Follow Trump As He Tries To Make

America Great Again

The 2017 Trump

Presidency 2
The Inauguration &
A New Beginning
January 10, 2017 - January 29, 2017

See How Main Stream Media Are Trying

To Destroy The United States And
The Trump Presidency
C
Coom
mppiilleedd FFrroom
mTThhee IInntteerrnneett B
Byy 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.

©2016
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
November 2016
FIRST EDITION
0987654321

2
 CONTENTS
U.S. Intelligence Agencies Have No Clothes xxx
The Real Significance Of Clapper’s (ODNI) Report On Russia
McCain Admits He Gave Dossier Containing "Sensitive Information" On Trump To The FBI
The Deep State Versus Donald Trump – New Smears And The Ukrainian Connection
FBI Reportedly Sought FISA Court Warrant To Spy On Trump Campaign Officials
The Deep State Goes To War With President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, As Democrats Cheer
How 4Chan McFooled John McCain, Buzzfeed, And The CIA Into Believing Trump's Golden Showers xxx
'I Did What Any Citizen Should Do': Sworn Trump Enemy John McCain Admits HE Handed Smear Dossier
To FBI - Because He Had No Idea If It Was Credible xxx
Christopher Steele, Ex-British Intelligence Officer, Said To Have Prepared Dossier On Trump
Putin Denies Leak
The Only Hookers In This Story Are The Cheap, Lazy Journalists Who Ran With Fake Trump Sleaze To
Urinate On His Presidency xxx
Tripwire Alert –The Intelligence Shadow War Final Act…
The Final Takedown Of Trump Begins In Earnest
If Putin Likes Me, I Consider That An Asset, Not A Liability - Trump (FULL VIDEO)
Trump Slams Buzzfeed As 'Failing Pile Of Garbage,' Rejects CNN Question Over 'Fake' Report
Massive Security Preparations Under Way For Inauguration, Amid Protest Threats To 'Paralyze' DC
Archived Posts Prove 4Chan Trolled CIA With Trump Golden Shower Story - Entire Russian Hack
Narrative Imploding? xxx
Buzzfeed Publishes Unsubstantiated Trump Report, Raising Ethics Questions
Claims Of Russia Holding ‘Compromising Data’ On Trump Not Reliable Says Wikileaks
‘Stinks From Every Possible Angle’: Media Blasts Buzzfeed’s ‘Unverified’ Trump Dossier
NYT Accuses CNN, Buzzfeed Of Peddling "Fake News" Over Russia Report
'This Is Pulp Fiction': Kremlin Denies Having Compromising Materials On Trump Or Clinton
Russia Has No Compromising Info On Trump Or Clinton, Report Is ‘Total Bluff’ – Kremlin
Gathering Of Compromising Data On Trump Financed By Democrats, Republicans
‘Nazi Germany’: Trump And The Clinton Elite Who Amplified ‘Fake News’
Trump Declares War On MSM And Corrupt Intelligence Operatives Helping Them
Trump Conducts His Own Sting Operation To Ensnare Intelligence Briefers – And Says He Caught Them
Leaking xxx
Dead Giveaway The 35 Page Dossier Was A Hoax? The British Don't Use "Confidential," They Use
"Official" xxx
Chuck Todd Excoriates Buzzfeed's Editor In Chief: 'YOU PUBLISHED FAKE NEWS'
CNN, BuzzFeed Publish ‘Golden Shower’ Rumors, Other Media Outlets Mock Them
Ivanka Trump Shifting Gears, Heading To Washington
Sen. McCain Exposed As Traitor, Gave Blackmail Hoax Dossier To FBI
Russian ‘Cyberattacking’ – When The Most Flagrant Lie Becomes The Truth
Could Trump Have Been Caught In A Classic “Honey Trap”?
Trump Blasts CNN's "FAKE NEWS", Says "Credibility Will Soon Be Gone!"
Identity Of "Former Intelligence Officer" Who Prepared The Trump Dossier, Has Been Revealed
BREAKING: Trump Says Head Of US Intel Admitted To Him Russia Report Is ‘Made Up, Phony Facts’
Donald Trump’s Fake News Conference
US Intelligence Has Nothing To Do With Memos Compromising Trump, Clapper Says
Trump: Head Of US Intel "Denounced Fictitious, Illegally Circulated Report"
Outrage At BBC Claims Of SECOND Russian 'Dirty Dossier' On Trump Amid Claims They Are Trying
To Derail His Presidency Before It Starts xxx
‘It’s Not How Hacking Works’: Anonymous Activist Deconstructs ODNI Report On ‘Russia Hackers’
Controversial Dossier On Trump Alleges That Russia Targets Jewish-American Businessmen
Trump’s Pick To Head The CIA Wants To Collect Your Personal Metadata—All Of It
Rosie O’Donnell Calls For Martial Law To Stop Trump From Becoming President
Obama, Biden Made Aware Of Dubious Dossier Of Trump Allegations Before Leak
‘Profound Dismay’: DNI Clapper Meets With Trump Over ‘Unverified’ Dossier Leak
Washington Seems On Brink Of ‘Civil War’ As Elites Fuel Anti-Trump Hostility – Former German MP xxx
'Will You Look After My Cat?' Ex-MI6 Spy 'Who Worked With Murdered Alexander Litvinenko' Flees His
£1.5m Home 'Fearing For His Life' Leaving His Pet With Neighbours After Being Outed As The Man Behind
The Dirty Dossier On Donald Trump xxx
3
Report: US Intel Met Secretly With Mossad, Plotting To Hide Intelligence From Trump xxx
The Establishment Is Trying To Steal The Presidency From Trump And The Liberal-Left Is Helping
Ethics Fiasco: Trump, Divestment And The Perversion Of Executive Politics
Planned Violence: Organizer Of Trump Inauguration Mass Riots Doesn’t Believe In “Peaceful Transition
Of Power” xxx
Organizer Makes Clear That Planned Mass Disruption
CIA Coup? Ex-Spook: Langley ‘Taking Traitor Trump Out Now’
EXCLUSIVE: Intel Vets Say Trump ‘Dossier’ Is A ‘Complete Fraud’
Confirmed: "Unknown" Republican, Democrat Paid For Anti-Trump Report
Did The Russians Really Hack The DNC?
Pulling A J. Edgar Hoover On Trump
Are Democrats Still The Lesser Evil?
US Report On Nonexistent Russian Hacking Made Its Intelligence Community A Laughing Stock
Is Trump Already Finished?
The New Smell Of McCarthyism Demands Faith Leaders Speak Truth To Power
Trump Says He Is Open To Lifting Russia Sanctions, Won't Label China Currency Manipulator
"On Day One" xxx
