Monday, December 31, 2018

PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYS An all concrete Wall was NEVER ABANDONED, as has been reported by the media.

An all concrete Wall was NEVER ABANDONED, as has been reported by the media. Some areas will be all concrete but the experts at Border Patrol prefer a Wall that is see through (thereby making it possible to see what is happening on both sides). Makes sense to me!

CA Lawmakers Were ABSOLUTELY Silent On Murder Of Officer Ronil Singh — Here’s The Proof


Ronil Singh was an American citizen and a legal immigrant who diligently served his community as a police officer. The day after Christmas, however, Singh’s life was taken by an illegal immigrant.

As Twitchy reports, nearly seven others were arrested for allegedly helping the suspect and illegal immigrant, Gustavo Perez Arriaga.

The death of the 33-year-old Newman Police Department officer rocked the nation, but lawmakers in his own "sanctuary" state were nearly silent about it. Many of the members did, however, tweet about the two children in the country illegally that died while under the custody of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

In a Twitter thread, conservative pundit Cameron Gray claimed as of Saturday only Republican House Leader Kevin McCarthy and Democrat Congressman Eric Swalwell directly mentioned Singh in a tweet of the 53 California members of Congress. California members include Democrat notables like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Jackie Speier, Ted Lieu, and others.





Retired Gen. McChrystal slams ‘immoral liar’ Trump for pulling out of Syria, says ISIS on the rise


If anybody but Donald Trump did what I did in Syria, which was an ISIS loaded mess when I became President, they would be a national hero. ISIS is mostly gone, we’re slowly sending our troops back home to be with their families, while at the same time fighting ISIS remnants......

Retired General Stanley McChrystal became the latest military heavyweight to round on the US president for curtailing American army presence in Afghanistan and Syria.

"If you pull American influence out, you're likely to have greater instability and of course it'll be much more difficult for the United States to try to push events in any direction," said the 64-year-old, who led the spec ops force that captured Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003, and later headed the entire NATO contingent in Afghanistan.

"There is an argument that says we just pull up our stuff, go home, let the region run itself. That has not done well for the last 50 or 60 years," continued the four-star general, who spoke as part of a long sit-down interview with ABC’s This Week.

Earlier this month Donald Trump announced plans to halve the current 14,000 US contingent in Afghanistan – though the White House later announced that no firm decision has been taken – and has ordered for all 2,000 American troops in Syria to leave.

Commenting on the latter decision, Trump tweeted that defeating Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) was "my only reason for being there during the Trump Presidency" and this task has effectively been accomplished after all strongholds controlled by the jihadist militia have been captured.

"I don't believe ISIS is defeated," disagreed McChrystal. "I think ISIS is as much an idea as it is a number of ISIS fighters. There's a lot of intelligence that says there are actually more ISIS fighters around the world now than there were a couple of years ago."

While Trump’s move was lauded internationally as an acknowledgement of the limits of US interventionism, and was praised by former US ambassador to Syria Robert S. Ford, the blowback from the establishment has been fierce, and has cut across party lines.

The double pullout was announced after another retired four-star general, John Kelly, Trump’s chief of staff, who had opposed it, left the White House. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned immediately after the Syria move, and blasted the president for abandoning "strong alliances" in his parting letter.

McChrystal urged his successor to "look in the mirror and ask them if they can get comfortable enough with President Trump's approach to governance, how he conducts himself with his values and with his worldview to be truly loyal to him as a commander in chief going forward."

The 30-year army veteran, who previously criticized the Oval Office incumbent, said that he himself would not work for the current administration, saying that he "doesn’t think that Trump tells the truth," and agreed when asked if the US president is "immoral."

Although McChrystal was lauded for his innovative approach to fighting irregular forces, and his outspoken temperament, his own career came to an abrupt end in 2010, after a Rolling Stone profile featured unflattering remarks about Barack Obama and then Vice President Joe Biden. Since then he has taught a course at Yale, sat on corporate boards, and has recently published a book on leadership.



Chinese schools enforce 'smart uniforms' with GPS tracking to surveil students

Ten schools in China have new "intelligent uniforms" that will track students' whereabouts with embedded computer chips.

The uniforms, which are equipped with GPS devices developed by a local tech firm, are meant to ensure that students don't skip class. Alarms are set to go off if a student walks out of the school building or falls asleep during a lesson.

According to state-run media, although the school’s administrators and parents have access to the location data, Principal of Renhuai Lin Zongwu said that "we choose not to check the accurate location of students after school."

Zongwu also noted that attendance rates have risen dramatically since the uniform’s introduction.

