in surveillance
technology.
The real question is: Were Trump and his associates
surveilled? Wake up, America. Was no one paying
attention to the disclosures from NSA whistleblower
Edward Snowden in 2013 when he exposed Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper as a liar for denying
that the NSA engaged in bulk collection of
communications inside the United States.
The reality is that EVERYONE, including the President,
is surveilled. The technology enabling bulk collection
would have made the late demented FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover’s mouth water.
Allegations about the intelligence community’s abuse of
its powers also did not begin with Snowden. For instance,
several years earlier, former NSA worker and
whistleblower Russell Tice warned about these “special
access programs,” citing first-hand knowledge, but his
claims were brushed aside as coming from a disgruntled
employee with psychological problems. His disclosures
were soon forgotten.
Intelligence Community’s Payback
However, earlier this year, there was a stark reminder of
how much fear these surveillance capacities have struck in
the hearts of senior U.S. government officials. Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York told
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Trump was
“being really dumb” to take on the intelligence
community, since
“They have six ways from Sunday at
getting back at you.”
Maddow shied away from asking the logical follow-up:
“Senator Schumer, are you actually saying
that Trump should be afraid of the CIA?”
Perhaps she didn’t want to venture down a path that would
raise more troubling questions about the surveillance of the
Trump team than on their alleged contacts with the
Russians.
Similarly, the U.S. corporate media is now focused on
Nunes’s alleged failure to follow protocol by not sharing
his information first with Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking
Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.
Democrats promptly demanded that Nunes recuse himself
from the Russia investigation.
337
On Tuesday morning, reporters for CNN and other news
outlets peppered Nunes with similar demands as he walked
down a corridor on Capitol Hill, prompting him to suggest
that they should be more concerned about what he had
learned than the procedures followed.
That’s probably true because to quote Jack Nicholson’s
character in “A Few Good Men” in a slightly different
context, the mainstream media “cannot handle the truth” –
even if it’s a no-brainer.
At his evening meeting on March 21 at the Old Executive
Office Building, Nunes was likely informed that all
telephones, emails, etc. – including his own and Trump’s –
are being monitored by what the Soviets used to call “the
organs of state security.”
By sharing that information with Trump the next day –
rather than consulting with Schiff – Nunes may have
sought to avoid the risk that Schiff or someone else would
come up with a bureaucratic reason to keep the President
in the dark.
A savvy politician, Nunes knew there would be high
political cost in doing what he did. Inevitably, he would be
called partisan; there would be more appeals to remove
him from chairing the committee; and the character
assassination of him already well under way – in The
Washington Post, for example – might move him to the top
of the unpopularity chart, displacing even bête noire
Russian President Vladimir Putin.
But this episode was not the first time Nunes has shown
some spine in the face of what the Establishment wants
ignored. In a move setting this congressman apart from all
his colleagues, Nunes had the courage to host an award
ceremony for one of his constituents, retired sailor and
member of the USS Liberty crew, Terry Halbardier.
On June 8, 1967, by repairing an antennae and thus
enabling the USS Liberty to issue an SOS, Halbardier
prevented Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats from sinking
that Navy intelligence ship and ensuring that there would
be no survivors to describe how the Israeli “allies” had
strafed and bombed the ship. Still, 34 American seamen
died and 171 were wounded.
At the time of the award ceremony in 2009, Nunes said,
“The government has kept this quiet I think
for too long, and I felt as my constituent, he
[Halbardier] needed to get recognized for
the services he made to his country.” (Ray
McGovern took part in the ceremony in
Nunes’s Visalia, California office.)
Now, we suspect that much more may be learned about the
special compartmented surveillance program targeted
against top U.S. national leaders if Rep. Nunes doesn’t traveled – acquiescence to America’s Deep State actors.
back down and if Trump doesn’t choose the road most
.

338
Leftists, Dick Cheney, And Hillary Clinton Unite To Peddle
Russia Hacking Narrative, Provoke New Cold War
By Brandon Turbeville
March 30, 2017
In the Twilight Zone of 2017 America, it’s official that
leftists and Democrats are welcoming with open arms their
newest ally and flame bearer in the war on Russia, Donald
Trump, and what they have convinced themselves Trump
and Putin stand for. The new hero? Dick Cheney.
No, this is not a joke. The alleged arch enemy of the left,
Darth Cheney himself, has joined the right wing cavalry of
neo-cons and Republicans coming to the aid of leftists, and
Democrats who are pushing the discredited narrative of
“Russian hacking” and “tampering with American
elections.”
Cheney, echoing John McCain, stated that Russia’s alleged
hacking was an “act of war” and predicted that we would
see more of “this kind of conduct and activity” going
forward. Of course, in the senile and compulsive minds of
McCain and Cheney, every act is an act of war.
Still, despite being a man with no heart or pulse (both
literally and figuratively), Cheney traveled all the way to
New Delhi to attend the Economic Times’ Global Business
Summit 2017 where he gave a speech in which he
addressed the Russian narrative. Cheney repeatedly cast
the unproven and discredited accusations against Russia
and Putin as a shot across the bow to America and
evidence that Russia is slowly trying to destroy the United
States.
“There’s no question there was a very
serious effort made by Mr. [Vladimir] Putin
and his government, his organization, to
interfere in major ways with our basic
fundamental democratic processes,” he
said.
339
“In some quarters, that would be
considered an act of war. I think it’s a kind
of conduct and activity we will see going
forward. We know he’s attempted it
previously in other states in the Baltics,” he
added.
Cheney also stated that,
“Another aspect of Mr. Putin’s conduct is
the issue that is now very much in the
headlines at home, and that has to do with
cyber warfare, cyberattack on the United
States – the fact that he took his
capabilities in the cyber area and used it to
try to influence our election.”
Leftists and Democrats are, of course, eating up Cheney’s
words as if they somehow prove their idiotic neo-
McCarthyistic fantasies regarding Russian hacking and
visions of Putin marching across Europe to establish the
Fourth Reich. Regardless of Trump’s rhetoric, campaign,
and presidency, (he has shown little signs that he is willing
to actually buck the Deep State system beyond a few half-
clever quips at press conferences) it should be noted that
Clintonistas and neo-cons publicly united in opposition to
his presidential run and that they now publicly appear to be
united against his presidency. Whether or not this
opposition is merely theatre remains to be seen but, for
now, it is clear to all that it at least exists in terms of
appearance. For that reason, it puts the neo-cons and the
Dems on the same side. If it’s theatre, well . . . that puts
them on the same side anyway. You can easily see where I
am going with this.
But today the veil has been lifted just a little more and
what those of us who are guided by our principles already
knew has been revealed to the world; i.e.
that the Clintonistas and Democratic
party are absolutely identical to the
Cheney neo-cons and Republicans.
They are not two opposing parties. They
are two peas in a pod.
In terms of policy there is no difference whatsoever. Over
the last two decades, neo-con/neo-liberal policies have
been introduced by both Republican and Democrat
administrations with only changes in the presentation –
hamfisted idiocy and “conservatism” under Bush and
“hope and change” messianism with Obama. At the heart
of the matter, however, was the fact that both parties are
nothing more than subsidiary brands of the same American
oligarchy controlled by Corporations, Wall Street, Secret
Societies, the intelligence community and the Deep State
apparatus.
The fact that the two leading figures for the
parties – Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton –
are virtually identical on the vast majority of
their policies should, therefore, not be
surprising.
Leftists, however, should embark on a mission of soul
searching since, in a period of a few short years, they went
.
340
from blaming the CIA for Iraq and painting Dick Cheney
as evil personified (fair enough) to becoming the biggest
and loudest cheerleaders for the CIA and completely in
line with Dick Cheney’s rhetoric.
Such a switch in political loyalties, morals, ethics, and
general awareness should serve as a warning against
further decision-making based on emotion and anger rather
than logic and principles. The emotional pawns who
succumb to making decisions based on temporary
emotions are just that – unwitting pawns constantly passed
back and forth amongst ideologies and groups using their
talent and energy to form something that benefits only the
oligarchy. Unfortunately, we should probably just expect
and entrenching of the Clinton-Cheney, Republican-
Democrat cognitive dissonance that has shown no signs of
abating anytime soon.
 Former Obama Official Stumbles While Trying To
Backtrack After Implying Intel Leaks
By Mike Ciandella
March 30, 2017 | 11:28 AM EDT
On CNBC’s Squawk Box on March 30, a former senior
Obama administration official tried to take back her earlier
admission that the former administration tried to “get as
much information” as possible on Trump and his
associates before the transition of power – but she only
dug herself in deeper.
Evelyn Farkas used to be the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Russia/Ukraine/Eurasia under President
Obama. Now, like former Press Secretary Josh Earnest,
she’s made the move over to NBC News as a National
Security Analyst. Claiming that her previous statements
had been misunderstood, Farkas insisted to the Squawk
Box panel that she was only explaining “why people might
be motivated to do that.” Later she seemed to imply that
the Trump administration would threaten intelligence
sources when she said “people could get hurt, if people
were giving us information.”
On March 2’s Morning Joe, Farkas dropped this
bombshell:
“I was urging my former colleagues and,
frankly speaking, the people on the Hill, it
was more actually aimed at telling the Hill
people, get as much information as you
can, get as much intelligence as you can,
before President Obama leaves the
administration. Because I had a fear that
somehow that information would disappear
with the senior people who left. So, it would
be hidden away in the bureacracy, that the
Trump folks, if they found out how we knew
what we knew about their -- the staff, the
Trump staff's dealing with Russians, that
341
they would try to compromise those
sources and methods."
So far, none of NBC’s news shows have mentioned this
comment, even though it first aired on its sister network
and NBC (like ABC and CBS) has been obsessed with
Trump’s “wiretap” comments.
This morning, when CNBC’s Squawk Box Host Andrew
Ross Sorkin confronted his new colleague about her
statement, asking her to clarify, she seemed flustered.
“I simply was referring, because we were a
conversation about concern in Washington
about what was going on, with regard to
Russian actions and potential American
involvement. And so, I was urging my
former colleagues, I worked on the Hill in
the Senate, years ago, to make sure that
they were reaching out to the White House
to get all the information they could.
Because, I was afraid that somehow there
might be a cover-up if there was something
behind the allegations.”
Co-host Joe Kernen pressed her further,
“I mean you actually said that ‘I knew
that there was more. I became very
worried because not enough was
coming out into the open, and I knew
that there was more.’ And then, you
actually said that that’s why you have all
the leaking, to make sure we get it out. I
mean, people are accusing you, Evelyn, of
admitting that was surveillance, admitting
that there was unmasking, and urging
people, or, at least, saying that intelligence
leaking, which could be a felony, is the way
that it should get out. And you weren’t even
part of the government at that point.”
Farkas doubled down and denied everything,
“No, so, I was referring to the motivation.
Because there had been a lot of
 discussion, in the media about why are
people leaking. And, so I was trying to, but
in a very short-hand fashion, explain, at the
very end of that quote, that people were
leaking because they were afraid of a
cover-up. I do not, absolutely do not
condone leaking. You know – it’s against
the law. What I was doing was
explaining, though, was why people
might be motivated to do that.”
Sorkin followed up,
“But just clarify, and just to put a fine point
on it, and then we’re going to move on,
when you said ‘if they found out how we
know what we knew,’ that wasn’t a
reference to the idea that you know that
there was surveillance going on?”
Farkas continued to deny everything:
“No! No. It’s sources and methods. It could
be people. And people could get hurt, if
people were giving us information.”
A partial transcript follows:
ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: There’s been a bit of
commotion and questions around a comment that you
made, relating to all of this, on Morning Joe recently. And
I wanted you to try to help clarify and explain it to us. And,
I don’t know if I can find the quote here and put it up on
the screen. But there was a time when you said, related to
getting this information out, you said that you had a fear
that somehow that information would disappear, this is in
terms of why it may have leaked, the senior Obama
people who left. ‘So it would be hidden away in the
bureaucracy…that the Trump folks if they found out how
we knew what we know about their…the Trump staff
dealing with the Russians…that they would try to
compromise those sources and methods, meaning we no
longer have access to that intelligence.’ Sean Hannity and
others have made a big issue of this, and I wanted you
just to explain what you meant by that, and in particular
when you talked about when they found out how we
knew. What do you mean by ‘how we knew’?
EVELYN FARKAS: Well, what I was getting at was the
fact that we were having now a transition of power from
the Obama administration to the Trump administration.
And if indeed there was an investigation ongoing, if
indeed there was information that the Obama
administration had about Russian interference, and
possible American involvement, I wanted to make sure
that Congress knew about it. That Congress had all that
information. So, I simply was referring, because we were
a conversation about concern in Washington about what
342
was going on, with regard to Russian actions and
potential American involvement. And so, I was urging my
former colleagues, I worked on the Hill in the Senate,
years ago, to make sure that they were reaching out to
the White House to get all the information they could.
Because, I was afraid that somehow there might be a
cover-up if there was something behind the allegations.
JOE KERNEN: I mean, you actually said that “I knew that
there was more. I became very worried because not
enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that
there was more.” And then, you actually said that that’s
why you have all the leaking, to make sure we get it out. I
mean, people are accusing you, Evelyn, of admitting that
was surveillance, admitting that there was unmasking,
and urging people, or, at least, saying that intelligence
leaking, which could be a felony, is the way that it should
get out. And you weren’t even part of the government at
that point.
EVELYN FARKAS: No, so, I was referring to the
motivation. Because there had been a lot of discussion, in
the media about why are people leaking. And, so I was
trying to, but in a very short-hand fashion, explain, at the
very end of that quote, that people were leaking because
they were afraid of a cover-up. I do not, absolutely do not
condone leaking. You know – it’s against the law. What I
was doing was explaining, though, was why people might
be motivated to do that. And I did not have any insider
information myself, but I knew, based on what was
coming out in the press, from these leaks and from official
sources, the newspapers were quoting people, that my
government probably has a pretty good sense of what the
Russians did, because we have good – we have good
intelligence on Russia.
…
SORKIN: But just clarify, and just to put a fine point on it,
and then we’re going to move on, when you said ‘if they
found out how we know what we knew,’ that wasn’t a
reference to the idea that you know that there was
surveillance going on.
FARKAS: No! No. It’s sources and methods. It could be
people. And people could get hurt, if people were
giving us information.
KERNEN: And there wasn’t a great deal of coordination
between people that were still in the State Department
and the Clinton campaign, where there’s information
sharing about what the intelligence community was
finding out with the Clinton campaign, which – you would
have been the conduit?
FARKAS: No. I can’t speak to what the Clinton campaign
knew, and what the White House – my sense is that there
was really a firewall between the administration and the
 Clinton campaign. And, in part, I think, meant that the threat.
Clinton campaign was really blindsided by the Russia
.

343
 Hillary And Other Leftists:
Sean Spicer Racist And Sexist For Not Taking
Reporter April Ryan's Nonsense
By Dan Calabrese
March 30, 2017

So we’re told that Spicer was being racist and sexist for the
way he dealt with Ryan here. OK. Let’s see the actual
exchange for ourselves:

We’re going to get this again and again for as long as

Trump is president, but that doesn’t mean we should just
settle in and let the media get away with it. You can’t win
with them, of course, if you’re a Republican
administration. If you let them walk all over you, they will.
If you give as good as you get, they’ll find a way to make
that a scandal - and their easiest and most predictable path
to doing that is if someone mixes it up with a female
and/or minority reporter.
April Ryan is certainly a goldmine for them, isn’t she?
Back in February they tried to martyr her because of an
exchange with Trump himself that was about as innocuous
as a thing can be.
Ryan was a lot less substantive and a
lot more obnoxious
Tuesday’s exchange was Sean Spicer was different. Ryan
was a lot less substantive and a lot more obnoxious in
asking Spicer about how he intends to repair what she
called Trump’s “image” problem. Spicer’s response was
basically that any “image problem” Trump might have
exists only in the minds and via the mouths of the media,
who continue to talk endlessly about certain things that are
either a) irrelevant; or b) not even true. The exchange was
testy, mainly because Ryan kept stepping on Spicer’s
responnse both verbally and nonverbally.
And guess who has re-emerged from whatever hole she
crawled into to declare Spicer racist and sexist as a result?
You should have known she’d be the thing that wouldn’t
leave:
344
Questions about this:
1. Did Spicer at any point refer to Ryan’s race? No.
2. Did Spicer at any point refer to Ryan’s sex? No.
3. Who kept interrupting the other? Ryan asked a
question, Spicer tried to answer it. Yes, they were both
shouting over each other, but it was Ryan who kept
cutting Spicer off as he tried to give her a detailed
answer. You don’t see all the head-shaking but Spicer
obviously does and considers it just as much a part of
the interruption as her tried to shout followup questions
when he’s not done with his initial answer.
What we’ve got here is exactly what it looks like: A tense,
testy exchange between a reporter and the White House
press secretary, brought on by a frankly obnoxious
question that’s impossible to answer effectively without
doing exactly what Spicer did, which is to turn the
question back on the press. Ryan doesn’t like that so things
get tense. Fine. But why should anyone think Spicer would
have handled it differently if a white male reporter had
asked the same question, or had continually interrupted his
answer, or had sat there shaking his head dismissively as
Spicer was trying to answer?
He wouldn’t, and you know it.
 Real reason they’re so furious today.
Their ammo is being revealed as
powerless, and everyone is starting to
notice
The standard the left is trying to set here is that minorities
and women can only be handled with kid gloves, and that
anyone who mixes it up with them is racist by definition
even if the matter at hand has nothing to do with race or
sex and makes no reference to it. And if that’s going to be
the standard by which we have to operate, what exactly
does the left think of female and minority reporters?
As for the question itself, it’s obnoxious in the extreme
precisely because it’s one of those unfalsifiable notions the
press likes to toss out there. The president has an image
problem! Russia! Wiretapping! So much! It won’t go
away!
.
345
If it won’t go away, it’s because they are resolved to keep
talking about it even if there’s nothing there to talk about.
That’s Spicer’s point. How can you repair an “image
problem” that’s created and kept alive solely by the will of
the press? You can’t, nor should you even take seriously
the notion that it’s your problem to fix. The stupid Russia
thing “won’t go away” because they don’t want it to, not
because there’s anything to it. Trump has decided to let it
be their problem, and they’re butthurt that he’s not
jumping through hoops trying to satisfy them.
Because Trump learned two things during the campaign:
1. You can’t satisfy them.
2. Them being satisfied doesn’t matter as much as
politicians have long assumed it does.
And that’s the real reason they’re so furious today. Their
ammo is being revealed as powerless, and everyone is
starting to notice.
 Hosts Of Morning Joe Bash Spicer
And Question His 'Stability'
By Alexis Thomasi
March 30, 2017 | 10:48 AM EDT
Thursday on Morning Joe, hosts Joe Scarborough and
Mika Brzezinski spent a large part of the show discussing
Sean Spicer’s reaction to reporter April Ryan during
Tuesday's White House press conference. This prompted
each of them to question his "stability" and "credibility."
Brzezinski introduced the segment with:
“Yesterday I was questioning Sean Spicer's
credibility because I really think it's at risk,
in jeopardy or shot. If you really think about
it and go through kind of a time-line. Now
you might want to add questioning his
stability. In yesterday's press brief– did you
see him yesterday? He kind of snapped.”
After the other panelists agreed with her, she continued:
“I think things are getting in his head which
is really early for that to be happening. But
then again, think about it. It happened
when American Urban Radio
correspondent April Ryan questioned him
over the administration's image. And I
didn't really see her shaking her head.”
Scarborough agreed:
“She wasn’t -- She didn’t shake her head.”
After the two concluded she was not shaking her head and
Brzezinski foolishly acted this out, she went on to say:
“I never saw any head shaking.”
346
She then introduced the clip of Spicer and Ryan.
The clip concluded with Scarborough and Brzezinski
exclaiming
“Oh my God!” and “What is wrong with
him?”
Scarborough continued:
“How condescending can anybody be?
This is not a first grade class. That was just
simply beyond the pale.”
Brzezinski concurred:
“Someone is in way over his head”
MSNBC contributor Mike Barnicle shared his thoughts,
saying:
“Well – Yes. I mean, there's a part of me
that has great sympathy for him because
he's got an audience of one that he's
dealing with, the President of the United
States. The other thing is, he clearly does
not have the temperament to be press
secretary.”
Scarborough agreed:
“No he doesn’t...The thing is, you just don't
have to be abusive, and in that
situation...I’ve never heard anybody be as
condescending from that position – And
abusive, for accusing somebody of doing
something they weren't even doing.”
Further into the segment, Scarborough was interrupted by
Brzezinski who began to mock the Spicer/Ryan situation.
She yelled,
“Stop shaking your head, Joe!,”
and the rest of the panelist laughed and cheered on her
Spicer parody. Brzezinski later suggested:
“Sean Spicer leaving on day two would
have said a lot and done a lot for this
presidency. It would have been better than
him staying there hanging on like a
complete shill lying.”
Barnicle quipped:
“It’s not too late”
Brzezinski went on and pulled political analyst Mark
Halperin into the conversation:
“Mark Halperin the question I've been
asking for the past two days with a smile on
my face, and I just want a yes or no...Is
Sean Spicer credible?”
Halperin responded:
Not within the briefing room with a lot of
people that cover him every day. And the
thing is, some people use the White House
podium to just get through the day, not
make news, not get any advantage. He's
become such a voice and such a face of
the administration, they're not winning most
news cycles. And in part it's because that
briefing daily is setting them back rather
than getting them going forward.
Scarborough added:
“You know there's no reason why he had to
do that with April Ryan. April asked a
question. Ask the question, answer the
question, move onto the next person...He
takes a lot of simple questions and turns
them into big fights.”
Brzezinski replied:
“If you look at what the job is, he's not
serving the President or the people. He’s
not doing the job.”
In another segment, Brzezinski brought up the Spicer clip
by asking Associated Press correspondent Julie Pace:
“Were you in the press briefing yesterday?”
Pace answered:
347
“I was unfortunately not there for
yesterday's show...I watched it, though.”
Scarborough chimed in:
“You know where she was? She was home
shaking her head.”
After more laughter and what they thought was witty
banter, Brzezinski and Scarborough introduced the clip.
Brzezinski declared:
“Here is what happened when Sean Spicer
kind of -- kind of snapped on her. Take a
look.”
Scarborough:
“He lost it.”
Following the clip, the same theatrics occurred. Brzezinski
proclaimed:
“Oh, my God – I can't get over it. Julie --”
Scarborough professed:
“No words for that. That's unbelievable.”
Brzezinski went on to ask Pace her question of the week
for the umpteenth time:
“Julie, first of all, can you make sense of
that, what happened there? And is Sean
Spicer credible at this point?”
Pace, right on cue, answered:
“Well, don't mess with April Ryan is my first
piece of advice for press secretaries.”
Brzezinski emphatically agreed saying,
“Never”.
Pace continued:
A lot of press secretaries have learned that
lesson over time. Look, April was asking a
really legitimate question. There's an FBI
investigation into whether the Trump
campaign was coordinating with Russians
during the election. That's just a fact.
James Comey said that publicly on Capitol
Hill. So to dismiss out of hand reporters
who are asking about that investigation or
 asking how the White House tries to move
past that is a legitimate question. It's a little
bit odd that Sean would try to undermine
just that very premise. In terms of Sean's
credibility, I think a lot of reporters who
cover the White House would tell you Sean
is helpful behind the scenes, that a lot of us
have good relationships with him behind
the scenes. I think any time you're in a
White House, though, where the press
briefing becomes the story, in part because
things that are said from the podium turn
out to later be not accurate or that the story
has to keep changing from the podium,
that's bad for the President. That is not a
situation where White Houses are
operating on their A game when the
podium piece of it is the story. And that's
where they find themselves a lot of days.
Scarborough inquired:
“People do watch it because it's taken on
its own sort of place, its own corner in
American popular culture. Didn't it rate like
a soap opera a couple of weeks ago? It is
theater a lot of times what they say – It's
not true. It's corrected the next day. You
look at the Nunes stuff where he said well
why in the world would he come over here
to, you know, tell us something we already
know. And now we find out that's exactly
what he did.”
Brzezinski added:
“Well, but that's unsustainable.”
Scarborough retorted:
“We say it's unsustainable. But how does
Spicer -- again, you've been doing this a
very long time -- How does Spicer keep
doing his job with any credibility when
events like that happen every day?”
Halperin responded:
“Well, as Julie said, you don't want the day
to be driven by the briefing...Too often that
briefing drives the story away from where
the White House wants it to be.”
Brzezinski, redirecting the conversation back to Ryan:
348
“And any slight shaking of the head came
when he accused her of having an
agenda.”
NBC News correspondent Katy Tur answered:
“She doesn't have an agenda she’s a
reporter. And – Julie was saying, it's a
completely valid question. How do you get
past that perception? And the White House
and Sean Spicer might not like that there's
a perception out there. They might not
agree with it because their job is – But
there's a perception that there's something
weird going on”
Scarborough asked:
“Well that's the question that we have to
end on. Is this about Sean Spicer or is this
about Donald Trump? Is this about – I
mean is this about the client who is Donald
Trump or is this about the PR rep who is
doing exactly what he is ordered to do,
down to wearing dark suits?”
Halperin answered:
“Well you don't just go back to when the
health care bill, the vote was pulled and the
President made two calls to two news
organizations he regularly disparages. He's
never going to let anyone run his PR
particularly when times are tough. And if
there's an attempt to shift direction to come
back, it's not going to be driven by anyone
on the staff, it's going to be driven by the
President.”
Scarborough reacted:
“ I mean we all known Sean, known Sean
for a long time, worked with him at the
RNC. I like Sean a lot personally. I've
always liked him a lot personally, he's been
a straight shooter to me...Like the guy.
Talked to him election morning...He's
always been kind. He’s always been giving.
This is not the Sean Spicer that we've
known over the past 10 years or so...Not
even close.”
Halperin replied:
This White House has gotten in a couple
months to where most White Houses get
six months, nine months in. Which is they
 feel under siege. They feel under siege. MSNBC - Morning Joe
They feel like they get only get negative 6AM
coverage, they get harassed, and don't get [6:12:18- 6:21:14 ]
credit for anything they do. And that always
starts with any administration with the
President who demands to know why am I
not seeing more people on TV effectively
defending me?

Brzezinski probing Halperin:

“Okay so let's be fair, Mark Halperin, what

have they done? If they don't get credit for
anything they do, what have they done?
What are we missing? What's the story?”
Halperin answered: “Well they would like
more credit for the Gorsuch nomination. I
know that’s one they bring up with me all MIKA BRZEZINSKI: So one of the other questions we’re looking
the time.” Brzezinski pushed further: at, yesterday I was questioning Sean Spicer's credibility because
“Anything else, Mark? Like any I really think it's at risk, in jeopardy or shot. If you really think
accomplishment that we're missing? about it and go through kind of a time-line, now you might want to
Please.” add questioning his stability. In yesterday's press brief– did you
see him yesterday? He kind of snapped.
Halperin answered:
MIKE BARNACLE: Yeah
They like their executive orders on
regulation. That's another one they tout. RICK TYLER: It sounded like mansplanning
But the bunker mentality they have, which
they carried with them from the campaign MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I think things are getting in his head which is
is the fact of life over there. Again, it's really early for that to be happening. But then again, think about
driven first and foremost by the President it. It happened when American Urban radio correspondent April
who wants to know why am I being Ryan questioned him over the administration's image. And I
constantly attacked, why aren't people didn't really see her shaking her head.
defending me? And it's very hard if you're
Sean Spicer or anyone else to break that JOE SCARBOROUGH: She wasn’t- She didn’t shake her head.
dynamic and say Mr. President, better to
be sunny and optimistic and fight through MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Did anyone see her shaking her head?
this rather than just wallow in it but that's
the dynamic.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: That’s the thing she was looking down--
Scarborough concluded the segment with this:
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: So what does shaking your head look like?
Like this, right?
“If you declare war against everybody,
everybody is going to declare war back. It’s
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yes, like you do to me- -She was looking
– you remember, I think that moment when
down at her paper.
he went to the New York Times and sat
down and talked to them and started to try
to build the relationship with the New York MIKA BRZEZINSKI: There's two shots here going on. I never
Times for one afternoon. And they, let's saw any head shaking. I don't know what's going on. Take a look.
face it, they built friendships that lasted a
lunch-time. But the lunch was over and APRIL RYAN: 2 1/2 months in, you've got this story today,
then he went back to fighting them. If he you’ve got other things going on, you've got Russia, you’ve got
had the discipline to sustain that, the press wiretapping, you’ve got–
would still be tough, that's their job, but it
wouldn't be constant.” SEAN SPICER: No, we don't have that. You--

This is the exchange that took place on March 29: APRIL RYAN: There are investigation on Capitol Hill–

349
SEAN SPICER: No, no I get it. But you keep– I've said it from
the day that I got here until whatever that there is no connection.
You've got Russia. If the President puts Russian salad dressing
on his salad tonight, somehow that's a Russian connection. But
every–
APRIL RYAN: It’s beyond that.
SEAN SPICER: Well, no that’s– I appreciate your agenda here.
APRIL RYAN: This is not an agenda. This is going on–
SEAN SPICER: No but hold on. At some point report the facts.
The facts are that every single person who has been briefed on
that subject has come away with the same conclusion,
Republican, Democrat s so I'm sorry that that disgusts you.
You're shaking your head–
APRIL RYAN: I am shaking my head and I am listening and
trying to–
SEAN SPICER: Okay but understand this, that at some point the
facts are what they are.
APRIL RYAN: –(Inaudible) – negative name in 2006
SEAN SPICER: Hold on -- But April, hold on– It seems like
you're hellbent on trying to make sure that whatever image you
want to tell about this White House stays. Because at the end of
the day–
APRIL RYAN: It was (inaudible) to call her that name. I am just
reporting --
SEAN SPICER: But you know what you're asking me a question
and I'm going to answer it. I'm sorry. Please stop shaking your
head again.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh my God!
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: What is wrong with him?
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Is he kidding me? What–– he wasn’t–
Mike Barnicle, she wasn't shaking her head, first of all.
MIKE BARNACLE: No she was not
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Secondly–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: She was trying to – understand– she was
being treated incredibly disrespectfully
JOE SCARBOROUGH: How condescending can anybody be?
Third, this is not a first grade class.
MIKE BARNACLE: Look it clearly–
350
JOE SCARBOROUGH: That was just simply beyond the pale.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Someone is in way over his head.
MIKE BARNACLE: Well– Yes. I mean, there's a part of me that
has great sympathy for him because he's got an audience of one
that he's dealing with, the president of the United States. The
other thing is, he clearly does not have the temperament to be
press secretary.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: No he doesn’t
MIKE BARNACLE: I mean Josh Earnest was in here the other
day, he had the temperment to be press secretary.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: By the way, Mike Mccurry was there
when hell was raining down from above. He stayed calm. Tony
Snow was there during a really tough time for Bush. We
remember Tony Snow. The thing is, you just don't have to be
abusive, and in that situation, Steve Kornacki, I’ve never heard
anybody be as condescending from that position –
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And abusive
JOE SCARBOROUGH: And abusive, for accusing somebody of
doing something they weren't even doing.
STEVE KORNACKI- Yeah, no, I kind of– I'm kind of where Mike
is on it, too where I'm trying to imagine the sort of political
professional, the communication specialist who could step into
this role and meet the demands being placed on him or her by
Donald Trump, by the boss, by the guy who we think is behind
the scenes every day when these press conferences are going
out and a reporter like April Ryan speaks up, and it's in your mind
that Donald Trump is behind there judging you on, I guess, how
tough you are, how forceful you are, those sorts of things. I don’t
know who– I'm not saying he did himself, I'm not saying he did
the White House any favors in that situation yesterday. I was–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No he didn't.
RICK TYLER: We need to automate the role–
STEVE KORNACKI: It's like you're sitting at a casino and you’re
losing on the slot machine and you're getting mad at the
machine– it's the guy who programmed the machine.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And there’s- it’s very clear the problem here.
The guy has absolutely no ability, none at all, none, to say Mr.
President this is the wrong thing to do. He can't do it. He doesn't
have the ability. It’s a sign of–
STEVE KORNACKI: Does anybody around Donald Trump have
that ability?
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Mika, Mika --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: And then he gets out there and he loses his
you know what because he's absolutely tied up in his head
because he has an inability to speak his mind.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Alright. Alrigh- yes, Sean Spicer should
tell Donald Trump I'm not doing your bidding anymore if it means
being abusive. But nobody around Donald Trump is telling him
the truth.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I know.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Nobody.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: It would be nice if somebody tried.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: And we'll go back to the first day, and I
won't reveal my sources, but the first day somebody tweeted
pictures of the crowd sizes before Spicer's first --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Hostage video
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Press conference. I picked up the phone
and I called somebody very high up at the White House and I
said, I just want you to know --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: This is the dumbest thing.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: -- That this is the stupidest thing I've ever
seen in my life. And if on the President’s first night in the oval
office you guys talk about crowd sizes, we're going to strip the
bark off your tree for the next week, we're going to kill you.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No but I mean, that right there shows that he
is unmatched. Should have said no.
SCARBOROUGH: Well- Let me finish.
BRZEZINSKI: Sorry
SCARBOROUGH: Thank you.
BRZEZINSKI: Yes
SCARBOROUGH: The story will be a lot shorter–
BRZEZINSKI: Stop shaking your head, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: If you'll just let me finish, the stories will be a
lot shorter.
BRZEZINSKI: Continue.
SCARBOROUGH: Thank you. And so they said after it was
over, I calle dup and said you just couldn't help yourself,. You all
look like total idiots. I added a word in there.
351
BRZEZINSKI: Well frauds.
SCARBOROUGH: This person he said --, you should have seen
how bad it was going to be. And after Sean finished his press
conference that you're screaming at us about, he then went into
the oval office and the President screamed at him for being too
weak and then screamed at him for wearing a light suit.
BRZEZINSKI: And that’s when you say–
SCARBOROUGH: That's when you say, Mike, this job is just not
for me.
MIKE BARNACLE: So but Joe, what you raise and what Steve
just mentioned is who can go into the President of the United
States, who can walk into the oval and say, Mr. President you’re
wrong --
SCARBOROUGH: Nobody.
BARNACLE: Even if you had a Jim Baker walking into the office,
you have to have someone who is receptive to hearing that kind
of counsel, and I don't think, it appears that the President of the
United States isn't receptive.
BRZEZINSKI: Well I don’t know– whether the Chicken or egg.
Somebody has to actually give that kind of counsel. And if he's
not receptive, great, leave. Sean Spicer leaving on day two would
have said a lot and done a lot for this presidency. It would have
been better than him staying there hanging on like a complete
shill lying.
BARNACLE: It’s not too late
BRZEZINSKI: Mark Halperin, the question I've been asking for
the past two days with a smile on my face, and I just want a yes
or no.
SCARBOROUGH: No, no, not with a smile on your face.
BRZEZINSKI: Is Sean Spicer credible?
MARK HALPERIN: Not within the briefing room with a lot of
people that cover him every day. And the thing is, some people
use the White House podium to just get through the day, not
make news, not get any advantage. He's become such a voice
and such a face of the administration, they're not winning most
news cycles. And in part it's because that briefing daily is setting
them back rather than getting them going forward.
SCARBOROUGH: You know there's no reason why he had to do
that with April Ryan. April asked a question. Ask the question,
answer the question, move onto the next person.
BARNACLE: Temperament.
SCARBOROUGH: He takes a lot of simple questions and turns
them into big fights. Now listen, he takes a lot of abuse day in
and day out. But guess what? Read Marlon Fitswater’s book–
BERZEZINSKI: Don’t take it
SCARBOROUGH: Marlon Fitswater’s said, everyday you go–
that's the press's job, whether it's George H.W. Bush -- you
know, what about Carney? Carney was a loved guy at Time
magazine. We loved him, we chatted on the show. He got behind
that podium. It didn't take him long for him to be a total jerk.
BRZEZINSKI: If you look at what the job is–
SCARBOROUGH: I mean you just get it every day – you know, it
is a tough, tough job.
BARNACLE: It might be time to rethink the job itself. I mean you
have the virtual cream of the crop of network broadcasters, print
people sitting in the White House press room, you get no news
out of there. You know? Why not send in some younger people,
interns to just record what the press secretary says. I mean-
you're not going to– they’re not breaking any big stories in that
White House press room. It’s not happening
BRZEZINSKI: It’s worse than that. And if you look at what the job
is, he's not serving the President or the people. He’s not doing
the job.
(...)
7AM
7:14:56 - 7:24:28
BRZEZINSKI: Julie, were you in the press briefing yesterday?
JULIE PACE: I was unfortunately not there for yesterday's show.
BRZEZINSKI: Oh well then let me show you something!
JULIE PACE: I watched it, though.
SCARBOROUGH: You know where she was? She was home
shaking her head.
BRZEZINSKI: Was she? Were you doing this? Because I don't
think April Ryan was.
SCARBOROUGH: Neither was April, yeah.
BRZEZINSKI: Here is what happened when Sean Spicer kind of -
- kind of snapped on her. Take a look.
SCARBOROUGH: He lost it.
352
APRIL RYAN: 2 1/2 months in, you've got this story today,
you’ve got other things going on, you've got Russia, you’ve got
wiretapping, you’ve got–
SEAN SPICER: No, we don't have that. You--
APRIL RYAN: There are investigation on Capitol Hill–
SEAN SPICER: No, no I get it. But you keep– I've said it from
the day that I got here until whatever that there is no connection.
You've got Russia. If the President puts Russian salad dressing
on his salad tonight, somehow that's a Russian connection. But
every–
APRIL RYAN: It’s beyond that.
SEAN SPICER: Well, no that’s– I appreciate your agenda here.
APRIL RYAN: This is not an agenda. This is going on–
SEAN SPICER: No but hold on. At some point report the facts.
The facts are that every single person who has been briefed on
that subject has come away with the same conclusion,
Republican, Democrat s so I'm sorry that that disgusts you.
You're shaking your head–
APRIL RYAN: I am shaking my head and I am listening and
trying to–
SEAN SPICER: Okay but understand this, that at some point the
facts are what they are.
APRIL RYAN: –(Inaudible) – negative name in 2006
SEAN SPICER: Hold on -- But April, hold on– It seems like
you're hellbent on trying to make sure that whatever image you
want to tell about this White House stays. Because at the end of
the day–
APRIL RYAN: It was (inaudible) to call her that name. I am just
reporting --
SEAN SPICER: But you know what you're asking me a question
and I'm going to answer it. I'm sorry. Please stop shaking your
head again.
BRZEZINSKI: Oh, my go– I can't get over it. Julie–
SCARBOROUGH: No words for that. That's unbelievable.
BRZEZINSKI: Look at her. Julie, first of all, can you make sense
of that, what happened there? And is Sean spicer credible at this
point?
JULIE PACE: Well, don't mess with April Ryan is my first piece of
advice for press secretaries.
BRZEZINSKI: Never.
JULIE PACE: A lot of press secretaries have learned that lesson
over time. Look, April was asking a really legitimate question.
There's an FBI investigation into whether the Trump campaign
was coordinating with Russians during the election. That's just a
fact. James Comey said that publicly on capitol hill. So to dismiss
out of hand reporters who are asking about that investigation or
asking how the White House tries to– move past that is a
legitimate question. It's a little bit odd that Sean would try to
undermine just that very premise. In terms of Sean's credibility, I
think a lot of reporters who cover the White House would tell you
Sean is helpful behind the scenes, that a lot of us have good
relationships with him behind the scenes. I think any time you're
in a White House, though, where the press briefing becomes the
story, in part because things that are said from the podium turn
out to later be not accurate or that the story has to keep changing
from the podium, that's bad for the President. That is not a
situation where White Houses are operating on their A game
when the podium piece of it is the story. And that's where they
find themselves a lot of days.
SCARBOROUGH: Well and Mark Halperin, people do watch it
because it's taken on its own sort of place, its own corner in
American popular culture. Didn't it rate like a soap opera a couple
of weeks ago?
BRZEZINSKI: Well why not? You don't know what's going to
happen. He’s going to lose it.
SCARBOROUGH: It is theater a lot of times what they say– It's
not true. It's corrected the next day. You look at the Nunes stuff
where he said well why in the world would he come over here to -
you know - tell us something we already know. And now we find
out that's exactly what he did.
BRZEZINSKI: Well, but that's unsustainable.
SCARBOROUGH: We say it's unsustainable. But – How does
Spicer -- again, you've been doing this a very long time. How
does Spicer keep doing his job with any credibility when events
like that happen every day.
MARK HALPERIN: Well, as Julie said, you don't want the day to
be driven by the briefing. At the same time, you mentioned Mike
Mccurry before, and some of the other people who have been
given high marks as press secretary. They used the briefing to try
to drive the story of the day towards where the White House
wants to be. Too often that briefing drives the story away from
where the White House wants it to be. And at the same time
there's no doubt that one of the biggest dangers to the President,
is not that the press is skeptical because we'll always be
skeptical of all Presidents of all parties, not that Democrats are
hostile, it's this creeping sense among some Republicans that
the lack of credibility on some issues is going to affect their ability
to get anything done on something like tax reform where you
need popularity and credibility if you’ve got any chance to do
something that big.
BRZEZINSKI: And any slight shaking of the head came when he
accused her of having an agenda.
KATY TUR: She doesn't have an agenda she’s a reporter. And –
Julie was saying, it's a completely valid question. How do you get
past that perception? And the White House and Sean Spicer
might not like that there's a perception out there. They might not
agree with it because their job is–
BRZEZINSKI: How can there not be one?!
KATY TUR: But there's a perception that there's something weird
going on, at the very least there's an FBI investigation into the
campaign. Let us remind everyone of all the Republicans and
Donald Trump himself who said repeatedly in the run up to the
election about how you can't vote for Hillary Clinton because
she's under an FBI investigation. Well now we learned that his
campaign was under an FBI investigation as well. So it's going --
there's a cloud -- that's a fact.
SCARBOROUGH: And the investigation, Steve, has nothing to
do with salad dressing. When he tries to be that flip or that glib,
he just seriously undercuts his credibility even more.
STEVE KORNACKI: No and it’s– it seems like the position that
he's going to be spitting out every time this is raised, and it's not
going to be going away by any measure any time soon, is
absolutely nothing -- he’s just going to stick to that line. I think
every time he does that, it's just going to invite ten more
questions from the audience and that's only going to upset him
and the whole thing is repeating himself.
BARNACLE: But remember he's playing to an audience of one.
BRZEZINSKI: Well that's the problem.
SCARBOROUGH: Well that's the question Mark Halperin thast
we have to end on.
BRZEZINSKI: He has no spine.
SCARBOROUGH: Is this about Sean Spicer or is this about
Donald Trump? Is this about– I mean is this about the client who
is Donald Trump or is this about the PR rep who is doing exactly
what he is ordered to do down to wearing dark suits.
MARK HALPERIN: Well you don't just go back to when the
health care bill, the vote was pulled and the President made two
calls to two news organizations he regularly disparages. He's
never going to let anyone run his PR particularly when times are
tough. And if there's an attempt to shift direction to come back,
it's not going to be driven by anyone on the staff, it's going to be
driven by the President.
SCARBOROUGH: So why does Sean– I mean we all known
Sean, known Sean for a long time, worked with him at the RNC. I

353
like Sean a lot personally. I've always liked him a lot personally,
he's been a straight shooter to me.
BRZEZINSKI: Sweet guy.
SCARBOROUGH Like the guy. Talked to him election morning.
BRZEZINSKI: I remember that.
SCARBOROUGH: I mean I Spent a lot of time – and like Sean
always. He's always been kind. He’s always been giving. This is
not the Sean Spicer that we've known over the past 10 years or
so.
MARK HALPERIN: This White House–
SCARBOROUGH: Not even close.
HALPERIN: This White House has gotten in a couple months to
where most White Houses get six months, nine months in. Which
is they feel under siege. They feelunder siege. They feel like they
get only get negative coverage, they get harassed, and don't get
credit for anything they do. And that always starts with any
administration with the President who demands to know why am I
not seeing more people on TV effectively defending me?
BRZEZINSKI: Okay so let's be fair, Mark Halperin, what have
they done? If they don't get credit for anything they do, what have
they done? What are we missing? What's the story?
HALPERIN: Well they would like more credit for the Gorsuch
nomination. I know that’s one they bring up with me all the time.
TUR: Well then don't step on the news.
SCARBOROUGH: Exactly. Donald Trump has always stepped
on good headlines.
.
354
BRZEZINSKI: Anything else, Mark? Like any accomplishment
that we're missing? Please.
SCARBOROUGH: It's early.
BRZEZINSKI: No I'm serious.
HALPERIN: They like their executive orders on regulation.
That's another one they tout. But the bunker mentality they have,
which they carried with them from the campaign is the fact of life
over there. Again, it's driven first and foremost by the President
who wants to know why am I being constantly attacked, why
aren't people defending me? And it's very hard if you're Sean
spicer or anyone else to break that dynamic and say Mr.
President, better to be sunny and optimistic and fight through this
rather than just wallow in it but that's the dynamic.
SCARBOROUGH: It's very simple. If you attack the Intel
agencies, they are going to attack you back, and they are going
to win as we have said every day here for six months.
BRZEZINSKI: And that’s a big probelm. And they are going to
bring you down.
SCARBOROUGH: If you call the press the enemy of the people,
the press is going to push back. If you attack Paul Ryan and say
I'll support you until I decide I'm not going to support you–
BRZEZINSKI: And then tease Jeanine Pirro and have her call for
his resignation. Sorry but–
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, no, I'm just saying if you declare war
against everybody, everybody is going to declare war back. It’s –
you remember, I think that moment when he went to the New
York Times and sat down and talked to them and started to try to
build the relationship with the New York Times for one afternoon.
And they, let's face it, they built friendships that lasted a lunch-
time. But the lunch was over and then he went back to fighting
them. If he had the discipline to sustain that, the press would still
be tough, that's their job, but it wouldn't be constant.
 Michael Moore:
Anti-Trump Coup Supporter
Posted By Stephen Lendman
Date: March 30, 2017
Michael Moore’s irrational anti-Trump rage lost him
credibility months ago. He’s either deranged, a Democrat
party plant, funded by Trump-hating extremists like Soros,
prematurely senile, or all of the above.
Throughout last year’s presidential campaign, he openly
supported war criminal, racketeer, perjurer Hillary. After
her defeat, he called for her to be installed as president
anyway.
Ahead of Trump’s inauguration, he urged disrupting it –
wanting it “block(ed), obstruct(ed),” and otherwise
interfered with to prevent him from becoming president.
He tried bribing Republican electors to defect, saying
“(i)f you vote your conscience…and your
state fines you…I will pay your fine.”
After Trump’s inauguration, he called for him to “vacate”
his office. In mid-February, he tweeted
“it appears you are still squatting in our
Oval Office.”
“What part of ‘vacate you Russian traitor’
don’t you understand? We can do this the
easy way (you resign), or the hard way
(impeachment).”
Other multiple tweets said
355
“(l)et’s be VERY clear: Flynn DID NOT
make that Russian call on his own.”
“He was INSTRUCTED to do so. He was
TOLD to reassure them. Arrest Trump.”
“TRUMP KNEW EVERYTHING. It will all
come out. Along with the rest of Trump’s
collusion and obedience to Putin.”
“This is who Trump named ‘National
Security Advisor.’ A lapdog to the lapdog of
Putin. Feeling secure America? He’s gonna
get us all killed.”
He demands “all actions being taken by” Trump’s
administration halted, calling his administration
“illegitimate” – urging his arrest and removal from office
if he won’t voluntarily step down.
His rants are more delusional and deranged than rational
thinking, making it appear he need psychiatric help. His
latest tirade on Instagram said the following:
“The Democratic Party needs to declare a
National Emergency. For the first time in
our history, the President of the United
States and his staff are under investigation
for espionage.”
“This announcement, by the head of the
Trump-friendly FBI, is a shock to our
democracy. The Democratic leadership in
the House and Senate needs to bring a halt
to all business being done in the name of
this potential felony suspect, Donald J.
Trump.”
“No bill he supports, no Supreme Court
nominee he has named, can be decided
while he is under a criminal investigation.
His presidency has no legitimacy until the
FBI – and an independent investigative
committee – discovers the truth.”
“Fellow citizens, demand the Democrats
cease all business. ‘The American people
have a right to know if their President is a
crook.’ Richard Nixon
Trump and his campaign backers are being investigated for
possible improper links to Russia, not espionage. Since last
fall, FBI efforts uncovered nothing.
No evidence or hint of it suggests anything credible to
uncover. Yet witch-hunt proceedings continue, perhaps
endlessly, part of a diabolical plot to undermine him.
The only justifiable national emergency is over the
urgency to halt US imperial wars, neoliberal harshness,
.
and growing homeland tyranny – issues Moore and others
like him ignore.
There’s plenty about Trump’s agenda to criticize. Bashing
him for the wrong reasons, gratuitously, or for defeating
Hillary is way out-of-bounds.
Wanting him illegitimately removed from office is the way
banana republics operate.