Will the CIA Assassinate Trump?
Zoe Saldana Believes Hollywood Bullied Donald Trump
Rothschild’s TNK-BP Intriguers Drafted The Trump-Russia Report
Obama Fires General Of D.C. National Guard, Effective 12:01 Pm, Inauguration Day
Fake News: Wash Post Changes Story On Trump ‘Firing’ D.C. Nat’l Guard General
More Democratic Legislators Plan On Sitting Out Trump’s Swearing-In
One China Policy Nonnegotiable, Says Beijing
John Brennan: Trump's 'Nazi Germany' Tweet To US Agencies Was 'Outrageous'
Trump Team May Move West Wing Briefings To Expand Capacity
Welcome To One of The Most Pivotal Weeks In Modern American History
Russian Foreign Ministry: "Obama Still Has A Few Days Left To Destroy The World"
Trump Team Considers Moving Press Corps, Alarming Reporters
Declaring Trump Illegitimate Part Of A Coup Plot
Packing Up! Anti-Trump Protesters Plan Demonstration Outside The New York City Home Of Ivanka
Trump And Jared Kushner To 'Help Ivanka Move' xxx
Fabricated Russian Hacking Claim Getting Surreal
MLK’s Niece: I Voted For Trump
Trump Calls CIA Chief ‘Fake News Leaker’ After Brennan Warns Him About ‘Talking & Tweeting’
Americans Will Get The Trump They Elected As President
Globalists To Hold Emergency Meeting In Washington DC On Trump
Trump's Twitter: Could Hackers Wreak Havoc From The White House?
Revelers, Rally-Goers To Clog DC For Trump's Inauguration
Donald Trump Won't Be Using The POTUS Twitter Account
Trump Slams Outgoing CIA Director Brennan After Criticism Over Russia Threat
White House Reporters To 'Fight' Trump Team's Plan To Limit Their 'West Wing Access'
Meet The Trumps: America's New First Family
Complicity Of Sources Shows Mainstream Bias: CIA And CNN Trolled With Made-Up Trump Story
Can Trump Take Back The Presidency From The CIA?
In Stunning Pair Of Interviews, Trump Slams NATO And EU, Threatens BMW With Tax; Prepared To
"Cut Ties" With Merkel xxx
The Truth About Trump: CIA Completely Discredited After Caught Peddling Buzzfeed False Smears As
Facts xxx
Nuking The Inauguration (20 January 2017)
Report: Terrorists, Cartels Plan Border Attack For Inauguration
That’s Strange: Weapons Caches Found Stashed In DC Days Before Inauguration
Will There Be War On The Streets Of Washington D.C. During The Inauguration On Friday?
Report: Anti-Trump Activists Plotting To Disrupt Inaugural Events With Butyric Acid, Stink Bombs
CIA's Brennan Rejects Donald Trump's Criticism, Says Dossier Didn't Come From Intel Community
Dear Anti-Trump Protesters: Show Your Commitment. Quit Your Jobs
Trump Anti-Communist Counter Revolution
The DNC Hands The Democratic Party Over To David Brock And Billionaire Donors
You Won’t Believe What CNN And The Mainstream Media Are Doing Now (VIDEO)
Putin Warns Of "Maidan-Style" Attempt To Delegitimize Trump; Doesn't Believe Trump Used Hookers xxx
4
In Moscow xxx
Putin Blasts Anti-Trump Prostitutes
‘Worse Than Prostitutes’: Putin Slams Those Behind Trump ‘Leak’
The Issue Is Not Trump. It Is Us
Report: Obama Administration Targeting Journalists And Trump Operatives For Murder
Four Reasons Trump Will Quit
Perhaps Proof of Election Fraud? Trump Inaugurated with Historically Low Approval
Video Exposes Anti-Trump Group Plans To Shut Down DC Bridges And Highways With "Clusterfuck
Blockades" xxx
Secret Service Taking Extraordinary Measures To Protect Against "Unprecedented" Inauguration Threats
What to Expect from the Trump Administration: A Protectionist and Pro-Corporate America Government
A Deep State Orchestrated Storm Awaits Trump In Office
Russia Expects To Talk With Donald Trump About Nuclear, Hypersonic And Space Weapons
CIA Director Slams Trump For Slamming CIA
Lavrov Blasts Voice Of America’s Report On Alleged Russian Hacker Attacks As ‘Lie’
Lavrov Dismisses Allegations Of Cyberattacks On Western Countries As 'Cooked-Up Evidence'
New York Times Warns "Budget Cuts Are Coming", Will Invest $5 Million To Cover Trump
Putin Accuses Outgoing US Administration Of Attempting To Undermine Trump’s Legitimacy
Outgoing CIA Director Hypes Nonexistent Russian Threat
Trump As Lightning Rod (Not Just For Disaffected Progressives, But For Panicked Insiders)
Interior Nominee Zinke Disputes Trump On Climate Change
Reagan And Trump: American Nationalists
Analyzing Mainstream News Anti-Logic
New ABC / Wapo Poll Shows Drop In Trump Favorability Courtesy Of Aggressive "Oversamples"
BBC’s Trump-Kremlin Documentary Is Like An ‘Austin Powers’ Film, Says Galloway
Trump To Ainsley Earhardt: 'I Don't Want Celebs At Inauguration, I Want The People'
Florida Man Charged With Making Online Threat Against Trump xxx
In An Epic Final Speech, Joe Biden Warns That The Progressive Democratic World Order Is At Risk Of
Collapse xxx
Trump The Disruptor
Russian Hacking And The Smell Test
NATO, An Obsolete Cold War Military Construct: Donald Trump And The History Of The Atlantic Alliance
Trump Warns Canada, Mexico He Will Begin NAFTA Renegotiation "Within Days Of Inauguration"
Bashing Trump’s Justifiable Outrage Over Disgraceful Press
Obama's Chelsea Manning 'Pardon' Proves The "Russian Election Hack" Story Was One Big Lie xxx
58% of Americans Don’t Think Russian “Hacking” Changed Election … 56% Believe U.S. Should Improve
Relations with Russia xxx
Corporate Media Now Pushing The Idea That The Entire Trump Administration Could Be Killed xxx
EXCLUSIVE: Florida Man Charged With Threatening To Kill President-Elect Trump At His Inauguration
On Twitter Was A Close Family Friend Of Bill And Hillary Clinton xxx
Obama Parting Shot Aims At Brennan, Clapper, Clinton: "The DNC Emails Were Leaked"
Nothing Is Real: When Reality TV Programming Masquerades As Politics
CNN: If Trump/Pence Is Killed During Inauguration, Obama Appointee Would Be President