The company's project manager told the state-run Global Times that the two chips embedded in the uniforms can be washed up to 500 times and can withstand temperatures up to 300 degrees Fahrenheit.

According to ABC, the company posted a public statement saying the uniforms "focus on safety issues" and provide a "smart management method" that benefits students, teachers and parents.

The chips can also reportedly be used as a cashless payment system for snacks bought on school grounds, although parents and the school would see everything a student buys.

In addition, if students try to swap uniforms in order to leave the campus, the system is designed to prevent that: Facial recognition scanners at school gates match the chips with the correct student, reports the Telegraph.

The technology, which is being used in China's southwest province of Guizhou, has apparently sparked debate on China's social media platforms.

"I think it's alright," wrote Yi Zhi Sirius on China's micro-blogging site, Weibo, according to the Telegraph. "First, it avoids the jobless and homeless gangsters or potential criminals from entering the schools; second, the uniforms will come in handy in cases of locating missing students."

Another user said: "It is horrifying. I imagine the parents agreed to this after being brainwashed."

Two years ago, China's Ministry of Education touted the development of "smart campuses" as part of its Five Year Plan.


Sunday, December 30, 2018

Trey Gowdy Finishes Report, Demands New Special Counsel Into Hillary

Trey Gowdy is leaving the Congress with his reputation as a fighter for truth intact. He just finished his investigation into Hillary and the abuses at the FBI and it spells doom for both.

Trey just recommended a new special prosecutor be appointed to look into the mess that James Comey and Hillary and the rest of the gang who couldn’t shoot straight made of the 2016 election.

From CNN: The Republican leaders of two House committees say their investigation into the FBI’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s email server and its probe of alleged coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia uncovered concerns about the "thoroughness and impartiality" of each investigation.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy sent a six-page letter Friday summarizing the findings of their joint probe into the FBI and Justice Department, writing that further investigation was needed — including appointing a second special counsel — to examine the "disparate way these two investigations were seemingly conducted."

Notably, the Republican lawmakers also argued that their investigation was not an attempt to undercut special counsel Robert Mueller — a charge leveled by Democrats throughout the Republican-led investigation.

"Quite the opposite, whatever product is produced by the special counsel must be trusted by Americans and that requires asking tough but fair questions about investigative techniques both employed and not employed," Goodlatte and Gowdy wrote.

John Kerry’s Family in Legal Battle to Keep Walls Around Luxurious French Villa, Say They’re Concerned of Terrorists Entering Property

Liberals hate the idea of building walls. Unless that wall is around their mansion or around the Academy Awards ceremony or around anywhere they are at any particular time. The American people don’t deserve a wall at their border but Nancy Pelosi deserves one around her multi-million dollar home in San Francisco.

They hypocrisy is absurd.

John Kerry has no problem lecturing Americans about how immoral a wall on our southern border is but has no problem with large walls around his villa in France to keep migrants out.

From Conservative Tribune:
Kerry, the former liberal senator, presidential candidate, and secretary of state, spends a significant amount of time at his family’s ancestral home in Saint-Briac-sur-Mer, a beach escape and resort playground for the elite.

"Hikers demanding right of way along a pristine stretch of coastal France are locked in a legal war with villa owners in a posh Brittany resort town, not least the family of US statesman and former presidential candidate John Kerry," an AFP report published by MSN stated.
Now, the family of the liberal icon is doing everything they can to keep pesky commoners and migrants from stepping foot near their villa — even if it means using large walls to do it.
Lalonde told AFP that Kerry’s extended family is worried about the "terrorist risks" of allowing common people onto the beach as French law requires, and fretted that "it will be fairly easy to target members of my family who are politically active."
So let’s get this straight: Liberals in both France and the United States frequently push socialist views, and insist that the "rich" must do "their fair share" to benefit anyone less fortunate.

You can’t make this stuff up.

This is infuriating and it just goes to show you that Kerry understands that walls work. He just doesn’t think Americans deserve one.

Wrong on so many levels.






FOX & Friends Sunday 12 /30/ 18 | Breaking News Today December 30, 2018 [VIDEO]

FOX & Friends Sunday 12 /30/ 18  | Breaking News Today December 30,...
FOX & Friends Sunday 12 /30/ 18 | Breaking News Today December 30, 2018  [VIDEO]



Monday, December 24, 2018

Remy: The Longest Time (TSA Version) [VIDEO]


Will the main stream media be forced to come clean? | Khashoggi: Qatari Asset in Life; Qatari Asset in Death - Security Studies Group

When Donald Trump announced that his first trip abroad as president would take him to Saudi Arabia and to Israel, it was a signal that the new administration had returned America’s traditional alliances in the Middle East to their privileged status. For the prior eight years, the Obama White House had, in contrast, prioritized relations with these countries’ regional adversary in Iran and embraced the Islamic Republic’s regional allies, Turkey and Qatar, as key interlocutors and partners. The Obama administration also supported Islamist movements in the Middle East, principally the Muslim Brotherhood, that threated to topple regimes and instigate more hostility toward the Jewish State.