356
 Obama Official Who Hinted
At Intel Leaks Now Says She’s
Victim Of ‘Fake News’
By Kyle Drennen
March 30, 2017 | 4:33 PM EDT
Appearing in MSNBC’s 3 p.m. ET hour on Thursday,
Evelyn Farkas, the former Obama administration official
who admitted on national television earlier this month that
the Democratic administration was trying to
“get as much information” as possible
about Donald Trump and his associates,
claimed she was actually the victim of a
“dark campaign of fake news.”
Farkas, President Obama’s former Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense and now an NBC News National
Security Analyst, whined to anchor Kate Snow:
“And on the dark campaign of fake
news, you know, that's still ongoing. We
see even someone like myself get swept
up in all of this. You know, when people
like me are speaking on behalf of process,
people spin to it suit their needs. And I
think it may be that the Russians are
behind even such fake news today.”
Snow teed up a clip of White House Press Secretary Sean
Spicer citing Farkas during the earlier press briefing:
“Sean Spicer did bring you up and your
name up in the press briefing. He talked
about something you said on Morning Joe.
I want to play that sound and get your
reaction.”
357
A clip ran of Spicer telling reporters:
Obama’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense that is out there, Evelyn Farkas,
she made it clear that it was their goal to
spread this information around, that
they went around and did this. And she
said, quote, “That's why there are so
many leaks.”
They have admitted on the record that this was their goal,
to leak stuff. And they – literally she said on the record,
“Trump's team.” There are serious questions out there
about what happened and why and who did it.
In reply, Farkas denied her own words:
So there’s a total distortion of what I
said and what I was talking about. I was
talking about the fact that I was – I was
outside of government, I no access to
intelligence on this whatsoever – but I was
concerned because I knew how the
Russians operate and I was reading these
reports about them hacking into the
elections and then giving information to
Wikipedia [sic] and that Trump people,
Trump team people, were going to
Moscow. And you know, there was a lot of
reporting on this.
Here is a transcript of the March 30 exchange:
3:08 PM ET
(...)
KATE SNOW: Yeah, and let me pick up on that with Evelyn
Farkas. When you look at these two congressional
investigations and the FBI investigation, and the Senate, as
Kasie [Hunt] says, seeming to move ahead more quickly
and in a more orderly way, I think you could say, more
 bipartisan way, are you confident that the Senate is going
get somewhere before anyone else?
EVELYN FARKAS: Yeah. So I think one important thing,
Kate, you know, we heard – we've been using the word
“process.” And process is really important because process
can help keep the politics down to minimum. And so, what
the Senate’s doing, by laying out the facts publicly so that
we can all understand what’s the base understanding that
they have with regard to Russia and Russia's intentions
towards the United States and our elections. I think that’s a
very professional, sober way to approach this. The House
has committed too many process fouls. So I think they’re
done, in effect. It’s all up to the Senate. But I would argue
that we may still need to have an independent bipartisan
investigation. We’ll have to just see what happens with the
Senate.
And on the dark campaign of fake news, you know, that's
still ongoing. We see even someone like myself get swept
up in all of this. You know, when people like me are
speaking on behalf of process, people spin to it suit their
needs. And I think it may be that the Russians are behind
even such fake news today.
SNOW: Evelyn, let me jump in on that because Sean
Spicer did bring you up and your name up in the press
briefing. He talked about something you said on Morning
Joe. I want to play that sound and get your reaction.
.
358
SEAN SPICER: We are not going to engage actively in that
kind of leaking that has been a problem. In fact, if you look
at the – Obama’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
that is out there, Evelyn Farkas, she made it clear that it
was their goal to spread this information around, that they
went around and did this. And she said, quote, “That's why
there are so many leaks.” They have admitted on the
record that this was their goal, to leak stuff. And they –
literally she said on the record, “Trump's team.” There are
serious questions out there about what happened and why
and who did it. And I think that’s really where our focus is
and making sure that that information gets out.
SNOW: Evelyn, your reaction?
FARKAS: So there’s a total distortion of what I said and
what I was talking about. I was talking about the fact that I
was – I was outside of government, I no access to
intelligence on this whatsoever – but I was concerned
because I knew how the Russians operate and I was
reading these reports about them hacking into the elections
and then giving information to Wikipedia [sic] and that
Trump people, Trump team people, were going to Moscow.
And you know, there was a lot of reporting on this. And so,
I got worried that the process wasn't being followed with
regard to Capitol Hill, with regard to Congress, because it
wasn't clear to me that the White House was keeping them
in the loop. And that was really important, especially since
we were about to have a transition in the government.
(...)
 Ex-Trump Adviser Carter Page
Rips 'False Narrative' On Russia Collusion
By Catherine Herridge, Pamela K. Browne, Christopher Wallace
Published March 30, 2017
EXCLUSIVE: Former Trump adviser Carter Page, in a
wide-ranging interview with Fox News, decried what he
described as “propaganda” driven by a “false narrative”
regarding his 2016 contacts with Russian officials, denying
that he ever worked with them to help the campaign.
Page is one of several Trump associates being scrutinized
amid multiple probes looking at Russia's interference in
last year's campaign. As he prepares for interviews with
the Senate Intelligence Committee and the House
Intelligence Committee, Page gave a categorical denial
when asked by Fox News Chief Intelligence Correspondent
Catherine Herridge whether he worked with the Russians
to help the Trump campaign.
“Absolutely not,” he said, laughing. “I did
nothing that could even possibly be viewed
as helping them in any way.”
Asked whether he had worked with the Russians to hurt
the Clinton campaign, he replied,
“Absolutely not. In no way, shape or
form.”
Still, Page acknowledged for the first time what he insists
was a brief meeting with the Russian ambassador at the
Republican National Convention – an admission sure to
fuel foes of the Trump administration looking for evidence
of Trump-Russia coordination.
Page, who described himself as an oil industry consultant
and U.S. Naval Academy midshipman, was a relative
unknown when the Trump campaign announced his hiring
as a foreign policy adviser in March 2016. He would stay
359
with the Trump team until September 2016, but says he
left because
“these stories kept coming out based on
the dodgy dossier.”
Page appeared in the infamous “Trump Dossier” created
by former British Intelligence operative Christopher
Steele, working for a U.S. political research group called
Fusion GPS on behalf of both Republicans and Democrats.
“And so out of respect and out of doing
what's best for the campaign, I thought it's
best if I step aside and take a leave of
absence at that at that point,” Page said.
In his opening statement before testimony by FBI Director
James Comey and NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers last
week, House Intelligence Committee ranking member
Adam Schiff, D-Calif., put Page at the center of an alleged
web of collusion to help Russia interfere with the 2016
U.S. presidential election.
Schiff went through a blow-by-blow of Page’s alleged pro-
Russian activities, which Page answered in his exclusive
interview.
“In early July,” Schiff said at the hearing,
“Carter Page travels to Moscow on a trip
approved by the Trump campaign. While in
Moscow, he gives a speech critical of the
United States and other western countries
for what he believes is a hypocritical focus
on democratization and efforts to fight
corruption.”
While Trump campaign
“people were okay with [the trip],” Page
said, “the word 'approved' … can be
misleading that I was actually authorized to
go and represent the campaign. It had
nothing to do with the campaign. I was
going as a private citizen.”
The oft-quoted line from the speech that was characterized
as anti-American was,
 "Washington and other western capitals
have impeded potential progress through
their often hypocritical focus on ideas such
democratization, inequality, corruption and
regime change.”
But Page told Fox News the line was taken out of context
to make him look bad.
“It was really about that concept of mutual
respect and the way various countries
including Russia, China and the United
States, can work together for having a
more constructive relationship primarily
with the states of central Asia, such as
Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan,” he said.
Schiff, at the hearing, pointed to another allegation from
the dossier, that
“Page also had a secret meeting with
Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin, reported to be a
former KGB agent and close friend of
Russian President Putin.”
“I have never met Igor Sechin in my life,”
Page countered. “Completely false. I've
never met him in my entire life. I may have
seen him at a conference once at a
distance, but I've never shaken his hand.”
After his Moscow speech, Page attended the Republican
National Convention last July in Cleveland. Steele and
Schiff described how Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak
met with Page – acting as a go-between on behalf of then-
Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Then,
according to Schiff,
“Just prior to the convention, the
Republican Party platform is changed,
removing a section that supports the
provision of lethal defensive weapons to
Ukraine, an action that would be contrary to
Russian interests.”
But Page told Herridge in the exclusive interview,
“I was always very cautious. The only time,
and you're the first person in the media that
I'm saying this very directly to -- I said,
‘Hello,’ to him in passing, handed him my
business card and never got a business
card from him, as I did for many
.
360
ambassadors in Cleveland during the
Republican National Convention.”
Page said the reason he never mentioned the passing
encounter before was
“out of respect for privacy for Ambassador
Kislyak. And there were very direct rules
that that was an off-the-record session.”
Still, Page asserted that,
“Nothing happened between me and
Ambassador Kislyak. That I can assure
you. I had no direct one-on-one material
discussions with him in any way, shape or
form.”
Page even denied the dossier allegation that Manafort
appointed him as a coordinator with the Russians:
“Totally false. Just like everything else
about those allegations.”
For his part, Page argued that the attacks on the Trump
administration by its political foes have harmed the U.S.
political system more severely than the allegations that
Russia meddled in the U.S. election.
“Liars and leakers in Washington and more
broadly the political class in the United
States actually had a much more negative
impact,” Page said. “All of the discussions
about the influence that the Russian
government had on the U.S. election would
actually pale in comparison to the much
heavier influence that the U.S. government
actually had in trying to hurt then-candidate
Trump. That negative impact based on
these complete lies has continued to
put a dark shadow over the United
States in general.”
Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief
Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC)
based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the
Justice Department and the Department of Homeland
Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based
correspondent.
 Nunes “Source” On Surveillance Of President Trump’s
Team Was A “Whistleblower-Type,” Paul Ryan Alleges
By Tyler Durden
Date: March 30, 2017
As the imbroglio within the House Intel Committee
continues with Democrats refusing the listen to the
‘message‘ without knowing who the ‘messenger‘ was,
361
Speaker Ryan provided a little more color on the source
of Devin Nunes’ information about incidental
surveillance of President Trump’s team
“[Nunes] had told me that a
whistleblower type person had given
him some information that was new, that
spoke to the last administration and part of
this investigation,”
“What Chairman Nunes said was he
came into possession of new
information he thought was valuable to
this investigation and he was going to
go and inform people about it.”
We wonder what Ryan’s definition of a “whistleblower-
type” is?
 2 White House Officials
Helped Give Nunes Intelligence Reports
By Matthew Rosenberg, Maggie Haberman And Adam Goldman
March 30, 2017
Representative Devin Nunes of California, a Republican and the
chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, arrived for a meeting
Tuesday on Capitol Hill. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times
WASHINGTON — A pair of White House officials
helped provide Representative Devin Nunes of California,
a Republican and the chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee, with the intelligence reports that showed that
President Trump and his associates were incidentally
swept up in foreign surveillance by American spy
agencies.
The revelation on Thursday that White House officials
disclosed the reports, which Mr. Nunes then discussed
with Mr. Trump, is likely to fuel criticism that the
intelligence chairman has been too eager to do the bidding
of the Trump administration while his committee is
supposed to be conducting an independent investigation of
Russia’s meddling in the presidential election.
It is the latest twist of a bizarre Washington drama that
began after dark on March 21, when Mr. Nunes got a call
from a person he has described only as a source. The call
came as he was riding across town in an Uber car, and he
quickly diverted to the White House. The next day, Mr.
Nunes gave a hastily arranged news conference before
going to brief Mr. Trump on what he had learned the night
before from — as it turns out — White House officials.
The chain of events — and who helped provide the
intelligence to Mr. Nunes — was detailed to The New York
Times by four American officials.
Since disclosing the existence of the intelligence reports,
Mr. Nunes has refused to identify his sources, saying he
362
needed to protect them so others would feel safe going to
the committee with sensitive information. In his public
comments, he has described his sources as whistle-blowers
trying to expose wrongdoing at great risk to themselves.
That does not appear to be the case. Several current
American officials identified the White House officials as
Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the senior director for intelligence at
the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer
who works on national security issues at the White House
Counsel’s Office and was previously counsel to Mr.
Nunes’s committee. Though neither has been accused of
breaking any laws, they do appear to have sought to use
intelligence to advance the political goals of the Trump
administration.
Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman, refused to
confirm or deny at his daily briefing that Mr. Ellis and Mr.
Cohen-Watnick were Mr. Nunes’s sources. The
administration’s concern was the substance of the
intelligence reports, not how they ended up in Mr. Nunes’s
hands, Mr. Spicer said.
The “obsession with who talked to whom,
and when, is not the answer,” Mr. Spicer
said. “It should be the substance.”
Jack Langer, a spokesman for Mr. Nunes, said in a
statement,
“As he’s stated many times, Chairman
Nunes will not confirm or deny speculation
about his source’s identity, and he will not
respond to speculation from anonymous
sources.”
Mr. Cohen-Watnick, 30, is a former Defense Intelligence
Agency official who served on the Trump transition team
and was originally brought to the White House by Michael
T. Flynn, the former national security adviser.
He was nearly pushed out of his job this month by Lt. Gen.
H. R. McMaster, who replaced Mr. Flynn as national
security adviser, but survived after the intervention of
Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, and Stephen K.
Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, the top Democrat on
the House Intelligence Committee, said he accepted an invitation on
Thursday to review the same materials that Mr. Nunes had seen.
Credit Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times
The officials who detailed the newly disclosed White
House role said that this month, shortly after Mr. Trump
claimed on Twitter that he was wiretapped during the
campaign on the orders of President Barack Obama, Mr.
Cohen-Watnick began reviewing highly classified reports
detailing the intercepted communications of foreign
officials.
There were conflicting accounts of what prompted Mr.
Cohen-Watnick to dig into the intelligence. One official
with direct knowledge of the events said Mr. Cohen-
Watnick began combing through intelligence reports this
month in an effort to find evidence that would justify Mr.
Trump’s Twitter posts about wiretapping.
But another person who was briefed on the events said Mr.
Cohen-Watnick came upon the information as he was
reviewing how widely intelligence reports on intercepts
were shared within the American spy agencies. He then
alerted the N.S.C. general counsel, but the official said Mr.
Cohen-Watnick was not the person who showed the
reports to Mr. Nunes.
That person and a third official said it was then Mr. Ellis
who allowed Mr. Nunes to view the material.
The intelligence reports consisted primarily of
ambassadors and other foreign officials talking about how
they were trying to develop contacts within Mr. Trump’s
family and inner circle before his inauguration, officials
said.
The officials all spoke on the condition of anonymity to
describe the intelligence and to avoid angering Mr. Cohen-
Watnick and Mr. Ellis. Officials say Mr. Cohen-Watnick
has been reviewing the reports from his fourth-floor office
in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where the
National Security Council is based.
363
The officials’ description of the intelligence is in line with
Mr. Nunes’s characterization of the material, which he said
was not related to the Russia investigations when he first
disclosed its existence.
According to Mr. Nunes, who served on the Trump
transition team, he met his source on the grounds of the
White House. He said he needed a secure location where
people with security clearances could legally view
classified information, though such facilities could also be
found in the Capitol building and at other locations across
Washington.
The next day, Mr. Nunes gave a news briefing at the
Capitol and then returned to the White House to brief Mr.
Trump on the information before telling other committee
members about what he had reviewed. His actions have
fueled criticism that the committee, under his leadership, is
unable to conduct a serious, independent investigation.
On Thursday, Representative Adam B. Schiff of
California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, said he needed clarification on whether White
House officials had pursued “a circuitous route” to feed
Mr. Nunes the materials so he could then hand them to Mr.
Trump.
“If that was designed to hide the origin of
the materials, that raises profound
questions about just what the White House
is doing that need to be answered,” he
said. He later said he accepted an
invitation on Thursday to review the same
materials that Mr. Nunes had seen.
Yet even before Thursday, the view among Democrats and
even some Republicans was that Mr. Nunes was given
access to the intelligence reports to divert attention from
the investigations into Russian meddling, and to bolster
Mr. Trump’s debunked claims of having been wiretapped.
G.O.P. Intelligence Chairman Apologizes
Photo by Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times.
On both counts, Mr. Nunes appears to have succeeded:
The House inquiry into Russian meddling that he is
leading has descended into a sideshow since he disclosed
the information, and the administration has portrayed his
information as vindicating the president’s wiretapping
claims.
Yet Mr. Nunes has dismissed Democratic calls to step
aside. Instead, he has canceled all committee hearings for
now, stalling his own investigation, which opened last
week with a hearing during which James B. Comey, the
director of the F.B.I., publicly disclosed that the bureau’s
investigation into Russian meddling included an
examination of any evidence that Trump associates had
colluded in the effort.
The chaotic situation prompted the leaders of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, which is running its own
investigation, to bluntly state on Wednesday that their
work had nothing to do with the House inquiry. And
television news programs have been dominated by
arguments about whether the incidental intelligence
gathering of Mr. Trump and his associates was the real
issue, or simply a distraction from the Russia
investigations.
.
364
Mr. Nunes has acknowledged that the incidental
intelligence gathering on Trump associates last year was
not necessarily unlawful, and that it was not specifically
directed at Mr. Trump or people close to him. American
intelligence agencies typically monitor foreign officials of
allied and hostile countries, and they routinely sweep up
communications linked to Americans who may be taking
part in the conversation or are being spoken about.
The real issue, Mr. Nunes has said, was that he could
figure out the identities of Trump associates from reading
reports about intercepted communications that were shared
among Obama administration officials with top security
clearances.
He said some Trump associates were also identified by
name in the reports. Normally, intelligence agencies mask
the identities of American citizens who are incidentally
present in intercepted communications, though
knowledgeable readers can often figure out the identities in
context.
 Obama Operatives In The EPA Plant
Trump Attack In Press Release For Executive Order
Obvious Purposeful Action Labeled A "Mistake"
By Alex Thomas -
03.30.2017 @9:11 PM EDT
(INTELLIHUB) — The Environmental Protection Agency
apologized Thursday after “mistakenly” releasing a press
release that attacked the president over an executive order
that removes many of the Obama-era climate change
policies.
In the release, the EPA not only allowed a direct attack
from a Democrat to be included, they misattributed the
negative statement as one coming from a Republican.
As The Hill reported,
“In the release, the EPA included quotes
praising Trump’s Tuesday order to start
undoing former President Barack Obama’s
climate actions, but it misattributed a
negative statement to Sen. Shelley Moore
Capito (R-W.Va.).”
“With this Executive Order, President
Trump has chosen to recklessly bury his
head in the sand. Walking away from the
Clean Power Plan and other climate
initiatives, including critical resiliency
projects is not just irresponsible — it’s
irrational,” the release quoted Capito as
saying.
“Today’s executive order calls into question
America’s credibility and our commitment
to tackling the greatest environmental
challenge of our lifetime.”
“However, that statement actually came
from Sen. Tom Carper (Del.), the top
.
365
Democrat on the Environment and Public
Works Committee and a harsh critic of
Trump’s environmental agenda,” continued
The Hill article before going on to note that
in reality Capito had praised the Trump
executive order.
Keep in mind that this so-called mistake comes amid a
major rift between Obama holdovers in the EPA and the
leaders appointed by President Trump. Many of the
holdovers are seeing their years long work get destroyed
before their eyes and apparently are not willing to go down
without a fight.
Consider this. The EPA later released an update version
that did not include the quote attacking Trump while
claiming that the reason for the error was due to a draft of
the press release accidentally being published.
This is downright laughable when you acknowledge the
fact that the only way anti-Trump quotes would be in a
draft for a press release about his own executive order
would be if Obama era operatives had put them there in the
first place!
This is yet another example of elements within the
government openly plotting and working against the
elected president. And, as Barack Obama’s former Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas recently
admitted, this sabotage started long before Donald Trump
ever took office.
 Schweizer: There’s More Evidence Of Podesta-Clinton
Collusion With Russia Than There
Ever Was With Trump
By: JD Heyes
Date: March 30, 2017
Author Peter Schweizer, Breitbart News’ editor-at-large,
told the news site’s SiriusXM radio program Thursday that
the campaign manager of Hillary Clinton’s recent
campaign and longtime friend of her and husband Bill may
have violated the law in his dealings with Russia.
Telling Breitbart Daily News that Podesta has “a very
interesting relationship with Russia, going back to when
Hillary Clinton was secretary of state,” Schweizer – author
of “Clinton Cash,” which exposed how foreign
governments helped enrich the Clintons through their
foundation – detailed how Podesta and Russian President
Vladimir Putin became intertwined.
“When she was secretary of state, he was
an advisor” who had a seat on Clinton’s
foreign policy advisory board, Schweizer
said. Based on emails released through
Wikileaks, “we know…that he was talking
to her all the time on everything from
speeches to personnel directions to policy
positions.”
Podesta, who joined the Obama White House as a
presidential advisor in 2013, first linked up in 2011 with
the executive board of a small Massachusetts energy
company called Joule Energy. A couple months later, the
company got “a large infusion of cash” – one billion
rubles, or about “$35 to $45 million, invested from
Russia.” (RELATED: If Trump Or His People Really
366
Did Something Illegal With Russia, They Would Have
Been Charged Already)
That money came from “a very unusual
entity” called RUSNANO, which is a
government-funded investment fund also
known as “Putin’s Child” according to the
Russian Science Ministry. “So it shows you
how connected this fund is,” Schweizer
said.
“They actually buy an equity stake in this
John Podesta-linked company, which they
can do. You can raise the question of why
they’re doing it while he’s advising Hillary
Clinton, b//ut they can legally do that,” he
said.
The problem for Podesta, he continued, is that when he
joined the White House he was required to file a large
amount of paperwork, including financial disclosure
forms, the boards on which he sits, stock holdings and so
forth.
“In the case of Podesta, there are two
omissions. One of them is the way the
Joule was structured, it has three corporate
boards. It has one based in Massachusetts,
one based in the Netherlands, and then it
has a holding company. John Podesta,
according to corporate records, was on all
three of those boards. He only listed two of
them on his financial disclosure. He omitted
probably the most important one, which
was the holding company,” said Schweizer.
While the Clinton author submitted the possibility that the
omission could have been an oversight, Schweizer said
Podesta did not disclose what he did with 75,000 shares of
stock he had in Joule Energy that were given to him as part
of his compensation for being on the company’s executive
board.
“He gave them to his daughter through an
LLC,” Schweizer explained, but it wasn’t
clear whether or not she actually became
 the owner. By that, he explained, “I mean
the Podesta emails” that show he had an
extensive conversation with company
execs and others connected to them,
though ostensibly he didn’t own the stock
any longer.
By failing to disclose what he had done with the stock,
Podesta – who has been around government before –
committed a “clear violation of what you are supposed to
disclose on these federal forms,” said Schweizer.
Host Alex Marlow then said it appears there is much more
evidence connecting the Clintons and Podesta to Russia
than there has ever been of President Donald J. Trump and
his circle of advisers. (RELATED: McCain Challenges
Trump To Prove Obama Wiretapped Him… Even
Though There’s Clear Evidence He Did)
“And yet the media is obsessed with one
and not the other,” Schweizer said, noting
the wall-to-wall coverage of the alleged
Trump/Russia collusion to “steal” the
.
367
election from Clinton despite the very
obvious lack of evidence to support the
allegation.
The “Clinton Cash” author also noted that, based on
Trump’s selection of Cabinet appointees and national
security advisors, the Trump-Putin connection makes no
sense.
“The thesis that everybody is operating on
is the Russians helped Trump win and
Trump is going to do all these favors for
Russia. The problem is, when you look at
the personnel decisions, who’s running
Russia policy in the United States –
whether that’s General Mattis at the
Pentagon, whether that is McMaster, the
national security adviser, whether that’s the
CIA director, whether that’s the director of
Russia policy on the National Security
Council, who’s a very solid scholar from the
Brookings Institution – none of these are
remotely pro-Putin,” he said.
 Adam Schiff Is A Traitor To Humanity
The Despicable Adam Schiff’s Function Is To Discredit
The Presidency Of Donald Trump
By Paul Craig Roberts
March 30, 2017
Rep. Adam Schif
Adam Schiff is a traitor to the United States.
Indeed, to all of humanity. Yes, he is a Jew, but America
has many loyal Jews. What makes Schiff a traitor is not
that he is a Jew.
He is a traitor, because he is
undermining American democracy and
the forces for peace.
The Clintons and the Democratic Leadership Council sold
out the Democratic constituency, that is, the working class
and peace, because they were convinced that they could
get more money from Wall Street, the global corporations,
and the military/security complex than they could from the
labor unions.
The labor unions were going to be destroyed by jobs
offshoring and the relocation of US manufacturing abroad.
This relocation of American manufacturing would destroy
the budgets of the state and local governments in
America’s manufacturing regions and result in fierce
pressure on the public sector unions, which are being
destroyed in turn.
In short, Democratic Party funding was evaporating, and
Democrats needed to compete against Republicans for
funding from the One Percent. George Soros helped the
Clinton Democrats in this transition, and soon there was no
one representing the working class.
Consequently, since Clinton the real median family
income of the working class has been falling, and in the
368
21st century the working class has been buried in
unemployment and debt.
But the Democratic Party has prospered, and so have Bill
and Hillary Clinton. The Democratic Party raised far more
money, especially from the One Percent, than Trump, who
allied with the working class, in the past presidential
election. Bill & Hillary have a personal fortune of $120
million at least, and $1.6 trillion in their personal
foundation that supports their daughter.
Using Government to get rich is an old trick in America,
but the Clintons took it to new highs when they flushed the
working class and became the whores for Wall Street,
Israel, and the military/security complex.
This is where the Democratic Party is today.
The despicable Adam Schiff’s function is to
discredit the presidency of Donald Trump
by creating an atmosphere in which any
interest in establishing normal relations
with Russia, thus reducing the tensions that
could result in nuclear war, is proof of being
a “Putin agent” and a “traitor.”
What Schiff is doing is making it impossible for President
Trump to reduce the dangerous tensions between the
nuclear superpowers that the Clinton, George W. Bush,
and Obama regimes created. These tensions can easily
result in nuclear war, as I have often emphasized.
It is extraordinary that Schiff, who endangers the existence
of all life on planet Earth, is a hero of the liberal
/progressive/left. The pressitute media whores love him.
He always gets top billing as he urges on humanity to its
final destruction.
How is it that Donald Trump, who says he wants to reduce
tensions with Russia is portrayed as a threat, while the
liberal/progressive/left, the CIA, and the Democratic Party
are portrayed as the salt of the Earth for promulgating
nuclear war with Russia (and China)?
I have no explanation as to why the peoples of the West, as
ignorant and idiotic as they are, and their ignorance and
idiocy are extreme, prefer nuclear war with Russia (and
China) instead of normal relations.
369
But the utterly evil Adam Schiff prefers nuclear war, and
that is where he is leading the insouciant West.
And you can bet your last cent that the media whores will
continue cheering Schiff on.
 Trump Says Mike Flynn SHOULD Ask For Immunity – As
He Slams 'Witch Hunt' By 'Media & Dems' For Disgraced
Former National Security Advisor's Legal Nightmare
 President Said Friday That Mike Flynn Should Ask For Immunity In Exchange For His
Testimony About Alleged Trump-Russia Ties
 The Former National Security Advisor Made The Offer To Both The FBI And House And
Senate Intelligence Committees
 Trump Tweeted That Flynn 'Should Ask For Immunity In That This Is A Witch Hunt
(Excuse For Big Election Loss), By Media & Dems, Of Historic Proportion!'
 The FBI And Intelligence Committees Are Investigating If Anyone In The Trump
Administration Colluded With Russia Prior To The Election
 Flynn Said During A 2016 Interview About Hillary Clinton That Anyone Who Seeks
Immunity Has 'Probably Committed A Crime'
 He Resigned As Trump's Security Adviser In February After 24 Days Following Reports
That He Misled White House Staff On His Interactions With Russia
By David Martosko, US Political Editor And Emily Crane For Dailymail.Com
Published: 07:44 EDT, 31 March 2017 | Updated: 08:13 EDT, 31 March 2017

Donald Trump's former national security adviser Michael
Flynn is reportedly willing to testify about the Trump
campaign's ties to Russia in exchange for immunity from
prosecution.
And the president said Friday that it would be a good idea.
'Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that
this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election
loss), by media & Dems, of historic
proportion!' Trump tweeted.
The agencies have not yet taken Flynn up on his offer,
according to officials with knowledge of the matter.
'General Flynn certainly has a story to tell,
and he very much wants to tell it, should
the circumstances permit,' said Flynn's
attorney, Robert Kelner.
President Donald Trump's former national security adviser
Michael Flynn is reportedly willing to testify about the
Trump campaign's ties to Russia in exchange for
immunity

Trump wrote Friday on Twitter that Flynn 'should ask for

immunity,' blaming journalists and Democrats for
orchestrating a 'witch hunt'

Flynn, who resigned as Trump's security adviser after just
24 days, has sent a request to both the FBI and the House
and Senate intelligence committees, saying he would
testify if the government guarantees that it would not
prosecute him, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Kelner said no 'reasonable person' with legal counsel
would answer questions without assurances that he would
not be prosecuted, given calls from some members of
Congress that the retired lieutenant general should face
criminal charges.

370
Flynn's ties to Russia have been scrutinized by the FBI and
are under investigation by the House and Senate
intelligence committees. Both committees are looking into
Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election and any
ties between Trump associates and the Kremlin.
Since July, the FBI has been conducting a
counterintelligence investigation into Russia's interference
in the election and possible coordination with Trump
associates.

His decision comes after he told NBC's Chuck Todd last

year that anyone who seeks immunity has 'probably Flynn (center), who resigned as Trump's security adviser
committed a crime.' after just 24 days, has sent the request to both the FBI and
the House and Senate intelligence committees
He made the comments in relation to former Hillary
Clinton staffers being granted immunity as the FBI
investigated her use of her server when she was secretary
of state.

Flynn's resignation in February came after reports emerged

that he misled White House staff on his interactions with
Flynn said last year on NBC 's 'Meet the Press' that anyone
Russia and discussed sanctions with the Russian
who seeks immunity has 'probably committed a crime'
ambassador

'The very last thing that John Podesta

The Justice Department had warned the Trump
(Clinton's campaign chairman) just said is
administration about Flynn's contacts with Russia weeks
no individual too big to jail, that should
before he was forced out.
include people like Hillary Clinton,' he said.
'I mean, five people around her have had, Government officials supposedly informed the White
have been given immunity, to include her House because they were concerned Flynn could be
former Chief of Staff. When you are given vulnerable to blackmail by the Kremlin.
immunity, that means that you have
probably committed a crime.'
The top Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee
said on Wednesday that the panel 'will get to the bottom' of
Flynn's resignation in February came after reports emerged Russia's interference in the 2016 election.
that he misled White House staff on his interactions with
Russia and discussed sanctions with the Russian
ambassador prior to the inauguration.

371

Sen. Mark Warner, the Virginia Democrat and vice
chairman, and Sen. Richard Burr, the committee's
Republican chairman, addressed reporters ahead of their
panel's first hearing on Russia.
The stakes for the Senate investigation have been
heightened given the disarray in the House investigation
into Russia. Democrats have called on Rep. Devin Nunes,
the Republican chair of the House committee, to recuse
himself over his close relationship with the Trump White
House.
Burr says the Senate committee has contacted 20
individuals about sitting for interviews. Among them is
Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior
adviser, who has acknowledged meetings with Russians
during the transition.
Flynn, who briefly served as Trump's national security
adviser, told NBC's Chuck Todd last year that people
seeking immunity were likely guilty of committing a crime
372
Comments retired Lt. Gen Mike Flynn made during the
2016 presidential campaign about immunity have
seemingly come back to bite him.
Flynn, who briefly served as Trump's national security
adviser, told NBC's Chuck Todd last year that people
seeking immunity were likely guilty of committing a
crime.
During the interview in September, Flynn took issue with
former staffers of Hillary Clinton being granted immunity
as the FBI investigated her use of the server when she was
secretary of state.
'The very last thing that John Podesta
(Clinton's campaign chairman) just said is
no individual too big to jail, that should
include people like Hillary Clinton,' Flynn
said.
'I mean, five people around her have had,
have been given immunity, to include her
former Chief of Staff.
'When you are given immunity, that means
that you have probably committed a
crime.'
The months-old statement is key because Flynn has
reportedly offered to testify about the Trump
administration's ties to Russia if the FBI can grant him
immunity from prosecution.
The Justice Department had warned the Trump
administration about Flynn's contacts with Russia weeks
before he was forced out
 Trump Trauma
By Helena Norberg-Hodge
March 31, 2017
While we mourn the tragedy that fear, prejudice and
ignorance “trumped” in this election, now is the time to go
deeper and broader with our work. There is a growing
recognition that the scary situation we find ourselves in
today has deep roots.
To better understand what happened – and why – we need
to broaden our horizons. If we zoom out a bit, it becomes
clear that Trump is not an isolated phenomenon; the forces
that elected him are largely borne of rising economic
insecurity and discontent with the political process. The
resulting confusion and fear, unaddressed by mainstream
media and politics, has been capitalized on by the far-right
worldwide.
Almost everywhere in the world, unemployment is
increasing, the gap between rich and poor is widening,
environmental devastation is worsening, and a spiritual
crisis – revealed in addiction, domestic assaults, and
suicide – is deepening.
From a global perspective it becomes apparent that these
many crises – to which the rise of right-wing sentiments is
intimately connected – share a common root cause: a
globalized economic system that is devastating not only
ecosystems, but also the lives of hundreds of millions of
people.
How did we end up in this situation?
Over the last three decades, governments have
unquestioningly embraced “free trade” treaties that have
allowed ever larger corporations to demand lower wages,
fewer regulations, more tax breaks and more subsidies.
These treaties enable corporations to move operations
elsewhere or even to sue governments if their profit-
oriented demands are not met. In the quest for “growth”,
communities worldwide have had their local economies
undermined and have been pulled into dependence on a
volatile global economy over which they have no control.
Corporate rule is not only disenfranchising people
worldwide, it is fueling climate change, destroying cultural
and biological diversity, and replacing community with
consumerism. These are undoubtedly scary times. Yet the
very fact that the crises we face are linked can be the
.
373
source of genuine empowerment. Once we understand the
systemic nature of our problems, the path towards solving
them – simultaneously – becomes clear.
Trade unions, environmentalists and human rights activists
formed a powerful anti-trade treaty movement – long
before Trump came on the scene. And his policies already
show that he is about strengthening corporate rule, rather
than reversing it.
Re-regulating global businesses and banks is a prerequisite
for genuine democracy and sustainability, for a future that
is shaped not by distant financial markets but by society.
By insisting that business be place-based or localized, we
can start to bring the economy home.
Around the world, from the USA to India, from China to
Australia, people are reweaving the social and economic
fabric at the local level and are beginning to feel the
profound environmental, economic, social and even
spiritual benefits. Local business alliances, local finance
initiatives, locally-based education and energy schemes,
and, most importantly, local food movements are springing
up at an exponential rate.
As the scale and pace of economic activity are reduced,
anonymity gives way to face-to-face relationships, and to a
closer connection to Nature. Bonds of local
interdependence are strengthened, and a secure sense of
personal and cultural identity begins to flourish. All of
these efforts are based on the principle of connection and
the celebration of diversity, presenting a genuine systemic
solution to our global crises as opposed to the fear-
mongering and divisiveness of the dominant discourse in
the media.
Moreover, localized economies boost employment not by
increasing consumption, but by relying more on human
labor and creativity and less on energy-intensive
technological systems – thereby reducing resource use and
pollution. By redistributing economic and political power
from corporate monopolies to millions of small businesses,
localization revitalizes the democratic process, re-rooting
political power in community.
The far-reaching solution of a global to local shift can
move us beyond the left-right political theater to link hands
in a diverse and united people’s movement for secure,
meaningful livelihoods and a healthy planet.
 Council To Lt. Gen. Flynn Seeks Assurances “Against
Unfair Prosecution” In A “Witch Hunt Environment”
By Shepard Ambellas -
03.31.2017 @10:16 AM EDT

intelligence hearings as if he is going to unleash a bag of

worms on the Trump Administration over something he
may or may not know.

However, a statement released by Flynn’s counselor

Robert Kelner tells a different story, a story that, according
to Keller, begins with “outrageous claims of treason.”

In Keller’s statement, he maintains that the Lt. General is a

“target” of a political “witch hunt” and needs “assurances
WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) — Circulating headlines against unfair prosecution.”
regarding Lt. General Michael Flynn declare that the
former National Security Advisor to Trump has Keller’s full statement reads:
demanded “immunity” to testify in the Trump-Russia