Obama Makes Incredible Admission About Wikileaks In Final Press Conference
President Trump's Inaugural Address Was The Shortest Since Carter
Trump Publicly Lynches Past Administrations For Selling American Out xxx
President Trump Orders A Standing Ovation For Hillary And Bill Clinton - And Finally Gets Them To
Smile After Humiliated Couple Sit Glumly Through His Swearing-In And Hear Crowd Chant 'Lock Her Up' xxx
Donald Trump Eviscerated Washington In His Inaugural Address
Completing The Criminal Takeover Of The United States
The Not-Hillary President
Trump’s Declaration of War
Area 51 & Other Government Secrets Trump Is About to Discover
President Donald Trump
Trump To Sign Executive Orders Straightaway
Russia’s Premier Blasts Obama
New President, New World
The Following Words Had Never Appeared In An Inaugural Address, Until Today
Trump And A New Gold-Backed Dollar
Trump’s Top Priorities
5
Trump Admin Outlines Policy Priorities For First 100 Days On Revamped WH Website
NYT Editors Bash Trump’s Inaugural Address
Phantom Phixer: Priebus Betrays Trump…Again
Mongoose: Is “The Family” Penetrating Donald Trump? Is a Religious-Criminal Cabal Securing Key Spots?
Wapo Rains On Trump’s Inaugural Parade
One Takeaway From Trump’s Inauguration Speech: Gangs
Pepe Escobar: Here's How The Trump Presidency Will Play Out
National Park Service Belittles President Trump On Official Twitter Account, Forced To Apologize
Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
Trump Triumphant
Celebs Threatening Trump Doesn’t Help
America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
Trump’s Plan To Kill UN Begins With Withdrawal Bill
Distracted Media Fails To Catch Trump Policy Decisions
White House Chief Of Staff Blasts Dishonest Media
Trump At The CIA: The Orwellian World Of Alternative Facts
Why Impeach Donald Trump
The Women’s March Was A Dismal Failure And A Hopeful Sign
The Deep State In The Age Of Trump
Reflections On DC: Promises And Pitfalls In The Anti-Trump Uprising
Senior Secret Service Agent Suggests She Wouldn't Take 'A Bullet' For Trump xxx
Mainstream Media Accidentally Admitted All The DNC Email Leaks Were True… Stunning Revelations
Of Collusion And Corruption Run By The Clintons xxx
Three Days In And Trump Has Already Kept One Pledge
Trump To Launch "Major Investigation Into Voter Fraud"
Vast Majority of Americans Back Trump’s Blast Against Washington Establishment
Your CIA At Work: And The Media Trust Their “Russian Hack” Story
ABC News Shockingly Claims Ownership Over Trump’s Words And Likeness
The Women’s March In Washington D.C., As Broadcast
Trump Prepares Orders Aiming At Global Funding and Treaties
President Trump Tells ABC News' David Muir: Construction of Border Wall Will Begin in 'Months'
A Time For Vigilance
The Entire Senior Management Team At The State Department Just Resigned
Alex Jones' InfoWars Offered White House Credentials
The State Department’s Entire Senior Administrative Team Just Resigned
Top State Dept. Officials Exit After Tillerson Visit
At Least Four Senior U.S. State Department Officials Leave Posts Say Officials
Al Sharpton Cries Over Trump’s Presidency; Claims The President Is ‘Not Legitimate’ xxx
Can President Trump Overcome Republicans’ Deep Collusion With Big Pharma, Monsanto And The
Pesticide Industry? xxx
Bombshell: At Least 25 Million Dead And Fraudulent “Registered Voters” In 2016 xxx
The U.S. Plan To Topple All 7 Countries On Trump’s Refugee Ban List xxx
Trump Argument Bolstered: Clinton Could Have Received 800,000 Votes From Noncitizens, Study Finds xxx
How To Know When President Trump Is WINNING … Just Listen For The Heads Exploding On The
Mentally Ill Left xxx
Guess What Group Plans To “Massively” Resist Voter Fraud Investigation (Video)
How The MSM Spun The False Russian Narrative
World Reaction To Trump’s Muslim Ban
Trump's Promises Before & After The Election
Case for Impeachment: The Muslim Ban Fiasco
Media Talking Heads Continue To Call For President Trump’s Murder
Senate Democrats Bash Trump's Immigration Ban; Emotional Schumer Vows Fierce Hill Opposition xxx
Team Trump Defends 'Extreme Vetting' At Airports As Priebus And Spicer Say Just 0.0033 Per Cent Of
International Arrivals Were Stopped – And Conway Reminds Americans That 9/11 Victims' Kids Will
Never See Their Parents Again! xxx
Conway Defends Trump Immigration Ban, Ripped Press 'A New One' Over Bias
What Trump's Executive Order On Immigration Does—And Doesn't Do
Trump Says Top Priority Is To 'Protect And Serve' America Amid Backlash Over Extreme Vetting
Trump Idea-Man Steve Bannon X-Rays NY Times’ Skull: Empty
Anti-Trump Protesters At JFK Chant, ‘F*Ck Your Wall! We’ll Tear It Down!’; Threaten Reporter
6
Investigation Launched Into Obama’s DHS Hacking State Election Systems
Trump Puts Mexican President In A Political Vise
Trump’s Travel Ban Plainly Excludes Countries Tied To 93% Of All US Terrorism xxx
“Muslim Ban” Media Lie Leads To Enraged Mob Of Mindless Left-Wing Zombies Physically Attacking
Trump Supporter In Broad Daylight xxx
50 Members Of The Republican Study Committee Implore Trump: “Fire The IRS Chief” xxx
'Unprecedented': Trump Adds Bannon To National Security Council, Kicks Out Intelligence Officials xxx
Defiant Trump Team Digs In: "We Wont Apologize For Keeping America Safe" xxx
Border Guards Say Trump's Orders Have IMPROVED Morale And Insist The Immigration Ban Will Save
Lives xxx
Time For US Media To ‘Clean House,’ Conway Says xxx
Oops! CNN Accidentally Airs Press Conference With Detained Iraqi Traveler Who Likes Trump –
ABC News Edits Out xxx
Understanding This Chart Can Flat Out Save America From Civil War xxx