 Even before taking office, it was clear that the Trump administration would reverse these policies.
Obviously, some were alarmed both at the American turn back to Jerusalem and Riyadh as well as the Trump administration’s recognition of the threat of political Islam, but none more than the architects of Obama foreign policy and the many talking heads, reporters, think tank wags and politicians who supported it and comprised their “echo chamber.”

That effort, spearheaded by former National Security Council Communications Director Ben Rhodes, organized a chorus of voices in support of Obama national security policy and waged brutal rhetorical war on its enemies in the press. Indeed, over the last decade, this community has come to broadly view the Iranian regime, Erdogan’s Turkey and Qatar-sponsored Muslim Brotherhood as positive forces in the Middle East. Moreover, they resented the efforts by Israel and Saudi Arabia to combat their signature achievement, the Iran Deal, an agreement they believed would solidify a new alliance with that country.

In some ways, the American public’s support for the Jewish State made it difficult for Obama partisans to wage total information war against it, even as they did just that during the intense time of the Iran Deal debate in 2015. The monarchy of Saudi Arabia, by contrast, was vulnerable; it quickly found itself the target of a relentless and hostile American press corps.

By the end of the first week of October 2018, when the disappearance of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi set off a global media firestorm, these voices, including many that were prominent in American media, were primed to take advantage—and revenge. Faced with a common enemy, members of the media and policy community who comprised the “echo chamber” that spun and amplified the positions of the Obama administration soon found themselves aligned with a sophisticated Turkish and Qatari information operation to target the US-Saudi alliance.
Due to their policy biases and the friendly intellectual environment created and nurtured by petrodollars inside the Beltway, American elites and policymakers have been soft targets for Qatari influence and information operations. Information operations use media and traditional tools of public relations to advance policy interests through narratives. A negative message is always more potent than a positive one, so operators of all kinds quickly find that the easiest way to advance one’s interests is to coordinate and weaponize media attacks on one’s enemies or rivals.

The narrative focusing on the death of Jamal Khashoggi was to be put into the service of both Qatar and Turkey’s main interest, undermining the stability of its rival, Saudi Arabia. When complete, the successful information operation would depict Khashoggi a heroic martyr to independent journalism and freedom, while Saudi Arabia would be the embodiment of evil and callousness. It is clear now that, not only was Khashoggi transmogrified in death into a major front in Qatar’s war on its Gulf neighbors; in life, he was Qatar’s asset in that war, as well.

The effort to transform Khashoggi from the political operative he was into a journalist and martyr for freedom was an information operation waged largely in the United States. It targeted a diverse audience spanning from “echo chamber” commentators and media figures to politicians, who would then be moved to act based on the new attitude and information the campaign had inserted into the discussion. This operational aspect is of primary importance; as information operations always work to advance policy interests, in order to succeed, these perceptions must affect policymakers and cause them to alter policy.

As the news of Khashoggi’s disappearance and death broke, nearly the entire media was abuzz with praise for the late columnist and engaged in an effort to turn him into a martyr for democratic values, free expression and freedom.

As the Post described him recently, “[Khashoggi was] a writer of modest influence beyond the Middle East when he was alive. In death, he has become a symbol of a broader struggle for human rights.” No outlet did more in the service of cementing that symbolism than the Washington Post and its news and editorial staff. Since October, that outlet has functioned unofficially as the most relentless and influential anti-Saudi lobbying shop in the nation’s capital. Indeed, the successful campaign of hagiography spearheaded by The Post prompted Time Magazine to name Khashoggi and other members of the media “Person of the Year.”

Of course, in order to do this, the media largely ignored salient facts about him that emerged almost immediately: his long history as an apologist and propagandist for the Muslim Brotherhood; his youthful collaboration with Osama Bin Laden and al Qaeda in Afghanistan; his antipathy toward both Israel and Shia Muslims; as well as rumors about his questionable and financial links to Qatari intelligence.

Now, shockingly, the Washington Post itself has largely revealed those rumors to be true. We now know that Jamal Khashoggi was never a journalist—at least, not in the usual sense of the word; he was a highly-partisan operative who worked with a handler to publish propaganda at the behest of the Emirate of Qatar. He was, in other words, an agent of influence.