Via ChuckRossDC/Twitter

374
President Trump agreed with Keller’s statement, tweeting
Friday:
“Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that
this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election
loss), by media & Dems, of historic
proportion!”
375
The FBI has been conducting a counter surveillance
investigation since July on Russia’s alleged election
interference and appears to not be cooperating fully with
the House Intelligence Committee regarding allegations
pertaining to the surveillance of Trump during the
campaign.
Lt. Gen. Flynn has admitted to being a foreign agent to the
Turkish government.
 Oligarchy In America
By Andrew Levine
March 31, 2017
Naming the System
In democracies, the demos, the people, rule; not social or
economic elites. This was the understanding of
philosophers in Athens twenty-five centuries ago, and it
remained the consensus view well into the modern era.
The received wisdom was that, like anarchy, democracy is
a theoretical possibility that can be instructive to reflect
upon, but not an ideal that anyone of sound mind would
actually endorse.
With the emergence of capitalist economic relations,
however, and, along with it, the rise of the nation state, the
traditionally marginalized demos became a factor in the
politics of societies on the way to modernity.
In that context, democracy took on more positive
connotations. The transformation was well underway by
the time of the French and American Revolutions.
Enlightenment thought played a role in fashioning those
world historical events and in promoting understandings of
their significance. It was thanks to Enlightened thinkers
that the idea took hold that nation states are comprised of
citizens. The idea is that, in principle, basic rights and
liberties should be distributed equally; that, within the
political sphere, equality reigns.
Because it demanded the rule of only a part of the
citizenry, the demotic part, the old understanding of
democracy eventually gave way. In effect, the concept
was scrubbed of its class content.
376
Needless to say, equal citizenship does not make social
and economic inequalities go away. It does, however,
establish a kind of political equality – at least in theory.
In practice, self-described democracies have sometimes
accommodated egregious political inequalities. This was
what the civil rights movement in the United States was
mainly about; and it has been, and still is, a major concern
of feminists in the United States and around the world.
The standard understanding of political equality is formal,
not substantive. Eligible citizens get one and only one
vote, and are therefore formally or procedurally equal with
respect to collective decision-making. That some citizens
may have more influence in determining outcomes than
others – not because they are more persuasive in
deliberations, but thanks to their economic and social
power – is not thought to offend the idea of citizenship as
such.
Thus the rule of the demos became the rule of an
undifferentiated citizenry; and we nowadays deem states
democratic if they institutionalize free, fair, and
competitive elections. Sometimes other practices
associated with more traditional understandings of
democratic theory are required as well — especially those
that assure that the public is informed and that political
choices are debated without fear or intimidation.
However, these protections have more to do with liberal
restrictions on what states can rightfully do than with
democracy as such.
Because, in the real world, facts on the ground make the
idea of rule by an undifferentiated citizenry seem
ludicrously hollow, and because contemporary and
traditional understandings of democracy diverge so
profoundly, it can be, and often is, misleading to use the
word “democracy,” as we customarily do, to denote both
classical and contemporary understandings.
But because the tables have turned, because the word
“democracy” nowadays has positive connotations,
defenders of the status quo are reluctant to give it up.
There have been theorists, however, who, being more
concerned with getting concepts straight than with using
them to justify the status quo, prefer not to contest the
concept, but would rather reserve it for instances in which
it plainly applies.
In practice, this means using “democracy” almost
exclusively in normative contexts, and in discussing the
work of the great democratic theorists of the past. It
means acknowledging the fact that, for descriptive political
science, the concept is as useless as the ancients believed.
Thus the late Robert Dahl suggested that instead of calling
regimes like the one in the United States “democracies,”
we ought to use the term polyarchy instead.
Etymologically, that word connotes the rule of the many.
The “many” Dahl had in mind were overlapping elites.
They need not all be based on wealth. In actually existing
polyarchies – or “Western democracies,” as they are more
familiarly known – organized labor and civil society
groups of all sorts can and do figure in the political power
structure too.
From the time of the Bolshevik Revolution to this day (in
sectarian circles), hard Left political parties and
unaffiliated leftwing intellectuals would distinguish
themselves from one another by advancing competing
views of the political economy and class nature of the
former Soviet Union.
Maoists and some Trotskyists called the Soviet system
“state capitalist.” There were many, not always
compatible, views of what that notion implies. For
Communists, the Soviet Union was a workers’ state.
Orthodox Trotskyists agreed – but with the caveat that it
was “bureaucratically deformed” to such a degree that
Soviet Communism betrayed the ideals of the Revolution
that gave it birth.
Building on the foundations Dahl laid, it is tempting to
describe the political regime in the United States in a
similar fashion. In that spirit, and at the risk of seeming
facetious, I would venture that the United States is a
polyarchy with plutocratic deformations.
In plutocracies, the rich rule. America’s plutocratic
deformations are “exceptional,” compared to those of most
other polyarchies, but they are not qualitatively different.
In capitalist societies, capitalists are rich, and states in
capitalist societies serve their interests. If only in this
sense, the rich rule. In nearly all cases, however, they rule
in more direct ways as well.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) insisted that a
condition for the possibility of democratic governance is
“that none should be so rich as to be able to buy another or
so poor as to be forced to sell himself.” Nearly everyone
agrees; the incompatibility of democracy with grossly
unequal distributions of income and wealth is a tenet of
both classical and modern democratic theory.
Polyarchies are democratic enough to be undone by gross
inequalities too. All Western democracies are more
377
polyarchic than democratic, and they all suffer, to some
extent, from deformations brought on by income and
wealth inequality. Neoliberal economic policies have
made the problem worse everywhere.
However, the American polyarchy has suffered more than
most; in the United States, plutocracy is out of control.
Of the many reasons why, perhaps the most important is
the inability of the American state to limit political
spending. The Supreme Court’s infamous Citizens’
United ruling nowadays gets all the attention, and it
deserves all the blame it gets. It should be remembered,
however, that this is only the latest in a series of Supreme
Court decisions, going back at least to Buckley v. Valeo in
1976, that effectively identify political spending – and
therefore political corruption – with Constitutionally
protected speech.
Democracy Tamed
Until well into the nineteenth century, the political class in
the United States, and its counterparts in Great Britain and
elsewhere, restricted the franchise to white male property
owners.
For determining how many representatives in Congress
states would be allotted, slaves counted for three-fifths of a
citizen. But they were not able to vote, of course; they
were the property of their owners. Freed blacks fared no
better.
Native Americans couldn’t vote either; neither could many
of the (mixed race) inhabitants of the lands the United
States took from Mexico in the first half of the nineteenth
century.
And although dissenting voices were raised from the
earliest days of the republic, white women were denied the
franchise too. The consensus view among men, and
among many women as well, was that the rightness of that
arrangement was too obvious to require justification.
The exclusion of propertyless white males was more
problematic. There were plenty of extant justifications to
draw upon, however. Property holders in Great Britain
and their Western European counterparts had been dealing
with the issue for some time, and the arguments were well
worked out.
The general strategy was to take on board and then adapt
the old arguments against the rule of the demos –
especially the idea that for collective deliberation and
decision-making to work properly, decision-makers must
be educated and informed, and must have ample time to
devote to deliberative processes. Propertyless white males,
having neither the time nor the resources to develop the
requisite capacities, fall short on this account.
This ostensibly high-minded rationale aside, the
underlying reason why the franchise was restricted to
persons of property was that the last thing property holders
wanted was an electorate full of poor and desperate
persons. They feared that the propertyless would use the
power of the state to seize and redistribute their wealth.
Their fears were reasonable. In the aftermath of the
French Revolution, wealth and income egalitarians did call
for extending the franchise in order to advance their cause.
The Chartists in Britain were the most important example,
but they were not alone.
However, as the nineteenth century wore on, it became
increasingly clear that the well off had little to fear. The
rise of political parties that mediated between individuals
and the state was an important part of the reason why. The
party system that emerged enabled elites to channel
popular aspirations in ways that left private property
secure.
With its potentially counter-systemic implications
neutered, democracy could finally serve as an ideal that
everyone could, at least in theory, endorse.
Thus property qualifications proved less robust than racial,
nativist and patriarchal restrictions of voting rights.
Under military protection, blacks could and did vote and
hold office in defeated Southern states during
Reconstruction. In short order, though, they were
effectively disenfranchised for the next hundred years;
and, to this day, in practice, if not in theory, their right to
vote remains precarious.
In the final decades of the nineteenth century, women did
win the right to vote in a few Western territories and states,
but it was not until 1920, after decades of struggle, that the
women’s suffrage movement finally succeeded in forcing
Congress and the states to ratify the Nineteenth
Amendment.
These victories notwithstanding, white supremacy and
patriarchy survived extensions of the franchise in much the
way that private property had decades earlier. It takes
more than voting to dislodge entrenched power.
There is no doubt, however, that while progress has been
uneven, the virulence of white supremacy and patriarchal
domination has diminished over the past several decades.
The gains seem irreversible too; not even the malign
forces behind Donald Trump can turn back the clock on
this. No doubt, voting is part of the reason why, though it
is unclear how large a role it has played.
Ironically, though, over the same period, income and
wealth inequality and other problems associated with
plutocracy have gotten worse; voting hasn’t helped with
378
that at all. Indeed, many less well off voters nowadays
vote for candidates and policies that make the problems
associated with plutocratic rule worse. So much for
expropriating the expropriators through the ballot box!
There are many reasons why this has happened: false
consciousness comes immediately to mind; it is surely part
of the explanation. For evangelicals and others with
retrograde social views in the United States, so is “values
voting.”
But the most important part of the explanation, in the
American case, is the lack of a real opposition party that
the system in place does not thoroughly marginalize. The
Democratic Party is useless for that. To be sure, even
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been known to
mouth off about the evils of inequality. But you don’t
need a bullshit detector to see that they are part of the
problem, not part of the solution.
The Trump phenomenon is both a symptom and a cause of
this sorry state of affairs. It seems anomalous, because
Trump’s persona is so outrageous, and because it is plain
that no one with his temperament should be anywhere near
the seat of power, much less anyone as clueless as he. It
doesn’t help either that his cabinet is full of nincompoops
and that his advisors are even worse; or that, for the time
being, he is pursuing reactionary social and economic
policies at home, and a reckless and basically incoherent
agenda in foreign affairs.
But the fact is that were he now to disappear from the
scene – say, by getting himself impeached or by quitting,
as he has done before in his capacity as a casino tycoon
and real estate mogul — it will seem, in retrospect, that
while, during his tenure in office, he raised the profile of
the polyarchy’s plutocratic deformations to new heights,
he did not fundamentally alter the nature of the regime.
If, however, Trump somehow stays on – because his vanity
demands it and because Democrats permit it – it may look
instead, in retrospect, that, at this moment, we are indeed
on the brink of a radical transformation; that our flawed
polyarchy is about to become something America has
never quite seen before, even in the robber baron days — a
full-fledged oligarchy.
Oligarchy Trump Style
Oligarchy, the rule of the few, is the problem we are facing
– not fascism. Trump is no fascist, not even a “friendly
fascist,” as Ronald Reagan was sometimes said to be.
For one thing, he has no coherent political vision, fascist or
otherwise; for another, he lacks the stature of a true fascist
leader. Calling the Donald a fascist actually demeans
fascism. This might seem like a good thing to do. But the
description is anachronistic, and things are what they are.
It would be foolish to trade off clarity for a dubious
rhetorical advantage.
It is true, though, that Trump is a magnet for the kinds of
people who, in the right circumstances, become fascists;
social psychologists call them “authoritarian
personalities.”
The description applies, however, only to a subset of
Trump voters. Most of them were not so much voting for
Trump as against Clinton and, insofar as they understood
what she represented, against Clintonism – against the
neoliberal turn, against liberal (“humanitarian”)
imperialism, and against America’s perpetual war regime.
The great German Social Democrat August Bebel called
anti-Semitism “the socialism of fools.” In that spirit, we
might say that “Trumpism is the anti-Clintonism of fools”;
or rather that it would be, if saying that didn’t require
dignifying Trump’s politics by putting an “ism” after his
name.
Trump has unleashed the furies, the forces of darkness.
Plenty of people – Muslims, Hispanics, persons of color,
women, and white workers too – are suffering on this
account, and if he isn’t stopped, it will get much worse.
Even so, he will not leave America a fascist state. The
danger he poses to the political realm is of a different
nature.
If he is able to ditch the largely beneficial rules and
regulations he and his minions inveigh against, and if he
can get Congress to enact the spending programs and tax
cuts he says he favors, some very rich malefactors will do
very well under his reign. Plutocracy will flourish.
But even allowing that, as “dialecticians” would say,
quality arises out of quantity, this will not change the
fundamental nature of the regime. America will still be a
polyarchy — with large and growing plutocratic
deformations.
It would be a regime changer, though, if Trump were to
turn the rule of the many into the rule of the few. This is
what he seems to be doing, right before our eyes.
He is not just forming a “kitchen cabinet” and relying upon
it inordinately. He is relying upon people he thinks won’t
betray him, and turning the reins of government over to
them.
However, his is no ordinary oligarchy. His oligarchs
didn’t find him; he found them. And, with one major
exception, they aren’t even plutocrats who have grown too
big – or too rich – for their britches.
379
“Oligarchy” has had unusually bad press in the United
States of late– thanks mainly to the resurgent Russophobia
that Americans of a certain age imbibed with their
mother’s milk, and thanks to the fact that Democrats and
their media flunkies are doing all they can to stir it up – not
just to delegitimize Trump but also to deflect blame for the
thrashing they took in the last election away from
themselves and onto an enemy Republicans hate as much
as they do.
Delegitimizing the Trump presidency is a worthwhile
project, but there are less reckless ways of going about it
than antagonizing a nuclear power. Inasmuch as Trump is
his own best delegitimizer, there are countless ways.
Were left-leaning pundits to go after Trump for moving the
country in an oligarchic direction, they would actually be
doing some good. However, they prefer to go after him by
linking him not to the homegrown oligarchs he is actually
empowering, but to the oligarchs of Russia and the former
Soviet republics, the evil “other.” That way they can get
Trump and get Russia too.
Russian oligarchs and their counterparts in other former
Soviet republics are, for the most part, well-connected
cronies of leading politicians – especially Vladimir Putin,
the man Democrats and Republicans of the John McCain
variety love to demonize. The official line is that they reek
of corruption; that our plutocrats are angels in comparison.
It is true that the Russian system is corrupt. The
corruption started when, with Western – especially
American – help, Russia’s regression to capitalism got
underway. At first, the beneficiaries of that debacle were
kleptocrats, connected to the old nomenklatura and, in
some cases, to organized crime.
They made off like the bandits they are, setting the tone for
what would follow as the system matured. The corruption
has never gone away.
We in the United States have our share of corruption too.
Trump fooled a lot of people campaigning against it; on
the principle that it takes one to know one, he got them to
think that, being on their side, he had the will and ability to
“drain the swamp.” Where is Sarah Palin now that we need
her to ask how that “swampy drainy thing” is going?
The way that it’s going is that he is bringing the swamp
into the White House itself. He is doing it by putting
together a kind of ma and pa oligarchy that does nothing to
diminish the level of corruption and that is manifestly less
competent than anything Russophobic liberal pundits can
find to complain about in Russia today.
Reduced to its core, the Trump oligarchy is comprised of a
Trump, a Kushner, Steven Bannon and, scariest of all,
Robert Mercer.
The Trump is, of course, daughter Ivanka, purveyor of
baubles and fashion. The line on her is that she is an
intelligent and savvy businesswoman. In fact, she owes
her success in business to the Trump name, and she knows
as much about politics as the average thirty something who
was born into the gilded world of the nouveau riche.
The Donald trusts her because she is family and because,
as he would be the first to say, she is hot. Also, he needs
her to be his acting First Lady.
I have high hopes, by the way, for the actual First Lady.
Circumstantial evidence and common sense – supported by
serious gossip – all suggest that she increasingly regrets
the Faustian bargain she made with the Donald.
If she would do the right thing, Melania Trump could do
more good for her (adopted) country than any woman with
access to presidential genitals since Eleanor Roosevelt —
more even than Monica Lewinsky or Nancy Reagan.
But for his dalliance with the former, Bill Clinton would
have had a shot at ending Social Security “as we know it,”
just as surely as he and Hillary ended Aid to Families with
Dependent Children; and but for the latter’s faith in
astrology and her and therefore her astrologer’s influence
over the villainous old Gipper, all kinds of mischief would
surely have resulted.
The Kushner is Jared, Ivanka’s husband. It was a match
made in capitalist heaven. They both have sleaze ball dads
who know how to work the system. They both grew up
with more money than God.
A difference is that the Kushners couldn’t capitalize on
their name, even if they wanted to, whereas the Trumps are
past masters at it. Also Jared’s father, unlike Ivanka’s,
has done time.
Another difference is that Ivanka’s dad could care less
about religion, except when his marks are evangelical
Christians, while Jared’s is an Orthodox Jew. So is Jared,
and therefore now Ivanka as well. The Kushners are also
rabid Zionists, ethnic cleansers whose “philanthropy” aids
the settler movement in Occupied Palestine.
Two mediocrities; two chips off the old block. With
oligarchs like these, how could Trump not “make America
great again?”
Having identified a vacuum there to fill, Bannon, an
apostle of the formerly fringe, now mainstream, far Right
has managed to make himself Trump’s guru.
He is the one largely responsible for bringing serviceable
cartoon characters like Kellyanne Conway and Stephen
Miller into the Trump fold. Without them and others of
380
their ilk, Trump would now be little more than a barely
remembered figure from a nightmare, and he would be
even less able to govern than he currently is. Reince
Priebus and Sean Spicer are just not enough.
Bannon can also be credited with bringing a semblance of
ideological coherence to the Trump campaign by drawing
on the thinking of pre-World War II clerical fascists and
their intellectual descendants in Europe today. Their ideas
give a nationalistic and Islamophobic coloration to the
retrograde social and economic policies that Republicans
traditionally champion.
How odd for a guru coaching a billionaire pretending to be
an American “populist” to draw on sources rooted on the
wrong side of the Dreyfus Affair, and for God-fearing,
down home American Protestants not to mind the foreign
and Catholic inflections. But there it is!
It was pointed out during the campaign that the adjective
“loathsome” attached to Ted Cruz’s name in much the way
that “fleet footed” attached to Achilles’. Bannon picks up
on the Cruz vibe too – especially when he echoes the old
Reagan nonsense about how government is not the
solution, but the problem.
To make his point, Bannon appropriated, and forever
sullied, the word “deconstruction,” depriving obscurantist
literary theorists of one of their most cherished concepts.
Bannon and therefore Trump say that they want to
deconstruct the government by which they mean reduce it
down to a vanishing point – all, that is, except those parts
of it that advance the class interests of the Trump and
Kushner families and their class brothers and sisters.
This would include its means of domestic repression and
world domination. They want to expand all that – indeed,
to throw money at it — even at the cost of offending the
deficit hawks in the House and Senate, and in the larger
Republican fold.
To soften the blow, Bannon and the others saw to it that
those government agencies which actually serve the public
would be led and staffed as much as possible by
nincompoops opposed viscerally to the agencies they lead.
Even if Trump goes, this will be an enduring part of his
“legacy.” With the Donald out of the picture, we would
have Mike Pence, a bona fide reactionary, in charge. How
pathetic that this is something to look forward to!
Then there is Mercer. If Jane Mayer’s scrupulously
careful investigative reporting (“fake news” in the Trump
lexicon) is even remotely on track, Mercer money has
effectively bought the White House – not because the
Donald is on the take, he doesn’t need to be, but because
he is in way over his head and Mercer and his daughter
Rebekah, are, under Bannon’s direction, helping him
muddle through.
In his pre-Dick Cheney days, when he too would get in
over his head, the man who is now only the second worst
President in modern times would rely on Bush family
fixers to get him through. Mercer is currently doing much
the same for the man who knocked George W. out of first
place.
Mercer, it seems, is weird as they come; daughter
Rebekah, not so much. She reportedly relishes her power
and influence as the First Lady of the alt-Right.
Her father, however, hardly ever speaks. In recent years,
limitless riches seem to have brought out the inner Gatsby
in the man. He has taken to indulging a taste for Long
Island estates, luxurious yachts, and lavish parties. But
even now, in comparison, Clarence Thomas, in his
capacity as a Supreme Court Justice, is positively
loquacious.
Mercer is an extreme libertarian and also a devote not just
of the usual conspiracy theories, but also of the idea that,
381
for example, global warming is good for the planet and
that nuclear accidents and even nuclear wars really aren’t
that bad.
How could such a man become so rich and therefore
powerful? The answer seems to be that, for writing
computer codes useful to the financial firms he runs, he is
something of an idiot savant.
Idiots savants who, for example, multiply and divide very
large numbers in their heads end up in freak shows. What
Mercer is uncannily good at is as socially useless. But it
also happens to be ridiculously lucrative in our twenty-first
century capitalist world.
And so Mercer and his daughter find themselves in a
position to turn their fantasies into state policies that,
thanks to their zeal and Trump’s fecklessness, could do
irreparable harm to the human race and the planet itself.
All oligarchies are bad. The one that Trump is laying on
us could make the others, even the Russian one that
Democrats and their pundits rail constantly against, look
good in comparison.
 Trump White House Sends Invite To All Intel
Committee Members To View Surveillance Docs Proving
Team Trump Was Surveilled, Unmasked
By J. D. Heyes, Editor-In-Chief
Posted On March 31, 2017
Political Espionage: Seeking to head of criticism by
Democrats of House Intelligence Committee Chairman
Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who last week went to the White
House to view sensitive surveillance intelligence on the
Trump transition team during the Obama administration,
the West Wing sent an invitation to all members of both
House and Senate intelligence panels to come and view
them as well.
Democrats and their allies in the Left-wing Establishment
media have been hyper-focused on criticizing the process
by which Nunes was permitted to view the sensitive
documents – reportedly alerted to them by two White
House National Security Council staffers, one installed by
the Trump administration – not the substance of the
intelligence revelations, which is: Trump transition team
members were surveilled, and then unmasked, by the
Obama administration. There is no denying that now.
Per Bloomberg News:
In a letter signed by White House Counsel
Donald McGahn, the administration said
Thursday it was responding to a March 15
request from intelligence committees for
“documents necessary to determine
whether information collected on U.S.
persons was mishandled and leaked.” It
asks the committees to probe whether the
intelligence was properly gathered, whether
names were improperly revealed and “to
the extent that U.S. citizens were subject to
382
such surveillance, were civil liberties
violated?”
White House press secretary Sean Spicer
announced the invitation during a briefing
with reporters in Washington Thursday,
shortly after the New York Times reported
that two White House officials had provided
House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes
with reports showing that Trump and his
associates were named incidentally by U.S.
spy agencies monitoring foreign officials.
As noted within the Times story mentioned above (and
linked above) the two officials – “Ezra Cohen-Watnick,
the senior director for intelligence at the National Security
Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who works on
national security issues at the White House Counsel’s
Office and was previously counsel to Mr. Nunes’s
committee” – are not accused of breaking any laws.
Rather, the Times speculates they are just lackeys for the
president.
Some things to ponder here. First, when Trump tweeted
out March 4 that Obama had “wire tapped” him at Trump
tower, that accusation was based on earlier reporting by the
Times and others. But the outraged Democratic
propaganda apparatus, otherwise known as the
Establishment media, begin to demand proof, summarily
ignoring their earlier reporting, which was based on
information leaked to them from within the Deep State.
Given this, wouldn’t it make sense for the Trump
administration to look for the proof being demanded of
it, and then make that available to the chairman of a
congressional intelligence committee investigating the
administration’s alleged “ties” to Russia (which is bogus to
begin with)?
Secondly, White House spokesman Sean Spicer is exactly
right when he criticizes the Establishment press for being
too concerned with the process by which Nunes – who has
a mandate to investigate – came by his intelligence instead
of the bombshell revelation that the incoming
administration was under surveillance – even incidental
surveillance – and that names were purposely unmasked
by members of the Obama administration and then leaked
to the media (a violation of U.S. law). If that were not
true, how else would former National Security Advisor
Michael Flynn’s name, along with the names of current
and former Trump campaign officials, have been
mentioned in media reports?
Like our reporting? Sign up for our daily email
newsletter and never miss a story! Click here
As for Democratic posturing over this, reaction to the
White House invite by Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking
member on the House Intelligence Committee, says it all,
per Bloomberg:
The top Democrat on the House
Intelligence Committee, Representative
Adam Schiff, said he’s willing to review
the material but questioned the
administration’s motives, saying
officials may be trying to disseminate
information that helps Trump’s case. “I
hope they’ll have some kind of explanation
for why they chose this path,” Schiff told
reporters at the Capitol.
So what if it “helps Trump’s case,” congressman, if
it’s true and legitimate information? Democrats have been
heaping scorn on Nunes for “politicizing” the intelligence
.
383
committee’s Trump-Russia investigation, but Schiff gets to
politicize the evidence? And of course, the Democratic
propaganda machine, the Establishment media, has been
doing its part, downplaying the real bombshells
implicating the previous administration while claiming
that the story is all about Nunes. (RELATED: Smoking
gun: Former Obama official admitted to a concerted effort
to spy on Team Trump)
Last night on Fox News‘ “The O’Reilly Factor,” retired
intelligence operative Lt. Col. Ralph Peters said “this
whole thing stinks,” in reference to how both parties are
conducting themselves regarding the leaking of sensitive
data, the politicization of the investigation and a host of
other issues. He’s right, it does stink.
But at this stage you’d have to be a complete political hack
to continue pushing three things:
1) Russia “hacked the election” in favor of Trump;
2) Team Trump was not swept up in any Obama-era
intelligence surveillance; and
3) that the unmasking of Trump transition team members
did not happen. All of these claims are now
demonstrably false.
 Sean Spicer On Fire! ‘There’s A Clearer Connection
To Russia With Hillary Than There Is Trump (VIDEO)
Sean Spicer Was On A Roll Today! He Spoke About Hillary Clinton’s
Involvement With Russia, Including Her Hand In
The Sale Of 1/5 Of Our Uranium.
Cristina Laila
Mar 31st, 2017 6:34 Pm

Sean Spicer:

“When you compare the two sides in terms

of who’s actually engaging with Russia,
trying to strengthen them, trying to interact
with them, it is night and day with our
actions and her (Hillary Clinton) actions
and yet no one questioned what she was
doing or how she was handling it…
When you talk about the stuff that went to
their (Clinton’s) Foundation, the concerns
that existed around the sale of 1/5 of the
countries Uranium, the paid speeches, the
personal calls from Vladimir Putin. I think
that when you wanna look at a connection
to Russia, there’s a clearer one there, and
much less of one that ever existed on this
side.”

Hillary Clinton was never questioned about her

involvement with Russia even though 1/5 of our Uranium
was sold to Russia under her watch and who could ever
forget her disastrous ‘reset’ stunt? The ‘reset’ button for
Russia actually said ‘overcharged’.

384
 Trump’s NAFTA Reversal
Likely Tied To Oil Industry Pressure
By Whitney Webb | Follow On Facebook |
March 31, 2017
Despite Trump’s promises to “entirely
renegotiate” what he once called “the worst
trade deal in history,” his administration’s
proposed changes to NAFTA are modest at
best. This reversal coincides with major
investments made by U.S. oil companies
that have direct ties to some of the most
powerful figures in the Trump
administration.
Trump pauses while speaking in the East Room of the
White House in Washington. (AP/Andrew Harnik)
WASHINGTON, D.C.– Having called the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) “the worst
trade deal in history” during his presidential campaign and
repeatedly promising to “entirely renegotiate” the
controversial pact, Donald Trump’s stance on NAFTA has
seemed clear for months, especially after he affirmed the
need to radically alter the agreement in order to “protect
our borders from the ravages of other countries making our
products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs”
during his inaugural address in January. However, Trump
remained mute on his ties to certain industries with a very
strong interest in keeping NAFTA largely intact.
Just a few months after officially assuming the office of
the president, Trump’s position on NAFTA seems to be
undergoing a dramatic renegotiation of its own. According
to the Wall Street Journal, the Trump administration is
now seeking only minor changes to the agreement – citing
385
an administrative draft proposal circulated in Congress by
the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
Though all of the details of Trump’s proposed changes to
NAFTA have yet to be made public, the Journal noted that
many of the deal’s most controversial provisions will
remain in place, such as arbitration panels laid out in
NAFTA Chapter 11 that allow businessmen and investors
to circumvent local courts. These panels, which served as
the foundation for the offshore courts once proposed by the
Trans-Pacific Partnership, have long been flagged as one
of the key ways in which NAFTA erodes national
sovereignty in favor of corporate interests.
The plan, which is by no means finalized, also calls for
minor changes regarding the protection of digital trade and
tougher intellectual property enforcement. The most
significant change proposed thus far would allow NAFTA
member nations to create tariffs if a flood of imports
causes “serious injury or threat of serious injury” to those
countries’ domestic industries. This measure seems to be
in line with Trump’s criticisms of U.S. trade policy.
However, he has frequently described the import of goods
from China as having been detrimental to the U.S.
economy. Any changes to NAFTA will have no effect over
U.S. imports of Chinese goods.
According to The Street, the proposal doesn’t necessarily
reflect Trump’s preferences, representing a compromise
“between trade hawks that want to use NAFTA
renegotiations to set a new trade agenda and moderates
that support the U.S. commitment to free trade.” However,
Trump transition officials hinted that Trump would adopt a
softer stance on NAFTA months ago, with one official
telling The Hill in January:
“I don’t think we’re looking to rip up NAFTA
as much as we are looking to right-size it
and make it fairer.”
However, other evidence seems to suggest that Trump’s
shifting position on NAFTA renegotiation has to do more
with making NAFTA fairer for business interests closely
aligned with his administration than U.S. workers.
The Influence of Fossil Fuel Interests on Trump’s Trade known, has decided to keep this aspect of NAFTA intact,
Policy as its removal could make those billion-dollar investments
vulnerable to termination. As a result, it seems highly
likely that these U.S. oil interests are pushing to keep the
bulk of NAFTA in place – a fact that Secretary of State
Rex Tillerson, former CEO of ExxonMobil, likely knows
all too well.

Also of top concern to U.S. oil interests now invested in

Mexico is the fact that NAFTA has no “survival clause” –
a provision that typically provides continuing protection of
treaties for multi-year investments. Without such a clause,
if a NAFTA member such as Mexico chose to terminate an
agreement made with corporations based in another
The Centenario deep-water drilling platform stands off the coast of NAFTA nation, those foreign investors could be deprived
Veracruz, Mexico in the Gulf of Mexico. (AP/Dario Lopez-Mills)
of protection under international law, as well as the right to
international arbitration.
In early December of last year, several U.S. fossil fuel
companies – including ExxonMobil and Chevron – were
Considering that the Mexican government warned the
granted a series of lucrative petroleum contracts by the
Trump administration last week that they were poised to
Mexican Hydrocarbon Commission. Most of the contracts
“step away from NAFTA,” Tillerson and Trump have most
concern deep-water offshore drilling projects in the Gulf of
likely chosen to forgo any major overhauls involving the
Mexico. Upon their entrance into the Mexican oil market –
trade deal to protect billions of dollars in U.S. oil
one that had been closed to foreign investors for 75 years
corporation investments, explaining the administration’s
due to a state monopoly on national oil reserves – these
decision to seek only “modest” changes to the free trade
U.S. companies suddenly became very interested in
agreement.
NAFTA and the likelihood of renegotiation under the
Trump administration.
Although Trump’s tough stance on NAFTA renegotiation
helped push him to victory last November, the president’s
As Forbes noted in January, certain controversial aspects
latest about-face on a key campaign promise once again
of NAFTA, such as the arbitration panels provided by
demonstrates that Trump’s repeated promises to serve the
NAFTA Chapter 11, would prove “essential to ventures
American people and make the nation “great again” are
involving operations that might last for over two decades,”
consistently overshadowed by his personal wealth and
such as the multi-year contracts recently obtained by top
industry ties. The president is, as many have described
U.S. oil firms. Not surprisingly, the Trump administration,
him, a billionaire first and a president second.
whose deep connections to the oil industry are well-
.

386
 'Russiagate' Is Failing And
Its Supporters Are Getting Concerned
Submitted By Alexander Mercouris Of The Duran
Mar 31, 2017 8:48 PM
‘Russiagate’ is failing and its supporters
are getting worried
Three weeks ago I wrote a piece for The Duran in which I
suggested that the corner appeared to have been turned in
the fake ‘Russiagate’ scandal.
What was a tentative conclusion then can now be firmed
up.
Though the leaders of the US security services have denied
the President’s allegation that they wire-tapped him –
though they were careful not to deny that they mounted
surveillance on him and his associates – the President’s
claim that they did, in effect smoked them out.
Thus former DNI James Clapper admitted that he had seen
no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and
the Russians up to the point of his retirement on 20th
January 2017, and former Acting CIA Director Michael
Morell more recently has publicly trashed the whole story
of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Possibly the single most important admission that no
evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and
the Russians has been found came however from within
the FBI itself, though it has gone almost completely
unnoticed.
This came in the form of information deriving from an
anonymous leak which appeared in an article in The New
York Times on 5th March 2017. This leak almost certainly
originated with FBI Director James Comey himself. The
relevant sentence in the article reads as follows
In addition to being concerned about potential attacks on
the bureau’s credibility, senior F.B.I. officials are said to
be worried that the notion of a court-approved wiretap will
raise the public’s expectations that the federal authorities
have significant evidence implicating the Trump campaign
in colluding with Russia’s efforts to disrupt the
presidential election. (bold italics added)
In my article of 6th March 2017 discussing this comment I
said the following:
387
This is very twisted language which shows
that The New York Times is not reporting
this part of the story straightforwardly.
However the meaning is clear enough.
The FBI is worried that the more discussion
of its investigation there is – extending all
the way to discussions by no less a person
than the President himself of court
approved wiretaps – the more people will
fall for the false ‘no smoke without fire’
argument, and will feel let down by the FBI
when it eventually announces that its
investigation has drawn a blank.
This is an entirely valid concern, and is one of several
reasons why such investigations are supposed to be
confidential.
This is the second confirmation within a few hours from
people who have held posts within the national security
bureaucracy that the endlessly repeated claims of collusion
between the Trump campaign and Russia are not supported
by evidence. The first was made by Clapper (see above)
and the second was made anonymously to The New York
Times by officials of the FBI.
These admissions follow a continuous pattern of
admissions from officials within the national security
bureaucracy now stretching back months that inquiries into
claims of collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia are
drawing a blank.
A further sign that the ‘Russiagate’
scandal is flagging is the way its
supporters are latching on to non
issues in order to keep it going.
Thus following the House Intelligence Committee hearing
on Monday 20th March 2017 the militantly anti-Trump
news media latched on to FBI Director Comey’s formal
confirmation that an FBI investigation was looking into the
allegation of collusion between the Trump campaign and
Russia, as if this was news, and made it the big story, even
though the existence of this investigation has been public
knowledge and the topic of exhaustive discussion in the
media for months.
No doubt this was done in order to avoid mentioning the
fact that the Committee on 20th March 2017 heard no
evidence even slightly damaging to the President, but did
hear evidence which appeared to confirm the truth of the
President’s claim that he and his campaign team had
been placed under surveillance during the most critical
months of the Presidential election campaign.
Then there was the way Representative Adam Schiff used
in his opening statement at the Committee hearing the
discredited ‘Trump Dossier‘ – shot through with obvious
falsehoods, uncorroborated by the intelligence agencies,
and trashed by no less a person than Michael Morell – as
his frame story for his whole narrative of secret collusion
between the Trump campaign and Russia. This is
desperate, and shows how evidence-less and fact-free the
whole ‘Russiagate’ story actually is.
Then there are the claims – almost certainly originating in
Ukraine – about the supposedly nefarious activities of
Donald Trump’s former campaign chair Paul Manafort.
Not only have these claims been emphatically and
authoritatively denied by the two people involved –
Manafort and Deripaska – with Manafort asking to give
evidence to the House Intelligence Committee to put the
record straight and Deripaska threatening to sue anyone
who repeats them, but since they involve alleged actions
which took place years before Donald Trump launched his
Presidential campaign, and have no connection to him,
their relevance to the ‘Russiagate’ scandal is not obvious.
Lastly, there is the wholly bogus non-scandal around
House Intelligence Committee chair Devin Nunes, who is
obviously being targeted by the Democrats because of his
increasingly openly expressed and entirely justified
skepticism about the whole ‘Russiagate’ story.
To be clear, Nunes’s decision to share information about
surveillance of the President and his team during the
transition period with the White House before he shared it
with his Committee colleagues was no doubt a mistake –
and one which Nunes has apologised for – but it is hardly a
serious one, or one which would justify removing him
from his chairing of the Committee.
To my mind what this episode shows is how sensitive the
Democrats are about the raising of the whole surveillance
issue. This lends further strength to my opinion – which I
note is coming to be increasingly widely shared – that it is
the surveillance carried out during the election of Donald
Trump and his campaign team which is the real scandal in
this affair, and that the fake ‘Russiagate’ scandal is the
smoke-screen concealing it.
Having increasingly given up on the House Intelligence
Committee, the proponents of the ‘Russiagate’ scandal
388
now seem increasingly to be resting their hopes on the
Senate Intelligence Committee.
They will be equally disappointed there. These attempts to
use Congressional committees as investigative and
prosecutorial instruments suffer from a basic
misconception: these are oversight committees, not
investigative or prosecutorial committees, and they cannot
be used in that way. They cannot magic up evidence of
collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia that the
actual investigation – the one carried out by the FBI – says
is not there.
The single most important fact about the last few weeks,
and the clearest possible sign that the ‘Russiagate’ scandal
is flagging, is that there have been no more leaks from
within the intelligence and security agencies since the ones
at the beginning of March about Jeff Sessions’s meetings
with the Russian ambassador.
That suggests that the former Obama administration
officials, who I suspect were the people who were
physically communicating the information in the leaks to
the media, are no longer being fed information about
Donald Trump and his associates or about the progress of
the FBI investigation by their sources within the
intelligence and national security bureaucracy.
That could be because people within the intelligence and
national security bureaucracy are being deterred by the
investigation into the leaking of classified material which
the President has been calling for but which the House
Intelligence Committee hearing on 20th March 2017
suggested FBI Director Comey is resisting (almost
certainly because people within the FBI were involved in
the leaks), or it could be because increasingly there is no
damaging information to leak.
Regardless of what the explanation is, in the absence of
any more leaks there has been nothing over the last few
weeks for the supporters of ‘Russiagate’ to work with.
The result is that in the absence of anything new the effort
to keep the ‘Russiagate’ scandal going and in the public
eye is flagging.
My best guess is that it will collapse entirely by early
summer.
 Trump’s Pick For FDA
Attempts To Distance Himself From Big Pharma
By Derrick Broze
March 31, 2017

speed up the drug approval process, a goal

which has also been strongly endorsed by
President Donald Trump.”

These conflicts will be explored on April 5 at the Health,

Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) committee’s
hearing on Gottlieb’s nomination. Interestingly, Reuters
reports that Gottlieb – or whoever the nominee ends up
being – would

“be responsible for implementing key

Critics are calling attention to the
relationship between pharmaceutical
companies and President Trump’s nominee
to the Food and Drug Administration.
Dr. Scott Gottlieb is promising to recuse himself from
more than 20 companies he is involved with should he be
accepted as the head of the Food and Drug Administration.
Gottlieb made the promise after his relationship with
pharmaceutical corporations became a concern to those
who oppose his nomination to the FDA. In a letter to the
ethics head of the Department of Health and Human
Services, Gottlieb promised to recuse himself from more
than 20 companies in which he is financially involved.
Gottlieb is a physician who was the deputy commissioner
at the FDA from 2005 to 2007 under the Bush
administration. He currently sits on the board of several
small “biopharma” companies and
advises GlaxoSmithKline, the sixth largest pharmaceutical
company in the world. Gottlieb also works for venture
capital fund New Enterprise Associates and is managing
director of investment banking firm TR Winston & Co.
elements in the recently passed 21st
Century Cures Act, which calls on the
agency to streamline the drug approval
process.”
Implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act points to a
deeper purpose for the incoming head of the FDA. For
more on that we look to a recent report from Truthstream
Media.
‘“The “21st Century Cures Act” – HR 34 –
became law in December, 2016 and most
people have no idea what it contains,” an
Activist Post Editor’s Note states.
“Essentially, it redefines what is meant by
informed consent. Or, put another way, it
expands the ability for Big Pharma to
experiment on the population under the
assumption that the dangers of vaccines
and pharmaceuticals are too minimal for
serious consideration.”

The increased focus on these connections come after a

report from the Wall Street Journal revealed details of
Gottlieb’s relationship with pharmaceutical
companies. According the WSJ, Gottlieb has earned
millions of dollars as an executive and in speaking fees
and consulting fees from the pharmaceutical industry.

As Fortune notes, “Gottlieb has previously

promoted fewer FDA regulations in order to

389
 Russia Turns On Trump, Blames Him
For Relations That Are "Worse Than The Cold War"
By Tyler Durden
Mar 31, 2017 10:51 AM

While few predicted the stock market surge should Trump U.S. in December, which however was made under Obama
get elected, virtually everyone anticipated a thawing of and not President Trump.
relations between Russia and the US if Donald Trump
were to occupy the White House. And yet, 5 months later,
the opposite has happened: stocks are just shy of the record
2,400 while relations between the Kremlin and the White
House, despite all the rhetoric of Trump being an extended
KGB agent or whatever the NYT/WaPo unsubstantiated
narrative of the day is, have remained abysmal with no
hope of improvement in sight.

As much was confirmed by Putin's spokesman Vladimir

Peskov today, who said on Friday that the relationship
between the U.S. and Russia may worse now than it was
during the Cold War.

When asked by "Good Morning America" host George
Stephanopoulos if the U.S. and Russia were in a "new
Cold War," Peskov said the current situation may be
worse, blaming the US for disintegrating the cooperation
between the two countries.
But what will come a shock to the new generation of
McCarthyist witch hunters, who see a Russian spy behind
every criticism of US policy, or economic data, or of
course democrats, Peskov blamed none other than the
"present presidential administration"
"New Cold War? Well, maybe even
worse. Maybe even worse taking into
account actions of the present
presidential administration in
Washington," Peskov told
Stephanopoulos.
Curiously, as an example of collapsing relations, Peskov
cited the decision to expel 35 Russian diplomats from the
.
The relationship between Trump and Russia has been the
subject of intense scrutiny since before the real estate
mogul took office in January. The U.S. intelligence
committee unanimously concluded late last year that the
Kremlin meddled in the 2016 election to help Trump, and
he has spoken warmly of Putin, expressing a desire to
improve U.S.-Russian relations. The House and Senate
intelligence committees are conducting a probe of Russian
election meddling, as well as Trump and his aides' alleged
ties to Moscow. The FBI is also investigating.
Putin denied that Russia sought to interfere in the
presidential election, and has blamed the accusations on
anti-Russian sentiment in the U.S.
However, as the the daily newsflow vividly indicates, the
anti-Russia witchhunt continues. And, in keeping with the
spirit of anti-Soviet (sic) paranoia sweeping the land, we
are confident that Peskov's statement will be interpreted by
the left as an attempt by Russia to cover up their
undisclosed "ties" to the Trump administration by turning
on him.

390
 Surveillance On Trump Backfires,
Russian Collusion False Narrative, Are Markets Topping
By Greg Hunter
March 31, 2017

The pile of felonies against people in the Deep State that Join Greg Hunter as he talks about these stories and more
illegally released classified information, for the purpose of in the Weekly News Wrap-Up.
embarrassing and destroying the incoming Trump
Administration, keep stacking up. This crime is orders of
magnitude worse that Watergate. The White House
invited leaders of Congress to see documents from
whistleblowers that point to improper handling of Intel
surrounding the Trump team.

Meanwhile, the Democrats and their allies in the

mainstream media (MSM) continue to push a false
narrative of Trump and his team colluding with the
Russians without one single piece of evidence of
wrongdoing after 8 months of an FBI investigation. The
leader of Russia, Vladimir Putin, said this week that
Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election is
After the Wrap-Up:
“fictional, illusionary, provocations and lies .
. . used for domestic political agendas.” The “Early Sunday Release” will feature four time, best-
selling book author James Rickards. He talks about the
coming financial collapse, how assets will be frozen by the
On the economy, two headlines from ZeroHedge.com
elite, what President Trump has to do now, and goes deep
point to a dangerous top forming in the markets. One
into gold and silver prices and why everybody needs to
proclaims “Margin Debt Hits New Record High but
own some physical metal.
Analysts Say “Don’t Worry.” Another says “Fed’s
Dudley: ‘I Don’t Think We Are Removing the Punch
Bowl Yet.” If these headlines are not the sign of an
extreme market top, I don’t know what it would take?

391
 'Senate Looking In The Wrong Place'
As FBI Influenced US Election - Kucinich
© AFP 2017/ MANDEL NGAN / FILES - Politics
21:30 31.03.2017(Updated 00:56 01.04.2017)
The US Senate Intelligence Committee
has held the first public hearing on
alleged Russian meddling in last year’s
presidential election. Two-time US
Democratic presidential candidate
Dennis Kucinich discussed the hearing
with Radio Sputnik.
Alleged Russian attempts to swing last year’s election
in Donald Trump’s favor have been in the media spotlight
for several months.
Radio Sputnik discussed this issue with Dennis Kucinich, a
former Ohio Democrat congressman and two-time
Democratic presidential candidate.
“There are a lot of allegations and
suppositions, but we are still waiting to see
if any proof is brought forward that Russia
influenced the outcome of the election.
There doesn’t appear to be any proof
at this point,” Kucinich said.
“I would also say that there is plenty
of proof that FBI Director Comey influenced
the outcome of the election with his
October 28 pronouncement of more emails
in the Clinton investigation,” the
congressman added.
He further said that there were polls that
were taken immediately afterward that
showed a shift in public opinion
against Secretary Clinton as a result
of Comey’s statements.
392
“The Senate is looking in the wrong place
and where they ought to be looking is
at the director of the FBI and his
announcement which broke protocol and
did in fact have a measurable effect
in changing the outcome,” Kucinich told
Radio Sputnik.
Talking about why the US has continuously blamed Russia
for meddling in US elections, the ex-congressman said that
the US and Russia need to repair the damage that has been
done to their bilateral relations.
“We need to rebuild our diplomacy and
establish contact between our people
at every level. We need to get away
from this narrative that suggests that
Russia and the US must be at odds. In
both countries we have people who benefit
from conflict between Russia and the US,
they benefit politically and in some cases
they can benefit financially,” the ex-
congressman said.
Looking at what can happen if no proof is found to back
up these allegations against Russia, the former
congressman said that while he doesn’t want to speculate,
he believes that the main problem going on right now is
that everything is speculation.
“It is very important for us to ask ourselves:
Do we want good relationships
between our nations? I think the answer
must be yes. However, if there will be any
evidence of political tampering, that should
certainly be brought forward, but even then
it should not be bases for setting us on a
footing of intractable conflict,” Kucinich
said.
The ex-congressman stressed that no substantial evidence
has been brought forward that would prove that Russia
changed the outcome of the US elections through some
kind of meddling.
 “The intelligence dossiers that have been
shared with the public include assertions
that Russian media such as RT had some
kind of a role in changing the outcome
of the elections by its news broadcast. That
is ridiculous because it nullifies what in the
US we say is ‘a principle virtue in our
democracy’ and that is freedom of the
press,” Kucinich said.
He further explained his statement by saying that all media
seek to influence the outcome of the election through their
coverage and every single media outlet whether it is owned
by the US or any other country will cover the US election
with a certain point of view. However, that does not mean
that their communication is false.
Looking at how these allegations are probably aimed
at damaging Donald Trump’s image, the former
congressman said that there are people in certain US
agency departments that are unfriendly toward Moscow
and do want to see conflict between the two countries.
“We must be careful not to let the policy
objectives and differences expand into full-
fledged conflict. It is important for leaders
in both countries to find a way to get
.
393
past this election and rebuild trust in the US
and Russia,” Kucinich said.
In conclusion the ex-congressman once again stressed,
“If you want to know who influenced the US
election, look no further than the FBI,
whose director on October 28 announced a
new investigation into Clinton’s email case
which had a measurable adverse impact
in her campaign and quite possibly could
have swung the election to Donald Trump.”
Testifying Thursday before the Committee, Democrat
Senator Mark Warner claimed that Russia had launched an
unprecedented campaign to influence America’s internal
affairs.
Republican Senator Marco Rubio assumed that his
presidential campaign team members were also targeted
by IP addresses from an unknown location in Russia. The
hearing was the first in a row of other similar discussions
expected to be held in recent months.
The Kremlin denies all accusations of Russian
cyberattacks, dismissing them as preposterous and
ungrounded.
 'FBI Never Had Access To DNC Computers, Used
Secondary Forensics' - Ray Mcgovern, Fmr CIA Officer
Published Time: 31 Mar, 2017 15:48

CIA takes riskier actions. As an intelligence analyst, I

would say we could perhaps forgive Crowdstrike, but we
could not forgive the head of the FBI who was very
embarrassed to say 10 days ago, “We never got direct
access to DNC computers. So, we had to use secondary
forensics and that came from Crowdstrike.” That is a very
poor admission to make.

We could forgive Crowdstrike, but we could not forgive

the head of the FBI who said they never got direct access
to DNC computers. That is a very poor admission to make,
says former CIA officer Ray McGovern.

The CIA possesses a tool for disguising the source of its

hacks, that's according to the latest release of classified
documents from Wikileaks, called "Marble". Previous
batches of CIA documents released by WikiLeaks also
revealed some other tactics the agency is said to have used
to link cyber-attacks to other countries.

At the same time, the agency is also believed to have a

program, called UMBRAGE, which allows it to mimic all
sorts of hacking techniques, and can leave traces that will
point to foreign sources instead of the US.