7
 U.S. Intelligence Agencies Have No Clothes
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog
Jan 10, 2017 11:15 PM
The true patriotism, the only rational
patriotism is loyalty to the nation all the
time, loyalty to the government when it
deserves it.
– Mark Twain, The Czar’s Soliloquy”
At this point, pretty much everyone in America has seen
the results of Hillary Clinton media pet, John Harwood’s
recent Twitter poll.
The significance of the above cannot be overstated. U.S.
intelligence agencies, like so many other national
institutions, have lost nearly all credibility in the eyes of
the American public. The list is long, but includes
economists, politicians, the mainstream media, central
bankers, the financial system, and a lot more. The loss in
credibility is well deserved and has nothing to do with
Russia. Rather, it’s a function of a disastrous 21st century
outcome for U.S. citizens both at home and abroad. A
result that was achieved under eight years of Republican
rule and then eight years of Democratic rule. The
results were the same whether a donkey or elephant was in
charge, because the people determining policy behind the
8
scenes never really changed (same economists, central
bankers, intelligence officials, etc), and the people selling
the catastrophic policies to the public definitely never
changes (mainstream media and its worthless pundits).
So here we stand at a moment where trust in essentially all
U.S. institutions is at a well deserved all-time low, and the
best the establishment can come up with is to blame
Russia. Even worse, those pushing the whole “Putin is to
blame for everything” conspiracy theories, consistently
refuse to back up their assertions with any evidence
whatsoever.
In fact, with each passing week the case
looks increasingly flimsy,
with the latest declassified document issued Friday being
particularly suspect. Even many of those largely convinced
of Russia’s meddling in the U.S. election admit the most
recent report was pathetic, embarrassing and proved
absolutely nothing.
Robert Parry of Consortium News summarizes the farce
perfectly in his recent piece U.S. Report Still Lacks Proof
on Russia ‘Hack’.
Here’s how he begins the article:
Repeating an accusation over and over again is not
evidence that the accused is guilty, no matter how
much “confidence” the accuser asserts about the
conclusion. Nor is it evidence just to suggest that
someone has a motive for doing something. Many
conspiracy theories are built on the notion of “cui
bono” – who benefits – without following up the
supposed motive with facts.
But that is essentially what the U.S. intelligence
community has done regarding the dangerous
accusation that Russian President Vladimir Putin
orchestrated a covert information campaign to
influence the outcome of the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential
election in favor of Republican Donald Trump.
Just a day after Director of National Intelligence
James Clapper vowed to go to the greatest possible
lengths to supply the public with the evidence behind
the accusations, his office released a 25-page
 report that contained no direct evidence that Russia
delivered hacked emails from the Democratic National
Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman
John Podesta to WikiLeaks.
The DNI report amounted to a compendium of
reasons to suspect that Russia was the source of the
information – built largely on the argument that Russia
had a motive for doing so because of its disdain for
Democratic nominee Clinton and the potential for
friendlier relations with Republican nominee Trump.
But the report’s assessment is more than just a
reasonable judgment based on a body of incomplete
information. It is tendentious in that it only lays out the
case for believing in Russia’s guilt, not reasons for
doubting that guilt.
For instance, while it is true that many Russian
officials, including President Putin, considered Clinton
to be a threat to worsen the already frayed
relationship between the two nuclear superpowers,
the report ignores the downside for Russia trying to
interfere with the U.S. election campaign and then
failing to stop Clinton, which looked like the most likely
outcome until Election Night.
If Russia had accessed the DNC and Podesta emails
and slipped them to WikiLeaks for publication, Putin
would have to think that the National Security Agency,
with its exceptional ability to track electronic
communications around the world, might well have
detected the maneuver and would have informed
Clinton.
So, on top of Clinton’s well-known hawkishness,
Putin would have risked handing the expected
incoming president a personal reason to take
revenge on him and his country. Historically, Russia
has been very circumspect in such situations, usually
holding its intelligence collections for internal purposes
only, not sharing them with the public.
Another very good breakdown of the clownishness of the
latest intel report was written by noted anti-Putin activist
Masha Gessen in The New York Review of Books. Like
many others, she finds the obsession with RT within the
report bizarre to say the least. She notes:
Finally, the bulk of the rest of the report is devoted to
RT, the television network formerly known as Russia
Today.
A seven-page annex to the report details RT activities,
including hosting third-party candidate debates,
broadcasting a documentary about the Occupy Wall
Street movement and “anti-fracking programming,
highlighting environmental issues and the impacts on
9
public health”—perfectly appropriate journalistic
activities, even if they do appear on what is certainly a
propaganda outlet funded by an aggressive
dictatorship. An entire page is devoted to RT’s social
media footprint: the network appears to score more
YouTube views than CNN (though far fewer Facebook
likes). Even this part of the report is slightly
misleading: RT’s tactics for inflating its viewership
numbers in order to secure continued Kremlin funding
has been the subject of some convincing scholarship.
That is the entirety of the case the intelligence
agencies have presented: Putin wanted Trump to win
and used WikiLeaks and RT to ensure that outcome.
Indeed, it appears the intelligence community is more
concerned that RT is doing a better job than U.S.
journalists at covering issues Americans care about than it
is about Russia “hacking the election.” She also concludes:
Despite its brevity, the report makes many
repetitive statements remarkable for their
misplaced modifiers, mangled assertions, and
missing words. This is not just bad English: this is
muddled thinking and vague or entirely absent
argument…
It is conceivable that the classified version of the
report, which includes additional “supporting
information” and sourcing, adds up to a stronger case.
But considering the arc of the argument contained in
the report, and the principle findings (which are
apparently “identical” to those in the classified
version), this would be a charitable reading. An
appropriate headline for a news story on this report
might be something like, “Intel Report on Russia
Reveals Few New Facts,” or, say, “Intelligence
Agencies Claim Russian Propaganda TV Influenced
Election.” Instead, however, the major newspapers
and commentators spoke in unison, broadcasting the
report’s assertion of Putin’s intent without examining
the arguments.
Which brings me to the biggest red flag in the entire
intelligence report. The part where it states:
We also assess Putin and the Russian
Government aspired to help President-
elect Trump’s election chances when
possible by discrediting Secretary
Clinton and publicly contrasting her
unfavorably to him. All three agencies
agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI
have high confidence in this judgment;
NSA has moderate confidence.
If any agency should have high confidence it’s the NSA,
and pretty much every security expert I follow seems to
agree. First, here’s what Bruce Schneier wrote in his recent
piece, Attributing the DNC Hacks to Russia:
Attribution is easier if you are
monitoring broad swaths of the Internet.
This gives the National Security
Agency a singular advantage in the
attribution game. The problem, of
course, is that the NSA doesn’t want to
publish what it knows.
Isn’t that interesting. The one agency with the most
information is the one least confident in the conclusion.
Why only moderate confidence from the NSA? I wonder.
Schneier isn’t the only one of course. As famed NSA
whistleblower William Binney noted in a recent article
coauthored with Ray McGovern, The Dubious Case on
Russian ‘Hacking’:
With respect to the alleged interference
by Russia and WikiLeaks in the U.S.
election, it is a major mystery why U.S.
intelligence feels it must rely on
“circumstantial evidence,” when it has
NSA’s vacuum cleaner sucking up hard
evidence galore. What we know of
NSA’s capabilities shows that the email
disclosures were from leaking, not
hacking.
Here’s the difference:
Hack: When someone in a remote location
electronically penetrates operating systems, firewalls
or other cyber-protection systems and then extracts
data. Our own considerable experience, plus the rich
detail revealed by Edward Snowden, persuades us
that, with NSA’s formidable trace capability, it can
identify both sender and recipient of any and all data