Rumors have floated inside the Beltway about the contents of Khashoggi’s text messages and, potentially, evidence of wire transfers from Qatar found at his residences in Turkey and in Virginia. The Post’s pre-Christmas release of this information is almost certainly in an effort to get ahead of a story that another outlet is pursuing, and frame some rather explosive revelations in the least damaging way.

In an extensive background portrait of Khashoggi buoyed with accounts from sympathetic friends, reporters Souad Mekhennet and Greg Miller admit that, “text messages between Khashoggi and an executive at Qatar Foundation International show that the executive, Maggie Mitchell Salem, at times shaped the columns he submitted to The Washington Post, proposing topics, drafting material and prodding him to take a harder line against the Saudi government.” The article also glides past crucial context about the relationships Khashoggi cultivated with Islamists and Muslim Brotherhood figures, especially in recent years, and why these connections are important to the work he was doing on behalf of Qatar.

Still, this report is crucial because the campaign to lionize Khashoggi and to destroy the US-Saudi relationship was built on the fiction that the Saudis had killed a mere journalist. Knowing the truth about Khashoggi—not only his anti-Americanism and pro-Islamism (which, for most of the media, is no sin), but his ties to Qatari information operators—would complicate the narrative greatly. The gory murder of a spy in the process of a rendition to his home country isn’t pretty, but it’s a far cry from the image the media wanted to present.

Before anyone else did so, we at the Security Studies Group (SSG) understood the implications of this information operation and aggressively began pushing back on pundits who were attempting to create a false Khashoggi hagiography. In time, some journalists and media figures began to question the defensibility of their position and to withdraw to positions that they found more secure.

Over the course of the next hours and days, SSG generated several research products, including backgrounders, articles and interviews that punctured the narrative by linking Khashoggi to the Muslim Brotherhood and other extremist Islamist groups. We had opened the narrative space in the debate for questioning and thoughtfully assessing Khashoggi’s Islamist background and sympathies. SSG Sr. Fellow Matt Brodsky published the first widely-distributed article about the late columnist’s Brotherhood connections, “Why is the Media Ignoring the Most Glaring Questions about Jamal Khashoggi?” at the Spectator. Using our research, soon other allies felt emboldened enough to publish aggressive push-backs on the unwarranted praise for Khashoggi in the mainstream media.
The inevitable hysterical overreaction from the press made it possible for us to increase not only the visibility of our message, but the credibility that comes from the public’s recognition of blatant media bias. The rancor of the “echo chamber” was best captured byPost, which noticed our campaign and tried to do damage control on October 19 with, “Conservatives mount a whisper campaign smearing Khashoggi in defense of Trump”:

In recent days, a cadre of conservative House Republicans allied with Trump has been privately exchanging articles from right-wing outlets that fuel suspicion of Khashoggi, highlighting his association with the Muslim Brotherhood in his youth and raising conspiratorial questions about his work decades ago as an embedded reporter covering Osama bin Laden…
Our offensive to highlight Khashoggi’s Muslim Brotherhood links and pro-Islamist sympathies was so successful that the Qatar-funded Brookings Institute issued a paper on October 19, “On Jamal Khashoggi, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Saudi Arabia,” to address (and begrudgingly acknowledge) the columnist’s Ikhwan membership and subsequent support for the Islamist movement. Even devoid of context for most readers, The Post’s recent acknowledgement of these connections—to the Brotherhood, as well as to elements of the Qatari network of foundations in Doha and Washington, especially—offers a great deal of vindication for our efforts in the service of accurate analysis.
This didn’t stop many commentators and media voices in the United States from partaking in this influence operation for reasons of their own. But before the partisan American “echo chamber” could engage, though, foreign sources would shape the stream of facts that could be molded into a potent narrative about Khashoggi’s death.

As Brad Patty and Nick Short concluded in their assessment of this information campaign, SSG’s “Firehoses in the Khashoggi Case,” this happened within hours of Khashoggi’s disappearance in Ankara. Turkey took advantage of the silence from Saudi Arabia in the crucial first 36 hours of the controversy to shift the narrative from Khashoggi’s disappearance to leaks of increasingly-brutal and graphic reports of his death at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. Officials from Turkey’s Erdogan government—a longtime regional rival of the Kingdom’s power and influence and, lately, an Islamist nation building a growing alliance with Qatar and Iran—began to distribute weaponized, unverified information to the press. They gave it directly to reporters at prominent American media outlets, especially David Kirkpatrick at the New York Times and a massive team from Khashoggi’s alma mater the Washington Post.