RT: Do these tactics revealed by Wikileaks seem to you, as

to a former CIA agent, to be credible? Could the US really
have this capability?
Ray McGovern: It is genuine. WikiLeaks and Julian
Assange have a 100 percent record on authenticity. That
matters. I am an intelligence analyst. This is the kind of
unadulterated evidence after which I lust. After which any
investigator or newsman should lust. Because Julian
Assange doesn’t change anything. It is documentary. And
what does that mean? And that means that as an
intelligence analyst, I can analyze and interpret it. And
there is no way other to interpret this than the poor people
from the Crowdstrike, the computer company that the
DNC hired to look into who was hacking into their
computers, it was beyond its capability to determine who
had this virus in there.
CIA has worked with NSA for 15 years on this kind of
program. How many lines of code are there? 700 million.
How much does each line of code cost? 25 dollars. Do the
math. So, only CIA as a beneficiary of NSA technology
can do this. Why does CIA do it and not NSA, because the
394
RT: The investigation into Russian alleged meddling in
the US is still underway, yet no real proof has been
provided. This story has been ongoing for quite a
while....Can we expect any concrete evidence to come out
this late?
RM: The problem is that the mainstream media in the US
accuses RT of being a propaganda organ. It is sort of like
the pot calling the kettle black. The black reality is that
some of this information never appears in the mainstream
media, witnessed by the fact that one of the deputy
assistance secretaries of state of the Pentagon admitted that
she was very concerned at the end of Obama
administration that the very sensitive information that
indicated how the Obama administration, i.e. the CIA, was
getting us information that was leaked on personages
within the Trump campaign. We had to protect that
information because we can never let them know how we
got it. That has not even been published and that is three
days old.
 NBC Allows Nancy Pelosi
To Spin Conspiracy Theories About Trump
By Kyle Drennen
March 31, 2017 | 11:34 AM EDT
On Friday, NBC’s Today invited on Democratic House
Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to attack the Trump
administration over investigations into Russian meddling
in the 2016 election and even teed her up to push baseless
conspiracy theories suggesting the President was being
blackmailed by Russia.
Co-host Savannah gently tried to point out that Pelosi’s
recent anti-Trump ranting was not fact-based:
“Something you say a lot, and have said
a lot, is that you think that the Russians
have something on President Trump.
You say, ‘What do they have on him?’
Do you actually have information to
back up that question or are you just
speculating without evidence?”
Pelosi was then given free reign to continue such wild
speculation:
No, I just wonder what the Russians
have politically, personally, or
financially on President Trump. Because
this is about a national security issue.
Why would the President of the United States just come in
and start to flirt with the idea of lifting sanctions on Russia
in terms of their behavior in Eastern Europe? Why would
the President of the United States question the START
treaty? Why would the President of the United States put
Putin on a pedestal and diminish the greatness of America
in that?
395
There's something wrong with this
picture.
Rather than grill the left-wing leader on hurling such
unfounded accusations against the President, Guthrie
barely managed a follow-up:
“You're asking these questions, but you
don't have underlying facts that suggest –”
Pelosi cut her off:
Well, there’s nothing I would suggest here.
But I would say this. Let's have the outside
independent commission investigate all of
this.
And I don't know how many more days
where new news connecting the Trump
campaign to the Russians needs to
come forward for the Republicans in
Congress to say, “Let's get to the truth.
The American people deserve the truth.”
Why are the Republicans protecting the
President?
Why don't we just have the truth?
The softball exchange began with Guthrie helpfully laying
out the case that Republican House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Devin Nunes and the White House were
supposedly colluding to influence the congressional
investigation:
So this is a tangled web. We were just watching how this
has all come about. According to facts as we understand
them right now, it appears that this information about
potential incidental surveillance came from the White
House to Chairman Nunes of the House.
Do you think Donald Trump was part of
all of this?
Do you think he knew all along that that information was
in the White House and that he was part of this kind of
orchestration of getting it out there through Chairman
Nunes?...
 Do you think President Trump was in on
it?
Later in the segment, Pelosi demanded that Nunes “recuse
himself” and denounced his “bizarre behavior.” Guthrie
wondered:
“Well, to that point, so you’ve just laid that
out, do you think Devin Nunes knew that he
was part of this whole orchestration, or do
you think he was an unwitting participant?
In other words, was he used by the White
House?”
The Democrat replied:
“Of course...he was duped....that's the
most innocent, most benign
characterization, that he was duped, but he
should have known better....It's about
having intelligence so that we can protect
the American people, not protect the
president.”
Fill-in co-host Craig Melvin wrapped up the friendly
segment by enthusiastically looking ahead to the 2020
presidential race:
“If the election were held tomorrow –
let's talk about the Democrats really
quickly here before we let you go – if the
election were held tomorrow, which
Democrat could beat Donald Trump?”
Pelosi dodged:
“Well, the election isn’t tomorrow, it's four
years away. We have a congressional
election in 18 months.”
Melvin pleaded:
“Is there a Democrat right now?”
Guthrie urged:
“It’s a thought experiment.”
Pelosi assured them:
“We have a wealth of talent in the party.”
Melvin begged:
“Two names, two names.”
396
Pelosi still didn’t answer, but started off the 2018 midterm
campaign instead:
“I’m not doing that. What I’m saying is, let’s
get a check on President Trump by electing
a Democratic congress in 19 months.
There's a lot of enthusiasm to do that right
now. But I'm certain that many excellent
people will put themselves forward.”
Not a single question was asked about Democrats’
obstruction of Trump’s agenda and no demands were made
on Pelosi to work with Republicans on any issue.
Here is a full transcript of the March 31 interview:
7:07 AM ET
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: And we have House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi with us exclusively. Congresswoman
Pelosi, good morning, good to see you.
REP. NANCY PELOSI: Good morning. My pleasure.
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Nancy Pelosi Speaks Out;
Talks Flynn Immunity, Russia, Nunes & Working With
GOP]
GUTHRIE: So this is a tangled web. We were just
watching how this has all come about. According to facts
as we understand them right now, it appears that this
information about potential incidental surveillance came
from the White House to Chairman Nunes of the House.
Do you think Donald Trump was part of all of this? Do you
think he knew all along that that information was in the
White House and that he was part of this kind of
orchestration of getting it out there through Chairman
Nunes?
PELOSI: Well, whether the President was aware or not is
one thing, the White House administration – the Trump
administration certainly was. And it is very bizarre. I have
a long experience in the intelligence community, served
with Republican and Democratic chairmen. I’ve been the
top Democrat there myself. I've never seen behavior this
bizarre on the part of the chairman.
GUTHRIE: Do you think President Trump was in on it?
PELOSI: Well, he – wittingly or unwittingly – but he has
not disassociated himself from it. And you take that and
then you have Flynn asking for – General Flynn asking for
immunity, there’s – we really have to really take some
steps back and hope that in the administration there's
some adult someplace who can say this is not fair to the
American people.
CRAIG MELVIN: On General Flynn and this question of
immunity, is it more important to find out precisely what he
knows, or is it more important to potentially build a case
against him?
PELOSI: Well, it depends. As was indicated, usually the
prosecutors or the committee, as the case may be, would
have to get some idea of what information he has. Now, in
the past, we saw in Iran-Contra, Colonel [Oliver] North, he
took an immunity bath. And we don't want people taking
immunity bath at the Congress so that we don't – so that
the Justice Department cannot make the case they may
want to make against him. This is about Flynn, his,
perhaps, violation of the law. What that could lead to, I
really don't want to think that it's about Flynn to get the
President. This is about Flynn and Flynn.
GUTHRIE: One of the things that the President has been
criticized for is making an allegation against the Obama
administration but not offering any proof. Something you
say a lot, and have said a lot, is that you think that the
Russians have something on President Trump.
PELOSI: Yes.
GUTHRIE: You say, “What do they have on him?”
PELOSI: Right.
GUTHRIE: You're asking the question. Do you actually
have information to back up that question or are you just
speculating without evidence?
PELOSI: No, I just wonder what the Russians have
politically, personally, or financially on President Trump.
Because this is about a national security issue. Why
would the President of the United States just come in and
start to flirt with the idea of lifting sanctions on Russia in
terms of their behavior in Eastern Europe? Why would the
President of the United States question the START
treaty? Why would the President of the United States put
Putin on a pedestal and diminish the greatness of
America in that? There's something wrong with this
picture.
397
GUTHRIE: You're asking these questions, but you don't
have underlying facts that suggest –
PELOSI: Well, there’s nothing I would suggest here.
GUTHRIE: Yes.
PELOSI: But I would say this. Let's have the outside
independent commission investigate all of this. And I don't
know how many more days where new news connecting
the Trump campaign to the Russians needs to come
forward for the Republicans in Congress to say, “Let's get
to the truth. The American people deserve the truth.” Why
are the Republicans protecting the President? Why don't
we just have the truth? So, you see the – I think that both
of the committees can do some kind of an investigation. I
don't think that the chairman of the House committee, he
should recuse himself, because some of this investigation
is about what happened during the –
MELVIN: You don't think that he should recuse himself?
PELOSI: I think he should recuse himself.
MELVIN: Oh, okay.
GUTHRIE: Yeah.
PELOSI: I think he should recuse himself, he should not
conduct the investigation, because he was part of the
transition. He was part of the transition. So for that and
other reasons, his bizarre behavior, why would the
chairman of the committee go to the White House to get
information that they could have conveyed to the
President, bring it to the President, and take it to the
press.
GUTHRIE: Well, to that point, so you’ve just laid that out,
do you think Devin Nunes knew that he was part of this
whole orchestration, or do you think he was an unwitting
participant? In other words, was he used by the White
House?
PELOSI: Of course, he was a – he was duped. Now, let’s
just give – that's the most innocent, most benign
characterization, that he was duped, but he should have
known better when you’re chairman of the committee.
This is, you know, again, the Intelligence Committee is a
small committee, you have a responsibility to the caucus,
to the Congress, to the country to protect the force
protection of our troops. It's about having intelligence so
that we can protect the American people, not protect the
president.
MELVIN: If the election were held tomorrow – let's talk
about the Democrats really quickly here before we let you
go – if the election were held tomorrow, which Democrat
could beat Donald Trump?
PELOSI: Well, the election isn’t tomorrow, it's four years
away. We have a congressional election in 18 months.
MELVIN: Is there a Democrat right now?
GUTHRIE: It’s a thought experiment.
PELOSI: Four years in advance, we didn't know it was
going to be Barack Obama. Four years in advance, we
didn't know it was going to be Bill Clinton. We have a
wealth of talent in the party.
398
MELVIN: Two names, two names.
PELOSI: I’m not doing that. What I’m saying is, let’s get a
check on President Trump by electing a Democratic
congress in 19 months. There's a lot of enthusiasm to do
that right now. But I'm certain that many excellent people
will put themselves forward.
GUTHRIE: House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, good to
have you here in the studio. Thank you very much.
PELOSI: My pleasure, thank you.
MELVIN: Have a good weekend.
 Spicer Skewers Media For Defending Dr. Farkas,
Calls Her Public Admissions Of Collecting
Intelligence On Trump 'Devastating'
By The_Real_Fly
Mar 31, 2017 4:17 PM

In today's press conference at the White House, Sean

Spicer shifted the conversation away from the nothing-
burger of who told Chairman Nunes about the Trump team
being surveilled by the Obama administration to the public
comments made by Dr. Farkas -- the former Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense specializing in Russia, who
said "get as much information as you can" to persons
inside the intelligence apparatus -- for the purposes of
preserving intel on the Trump team in an effort to hide it
from the incoming administration.

Spicer called her comments alone 'devasting' and posited

the notion that had the media been treating the Trump
administration fairly, they'd be more concerned with the
intelligence leaks coming out of the Obama administration
-- surveilling Trump and his team -- for reasons that are,
indelibly, unclear.

Furthermore, he mentioned Hillary Clinton's paid speaking

fees from Russia, selling off 1/5th of America's uranium
supplies, and receiving personal phone calls from Vladimir
Putin as actual legitimate Russian connections that should
raise an eyebrow. In terms of Obama officials admitting to
surveilling and safe keeping intelligence on the Trump
team, Spicer thinks there was an attempt to do something
that was politically motivated and should be investigated.

Immediately following Dr. Farkas' comments were made

on the Morning Joe show, revealing that the Obama
administration had been surveilling the Trump team, the
notion of how she might've come into contact with Trump
team intelligence, after she had resigned from the
pentagon, became a topic of discussion -- which the media
didn't seem to grasp today with Spicer.

Here's Spicer chastising the media for defending Dr.

Farkas, instead of asking her questions as to how she had
access to Trump intelligence, post resignation, and why
399
she spread classified information in an effort to conceal it
from the incoming administration.
Bradley Moss, an attorney who specializes in national
security law, tweeted his dismay that Dr. Farkas' public
comments had become a topic of discussion, saying
"OMG, yadda, yadda, yadda." This is all a big
inconvienence for those who'd rather spend their time
mocking the President for alleging that Obama had, in fact,
ordered 'wiretapping' done on him and his team. It's even
more troubling for them to learn, after the fact, that
everything the President said was true.
400
Nevertheless, Dr. Farkas agreed with Moss, tweeting
'Amen Brother. Who benefits from this fake news? R-U-S-
S-I-A.'
Using her logic, anything that doesn't impugn the character
of the President of the United States, any defense for the
rule of law as it pertains to the illegal transfer of classified
documents and unmasking of persons, is, in fact, aiding
and abetting the Russian government. In other words, she
believes, arrogantly, that she is above the law -- because
she's fighting the good fight against Mother Russia --
defeating it for a second time in a renewed cold war.
Unreal.
 Wikileaks Dumps On CIA:
Documents Show Agency Can Disguise Its Hacking
By Usafeaturesmedia
Posted On March 31, 2017
(NationalSentinel) Cyberwar: Wikileaks has struck again,
this time releasing a trove of data showing that the CIA has
developed software that allows it to hack into foreign
systems and make it seem like it was done by someone
else.
As reported by the UK’s Daily Mail:
WikiLeaks has published hundreds more
files today which it claims show the CIA
went to great lengths to disguise its own
hacking attacks and point the finger at
Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.
The 676 files released today are part of
WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 tranche of files and they
claim to give an insight into the CIA’s
Marble software, which can forensically
disguise viruses, trojans and hacking
attacks.
.
401
WikiLeaks says the source code suggests
Marble has test examples in Chinese,
Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi (the
Iranian language).
It says: ‘This would permit a forensic
attribution double game, for example by
pretending that the spoken language of the
malware creator was not American English,
but Chinese.’
This could lead forensic investigators into
wrongly concluding that CIA hacks were
carried out by the Kremlin, the Chinese
government, Iran, North Korea or Arabic-
speaking terror groups such as ISIS.
Like our reporting? Sign up for our daily
email newsletter and never miss a
story!
Experts who have reviewed the material say it appears
genuine – bad news for the CIA.
Then again, the CIA can’t be the only advanced
intelligence service with this capability. Given the
technological capabilities of China and Russia, especially,
and given the desire for countries to disguise their online
hacking activities, it only seems reasonable to assume that
while the CIA has Marble, other countries have something
similar.
 Trump Tells American Firms To Look For China
Alternatives Ahead Of First Meeting With Xi
Published Time: 31 Mar, 2017 12:50
U.S. President Donald Trump © Carlos Barria / Reuters
US President Donald Trump has warned American
businesses they may be forced to cut ties with China. Next
Thursday President Trump will have his first meeting with
Chinese President Xi Jinping. Businesses and experts are
warning Trump of a possible backlash.
"The meeting next week with China will be
a very difficult one in that we can no longer
have massive trade deficits and job losses.
American companies must be prepared to
look at other alternatives," Trump tweeted.
Trump will host the Chinese President at his country club
in Florida. The two leaders will "discuss global, regional,
and bilateral issues of mutual concern,” the White House
said in a statement.
Beijing responded to Trump’s harsh rhetoric quite
neutrally.
On Friday, China's Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Zheng
Zeguang repeatedly emphasized that
"both China and the US attach great
importance to the upcoming presidential
meeting."
The countries
402
"hope for a successful meeting so that a
correct direction will be set for the growth of
bilateral relations," he added.
General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt has warned Trump
about the importance of trade with China.
"The country loses if we don't trade. The
relationship with China is key. If you give
up on trade, you give up on the best lever
that the president of the United States has
in negotiating around the world. I just think
that President Trump is too smart to give
up on that," he said, as quoted by Reuters.
Experts have warned that threats from the Trump
administration could backfire.
“This is a very dangerous way to start the
meeting,” said Amy King, a senior lecturer
at Australian National University and expert
on Chinese foreign relations, as quoted by
the Guardian.
“Trump needs to recognize there is very
little he can do in terms of getting China to
yield by threatening high tariffs, and they
would simply have a backfire effect on the
US economy,” she added.
Trump is known for his tough stance on China. He has
appointed a longtime China critic Peter Navarro as the
head of a new national trade body, the White House
National Trade Council.
Navarro has written books like The Coming China Wars
and Death by China. In a preamble to one of his books, he
wrote:
"help defend America and protect your
family - don't buy 'Made in China.'
 White House Ponders
Reorganization After Health Care Debacle
After Months Of Chaos, Advisers Huddle Over What Comes Next.
By Alex Isenstadt And Shane Goldmacher
03/31/17 08:47 PM EDT
Several senior Trump aides said they were carefully examining how
the beleaguered administration functions as they weigh possible fixes.
| Getty
Less than three months into Donald Trump’s White House,
top advisers are exploring organizational changes to
stabilize an administration consumed by crisis and chaos.
Following the failure to advance health-care legislation,
senior officials, including Vice President Mike Pence,
chief of staff Reince Priebus, senior adviser Jared Kushner,
chief strategist Steve Bannon, and chief economic adviser
Gary Cohn gathered this week to hold post-mortems about
what went wrong.
“Everybody,” said one official involved in
the talks, “agreed to do it differently next
time.”
In interviews over the last week, several senior aides said
they were carefully examining how the beleaguered
administration functions as they weigh possible fixes.
Among the top concerns: The circular firing squad
continually playing out in the press pitting top aides
against one another — a dynamic that one senior adviser
described as increasingly unsustainable.
“It will have to either stop or there will have
to be decisions made,” this person said,
hinting that more serious changes would be
made if the incessant shooting doesn’t end.
403
The discussions provide a window into an embattled
administration that is scrambling to find answers. It’s also
an acknowledgment that the White House is not the "fine-
tuned machine" that Trump has sought to portray.
Among those frustrated, say friends and aides, is the
president himself.
"In my experience the president is focused
on the practical. He uses trial and error,
things that don't work are discarded, things
that work are used all the time,” said Chris
Ruddy, a longtime Trump friend who is
chief executive of Newsmax, a
conservative website. “This approach made
him billions, a TV star and a presidential
winner."
Another close Trump friend was more explicit:
"Trump is a guy who likes to put things on
the board — and when he doesn't get it, he
looks around the room and says, ‘Why
didn't I get it?’"
White House officials tried to tamp down talk of any
internal upheaval. “No,” press secretary Sean Spicer
answered curtly when asked Thursday if more staff
shakeups were coming following the sudden departure of
deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh, one of the top-ranking
women in the White House.
Some aides said they were waiting to see how April
unfolds. Within the highest levels of the administration,
the coming month is seen as a critical one, with Trump’s
team preparing for a visit from Chinese President Xi
Jinping, the expected confirmation vote of Supreme Court
nominee Neil Gorsuch, and the possible launch of tax and
infrastructure packages.
“We're going to keep adjusting until we
figure out how to get it right and successful
and I think that sometimes it comes from
things that we do by changing things
organizationally,” said one senior
 administration official, adding, “Where we
are today is way more advanced than what
we were 60 days ago. And where we’ll be
60 days from now will be way more
advanced.”
The first changes are already afoot. Walsh became the
West Wing’s first casualty, when it was announced on
Thursday that she would be departing to help run a pro-
Trump outside group. Within the White House, the
departure was seen as a blow to the influence of chief of
staff Reince Priebus, who counted Walsh as a longtime
lieutenant.
Priebus and Walsh had come under fierce criticism from
rival administration factions, with some accusing them of
going too far to restrict access to the president. Others
faulted the Priebus team for the failure of the health care
bill, noting that the chief of staff had been hired in large
part because of his Capitol Hill relationships, particularly
with Speaker Paul Ryan.
Those who have spoken with Priebus in recent days said
he has expressed frustration with his own diminished
power in the West Wing and with Walsh’s departure. One
person close to the president described Walsh, who was an
accomplished Republican fundraiser before becoming
Priebus’s top aide, as the chief of staff’s “oxygen tank.”
White House aides strenuously deny that Priebus’s job is
in jeopardy. But Trump, who churned through three
campaign managers in 18 months, has a history of
shuffling through top staff – sometimes abruptly. And one
senior adviser said that aides with political and campaign
backgrounds would gradually “fall off” and make way for
others.
In hopes of promoting conservative policies and, perhaps
preserving his standing, Priebus has forged an unexpected
alliance with Bannon, a fiery populist who, as the former
chairman of Breitbart News, orchestrated attacks on the
Republican establishment. The two are looking to combat
the rising influence of Cohn and Dina Powell, the deputy
national security adviser for strategy, who they view with
suspicion because of their more moderate views.
As Priebus has come under fire, Bannon has rushed to his
defense.
“Reince [is] here to stay," he told
POLITICO.
In the immediate term, the administration has begun the
process of finding a replacement for Walsh, who had
.
404
played a critical role in overseeing scheduling and
logistics. Among the names mentioned by officials: White
House legislative affairs director Marc Short, deputy
assistant to the president Sean Cairncross, deputy chief of
staff for operations Joe Hagin, director of presidential
personnel Johnny DeStefano. David Urban, a Washington
lobbyist who helped to oversee Trump’s successful
Pennsylvania campaign, is also being considered.
In the longer term, it is examining how to improve the
systems and processes that govern how the White House
runs. There have been discussions about improving the
scheduling operation. And within the highest ranks of the
administration, there has been an acknowledgment that too
many agenda items are often being tackled at once.
“We’re doing a lot of good stuff, but it’s too
much stuff and a lot of it is getting drowned
out in the noise of too much stuff,” said one
senior adviser.
Officials are also frustrated with the outside group that was
established to support the president’s agenda. Walsh’s
departure to America First Policies, the principal pro-
Trump political organization, was pitched by the White
House as a shoring up of the flagging organization, which
was absent from the health care fight. Kushner had hand-
picked Brad Parscale, the campaign’s digital director, to
lead that group, and some laid its failures at his feet.
“That’s Jared’s group,” one top White House official said.
With Walsh’s arrival, it now has close ties to Priebus.
As America First Policies sat on the sideline, a second
group, Making America Great, was formed that is more
closely aligned with Bannon and Republican donor
Rebekah Mercer. Other organizations, including one co-
chaired by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani
and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and one
bankrolled by the billionaire Ricketts family, are also
looking to invest. All of them are jockeying for donors and
political turf.
Increasingly, the dynamic among the outside groups
mirrors that of the White House itself, with rival factions
competing for donors and political turf.
But as the White House recovered from the health care
debacle and dispatched Walsh to repair America First
Policies, one top aide used a single word to describe the
outside group effort so far:
“Aimless.”
 Trump Meets With Former
US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice
© AP Photo/ South Bend Tribune, Robert Franklin - US
19:17 31.03.2017(Updated 19:21 31.03.2017)

President Donald Trump met on Friday

with former national security adviser
and Department of State head
Condoleezza Rice, White House Press
Secretary Sean Spicer said on Friday.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — Rice was appointed national

security adviser in 2001 during the first term of President
George W. Bush and served as secretary of state
from 2005 to 2009.

"POTUS [Trump] welcomed former NSA

and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice In October, during the 2016 presidential campaign, Rice
back to White House this morning," Spicer called on Trump to drop out of the race.
stated in a Twitter message.
.

405
 Trump’s Budget
‘Grave Mistake’: Hillary Clinton
Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:14PM
Hillary Clinton delivers remarks at Georgetown University in
Washington, DC, March 31, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
Former US presidential candidate Hillary
Clinton has criticized President Donald
Trump’s proposed budget plan, calling
it a “grave mistake.”
“(It) should alarm us all,” Clinton said of
Trump’s budget plan in a speech about the
importance of women in politics at
Georgetown University on Friday.
“We are seeing signals of a shift that
should alarm us all. This administration's
proposed cuts to international health,
development and diplomacy would be a
blow to women and children and a grave
mistake for our country,” She said. “Turning
our backs on diplomacy won't make our
country safer.”
The blueprint, which was unveiled earlier this month,
introduces cuts to contributions to the United Nations and
dozens of its affiliated agencies.
Trump’s proposal also included a $54 billion cut to
education, healthcare and housing, as well as the State
Department’s funds to make up for an increase of the same
amount in military expenses.
Clinton, who served as secretary of state under former
President Barack Obama, said the cuts would only make
America less secure and undermine its standing in the
world.
406
US President Donald Trump speaks about signing executive orders
on trade policies in the Oval Office of the White House in
Washington, DC, March 31, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
The Trump White House has also proposed similar cuts to
fund his wall on the border with Mexico. During the
presidential campaign, Trump vowed that Mexico would
pay for the wall designed to keep illegal immigrants from
entering the United States. The Mexican government has
strongly rejected the claim.
Both Democrats and Republicans have already rejected
parts of the blueprint, making it difficult Trump to win
Congress’ approval.
“I don't think these reductions at the State
Department are appropriate because many
times diplomacy is a lot more effective —
and certainly cheaper — than military
engagement,” said Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell.
To show how divided Republicans were on the budget,
Clinton quoted Trump’s Defense Secretary James Mattis,
who once said cutting funds for the State Department
means he has to buy more ammunition.
Congress should enact the spending legislation to fund
federal agencies by April 28 to prevent a government
shutdown.
"If True, Does Not Get Much Bigger" Trump Tweets About
"Very Well Known" Intel Official Behind
Trump "Unmasking"
By Tyler Durden
Apr 1, 2017 9:37 PM
After slamming NBC's coverage of the "Fake
Trump/Russia Story", congratulating the NYTimes for
"finally getting it" on Obamacare, Trump on Saturday
commented on the previously discussed Fox News story
about a "very senior, very well known" U.S. intelligence
official who was allegedly involved in unmasking the
names of Trump associates, and who had reprotedly
surveilled Trump before the nomination.
"Wow, @FoxNews just reporting big news.
Source: 'Official behind unmasking is high
up. Known Intel official is responsible.
Some unmasked not associated with
Russia. Trump team spied on before he
was nominated. If this is true, does not get
much bigger. Would be sad for U.S.," he
added.
As discussed Friday night, A Fox News source (unnamed,
because these days that's all there is, just ask the NYT and
Wapo) said that the U.S. official behind the systematic
unmasking of Trump associates and private individuals
was "very well known, very high up, very senior in the
intelligence world" and was doing so for political, not
nationa security reasons, intent on "hurting and
embarrassing Trump and his team." In other words,
another intel agency war between the old, pro-Hillary
Clinton, guard and the new administration.
407
Additionally, the Friday Fox News report cited “a number
of sources” with claims that not only were the two White
House officials not the sources of the information shared
with Nunes, but that Nunes knew of the information in
January, and that the agencies where the information came
from had blocked Nunes from gaining access to it. Further,
the report cited officials within the agencies who said they
were frustrated with the spreading of names for political
purposes.
“Our sources, who have direct knowledge
of what took place, were upset because
those two individuals, they say, had nothing
to do with the outing of this information,”
Fox reported.
“We’ve learned that the surveillance that
led to the unmasking of what started way
before President Trump was even the GOP
nominee,” Fox News reported Adam
Housley said. “The person who did the
unmasking, I’m told, is very well known,
very high up, very senior in the intelligence
world and is not in the FBI.”
“This led to other surveillance which led to
multiple names being unmasked. Again
these are private citizens in the United
States,” said Housley. “This had nothing
to do with Russia, I’m told, or foreign
intelligence of any kind.”
“Fox also learned that an individual with
direct knowledge that after Nunes had
been approached by his source, the
agencies basically would not allow him in at
all,” said Housley.
Understandably, the Fox News report has gotten zero
media attention on any other news outlet.
For those who missed the original report from Friday
night, it is reproduced below.
***
 Intel Official Behind "Unmasking" Of
Trump Associates Is "Very Senior, Very
Well Known"
Day after day, various media outlets, well really mostly the
NYT and WaPo, have delivered Trump-administration-
incriminating, Russia-link-related tape bombs sourced via
leaks (in the hope of keeping the narrative alive and
"resisting."). It now turns out, according to FXN report,
that the US official who "unmasked" the names of multiple
private citizens affiliated with the Trump team is someone
"very well known, very high up, very
senior in the intelligence world."
As Malia Zimmerman and Adam Housley report,
intelligence and House sources with direct knowledge of
the disclosure of classified names (yes, yet another
"unnamed source") said that House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Devin Nunes, now knows who is responsible -
and that person is not in the FBI (i.e. it is not James
Comey)
Housley said his sources were motivated to come
forward by a New York Times report yesterday which
reportedly outed two people who helped Nunes access
information during a meeting in the Old Executive Office
Building.
However, Housley’s sources claim the two
people who helped Nunes "navigate" to the
information were not his sources. In fact,
Nunes had been aware of the information
since January (long before Trump's
'wiretap' tweet) but had been unable to
view the documents themselves because
of "stonewalling" by the agencies in
question.
408
For a private citizen to be “unmasked,” or named, in an
intelligence report is extremely rare. Typically, the
American is a suspect in a crime, is in danger or has to be
named to explain the context of the report.
“The main issue in this case, is not only
the unmasking of these names of
private citizens, but the spreading of
these names for political purposes that
have nothing to do with national
security or an investigation into
Russia’s interference in the U.S.
election,” a congressional source close to
the investigation told Fox News.
The White House, meanwhile, is urging Nunes and his
colleagues to keep pursuing what improper surveillance
and leaks may have occurred before Trump took office.
They’ve been emboldened in the wake of March 2
comments from former Obama administration official
Evelyn Farkas, who on MSNBC suggested her former
colleagues tried to gather material on Trump team contacts
with Russia.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer
said Friday her comments and other
reports raise “serious” concerns about
whether there was an “organized and
widespread effort by the Obama
administration to use and leak highly
sensitive intelligence information for
political purposes.”
“Dr. Farkas’ admissions alone are
devastating,” he said.
Clearly this confirms what Evelyn Farakas said,
accidentally implicated the Obama White House in the
surveillance of Trump's campaign staff:
 The Trump folks, if they found out how
we knew what we knew about the Trump
staff dealing with Russians, that they
would try to compromise those sources
and methods, meaning we would not
longer have access to that intelligence.
source. “Opposition by some in the
intelligence agencies who were very
connected to the Obama and Clinton teams
was strong. After Trump was elected, they
decided they were going to ruin his
presidency by picking them off one by one."

Furthermore, Farkas effectively corroborated a New York ***

Times article from early March which cited "Former
American officials" as their anonymous source regarding So if the source isn't Comey, has anyone seen Jim Clapper
efforts to leak this surveillance on the Trump team to recently? The answer should emerge soon, meanwhile the
Democrats across Washington DC. ridiculous game with very high stakes of spy vs spy, or in
this case source vs source, continues.
***
The report summarized below in video format:
In addition, citizens affiliated with Trump’s team who
were unmasked were not associated with any intelligence
about Russia or other foreign intelligence, sources
confirmed. The initial unmasking led to other surveillance,
which led to other private citizens being wrongly
unmasked, sources said.

"Unmasking is not unprecedented, but

unmasking for political purposes ...
specifically of Trump transition team
members ... is highly suspect and
questionable,” according to an intelligence

409
 Trump Applauds NYT
Report Showing Obamacare In Trouble
By Fox Insider
April 1, 2017

The New York Times appeared to reinforce a claim In a tweet last week, the president said the Affordable Care
President Trump recently made about ObamaCare being Act will "explode" and cause all sides to "get together and
on the brink of collapse. piece together a great healthcare plan for the people."

Bolling: Media In 'Frenzy'

Because Trump Doesn't Care What They Think
By Fox Insider
April 1, 2017

Eric Bolling said the reason that the media "dissects" every
tweet President Trump publishes is because they are
frustrated that he is not concerned with their feelings.

"Give the man a chance," Bolling said,

comparing the media to "bees buzzing
around a hive," following every move the
president makes.

410
 Meltdown Is Approaching
By Jim Kirwan
4-1-2017
We're out of 'Time' and our 'Universe' is melting into
Chaos, on virtually every facet of what's left of life on
earth.
Politically, militarily, socially and morally the planet has
entered meltdown, while we continue to lose our human-
will to fight these global-treason's as their explosions
continue to subsume the international-rules that once
protected billions from world-wide-lawlessness.
Inside the totally conflicted mess that was the last
presidential-election, the figurehead in the tarnished house,
along with it's evil twin two miles from the White House
has given the US a two headed government, both of which
are beset with traitors and barbarity across the planet,
while the answers which clear-actions could solve are
trapped in a modern tar-baby of inactivity: Kept alive by
the lies that surround every choice or the lack thereof that
only deepens with every passing hour.
Today from Robert David Steele on CrossTalk we got a
glimpse of the scale of what we face.
Steele, beginning at 3min 09sec:
“I've written eight books on the fact that
the intelligence community is a scam. It
is not worth what we pay for it. General
Tony Zini is on record that he got less
than 4% of what he needed, as the
commander of central command from
the 'secret world'.
What we have here is a few leaders that
as Phil says are out of control. But make
no mistake about it: These people and
411
their complicit media partners are 'the
best of the servant class'. The people
who actually rule Washington are the 40
billionaires that own the two party
tyranny.” 3min 45sec”
05min 04sec: “Can I jump in here? Let
me just say here I'm the top Amazon
reviewer for non-fiction, across 98
categories. One of the most important
books I have reviewed is called “Dick
Cheney it's called “Vice: Dick Cheney
and the Hijacking of the American
Presidency”. The U.S. government is
run by a two party tyranny on behalf of
40 billionaires. There is no difference
between the Republican and the
Democratic party. What's important
about Donald Trump is he is the first
president since John F. Kennedy, who
is not-anointed by the Deep State. So
yes Obama was absolutely terrible, but
the Bushes and the Clintons before him
were also terrible.” 05Min 4sec.
Cheney also had a staff of over 600 people and ran a
totally separate government for the entire time he was
there.
Is this where Obama got his idea for the 2nd White House?
9min 32sec:
“... Except that's not accurate: The press
was in the bag for Cheney! Nine hundred
and thirty-five lies were documented by
Charles Lewis, and the press was in the
bag for Dick Cheney. I cannot over
 emphasize the fact that the Republican
party is going to implode in this coming
year: And its the two party tyranny, not the
Democrats and not the intelligence
community that is the greatest threat to
American Security.” 9min 59sec
11min 20sec
“Oh come on You're being naive”
Peter Laval:
“No I'm being honest okay you're being I
understand the reality here, but you should
be if your going to break the law you
should at least worry about being held to
account.”
Steele:
“When I was 'in service' STOP. When I
was in service it was known that the five
“I's” prior to 911 had an agreement that
they would spy on each others politicians
and hand over the take so that they could
technically lie to congress and say that they
weren't spying on our politicians.” 11min
57sec.
k - Peter Lavelle is a terrible “host” because he's trying to
steer every question down to some tripe that he wants to
make points on: He's as pathetic as his bow-tie, in a time
when real men and real hosts are needed, Peter is proving
himself to be a very limp contributor - if the public is ever
going to unravel any of this...
Steele @17min 12sec
“... It already is a police state Look William
Bini couldn't make it ~ (but) we've had
lunch about this. NSA is surveiling 100% of
all U.S. politicians and judges. It is also
surveilling Wall Street for insider trading
purposes, it's surveillance of Americans is
incidental. Now I want to make the point
that NSA has NO LEGISLATIVE
CHARTER. Donald Trump can shut NSA
down 'tomorrow'.” 17Min 53sec.
Steele 19min “I don't agree. I previously outlined the four
tracks that are trying to destroy Trump. The intelligence
community, the media, Soros and the violent spring and of
course David Stockman's excellent analysis of Wall Street'
kicking out the props from under the American economy.
What Donald Trump is lacking right now is a serious staff
that's capable of putting together a GRAND STRATEGY.
He could shut down the intelligence community by turning
off their money. I can shut down NSA tomorrow and
412
suspend all CIA operations including their drone
assassination operations. Presidential power is seriously
underestimated.
What's lacking right now is a holistic approach to an
electoral reform act that builds the base and buries the two
party tyranny. A Trump channel that completely by-passes
the fake-news media and a counter-intelligence surge that
takes out the 500 traitors that are across the U.S.
government.
Trump can do this. I absolutely agree with Michael, Trump
is 'the man' but right now he is 'slow' to see the holistic
approach that he needs to take to put the intelligence
community back into a very small box.” 21min 15sec
there's more but you get the idea.
Who Rules
https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/382918-national-
security-state-intelligence/
On the ever-expanding Global-Front
The U.S. has troops in over 160 nations, and we've
attacked so many nations in the last 200 years that they are
almost too numerous to even list: Many nations have been
attacked repeatedly with absolutely no consequences. Yet
we still pretend that this global INVASION by the Muslim
hordes is not a threat, when for our part in this, the truth is
that we've done all this to countless millions, many times
before look it up!
ISIS
Many people in America do not know why the date of 911
is significant to the wider world—long before this place
we call America was even a wet dream.
The year of “911” was the year that the Muslim hordes
were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1924. That put an
end to the Muslim Caliphate that reined worldwide, for
1,400 years. And now thanks to our policies we engineered
the rebirth of the Muslim Caliphate, financed by the U.S.
and Israel.
1400 shocking years of Islam in 5 minutes - Muslims are
scared of this!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj8J62BqRMo
And Trump is eyeball deep in the rebirth of the next
Muslim Caliphate, along with the cooperation of Israel that
is treating the ISIS wounded and sending them back to
fight in Syria & Iraq.
TRUMP IS THE SWAMP:
Trump's Jewish Elite MAFIA and The 5 Dancing Israelis
(2017) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcd-yvudYSg
Between the Deceptions of Israel in cooperation with
Trump and his whole damned family, the nuclear clock
keeps getting closer by the minute.
Of course there's Turkey, Crimea, Ukraine, North Korea,
Syria, again and again And Trump sent 4,000 US troops to
Kuwait, along with more tanks troops and heavy
armaments to the Russian borders, even though Russia just
announced a 25% reduction in their current military
budget? And Trump's gaggle of over-the-hill “warriors”
are just itching for a serious fight with Russia, China, and
anyone else that might dare to even listen to anything
besides U.S. warmongering.
How long before we move the traitorous congress to Israel
and just change the U.S. flag to the Star of David?
South Africa
At the moment there are 4 million whites that are about to
be butchered by the black population who are screaming
for the end of the white race. Trump could send an
American humanitarian airlift over there and airlift the
besieged 4 million whites to the USA. Then he could order
that 8 million illegal blacks be sent back to South Africa
where they would be much happier in that soon to be all
Black place. Of course that will never happen, because
America has just begun our own war against all the
remaining White people in America.
I guess it's no longer illegal to call for the death or the
murder, rape or torture of all people of a single viewpoint
or a single color?
Still Report #462 - US Taking 100k Muslim Refugees /
Year
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIf3tElDLfA
413
Trump already has all the legal laws on the books to stop
these lawless
Murdering rapists from coming here but he refuses to use
them,
And he's paying for this with the money from Social
Security
WHILE STATING THAT HE WANTS 50 MILLION
MORE.
This just goes on and on, which reminded me of something
a reader sent me recently:
“Hey Jim:
I've come to a possible conclusion. The
only way to beat "them" is to be more
barbaric than they are. We all have it in us
to become brutally violent. Many of us just
have great control over turning that switch
on. I know if I'm cornered, then I could do
some serious harm if me or my loved ones
are under attack. I have no idea how
people in Europe have sat back and let this
happen to their children and done nothing.
It's as if they are preserving themselves for
their "way of life". They want to keep the
nice little conveniences of life instead of
fighting for tomorrow or even today. I look
around in those "suburbs" of America, and
all I see are weak men that won't ever fight
for anything. It's despicable what many of
them have become. They're extremely soft
and it's the world today that let them get
that way. I know we can become weak by
the women in our lives to some extent, but
this has become ridiculous. I can say when
SHTF those people that I just discussed
will only get in the way. There are probably
thousands out there like me that are ready
for combat whether it be hand-to-hand or
otherwise. Sometimes, I think I've been
waiting for that my whole life.
Thanks for the excellent articles,
Agreed Ryan. When that moment arrives, there are a great
many of us that will definitely surprise a lot of those that
have convinced themselves that we've all gone dormant...
CONCLUSION:
But the real challenge facing all of us, of any color or
belief system, is how to survive when what we were born
as becomes an automatic crime.
No one gets to pick what color we are or where we were
born.
So with so many different causes seeking to slaughter the
white race in order to eliminate the White Race, how will
that work?
Take a look at global politics and just how many people
appear to be white around the world?
Given this 'problem' will we exterminate the 40 billionaires
first or will we just torture and slaughter whites wherever
they are in the world?
Will anything besides skin color make any difference?
414
Especially given the fact that so many “White Americans”
are the same people calling for the end of the White Race
worldwide?
What is coming will supposedly be determined by 'crimes'
that will directly conflict with issues that none of us have
any control over, so long as we limit humanity to only
these new standards?
We are facing the end of civilization as it was.
kirwanstudios@outlook.com
.
 White House To Disclose
Financial Info On High-Level Staff
Published Time: 1 Apr, 2017 00:37Edited Time: 1 Apr, 2017 16:10
The White House is expected to publicly release several
financial disclosure reports covering senior staff members
on its website.
On Friday, the White House issued a press release saying
they would share financial information from some high-
level staff members by the evening.
Under federal law, high-level officials in the White House
are required to file public financial disclosure reports with
ethics officials within 30 days of taking office.
“These reports are reviewed by the White
House and are used to identify and prevent
potential financial conflicts of interest,” the
press release said.
The reports will also be reviewed by the US Office of
Government Ethics for certification.
President Donald Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, agreed
to become an advisor to the president, meaning she and her
husband Jared Kushner are also required to share their
financial disclosures within 30 days of taking office.
Officials said that financial disclosures from Trump and
Vice President Mike Pence are not expected to be released
on Friday, according to USA Today.
415
The financial disclosure reports from Chief Strategist
Steve Bannon, Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and National
Economic Council Director Gary Cohn may be released on
Friday. However, it is unclear if the disclosures will
include all of the aides.
Financial information for the members of Trump’s cabinet
who had Senate confirmation hearings is available on the
US Office of Government Ethics website.
At a press conference Friday, White House Press Secretary
Sean Spicer said the current administration is “very blessed
and very successful,” adding they should be “celebrated”
for disclosing their finances.
“I think it speaks volumes to the desire for a
lot of these people to fulfill the President’s
vision and move the agenda forward that
they are willing to list all of their assets,
undergo this public scrutiny, but also set
aside a lot,” Spicer said.
“There’s a lot of people that have done a lot
to come into this administration to give
back, that have been inspired by the
President’s victory and the President’s
agenda to move the country forward,” he
added.
 Trump A Russian Mouthpiece?
By Stephen Lendman
4-1-2017
The suggestion is spurious on its face. It would be
laughable if the diabolical agenda of his opponents wasn’t
so menacing.
Neocon CIA-connected Washington Post editors accused
his administration of “derail(ing) (the) House Intelligence
Committee’s investigation into (accusations of) Russia’s
interference in the presidential election” - no evidence
proving it since accusations surfaced last year.
Ranking Virginia Democrat Senate Intelligence Committee
member Mark Warner lied, accusing
“(a)n outside foreign adversary (Russia)
(of) hijack(ing) our most critical democratic
process, the election for president…”
Trump calls ongoing investigations
“a witch hunt,” Democrats “using (it) to
excuse their ‘big election loss.’ “
WaPo:
It “should be undeniable…that the regime
of Vladi mir Putin brazenly intervened in US
politics, including by hacking the
Democratic National Committee and
releasing stolen material through the
WikiLeaks site…”
It’s “still trying to disrupt the political
system, including by sowing fake news and
faux controversies on social media…”
It’s attempting
“to disrupt elections in other Western
democracies, including France and
Germany. The top priority of the president
and Congress should be to fully expose
this hostile assault and develop means to
counter it.”
.
416
“…Trump appears to be doing his best to
confuse the public…and prevent the truth
from coming out. That, of course, is
Russia’s agenda.”
Fact:
Not a shred of evidence suggests Russia
interfered in last year’s US presidential
election - or any others anywhere.
Fact:
Claims otherwise are malicious Big Lies -
irresponsible Russia bashing and efforts to
delegitimize Trump’s election.
Fact:
Fake new is a Western media specialty,
notably from CIA-connected WaPo, The
New York Times, and deplorable television
misinformation - truth-telling on major
issues considered heresy.
A same-day WaPo article absurdly said Trump “sounds
like a Russian mouthpiece,” saying:
He “parrot(s) Russian-friendly themes.” He
“furthers Russia’s intention to undermine
American democracy.”
He “sow(s) doubt about the legitimacy of
our system and claim(s) moral equivalency
for his own anti-democratic tactics.”
Are he and other administration officials
“useful (Russian) idiots?” “He is the most
useful of them all.”
Based on his performance so far, Trump warrants plenty of
criticism - for the right reasons, not the wrong ones.
Suggesting he’s a Russian “mouthpiece” or “useful idiot”
is deplorable scoundrel media fake news, masquerading as
the real thing.
 CIA Has Tools For Framing
Russia, China, Others For Hacks
Written By C. Mitchell Shaw
Saturday, 01 April 2017
The most recent release by WikiLeaks
shows that the CIA has developed
obfuscation tools for causing its hacks
to be falsely attributed to foreign
powers. And WikiLeaks has released
not only the documents, but also the
source code of those tools.
The third batch of “Vault 7” leaks — published by
WikiLeaks Friday — show documented evidence that the
CIA developed methods for obfuscating hacks and making
it appear that the hacker was from Russia, China, North
Korea, or Iran. The 676 files — code-named “Marble” —
will certainly cast a shadow of doubt over claims from the
past few years that certain hacks could be attributed to
hackers in those countries.
According to a WikiLeaks press release:
Today, March 31st 2017, WikiLeaks
releases Vault 7 "Marble" – 676 source
code files for the CIA's secret anti-forensic
Marble Framework. Marble is used to
hamper forensic investigators and anti-
virus companies from attributing viruses,
trojans and hacking attacks to the CIA.
Marble does this by hiding ("obfuscating")
text fragments used in CIA malware from
visual inspection. This is the digital
equivallent of a specalized CIA tool to
place covers over the english language text
on U.S. produced weapons systems before
giving them to insurgents secretly backed
by the CIA.
417
Since computer forensics — like other branches of
forensic science — depends on finding and analyzing
clues, Marble “plants” false clues sure to be spotted by
investigators and helps removes clues that would lead
those investigators to accurately attribute the real source of
the hack. The end result is that the computer forensicists
believe they have “proof” that the hacker was foreign (for
instance, Russian). And because the “traces” of the
hacking tools (deliberately) left behind indicate tools too
advanced to have been developed without a government-
sized budget, the next leap is that the hacker was state-
sponsored. At least that part is true; but he works for the
CIA, not the SVR or FSB.
Interestingly, WikiLeaks didn’t just leak documents about
the methods the CIA used, but has actually published the
computer source code itself. WikiLeaks — having
previously redacted documents and files in the Vault 7
leaks because of the dangerous nature of the cyberweapons
involved — was careful to point out in this press release
that “the Marble Framework is used for obfuscation only
and does not contain any vulnerabilities or exploits by
itself.”
While this publication by the anti-secrecy website “does
not contain any vulnerabilities or exploits,” what it does
contain is explosive. The source code the CIA used to
obfuscate its hacking activities is laid bare for all to
download, see, and examine. Wrapped up (or, technically,
zipped up) in one nice little package of six folders
containing 676 files, the source code is a smoking gun.
The size of this particular package is deceiving. The whole
package is only 539.8 kB in size. By way of comparison,
the last picture this writer took on his OnePlus 3
smartphone was 32.58 mB (or more than 60 times larger
than this entire leak).
But, if a picture is worth a thousand words, a line of
computer code is worth the Library of Congress. And these
particular lines of computer code serve as irrefutable
evidence that the CIA has created a way to perpetrate fell
deeds and frame other foreign powers for them.
As the press release says:
 Marble forms part of the CIA's anti-
forensics approach and the CIA's Core
Library of malware code. It is "[D]esigned to
allow for flexible and easy-to-use
obfuscation" as "string obfuscation
algorithms (especially those that are
unique) are often used to link malware to a
specific developer or development shop."
And:
The source code shows that Marble has
test examples not just in English but also in
Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and
Farsi. This would permit a forensic
attribution double game, for example by
pretending that the spoken language of the
malware creator was not American English,
but Chinese, but then showing attempts to
conceal the use of Chinese, drawing
forensic investigators even more strongly to
the wrong conclusion, — but there are
other possibilities, such as hiding fake error
messages.
While these files prove that the CIA created these tools for
the purpose of making its hacking appear to have been
perpetrated by state-sponsored hackers from Russia,
China, North Korea, or Iran, they do not prove that the
CIA ever actually used them for that purpose. Proving that
is beyond the scope of the files published by WikiLeaks.
Having said that, it seems beyond belief that the CIA
would create (and continue to update) tools it never used
for their intended purpose. If nothing else, the files
certainly show intent; if they don’t, then anyone ever
arrested and charged with possession of burglary tools is
owed an apology.
By creating these tools (and the documentation on the use
of them), the CIA has turned computer forensics against
itself. It is more than a little like a forensic technician
doubling as a murderer and using his knowledge of
forensics to cover his tracks. But this debacle by the CIA is
a double-edged sword. Now that WikiLeaks has essentially
“open-sourced” the CIA’s code, there is a very real
shadow of doubt hanging over every case where computer
forensicists have positively attributed hacks to foreign
powers. One now has to wonder if it the CIA might have
perpetrated those hacks, or if it might have been someone
else who gained access to the obfuscation tools developed
by the CIA.
Some cases over just the last few years immediately come
to mind.
 In late 2014, it was reported that a computer network at
the White House had been hacked and that
.
418
Washington had not even discovered the hack; an
"ally" made U.S. officials aware of it. The evidence —
including traces of computer code left behind —
pointed to Russian state-sponsored hackers.
 Almost as soon as that story broke, reports of a
cyberattack on America’s infrastructure began pouring
forth. A complex Trojan Horse malware program,
dubbed "BlackEnergy,” was found to have infected
critical government and industry networks including
those that control vital parts of the nation's
infrastructure — "complex industrial operations like oil
and gas pipelines, power transmission grids, water
distribution and filtration systems, wind turbines and
even some nuclear plants." Again, the computer
forensic evidence pointed to Russian state-sponsored
hackers.
 In December 2014, Sony Pictures Entertainment was
hacked to the tune of 100 terabytes of sensitive
company data — including the full files of movies that
had not even been released. All of that data was
dumped to the Web. The FBI claimed that computer
forensics pointed the finger squarely at North Korea —
despite the fact that the Hermit Kingdom can’t even
keep the lights on in half the country at one time.
 In January 2015, ISIS reportedly hacked the Twitter
and YouTube accounts for the U.S. military Central
Command as well as the Twitter accounts and website
servers of the Albuquerque Journal newspaper in New
Mexico and WBOC 16 TV in Salisbury, Maryland. The
hackers then posted anti-American, pro-Jihad videos
and messages.
 In June 2015, reports of the granddaddy of all hacks
against the United States dominated the news cycle.
The United States Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) had its outdated security protocols laid to waste
by hackers who then exfiltrated the personal data of
more than 22 million Americans. This time, the traces
of computer code and other computer forensic
evidence pointed to China.
While all of these hacks (with the exception of the Sony
hack) may have been exactly what they appeared to be,
this new revelation from WikiLeaks indicates that it is
possible they weren’t. This writer — who wrote all of the
stories linked above — would certainly take each of them
with a grain of salt if he were reporting on them today.
Because it is is no stretch of the imagination to think that
the CIA could have orchestrated any or all of them for the
purpose of fomenting aggression toward the nations who
were blamed. It is also possible that hackers who gained
access to the CIA’s tools used them for what they were
made for — covering their tracks.
Regardless of whether these hacks were carried out by
foreign powers, the FBI, or teenagers, the one thing that is
certain is that the intelligence community cannot be
trusted.
 Trump Dumps US 16-Year Plan
To Topple Mideast States, Ex-Military Official Says
© AFP 2017/ JIM LO SCALZO / EPA POOL - Middle East
07:21 01.04.2017
US President Donald Trump’s decision
not focus on toppling Syrian President
Bashar Assad marks the end of a 16-
year-long master plan to effect regime
change across the Middle East, former
US Army Major Todd Pierce told
Sputnik.
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) – On Friday, White House
spokesperson Sean Spicer said the United States should
accept the political reality with respect to Assad and focus
on eliminating Daesh, outlawed in Russia.
“The US policy going back to 2001
according to WikiLeaks has been the
neoconservative fascist modeled plan
of people like Richard Perle and Michael
Ledeen to create the greatest chaos and
catastrophe with the greatest human cost
possible in Syria,” Pierce said on Friday.
The consistent US strategy to systematically destroy
established governments across the entire Middle East
region goes back to after the September 11, 2001, or 9/11
al-Qaeda attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in the
United States, Pierce pointed out
Former NATO Supreme Commander General Wesley
Clark “revealed that immediately after 9/11, the Bush
.
419
administration began to implement that plan with seven
Mideast countries targeted for destruction, with Syria
in line right behind Iraq,” Pierce said.
“That US policy was so successful in that
diabolical purpose that we depopulated
much of Syria with the people often having
nowhere to go but to Europe, with that
massive population shift to Europe in turn
having consequences for European
politics, as we have seen,” he stated.
Pierce said President Donald Trump should be applauded
if he remained consistent in abandoning the strategy
of systematically destabilizing and toppling Arab
governments.
“If it is true that this fanatical militaristic
scheme of the US government to target
Assad for regime change is now to be
considered in light of political reality,
meaning to cease and desist [from] the war
against Syria, the whole world should
breathe a sigh of relief,” he said.
However, international opinion should also launch a
campaign to bring the true architects of this program
to trial at the International Court of Justice at The Hague
in The Netherlands, Pierce insisted.
“They should also demand that the
planners of this U.S. policy of human
destruction be charged and tried as war
criminals, as [former Serbian President]
Slobodan Milosevic was,” he said.
Trump campaigned in the 2016 US presidential election
on a policy of ending efforts to topple governments
across the Middle East in the name of promoting agendas
of democracy and human rights.
 Leftists Freak After Donald Trump
Proclaims National Sexual Assault Awareness Month
By Charlie Spiering
1 Apr 2017

On Wednesday, First Lady Melania Trump also gave a

speech calling for “the international community to stand
up against violence toward women and children and
declared the need for promoting women’s empowerment”
at the State Department’s International Women of Courage
Award ceremony.