crossing the network.
Leak: When someone physically takes data out of an
organization — on a thumb drive, for example — and
gives it to someone else, as Edward Snowden and
Chelsea Manning did. Leaking is the only way such
data can be copied and removed with no electronic
trace.
Because NSA can trace exactly where and how
any “hacked” emails from the Democratic National
Committee or other servers were routed through
the network, it is puzzling why NSA cannot
produce hard evidence implicating the Russian
government and WikiLeaks. Unless we are dealing
with a leak from an insider, not a hack, as other
reporting suggests. From a technical perspective
alone, we are convinced that this is what happened.
10
Again, if any agency should have high confidence, it is the
NSA.
Moving along, the U.S. government’s case gets even
weaker the more you dig into it. A perfect example can be
seen in how poorly State Department spokesman Robert
Kirby handled a few questions during a recent press
conference. Here’s the clip:
Three major red flags appear in this exchange. First, Mr.
Kirby admits that no evidence has been provided to the
public regarding Russian hacking and distribution of
information to Wikileaks, and that none would be
forthcoming.
Second, Mr. Kirby repeatedly insists that the fact “all 17
intelligence agencies” came to the same conclusion should
be sufficient for the American public in the absence of any
actual proof. To this I reply:
I don’t know about you, but the fact that seventeen
agencies representing a bipartisan status quo that has been
catastrophically wrong about pretty much everything came
to the same conclusion, does not inspire confidence or
credibility in the mind of this citizen.
Finally, there’s red flag number three. When AP reporter
Matt Lee follows up wondering why the WMD assessment
debacle holds no relevance to the current intelligence
assessment, Mr. Kirby responds by highlighting all of “the
kinds of gains that have been made in intelligence and
analysis since then.”
Here’s the problem. The Director of National Intelligence
(DNI), James Clapper does not have clean hands when it
comes to the WMD affair. He also blatantly lied to the
American people with regard to NSA surveillance before
being called out by Edward Snowden. As Binney and
McGovern explain:
Mr. Trump’s skepticism is warranted not only by
technical realities, but also by human ones, including
the dramatis personae involved. Mr. Clapper has
admitted giving Congress on March 12, 2013, false
testimony regarding the extent of the National
Security Agency’s collection of data on
Americans. Four months later, after the Edward
Snowden revelations, Mr. Clapper apologized to the
Senate for testimony he admitted was “clearly
erroneous.” That he is a survivor was already
apparent by the way he landed on his feet after the
intelligence debacle on Iraq.
Mr. Clapper was a key player in facilitating the
fraudulent intelligence. Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld put Mr. Clapper in charge of the analysis
of satellite imagery, the best source for
pinpointing the location of weapons of mass
destruction — if any.
When Pentagon favorites like Iraqi émigré Ahmed
Chalabi plied U.S. intelligence with spurious
“evidence” on WMD in Iraq, Mr. Clapper was in
position to suppress the findings of any imagery
analyst who might have the temerity to report, for
example, that the Iraqi “chemical weapons facility”
for which Mr. Chalabi provided the geographic
coordinates was nothing of the kind. Mr. Clapper
preferred to go by the Rumsfeldian dictum: “The
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” (It
.
11
will be interesting to see if he tries that out on the
President-elect Friday.)
A year after the war began, Mr. Chalabi told the
media, “We are heroes in error. As far as we’re
concerned we’ve been entirely successful.” By that
time it was clear there were no WMD in Iraq. When
Mr. Clapper was asked to explain, he opined, without
adducing any evidence, that they probably were
moved into Syria.
To conclude, I certainly think it is important to know if the
Russian government hacked the DNC/Podesta and then
handed that information to Wikileaks. Likewise, such an
explosive claim necessitates publicly available evidence
given the horrible track record of U.S. intelligence
agencies.
Until such evidence is made available I,
like countless other Americans, will
tend to believe Wikileaks, which has a
track record of proving its claims and
being accurate, as opposed to U.S.
intelligence, which doesn’t.
12
 The Real Significance Of
Clapper’s (ODNI) Report On Russia
For The USA As A Country, It Is Vital To Purge The Top Levels
Of Power From Incompetent And Dishonorable Clowns.
By The Saker
January 10, 2017
ODNI – Office of the Director of National Intelligence, USA
I have to confess that my first reaction was to simply
ignore this report as an irrelevant load of nonsense. Then I
listed to a Ukrainian blogger, Anatoli Sharii, making fun of
this report for over 10 minutes. Listening to him my first
reaction was “can’t be – Sharii is in overkill mode”. But
then Sharii began quoting the report at length and I simply
could not believe my eyes (I reading the original English
text which Sharii had translated into Russian): every word
Sharii said was true. That’s when I decided to download
this document and read it. Please do read the full text.
Before we go into the details, I also recommend that you
go through the following two examples of how the US
corporate media “helpfully” provided their readers with a
“guide” to better understand/interpret this report:
CNN: 10 most damning findings from report
on Russian election interference
VOX: The key findings from the US
intelligence report on the Russia hack,
decoded
Again, even if it is painful, I recommend that you read the
full text of the “guides” provided by these media outlets.
Now let’s turn to the contents.
13
James Clapper, U.S. Director of National Intelligence, speaks at the
Council of Foreign Relations, a Neocon Think Tank.
First, remember what the stated goal of
this report was: to convince President-
Elect Donald Trump that the Russians had
actively interfered in the US Presidential
elections. Since Donald Trump openly and
repeatedly expressed his deepest
skepticism about this entire issue, this
report is the best the Neocons got to try to
make him change his mind.
Second, there is this key sentence in the first page of the
report:
“while the conclusions in the report are
all reflected in the classified
assessment, the declassified report
does not and cannot include the full
supporting information, including
specific intelligence and sources and
methods“.
Translated in plain English this means this:
“while we cannot tell you exactly how
we know what we know, lest the bad
guys find out about a super-secret
intelligence gathering methods, we
promise you that the conclusions made
public today are supported by our
 research. In other words, while
“sources and methods”
are kept secret, the conclusions made
public do faithfully summarize our findings.
In even simpler words we could say
“our conclusions are exhaustive, there
are no other findings kept secret, only
our methods and means have been
classified”.
Basically this means that, this is all the Neocons got.
So what does the report say:
1. The Russians were critical of the US democracy
process (page ii)
2. Putin & Co preferred Trump over Clinton (page ii)
3. The Russian media (state and private) was critical of
Clinton (page ii)
4. The Russian military intelligence agency GRU is
behind well know hackers (page ii and iii)
5. The Russians obtained access to US electoral boards
but that did not affect the vote count (page iii)
6. The Russians will use that experience in the future
against US allies (page iii)
That’s it. Seriously. That’s all they got. The rest of the
report is just a kind of vague discussion filled with “we
assess”, “we believe” and other such “estimative
language” (explained on page 13 of the report).
well claim that the Martian intelligence services are linked
to Wikileaks or that Russian time-travel machines were
involved in the assassination of JFK. Frankly, this is as
lame as it is pathetic.
I don’t know what Trump was thinking when he listened to
this load of bovine excreta, but I know that had I been in
his position I would have literally kicked the folks
presenting this report down the stairs of my house and that
I would have immediately fired all the persons and offices
linked to the drafting of this text. Why?
Because as somebody who wrote analytical reports himself
I know that this report is so bad and vague that it would
have been unacceptable even coming from a first year
junior analyst, nevermind top intelligence officials.
Second, because this report contains absolutely no
actionable intelligence whatsoever. So the Russian don’t
like Hillary and they say so. What’s the big deal? Hillary
was the most incompetent and russophobic Secretary of
State in US history and had she been elected the risks of
thermonuclear war would have been immense. Does it
really surprise anybody that most Russians (including
yours truly) absolutely hate, despise and fear her?
What is Trump suppose to do now: call Putin and tell
him
“Vladimir, please tell RT not to criticize
US public figures?!”.