Another major source of news about Khashoggi was, unsurprisingly, Qatar’s Al Jazeera network, and Middle East Eye, a relatively new outlet with ties of its own to Qatar. Some of the most scandalous, unverified stories in the press were sourced to Turkish officials and conformed “by a high-ranking Arab official.” There is a very high likelihood this is a home-town official from Qatar. For months, US major media outlets and high-profile “echo chamber” pundits were knowingly assuming the risk of broadcasting false Turkish and Qatari narratives, without adequately informing their readers of the risk being passed on to them.

By December 2018—when the campaign had done great harm to the US-Saudi relationship and America’s alliances in the Middle East—Erdogan was publicly bragging about his part in this successful information operation, and as well he should. It caused tremendous damage to the Kingdom and the Crown Prince, but also elevated Turkey and Qatar and gave it leverage to use with the US and others.

Once President Trump released a robust statement supporting the US-Saudi alliance, intense political pressure was felt from anti-Trump forces in the American media, which pushed Democrats toward Qatar and Iran, and away from Saudi Arabia. Suddenly, the alliance had become a partisan issue; prominent Democrats in Congress began calling for a reevaluation of American policy toward the country. The intensity with which the Kingdom’s critics have attacked the US-Saudi relationship specifically points to more than just a target of opportunity. These critics could be placed into (at least) one of the following categories: (a) a pro-Iran position; (b) a pro-Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood position; and (c) anti-Trump. Often—as with the case of the Washington Post—it is a combination of all three.

Led by Sen. Chris Murphy and Elizabeth Warren, voices from the political left seemed to outdo each other in berating Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, with whom President Trump and members of his administration have warm relations. They are trying to use outrage over Khashoggi’s death to force a Saudi surrender in the war in Yemen; and end to arms sales, a break in US-Saudi relations, or even to depose Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman from his position in the Kingdom’s order of succession. This, of course, was the Qatari policy aim and the conclusion of a successful information operation.


Sacha Baron Cohen: Planned Ben Carson takedown fell apart after White House pulled the plug

Sacha Baron Cohen almost added Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson to his roster of high-profile figures he pranked on his controversial comedy series "Who is America?" but he revealed the White House thwarted his attempt at the last minute.

The "Borat" actor and Carson's team set up an interview at the Mandarin Hotel in Washington, D.C., Cohen told Deadline in an interview published last week.

He'd been living "undercover and in disguise" in D.C. for a few weeks leading up to the interview. Cohen said that on the day of the interview, they'd had "bad luck [because] there was a big international conference of politicians" at the hotel.

"[Former Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice was there, a bunch of other politicians, and the whole place was filled with Secret Service, some of whom were completely undercover and some of whom were clear," Cohen said.

Cohen's team and Carson's team -- which included his own Secret Service detail and White House press staff -- made it to the room for the interview, and Cohen made his way toward the camera, in character for the show.

"This character has a bunch of Shopkins [collectible toy figures], and the White House press representative was there," Cohen recalled. "He says, ‘What are those?’ I say, 'These are Shopkins.'"

Cohen said the press rep questioned why the Shopkins were there, to which he replied: "It's because that's what I do, I unbox Shopkins."

At that point, Cohen said, Carson was "literally walking in front of the camera. He's just about to enter the frame and this guy from the White House had an instinct and he said, 'Pull him.'"

"And suddenly the Secret Service pulled him out. So the most I got to see was Ben Carson’s leg," Cohen told Deadline.

And so, Carson wasn't duped by Cohen, like many of America's politicians did. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., appeared on the show — even though Cohen said his "people had been suspicious from day one."

Former Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., and former Rep. Joe Walsh, R-Ill., were among those tricked by Cohen. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was also interviewed by Cohen and voiced her anger, but he claimed she was cut from the show because "there was no comedy gold."





Some of us will be enjoying the beaches in Florida on Christmas Day - So who's getting a White Christmas this year?



Sunday, December 23, 2018

America's Great Wall [video]




De Blasio builds ‘privacy fence’ around Gracie Mansion

Mayor Bill de Blasio, a self-declared progressive “man of the people,” has erected a massive new “privacy fence” to keep his constituents from looking in on Gracie Mansion.

The new fence — constructed just inside an existing red brick wall and a wrought-iron fence ringing the historic property — was actually dubbed a “privacy fence” by de Blasio and first lady Chirlane McCray, sources told The Post.

“So much for being mayor of the people. That brick fence was good enough for Rudy Giuliani and his family, and for Ed Koch and all the mayors before him,” a law enforcement source said.
“They didn’t need a taller fence. That’s the same house where everybody else lived for years.”
Sources said the increasingly thin-skinned mayor demanded the extension because he was sick of nosy people in Carl Schurz Park peeping in while he hung out in the yard.