Trump’s committment to the issue of sexual assault drew

predictable hatred from the left and Never Trumpers.

“I wonder if Trump would encourage this

President Donald Trump proclaimed
April as National Sexual Assault
Awareness and Prevention Month,
following in the footsteps of his
presidential predecessor President
Barack Obama.
“We recommit ourselves this month to
establishing a culture of respect and
appreciation for the dignity of every human
being,” Trump said in a statement.
The proclamation noted that on average there are 300,000
instances of rape or other sexual assault crimes committed
every year, and vowed that his administration would fight
to protect people from sexual violence. He also committed
to fighting child pornography. The statement also called
for young people to hold their peers accountable and adults
to teach men and boys to prevent violence.
same support of the 16 women who have
publicly accused him of sexual assault,”
wrote Huffington Post editor Emma
Gray on Twitter. Gray wrote an article at
the Huffington Post headlined “Accused
Sexual Predator Proclaims April
National Sexual Assault Awareness
Month” as she complained that Trump’s
statement “removes almost all references
to rape culture.”
“When I read Trump declared April,
‘National Sexual Assault Awareness
Month’, I thought it was an April Fools
joke,” CNN commentator Ana Navarro
snarked on Twitter.
“Trump declared April National Sexual
Assault Awareness month. In related
news, Putin named April National Don’t-
Stand-By-Open-Windows month,” wrote
actor George Takei on Twitter.

“Irony just stabbed itself in the heart with a

“Our families, schools, and communities
pair of dull scissors,” tweeted Kashana
must encourage respect for women and
Cauley, a writer for The Daily Show.
children, who are the vast majority of
victims, and promote healthy personal
“Grab Em By The Pussy Month will be in
relationships,” the statement read.
May,” wrote MSNBC anchor Christopher
Hayes.

420
 Trump Declared War On GOP
Establishment But Now Sides With
Them In Party Civil War
Peter Hasson -
Associate Editor
9:27 PM 04/01/2017

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and other establishment

Republicans led the (unsuccessful) charge to try and get
the the bill — which performed disastrously in public
opinion polls — passed through Congress.

Anti-establishment Republicans in the House Freedom

Caucus as well as in the Senate fought the proposed
Donald Trump with then-RNC chairman Reince Preibus (Getty legislation, which Trump later instructed Ryan to pull from
Images)
the floor, so as to avoid a potentially humiliating loss.
As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump consistently
Since the bill’s failure, Trump has directed his anger
railed against establishment Republicans, referring to them
towards the House Freedom Caucus, even suggesting he
as “Dishonest people” and “the failing REPUBLICAN
may support primary opponents against members of the
ESTABLISHMENT.”
caucus.
Trump poked the establishment a month before the
“Democrats are smiling in D.C. that the
election, writing on Twitter,
Freedom Caucus, with the help of Club For
Growth and Heritage, have saved Planned
“The media and establishment want me out Parenthood & [Obamacare]!” Trump
of the race so badly – I WILL NEVER tweeted.
DROP OUT OF THE RACE, WILL NEVER
LET MY SUPPORTERS DOWN!” “The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire
Republican agenda if they don’t get on the
team, & fast,” he wrote in another tweet.
It looked like Trump would continue his anti-establishment
“We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!”
politics as president.
“Freedom Caucus stood with [you] when
“The establishment protected itself, but not others ran,” Idaho Rep. Raul Labrador, a
the citizens of our country,” he declared in member of the Freedom Caucus, replied.
his inaugural address. “Remember who your real friends are.
We’re trying to help [you] succeed.”
“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.”

But now, Trump is singing a different tune.

It’s not the establishment that has earned Trump’s ire, but
rather the anti-establishment members of the House (Screenshot/Twitter)
Freedom Caucus.
White House social media director and Trump advisor Dan
The caucus, comprised of roughly 30 of the most Scavino called on Trump supporters to primary Michigan
conservative Republicans, played a key role in blocking Republican Justin Amash, a prominent House Freedom
Republicans’ Obamacare replacement bill.

421
Caucus member. (RELATED: Trump Aide Calls For
Primary Challenge To Freedom Caucus Member)
Dan Scavino declares support for Justin Amash’s future primary
opponent (Screenshot/Twitter)
Amash fired back soon after, saying the Trump
administration and GOP establishment have merged into
the “Trumpstablishment” with the “Same old agenda:
Attack conservatives, libertarians & independent thinkers.”
As Trump sides with the Republican establishment over
the House Freedom Caucus, members of the conservative
.
422
media who helped propel Trump to victory are choosing
the House Freedom Caucus over the president.
“I think it is really, really unhelpful to Donald
Trump’s ultimate agenda to slam the very
people who are going to be propping up his
border wall, all the things he wants to do on
immigration, on trade,” said conservative
radio host Laura Ingraham.
“Now I don’t know who’s telling the White
House to focus their anger on the Freedom
Caucus, but I do think it’s misplaced,” Fox
News host Sean Hannity said.
Both Hannity and Ingraham were among Trump’s biggest
backers in conservative media during his presidential run.
They both have also cultivated a fiercely anti-
establishment brand.
Now, they’re signaling their displeasure that Trump is
siding with the establishment that he and talk radio hosts
— Hannity and Ingraham included — once counted as a
common enemy.
 The Dominoes Are Beginning To Fall - Another 'Swamp
Monster' Drained As Former State Department
Employee Is Arrested
By Susan Duclos - All News Pipeline
April 1, 2017
While the mainstream media is still busy lamenting over
"Russia!" and breathlessly waiting for the next dreaded
"Trump tweet," what they haven't spent much time on is a
recent arrest and charging of a former State Department
employee, Candace Marie Claiborne, who possessed Top
Secret security clearance and provided diplomatic and
economic information to Chinese foreign intelligence
agents in exchange for gifts and bribes. She then
proceeded to "obstruct" the investigation into said illegal
actions, and was arrested and charged for that obstruction
on March 28, 2017.
Via the Department of Justice official press release, dated
March 29, 2017:
According to the affidavit in support of the
complaint and arrest warrant, which was
unsealed today, Claiborne began working
as an Office Management Specialist for the
Department of State in 1999. She has
served overseas at a number of posts,
including embassies and consulates in
Baghdad, Iraq, Khartoum, Sudan, and
Beijing and Shanghai, China. As a
condition of her employment, Claiborne
maintains a Top Secret security clearance.
Claiborne also is required to report any
contacts with persons suspected of
affiliation with a foreign intelligence agency.
Despite such a requirement, the affidavit
alleges, Claiborne failed to report repeated
contacts with two intelligence agents of the
People’s Republic of China (PRC), even
though these agents provided tens of
423
thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits to
Claiborne and her family over five years.
According to the affidavit, the gifts and
benefits included cash wired to Claiborne’s
USAA account, an Apple iPhone and
laptop computer, Chinese New Year’s gifts,
meals, international travel and vacations,
tuition at a Chinese fashion school, a fully
furnished apartment, and a monthly
stipend. Some of these gifts and benefits
were provided directly to Claiborne, the
affidavit alleges, while others were
provided through a co-conspirator.
According to the affidavit, Claiborne noted
in her journal that she could “Generate 20k
in 1 year” working with one of the PRC
agents, who, shortly after wiring $2,480 to
Claiborne, tasked her with providing
internal U.S. Government analyses on a
U.S.-Sino Strategic Economic Dialogue
that had just concluded.
Claiborne, who allegedly confided to a co-
conspirator that the PRC agents were
“spies,” willfully misled State Department
background investigators and FBI
investigators about her contacts with those
agents, the affidavit states. After the State
Department and FBI investigators
contacted her, Claiborne also instructed
her co-conspirators to delete evidence
connecting her to the PRC agents, the
affidavit alleges.
The entire 59 page complaint can be found at SCRBD and
is embedded at the bottom of this article.
DRAINING THE SWAMP
I have seen much hand-wringing across the Internet by
Trump supporters as he chose cabinet members and
advisors, with much discussion on who he chose for this
position or that position, claiming his pledge to "drain the
swamp" was being broken by bringing in members of the
community that were "wealthy" or "lobbyists" or "big
business" or what-ever some might consider as part of the
swamp, but as a non-political figure, many us believed that
Trump's references to the "swamp" during his campaign
mean "corrupt" individuals inside Washington and this
falls directly in line with what we have noted previously.
So far, that has included the early March demand for
resignations of 46 Obama era hold over U.S. attorneys,
following the second round of of purges at the State
Department in Mid-February when States Secretary of
State Rex Tillerson deconstructed the 7th Floor 'Shadow
Government," as well as the removal of the acting
Attorney General Sally Yates before Jeff Sessions was
confirmed by the Senate, the same day Trump replaced
Daniel Ragsdale in his role as acting director of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
One by one, those "swamp monsters" are being drained.
WHY AREN'T THE MSM ALL OVER THIS?
So why the limited reporting on this in some news
organizations before they rush off to file their next report
on something "Russia" related, rather than delving into
exactly what type of information Claiborne had shared
with the Chinese? How much damage it did or did not do?
Who her unnamed co-conspirator was?
The answers are easy.
Number 1: The dates of the crimes started
in 2011, while Hillary Clinton was Secretary
of State.
Remember the Clinton's have a long history of scandal
associated with the Clinton presidency, including Bill
Clinton handing China our missile technology and the
1996 campaign finance contribution controversy.
Key Quote:
"With all this talk of Russians allegedly
interfering in U.S. elections, it is worth
recalling that it wasn’t too long ago that
the previous Democrat in the White
House betrayed America by working
hand in hand with our Communist
enemies in mainland China.
As president, Bill Clinton essentially
wiped out any strategic advantage the
U.S. had by selling advanced U.S.
missile technology to our enemy, the
People’s Republic of China."
Number 2: The dates of the obstruction,
according to the complaint, was 10/1/2014
424
- 8/24/2016, under the Obama
administration.
Number 3: It doesn't fit into the "Russia"
narrative the MSM wants to focus on.
Does anyone doubt that if this was the year 2018 or 2019
and someone in the State Department under the Trump
administration with Top Secret clearance was caught
selling information to any foreign entity, it would be
headline news for weeks or months, with every other story
from all the establishment media addressing one
manufactured angle after another?
So where are they on this?
RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA!
There are too busy twisting themselves into pretzels in an
attempt to keep the "Russia collusion" story alive while at
the same time trying to avoid the fact that more and more
information is being revealed that someone high up in the
Obama administration illegally "unmasked" the names of
American citizens, then deliberately disseminated it
throughout the intelligence community.
Via PJ Media:
NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers told the
House Intelligence Committee in an open
hearing this month that 20 people in his
agency have the authority to unmask U.S.
names in FISA collection reports. "We use
two criteria: the need to know on the
person requesting us in the execution of
their official duties, and the second part
was, is the identification necessary to truly
understand the context of the intelligence
value that the report is designed to
generate?" he said.
Housley said that the collection led to
"other surveillance which led to multiple
names being unmasked."
"This had nothing to do with Russia, I'm
told or foreign intelligence of any kind,"
Housley said. Nunes confirmed when
originally discussing the documents that
they were not connected to the Russia
investigation.

"The main concern here is not only the

unmasking of the names, but the spreading
of names for political purposes that had
nothing to do with national security and
everything to do with hurting and
embarrassing the Trump transition and his
team," Housley said.

BOTTOM LINE

Another "Swamp Monster" has been

drained, Trump is cutting Obama-era
regulations left and right, he withdrew
the U.S. from the TPP, implemented a
federal hiring freeze, exempting the
military, limited abortion funding over-
seas, revoked Obama's transgender
bathroom "guidance" for schools,
ordered the State Department to cut UN
funding by half, is trying to cut the EPA
budget by a quarter, is working towards
cutting off federal funding for sanctuary
cities, and much, much more, while the
MSM is still busy screaming "RUSSIA,
RUSSIA, RUSSIA," from the rooftops.
Is it a coincidence that after months of
the liberal media going on, ad nauseam,
about Russia and the 2016 election, it
took just one series of rapid tweets from
Trump to turn the story to Americans
being "unmasked" by intelligence
officials?

For those that still bemoan Trump's use

of Twitter, it is a good reminder that he
has played the media from day one,
using their own bias against them to
make fools of them by forcing them to
make fools of themselves.

COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST STATE

DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE BELOW.

[next page]

425
426
 Tweeting Again, Trump
Pushes Obama Surveillance Story
© Ap Photo/ Dmitri Lovetsky - Politics
23:52 01.04.2017(Updated 04:42 02.04.2017)

"I think the biggest problem here is you

US President Donald Trump used his
Saturday morning to reiterate his widely
refuted claim that former President
Barack Obama put his Trump Tower
campaign offices under surveillance
during the 2016 presidential election.
have the president not wanting to accept
the conclusion that Russia tried to interfere
in the election and that there is going to be
an investigation in this, whether he likes it
or not."
"The source of all of the current problems
for this West Wing right now, for this
presidency right now, all stems from that
tweet where the president accused
[Obama] of wiretapping him," he added,
according to Business Insider.
Trump's early-morning tweets included what appeared
to be a personal attack on the news journalist, referring
to Todd as ‘Sleepy Eyes,' while returning to a tried-and-
true gambit of claiming that any news story he doesn't
like is "Fake News.

Referring to the Friday episode of NBC's "Meet The

Press," in which host Chuck Todd interviewed former
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest about an
ongoing investigation into collusion and back dealings
between the Trump administration and various political
and financial entities in Russia, Trump asked when the
media would stop talking about Russia and start talking
Attempting to draw attention away from the ongoing
about the Obama "surveillance scandal" again.
Russia question to the more palatable topic of his own
persecution, Trump commented on a Fox News report
claiming to have revealed the "high up" official
responsible for the unmasking of private citizens and
associates of Trump who were allegedly caught up in
surveillance activities under the Obama administration.
Trump's claims that Trump Tower was "wiretapped"
by Obama have been refuted by Obama administration
officials, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and FBI
Director James Comey, among others.

Later on Friday evening, Todd appeared on NBC's

"Nightly News," observing that the president's debunked
assertions were the primary reason for a perceived lack
of legitimacy in Trump's administration.

During Friday's program Todd said:

427
 Flynn offered to testify in the ongoing investigation,
in exchange for immunity from prosecution, but was
turned down. It was noted that, prior to the November
2016 presidential election,

Flynn said, "when you are given immunity,

that means you have probably committed a
crime."

Adding fuel to the fire of Trump's difficulties is former Trump and his administration have said Flynn should be
National Security Advisor Michael Flynn who, after just interviewed in the ongoing investigations, and that they
two weeks in office, was forced to resign when it came have nothing to hide.
to light that he had lied under oath to cover
up conversations with Russian ambassador Sergey
Kislyak.

428
 Trump: If China Doesn't Take
Care Of N Korea, 'We Will'
By Wanda Carruthers
Sunday, 02 Apr 2017 04:35 PM
North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un (via Getty Images)
President Donald Trump said Sunday he was open to the
possibility of unilateral action against North Korea, should
China fail to join the U.S. in pressuring North Korean
leader Kim John Un over the nuclear threat his regime
poses.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Trump said he
would discuss the issue at his Florida resort later this week
in his first meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
"China has great influence over North
Korea. And China will either decide to help
us with North Korea, or they won't," Trump
said in the Oval Office. "If they do, that will
be very good for China, and if they don't, it
won't be good for anyone.
"Well if China is not going to solve North
Korea, we will," Trump added. "That is all I
am telling you."
Trump continued that it was "totally" possible for the U.S.
to act unilaterally, but when pressed what that could mean,
he responded,
"I don't have to say any more. Totally."
The White House viewed North Korea as "the most
imminent threat" to the U.S. following warnings from
former President Barack Obama over gains North Korea
429
had made in long-range missiles and nuclear weapons,
according to The Financial Times.
Trump has not held back in criticizing China over their
economic and trade policies, but indicated ahead of the
U.S.-China meeting that he thought he could find common
ground with the Chinese president.
"I have great respect for him. I have great
respect for China. I would not be at all
surprised if we did something that would be
very dramatic and good for both countries,
and I hope so," Trump said.
After taking office, Trump asked the National Security
Council to put together a list of options which he could
take to his meeting with the Chinese president, according
to two sources. Those include sanctions to more covert
activities.
Dennis Wilder, a former CIA China analyst and aide to
former President George W. Bush, told The Financial
Times the list could include sanctions, pressure on the
Chinese government to cut back on North Korean labor or
more "controversial" tactics,
"like taking covert action against North
Korea, for example using cyber."
Deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland, told The
Financial Times in a separate interview there was
"a real possibility that North Korea will be
able to hit the U.S. with a nuclear-armed
missile by the end of the first Trump term."
Reportedly, the White House recently
offered McFarland a position as
ambassador to Singapore.
And, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, in
a visit last month to Asia, announced that
the "policy of strategic patience has
ended."
China has voiced concerns over the threat posed by North
Korea when its Foreign Minister Wang Yi last month
called for a halt to their nuclear program. This, while also
urging the U.S. to cease military exercises in the region.
 "The two sides are like two accelerating
trains coming towards each other with
neither side willing to give way. The
question is, are the two sides really ready
for a head-on collision?" Wang said.
In a separate interview, U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations Nikki Haley said the United States is looking to
China to take action against North Korea.
"The only country that can stop North
Korea is China and they know that," Haley
told ABC's "This Week" in an interview
broadcast on Sunday. "We're going to
continue to put pressure on China to have
action."
The Mar-a-Lago meeting will be the two leaders' first face-
to-face encounter.
On Thursday, Trump predicted a "very difficult" summit
with Xi, noting the disputes over trade policy between the
world's two most powerful nations and leading economies.
Following that country's early March missile tests, which
came provocatively close to Japan, the US leader
emphasized his administration's commitment to
"deter and defend against North Korea's
ballistic missiles using the full range of
United States military capabilities."
Former US defense secretary Ash Carter, who served
under Barack Obama, said the US has
"always had all options on the table."
Also speaking on ABC, he recalled that the United States
drew up a "preemptive strike plan" in 1994 to knock out
North Korea's Yongbyon reactor, during a confrontation
over its nuclear program.
"We have those options," he said. "We
shouldn't take them off the table."
But he said a US strike on North Korea would likely
trigger a North Korean attempt to invade South Korea.

But Haley emphasized that at the Florida meeting

"the most important conversation will be
how we're going to be dealing with the
nonproliferation of North Korea."
Beijing, increasingly frustrated with Pyongyang's nuclear
and missile activities, has announced a suspension of all
coal imports from the North until the end of the year.
Haley deemed that measure -- which was in keeping with
UN sanctions against North Korea over its nuclear
program and missile program -- insufficient, saying that
coal is "going in other ways."
"At some point, we need to see definitive
actions by China condemning North Korea
and not just calling them out for it," she
said.
"This is a war that would have an intensity
of violence associated with it that we
haven't seen since the last Korean War,"
he said.
"Seoul is right there on the borders of the
DMZ, so even though the outcome is
certain, it is a very destructive war. And so
one needs to proceed very carefully here."
He said Washington should continue to pressure China to
lean on North Korea, but he was not optimistic that would
lead to anything.
Beijing fears a potential North Korean collapse, which
would result in
"a unified Korea allied with the United
States on their border," Carter said.

Since taking office, Trump has left open the possibility of AFP contributed to this report.
military action against North Korea.

430
 US Ambassador To UN:
‘Trump Never Stopped Me From Beating Up On Russia’
© REUTERS/ Stephanie Keith - US
03:49 02.04.2017
Despite all the accusations of cozy –
perhaps too cozy – relations between
US President Donald Trump and
Russian President Vladimir Putin, and
Russia in general, the US ambassador
to the United Nations says the president
has never told her what to say about it.
US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said
in a recent interview that the US president has never
stopped her from "beating up on Russia."
"The president has not once called me and
said, 'Don't beat up on Russia;' has not
once called me and told me what to say,"
Haley said in an interview on ABC's "This
Week" March 31.
During the interview with ABC host Martha Raddatz, who
tried to make Haley pass judgment on whether the US
president should take a tougher stance on Russia and
"condemn what's happening inside Russia" in order
to preserve the US's role of the "moral conscience of the
world," the ambassador replied by saying it's her job
to express that stance to the world body.
.
431
Trump
"has got a lot of things he's doing, but he is
not stopping me from beating up on
Russia," she added.
Trump has been repeatedly accused of having ties
with Russia, with his former National Security Advisor
Michael Flynn forced to resign over lying to the
administration and Congress about his contacts
with Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak.
The Trump-Russian ties story has even gotten on Trump's
own nerves. He's asked US media to "stop with the Fake
Trump/Russia story" and focus more on former President
Barack Obama's alleged spying on his campaign.
Haley has been a consistent critic of Russia, blaming
Russia for the situation in Ukraine and claiming that US
sanctions on the country won't be lifted unless Russia
"returns" the Crimean Peninsula to its western neighbor.
Her stance appears sometimes at odds with Trump's
intentions to ease relations with Russia, which he
expressed during his presidential campaign.
During her first speech in the United Nations in February,
Haley said it was "unfortunate" that she had to start her
service as US ambassador by criticizing Russia, as so
many of her predecessors had to "far too many times"
before.
"It should not have to be that way," she
said, before going on to give a lengthy
speech about Russia's alleged
wrongdoings in Ukraine. "We do want
to better our relations with Russia."
 'Heil President Trump':
New York Post App Is Hacked On April Fool's Day
And Sends Push Notifications Comparing Donald To A Nazi
 The New York Post App Was Hacked On Saturday Night Around 10.45pm
 App Sent Out Message Saying 'Heil President Donald Trump,' 8 More Messages
 One Included A Quotation From The Nirvana Song 'Come As You Are'
 The Post Apologized For The Incident And Admitted Its System Was Compromised
By Associated Press And Dailymail.Com Reporter
Published: 01:52 EDT, 2 April 2017 | Updated: 08:29 EDT, 2 April 2017

The New York Post app was hacked on April Fools' Day
and sent out push alert notifications that included 'Heil
President Donald Trump.'

The newspaper's app sent out the alerts starting around

10.45pm on April 1 before at least eight more were sent
out, the New York Daily News reported.

The messages, which appeared to be directed at Trump,

gave admonishments such as: 'Open your heart to those
you do not understand and listen to all those you fear and
look down upon.'

'Hear me now, for I speak as an angel in the words of God,'

the messages said. 'In casting truth into the darkness of
your shadow, you have gravely sinned...'

The first message was

'Heil President Donald Trump!'
Eight messages followed, seeing to address the US
President
The next one read:
'And yet, for your generosity of spirit and
sharpness of mind, salvation remains
within reach.'
Another message quoted the Nirvana song 'Come As You
Are':
'"Take your time, hurry up, the choice is
yours, but don't be late"...For the fate of
your soul is soon to be decided.'
The New York Post's push notification system was hacked The hack concluded:
on April Fool's night and readers were sent a bizarre series
of messages that appeared to reference US President 'With Lucid Love, Sarah.'
Donald Trump

432
 The New York Post apologized for the hack Saturday night.

In a follow-up alert, the paper said:

'Our push alert notification system was

compromised this evening. We are working
to resolve the issue. Please accept our
apologies.'

Rupert Murdoch, who owns the Post in addition to Fox

News and other media outlets, is believed to have a close
relationship with Trump despite initial hesitation, reports
CNN.

Rupert Murdoch, who owns the New York Post, has allegedly
developed a close relationship with Trump

In July 2015, following an insult Trump hurled at John

McCain during the GOP primary, Murdoch tweeted:
'When is Donald Trump going to stop embarrassing his
friends, let alone the whole country?'

But over time, particularly since Trump's victory in the

2016 election, Murdoch changed course, reports New
York Magazine.

On January 9, 11 days before his inauguration, Trump

tweeted: 'Rupert Murdoch is a great guy who likes me
much better as a very successful candidate than he ever did
as a very successful developer!'

One of the messages incorporated lyrics from the Nirvana

song 'Come As You Are.' The New York Post apologized
for the hack, which began around 10.45pm, shortly after
433
 Shocker: Financial Docs Reveal
A White House Packed With The Super-Rich
© AP Photo/ Patrick Semansky - Politics
02:47 02.04.2017(Updated 07:23 02.04.2017)
The combined net worth of top White
House officials now exceeds the $12
billion mark, according to mandated
financial disclosures released Friday
night.
US President Donald Trump's team, a handpicked group
of extremely wealthy advisers from the highest echelons
of America's rich, has drawn accusations from ethics
watchdogs of the likelihood of widespread profit-taking
and corporate collusion within the president's
administration.
Documenting assets, investments and salaries of some 180
officials close to the administration, the disclosures shed
light on the financial network now enmeshing the White
House.
Financial information about Trump, said to be a $500,000 during his tenure, also bringing in a minimum of
billionaire, is not included in the disclosures.
Those at or near the top of the list include the president's
son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, and Trump's
economic adviser, Gary Cohn, a former president
of multinational finance company Goldman Sachs.
Kushner, along with his wife, Trump's daughter Ivanka,
are the beneficiaries of Kushner's family real-estate
business, said to be worth as much as $740 million,
according to The Hill. Prior to joining the Trump
administration, Kushner had holdings in some 58
businesses, of which he is said to have now divested
himself. Prior to January, Kushner held about $90 million
of credit, as well.
Ivanka has kept her financial interest in the Trump
International Hotel in Washington DC, to the tune
of somewhere between $5 and $25 million. Her position
as an adviser to the president, her father, will be unpaid,
according to reports.
434
Cohn is shown as having some $254 million in assets,
earning a minimum of $48.3 million over 2016 and early
2017.
Alongside Kushner and Cohn in the White House inner
circle is Steve Bannon, Trump's chief strategist and the
former head of right-wing website Breitbart News. Bannon
has revealed assets of up to $56 million, and an annual
yearly salary at Breitbart of just under $200,000.
Trump's former campaign manager Kellyanne Conway,
who now serves as the president's White House counselor,
is said to be worth some $40 million, primarily as a result
of profits realized by her political counsultancy, as well
as large stock holdings in Pfizer, Kraft Heinz and Philip
Morris, among other publicly-held multinationals.
Former Republican party head Reince Pribus earned over
$750,000 last year in other financial dealings and a law
firm salary.
According to Deutsche Welle, Democratic lawmakers and
ethics groups have voiced concern that Trump's cabinet
picks include those with more potential conflicts of interest
due to their investments than during any previous
administration.
The financial disclosures, reviewed by the Office
of Government Ethics, are required by law, and are
considered to be a snapshot, not necessarily revealing
current worth or specific investments. If conflicts
of interest are identified, the agency can require cabinet
members to sign agreements to ensure that they will divest
themselves of holdings, or resign from corporate positions
of power.
Unlike recent presidential candidates, Trump, a deep-
pockets real-estate speculator, has consistently refused
to reveal his tax returns and instead of transferring his
business interests to a blind trust, as is common, handed
off the reins to two of his sons, a move many have
criticized.
 Another Democrat Rats On Obama:
We’ve Been Spying On Trump Since 2015
Sean Adl-Tabatabai
April 2, 2017

about the issue until very late in the

election.

Now the democrats are offering new information that

Trump has been under investigation for suspect Russian
ties since SPRING of 2015! That’s amazingly odd
considering that Trump announced his candidacy in June
of 2015.

Another top Democrat has joined a long

list of Obama insiders who have outed
their former boss for illegally spying on
Donald Trump.

Mary Anna Marsh, principal of the Dewey Square Group,

a Democrat PR firm, revealed to Fox News that the Obama
administration had been snooping on Trump as early as the
spring of 2015.

This was the same time that Trump announced his

candidacy for president:

Mary Ann Marsh:

Fact, the investigation of Trump, his
associates and their relationship with
Russia started in the spring of 2015. That is
a fact. That is widely known.
She joins the likes Evelyn Farkas, another Obama admin
insider, who admitted to MSNBC that she helped Barack
Obama spy on Trump before he left office.
Alt-rewrite.com reports:
The democrats are throwing everything against the wall
and hoping that it sticks. This Russian collusion conspiracy
gets more confusing and convoluted everyday.
There is NO evidence.
Of Marsh’s statements are true then it actually calls into
question the testimony of James Comey to the House Intel
Committee. Was he lying? Did he have no knowledge of a
prior investigation? Why?

America was shocked to hear that the FBI

was investigating the Trump campaign
since July of 2016. Particularly because
Obama and his administration didn’t speak
.

435
 Gratuitous Trump Bashing
Ignores Hillary’s Crimes
By Stephen Lendman
4-2-2017
Valid criticism is warranted. Media scoundrels focus on
unjustifiable Trump and Russia bashing.
Facts don’t interfere with their agenda. What’s most
important to explain is suppressed. Presstitution substitutes
for responsible journalism.
Today’s NYT and Washington Post editions resemble all
other days, featuring deplorable rubbish, not real news and
information. Some examples accessed on their Sunday
pages:
The NYT:
“Trump Couple, Now Officials, Can’t
Escape Conflict Laws” - referring Ivanka
Trump and her husband Jared Kushner.
“Flynn Failed to Disclose Income Linked
to Russia” - nor did Bill and Hillary
Clinton, John Podesta, and likely other
Democrats, information The Times
suppresses.
“Pick Your Favorite Ethics Offender” -
claiming the White House is up for sale,
used for “personal gain.”
Trump and his family aside, already super-rich, isn’t that
what politics is all about, Republicans, Democrats and
their cronies enriching and empowering themselves at the
public’s expense?
“Manhood in the Age of Trump” - claiming
he “feels the most
manly…when…salivating over women and
styling himself as some conquistador of the
flesh…”
Disgusting stuff not fit to print or read, typical NYT
rubbish.
“Trump Is A Chinese Agent” - hack
columnist Thomas Friedman’s days earlier
article, calling the president more Beijing
“agent” than “Russian stooge,” ludicrously
claiming his trade policy aims “to make
China great again.”
436
Lots more trash infests Times’ pages daily, deplorable stuff
unfit to print or read.
CIA-connected WaPo matches its rubbish. Some examples
from today and days earlier:
“Trump’s failing presidency has the GOP in
a free fall.” Succeeding or failing can’t be
judged from 10 weeks in office.
“Donald Trump’s joyless presidency” -
largely bashing him for correctly calling
media scoundrels “dishonest.”
“Trump’s Washington Means Civil War -
For Both Parties” –
claiming today’s political climate is unlike any in recent
memory fails to explain how Trump is bashed the way
Nixon was wrongfully treated late in his presidency.
In Sunday’s edition and days earlier, numerous NYT and
WaPo Trump bashing articles were featured over real
news, information and analysis - considered heresy to
publish.
During the presidential campaign, Hillary’s high crimes
were suppressed. Instead, media scoundrels provided press
agent services for a war criminal, racketeer, perjurer -
Trump relentless bashed, a disgusting display of
partisanship, journalism the way it should be out-the-
window.
A previous article discussed Judicial Watch’s investigation
into the Clinton Foundation’s controversial 2010 uranium
deal with Russia.
Hillary used her secretary of state position for profit-
making. Media scoundrels ignored what demanded feature
articles.
On March 29, Judicial Watch
“released 1,184 pages of State Department
records, including previously unreleased
Hillary Clinton email exchanges, revealing
additional instances of (Huma) Abedin and
Hillary Clinton sending classified
information through unsecured email
accounts and contributors being given
 special access to the former secretary of
state.”
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton commented, saying
“(t)hese emails are yet more evidence of
Hillary Clinton’s casual and repeated
violations of laws relating to the handling of
classified information.”
Is it likely? No. Will Bill and Hillary Clinton be held
accountable for numerous criminal activities? Not ahead if
not so far - nor Obama for eight years of high crimes as
president.
Instead, expect continued efforts to delegitimize and
undermine Trump for the wrong reasons. America’s
deplorable state keeps getting worse.

“The Justice Department should finally

begin an independent investigation into the
Clinton email matter.”
.

437
 The Week That Perished
By Takimag
April 02, 2017
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons - Maxine Waters
CONGRESSWOMAN’S HAIR COMPARED TO
JAMES BROWN’S, WORLD RECOILS IN
RIGHTEOUS HORROR
Since 1991, Democratic
Congresswoman Maxine Waters has represented much of
southern Los Angeles, a wonderfully vibrant community
which has gifted the world with endless gang war, two
major riots, and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame members
Niggaz Wit Attitudes.
Waters referred to the 1992 LA Riots—in which 54 people
died because serial loser Rodney King refused to obey
police orders to lie on the ground and instead kept getting
up to attack them—as an “understandable…rebellion.”
She also said that she was forced to march
for abortion rights “because my mother
could not have an abortion.”
More recently Waters has been the loudest of the
congressional blabbermouths calling for Donald Trump’s
impeachment. She referred to his cabinet members as
“scumbags” and depicts Trump as a puppet of Vladimir
Putin, who as everyone knows recently invaded Korea.
Waters may not be the dumbest member of Congress—
after all, she has to compete with such titans of anti-
intellectualism as Hank Johnson and Sheila Jackson-Lee—
but she is aggressively and impenitently stupid
nonetheless.
.
438
In a recent oratory on the floor of Congress, Waters said
that race pimps such as her were the true patriots and that
Trump—rather than her constituents who loot and rob and
riot and take more money from the federal treasury than
they contribute in taxes—was going to destroy the country.
While watching a clip of her sub-literate ululations, Fox
News host Bill O’Reilly said he didn’t listen to a word of
her speech because he was too fixated on her “James
Brown wig.” Despite the fact that whatever wig the 78-
year-old career politician is wearing is nearly
indistinguishable from the late soul singer’s hair, the
progressive shock troops erupted in horrified rage at such
an insensitive, misogynistic, and deeply racist statement.
On MSNBC, Waters told white lesbian Chris Hayes that
“I’m a strong black woman and I cannot be
intimidated”
and that we all needed to look away from racist bigots who
make comments about strong black women’s hair and
instead focus on “the real issues of this country,” chief of
which is apparently the mass delusion that Russia stole the
election.
The esteemed and impartial Black Voice News stood in
solidarity with Waters, claiming she is helping to
“bring an end to a national edifice that
supports the dual poisons of misogyny,
racism and sexism.”
Technically, that would be three “poisons”
rather than two, but to note this would be to
lend tacit support to this horrifying “national
edifice,” so we will refrain from pointing out
that Waters’s supporters seem every bit as
dumb as she is.
 SHOCK: Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley Sends Second
Letter To FBI Director Comey Asking Why FBI Was
Involved With Paying Research Firm For
Trump/Russia Dossier.
By Pamela Williams
Published April 2, 2017 · Updated April 3, 2017
Wow, did I honestly just read this? Senator Charles
Grassley has sent his second letter to FBI Director James
Comey to inquire about how the FBI became involved in
colluding with Christopher Steele, a former agent for the
U.K.’s foreign intelligence service, MI6, concerning the
lurid dossier on President Donald Trump and Russia.
I am sitting here reading this in disbelief, as this whole
thing just keeps getting bigger and bigger like Director
Comey’s nose. This is Senator Grassley’s second letter!
Does Comey really believe he can hide behind closed
doors at this point? Director Comey needs to wake up and
confess his dirty deeds.
So now we discover the FBI was actually involved in that
crazy dossier and the golden waters story! I still am not
clear on where this actually originated. There was an
actual rumor it originated on the Internet site 4chan as a
prank. Remember that? But then it turned into the
Christopher Steele spy story, and finally there was actually
a man associated with Steele who was found deceased in
his car.
Steele had been commissioned by an opposition research
firm at the request of Republican opponents of Trump to
dig into allegations that the Russian government had a
substantial amount of compromising information on
Trump during his effort to win the GOP presidential
nomination. After Trump became the party nominee, a
backer of Hillary Clinton continued to pay for the
information. This is unbelievable!
In October just a few weeks before the election, the FBI
agreed to fund Steele’s investigations even as it remained
unsure about the legitimacy. No payments were ever
exchanged, but the damage was done after the dossier
became public knowledge. Who would ever imagine the
FBI would be mixed up in such a thing?
“The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton
campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the
Republican nominee for president in the run-up to the
election raises further questions about the FBI’s
439
independence from politics,” Grassley wrote in a March 6
letter to Comey. However, that letter went unanswered.
How can FBI Director James Comey continue to disregard
the law when he is the Director of what used to be the most
respected agency not only in the United States but the
world? What has he done to the FBI? It can never recover
from this type of damage. While the FBI was created to
uphold the law, it became involved with Hillary Clinton,
and helped to destroy it…just as she does everything she
touches, with the germs of dirty money.
In Grassley’s second letter dated March 28, he says, “The
idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign
would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican
nominee for president in the run-up to the election raises
further questions about the FBI’s independence from
politics, as well as the Obama Administration’s use of law
enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends.”
Why doesn’t someone just charge Clinton and Obama
once and for all?
Further Grassley demands that “all FBI policies,
procedures, and guidelines applicable when the FBI seeks
to fund an investigator associated with a political
opposition research firm connected to a political candidate,
or with any outside entity.”
A very important aspect in Grassley’s communications to
the FBI is his focus on Andrew McCabe. McCabe was a
friend of Hillary’s. He is currently under investigation by
the FBI’s Inspector General for playing a role in Clinton’s
email investigation. Here we go again with Hillary
Clinton’s poisonous touch.
McCabe’s wife accepted nearly $700,000 in political
donations arranged by a close friend, Virginia Governor
Terry McAuliffe, for her run for state senator. Remember
that? I do!
Grassley goes on to write:
 “While Mr McCabe recused himself from
public corruption cases in Virginia…he
failed to recuse himself from the Clinton
email investigation, despite the appearance
of a conflict created by his wife’s campaign
accepting $700,000 from a close Clinton
associate during the investigation.”
A key passage from Grassley’s letter is as follows:
Mr. McCabe’s appearance of a partisan
conflict of interest relating to Clinton
associates only magnifies the importance
of those questions. That is particularly true
if Mr. McCabe was involved in approving or
establishing the FBI’s reported
arrangement with Mr. Steele, or if Mr.
McCabe vouched for or otherwise relied on
the politically-funded dossier in the course
of the investigation. Simply put, the
American people should know if the FBI’s
second-in-command relied on Democrat-
funded opposition research to justify an
investigation of the Republican presidential
campaign.
2. Has McCabe been involved in surveillance or
intercepts of any sort in the case?
3. Has McCabe “made any representations to prosecutors
or judges” regarding the Steele dossier?
4. Has McCabe had any interactions with Steele himself?
5. Did McCabe brief anyone in the Obama administration
on the Trump-Russia investigation?
6. Was McCabe ever authorized by the FBI to speak to
the media about the case?
7. Did he ever do so without authorization?
8. Has anyone in the FBI raised questions about
McCabe’s possible Clinton-Trump conflict of interest?
9. Has any complaint been filed about it?
10. Has anyone at the FBI recommended or requested that
McCabe recuse himself from the Russia-Trump
investigation?
I truly appreciate Senator Charles Grassley and his
commitment to the inquiry into the FBI’s role in this whole
horrid affair. America waits speechless and in shock for
answers.

The following questions are being asked by Grassley of the

FBI:

1. Has McCabe been involved “in any capacity” in

investigating alleged collusion between TrumpWorld
and Russia?

440
 Report: High-Level Obama Operative Unmasked Trump
Associates During Surveillance, Spread Their
Identities For Political Purposes
Official Is "Very High Up" In Intelligence Community
By Alex Thomas -
04.02.2017 @10:19 PM EDT

which has a Sensitive Compartmented

Information Facility (SCIF) required to view
classified or top secret reports. The White
House did not tell Nunes about the
existence of the intelligence reports, but did
help him gain access to the documents at
his request,” Fox News continued.

This is an extremely important part of the story, especially

John Althouse Cohen/Flickr
(INTELLIHUB) — The Obama intelligence official who
exposed the names of multiple Americans affiliated with
the Trump team is a high-level operative that is well know
throughout the world, according to a report by Fox News.
The report quotes a Congressional source close to the
investigation while also revealing that House Intelligence
Committee Chairman Devin Nunes now knows the identity
of the intelligence official and that the person is not a part
of the FBI. It also notes that the “unmasking” of a private
citizen is extremely rare.
“The main issue in this case, is not only the
unmasking of these names of private
citizens, but the spreading of these names
for political purposes that have nothing to
do with national security or an investigation
into Russia’s interference in the U.S.
election,” the source told Fox News.
The shocking report goes on to detail the fact that Nunes
has known about the surveillance and unmasking since
January but was stonewalled by the intelligence
community as he attempted to look into the issue.
“He eventually was able to view them, but
there was only one safe place to see the
documents without compromising the
sources’ identities — the old executive
office building on White House grounds,
when you consider that Nunes has been attacked for
meeting his sources on the White House grounds when we
now know that there was a cover-up taking place and that
Nunes only chance to see the evidence was there.
The report from Fox News comes on the heels of a
stunning admission by former Deputy Assistant Secretary
of Defense Evelyn Farkas who revealed on MSNBC that
she and her team had conducted an extensive operation to
gather information about Trump team contacts with
Russia.
“Evelyn Farkas has stated freely on TV
that she and a group of associates from
the Obama Administration went to
congressional staffers who did not have
access to these COMINT products and
urged them to seek to gain access to
them.”
As Intellihub News reported, “Barack Obama’s former
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas has
admitted that the Obama administration spied on the
Trump team and then rushed to spread the intelligence to
colleagues on the Hill while simultaneously covering up
where it came from.”
“The stunning admission, revealed during
an appearance on MSNBC, appears to
confirm that the Obama administration did
indeed conduct surveillance on Trump, a
fact many already believe after reports in
the New York Times that cited the
wiretapping.”