The most amazing thing is that in the 25 pages of the

report there is not ONE SINGLE ELEMENT OF
PROOF. Absolutely nothing.

What we have are what I can only call “political

complaints” (points 1 through 3 above) and totally
unsubstantiated allegation of illegal monitoring of various
US servers/networks/computers. And that, my friends, is
absolutely stunning. Why? Because in the first instance
the US intel agencies are complaining that the Russians are
using their God given right to express their opinions and
preferences and while in the second instance the US
complains that Russia is doing exactly that which the
biggest US intel agency – the NSA – has been officially
(and secretively) created to do: monitor others.

About half the report is basically a long, paranoid rant

about how effective RT and Sputnik are and how popular
they have become in the West. Seriously, they are trying
to convince Trump that the Russians are bad bad bad by
saying that RT has good talkshows! This simply blows my
mind.
As for whether the GRU ( GRU is Russia’s largest foreign
intelligence agency) is in any way linked to Guccifer or
DCLeaks.com – this is plain laughable and they might as
And what was Trump supposed to answer if Putin replied
to him
“Donald, the USA has been deeply
interfering inside Russia, you ran our
country in the 1990s, you rigged out
elections, your snipers shot our people

14
 from the roof of your embassy in 1993
and your media has been demonizing
me personally for years now – and you
want me to tone down RT?!”.
The good news is that Trump did the right thing: he
ridiculed this absolutely laughable report and reiterated his
desire for a good relationship with Russia:
Neocons and pro-Neocon Architects of Iraq War
We already saw Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons, we
already had the zig-zaging nonsense about the Iranian
military nuclear program, and now we have this
Kindergarten level direct interference in internal US
politics.
The U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) consists of 16
agencies/organizations and one overarching entity, the
Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
If the USA was some kind of tiny and irrelevant country
like, say, Estonia, that would be no big deal. But when the
15
However, this should not be the end of the story. Not
only is this report a botched and pathetic attempt at serving
the narrow political interests of the Neocons, it is also am
immense stain on the already battered reputation of the US
intelligence community.
US tax payer spends many billions to fund not one, not
two or three, but 16 intelligence agencies and all they can
produce is this kind of total crap, this is a problem. A
problem made worse by the fact that this kind of
“intelligence” is what the President will use to have to
make critical decisions, including the one to go to war or
even to use nuclear weapons.
So funny as this all is, this is also scary. It appears that the
US intelligence community has been so totally politicized
that it is unable to fulfill its most important task: inform
US decision makers.
Yet again I come to the same conclusion:
Trump needs to crack down hard, very hard, on the US
intelligence community, especially the CIA. The entire
community must be reformed and dramatically reduced in
size. In intelligence matters, bigger is not better, and a
bloated immense intelligence community of 16 agencies is
something not a single country in history has every tried.
 This is not only a total waste of
resources, this is outright dangerous.
For years now the Russian have been complaining about
what they politely called the “lack of professionalism” of
their US colleagues.
on charges of corruption, obstruction of justice, fraud,
abuse of power, criminal conspiracy to defraud, etc.
Congress (which always felt above the law) and the intel
community (which uses secrecy to hide corruption) should
be especially vulnerable to such tactics.

No doubt that now they will openly begin to deplore the

“lack of professionalism” of the US intelligence services.
Why? Because Russia’s security very much depends on
the US intelligence community truthfully and competently
reporting about Russia to the US President.

A competent US intel community would tell the President

that Russia is no threat whatsoever and the working with
Russia on the basis of healthy self-interest, basic common
sense and mutual respect would be in the interest of both
countries. But right now the US intel community is only
making matters worse, and that harms both the USA and
Russia.

Trump should appoint somebody at the

head of the FBI with “a cold head, a
burning heart and clean hands” (to
borrow the expression of Felix
Derzhinskii) and order a massive crack-
down on Congress, the US media and
the US intelligence community.
Just like Putin did it in Russia, and how the US dealt with
the likes of Al Capone, he can probably get most of them
.
For Trump and, I would argue, for the USA as a country, it
is vital to purge the top levels of power from such
incompetent and dishonorable clowns. Besides, they will
not leave Trump alone nor will they give him a fair chance
to prove himself. And the Neocons cannot be appeased,
they always want more. Unless Trump takes immediate
action against them as soon as he enters the White House
his Presidency will be doomed, as will the future of the
USA.