“He likes to sit out on the porch and he felt like people were getting too close to him. Some people would see him and yell, ‘Hi, Mr. Mayor!’ ” a source said.
“They weren’t being derogatory or nasty or anything.”
Here’s a closer look at the fence, built just inside Gracie’s existing wall.Brigitte Stelzer

The Parks Department, which maintains the landmarked mansion and added the new fence, would not confirm whether permits were required or ever obtained. The agency also declined to say how much the job cost.

Parks spokesman Phil Abramson claimed the new fence was “due to security concerns.”
The Landmarks Preservation Commission did not return a request for comment about whether the fence needed its approval.

Joni Dropkin, 40, who lives near the Upper East Side mansion, said it was ironic that Hizzoner would build a barrier between the public and his taxpayer-funded home — which is dubbed the “People’s House” in an online visitors guide.

“The fence really turns me off because he always advertised himself as the ‘people’s mayor’ and [said] he would always make himself available. There’s something so shady about it,” she said.
Mayor Bill de BlasioUPI

“When he lived in Brooklyn, he was the type of guy who would hang outside and wave to everyone. Now he’s fencing himself in. I wouldn’t mind seeing him on the deck in his robe drinking coffee and waving to the people in the park,” Dropkin said.

“That would show me that he’s not paranoid or afraid to handle the public and issues. That’s the kind of approachable everyman he wanted everyone to think he was when he was getting elected.”
Even wealthy former Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who did not live in the mansion, was easy to spot when hosting public events there, Dropkin added.

“I used to see Bloomberg here in the summer back when he was mayor. You could almost see right in. And that’s what I liked a lot about him; very transparent,” she said.





Published on Dec 23, 2018


OH BREAKING!! POSSIBLE ARREST ON THE WAY! The Video Obama Wants To Hide & Hannity Wants All To See!


Published on Dec 23, 2018



Monday, December 17, 2018

CORRUPTION: Mueller Deleted All Strozk Texts Before Giving Phone To Inspector General

A major possible case of corruption has appeared that shows Robert Mueller deleted all of the Peter Strzok’s text messages before handing the fired FBI agent’s phone into the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General.

This breaking news comes from a report released by the federal watchdog as American citizens wait for the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s lengthy investigation.

When the Justice Department inspector general released a report, it mentioned that thousands of the text messages between Strzok and Lisa Page, the former FBI attorney he was having an affair with, were not able to be recovered and that Mueller’s team had “wiped clean” the phones.
Deleting text messages, deleting emails, it all sounds familiar.

As stated by Breitbart:
 “SCO’s Records Officer told the OIG that as part of the office’s records retention procedure, the officer reviewed Strzok’s DOJ issued iPhone after he returned it to the SCO and determined it contained no substantive text messages,” the watchdog report reads. As Conservative Review national security reporter Jordan Schachtel first discovered, the OIG said Strzok’s cell phone was “reset to factory settings,” deleting all data stored on the device.”

It was the federal watchdog who stated in a report that it found “no discernible patterns” regarding the content of the text messages that the FBI was actually able to recover.

The report appears to make it seem like Strzok and Page exhibited no pattern of anything in the text messages the FBI recovered, but then there were still reportedly thousands of messages that no one can access anymore.

If there was nothing to hide and no pattern of behavior that stood out, then why would Mueller’s team wipe the phones clean before handing them off? Did a cover up just happen before our eyes?
Breitbart continued:

“Strzok and Page testified before Congress this summer, and the former FBI agent admitted that he had not turned over all of his communications with Page to the Inspector General from his personal phone, even though their recovered conversations showed the two suggesting they move to apps like iMessage or Gmail. Strzok told outgoing Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) that it is a “safe assumption” that he sent messages to Page from his personal phone that were similar in nature to the widely-publicized messages attacking Trump supporters. He told House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) that he himself determined which messages on that phone were “relevant to FBI business” that the Inspector General could review.”

While the pair was exchanging text messages, the FBI was busy investigating Hillary Clinton and her private email account regarding it being used improperly during her time as Secretary of State. Strzok and Page were both assigned to her case.

Reports suggest that the pair was having an affair during the time of Clinton’s investigation. Strzok ended up getting fired for his anti-Trump messages that he sent to page.

It was reported that the FBI used software to gather over 20,000 text messages from Strzok’s and Page’s phones and some of the more controversial messages have been shared in past articles. In particular, Strzok saying that he would “stop” Donald Trump from winning the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton.