441
In the coming days we may actually find out who this bottom dollar that his name ends with Brennan or Clapper.
“high-level” Obama operative is and you can bet your
.

442
 Democrats Launch Delusional ‘Moscow Project’
To ‘Uncover The Truth’ About Trump And Russia
Danielle Ryan
Published Time: 2 Apr, 2017 15:17

If they think your “evidence” seems reliable, they’ll

publish it. It’s that easy.

If, however, you’re among the few liberals left in America

unconvinced that you possess evidence of Trump’s status
as a long-time Russian agent, you can simply choose to
make a financial contribution to the project instead.

After all, “the American people need

answers” and “without your donations” we’ll
never get to the bottom of this never-
ending saga of treachery and treason.
Have you been suffering sleepless nights over Donald
Trump’s alleged ties to Russia? Have you been fearing for
the future of American democracy? Have you been
wishing there was something you could do to help get to
the bottom of all this?

Well, worry no more. One Washington-based liberal think

tank has heeded your pleas for action.

The Center For American Progress (CFAP) Action Fund

has launched ‘The Moscow Project’ to help “uncover the
truth” about Trump’s ties to the Kremlin. In particular,
they want you (yes, you) to help verify claims made in the
infamous Trump/Russia dossier published by BuzzFeed in
January.

“By scouring the internet to investigate

allegations, donating to fund our research,
or sharing our findings on Twitter and
Facebook, you can help uncover the truth
about Trump and Russia,” the website’s
landing page explains.
For the confused among you, the think tank has helpfully
That’s right. The Democrats, through their CFAP action
added a timeline of events and incidents that reveal “a
fund, are essentially trying to crowd-source an
troubling pattern of alignment” between the American
investigation into Trump’s alleged collusion with the
president and Russian officials. Like, for example, the
Russian government by encouraging random people to
scandalous fact that you can buy Trump vodka in Moscow
“annotate” an already widelydiscredited document full of
— and the wholly unexpected and deeply troubling
wild and unverifiable claims.
revelation that when Trump visited Russia in 2013, he was
found to be in contact with actual Russian people. He even
So, what’s a concerned citizen to do? Simply
tried on a traditional Russian ushanka hat.
“create an account, highlight a portion of
Another helpful aspect of the site is the “players” section,
the dossier’s text, and add a comment that
where readers can peruse the biographies of all the people
includes corroborating evidence” — and
mixed up in the scandal, sorted according to importance
bingo.
and marked with little American or Russian flags to
443
indicate their nationality. The use of the Cyrillic letter “Щ”
to replace the “W” in Moscow is also a nice touch. A
subtle reminder to patriotic Americans that the Russkies
remain enemy number one.
The only thing missing is some light balalaika music
playing automatically in the background — and maybe a
flashing red hammer and sickle. Then again, the latter was
utilized fairly well already by the Progress For USA (PAC)
when they launched their pre-election “Putin-Trump
project” as the go-to source for information on the
“unprecedented ties” between Trump and the Kremlin.
I was going to say you really couldn’t make this stuff up,
but apparently you can; Russia-related conspiracies and
.
444
subsequent amateur “investigations” into them have
become quite the little cottage industry.
The Moscow Project is headed by Max Bergmann, who,
rather ironically, was a former speechwriter for John Kerry
at a time when Kerry was mocking Republicans for
promoting the “preposterous notion” that Russia was the
US’ main geopolitical foe. Ah, how quickly things change.
Mitt Romney, Kerry said at the time, talks
“like he’s only seen Russia by watching
Rocky IV.”
Fast forward a couple of years and the entire Democratic
Party is talking like their only point of reference on Russia
is Red Dawn.
 OOPS! The Sickening Truth Slips Out On CNN –
Now We Know Why They Continue To Push
'The Russian Boogeyman' Theme!
Would They Push It To 'Nuclear Annihilation'?
By Stefan Stanford - All News Pipeline - Live Free Or Die
April 2, 2017

Podesta. As we hear in the 2nd video below from Breitbart

editor Peter Schweizer, Podesta became very, very rich
due to Russia, and that's documented, verified news.

We also have absolute proof that money flowed into the

In psychology, projection is a theory in
which humans defend themselves
against their own (sometimes
unconscious) impulses or qualities by
denying their existence in themselves
while attributing them to others. For
example, a person who is habitually
rude may constantly accuse other
people of being rude. It incorporates
blame shifting.
In the recent tweet seen screenshot below from President
Donald Trump, he urges Americans to watch a Fox News
story on John Podesta's ties with Russia. Reminding
Americans and the world "it was Russia" stone-throwers
on the left may have been living in Russia-funded glass-
houses, we see now playing out in politics a classic case of
psychological projection.
'Actors on the world stage' attempting to deny or downplay
their own ties to Russia, casting those qualities of
themselves upon President Trump, we also get ear-opening
truth from CNN in the first video below that projection is
now voraciously at play within the mainstream media and
the 'deep state'.
In this new story over at Breitbart they report that while
the MSM is busy chasing Trump-Putin 'conspiracy
theories', they've completely neglected links between
Russia and key players on the Democrats, specifically
445
Clinton Foundation due to a Russian uranium deal, this
story coming straight to us from the NY Times. How far
do the ties stretch between the Clinton's and their
associates and Russia? As we reported back on August
27th of 2016, Russia's Yamantau Mountain doomsday
bunkers were largely funded with a one billion dollar aid
package given to Russia by Bill Clinton, allegedly to help
them take down their nuclear weapons. More on that
below but first, from the Breitbart story detailing Podesta's
Russia links.
“In 2011, he joins the executive board of
this small energy company in
Massachusetts called Joule Energy,”
(Breitbart editor Peter) Schweizer
recalled. “And Joule Energy, about two
months after he joins the executive
board, gets a large infusion of cash.
They get one billion rubles, which is
about $35 to $45 million, invested from
Russia. It comes from a very unusual
entity, this entity called RUSNANO.”
“RUSNANO is this government-funded
investment fund, called ‘Putin’s Child’
by the Russian Science Ministry, so it
shows you how connected this fund is,”
he explained. “They actually buy an
equity stake in this John Podesta-linked
company, which they can do. You can
raise the question of why they’re doing
 it while he’s advising Hillary Clinton, but Anderson Cooper that the CIA has been meddling
they can legally do that.” elections across the world for a very, very, very long time.

“The problem for Podesta becomes With the entire establishment and MSM still trying to
when he joins the Obama White House blame Russia for President Trump being in office nearly 6
as counselor to the president in 2013,” months after the election, we get truth from one who
he continued. “In order to do that, he’s knows slipping out when he likely least expected it.
got to file those large, cumbersome, but
I think essential financial disclosure
forms where you list what boards are
you on, that you are connected to or
have been connected to in the last year,
what entities. You’re also required to
disclose your stock holdings.”

“In the case of Podesta, there are two

omissions. One of them is the way the
Joule was structured, it has three
corporate boards. It has one based in
Massachusetts, one based in the
Netherlands, and then it has a holding
company. John Podesta, according to
corporate records, was on all three of
those boards. He only listed two of them
on his financial disclosure. He omitted
probably the most important one, which
was the holding company,” said
Schweizer.
While CTV News recently reported Putin had emphatically
DENIED hacking US elections while using HW Bush's
infamous line: "Read my lips", the still-sleeping masses
would be wise to read the lips of CIA-asset Cooper in the
video directly below in which he states outright:

"Of course, the US meddles in the

internal affairs of other nations. The CIA
has done that for decades".

Oops!

Is Anderson Cooper peddling 'fake news' on CNN in this

In this story from The Hill that the Drudge Report linked
to on Friday they reported that according to the spokesman
of Russian President Vladimir Putin, relations between the
US and Russia are 'maybe worse' now than they were
during the Cold War. Dmitry Peskov joined George
Stephanopoulos on ABC Good Morning and blamed the
US for the disintegrating cooperation between the two
countries while citing an Obama administration decision to
expel 35 Russian diplomats from the US back in
December.
Also claiming that allegations of Russian hacking during
the US election have led to increased anti-Russian
sentiment in the US with deep-state US intelligence
officials warning the Kremlin was likely to try and meddle
in other upcoming elections across Europe, we get
bombshell proof straight from the mouth of CNN's
video or is THIS why Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, the
DNC, the Rino's in Congress, the entire establishment and
our 'deep state' have gone off the 'deep end'? Even the
Washington Post sometimes gets it right...on October 13th
of 2016 they published a story called "The Long History
Of The US Interfering With Elections Elsewhere" which
helps prove to us where this 'Russian boogeyman'
projection comes from. First, from Anderson Cooper
dropping this sickening truth (that most independent news
readers know) with more below on the tensions that are
ramping up now between the US and Russia that could still
lead to catastrophe.
According to former Vice President Dick Cheney, Russia's
'meddling with the election' could be an 'act of war'. Have
all of the acts of US/CIA interference in elections the past
decade around the world also been 'acts of war'?

446

With Hillary Clinton suddenly making a 'reappearance' as
the popularity of President Donald Trump continues to
remain at rather low levels nationwide except among his
staunch supporters, we remind you of where things were
prior to Trump's election back in November with some of
the headlines that were splashed across ANP back then
including.:
Russian General Has Alarming Warning For Americans:
'We Are Teetering On The Brink' - Russia
Warns Globalists Trying To Turn The Entire
World Into 'Uncontrolled Chaos'
'Everything's Aligned For All Hell To Break
Loose' - Vladimir Putin's Ominous Message
To The American People
'A Very Disturbing Series Of Events' - Are
The Russians Running To Their Bunkers?
Putin Checkmates Hillary Clinton And The Globalists As
Insider Warns: 'We Might All Be Dead Soon' - Russia
Unveils 'Satan 2' Country Destroying Super-Nukes
Putin Prepares For Nuclear War - Russia Building Dozens
Of Nuclear Underground Command Posts While Obama
Leaves Americans Defenseless
Russian Official Warns 'There Will Be Hiroshimas And
Nagasakis Everywhere' - As State-Owned Television Tells
Russian Citizens To Locate Nearest Bomb Shelters
Putin's Scathing Warning To Hillary And The Globalists:
'Using Terrorists For Political Gain Is Dangerous' - What
Does Putin Know That We Don't Know? Hillary And
Globalists Preparing American Public For War With
Russia
While many Americans are not happy with the way things
have gone during the first few months of the Trump
presidency, we're absolutely sure that we're much better
off than we could have been had the election turned out the
447
other way and Russian President Putin's warning to
America and the world seen below had come true.
Remember! Putin Ordered Russian Military Leaders To
'Prepare For Imminent War With America' If 'Satan'
Hillary Wins
From this Inquisitr story we used as a source for our story
on ANP, we see that despite the tensions playing out today
between the US and Russia, it could have been so much
worse for America and the world had Clinton won. In the
2nd video below we hear that the Russian Embassy played
an April Fools Day joke on the 1st, leaving a message on
their answering machine in which they offer hacking
services and 'election interference' while in the final video
below, we get more proof that foreign powers are RIGHT
NOW seeking to destabilize Russia from within.
Hillary Clinton brings the real threat of
war, not Donald Trump, according to
Vladimir Putin, as election news has
Russia gearing up for a possible attack.
Hillary’s image as a war hawk is lost on
mainstream American voters, but
Russia, Europe, and other nations saw a
not-so-warm-and-fuzzy side of Hillary
when she was Secretary of State, and
the contents of Mrs. Clinton’s
intercepted emails has not served to
soothe their fears.
Ironically, Hillary Clinton’s war hawk
ways have the Russian public scared to
death in a very specific way, and the
Kremlin is gearing up for what it
perceives as an unwanted but inevitable
war with Hillary.
Putin doesn’t say Hillary is thin-skinned
— he says she’s Satan incarnate.
Vladimir Putin does not obfuscate his
opinion of Mr. and Mrs. Clinton. They
are both Satan in his eyes. Many older
Russians blame Bill Clinton for the
collapse of the Russian economy during
the 1990s, while younger people have
 formed their opinions based on Russian
media reports.

The Observer reports Putin’s words as

he describes his view of Mrs. Clinton.
“First, there was Bush senior in power,
then Bush junior. [Bill] Clinton was [U.S.
President] two times in a row, now his
wife has ambitions. Again, the family
might stay in power. As they say in
Russia, a husband and a wife are the
same Satan.”

Hillary Clinton is Satan to the Russian

People, according to the Observer,
while they see at least a ray of hope in
Donald Trump.

Vladimir Putin has ordered the

Aerospace Defense Forces to accelerate
the deployment of two or more missile
attack early warning system satellites.
He told his military leaders to prepare
for imminent war if Hillary is elected
according to ETF.

“If it’s Hillary Clinton, it’s war.”

448
 US Ambassador To The UN Nikki Haley
Says There's 'No Question' Russia Meddled In The Election
 U.S. Ambassador To The United Nations Nikki Haley Appeared On ABC's This Week And
Talked About Russian Meddling In The 2016 Presidential Election
 Haley Said She Believed There's No Question That Russia Was Involved In The Presidential
Elections And The Kremlin's Action Will Be Addressed
 She Said Trump Hasn't Told Her Not To Criticize Russia And That She Was 'Beating Up On
Russia' Over Its Actions In Crimea
By Associated Press
Published: 09:34 EDT, 2 April 2017 | Updated: 15:59 EDT, 2 April 2017

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations says there's 'no
question' Russia was involved in the U.S. presidential
election and that the actions of the Kremlin will be
addressed after the investigations are completed.
'We don't want any country involved in our
elections, ever,' Nikki Haley said in an
interview aired Sunday on ABC's 'This
Week.'
Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied his country
meddled in the contest between Republican Donald Trump
and Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Democratic Party emails but that any Russian involvement
in the election didn't affect the outcome.
U.S. intelligence agencies report that Russia tried to help
Trump's campaign effort. The FBI as well as congressional
committees are investigating whether the Russian
government coordinated with Trump associates during the
campaign.
Trump as president persuaded Haley to leave the
governorship of South Carolina to represent the U.S. at the
United Nations.
In the interview with ABC, she said Trump hasn't told her
not to criticize Russia and that she was 'beating up on
Russia' over issues such as its actions in Crimea and its
dispute with Ukraine.

'There's no love or anything going on with

Russia right now,' she said. 'They get that
we're getting our strength back, that we're
getting our voice back and that we're
starting to lead again, and, honestly, at the
United Nations, that's the No. 1 comment I
get is that they're just so happy to see the
United States lead again.'

Haley said the U.S. is also pressuring China to take a

Nikki Haley said Sunday in an interview aired Sunday on
ABC's 'This Week' there's no question Russia was involved
in the U.S. presidential election and that the actions of the
Kremlin will be addressed after the investigations are
completed
While the Trump White House rejects any suggestion that
Trump or his staff had connections to Russia, Trump
himself has said he believes Russian operatives hacked
firmer stand regarding North Korea's nuclear program.
China provides diplomatic and economic support to its
neighbor but claims that its influence over Kim Jong Un's
government is limited.
U.N. resolutions have failed so far to deter North Korea
from conducting nuclear and missile tests. Last year the
North conducted two nuclear tests and two dozen tests of
ballistic missiles.

449
The U.S. would 'no longer take the excuses from China
that they're concerned, too,' Haley said. 'They need to show
us how concerned they are. They need to put pressure on
North Korea. The only country that can stop North Korea
is China, and they know that.'
Asked what the U.S. would do if China doesn't cooperate,
Haley said:
ballistic missile attacks from North Korea or
does China want to do something about it?'
She added:
'At some point, we need to see definitive
actions by China condemning North Korea
and not just calling them out for it.'

'China has to cooperate. This is now down

to, do we want to continue to see these
.

450
 Schiff Accuses Intel Chair Nunes Of
Conspiring With Trump To Distract From Russia Probe
By Tyler Durden
Apr 2, 2017 5:37 PM
Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, accused the White House and Devin Nunes,
his Republican counterpart and the Chair of the House
Intel Committee, of conspiring to divert attention from
Moscow’s actions. Schiff said Nunes had colluded with
Trump as part of a White House ploy, in an “attempt to
distract” the public from links between Trump and Russian
meddling.
Schiff said on CNN’s State of the Union that Nunes and
the White House had made an “effort to point the Congress
in other directions, to basically say,
‘Don’t look at me, don’t look at Russia,
there’s nothing to see here’.”
“It certainly is an attempt to distract and to
hide the origin of the materials, to hide the
White House's hand. The question is, of
course, why? And I think the answer to the
question is this effort to point the Congress
in other directions, basically say, ‘Don't look
at me, don't look at Russia, there is nothing
to see here,’” Schiff said.
Schiff also slammed Nunes for the way in which he
reviewed the source’s intelligence reports.
“It doesn't need to be done, you know, by
night through stealth at the White House.
The only reason to do that, again, is if you
want to hide where these materials are
really coming from and who is behind it,”
451
the Democratic lawmaker said, adding that both the Senate
and House intelligence committees should be able to
review the documents.
Schiff on Friday viewed the documents, telling Tapper on
Sunday some red flags were raised.
“First, the deputy assistant to the White
House informed me when I went to see
them that these are exactly the same
materials that were shown to the chairman.
Now, this is a very interesting point. How
does the White House know that these are
the same materials that were shown to the
chairman, if the White House wasn't aware
what the chairman was being shown?”
Schiff asked.
“And the second point was also made to
me. And this is -- I think was also
underscored by Sean Spicer -- and that is,
it was told to me by the deputy assistant
that these materials were produced in the
ordinary course of business,” Schiff added.
That said, Schiff largely ignored to discuss the essence of
the docs, and whether they confirmed what Nunes said,
namely that Trump had indeed been the subject of
surveillance; instead reverting back to the narrative that the
events detracted from his priority: investigating Russia’s
interference in the election.
“I think part of the reason why that was
done is this effort to deflect attention from
the Russia investigation, to raise other
issues, to effectively create a cloud through
which the public cannot see what is at
stake here. And what is at stake here is a
foreign intervention in our election, a very
serious issue about whether U.S. persons
were involved, an investigation that is being
conducted by the FBI into possible
coordination with the Trump campaign,”
Schiff said.
***
Meanwhile, Trump over the weekend continued to seize on
Nunes’s original allegation that the identities of Americans
caught up in the surveillance had been improperly
“unmasked” by US officials, for internal use during the
Obama presidency.
“If this is true, does not get much bigger,”
Trump said on Twitter. “Would be sad for
US” On Sunday he added: “The real story
turns out to be SURVEILLANCE and
LEAKING! Find the leakers.”
Schiff in turn responded by saying that “alarm bells”
should go off whenever President Trump calls something
“fake”:
452
“I would tell people, whenever they see the
president use the word 'fake,' it ought to set
off alarm bells,” Schiff told CNN's Jake
Tapper.
Schiff added that the the White House is trying to mislead
the country into believing there is no connection between
Russian officials and Trump campaign associates, which -
again - is an odd thing to say for the House Intel
Committee member who complains that he is unable to
conclude his probe due to distractions by Trump, unless of
course he has decided what the conclusion of the
"investigation" will be ahead of time.
And so, despite the FBI admitting on several occasions
that there does not appear to be any evidence of collusion
between Trump and Russia, the media circuit continues to
be wrapped tighly around this narrative which serves as the
true public distraction, and as a strawman foil to accuse
anyone who is, or voted against Hillary Clinton/the
establishment - now including supporters of Bernie
Sanders - of being "influenced" by Putin, in what has
become the biggest US witch hunt since Joe McCarthy.
 How Obama's White House
Weaponized Media Against Trump
Authored Op-Ed By Michael Doran Via The Hill
Apr 2, 2017 7:58 PM
Senator Chuck Schumer and Congressman Adam Schiff
have both castigated Devin Nunes, the chairman of the
House Intelligence Committee, for his handling of the
inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential
election.
They should think twice. The issue that
has recently seized Nunes is of vital
importance to anyone who cares about
fundamental civil liberties.
The trail that Nunes is following will
inevitably lead back to a particularly
significant leak.
On Jan. 12, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius
reported that “according to a senior U.S. government
official, (General Mike) Flynn phoned Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29.”
From Nunes’s statements,
it’s clear that he suspects that this
information came from NSA intercepts
of Kislyak’s phone. An Obama official,
probably in the White House,
“unmasked” Flynn’s name and passed it
on to Ignatius.
Regardless of how the government
collected on Flynn, the leak was a felony
and a violation of his civil rights.
But it was also a severe breach of the public trust. When I
worked as an NSC staffer in the White House, 2005-2007,
453
I read dozens of NSA surveillance reports every day. On
the basis of my familiarity with this system,
I strongly suspect that someone in the
Obama White House blew a hole in the
thin wall that prevents the government
from using information collected from
surveillance to destroy the lives of the
citizens whose privacy it is pledged to
protect.
The leaking of Flynn’s name was part of what can only be
described as a White House campaign to hype the Russian
threat and, at the same time, to depict Trump as Vladimir
Putin’s Manchurian candidate. On Dec. 29, Obama
announced sanctions against Russia as retribution for its
hacking activities.
From that date until Trump’s
inauguration, the White House
aggressively pumped into the media two
streams of information: one about
Russian hacking; the other about
Trump’s Russia connection.
In the hands of sympathetic reporters, the two streams
blended into one.
A report that appeared the day after
Obama announced the sanctions shows
how.
On Dec. 30, the Washington Post reported on a Russian
effort to penetrate the electricity grid by hacking into a
Vermont utility, Burlington Electric Department. After
noting the breach, the reporters offered a senior
administration official to speculate on the Russians’
motives.
Did they seek to crash the system, or
just to probe it?
This infrastructure hack, the story continued, was part of a
broader hacking campaign that included intervention in the
election. The story then moved to Trump: “He…has
spoken highly of Russian President Vladimir Putin, despite
President Obama’s suggestion that the approval for
hacking came from the highest levels of the Kremlin.”
The national media mimicked the Post’s
reporting. But there was a problem: the
hack never happened. It was a false
alarm — triggered, it eventually became
clear, by Obama’s hype.
On Dec. 29, the DHS and FBI published a report on
Russian hacking, which showed the telltale signs of having
been rushed to publication.
“At every level this report is a failure,”
said cyber security expert Robert M.
Lee. “It didn’t do what it set out to do,
and it didn’t provide useful data. They’re
handing out bad information.”
Especially damaging were the hundreds of Internet
addresses, supposedly linked to Russian hacking, that the
report contained.
The FBI and DHS urged network
administrators to load the addresses
into their system defenses. Some of the
addresses, however, belong to
platforms that are widely used by the
public, including Yahoo servers.
At Burlington Electric, an unsuspecting network
administrator dutifully loaded the addresses into the
monitoring system of the utility’s network. When an
employee checked his email, it registered on the system as
if Russian hackers were trying to break in.
While the White House was hyping the Russia threat,
elements of the press showed a sudden
interest in the infamous Steele dossier,
which claimed that Russian intelligence services had
caught Trump in Moscow in highly compromising
situations.
The dossier was opposition research
paid for by Trump’s political opponents,
.
454
and it had circulated for months among
reporters covering the election.
Because it was based on anonymous sources and entirely
unverifiable, however,
no reputable news organization had
dared to touch it.
With a little help from the Obama White
House, the dossier became fair game for
reporters.
A government leak let it be known that the intelligence
community had briefed Trump on the dossier. If the
president-elect was discussing it with his intelligence
briefers, so the reasoning went, perhaps there was
something to it after all.
By turning the dossier into hard news, that
leak weaponized malicious gossip.
The same is true of the Flynn-Kislyak leak. Ignatius used
the leak to deepen speculation about collusion between
Putin and Trump:
“What did Flynn say (to Kislyak),” Ignatius
asked, “and did it undercut the U.S.
sanctions?” The mere fact that Flynn’s
conversations were being monitored
deepened his appearance of guilt. If he
was innocent, why was the government
monitoring him?
It should not have been. He had the right to talk to in
private — even to a Russian ambassador.
Regardless of what one thinks about
him or Trump or Putin, this leak should
concern anyone who believes that we
must erect a firewall between the
national security state and our domestic
politics.
The system that allowed it to happen must be reformed.
At stake is a core principle of our democracy: that elected
representatives control the government, and not vice versa.
 BREAKING: Susan Rice Preparing To
Take Fall For Illegal Obama Spy Program?
By DCwhispers
Posted On April 2, 2017
Mike Cernovich has come out today to
declare former Obama National Security
Adviser Susan Rice as the one who
gave the order to illegally “unmask”
several members of the Trump
transition team. Cernovich also
indicated several members of the
Mainstream Media knew of the illegal
Obama spy program story and refused
to cover it in order to protect Barack
Obama.
Readers might recall it was Rice who
was pushed out front and center during
the Benghazi Massacre scandal. If Mr.
Cernovich’s reporting is correct, it
appears the Obama Machine is about to
use her in that same sacrificial capacity
yet again.
455
Cernovich went on to further detail his claims HERE
“Susan Rice, who served as the National
Security Adviser under President Obama,
has been identified as the official who
requested unmasking of incoming Trump
officials, Cernovich Media can exclusively
report.
The White House Counsel’s office
identified Rice as the person responsible
for the unmasking after examining Rice’s
document log requests. The reports Rice
requested to see are kept under tightly-
controlled conditions. Each person must
log her name before being granted access
to them.
Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R.
McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek
Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman
Nunes.
“Unmasking” is the process of identifying
individuals whose communications were
caught in the dragnet of intelligence
gathering. While conducting investigations
into terrorism and other related crimes,
intelligence analysts incidentally capture
conversations about parties not subject to
the search warrant. The identities of
individuals who are not under investigation
are kept confidential, for legal and moral
reasons.”
—————————
REMINDER: Trey Gowdy had this very recent exchange
with FBI Director James Comey during a Congressional
hearing:
GOWDY: Would National Security Adviser Susan Rice —————————
have access to an unmasked U.S. citizen’s name?
Monday is likely going to very interesting.
COMEY: I think any — yes, in general, and any other
national security adviser would, I think, as a matter of
their ordinary course of their business.

456
 Obama Surveillance Of Trump
‘Much Worse Than Expected’
From YourNewsWire
April 2, 2017
Sources in the intelligence community
have confirmed that spying conducted
by the Obama administration on Donald
Trump is “much worse” than the public
are being led to believe.
According to insiders, Obama illegally revealed names of
people in the Trump camp who were under surveillance in
order to score political points for the Democrats and to
help the Clinton campaign win.
These bombshell claims come from top officials of the
intelligence community who say they want to fight back
against the propaganda and lies being spewed by the press
and by their bosses.
According to reporter Adam Housley, sources from within
the FBI are
“frustrated with the politics that is taking
place in these (intelligence) agencies.”
Wnd.com reports:
And what they have revealed is amazing. Here is what they
told Fox:
1) Surveillance targeting the Trump team during the
Obama administration began months ago, even before
the president had become the GOP nominee in July.
2) The spying on the Trump team had nothing to do with
the collection of foreign intelligence or an investigation
into Russia election interference.
457
3) The spying was done purely “for political purposes” that
“have nothing to do with national security and
everything to do with hurting and embarrassing Trump
and his team.”
4) The person who did the unmasking was someone “very
well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence
world, and is not in the FBI.”
5) Congressional investigators know the name of at least
one person who was unmasking names.
6) The initial surveillance on the Trump team led to “a
number of names” being unmasked.
7) House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Devin
Nunes, R-Calif., has known about the unmasking since
January.
8) Two sources in the intelligence community told Nunes
who did the unmasking and told him at least one of the
names of someone in the Trump team who was
unmasked. The sources also gave Nunes the serial
numbers of the classified reports that documented the
unmasking.
9) It took Nunes a number of weeks to figure out how to
see those intelligence reports because the intelligence
agencies were stonewalling him, and not allowing the
chairman or other people to see them.
10) There were only two places Nunes could have seen the
information: where the sources work, which would have
blown their cover; and the Eisenhower Executive Office
building on the White House grounds, which houses
the National Security Council and has computers linked
to the secure system containing the reports he sought.
11) Nunes got access to that system on March 21 with the
help of two Trump administration officials.
The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel reported that
the documents Nunes saw confirming the Obama
administration spied on the Trump team for months
“aren’t easily obtainable, since they aren’t
the ‘finished’ intelligence products that
Congress gets to see.”
She said there were
“dozens of documents with information
about Trump officials.”
Strassel also reported there was a stonewall against the But even the reports that did not unmask identities
Intelligence committee chairman because,
“were written in ways that made clear
“for weeks Mr. Nunes has been demanding which Trump officials were being
intelligence agencies turn over said discussed.”
documents—with no luck, so far.”
And, importantly, the documents were
She also learned that, along with former National Security
Adviser Michael Flynn, one other Trump official was “circulated at the highest levels of
unmasked. government.”

(Flynn resigned after his unmasking was leaked to the Strassel concluded,
press as part of reports that he spoke on the phone with the
Russian ambassador before the new administration took
“To sum up, Team Obama was spying
office. President Trump said the two discussed nothing
broadly on the incoming administration.”
inappropriate and Flynn was just doing his job, but the
president asked for the aide’s resignation because he was
not completely honest in his initial account of the
conversation.)

458
 Susan Rice Ordered Unmasking
Of Trump Team In Intel, Bloomberg View Reports
By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times
Monday, April 3, 2017
In this photo taken April 29, 2016, National Security Adviser Susan
Rice is seen on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington.
(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
Susan Rice, who Newsweek once described as former
President Barack Obama’s “right-hand woman,” was at the
center of unmasking Trump administration officials, a new
report concludes.
Eli Lake, who broke the story for Bloomberg View, wrote
on Monday morning:
“White House lawyers last month
discovered that the former national security
adviser Susan Rice requested the identities
of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports
on dozens of occasions that connect to the
Donald Trump transition and campaign,
according to U.S. officials familiar with the
matter.
“The pattern of Rice’s requests was
discovered in a National Security Council
review of the government’s policy on
‘unmasking’ the identities of individuals in
the U.S. who are not targets of electronic
.
459
eavesdropping, but whose communications
are collected incidentally. Normally those
names are redacted from summaries of
monitored conversations and appear in
reports as something like ‘U.S. Person
One.’
“The National Security Council’s senior
director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-
Watnick, was conducting the review,
according to two U.S. officials who spoke
with Bloomberg View on the condition of
anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss it publicly. In
February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice’s
multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons
in intelligence reports that related to Trump
transition activities. He brought this to the
attention of the White House General
Counsel’s office, who reviewed more of
Rice’s requests and instructed him to end
his own research into the unmasking
policy. …”
One U.S. official familiar with the reports
said they contained valuable political
information on the Trump transition such as
whom the Trump team was meeting, the
views of Trump associates on foreign
policy matters and plans for the incoming
administration,” Mr. Lake reported.
This is a bombshell report confirms other outlets’
reporting, and explains why House Intelligence Committee
Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes was acting so cagey last
week. He had to go to the White House to get access to the
NSC’s computers and Ms. Rice’s log-ins. Bloomberg’s
reporting confirms a New York Times account that Mr.
Cohen-Watnick took the review to the White House
general counsel and then subsequently gave the
information to Mr. Nunes.
 Judge Rules That Donald Trump INCITED VIOLENCE
When He Chanted 'Get Em Out Of Here' At
Protesters During Louisville Rally
 A Louisville federal judge ruled 3 protesters could sue President Trump, his campaign and
three of his supporters for a violent incident at a campaign rally
 Trump yelled at the protesters to 'get out' of his rally and his supporters allegedly attacked
them to push them out of the rally
 Trump's lawyers sought to dismiss the lawsuit citing Trump used free speech
By Associated Press and Kaileen Gaul For Dailymail.com
Published: 17:45 EDT, 1 April 2017 | Updated: 03:35 EDT, 3 April 2017

Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled Trump incited

violence at the Louisville rally

A federal judge ruled President Donald Trump incited

violence when he yelled

'get 'em out of here'

at a group of protesters during Louisville campaign rally.

Now, the protesters will be allowed to proceed in their

lawsuit against the president, his campaign and three of his
supporters.
Trump's lawyers sought to dismiss the lawsuit by three
protesters who say they were roughed up by his supporters
at a March 1, 2016 rally in Louisville, Kentucky. They
argued that Trump didn't intend for his supporters to use
force and used free speech as a defense.
Two women and a man say they were shoved and punched
by audience members at Trump's command. Much of it
was captured on video and widely broadcast during the
campaign, showing Trump pointing at the protesters and
repeating 'get them out.'
Kashiya Nwanguma (in green) was shoved by Trump supporters at
the Louisville rally last year
One the third occasion Trump yelled 'get out' at the
protesters, he clarified 'don't hurt them' to his supporters.
Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled Friday that the suit
can proceed. Hale found ample facts supporting allegations
that the protesters' injuries were a 'direct and proximate
result' of Trump's actions, and noted that the Supreme
Court has ruled out constitutional protections for speech
that incites violence.

'It is plausible that Trump's direction to "get

'em out of here" advocated the use of
460
 force,' the judge wrote. "It was an order, an
instruction, a command."
Plaintiffs Kashiya Nwanguma, Molly Shah and Henry
Brousseau allege that they were physically attacked by
several members of the audience, including Matthew
Heimbach, Alvin Bamberger and an unnamed defendant
they have yet to be able to identify.
Then presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a rally in
Louisville and yells at his supporters to 'get em out of here' in
reference to the protesters
Footage from WLKY shows the moment Nwanguma is
shoved by Trump supporters after the candidate yelled to
remove her from the crowd.
Bamberger later apologized to the Korean War Veterans
Association, whose uniform he wore at the rally. He wrote
that he 'physically pushed a young woman down the aisle
toward the exit' after 'Trump kept saying 'get them out, get
them out,' according to the lawsuit.
Heimbach is a leader of the white supremacist group
Traditional Youth Network according to the Courier-
Journal. He sought to dismiss the lawsuit's discussion of
his association with a white nationalist group and of
statements he made about how Trump could advance the
group's interests. The judge declined, saying such
information could be important context when determining
punitive damages.
461
Henry Brousseau (left), Kashiya Nwanguma (right) and Molly Shah
allege they were attacked by several Trump supporters after Trump
commanded to 'get 'em out of here'
Henry Brousseau, Kashiya Nwanguma and Molly Shah (pictured)
said a leader of a white nationalist group, was one of the people who
attacked them
The judge also declined to remove allegations that
Nwanguma, an African-American, was the victim of
racial, ethnic and sexist slurs from the crowd at the rally.
This context may support the plaintiffs' claims of
negligence and incitement by Trump and his campaign, the
judge said.
'While the words themselves are repulsive, they are
relevant to show the atmosphere in which the alleged
events occurred,' Hale wrote.
Lawyers for Trump and his campaign also argued that they
cannot be held liable because they had no duty to the
plaintiffs, who assumed the risk of injury when they
decided to protest at the rally. The judge countered that
under the law, every person has a duty to every other
person to use care to prevent foreseeable injury.
'In sum, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have adequately
alleged that their harm was foreseeable and that the Trump
Defendants had a duty to prevent it,' the judge ruled,
referring the case to a federal magistrate, Judge H. Brent
Brennenstuhl, to handle preliminary litigation, discovery
and settlement efforts.
 Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies
To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump
Richard Pollock - Reporter
10:08 PM 04/03/2017
Former President Barack Obama’s national security
adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce
“detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving
Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for
president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph
diGenova.
“What was produced by the intelligence
community at the request of Ms. Rice were
detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone
calls with unmasked Trump associates in
perfectly legal conversations with
individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller
News Foundation Investigative Group
Monday.
“The overheard conversations involved no
illegal activity by anybody of the Trump
associates, or anyone they were speaking
with,” diGenova said. “In short, the only
apparent illegal activity was the unmasking
of the people in the calls.”
Other official sources with direct knowledge and who
requested anonymity confirmed to TheDCNF diGenova’s
description of surveillance reports Rice ordered one year
before the 2016 presidential election.
Also on Monday, Fox News and Bloomberg News, citing
multiple sources reported that Rice had requested the
intelligence information that was produced in a highly
organized operation. Fox said the unmasked names of
Trump aides were given to officials at the National
Security Council (NSC), the Department of Defense,
James Clapper, President Obama’s Director of National
Intelligence, and John Brennan, Obama’s CIA Director.
462
Joining Rice in the alleged White House operations was
her deputy Ben Rhodes, according to Fox.
Critics of the atmosphere prevailing throughout the Obama
administration’s last year in office point to former Obama
Deputy Defense Secretary Evelyn Farkas who admitted in
a March 2 television interview on MSNBC that she
“was urging my former colleagues,” to “get
as much information as you can, get as
much intelligence as you can, before
President Obama leaves the
administration.”
Farkas sought to walk back her comments in the weeks
following:
“I didn’t give anybody anything except
advice.”
Col. (Ret.) James Waurishuk, an NSC veteran and former
deputy director for intelligence at the U.S. Central
Command, told TheDCNF that many hands had to be
involved throughout the Obama administration to launch
such a political spying program.
“The surveillance initially is the
responsibility of the National Security
Agency,” Waurishuk said. “They have to
abide by this guidance when one of the
other agencies says, ‘we’re looking at this
particular person which we would like to
unmask.'”
“The lawyers and counsel at the NSA
surely would be talking to the lawyers and
members of counsel at CIA, or at the
National Security Council or at the Director
of National Intelligence or at the FBI,” he
said. “It’s unbelievable of the level and
degree of the administration to look for
information on Donald Trump and his
associates, his campaign team and his
transition team. This is really, really serious
stuff.”
Michael Doran, former NSC senior director, told
TheDCNF Monday that
 “somebody blew a hole in the wall between
national security secrets and partisan
politics.” This “was a stream of information
that was supposed to be hermetically
sealed from politics and the Obama
administration found a way to blow a hole
in that wall,” he said.
Doran charged that potential serious crimes were
undertaken because
“this is a leaking of signal intelligence.”
“That’s a felony,” he told TheDCNF. “And
you can get 10 years for that. It is a
tremendous abuse of the system. We’re
not supposed to be monitoring American
.
463
citizens. Bigger than the crime, is the
breach of public trust.”
Waurishuk said he was most dismayed that
“this is now using national intelligence
assets and capabilities to spy on the
elected, yet-to-be-seated president.”
“We’re looking at a potential constitutional
crisis from the standpoint that we used an
extremely strong capability that’s supposed
to be used to safeguard and protect the
country,” he said. “And we used it for
political purposes by a sitting president.
That takes on a new precedent.”
 Susan Rice Requested To Unmask
Names Of Trump Transition Officials, Sources Say
By Adam Housley
Published April 03, 2017
Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former
national security adviser under then-President Barack
Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump
transition officials caught up in surveillance.
The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald
Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security
Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA
Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the
top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.
The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance
of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to
him, including family members, for up to a year before he
took office.
It was not clear how Rice knew to ask for the names to be
unmasked, but the question was being posed by the
sources late Monday.
464
Rice was ambassador to the UN when she went on Sunday news
shows to say the Benghazi attack was prompted by a video. (Fox
News Photo)
"What I know is this ... If the intelligence
community professionals decide that
there’s some value, national security,
foreign policy or otherwise in unmasking
someone, they will grant those requests,"
former Obama State Department
spokeswoman and Fox News contributor
Marie Harf told Fox News' Martha
MacCallum on "The First 100 Days. "And
we have seen no evidence ... that there
was partisan political notice behind this and
we can’t say that unless there’s actual
evidence to back that up."
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, asked about the
revelations at Monday’s briefing, declined to comment
specifically on what role Rice may have played or
officials’ motives.
Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., says he has seen incidental surveillance
reports he fears were used for political reasons. (The Associated
Press)
 “I’m not going to comment on this any
further until [congressional] committees
have come to a conclusion,” he said, while
contrasting the media’s alleged “lack” of
interest in these revelations with the
intense coverage of suspected Trump-
Russia links.
When names of Americans are inciden///tally collected,
they are supposed to be masked, meaning the name or
names are redacted from reports – whether it is
international or domestic collection, unless it is an issue of
national security, crime or if their security is threatened in
any way. There are loopholes and ways to unmask through
backchannels, but Americans are supposed to be protected
from incidental collection. Sources told Fox News that in
this case, they were not.
This comes in the wake of Evelyn Farkas’ television
interview last month in which the former Obama deputy
secretary of defense said in part:
“I was urging my former colleagues and,
frankly speaking, the people on the Hill – it
was more actually aimed at telling the Hill
people, get as much information as you
can, get as much intelligence as you can,
before President Obama leaves the
administration.”
Meanwhile, Fox News also is told that House Intelligence
Committee Chairman Devin Nunes knew about unmasking
and leaking back in January, well before President
Trump’s tweet in March alleging wiretapping.
Nunes has faced criticism from Democrats for viewing
pertinent documents on White House grounds and
announcing their contents to the press. But sources said
465
“the intelligence agencies slow-rolled
Nunes. He could have seen the logs at
other places besides the White House
SCIF [secure facility], but it had already
been a few weeks. So he went to the White
House because he could protect his
sources and he could get to the logs.”
As the Obama administration left office, it also approved
new rules that gave the NSA much broader powers by
relaxing the rules about sharing intercepted personal
communications and the ability to share those with 16
other intelligence agencies.
Rice is no stranger to controversy. As the U.S.
Ambassador to the UN, she appeared on several Sunday
news shows to defend the adminstration's later debunked
claim that the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in
Libya was triggered by an Internet video.
Rice also told ABC News in 2014 that Army Sgt. Bowe
Bergdahl
"served the United States with honor and
distinction" and that he "wasn't simply a
hostage; he was an American prisoner of
war captured on the battlefield."
Bergdahl is currently facing court-martial on charges of
desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for allegedly
walking off his post in Afghanistan.
Adam Housley joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in 2001
and currently serves as a Los Angeles-based senior
correspondent.
 Report: Trump Was Spied On
For Up To A Year Before Inauguration,
Susan Rice Implicated In Unmasking
Published: April 3, 2017

Ok, it was a crazy weekend with lots of things sensitive to

national security taking place. Let's get you up to speed.

The fake news main stream media is ignoring the real

scandal, which is the unmasking of Trump during
'incidental' surveillance by our intelliegence agencies.
When Chairman Nunes came out and told you that some
very troubling surveillance had been taking place against
Trump, which was not related to national security, the
DNC controlled media tied themselves into little pretzels
of rage because it validated what Trump was saying all
along -- that he'd been 'wiretapped.'
What happened next is lunacy prevailed inside the
democratic party, amplified by the media. Instead of
investigating who ordered the unmasking of Trump and
who leaked this information, the media wanted to know
who told Nunes. You can't make this stuff up. Ignore the
crime, go after the whistleblower.
But now the pieces are beginning to fall into place.
Mike Cernovich broke a story last night that the person to
authorize the unmasking of Trump was none other than
Obama's National Security Advisor, Susan Rice. More
than that, Katie Walsh, former White House's deputy chief
of staff for Reince Priebus, was, in fact, the conduit
working between Rice and Maggie Haberman from the
NY Times. Last week, the White House became aware of
this connection and summarily fired Walsh. According to
Cernovich, the treachery doesn't end there. In fact, Reince
Priebus hired Walsh and might be involved in undermining
the Trump team as well.

Fox News is reporting that an 'unprecedented' amount of

spying was being done on Donald Trump -- for up to a
year before the inauguration. Think about that for a
second. None of this, according to Fox's sources, was
related to national security or MUH Russia.

lectronic surveillance of Trump and supporters for up to a

year before inaugurartion. That information was
disseminated through NSA channels."

In a recent interview with PBS, Susan Rice said she knew

nothing about 'incidental' spying being done on Trump and
also knew nothing about safekeeping of Russian-Trump
intelligence, which was purported by Dr. Farkas.

Now on the conspiratorial end of things, the tweets of

some random person imagining what might've happened
between Russia and the Trump administration garnered the
attention of General Flynn, causing him to follow him on
Twitter.

His stream of consciousness is posted below. In a nut shell,

he said Russia told Trump that Watergate level spying was
being done against him by Obama, but the Trump team
466
couldn't say anything before election because Russia was
made toxic by media and democrats.

This all has a feeling of imminence.

467
 Susan Rice ‘Unmasking’ Story Once Again
Highlights the Worthlessness of Corporate Media
Michael Krieger
Posted Monday Apr 3, 2017 at 1:24 pm

labeled CEO of America’s “fake news” empire during a 60

Minutes expose, I considered it unlikely that’d he’d go out
with such claims unless he felt pretty confident in their
validity. Then today, Eli Lake of Bloomberg
News confirmed the main part of this story, and added
some additional nuggets.