16
 McCain Admits He Gave Dossier Containing "Sensitive
Information" On Trump To The FBI
By Tyler Durden
Jan 11, 2017 10:25 AM
While hardly surprising considering the copious amounts
of bad blood between the President elect and John
McCain, earlier today the Arizona senator confirmed that
he passed along the 35-page report to the FBI that details
unverified allegations that President-elect Trump's team
coordinated with the Russian government to defeat Hillary
Clinton.
In a statement released Wednesday, McCain said passing
the report along was the extent of his involvement in the
process.
"Late last year, I received sensitive
information that has since been made
public," McCain said. "Upon examination
of the contents, and unable to make a
judgment about their accuracy, I
delivered the information to the director
of the FBI. That has been the extent of
my contact with the FBI or any other
government agency regarding this
issue."
As The Washington Examiner notes, reports surfaced
Tuesday night that a foreign contact of McCain's passed
along the report detailing alleged compromising
information the Russian government has on Trump. That
report was published in full by Buzzfeed Tuesday evening,
despite being unverified information.
As the Mail adds, Carl Bernstein, the Watergate reporter
who contributed to the first story about its existence,
suggested that McCain was handed it by a former British
ambassador to Moscow.
Bernstein told CNN:
'It came from a former British MI6 agent
who was hired from a political opposition
research firm in Washington who was
doing work about Donald Trump for both
republican and democratic candidates
opposed to Trump.
.
17
'And then, a former British ambassador to
Russia independently was made aware of
these findings and he took the information
to John McCain – Senator John McCain of
Arizona – in the period just after the
election, and showed it to McCain –
additional findings.
'McCain was sufficiently disturbed by what
he read to take it to FBI director James
Comey himself personally, they had a five
minute meeting the two men, very little was
said, McCain turned it over to him and is
now awaiting what the FBI’s response is to
that information.'
The identity of the former British ambassador has not been
disclosed, however, only one former British ambassador to
Washington remains in UK government service, Sir Tim
Barrow, who went on to be Foreign Office political
director and is now Britain's ambassador to the European
Union. The Arizona senator said at the time:
'"Donald Trump’s behavior... concluding
with the disclosure of his demeaning
comments about women and his boasts
about sexual assaults, make it impossible
to continue to offer even conditional
support for his candidacy.'
***
McCain's statement comes on the heels of reports that
President Barack Obama, Trump and congressional leaders
were briefed on the allegations made in the dossier. The
two-page summary is based on a collection memos created
by political opponents of Trump during his presidential
campaign, alleging that the Russians had compromising
information on Trump. The memos were purportedly
compiled by a former British intelligence official.
The Trump camp pushed back hard against the report
Wednesday, calling it "offensive crap" and Trump himself
went on Twitter to deny any coordination with the Russian
government.
 The Deep State Versus Donald Trump –
New Smears And The Ukrainian Connection
By B
January 11, 2017 at 07:39 AM
As remarked on January 6:
When Hillary Clinton was defeated in the
U.S. presidential election the relevant
powers launched a campaign to
delegitimize the President elect Donald
Trump.
The ultimate aim of the cabal is to kick him
out of office and have a reliable
replacement, like the Vice-President elect
Pence, take over. Should that not be
possible it is hoped that the delegitimization
will make it impossible for Trump to change
major policy trajectories especially in
foreign policy. A main issue here is the
reorientation of the U.S. military complex
and its NATO proxies from the war of terror
towards a direct confrontation with main
powers like Russia and China.
The deep state campaign against Trump opened new
grounds today with the publication of completely fake and
thereby unverifiable anonymous assertions which include
the smear that Trump had some fun in a Moscow hotel and
that Russian secret services is using that to manipulate
him.
Like many smears against Trump via proxies of the
Clinton presidential campaign these new ones seem to
origin from Ukraine related sources and Ukrainian
"nationalist" (aka fascist) putsch supporters.
The new assertions about Trump come in 35 pages of
"reports" by an anonymous (claimed) former British
intelligence operator working for a private U.S. company
with dates ranging from June 20 2016 to December 13
2016. They say that Russia has some tapes of Trump
watching sex games in 2013, they claim that Trump
campaign officials coordinated the Clinton campaign leaks
with Russia and that the Russian President Putin was
highly involved in all of this.
Here is how the claimed former intelligence operator
typically describes his sources in these "reports":
18
Speaking to a trusted compatriot in June
2016 sources A and B, a senior Russian
Foreign Ministry figure and a former top
level Russian intelligence officer still active
inside the Kremlin respectively, the
Russian authorities had been cultivating
and supporting U.S. Republican
presidential candidate, Donald TRUMP for
at least five years. Source B asserted that
the TRUMP operation was both supported
and directed by Russian President Vladimir
PUTIN.
The anonymous former British operator hears from an
anonymous asserted compatriot what two anonymous
sources, asserted to have access to inner Russian circles,
claim to have heard somewhere that something happened
in the Kremlin.
They assert that Trump was supported and directed by
Putin himself five years ago while even a year ago no one
would have bet a penny on Trump gaining any political
significant position or even the presidency.
There is a lot more of such nonsense in these new Hitler
diaries. It is bonkers from a to z.
Senator John McCain, friend of Ukrainian fascists, passed
the "report" to the FBI and thereby made it into an official
document.
Even as they are obvious fake the FBI tried to use these
"reports" to get a wide warrant from the foreign
intelligence surveillance (FISA) court to listen in on
Trump campaign officials. The court thankfully denied or
at least narrowed down the request.
The first "reports" were created as part of the opposition
research paid by a Republican candidate running in the
primaries against Trump. They were later produced for and
paid by the Democratic campaign. They have been
shopped around in Washington for several month. The
NYT, the WSJ, CNN and the FBI all investigated the
assertions in them. Despite those considerable combined
capacities they could verify none of them. All publications
refrained from publishing the claims during the campaign
because there was no evidence at all that supported them.
Buzzfeed now pushed these out despite also saying that
they have found nothing verifiable in them.
Even worse, the Director of National Intelligence Clapper
(who once claimed Saddam's non-existing WMDs were
shipped to Syria) presented these to Congress and the
president elect Trump as "annex" to his baseless U.S.
Intelligence report of "Russian hacking".
A murky preview of the assertions had been given by
David Corn in a Mother Jones piece in October. He talked
with the said-to-be author of the "reports":
"It started off as a fairly general inquiry,"
says the former spook, who asks not to be
identified. But when he dug into Trump, he
notes, he came across troubling
information indicating connections between
Trump and the Russian government.
According to his sources, he says, "there
was an established exchange of
information between the Trump campaign
and the Kremlin of mutual benefit."
The current publication of this full barrel of bullshit comes
a day after members of the Trump cabinet have been
successfully confirmed by Congress and hours before his
long expected press conference. It is thereby destined to
overshadow a successful start of the Trump presidency.
There are signs that the "reports" were written with some
Ukrainian nationalist and anti-semitic background. Just
consider this passage from the July 26 "report":
In terms of the FSB's recruitment of
capable cyber operatives to carry out its,
ideally deniable, offensive cyber
operations, a Russian IT specialist with
direct knowledge reported in June 2016
that this was often done using coercion and
blackmail. In terms of 'foreign' agents, the
FSB was approaching U.S. citizens of
Russian (Jewish) origin on business trips
in Russia.
Such tropes are typical of the anti-semitic Ukrainian
"nationalist" (aka Nazi) narrative. ("All Soviet/Communist
ideologues/functionaries are Jews.") Russian services
would, unlike Mossad, not recruit IT hackers conditioned
on "Jewish" ethnic relations or believe. They would hire
anyone competent who they think they could trust.
We have seen more Ukrainian "nationalists" involved in
the "Russian hacks" propaganda claims. A July 2016
Yahoo piece by (Clinton campaign mouthpiece) Michael
Isikoff wrote:
19
Just weeks after she started preparing
opposition research files on Donald
Trump’s campaign chairman Paul Manafort
last spring, Democratic National Committee
consultant Alexandra Chalupa got an
alarming message when she logged into
her personal Yahoo email account.
...
Chalupa — who had been drafting memos
and writing emails about Manafort’s
connection to pro-Russian political leaders
in Ukraine — quickly alerted top DNC
officials.
...
“I was freaked out,” Chalupa, who serves
as director of “ethnic engagement” for
the DNC, told Yahoo News in an interview,
noting that she had been in close touch
with sources in Kiev, Ukraine, including a
number of investigative journalists, who
had been providing her with information
about Manafort’s political and business
dealings in that country and Russia.
Chalupa is also somewhat involved with the ProPornOT
list, promoted by the Washington Post, of alleged pro-
Russian propaganda websites. This website, Moon of
Alabama, is also on that list :-) (see at end of piece).
(Unfortunately though we have never received a penny, or
anything else, from Russian sources, are critical of Putin's
neoliberal economic policies and have been plagiarized by
the Russian government financed Russia Today without
any compensation.) The ProPornOT Twitter account says
it is “Ukrainian-American” and it used the Ukrainian
fascist salute of the OUN-Bandera killer gangs "Heroiam
Slava!" to hail Ukrainian hackers attacking Russia. The
ProPornOT list is designed after a Ukrainian model used to
smear Ukrainian anti-fascist media and journalists.
Chalupa is a main promoter of the "Russia hacked the
Democratic campaign" allegations based on thin if any
evidence. She was named by the same Isikoff of Yahoo as
one of 16 people who shaped the 2016 election.
Chalupa is also:
founder and president of the Ukrainian
lobby group “US United With Ukraine
Coalition”, which lobbied hard to pass a
2014 bill increasing loans and military aid
to Ukraine, imposing sanctions on