Upon contacting Verizon Wireless, the Office of the Inspector General stated that text messages are retained for up to seven days, then erased.

Any of the messages missing from Strzok and Page were older than seven days by the time they were being sought after, meaning they are likely gone for good.


Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Fitton: Dossier Looks Like A Smear Operation Of The Russians Through the Clinton Campaign


Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton discussed Former FBI Director James Comey's congressional testimony on Fox & Friends First.

HEATHER CHILDERS, FOX NEWS: Welcome back to "Fox Friends First". Lawmakers sifting through more than 200 pages of transcripts from Former FBI Director James Comey’s marathon testimony. So what did we learn? Joining me now is the President of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton. Thank you so much for joining us. I know you were up late last night it's going to be a very busy day again today, we appreciate your time. let's get right to it though. some of the main takeaways one of them obviously was that James Comey did not appear to remember a lot or he did not know a lot to begin with. but he said I don't know at least 156 times amongst a lot of other variations of that.

TOM FITTON, JUDICIAL WATCH: It wouldn’t be so bad if he professed ignorance on minor topics, but he professed ignorance on a lot of key aspects of the FISA. The details about what for instance who funded it because he signed off on at least one of the FISA warrants that targeted Carter Page and the Trump Team. He professed not to know more about the origins beyond what he read in the newspapers later. That is concerning given that a review of the personal application that have been released shows that that courts were misled. They were told that this dossier for instance had origins in political opposition to president but wasn’t told the Clinton campaign was behind it.
CHILDERS: And the pages and pages of testimony. The anti- trump dossier was in fact unverified.

FITTON: He confirmed what we already knew that it was cooperated. they concluded that in his report earlier this year and he was pushed on by the left. When they first applied to the courts and when it was renewed. Remember the dossier was used with the help of Russia intel according to the fusion GPS. It looks like a smear operation by the Russians through the Clinton camp with the willing help of the FBI and frankly now the Mueller observation.

CHILDERS: The issue of verification. the intel sources say that presenting is singled fact that throws into account this whole woods procedure which needs to be followed in order for the FISA to be granted.

FITTON: It's one thing to say hey we like the source but if they can't find a substantiation for what the source is telling them. and there not telling the court that that's a real problem.

CHILDERS: The four Americans that were apparently under investigation but not President Trump.

FITTON: That is important. Those are all people associated with the Trump campaign. That includes Carter Page. James Comey tried to pretend just because we are targeting four people on the trump campaign doesn't mean we are targeting the trump campaign. who is he kidding?

CHILDERS: let's move to the fourth one. he defended the FBI agent Peter Strozk. There was no indication of bias. he just said who are you kidding. you can probably say that here too.

FITTON: He said that if he was on this. this is what is really frustrating. If he knew what the texts were at the time, he would've pulled him them off the Clinton and the Russia case. Later he said it was a conspiracy theory. He want to have it both ways and it shows you that Mr. Comey may have some Strozk problems also given his biases.

CHILDERS: But he is not friends with Robert Mueller, he doesn't have his personal cell phone number. he hasn't been able to come over to his house. What do you think about that?

FITTON: There is a Washington post story and not too long ago talking about them being brothers in arms. It doesn't matter in the sense that they have a professional relationship and he specifically leaked information to get a special concert going and now Mueller using him as the witness. And people are concerned about the conflicts legitimately since they have this long and close working relationship.

CHILDERS: And you're testifying before congress on December 13.

FITTON: This Thursday on the Clinton Foundation issue. This is the hearing that has been put off a few weeks and we will see what happens but we broke open the pay to play scandal.



Modern wheat, sprayed with toxic chemicals, may be one of the worst foods to eat for gut health

(Natural News) Many of us grew up believing that wheat was the epitome of a healthy food. In recent years, however, the gluten-free sections in most grocery stores have gone from bare to bulging, as more and more people have decided to eliminate gluten – or even all grains – in a bid to improve their health. While some people are sensitive or even allergic to the gluten in wheat, others have decided to eliminate wheat in a bid to increase their energy levels and reduce the strain on their digestive systems.

As reported by Waking Times, a recent study has confirmed what these people have believed all along; that eating wheat makes them feel sluggish and unwell. The study, entitled, Diversity of the cultivable human gut microbiome involved in gluten metabolism: isolation of microorganisms with potential interest for coeliac disease, confirmed that wheat encourages the growth of pathogenic bacteria in the gut because gluten is very difficult to digest and these bacteria – including disease-inducing culprits like Streptococcus, Staphylococcus, Clostridium and Bifidobacterium – are needed to get the job done. (Related: Gluten attacks the brain and damages the nervous system.)