From Bloomberg:

White House lawyers last month

Yesterday, Mike Cernovich published explosive claims
that Obama’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, has
been behind the “unmasking” of certain Trump advisors in
relation to their conversations with foreign officials under
routine surveillance. He noted:
The White House Counsel’s office
identified Rice as the person responsible
for the unmasking after examining Rice’s
document log requests. The reports Rice
requested to see are kept under tightly-
controlled conditions. Each person must
log her name before being granted access
to them.
Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R.
McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek
Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman
Nunes.
“Unmasking” is the process of identifying
individuals whose communications were
caught in the dragnet of intelligence
gathering. While conducting investigations
into terrorism and other related crimes,
intelligence analysts incidentally capture
conversations about parties not subject to
the search warrant. The identities of
individuals who are not under investigation
are kept confidential, for legal and moral
reasons.
When I first read the piece last night it caught my attention
due to the very specific claims made by Cernovich not just
related to Susan Rice, but also Maggie Haberman of The
New York Times. Considering Cernovich had just been
learned that the former national security
adviser Susan Rice requested the identities
of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports
on dozens of occasions that connect to the
Donald Trump transition and campaign,
according to U.S. officials familiar with the
matter.
The pattern of Rice’s requests was
discovered in a National Security Council
review of the government’s policy on
“unmasking” the identities of individuals in
the U.S. who are not targets of electronic
eavesdropping, but whose communications
are collected incidentally. Normally those
names are redacted from summaries of
monitored conversations and appear in
reports as something like “U.S. Person
One.”
The intelligence reports were summaries of
monitored conversations — primarily
between foreign officials discussing the
Trump transition, but also in some cases
direct contact between members of the
Trump team and monitored foreign officials.
One U.S. official familiar with the reports
said they contained valuable political
information on the Trump transition such as
whom the Trump team was meeting, the
views of Trump associates on foreign
policy matters and plans for the incoming
administration.
Rice did not respond to an email seeking
comment on Monday morning. Her role in
requesting the identities of Trump transition
officials adds an important element to the
dueling investigations surrounding the

468
 Trump White House since the president’s
inauguration.
Now here’s where it gets particularly problematic for
Susan Rice.
Rice herself has not spoken directly on
the issue of unmasking. Last month
when she was asked on the “PBS
NewsHour” about reports that Trump
transition officials, including Trump
himself, were swept up in incidental
intelligence collection, Rice said: “I
know nothing about this,” adding, “I
was surprised to see reports from
Chairman Nunes on that account
today.”
Either Cernovich and Eli Lake are lying, or Susan Rice has
a big fat problem. Perhaps 60 Minutes should do an expose
on her penchant for her looseness with the truth, but I’m
not holding my breath.
While all that’s interesting enough, I want to zero in on
another claim made by Cernovich. He wrote:
This reporter has been informed that
Maggie Haberman has had this story
about Susan Rice for at least 48 hours,
and has chosen to sit on it in an effort to
protect the reputation of former
President Barack Obama.
.
469
This line caught my attention as much as the Rice claims
when I first read it. This is a very specific claim, about a
very specific reporter, and if true, would be another major
embarrassment for corporate media.
While it appears Haberman herself has been quiet on the
subject, The Daily Caller reported the following:
Cernovich said in his report Sunday that
New York Times reporter Maggie
Haberman knew about the Rice requests,
and “has chosen to sit on it in an effort to
protect the reputation of former President
Barack Obama.” A New York Times
spokeswoman told The Daily Caller,
“Cernovich’s claim regarding Maggie
Haberman is 100 percent false.”
I don’t know what’s more embarrassing. The New York
Times potentially sitting on this story, or that sources feel
more comfortable going to a guy blogging his gym pants
with scoops versus the “paper of record.”
In any event, this whole drama sets up the corporate media
for more embarrassment going forward. All any source has
to do to ruin 60 Minutes forever, is keep feeding Cernovich
real news. We live in interesting times, and it’s only going
to get more interesting.
Corporate media has no one to blame but
themselves.
It has completely failed the American
public.
 Susan Rice Flashback:
‘I Know Nothing’ About Trump Unmasking
White House Lawyers Reveal She Was Lying
Jamie White | Infowars.Com
April 3, 2017
Senior Obama administration official
Susan Rice told PBS “I know nothing”
about the “unmasking” of Trump
administration officials almost two
weeks before she was recently
identified as the unmasker by White
House lawyers.
PBS host Judy Woodruff asked Rice to explain why House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes would
level allegations that Trump’s team may have been
surveilled under the Obama administration.
“I know nothing about this,” Rice
responded. “I was surprised to see reports
from Chairman Nunes on that count today.”
Rice, Obama’s former National Security Advisor, went on
to say that
470
“no president, no White House can
order the surveillance of another
American citizen,” but that “legal,
lawful” incidental collection may have
occurred.
Woodruff referred Rice to the New York Times article
which admitted that Obama allowed individuals to
disseminate information throughout the government about
what they knew about Trump and Russia.
“Could there be a connection there?”
Woodruff asked.
Rice flatly denied the suggestion.
“I’m not aware of any connection,” she
said. “I read the New York Times story. I
must say, Judy, as one of the most senior
White House officials and the most senior
responsible for national security, I found
that report a bit perplexing.”
“I wasn’t aware of any orders given to
disseminate that kind of information.”
However, White House lawyers discovered in a National
Security Council review that Rice requested the identities
of U.S. persons connected to Trump’s team dozens of
times.
The establishment and MSM pushed back hard on Trump
after he asserted that Obama “wiretapped” him and his
team at Trump Tower last month, with several members of
Congress and the intelligence community consequently
denying any wiretapping took place.
But cracks have been forming around the denials,
especially after Obama’s former Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas recently admitted on
MSNBC that Obama did in fact spy on Trump in order to
gather “intelligence” for political purposes.
471
 Trudeau To Trump: Drop Dead!
(Implications For Gold)
By Peter Diekmeyer
Apr 3, 2017 10:48 AM

The article recalls Canadian Prime Minister Justin

Trudeau’s message to US President Donald Trump, who
has been seeking help to relieve America’s defence forces.

Trudeau’s blunt reply, delivered in last week’s Liberal

budget, came in the form of vast cuts to Canada’s military
spending. Just as important as the scale of the cuts was the
timing, which came shortly after the US President had
demanded an increase.

This sharp rebuttal has important implications for how a

Forty years ago, the Daily News published its famous Ford
to City: Drop Dead headline, which dealt with President
Gerald Ford’s response to a New York City handout
request.
Trump Administration’s policies could play out on the
world stage, the US economy, and yes, for gold.
First, a little background.
Donald Trump's threats

America is widely criticized for its wars, occupations, and

bombings. However, the country also plays a crucial role
as a global cop, which on balance, does a lot more good
than bad, particularly for rich Western economies.

American soldiers guard the world's sea lanes, keeping

commerce safe. Its bases in more than 100 countries help
keep a range of governments in power, which are
favorable to US (and Canadian) interests.

But that costs a lot of money, and American taxpayers

have been footing much of the bill. American military
spending, as a percentage of GDP, is roughly triple that of
what other NATO counties pay, possibly more.

(The precise total is hard to determine, because reported

US defence outlays exclude items such as nuclear
weapons, military pensions, supplemental allocations, and
the like).

Trump has demanded that NATO allies, which have been

freeloading on the back of US protection, ante up. His key
demand is that they abide by a target set more than a
decade ago: to spend 2% of their GDPs on defence.

More important, Trump threatened to withdraw protection

for laggards by hinting that the United States might not

472
feel bound to defend countries that didn't meet their 2%
commitments.
There's method to Trump's madness. Lost in his bellicose
rhetoric is the fact that if NATO members adhere to his
demands, it would generate huge business for American
defence contractors, who produce much of the world's best
equipment.
Trump's request, in short, is for foreign help to bail out
America's military industrial complex.
Trudeau's response: smile, shake hands and cut
defence spending
Like Gerald Ford before him, Justin Trudeau never
actually voiced the words "Drop Dead." In fact Trudeau's
recent meeting with the US president was characterized by
smiles, much-publicized handshakes, and a co-
announcement with a swooning Ivanka Trump of a new
initiative to advance women's rights.
Then Trudeau got on a plane, went home, and did exactly
the opposite of what Trump demanded. Worse, the $8.4
billion in "re-profilings" that Trudeau's government
announced amount to the largest defence cuts in recent
history.
Canada has no enemies to defend against, Trudeau is
betting. Even if it did, with time and winter as our allies,
Canada could defeat any invading force, the thinking goes.
473
Implications for gold and the economy
Trudeau's slap in the face of a nascent Trump
Administration has huge implications for its agenda going
forward. The most obvious of these relates to Trump's
"America First," trade policies.
As previously highlighted (see Smoot-Hawley, Donald
Trump's economic mentors), the idea that the United States
can set up trade barriers without encountering serious
retaliation is a pipe dream.
Unless Trump changes his bullying tactics, he is similarly
unlikely to get his way with Congress. Like Trudeau, US
Senators (both Republicans and Democrats) will simply
smile at his tax cut, health care, and deregulation
proposals, play along, and then filibuster to ensure they
never make it to the floor.
There's even a takeaway for investors worried that Trump,
who is facing the same liquidity trap that Franklin Delano
Roosevelt faced during the 1930s, might similarly respond
by seizing Americans' gold.
Because a Trudeau government that ignores Trump's
threats on defence provides a strong signal that it would
also be unlikely to comply with US expropriation requests
related to American gold stored in Canada.
Trump is a quick learner. But whether he can adjust his
tactics fast enough to force a shift in Canadian policy
remains an open question.
 Eli Lake: Susan Rice Requested
Unmasking Of People Connected To Trump Transition
By Charlie Spiering
3 Apr 2017

The breaking news helps confirm some of President

Trump’s accusations that senior Obama officials were
involved in disseminating classified information about his
transition team to the media, fueling new details about the
congressional investigations into Russia’s meddling in the
election.

On Monday, Fox News senior correspondent Adam

Housley said that the “unprecedented” unmasking took
place at the direction of “very high-up” officials.

“A lot of these men and women in the

Susan Rice, who was former President
Barack Obama’s national security
adviser, did not respond to a report
from Bloomberg columnist Eli Lake that
on multiple occasions, she made
requests to unmask United States
citizens connected to President Donald
Susan Rice has not denied the allegations, saying only,
Trump’s transition team.
intelligence communities did not want to
speak about what’s going on because they
were concerned about those methods
being known,” Housley reported. “But now,
they figure they might as well at least clarify
things since Nunes has been leaked to by
someone they don’t know or at least they
tell me they don’t know.”

“I know nothing about this” when asked

According to Lake, Rice did not respond to an email
about the reports last month on PBS.
seeking comment on the story.
.

474
 Rolling Stone's Taibbi Mocks
Liberal Trump-Russia Collusion Obsession
By P.J. Gladnick
April 3, 2017 | 6:37 PM EDT
A good way to judge how the fake news story about the
supposed collusion between the Donald Trump campaign
and the Russians is holding up is to take a look at how
liberal but skeptical reporter Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone
is covering it.
Almost a month ago on March 8, Taibbi was warning
Democrats and the mainstream media to be very wary of
this dubious story. Since nothing has been uncovered
since then to lend a shred of credibility to this fake news
story, Taibbi has progressed to openly mocking those who
continue, against all evidence, to desperately hang on to
this fairy tale in order to somehow bring President Trump
down.
You can get an idea of just how brutal Taibbi's mockery of
the Trump-Russia collusion cultists is just by the title of
his April 3 Rolling Stone story: Putin Derangement
Syndrome Arrives. The subtitle is no less brutal: Whatever
the truth about Trump and Russia, the speculation
surrounding it has become a dangerous case of mass
hysteria.
Nobody wants to be the one claiming the emperor has no
clothes the day His Highness walks out naked. And this
Russia thing has spun out of control into just such an
exercise of conspiratorial mass hysteria.
Even I think there should be a legitimate independent
investigation – one that, given Trump's history, might
uncover all sorts of things. But almost irrespective of what
ends up being uncovered on the Trump side, the public
prosecution of this affair has taken on a malevolent life
of its own.
One way we recognize a mass hysteria movement is that
everyone who doesn't believe is accused of being in on the
475
plot. This has been going on virtually unrestrained in both
political and media circles in recent weeks.
The aforementioned Mensch, a noted loon who thinks
Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart but has somehow
been put front and center by The Times and HBO's
Real Time, has denounced an extraordinary list of
Kremlin plants.
She's tabbed everyone from Jeff Sessions ("a Russian
partisan") to Rudy Giuliani and former Assistant FBI
Director James Kallstrom ("agents of influence") to Glenn
Greenwald ("Russian shill") to ProPublica and Democracy
Now! (also "Russian shills"), to the 15-year-old girl with
whom Anthony Weiner sexted (really, she says, a Russian
hacker group called "Crackas With Attitudes") to an
unnamed number of FBI agents in the New York field
office ("moles"). And that's just for starters.
That's Louise Mensch. She has become such a moonbat in
regards to the Trump-Russia collusion fake news story that
Taibbi is worried that she will completely destroy the
credibility of all liberals.
Others are doing the same. Eric Boehlert of Media Matters,
upon seeing the strange behavior of Republican Intel
Committee chair Devin Nunes, asked "what kind of
dossier" the Kremlin has on Nunes.
Dem-friendly pollster Matt McDermott wondered why
reporters Michael Tracey and Zaid Jilani aren't on board
with the conspiracy stories (they might be "unwitting"
agents!) and noted, without irony, that Russian bots
mysteriously appear every time he tweets negatively about
them.
So there are other conspiracy loons besides Mensch. And
if you are liberal but somewhat skeptically sane on the
matter of the Trump-Russia collusion fantasy as Taibbi is,
you will also be smeared by the loons:
I've written a few articles on the Russia subject that have
been very tame, basically arguing that it might be a good
idea to wait for evidence of collusion before those of us in
the media jump in the story with both feet. But even I've
gotten the treatment.
I've been "outed" as a possible paid Putin plant by the
infamous "PropOrNot" group, which is supposedly
dedicated to rooting out Russian "agents of influence."
You might remember PropOrNot as the illustrious
research team the Washington Post once relied on for a
report that accused 200 alternative websites of being
"routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the
election season."
Even someone with a respectable reputation such as
Senator Mark Warner (D) of Virginia is acting like a loon
on this matter as hilariously revealed by Taibbi:
Warner furthermore told The Times that in order to get
prepared for his role as an exposer of 21st-century Russian
perfidy, he was "losing himself in a book about the
Romanovs," and had been quizzing staffers about "Tolstoy
and Nabokov."
476
This is how nuts things are now: a senator brushes up
on Nabokov and Tolstoy (Tolstoy!) to get pumped to
expose Vladimir Putin.
...If the party's leaders really believe that Russian
intervention is anywhere in the top 100 list of reasons
why some 155 million eligible voters (out of 231 million)
chose not to pull a lever for Hillary Clinton last year,
they're farther along down the Purity of Essence nut-
hole than Mark Warner.
The problem for Matt Taibbi is that the Democrats and
their MSM allies dug themselves so deep into that "Purity
of Essence nut-hole" that they can't get out despite his
warnings and mockery.
 Report: Mike Cernovich Reveals Obama Natl Security
Advisor Susan Rice Responsible For
Unmasking Trump Team
By Zeropointnow
Apr 3, 2017 12:04 Am

Journalist and author Mike Cernovich has just dropped an

exclusive bombshell - naming Obama's National Security Fox News anchor Adam Housley tweeted on Friday that
Advisor Susan Rice as the official responsible for the the surveillance that led to the unmasking began before
'unmasking' of the incoming Trump team during Trump was the GOP nominee:
'incidental' surveillance. This was apparently discovered
after the White House Counsel's office reviewed Rice's
document log requests:

The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-

controlled conditions. Each person must log her name
before being granted access to them.

Upon learning of Rice’s actions, [National Security Housley also said that the person who did the unmasking is
Advisor] H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek a "very senior" and "very well known" person in the
Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes. surveillance community - and not someone in the FBI.

Cernovich points out, as revealed in an article by

Circa, that President Obama began loosening the rules
regarding "incidental intercepts" starting in 2011 - making
it easier for the US Government to spy on individuals who
are not the primary target(s) of a surveillance operation.

As his presidency drew to a close, Barack Obama’s top

aides routinely reviewed intelligence reports gleaned from It seems the spreading of names was done for “political
the National Security Agency’s incidental intercepts of purposes that have nothing to do with national security,” or
Americans abroad, taking advantage of rules their boss foreign intelligence, but hurting Trump’s team, Housley
relaxed starting in 2011 to help the government better fight noted.
terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking
threats
"It had everything to do with hurting and
embarrassing Trump and his team,"
And guess who had authorization to unmask individuals according to his sources. -TownHall
who were 'incidentally' surveilled? Former CIA Director
John Brennan, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch,
and Obama's National Security advisor Susan Rice. This of course begs the question of whether or not
President Obama would have ordered Rice to perform the
unmasking...
Also of note is the claim that New York Times journalist
Maggie Haberman has been sitting on the Susan Rice story
for at least two days:

This reporter has been informed that

Maggie Haberman has had this story about
Susan Rice for at least 48 hours, and has
chosen to sit on it in an effort to protect the
reputation of former President Barack
Obama.

477
478
 UPDATE=> CONFIRMED: Obama National Security
Advisor Susan Rice Requested The Unmasking Of
Incoming Trump Officials
Jim Hoft
Apr 3rd, 2017 10:42 Am

Senior Fox News Correspondent, Adam Housley revealed

on Friday that Intel Chair Devin Nunes (R-CA) knows
who unmasked the identities of Trump and his close
associates.

Sources also told him that the unmasking was purely for
political purposes to embarrass Trump and had
NOTHING to do with national security.

Now this.. Susan Rice made a name for herself when she said the
Benghazi massacre was a protest and when she defended
According to activist and author Mike deserter Bowe Bergdahl for ‘serving admirably.”
Cernovich the leaker and unmasker is
Susan Rice.
UPDATE— Mike Cernovich has more on the story at
The Medium.

The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the

person responsible for the unmasking after examining
Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested
to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each
person must log her name before being granted access to
them.

It is now widely accepted that Barack Obama spied on the Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster
Trump Transition Team. dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to
brief Chairman Nunes.

“Unmasking” is the process of

identifying individuals whose
communications were caught in the
dragnet of intelligence gathering.

While conducting investigations into terrorism and other

related crimes, intelligence analysts incidentally capture
conversations about parties not subject to the search
warrant. The identities of individuals who are not under
investigation are kept confidential, for legal and moral
reasons.

Read the rest here.

479
 UPDATE—- Bloomberg confirmed on
Monday that Susan Rice was the
unmasker of the surveillance on Donald
Trump and his associates.
Via Eli Lake:
White House lawyers last month
discovered that the former national security
adviser Susan Rice requested the identities
of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports
on dozens of occasions that connect to the
Donald Trump transition and campaign,
according to U.S. officials familiar with the
matter.
The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a
National Security Council review of the government’s
policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the
.
480
U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but
whose communications are collected incidentally.
Normally those names are redacted from summaries of
monitored conversations and appear in reports as
something like “U.S. Person One.”
The National Security Council’s senior director for
intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the
review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with
Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because
they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In February
Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice’s multiple requests to
unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to
Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention
of the White House General Counsel’s office, who
reviewed more of Rice’s requests and instructed him to
end his own research into the unmasking policy.
481
 MSNBC: Covering Trump Surveillance Story
Helps Russia ‘Undermine’ American Democracy
By Kyle Drennen
April 3, 2017 | 5:16 PM EDT
So desperate to discredit a bombshell Bloomberg report
that former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice
sought to unmask Trump transition officials caught up in
intelligence surveillance, on Monday afternoon, MSNBC
host Katy Tur outrageously suggested that simply
reporting on the story was helping Russia “undermine our
democratic institutions.”
During the 2 p.m. ET hour, Tur talked to the journalist
who broke the news, Bloomberg View columnist Eli Lake,
and tried to dismiss his reporting by conflating it with a
blog post from a conspiracy theorist:
“Eli, the same details from your report
appeared last night in another report by
the man who pushed the Pizzagate
story. Does that concern you?”
Lake flatly rejected her insinuation:
“Well, I have nothing to do – I mean, I was
unaware of that when I was reporting my
story. I know there are a lot of other
mainstream journalists who are reporting it.
I don't know how that guy got his
information, and I can tell you, it had no
effect on my reporting.”
Earlier in the exchange, Tur tried to spin Rice’s request
that Donald Trump associates be unmasked as “perfectly
routine.” Lake implored viewers to the issue seriously:
And I have to say to the viewers of
MSNBC, who I think tend to lean more
on the progressive side, I think
482
Democrats should be very concerned
about this.
Because if the Obama White House can do this during the
transition to the Trump transition, then there’s nothing that
would stop the Trump administration from doing this to his
political opponents, if it’s fairly easy for senior White
House officials to do this kind of thing and gather that kind
of intelligence if it’s not directly related to, you know,
clearly national security foreign intelligence reasons.
Moments after the conversation with Lake concluded, Tur
spoke to former FBI Special Agent Clint Watts and feared:
“A story like we just saw in Bloomberg,
and also the same story that was in the
Pizzagate guy’s media blog post, do
stories like that advance what Russia is
trying to do in order to undermine our
democratic institutions?”
Watts proclaimed:
“Yeah, they’re ammunition for their
system....it’s much more beneficial to
them to take that which is already
gaining traction, other false stories, and
just reinject those into the system and
audiences that they have the influence in.”
Minutes before bringing Lake on, Tur tried to downplay
the Rice story by asking New York Times National Security
Reporter Matthew Rosenberg:
“This idea of unmasking has been very
much a talking point that we’ve been
hearing in the past few days. Talk to me
about that report, and was there anything
in there that was a bombshell?”
Predictably, Rosenberg ranted:
I mean, this is the amazing thing. In a
month in which – let's be honest, a month
ago, Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General,
recused himself. Jim Comey, a few weeks
 ago, the Director of the FBI, announced
there was an espionage investigation
involving in the White House. And yet,
we’re here talking about a very narrow
technical issue of intelligence....
There’s no big bombshell
there....There’s no great big bombshells
here....So it does seem to be taking a
very narrow, small issue to distract from
much bigger issues that they don't want
to talk about.
Here is a full transcript of Tur’s April 3 exchange with
Lake:
2:22 PM ET
TUR: As the President continues to push an unsubstantiated
claim that he was wiretapped by President Obama, anonymous
report that appear to bolster Trump’s assertions are starting to
proliferate online. The latest, from Bloomberg, says President
Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice repeatedly
sought to unmask the names of Trump aides in raw intelligence
reports. The same day, Nunes made those initial claims that U.S.
spies may have scooped up communications from the Trump
transition team, this is what Rice had to say.
SUSAN RICE: I knew nothing about this. I was surprised to see
reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today. I really don't
know to what Chairman Nunes was referring.
TUR: The GOP is already weaponizing this story. Senator Rand
Paul tweeting, “Smoking gun found! Obama pal and noted
dissembler Susan Rice said to be spying on Trump campaign.”
Joining me now, the man behind that Bloomberg report, Eli Lake.
Eli, thanks for joining us.
ELI LAKE [COLUMNIST, BLOOMBERG VIEW]: Thanks for
having me.
TUR: Does that – is there a disconnect there between what
Susan Rice said in that interview with Judy Woodruff and what
you are reporting?
483
LAKE: Well, I mean, she was not asked directly about unmasking
the names of U.S. persons who were incidentally collected in
intelligence reports, so I suppose that there is sort of wiggle room
there and she may have thought it was referring to something
else. And the backdrop of this is the Trump tweet that said that
Obama had illegally wiretapped Trump Tower, which is – which
no – there’s been no support for that specific claim. Although I
think it's significant that there were a number of these kinds of
raw reports and that Susan Rice had sought to find out who the
individuals were when they were referring to the Trump transition
activities.
TUR: As the acting National Security Adviser at the time, isn’t it
perfectly routine for her to ask to unmask names so she can see
them, so she can better understand an investigation that is
ongoing?
LAKE: Well, if it was about Russia, but remember, the original
claim from Chairman Nunes was that these reports had nothing
to do with Russia. And in addition to that, it really depends on the
context. I mean, yes, it’s true that you can have senior political
appointees unmasking incidental collection like this if there were
sort of a pending terrorist attack or some sort of – you know, a
server was taken over by bots in a cyber attack of some sort like
that. So that sort of thing happens, but, you know, the bar is
pretty low. Is there sort of a foreign intelligence, you know, value
to any of this? Which could mean just about anything.
And in this particular case, it appears, at least – and I'd like to
see the White House declassify these reports so we can all look
at the evidence ourselves – but from my sources, it appears that
this was, you know, pretty much rumor, valuable potential
political information about the Trump transition plans for when
they came into office and who they were meeting with and their
views on foreign policy. Again, it's a pretty low bar and maybe the
real scandal here is that the rules need to be tightened and the
surveillance law needs to be reformed.
TUR: Were you able to find out if she was successful in
unmasking these names? Doesn’t she have to have that granted
by NSA Mike Rogers?
LAKE: Yes, but she – in a lot of cases she was able to unmask
the names later.
TUR: But could Mike Rogers be considered somebody out for a
political hit on anybody in the Trump campaign, considering he
was trying to get a position within the Trump administration?
LAKE: No, I don't think Mike Rogers could, but I think it’s also the
standard practice. We know from before, when in the middle of
the Iran deal fight in 2015, that the names of members of
Congress and Americans who were in Jewish groups were
incidentally collected and unmasked and sent to the White House
when – during the legal surveillance of Israeli senior officials. So
this kind of thing has happened before.
And I have to say to the viewers of MSNBC, who I think tend to
lean more on the progressive side, I think Democrats should be
very concerned about this. Because if the Obama White House
can do this during the transition to the Trump transition, then
there’s nothing that would stop the Trump administration from
doing this to his political opponents, if it’s fairly easy for senior
White House officials to do this kind of thing and gather that kind
of intelligence if it’s not directly related to, you know, clearly
national security foreign intelligence reasons.
LAKE: Well, I have nothing to do – I mean, I was unaware of that
when I was reporting my story. I know there are a lot of other
mainstream journalists who are reporting it. I don't know how that
guy got his information, and I can tell you, it had no effect on my
reporting.
TUR: Eli Lake, appreciate your time.
LAKE: Thank you.

TUR: Eli, the same details from your report appeared last night in
another report by the man who pushed the Pizzagate story. Does
that concern you?
.

484
 Fresh Evidence The Russia
‘Scandal’ Is A Team Obama Operation
By Post Editorial Board
April 3, 2017 | 8:29pm
Susan Rice Getty Images/Nicholas Kamm
Do you suspect that the noise over Trump campaign
contacts with the Russians is just a political hit arranged by
Obama insiders before they left? You got fresh evidence of
that Monday, with news that then-national security adviser
Susan Rice was behind the “unmasking” of Trumpites in
transcripts of calls with Russian officials.
Again, nothing on the public record so far shows that
anyone on Team Trump said anything improper on those
calls.
It’s no surprise that US spooks intercept foreign officials’
calls. But intelligence community reports don’t disclose
the names of US citizens on the other end. To get that info,
a high official must (but rarely does) push to “unmask” the
Americans’ names.
Bloomberg’s Eli Lake now reports that Rice started doing
just that last year.
That was perfectly legal. But we also know that the Obama
administration later changed the classification of the
“unmasked” transcripts, and other similar material, in
.
485
order to spread the information as widely as possible
within the government.
The motive for that was (supposedly) to prevent Team
Trump from burying it all once it took over. But the result
was that it made it relatively safe for someone (or
someones) to leak the info to the press.
Which made it likely somebody would leak. So Team
Obama’s “spread the info” initiative certainly broke the
spirit of the laws.
Those leaks have produced a nagging political sore for the
new administration — leading to the ouster of national
security adviser Michael Flynn, helping to drive down
President Trump’s approval ratings and making it harder
for him to push his program through.
Rice certainly wasn’t politically naive about the political
uses of intelligence information. She was, after all, the
Obama official who famously made the rounds spouting
the false “Our intel says it was about the video” line on the
Benghazi attack back during the 2012 campaign.
All of this puts the actions of House Intelligence
Committee Chairman Devin Nunes in clearer perspective.
After viewing the Rice requests at the White House, he
disclosed that Trump officials had been caught up in
incidental surveillance.
All of which is a reminder that two issues are in play here:
Russian meddling in the election, about which the nation
already knows plenty — and the Obama team’s efforts to
sabotage Team Trump.
 FBI To Create Special Unit To
Investigate "Russian Role" In US 2016 Election
© AFP 2017/ YURI GRIPAS - US
12:34 03.04.2017(Updated 12:35 03.04.2017)
The new unit is expected to begin
operations in May, with the team likely
to include some 20 agents drawn from
other units.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The US Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) plans to create a specialized unit that
will prioritize the agency’s investigations into claims
of Russia's interference in the 2016 US Presidential
election, local media reported.
"It’s [the unit] meant to surge resources," a source familiar
with the situation told the Financial Times newspaper late
on Sunday, adding that the move is also meant to give
more access to the investigation’s details to FBI director
James Comey.
486
The new unit is expected to begin operations in May,
with the team likely to include some 20 agents drawn
from other units. The unit’s chief will reportedly brief
Comey on the ongoing probe weekly, providing day-to-
day updates to FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
According to the media, the high-profile nature of the
investigation requires a central manager, with a source
familiar with the plan, saying that the investigation is "too
big and it’s on the front page of the newspaper every day."
A spokeswoman for the FBI declined to comment on the
information, the media added.
On March 20, Comey confirmed to the House Intelligence
Committee that the FBI was conducting investigation
into efforts allegedly undertaken by the Russian
government to interfere with the US election.
Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a direct denial
on Thursday of allegations that his country influenced the
2016 US presidential elections. On Wednesday, Russian
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reiterated Moscow's
assertion that US claims of Russian interference in the
election are completely unfounded.
 New Huma Emails Uncover Clinton
State Dept Plan To Bring NYT Reporter
David Brooks To Heel
By Zeropointnow
Apr 3, 2017 5:26 AM

Recently released Huma Abedin State Department emails -
acquired by Judicial Watch via FOIA request, reveal
Clinton State Department staff planning to summon New
York Times reporter David Brooks for an "OTR" (off the
record) conversation over a "shot" he took at Hillary in a
Feburary 2010 article. This isn't the first time we've
learned of the Democrat apparatus wrapping their
tentacles around the MSM, and it's the second time
in weeks Judicial Watch has delivered a bombshell.
They're doing good work.
In summary; Hillary Clinton - code named "Evergreen,"
fired off an email on February 9th, 2010 to advisors
Philippe Reines and Jake Sullivan regarding an article
written by NYT's David Brooks (links added):
intrusive -- basis. An OTR conversation
with you is the best way to help guys
like Brooks 'figure out' how things work.
So a top Clinton advisor wanted to get 'back in the habit' of
bringing people or groups in every few weeks? This
clearly suggests the Clinton State Dept. was at some point
regularly meeting with members of the MSM to discuss
content. And how exactly did Hillary, assuming the
'OTR' meeting with David Brooks took place, help him to
'figure out' how things work?

From: Evergreen
To: PIR (Philippe Reines), Jake Sullivan
Subject: David Brooks
"Took a shot at me in his column today.
Any ideas what prompted it?"

To which senior advisor Philippe Reines responds:

"Not sure - but this is a good excuse to

bring him in for an OTR [off the record]
with you. Lona mentioned you wanted to
see [NYT Journalist] Tom Friedman - with
your ok, we could schedule both
(separately) over the next month or so.

I'd very much like to get back in the habit of bringing

someone or a small group in every few weeks"

Followed by Jake Sullivan's response:

Phillippe and I had an offline conversation

about this and I agree entirely. I think it
makes sense for you to meet with
influencers on a regular -- though not

487
 Eerie Prescience Of Donald Trump
Israel Shamir
April 3, 2017
Table of Contents
If President Trump would say “The sun rises in the east
and sets in the west”, undoubtedly the New York Times
will sarcastically laugh and claim that the ignorant redneck
who became the president thanks to Putin the Killer’s
interference, is not aware of not-so-recent advances in
astronomy that make his sentence truly absurd. There was
no statement, not a single Trump’s twit that the mass
media did not debunk and made a subject of mirth.
However, as time goes, we learn that Trump knows things
other people do not know or do not dare to say. Here are
three statements of Trump that caused disbelief and
indignation but later on, they turned out to be absolute
truth.
Sweden
In February, Trump said: “You look at what’s happening
in Sweden. Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden.
They took in large numbers [of immigrants]. They’re
having problems like they never thought possible.” His
enemies almost died of laughter. “What has he been
smoking?”, – asked Carl Bildt, elderly Swedish statesman,
the leading pro-NATO Russia-basher of this country.
Swedish devotees of the NWO competed for the silliest
response: “we went to sleep at 9 pm”, “a moose has been
sighted”, “we ate too much”.
A few days passed, and this complacency was destroyed
by immigrants rioting in a Stockholm suburb. They burned
cars, women were molested, peaceful Sweden has been
turned into a trouble spot. It was even worse in Malmo, the
488
third city of Sweden, practically vacated by Swedes.
Immigrants took over its urban centre, while the
prosperous Danes had bought its leafy suburbs. Swedish
media tried to keep these events under wraps, but failed. It
appears that immigrant crimes have a special code R291,
making it forbidden for the press to publish. The riots and
the displacement of native Swedes are a real problem in
Sweden, and they are likely to impact the Swedish vote
next year.
So Trump was right, and his debunkers were wrong.
Thanks to the obedient Swedish media, the government
played the game of «Tout va très bien, Madame la
Marquise», “everything is fine”, but Trump knew what
was brewing and he did not hesitate to say that. In a few
days it became clear that he was right; but surely his
detractors did not apologise and did not acknowledge their
fault.
By the way, an important Swedish newspaper has
published an attack on yours truly. They did not like that I
“designated” Trump’s triumph as a historical turning point,
“the Jewish century” was now at an end, and Europe will
rise from “the liberal tyranny”, and in particular, “the
happy slaves” in Sweden would have the strength to rise
up against the stifling media and fanatical feminism.” To
make clear that I am a rotten egg, they added “a racist and
holocaust denier”, just like Trump. This is a mark of
disobedience. They can’t get off this topic, for some
reason.
Wiretapping
In March, Trump Tweeted “Obama had my “wires tapped”
in TrumpTower just before the victory.” And the
mainstream media exploded in laughter. Their headlines
called it “unsubstantiated insinuations” or worse. (One
could think that their accusations of Russian interference
were ever substantiated!) It took a few days and proof
emerged.
This was obvious from the very beginning to whoever
listened to Edward Snowden and to Julian Assange of
Wikileaks. The secret services surveil everybody and
everything. Not in vain, after Trump’s victory, Obama
allowed the CIA and NSA to spread their illegally obtained
data among other agencies without judicial control. This
was done to facilitate future leaks of poison and make the
location of the leak nigh impossible, or quite difficult.
Anyway, the claim of Trump has been validated by Devin
Nunes, the brave head of the House Intelligence
Committee, who saw proof of the surveillance and
reported it to his President. (A propos, Nunes was the man
who openly supported the Liberty survivors and the
enquiry of the Israeli attack on the American vessel. Even
brave people are usually hesitant to quarrel with the Israeli
Lobby, but he did. Such a person can already do anything,
even report to his president that he was wiretapped.)
The agencies indeed wiretapped Tramp and his assistants,
and they spread the data widely. After the inauguration, the
data was leaked into CIA-related media. At first, it was not
even denied: on January 20, the New York Times carried a
front-page story with the headline: “Wiretapped Data Used
in Inquiry of Trump Aides” saying, inter alia, that
“American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are
examining intercepted communications and financial
transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible
links between Russian officials and associates of
President-elect Donald J. Trump.”
This surveillance and its leak caused the Flynn affair. I
have learned what Flynn actually discussed with the
Russian ambassador. I haven’t seen this being reported in
the US media: they darkly hissed of Flynn “discussing
sanctions” with the Russian. The truth was somewhat
different. Flynn called the Ambassador when Obama in a
fit of fury expelled dozens of Russian diplomats in 24
hours just before the New Year’s Eve, and forbade them to
use their holiday vacation premises. Obama did it in order
to poison the US-Russia relations, for as you know, the
NWO-beholden Democrats want at least a cold war, or
preferably a nuclear one with the Russian bear. Obama
tried his worst to spoil the relations to such an extent, that
even Trump would find it hard to heal.
Flynn did his best (I presume on orders of Trump) to calm
the Russians. He offered and procured help: the expelled
diplomats needed a plane to leave on very short notice, and
seats weren’t available. Flynn fixed it. Flynn told the
Ambassador that Trump would roll back Obama’s punitive
measures related to the expulsion. The Ambassador passed
the message to Putin, and Putin, always a gentleman,
489
refrained from tit-for-tat expulsion of the US diplomats
from Moscow, as he would definitely do otherwise. Putin
even invited children of the US diplomats to a Christmas
event in Kremlin. So Flynn acted for the benefit of
America and its diplomats, and saved the two great
countries from much aggravation. He deserves a medal for
his work, not a dismissal; and it is really shame that Trump
could not keep him.
The newspapers keep denying the wiretap, but they do so
in a tricky way: as surveillance did not literally “tap wires”
(for there are no wires between mobiles) they swore it did
not happen. This is an old trick, practiced by Autolycus,
grandfather of Odysseus, and he learned from his father
Hermes how to cheat under oath.
So Trump spoke truth, and he proved it in a most
impressive way.
Jews Under Threat
The third case of Trump being ridiculed and fully
vindicated is the most remarkable one. There were recently
many threats against Jewish institutions all over the US.
The Jewish media connected the threats with Trump’s
election. They called it a “wave of threats”, “second wave
of threats”, “third wave of threats”. Apparently, dozens, if
not hundreds of Jewish institutions received intimidating
calls and threats.
The Jewish journalists are usually Trump-haters. Not for
some specific Jewish reasons: they are for immigration, for
race-mixing (always excepting Jews), for re-gendering,
and for finance. For them, Trump’s attack on financier
George Soros, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, and
Goldman Sachs Chair and CEO Lloyd Blankfein has been
an antisemitic attack as they are Jewish.
So it was easy for them to blame Trump for the threats. At
his press-conference, Trump made a short work of Jake
Turx, a Jewish reporter who insinuated that Trump
encouraged antisemitism. He said that the Jews probably
did the threats themselves, or something to such effect.
The Jewish media exploded once again. How did he dare?
The ADL, the Jewish wannabe gestapo, wrote: “anti-
Semites alleged that Jews themselves are behind the
numerous bomb threats to Jewish institutions as a way to
garner sympathy for being a victim and that the Jews are
using the cemetery desecration to force President Trump
into making a statement about anti-Semitism.”
The Pennsylvania Attorney General claimed that Donald
Trump said to him that Jewish people might be behind the
threats and attacks on Jewish Community Centres to
“make others look bad”, another liberal-Jewish publication
alleged and concluded: “The President of the United States
should never be claiming that threats and attacks are “false
flags.” America needs a president, not a bigoted
conspiracy theorist in chief.”
And then Trump called upon the FBI and had their sent
agents to Israel. There, in a rather small southern town of
Ashkelon, lived a young hacker with his five computers
and three antennas who made all the threats single-handed.
What’s worse, he did it for two years, and Israeli police did
nothing to apprehend him – until they saw FBI agents.
Then they immediately arrested the guy who spilled the
beans right away. Apparently FBI knew all about him, but
while Obama was at the helm, they did nothing.
If he were a goy, Jews would call to crucify him – and
Trump. But as he was a Jew, the responses in the Jewish
media were very kind and understanding. He was a very
young and very patriotic young man, he was sick, and he
did not understand what he did, but he surely acted for
perceived benefit of the Jews.
So indeed the threats and attacks were “false flags”, as
these awful antisemites and bigoted conspiracy theorists
had claimed.
For the following quotation I’ll thank Steve Sailer, who
dug it up. David Schraub wrote in the Jewish magazine
Tablet (they did once a hatchet job on me): “On March 1, I
penned a column excoriating Donald Trump and other
mainstream conservatives for suggesting attacks on Jewish
sites—bomb threats, vandalism, and otherwise—were false
flag attacks designed to discredit the right.
Palestinian conflict. His velvet glove hides an iron fist. The
Israeli right has been so happy about his election, but now
they feel that perhaps they made a wrong choice. For the
first time ever, American diplomats visited not only
Ramallah, but Palestinian refugee camps as well. It
appears they try to deal with the Jewish settlers directly.
And among settlers, there is a not inconsiderable fraction
of people who want to settle with Arabs and live as equals
among them. So I am not pessimistic about a Middle East
peace.
Trump ordered giving up the regime change drive in Syria,
and this is already a good thing. It would be better if he
were to forget about the Middle East completely, but
probably the US military would not allow that.
And Trump is not alone. It is true that mainstream media is
against him, but the real sector of the US economics stands
behind the President. I was told that negotiators of Sony-
Ericson have tried to make some deals with American
companies and unwisely they referred to their work for the
CIA (they manufactured wiretap devices or similar). To
their great surprise, the American businessmen were
underwhelmed and had sent them home without signing
the deal. Partnership with the CIA means partnership with
the liberals of the WaPo and the NY Times, and it is not
the flavour of the month among American industrialists.

Later that week, Juan Thompson—a former journalist for

the left-wing outlet The Intercept—became the first man
arrested for calling in some of these threats, allegedly in
the hopes that he could blame his ex-girlfriend for the
crime. Clearly, I lack the gift of timing. Today, Israeli
officials announced the arrest of a 19-year-old with dual
Israeli-American citizenship who is alleged to have been
behind many of the remaining bomb calls.” End of quote.
(He lacked the gift of timing, but he did not lack hutzpah,
for instead of apologising he insisted he was basically
right. As I wrote once, being Jewish means you never have
to say I am sorry.)

So now you see that you have a prescient President? And
not only prescient, but a man of iron will, too. Obama
knew that the threats were coming from Israel, but he
never dared to say that. Trump is nobody’s fool. There are
signs that he will even solve the unsolvable Jewish-
With such strong backing, it is too early to despair of
Trump. He still can emerge the winner in his struggle
against secret services and their media. And do not forget:
the next time newspapers ridicule Trump’s twits, hold your
laughter for a while. He is eerily prescient.

490
 President Trump Officially Signs Resolution To Overturn
FCC Internet Privacy Rules
By Chance Miller
Apr. 3rd 2017 7:00 Pm PT
As expected, President Trump today signed a resolution
that will repeal Obama-era Internet privacy regulations.
The move comes following the resolution passing the
Senate and the House, despite calls from privacy advocates
that it would allow ISPs to sell the browsing history of its
customers.
The rules were set form by the FCC last year, but had
actually not gone into effect yet. Instead, the Trump
Administration repealed them prior to them taking effect.
The regulations would have required broadband companies
to get user permission before sharing sensitive information
such as browsing and location data, app usage, and more.
Furthermore, it would have required ISPs to protect
browsing data from hackers and alert customers of any
breaches.
Additionally, the the resolution passed today prohibits the
FCC from passing any additional privacy restrictions that
would protect the data customers.
“The consequences of passing this
resolution are clear: broadband providers
like AT&T, Comcast, and others will be
able to sell your personal information to the
highest bidder without your permission,”
said Representative Anna Eshoo (D-CA)
on the House floor this afternoon.
.
491
“And no one will be able to protect you, not
even the Federal Trade Commission that
our friends on the other side of the aisle
keep talking about.”
Though many have argued that repealing the soon-to-take-
effect Obama-era regulations paves the way for ISPs to sell
user information, a handful of providers have already said
they won’t partake in that. Over the weekend, Comcast,
AT&T, and Verizon said they wouldn’t sell individual
browsing history and further clarified their privacy
policies.
AT&T says in its privacy statement it
“will not sell your personal information to
anyone, for any purpose. Period.”
In a blog post Friday, AT&T said it would not change those
policies after Trump signs the repeal.
Verizon does not sell personal web browsing histories and
has no plans to do so in the future, said spokesman Richard
Young.
“We do not sell our broadband customers’
individual web browsing history. We did not
do it before the FCC’s rules were adopted,
and we have no plans to do so,” said
Gerard Lewis, Comcast’s chief privacy
officer.
As my colleague Ben Lovejoy noted last week, this sort of
legal action only further solidifies the fact that it’s time to
look at ways to protect yourself on the Internet…
 Tucker Carlson: ‘Our Laws Provide
No Serious Protection From Being Spied
Upon for Political Reasons’
Dr. Fly
Mon Apr 3, 2017 10:17pm EST

Tucker Carlson tackled the subject of Susan Rice and
privacy this evening — drawing a red line in the sand —
proclaiming that ‘our laws provided no serious protections
from being spied on for political reasons.’
Can anyone make an argument proving this to be a false
statement?
All too often, lazy thinkers conclude that it is the right of
government to spy on its citizens. Perhaps that is the case
.
in Saudi Arabia or Canada, but it’s not supposed to be that
way here. Either the promotional propaganda that lauds
America’s democracy as being the ideal for representative
forms of government are true or they aren’t. Providing the
latter prevails, as it is now, no one will ever believe in the
dream that was democracy — thanks to a cadre of corrupt
mountebanks who’ve abused the goodwill of the American
people and its systems for purposes of self-aggrandizement
and a prevailing bias that wantonly eschews the liberty of
its citizens — superseded only by a craven and insatiable
appetite for power.

492
 ABC, NBC Finally Report Rice
Revelation Only To Defend Obama Admin’s Actions
By Kristine Marsh
April 4, 2017 | 10:51 AM EDT

White House correspondent Kristen Welker’s report on

Today downplayed the news, passively connecting Rice to
the report, and arguing it was “common practice” for
security officials to do what she did.

Separately, Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice

is in the spotlight this morning amid reports she requested
the identities of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports.

That wound up connecting to some of

Donald Trump's transition and
After ABC and NBC’s evening news broadcasts Monday campaign officials.
night completely ignored a morning report revealing
former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice Trump administration says Rice crossed the line by doing
requested classified intelligence of Trump associates, it. Now Rice hasn’t commented publicly,
“dozens of times,” the networks finally did their job
Tuesday morning, giving it the bare minimum of coverage.
However, all three networks were quick to take sides and but former Obama officials are pushing
defend the Obama Administration’s actions. back and argue it is common practice to
seek identities in the course of trying to
understand intelligence reports.
On ABC’s Good Morning America, White House
correspondent Cecilia Vega didn’t even pretend to report
the new development objectively. After anchor Amy
Robach noted the uproar among conservatives to the
report, Vega agreed, noting some were calling it

“the smoking gun.” But Vega quickly shot

down this argument, saying
“It is not that.”

Definitely so.

In fact, some of president’s

conservatives allies are applauding this,
they are calling this the smoking gun,
that proves his wiretapping claims. It is
not that Amy. A former aide close to Rice
doesn't deny that she did, in fact, seek out
these names but they say she did
nothing illegal or nothing out of the
purview of her job.
Her former job as national security advisor, Amy.
Just like ABC, NBC also relied on an unnamed source to
defend Rice.
493
Just as CBS was the only network to cover the story last
night, it was the only network to give the story more than a
few seconds take on it this morning. While Major Garrett’s
report was twice as long as the coverage ABC and NBC
gave to the topic, he dutifully came to Obama
Administration’s defense yet again.
As National Security Advisor it was
within Rice's authority to request the
unmasking of names. However, the
source said Rice did not ask that the
names be distributed through the
intelligence community. As members of
 the Trump White house continue to
allege.
While spending an entire month endlessly criticizing
Donald Trump for his allegations that President Obama
.
wiretapped Trump Tower each network spent less than a
minute reporting this latest development which supports
the idea the Obama Administration was secretly gathering
intelligence on the Trump team.

494
 CNN Goes On Rampage Against
Susan Rice Bombshell, Instructs Viewers To Ignore Story
'We Will Not Aid And Abet The People Trying To Misinform You'
Apr 4, 2017
Since news broke Monday that the Obama
Administration's National Security Adviser, Susan Rice,
directed the "unmasking" of NSA intercepts of Trump
associates, CNN has raced to shoot down the blockbuster
report.
CNN Tonight's Don Lemon went so far as
to announce he would ignore the news at
all costs.
While interviewing a Democratic congressman, CNN's
Chris Cuomo claimed it was "demonstrably untrue" Rice
sought surveillance of the Trump team, even as that's
exactly what yesterday's reports prove.
Over the last 24 hours, the network has also repeatedly
called on its chief national security correspondent, Jim
Sciutto, to dismiss the reports as a non-story; Sciutto has
even excused Rice claiming ignorance of the unmasking
scandal two weeks ago, arguing Rice "wasn't aware" what
unmasking Rep. Devin Nunes (D-Calif.) was referring to.
And on Tuesday's "New Day," anchor Alisyn
Camerota openly pleaded with Sen. John McCain to write-
off the news as unimportant.
Last night, Lemon began "CNN Tonight" with an
announcement that the Rice report a "fake scandal ginned
up by right-wing media and Trump" that he would not be
baited into justifying with coverage.
"On this program tonight, we will not insult
your intelligence by pretending," it's
legitimate, he said. "Nor will we aid and
abet the people trying to misinform you, the
American people, by creating a diversion.
Not going to do it."
Sciutto also claimed the story was "ginned up" to distract
from Trump tweeting that the Trump Tower was
"wiretapped," when it was in fact communications were
picked up through ordinary NSA surveillance.
"Again, to note by senior intelligence officials who work
for both Democrats and Republicans, this appears to be a
495
story, largely ginned up, partly as a distraction from this
larger investigation," Sciutto told Anderson Cooper,
explaining that "someone close to Ambassador Rice" told
him this type of unmasking is "not unusual."
In another appearance, Sciutto even attempted to excuse
Rice from claiming to have no knowledge of the
unmasking she's been caught orchestrating.
"From her perspective she didn’t know
what specific unmasking Devin Nunes and
others are talking about, in part because
that is something she asks — or asked
during the regular course of her work as
national security adviser," he said. "I do
know from speaking to people yesterday
close to her that she doesn’t know
specifically what Devin Nunes and others
are accusing her of when it comes to
unmasking because that was something
sets in the regular course of her job."
And in yet another appearance, Sciutto also setup
something of a strawman, arguing that the unmasking story
is not important because "unmasking is not leaking."
During an interview with Sen. John McCain, CNN's
Camerota plainly tried nudging the Arizona senator into
dismissing the Rice bombshell:
CAMEROTA: “Okay, senator, I want to
move on to other news of the day and that
is, as you know, the Trump White House
 has talked about what they see or they say
they see as a controversy of the former
national security adviser Susan Rice
unmasking a name, someone on team
Trump, that was somehow caught up in
some incidental collection of surveillance.
They say that this is a controversy, it shows
that she has done something wildly out of
the bounds of normalcy. Is this business as
usual for a national security adviser to ask
for a name to be revealed, an American
name, if she wants to know more or is this
some sort of a controversy?”
McCAIN: “I think the circumstances
indicate that there’s a possibility that that
request could have been politically
motivated. But we need to get to the
bottom of it. As I’ve said, and I’ll probably
say many more times because I’m kind of
boring, this is a centipede. A shoe will drop
.
496
every few days, the latest the meeting in
Seychelles. This is a requirement, in my
view, why we need a select committee in
order to get through all this because there’s
lots more shoes that will drop. I can’t make
a judgment on what I just heard. She did
have the authority to do it. What was the
motivation for doing it, I think is the
question.”
CAMEROTA: “What we’ve heard from the
reporting, is that if she saw a masked name
that said American number one had these
conversations with Russians at the same
time that President Obama had imposed
sanctions, wouldn’t that arouse some
curiosity on her part?”
McCAIN: “All I can say, Alisyn, is that I
don’t know enough to reach a conclusion
except to say this is another aspect of this
multi-dimensional scandal."
 CNN Partisan Cuomo Spins
Susan Rice Story As ‘Another Fake Scandal’
By Jackson Richman
April 4, 2017 | 11:02 AM EDT
On Tuesday, CNN New Day anchor Chris Cuomo
sidestepped reports that Barack Obama's National Security
Adviser Susan Rice may have abused her authority in
unmasking intelligence reports regarding communication
between President Donald Trump's transition team and
Russia. Instead, he blasted outlets like Fox News:

"President Trump wants you to believe

he is the victim of a 'crooked scheme,'
his words. There is no evidence of any
wrongdoing. In fact if anything, the NSA
asking for identities was foreign
players. The White House blasting the
At Monday's White House press briefing, Press Secretary
press for not reporting on another fake
Sean Spicer said,
scandal being peddled by right-wing
media."
"From a media standpoint somewhat
intrigued by the lack of interest we've seen
The report also consisted of conflating the terms in some of these public revelations and
"wiretapping" and "surveilled." President Trump tweeted reporting that has gone in that direction
last month and accused Obama of wiretapping Trump we've seen and some other directions that
Tower during the 2016 election. we've seen."

"We're at a space where intelligence is
routinely politicized," national security
correspondent Jim Sciutto said.
He waved away concerns of Rice's intentions behind the
unmasking:
"Susan Rice at the center of President
Trump's latest attempt to renew his
unproven wiretapping claim and divert
attention away from his team's contacts
with Russia.”
Moreover, the CNN report adopted talking partisan talking
points, such as playing two interviews from Democratic
representatives Jim Himes of Connecticut and Eric
Swalwell of California, dismissing these concerns over
Rice.
"Officials stress unmasking names in
intelligence reports is a routine procedure,
something different from leaking this
information to the press," Sciutto said.

Sciutto added,

"A source close to Rice telling CNN that

allegations that she did anything
unusual or improper [is] ‘false.’ The
White House blasting the media for
ignoring this ginned up scandal."

Himes said in a CNN interview,

497
 "If somebody feels intelligence value
there's procedures you go through and
lawyers look over your shoulder, so there's
nothing unusual about unmasking."
Swalwell took Himes' remarks a step further and said on
the network,
"We believe this is nothing more than a
record to roll more smoke bombs into an
investigation that was making progress."
Sciutto accused the Trump administration, which he said
"tried to distort comments made by a
former Obama defense official, Evelyn
Farkas."
Last week, conservative media noted a March
2nd interview Farkas did with MSNBC's Morning Joe.
The former Pentagon's top expert on Russia, Farkas said,
"I had a fear that somehow that
[intelligence] information would disappear
with the senior [Obama] people who left, so
it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy
... that the Trump folks – if they found out
how we knew what we knew about their ...
the Trump staff dealing with Russians –
that they would try to compromise those
sources and methods, meaning we no
longer have access to that intelligence.”
Sciutto ended his report and acknowledged,
"There are legitimate questions about
unmasking. How easy does the law
unmask names of Americans caught up in
the surveillance of foreigners. Those are
legitimate questions."
He added, however,
"But based on what we know now, there is
nothing unusual or certainly illegal about
the unmasking done by former Obama
officials."
While there may be nothing illegal about unmasking, the
Rice speculation may be related to intelligence reports
leaked to Washington Post columnist David
Ignatius. Former Bush National Security Council official
Michael Doran penned in The Hill,
"The issue that has recently seized [House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin]
Nunes is of vital importance to anyone who
498
cares about fundamental civil
liberties...Regardless of how the
government collected on [former National
Securty Adviser Michael] Flynn, the leak
was a felony and a violation of his civil
rights."
Doran added,
"The leaking of Flynn’s name was part of
what can only be described as a White
House campaign to hype the Russian
threat and, at the same time, to depict
Trump as Vladimir Putin’s Manchurian
candidate."
The Daily Caller's Richard Pollock reported Monday that
according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova,
"What was produced by the intelligence
community at the request of Ms. Rice were
detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone
calls with unmasked Trump associates in
perfectly legal conversations with
individuals."
Here is the transcript of the April 4th report:
New Day
04/4/2017
6:00:05 AM – 6:04:58 AM [4 min., 53 sec.]
CHRIS CUOMO: President Trump wants you to believe he is the
victim of a crooked scheme, his words. There is no evidence of
any wrongdoing. In fact if anything, the NSA asking for identities
was foreign players. The White House blasting the press for not
reporting on another fake scandal being pedaled by right-wing
media. This is Day 75 of the Trump Presidency, and we do have
it covered. Let's begin with CNN's Jim Sciutto live in
Washington. Busy night for you, my friend.
JIM SCIUTTO: We're at a space where intelligence is
routinely politicized. But even the terms of intelligence are
deliberately distorted. I've spoken to the most senior former
intelligence officials from both Republican and
Democratic administrations. They say definitively unmasking is
not leaking. It is routine. It is something that senior national
security officials do on a regular basis to get a better
understanding of the intelligence reports they every day. It's
legal. There are protocols put in place since 9/11 to allow this
to happen. It cannot be done alone, requires the approval of
the intelligence community. That information is not
widely disseminated. It's between the briefer and that senior
national security official whoever it is, including Secretary
Rice. I've spoken to people close to Secretary Rice. It is their
position that she -- reports that she improperly unmasked identity
are, in their words, false. This appears to be an attempt to back
justify unfounded claim president Obama surveilled him.
Susan Rice at the center of President Trump's latest attempt to
renew his unproven wiretapping claim and divert attention
away from his team's contacts with Russia. President Trump
seizing on conservative media reports that claim that
Ambassador Rice unmasked the names of Trump
Transition officials caught up in routine surveillance. At its core,
this was surveillance for apparently political reasons tweeting
that he was spied on before the nomination and calling it
a crooked scheme. A source close to Rice telling CNN that
allegations that she did anything unusual or improper, ‘false.’ The
White House blasting the media for ignoring this ginned up
scandal.
[ROLL CLIP]
SEAN SPICER: From a media standpoint somewhat intrigued by
the lack of interest we've seen in some of these public
revelations and reporting that has gone in that direction we've
seen and some other directions that we've seen.
SCIUTTO: Officials stress unmasking names in intelligence
reports is a routine procedure, something different from leaking
this information to the press.
[ROLL CLIP]
JIM HIMES: If somebody feels intelligence value
there's procedures you go through and lawyers look over your
shoulder, so there's nothing unusual about unmasking.
SCIUTTO: The administration's latest justification, a far cry
from President Trump's initial claim one month ago, President
Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, an accusation that Mr. Trump
that attempted to redefine.
[ROLL CLIP]
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: That covers surveillance
and many other things.
SCIUTTO: And justify even after his own FBI director refuted
the claim.
[ROLL CLIP]
.
499
TRUMP: I think you're going to find some very interesting
items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks.
SCIUTTO: Last week the Trump administration tried to
distort comments made by a former Obama defense official,
Evelyn Farkas.
[ROLL CLIP]
SPICER: Dr. Farkas’ admissions alone are devastating.
SCIUTTO: This to support President Obama spied on him. She
said her comments were widely misinterpreted. The week before
that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes got
wrapped up in the White House diversion.
[ROLL CLIP]
DEVIN NUNES: The President needs to know these intelligence
reports are out there.
SCIUTTO: Briefing the Commander in Chief and media before
his own committee about classified information about
incidental collection on the president's associates.
[ROLL CLIP]
TRUMP: I very much appreciated the fact that they found what
they found.
SCIUTTO: Trump calling Nunes’ announcement
‘vindication.’ Days later it turns out officials inside Trump’s White
House were the original source of the documents shown to
Nunes.
[ROLL CLIP]
ERIC SWALWELL: We believe this is nothing more than a record
to roll more smoke bombs into an investigation that was making
progress.
SCIUTTO: Now, there are legitimate questions about
unmasking. How easy does the law unmask names of Americans
caught up in the surveillance of foreigners. Those are legitimate
questions. But based on what we know now, there is nothing
unusual or certainly illegal about the unmasking done by former
Obama officials. Chris and Alisyn.
 Morning Joe Diagnoses
President Trump With Mental 'Disorder'
By Alexis Thomasi
April 4, 2017 | 10:24 AM EDT
Monday on Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough, along
with the other panelists, attempted to diagnose President
Trump with a mental disorder. The discussion began after
a clip was played of Trump walking out of a signing.
Scarborough repeatedly asked his co host, Mika
Brzezinski,
“What just happened?”.
This catapulted into Scarborough explaining:
“We had our misgivings about him. But I
think it's safe to say neither you nor I
thought it would be this bad.”
Scarborough continued this discussion expressing:
“We were concerned – really, really
concerned. Never thought though that the
guy that we've known for 10, 11, 12 years
would be that much of a petulant
brat...Because it hurts him. It’s like he’s
getting a hammer every day and just – we
didn't think he would get a hammer every
day and pick it up and just hit his hand.”
Donny Deutsch, an advertising executive and frequent
liberal guest on the show, answered:
No, actually quite the opposite. The day
after he got elected I came on your show
and I was -- maybe I was just whistling in
the dark. I said you know what, maybe his
need to be loved, and his ego to be
successful, and want to pull the left side to
500
the middle, all of the above -- It's quite the
opposite...I also think it's time, and I know
in the post Goldwater era there's the
unwritten rule in the psychiatric community
that nobody diagnoses from afar, I just
don't think he's a well guy, period.
Scarborough agreed and pulled political analyst Mark
Halperin into the conversation:
When you start doing things, Mark
Halperin, that are against your best interest
-- See, because, during the campaign he
did all these horrible things, right? But you
could say they are horrible things but
there's going to be a segment of his base
that will actually vote for him because he's
talking about the birther stuff or he's talking
about this or he's talking about that so – In
that respect he would do these things that
were offensive to all of us but you wouldn't
say, well this is actually like him hitting
himself on the hand with hammer. What he
is doing now is not in his self-interest. And
that's when you start saying, wait a
second, how well is he if he's doing these
things that any rational human being would
know would hurt him politically?
Further into the segment, Scarborough again brought up
the mental health of the President, saying:
“We talked about this before, how well the
guy is off right now mentally. Any sane,
rational person would know if I keep
bringing attention to something, then I'm
going to keep churning up attention on
something, and it is not going to be in my
best interests...And his staff, like any sane,
rational staff would be pulling their hair out
right now saying, my God. Instead, they
keep making excuses for it.”
Deutsch, playing into this comment, replied:
 There’s a disorder -- it’s interesting. There
was an article over the weekend about
election night that right even after his
triumph he was fixated on a three-day old
negative article, they literally couldn't get
him off of. And that's what this is -- I don't
know what the disorder is. And I'm not
being glib, that regardless of what else is
going on if there’s – if he's been pricked in
a certain area, there's an inability,
physiologically for him to move off of it,
even if it's self-destructive.
Scarborough retorted:
He is elected President of the United
States, and he starts lying about 3 million
votes being illegally cast. And he is
obsessed on that from the day he's elected
President of the United States in the most
shocking political upset of our lifetimes...
Then the day he's inaugurated, Mika, he is
now the 45th President of the United
States. What does he do? He starts
obsessing about crowd size and starts lying
about crowd size. Now I'm sorry, that is not
a healthy, normal, well functioning man.
And he obsesses and he lies about crowd
size for another three or four weeks...Until
he starts lying about Barack Obama. Not
healthy. Something is deeply wrong with
this man that he cannot show...Everything
he is doing just as offensive, but it is
against his political interest. And that's
where you start saying, okay, wait a
second. There's no rational reason why he
should be doing this every day, even if you
think he's a cynical, horrible human being,
this hurts him.
Deutsch, again feeding right into this narrative:
“And Joe, what you and I are dancing
around here and going back to, yes, there
was logic, devious and disgusting, but
everything now points to certain
disorders. My hair is not on fire but – and
I'm not a clinician. And I, once again, we no
– doctors don't diagnose – There’s a – he's
not well in many ways. If anybody who was
behaving this way, if a school teacher was
behaving this way, if your friend was
behaving this way, you'd be concerned.”
Continuing Deutsch’s thought,
Scarborough said: “If any CEO behaved
this way, they would have been fired by the
board 60 days ago.”
501
In another segment towards the end of the show, the hosts
of Morning Joe began to say more absurd things regarding
the President. Brzezinski spoke:
“We leave you with one of the President's
tweets from just moments ago. Quote, "Did
Hillary Clinton ever apologize for receiving
the answers to the debate?” Scarborough,
outraged, exclaimed: “Oh my God. Are you
kidding me? Are you kidding me? You're
worried about North Korea or that?”
Brzezinski retorted:
“This guy is tweeting right now. Our
President, the leader of the free world. He’s
got his fingers on the button and he’s
tweeting about Hillary.” Scarborough,
again, blurted out: “Are you kidding me?”
Nick Confessore of The New York Times
declared: “Hillary and the debate?
Nobody cares. Nobody cares.”
Scarborough agreed and yelled out,
“Nobody on the planet cares.”
Brzezinski proclaimed:
“There goes that hammer again!” Following
these exchanges, Scarborough turned to
his co host and said: “Mika, you can say
it...The amendment thing.” Brzezinski
asserted: “The 25th Amendment. Let’s do
it.”
Brzezinski was referring to the provision in the 25th
Amendment that allows for the president's removal from
office.
Here is the full exchange that took place April 3
MSNBC - Morning Joe
6AM TEASE
6:00:53 - 6:05:05
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Wait. What just happened there?
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Well he walked out of -- he– he just–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: But it's a signing, right?
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I know but- he didn't want to do it.
DONNY DEUTSCH: He didn’t have a pen.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: But– he– somebody had to–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: At the last minute he decided we're going to
do this signing inside but he didn't tell anybody.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well- Cuz I'm just saying I saw it-
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yeah
JOE SCARBOROUGH: And then I'm thinking, this reminds me of
a show
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yes! My favorite show.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Somebody actually tweeted it. So let's
watch this really quickly.
[Played to the theme of Veep when they usually are rolling the
credits. Morning Joe added the credits and theme song to this
clip of Trump]
DONALD TRUMP: Very, very quickly. Thank you very much.
REPORTER: Mr. President, today with your tweet, were you
trying to tell the justice department to grant immunity to Michael
Flynn? Were you trying to do that Mr. President? Was that your
intention Mr. President, sir? Mr. President, was that your
intention, Mr. President? Was that your intention, sir?
>> Thank you, guys.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: They literally didn’t have to edit a thing.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: No. Life imitates art, yeah I think so.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Oh my God.
>>He did not sign it.
>>He did not sign.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That happened.
DONNY DEUTSCH: It's kind of like a metaphor–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That happened!
502
DONNY DEUTSCH: For he was supposed to sign but he didn't.
And he's supposed to behaving like a president and he’s not
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: But he's not. Alright–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: We are how many days in, are we
Donny? How many days are we in?
DONNY DEUTSCH: 70, feels like year six.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: I’ll tell you this. Now everybody goes how
do you not -- how could you not have known he would’ve -- listen,
we've known this guy for 10, 11, 12 years.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yeah
JOE SCARBOROUGH: We had our misgivings about him. But I
think it's safe to say neither you nor I thought it would be this bad.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Definitely not.
DONNY DEUTSCH: No, I--
JOE SCARBOROUGH: We were concerned–
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: This is–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Really, really concerned. Never thought
though that the guy that we've known for 10, 11, 12 years would
be that much of a petulant brat that when somebody would ask
him a question he would—
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Move his entire signing service and leave
everybody hanging.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Because it hurts. It’s like he’s getting a
hammer every day and just– [motioning a hammer hitting his own
hand] We didn't think he would get a hammer every day and pick
it up and just hit his hand.
DONNY DEUTSCH: No, actually quite the opposite. The day
after he got elected I came on your show and I was- - maybe I
was just whistling in the dark, I said you know what, maybe his
need to be loved, and his ego to be successful, and want to pull
the left side to the middle, all of the above- It's quite the opposite.
And I– bless you- I also think it's time, and I know in the post
Goldwater era there's the unwritten rule in the psychiatric
community that nobody diagnoses from afar, I just don't think
he's a well guy, period.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No. No– It’s just, I mean– No–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: When you start doing things, Mark
Halperin, that are against your best interest. See, because,
during the campaign he did all these horrible things, right? But
you could say they are horrible things but there's going to be a
segment of his base that will actually vote for him because he's
talking about the birther stuff or he's talking about this or he's
talking about that so–
MARK HALPERIN: The wall.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: The wall. In that respect he would do
these things that were offensive to all of us but you wouldn't say,
well this is actually like him hitting himself on the hand with
hammer. What he is doing now is not in his self-interest. And
that's when you start saying, wait a second, how well is he? If
he's doing these things that any rational humanbeing would know
would hurt him politically. Because those things that he did that a
lot of us found repugnant before --
DONNY DEUTSCH: They were effective.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Actually, you could say, you know what,
they offend me but--
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Don’t like it– It’s completely wrong.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Unfortunately it's effective among some
members in the primary.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Will work-
MARK HALPERIN: The glass half empty story is pretty intense.
Low approval ratings, failure of the health care initiative, disarray
within a lot of the government, a lot of tension, and no clear
ability to move forward. Glass half full, and probably not half but
the full part of the glass- I spent last week, five dates in five days-
people are willing to give them a chance. They are not as
impatient as Washington. Huge week, can he get Gorsuch
through? Lots of foreign policy–
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Hold a second. Hold a second. Mitch
Mcconnell will get Gorsuch through
MARK HALPERIN: Yeah
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Just like Mitch Mcconnell --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Yeah- that’s not really-
JOE SCARBOROUGH: I think conservatives are going to see
that as Mitch Mcconnell's accomplishment for good reason and
not Donald Trump's accomplishment.
MARK HALPERIN: Can he get Gorsuch through in a way that he
gets credit. But what– What does he turn to now? What is the–
what are the big issues the President wants to put before the
country? This week is kind of wide open you know? Is he going
to talk about trade? Is he going to talk about health care? Is he
going to talk about taxes?
503
(...)
6:14:44 - 6:19:24
JOE SCARBOROUGH: We talked about this before, how well the
guy is off right now mentally. Any sane, rational person would
know if I keep bringing attention to something, then I'm going to
keep churning up attention on something, and it is not going to be
in my best interests.
MARK HALPERIN: It’s got nothing to do with jobs and the
economy, which is all he says he wants to be focused on.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well- and it's got nothing to do with --
he's repeated this over and over and over again. It really is like
picking the same scab over and over again. I'm sorry to say that,
but that's what he's doing. And his staff, like any sane, rational
staff would be pulling their hair out right now saying, my God.
Instead, they keep making excuses for it.
DONNY DEUTSCH: There’s a disorder- it’s interesting. There
was an article over the weekend about election night that right
even after his triumph he was fixated on a three-day old negative
article, they literally couldn't get him off of. And that's what this
is– I don't know what the disorder is. And I'm not being glib, that
regardless of what else is going on if there’s– if he's been pricked
in a certain area, there's an inability, physiologically for him to
move off of it, even if it's self-destructive.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: He is elected- President of the United
States, and he starts lying about 3 million votes being illegally
cast. And he is obsessed on that from the day he's elected
President of the United States in the most shocking political
upset of our lifetimes. Most people would say–
MARK HALPERIN: Or maybe ever. Ever.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Probably ever. Most people go, I'm good
with that. You know, what I'm going to kind of just kind of take
that to the house and just relax and golf and smile. Then the day
he's inaugurated, Mika, he is now the 45th President of the
United States. What does he do? He starts obsessing about
crowd size and starts lying about crowd size. Now I'm sorry, that
is not a healthy, normal, well functioning man. And he obsesses
and he lies about crowd size for another three or four weeks.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Still does.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Until he starts lying about Barack
Obama. Not healthy. Something is deeply wrong with this man
that he cannot show -- hell, he's not even a day trader, he's a
minute trader. And he keeps -- again, here is the critical thing.
Don't say, please, on Twitter, please, stop being stupid. Don't be
stupid and say you should have known this was coming because
of what he did with the birther stuff. I will say it again, Donald
Trump cynically knew that if he played the birther card that 45%
of the Republican party would be in support of him and say, hey,
that's our guy. He's saying what nobody else will say. That was in MIKA BRZEZINSKI: We leave you with one of the President's
his self-interest. It was offensive. It was – a lie, and it was racist. tweets from just moments ago. Quote, did Hillary Clinton ever
But his political self-interest was cynically forwarded just– just like apologize for receiving the answers to the debate?
a bigot in the South back in the 1940s would do that by– But in
this case, Mika, everything he is doing just as offensive, but it is JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh my God. Are you kidding me?
against his political interest. And that's where you start saying,
okay, wait a second. There's no rational reason why he should
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Just asking. Swear to God. This guy is
be doing this every day, even if you think he's a cynical, horrible
tweeting right now.
human being, this hurts him.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Are you kidding me? You worried about
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Right.
North Korea or that?

DONNY DEUTSCH: And Joe, what you and I are dancing

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Our President, the leader of the free world.
around here and going back to, yes, there was logic, devious and
He’s got his fingers on the button and he’s tweeting about Hillary.
disgusting, but everything now points to certain disorders. My
hair is not on fire but– and I'm not a clinician. And I, once again,
we no– doctors don't diagnose– There’s a – he's not well in JOE SCARBOROUGH: Are you kidding me?
many ways. If anybody who was behaving this way, if a school
teacher was behaving this way, if your friend was behaving this NICK CONFESSORE: Hillary and the debate? Nobody cares.
way, you'd be concerned. Nobody cares.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Right. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Nobody on the planet cares.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: If any CEO behaved this way, they would MARK HALPERIN: Oh there’s one person...
have been fired by the board 60 days ago.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: There goes that hammer again!
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: That's what I wonder about the
administration, this incredible foreign policy team– JOE SCARBOROUGH: Mika, you can say it.

DONNY DEUTSCH: What we never get to talk about. MIKA BRZEZINSKI: I can?

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: The advisers are all too afraid to say JOE SCARBOROUGH: The amendment thing.
anything, even members of the family. They just can't do it. They
get in the room with him. They talk to people who have really MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Oh, it' time for article 25.
good advice– They talk to you (Scarborough) sometimes, and
you give really good advice, same stuff you say on the air, but
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Amendment– 25th amendment.
better, maybe even more clear, then they get in the room and
they can't do it.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: 25th amendment. Let’s do it.
(...)
DONNY DEUTSCH:And the psychiatrist to step forward.
7:43:24 - 7:44:10
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: No seriously, that– there are people who
need to really think about that. How long do they want this to
last? How bad do they want things to get?

504
 The Real Russiagate: Obama’s Stasi State
By Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
April 4, 2017
Mike Whitney has written an excellent expose of the
“Russiagate” cover story for Obama’s political use of
national security to help his party oppose Republicans.
Covert surveillance of politicians on Obama’s Nixon-like
“Enemies List” has been going on for many years, but is
only now being unmasked as a result of the failure of its
cover story (“We weren’t spying on enemies; only on
Russians to protect America”).
Democratic-leaking mass media have passed on the cover
story authored by former Obama-administration officials
led by CIA director John Brennan, FBI director James
Comey, the DNC, and Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff. The
loose ends in this cover-up have now been so widely
exposed as hearsay and political that only 13% of
Republicans believe the fact-free story – but, according to
a poll, 67% of Democrats.
Whitney reports that Comey began the investigation in
July 2016. As of last Friday (March 31, 2017) not a scrap
of evidence has turned up. This did not deter Comey from
telling Congress that Putin “hated Secretary Clinton so
much that the flip side of that coin was that he had a clear
preference for the person running against the person he
hated so much.” So the Russians allegedly “engaged in a
multifaceted campaign to undermine our democracy.”
Comey based this conclusion on what has become a
hilarious bit of gullibility. The Russians, he said
“were unusually loud in their intervention.
It’s almost as if they didn’t care that we
505
knew, that they wanted us to see what they
were doing.”
Alternatively, someone wanted investigators to infer that
the Russians were doing the hacking. They were careful to
insert the signature of GPU-NKVD founder Felix
Dzerzhinsky for anyone to find. As Wikeleaks Vault 7
releases prove, the CIA can hack computers and leave
anyone else’s signature. Due to poor security, the CIA’s
cybertechnology ended up in the Internet domain.
“They’ll be back. They’ll be back, in 2020.
They may be back in 2018,” warned Mr.
Comey. But who is the “they”? “They” seem
to be “us,” or at least what numerous
former national security officials have
suggested: either the NSC, CIA or its “Five
Eyes” partner, British MI6.
Wall Street Journal editorialist Kimberley A. Strassel
poses the real question:
Why hasn’t the Trump administration
had the Secret Service arrest Comey,
Brennan, Schiff, the DNC and Hillary for
trying to overthrow the President of the
United States?
“Mr. Nunes has said he has seen proof that
the Obama White House surveilled the
incoming administration—on subjects that
had nothing to do with Russia—and that it
further unmasked (identified by name)
transition officials. This goes far beyond a
mere scandal. It’s a potential crime.”
What we are watching is turning out to be traces of a plot
against a government elected by the American people.
Attempts by House national security committee Chairman
Devin Nunes have been countered with demands by his
potential victims to recuse himself so as to stop his exposé
of how
“Team Obama was spying broadly on the
incoming administration.”
It seems that this has been going on for many years now.
Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich has dropped a bombshell
about what appears to be his own illegal surveillance under
Obama’s NSC.
“When the president raised the question of
wiretapping on his phones in Trump Tower,
he was challenged to prove that such a
thing could happen. It happened to me.”
Here’s what happened, which was revealed two years after
he left office in 2013 when the Democrats were overjoyed
to see Ohio Republicans redraw the election district lines
to get rid of his candidacy. The Washington Times asked
him to authenticate a secret recording of a cell phone call
“from Saif el-Islam Qaddafi, a high-ranking
official in Libya’s government and a son of
the country’s ruler, Moammar Qaddafi.”
Before taking the call, Rep. Kucinich
“checked with the House’s general counsel
to ensure that such a discussion by a
member of Congress with a foreign power
was permitted by law.”
“I was assured that under the Constitution
a lawmaker had a fundamental duty to ask
questions and gather information—activity
expressly protected by the Article I clauses
covering separation of powers and
congressional speech and debate.”
Given the quality of the recordings was excellent on both
ends of the call, Kucinich concluded that
“the tape was made by an American
intelligence agency and then leaked to the
Times for political reasons. If so, this
episode represented a gross violation of
the separation of powers.”
His repeated Freedom of Information Act requests made in
2012 before leaving office have been stonewalled by the
intelligence agencies for five years.
We are now in a position to see the real story behind
“Russiagate.” It’s not about Russia, except incidentally.
506
The Obama regime abused the
government’s surveillance powers and
spied on Donald Trump and other
Republicans in order to build a dossier
for the DNC to leak to the press in an
attempt to slander or compromise
Trump and throw the election to Hillary.
They’ve been caught, but we can now see
that they took steps to protect themselves
against this. They prepared a cover story.
They pretend they were not spying on
Trump, but on Russians – which only by
fortuitous happenchance turned up
incriminating smoke against Trump.
This cover story was buttressed by the
fake news story prepared by former MI6
freelancer Christopher Steele. As
Whitney reports, Steele “was hired as an
opposition researcher last June to dig up
derogatory information on Donald Trump.”
Unvetted and unverified information paid
for by so-called informants “somehow”
found its way into U.S. intelligence agency
reports. These reports were then leaked to
Democrat-friendly media.
This is where the crime lies.
Obama regime and DNC were using these agencies for
domestic political use, KGB style.
The Obama/Clinton cover story is now falling to pieces.
That explains the desperation in the attack byAdam
Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence
Committee, on Committee Chairman Devin Nunes to stop
the exposure. Russiagate is not a Trump/Putin collusion
but a domestic spy job carried out by Democrats.
Law requires Trump to arrest those
responsible and to put them on trial for
treason and conspiracy to overthrow
the government of the United States.
If Trump fears to prosecute the Obama operatives within
the Deep State, they will try all the harder to attack him to
the point of forcing his removal, or at least discrediting
him and his fellow Republicans to pave the way for the
2018 elections.
 ABC, NBC Cover-Up Revelation Susan Rice
Ordered Trump Aides Unmasked, CBS Defends
By Nicholas Fondacaro
April 3, 2017 | 9:47 PM EDT
A massive revelation in the alleged surveillance of
President Trump’s aides broke Monday morning when
Bloomberg reported that
“[f]ormer National Security Adviser Susan
Rice requested the identities of U.S.
persons in raw intelligence reports on
dozens of occasions that connect to the
Donald Trump transition and campaign.”
With their identities unmasked, it allowed for someone to
freely and illegally leak their names to the press. It’s
controversial news but ABC and NBC both chose to ignore
it that night, while CBS defended Rice.
“We learned more today about the
President's allegation that he and his
aides were caught up in Obama-era
surveillance,”
CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley said, teeing up
reporter Margaret Brennan. Strangely, Pelley stayed away
from flinging the fiery insults which drew him much praise
from the left. Instead of calling Trump’s claims
“baseless,” he kept it neutral, only referring to them as
“allegations.” He also described what the concern was as
“Obama-era surveillance,” something he had not done in
the past.
Brennan played defense for Rice, stating:
“Well, Scott, as national security adviser
to the president, Susan Rice could and
did request the names of individuals
507
who were picked up during legal
surveillance of foreign nationals.”
She then cited unnamed sources who told her there was
nothing wrong with what Rice did:
Now, according to a former national
security official, Trump associates were not
the sole focus of Rice's request, but they
may have been revealed when she asked
to understand why they were appearing in
intelligence reports. However, Rice did not
spread the information according to this
former official, who insisted that there was
nothing improper or political involved.
On Fox News’s Special Report, it was a whole different
story as they led the program with Rice’s unmasking
efforts.
“The surveillance of people close to
President Trump, possibly the President
himself, now has a name and a face
attached to it. And it's one you've seen in
major scandals before,” declared fill-in host
James Rosen during the opening tease.
“Two weeks ago, Chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee announced to the
press and President he had uncovered a
disturbing trend of intelligence collection on
Trump officials, some of which was made
public,” reported Chief White House
Correspondent John Roberts, “Today, we
learn more about the ‘how’ and ‘who’ of
what's going on.”
The Fox News reporter noted that when it came to
statements from House Intelligence Committee Chairman
Devin Nunes about Trump aides being swept up in
incidental collection, Rice claimed she didn't know
anything.
“I know nothing about this. I was surprised
to see reports from Chairman Nunes on
that count today,” she claimed on PBS
NewsHour on March 22.
That is now exposed as a lie, just like then she lied about
what caused the Benghazi attack.
All of that and more went unreported on the Big Three
networks. Ironically during Monday's White House press
briefing, Press Secretary Sean Spicer called the media out
for doing just that. “I think that it is interesting the level or
lack of interest that I've seen in these developments when
it goes in one direction,” he declared, referencing when the
press rushed to wrongly finger NSC Director Ezra Cohen-
Watnik as the source of Nunes’ information. But he, in
fact, was the one who discovered Rice’s order during a
review of the unmasking process. A noticeable double
standard indeed.
Transcripts below:
CBS Evening News
April 3, 2017
6:35:28 PM Eastern
… ROSEN: We begin with Chief White house Correspondent John
SCOTT PELLEY: Margaret, we learned more today about the
President's allegation that he and his aides were caught up
in Obama-era surveillance. What did you find out today?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, Scott, as national security adviser
to the president, Susan Rice could and did request the names of
individuals who were picked up during legal surveillance of
foreign nationals. Now, according to a former national security
official, Trump associates were not the sole focus of Rice's
request, but they may have been revealed when she asked to
understand why they were appearing in intelligence reports.
However, Rice did not spread the information according to this
former official, who insisted that there was nothing improper or
political involved.
PELLEY: Margaret Brennan at the White House. Margaret, thank
you.
...
508
F
ox News Channel
Special Report
April 3, 2017
6:00:15 PM Eastern
JAMES ROSEN: The surveillance of people close to President
Trump, possibly the President himself, now has a name and a
face attached to it. And it's one you've seen in major scandals
before. This is Special Report.
…
ROSEN: Good evening, I am James Rosen sitting in for Bret
Baier. Fox News has confirmed that President Obama's national
security advisor secretly ordered the intelligence community to
reveal to her the names of people close to President Trump who
had been swept up in U.S. surveillance on foreign targets and
referenced only by code in classified intelligence reports.
…
Roberts and a familiar name from the Obama administration
surfacing in yet another scandal. Good evening, John.
JOHN ROBERTS: James, good evening. Two weeks ago,
Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee announced to the
press and President he had uncovered a disturbing trend of
intelligence collection on Trump officials, some of which was
made public. Others remain known to administration officials.
Today we learn more about the “how” and “who” of what's going
on.
[Cuts to video]
Multiple sources tell Fox News that President Obama's national
security advisor Susan Rice was the one who requested the
names of Trump officials be unmasked in the intelligence reports
that were collected during the campaign and transition. The
White House, which has access to intelligence logs that allegedly
show Rice was behind the unmasking, was playing coy today.
Does this White House look at what she allegedly requested as a
national security issue or political issue?
SEAN SPICER: Well, that's a nice back door into a line of
questioning. I think until there is a finding of that, I don't want to
start getting into motives because we still haven't—I mean, me
getting to the motives assumes certain things in fact that I don't
think we are ready to go to yet.
ROBERTS: Senator Rand Paul, today, described the revolution
as, quote "A smoking gun." In a tweet writing: "Smoking gun
found! Obama pal and noted dissembler Susan Rice said to have
been spying on Trump campaign." There is no suggestion that
what Rice allegedly requested was illegal. As the President's
point person on national security, she had the authority. But in a
recent television appearance, she claimed no knowledge of it.
SUSAN RICE: I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see
reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.
ROBERTS: Rice has a checkered past when it comes to public
statements. She had initially claimed the Benghazi attack was in
response to a controversial video and praised sergeant Bowe
Bergdahl who faces a court-martial in may for desertion.
.
509
RICE: He served the United States with honor and distinction.
ROBERTS: In its closing days, the Obama administration
scrambled to preserve as much intelligence it could about Russia
and possible collusion with the Trump campaign. Former Obama
administration official Evelyn Farkas appeared to acknowledge
Trump officials had been the subject of surveillance.
EVELYN FARKAS: Get as much as you can before President
Obama leaves the administration, because I had a fear somehow
that information would disappear.
ROBERTS: The extent of the unmasking became apparent when
NSC Director Ezra Cohen-Watnik conducted a review of
unmasking policy. Sources say he came across many instances
where the names of Trump officials had been revealed. He
brought that information to the White house counsel, who told
him to suspend the review. Cohen-Watnik was suspect of an
intense media coverage when he was mistakenly identified as
one of House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes' sources.
Today the Press Secretary wondered why the Rice Revelations
weren’t drawing the same attention.
SPICER: I think that it is interesting the level, or lack of interest
that I've seen in these developments when it goes in one
direction.
[Cuts back to live]
ROBERTS: While this new information adds another layer of
intrigue to everything that went on during the campaign, it still
seemed to fall short of proving the President’s claim back on
March the 4 that he was being quote “wiretapped” by President
Obama. James.
 Susan Rice Made ‘Dozens’
Of Requests To Unmask Trump’s Associates
"I Know Nothing About This."
By Randy Desoto
On April 3, 2017 At 11:17am
Susan Rice, former national security adviser to President
Barack Obama, made numerous requests seeking to Just days before Obama left office in January, his
unmask Trump associates. administration issued new rules enabling the National
Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal
communications with 16 other intelligence agencies before
Bloomberg View’s Eli Lake reported on Monday, “Rice
requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence applying privacy protections.
reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald
Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials One of the implications of the new rules was it became far
familiar with the matter.” more difficult to track down those who leaked classified
information to the press.
The former Obama White House official’s pattern of
requests was discovered during a National Security
Council review of the government’s policy of
“unmasking.” Unmasking is the revealing of names of
Americans involved in intercepted communications.

Rice did not respond to a request by Bloomberg for

comment concerning the matter.

When questioned on PBS NewsHour about Trump

transition officials being swept up in incidental intelligence
collection last month, Rice responded,

“I know nothing about this. I was surprised

to see reports from Chairman Nunes on
that account today.”

Adam Housley of Fox News reported Friday that the

intelligence official who ordered the unmasking was

“very well known, very high up, very senior

in the intelligence world.” Though none of these revelation directly supports Trump’s
March 4 tweet that Obama ordered Trump Tower to be
Rice, as national security adviser, would seemingly fit that “wire tapped,” it nonetheless strengthens his case that
bill. illicit surveillance activity against his campaign and
transition team was occurring.
“The main issue is not only the unmasking
of the names,” said Housley, “but the Trump responded to the reporting with a series of tweets:
spreading of the names for political
purposes that have nothing to do with
national security and everything to do with
embarrassing and hurting Donald Trump
and his team.”

510
 ice also found herself in the center of controversy in the
fall of 2012.

While serving as U.N. ambassador, Rice blamed the

attacks on the American consulate and CIA Annex in
Benghazi on a spontaneous uprising, prompted by an anti-
Islam YouTube video.

The version of events she proffered during multiple

television appearances was later repudiated when the
details of the raids were made public.

511
 Killing The Conspiracy:
Russian Businessman With ‘Ties’ To Trump Tells All
© Uralkali Politics
22:01 03.04.2017(Updated 01:53 04.04.2017
After months of conspiracy theories
about why Russian billionaire Dmitry
Rybolovlev and President Donald Trump
were in the same place at the same time,
it has been revealed that he was simply
in town for business meetings.
Speculation in the mainstream media, perhaps most
prominently by MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, has focused
on why Rybolovlev’s Airbus 319 was spotted on an airport
tarmac in Charlotte, North Carolina at the same time
as Trump’s private plane in the days before the November
2016 US election. Trump was in town for a last minute
campaign rally, and pundits had surmised, without any
basis, that he had also met with the oligarch.
Despite both the White House and Rybolovlev issuing
statements saying that they have never met, the speculation
persisted.
The rumors were finally quashed, however,
as Rybolovlev’s spokesman Brian Cattell confirmed
to McClatchy that the businessman’s family trust has
.
512
invested in a billion-dollar company with offices
in Concord, North Carolina, called Alevo. It has also been
confirmed that he was meeting with officials from the
company during the November visit.
Alevo, a Switzerland-based corporation, is planning
to build 40-foot battery modules which will store excess
electricity from power plants. Fortune’s Russian
publication has reported that Rybolovlev has invested
$35.2 million in the company.
When asked why the oligarch did not squash the rumors
right away, his spokesman told McClatchy that
Rybolovlev
“will not, provide a running, public
commentary on private meetings.”
“The Rybolovlev family trust has a number
of diverse business interests, of which its
holding in Alevo is but one. It does not
publicize its private business activities, and
in most cases it would in fact be
inappropriate for it to do so,” Cattell said.
“As an investor in a private company,
neither the trust nor the company has any
obligation to disclose this holding. At the
same time, however, the trust has never
sought to keep it secret.”
Alevo has already created more than 200 jobs in North
Carolina and is looking to continue hiring for positions
in manufacturing, maintenance, engineering and other
fields, McClatchy reported.
 Rice Trump Wiretapping Access
Grew After Trump Victories
Daniel Greenfield
April 3, 2017
Here's Part 1 from earlier.
White House lawyers last month discovered that the
former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the
identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on
dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump
transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials
familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice's requests was discovered in a National
Security Council review of the government's policy on
"unmasking" the identities of individuals in the U.S. who
are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose
communications are collected incidentally. Normally those
names are redacted from summaries of monitored
conversations and appear in reports as something like
"U.S. Person One."
That was from Eli Lake at Bloomberg. Now the media,
once it gets around to having to actually cover it (for now
it's Washington Post/Slate mumbling about "right wing
nutjobs") will be arguing that Rice's actions were
legitimate. So here's an intriguing Part 2. from Sarah
Carter at Circa It's not surprising, but if it holds up, it gets
us closer to motive.
Computer logs that former President Obama’s team left
behind in the White House indicate his national security
adviser Susan Rice accessed numerous intelligence reports
513
during Obama's last seven months in office that contained
National Security Agency intercepts involving Donald
Trump and his associates, Circa has learned.
Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National
Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA
materials, some of which included unmasked Americans'
identities, appeared to begin last July around the time
Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after
Trump’s election in November launched a transition that
continued through January.
We already knew this in part because of the timing of the
FISA requests as I wrote earlier this month.
Trump had locked down the GOP nomination in May.
Next month there was a FISA request targeting him. The
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court denied the request,
and it is still unknown whether the request targeted Trump,
or only his associates, but it’s silly to pretend that the
submission of such a request a month after he became the
presumptive GOP nominee was apolitical.
The second, narrower, FISA request came through in
October. This one was approved. The reason for getting a
FISA request in October was even more obvious than
June. October is the crucial month in presidential elections.
It’s the month of the “October Surprise” when the worst
hit pieces based on the keenest opposition research is
unleashed.
So this was about as apolitical as Watergate. The media
will claim that Rice's actions were legitimate. But the next
step will be finding how the material was leaked.
Remember the left is good at working within the system.
Like Hillary Clinton, they set up chains of plausible
deniability so that no laws were technically broken in each
individual act. The real criminal culpability will come
when the dots are connected together, when we know just
who received the information and how it was used.
 Protesters Display Massive 'Impeach Trump' Sign At
Washington Nationals' Opening Game
By Anna Giaritelli (@Anna_Giaritelli)
4/3/17 6:22 PM

Even Major League Baseball's Washington Nationals are

not immune to politics.

Some protesters at the season opener in Washington on

Monday unfurled a massive banner above section 132 that
stated "Impeach Trump Resist."

The visual declaration did not interfere with the game. The
Nationals went on to beat the Miami Marlins 4-2.

514
515