It takes dangerous bacteria – lots of it – to digest gluten
The abstract of the study, which was conducted by researchers from Spain’s Universidad de León and published in the journal FEMS Microbiology Ecology, explains:

The aim of this study was the isolation and characterisation of the human gut bacteria involved in the metabolism of gluten proteins. Twenty-two human faecal samples were cultured with gluten as the principal nitrogen source, and 144 strains belonging to 35 bacterial species that may be involved in gluten metabolism in the human gut were isolated. Interestingly, 94 strains were able to metabolise gluten, 61 strains showed an extracellular proteolytic activity against gluten proteins, and several strains showed a peptidasic activity towards the 33-mer peptide, an immunogenic peptide in patients with coeliac disease. Most of the strains were classified within the phyla Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, mainly from the genera Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, Staphylococcus, Clostridium and Bifidobacterium.
The power of the elements: Discover Colloidal Silver Mouthwash with quality, natural ingredients like Sangre de Drago sap, black walnut hulls, menthol crystals and more. Zero artificial sweeteners, colors or alcohol. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store and help support this news site.

The researchers were pleased with the results of their study, since their aim was to discover which bacteria might be utilized to assist celiac patients with the digestion of gluten. However, the findings are also alarming, because they show just how difficult it is to digest this protein.

Could wheat be the unhealthiest food on the planet?
Most wheat is sprayed with toxic, cancer-causing Roundup as a pre-harvest desiccant, and animal studies have found that the glyphosate in Roundup contributes to the overgrowth of the dangerous bacteria Clostridium botulinum – the bacteria that produces botulism.

If we combine these two alarming facts – that wheat encourages the production of dangerous bacteria to assist in the digestion of gluten, and that most wheat is sprayed with Roundup, which promotes the overgrowth of other dangerous bacteria – it soon becomes obvious that wheat is anything but a health food.

Is gluten-free any better?
It might be tempting to think that simply switching to gluten-free foods will solve the problem, but that isn’t necessarily true. As previously reported by Natural News:

Gluten-free foods are often packed full of other additives to make them either have the same texture or same taste as food that does contain gluten. However, this could be raising the risk of obesity, diabetes and malnutrition, according to an expert from Columbia University Medical Center, Dr. Norelle Reilly. …
Dr. Reilly states that, "There is no evidence that processed gluten free foods are healthier nor have there been proven health or nutritional benefits of a gluten free diet. … Gluten free packaged foods frequently contain a greater density of fat and sugar … Obesity, overweight and new-onset insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome have been identified after initiation of a gluten-free diet," The Telegraph reported.

After weighing all the facts, many people have decided to eliminate all processed foods – including gluten-free products – from their diet, and instead increased their consumption of fresh, organic fruits and vegetables and free-range meats from animals which have not been given routine hormones or antibiotics.

Sources include:

The Tables Have Turned: $350 MILLION Lawsuit Filed Against Mueller for Constitutional Violations, Alleged Leaks

It’s pretty clear at this point that the Mueller investigation is a total waste of time. There was no collusion and the idea that there was is just silly. Basically, Mueller has been going around for the last few months trying to ruin the lives of people who were close to the Trump campaign. Jerome Corsi is one of the people that Mueller has been strong arming but he’s not going down without a fight. In fact, he’s firing back…

From Politico:
An author and conspiracy theorist who says he’s being threatened with indictment by special counsel Robert Mueller’s team in the Trump-Russia probe filed a federal lawsuit Sunday night accusing Mueller of constitutional violations and leaking grand jury secrets.
Jerome Corsi’s new suit against Mueller also accuses the special prosecutor of trying to badger Corsi into giving false testimony that he served as a conduit between Wikileaks found Julian Assange and Roger Stone, a longtime adviser to then-candidate Donald Trump.
Corsi is demanding $100 million in actual damages and $250 million in punitive damages for injury to his reputation.

Here’s more.


From Washington Examiner:
Corsi, 72, is demanding $100 million in "general and compensatory damages" and $250 million in punitive damages from the law enforcement agencies.
For months, Mueller’s team has investigated whether Corsi knew in advance that WikiLeaks had obtained emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, which were stolen by Russian intelligence officers. In the summer of 2016, during the height of the presidential campaign, WikiLeaks published troves of Democratic National Committee emails.
In his lawsuit, Corsi said Mueller’s team has unfairly targeted him because it has "misrepresented the investigative research" that Corsi conducted into the Clinton emails, and because of Corsi’s "investigative deduction" that the emails would "probably be released at a later date."