Russians, and tightly aligning US and
Ukraine geostrategic interests.
Moreover Chalupa coordinated her anti-Trump/anti-
Russian campaign with the Ukrainian embassy in
Washington DC:
 Ukrainian government officials tried to
help Hillary Clinton and undermine
Trump by publicly questioning his
fitness for office. They also
disseminated documents implicating a
top Trump aide in corruption and
suggested they were investigating the
matter, only to back away after the election.
And they helped Clinton’s allies research
damaging information on Trump and his
advisers, a Politico investigation found.
A Ukrainian-American operative[,
Alexandra Chalupa,] who was
consulting for the Democratic National
Committee met with top officials in the
Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an
effort to expose ties between Trump, top
campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia,
according to people with direct knowledge
of the situation.
One must thereby categorize Chalupa as a Ukrainian agent
or at least as naive manipulated by the Ukrainian
government and read her accordingly.
The foreign influence on the presidential
race through the Ukrainian (fascist)
connection to the Clinton campaign is
thereby much more grounded in reality
than the alleged but completely
unproven Russian connections to the
Trump campaign.
We have a Ukrainian-American nationalist Democratic
campaign operator promoting anti-Russian and anti-Trump
claims in cooperation with the Ukrainian government, a
Ukrainian-American ProPornOT blacklist for smearing
random website of being "Russian propaganda" and
Ukrainian fascist tropes used in fact-less "reports" intended
to smear Trump as a Russian puppet. Above all of this we
have a U.S intelligence community that is feverishly
fighting against a Trump presidency which is likely to cut
back its many excrescences and excesses.
The CIA, the MI-6 and the German BND (a CIA
controlled service) have pampered and promoted the again
very active anti-Russian Ukrainian fascist circles since (at
least) the late 1940s. A U.S. National Archive book about
Hitler's Shadows - Nazi War Criminals, U.S. Intelligence
and the Cold War (PDF) notes:
British operations through Bandera
expanded. An early 1954 MI6 summary
noted that, “the operational aspect of this
[British] collaboration [with Bandera] was
20
developing satisfactorily. Gradually a more
complete control was obtained over
infiltration operations and although the
intelligence dividend was low it was
considered worthwhile to proceed....”
...
In June 1985 the General Accounting
Office mentioned Lebed’s name in a public
report on Nazis and collaborators who
settled in the United States with help
from U.S. intelligence agencies. The
Office of Special Investigations (OSI) in the
Department of Justice began investigating
Lebed that year. The CIA worried that
public scrutiny of Lebed would compromise
QRPLUMB and that failure to protect
Lebed would trigger outrage in the
Ukrainian émigré community. It thus
shielded Lebed by denying any connection
between Lebed and the Nazis and by
arguing that he was a Ukrainian freedom
fighter. The truth, of course, was more
complicated. As late as 1991 the CIA tried
to dissuade OSI from approaching the
German, Polish, and Soviet governments
for war-related records related to the OUN.
OSI eventually gave up the case, unable to
procure definitive documents on Lebed.
Mykola Lebed, Bandera’s wartime chief
in Ukraine, died in 1998. He is buried in
New Jersey, and his papers are located at
the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard
University.
There is no open evidence yet of a direct connection
between the three anti-Russian/anti-Trump items above,
the Ukrainian-fascist movement and John Brennan's deep-
state CIA. There are consistencies in tone and message,
some common history including the 2014 putsch in
Ukraine and a connecting Ukrainian-American person in
bowels of the Clinton campaign.
But even that is more than the baseless assertions of
"Russian hacking" in the DNI intelligence reports and the
now published MI-6 smears. Seen from a distance the
"Intelligence Community" is more compromised by these
"leaks" than the President elect Trump.
It is not predictable who will win this fight, the "deep
state" cabal that wants to keep the U.S. on an anti-Russian
course or the somewhat outsider isolationist Trump. My
bet is on the bullshit artist Trump.
In the bigger international picture the fight itself, and the
publicity it gets, lets the U.S. look like the Banana republic
it is destined to become.
 FBI Reportedly Sought FISA Court Warrant
To Spy On Trump Campaign Officials
Submitted By Jason Ditz Via Antiwar.Com,
Jan 11, 2017 11:05 PM
A new report released today features both
the FBI seeking to launch a surveillance
operation against an active US
presidential campaign, and the ultra-rare
case of the FISA courts actually turning
down an FBI request to conduct
surveillance against somebody.
The report, originating at the Guardian, claims that the
FBI had sought broad surveillance powers over four
high-ranking members of President-elect Donald
Trump’s campaign during the election, claiming them to
have had contact with Russian officials.
The FISA court turned the request
down, telling investigators they needed
to narrow the request.
Though the four are not directly named in the report, it is
related to claims in a dossier of Russia having substantial
blackmail dirt on Trump, and that dossier centered heavily
21
around accusations against a handful of Trump campaign
personnel,
including Carter Page, Paul Manafort,
and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, along with
Trump’s personal lawyer Michael
Cohen, meaning some of them may well
be among the targets.
Secondary reports speculated that the FBI may well have
sought a more narrow application for surveillance,
though details on that are even less clear than the previous
reports.
Though a lot of these reports don’t end up substantiated,
if true this could well add to the
expected acrimony between the
incoming administration and the
intelligence community.
 The Deep State Goes To War With President-Elect, Using
Unverified Claims, As Democrats Cheer
Glenn Greenwald
January 11 2017, 8:35 A.M.
In January, 1961, Dwight Eisenhower delivered his
farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president;
the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this
specific threat to democracy:
“In the councils of government, we must
guard against the acquisition of
unwarranted influence, whether sought or
unsought, by the military-industrial
complex. The potential for the disastrous
rise of misplaced power exists and will
persist.”
That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation
of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War
mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically
expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.
This is the faction that is now engaged in open
warfare against the duly elected and already widely
disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using
classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients
of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake
News.”
Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of
which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with
hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling
from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well
as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced
further and further from reason with each passing day, are
willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic,
align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported,
tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.
22
The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are
numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of
legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those
threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and
constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and
sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those
strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in
times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.
But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to
unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own
policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and
self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have
produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit
over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind.
Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be
instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the
very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an
assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human
rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries
who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign
operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on
those doing it.
Beyond all that, there is no bigger favor that Trump
opponents can do for him than attacking him with such
lowly, shabby, obvious shams, recruiting large media
outlets to lead the way. When it comes time to expose
actual Trump corruption and criminality, who is going to
believe the people and institutions who have demonstrated
they are willing to endorse any assertions no matter how
factually baseless, who deploy any journalistic tactic no
matter how unreliable and removed from basic means of
ensuring accuracy?
All of these toxic ingredients were on full display
yesterday as the Deep State unleashed its tawdriest and
most aggressive assault yet on Trump: vesting credibility
in and then causing the public disclosure of a completely
unvetted and unverified document, compiled by a paid,
anonymous operative while he was working for both GOP
and Democratic opponents of Trump, accusing Trump of a
wide range of crimes, corrupt acts and salacious private
conduct. The reaction to all of this illustrates that while the
Trump presidency poses grave dangers, so, too, do those
who are increasingly unhinged in their flailing, slapdash,
and destructive attempts to undermine it.
For months, the CIA, with unprecedented clarity, overtly
threw its weight behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and
sought to defeat Donald Trump. In August, former acting
CIA Director Michael Morell announced his endorsement
of Clinton in the New York Times and claimed that

“Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an

unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”

The CIA and NSA director under George W. Bush, Gen.

Michael Hayden, also endorsed Clinton, and went to the
Washington Post to warn, in the week before the election,
that

“Donald Trump really does sound a lot like

Vladimir Putin,” adding that Trump is “the
useful fool, some naif, manipulated by
Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but
whose blind support is happily accepted
and exploited.”
Back in October, a political operative and former
employee of the British intelligence agency MI6 was being
It is not hard to understand why the CIA preferred Clinton paid by Democrats to dig up dirt on Trump (before that, he
over Trump. Clinton was critical of Obama for restraining was paid by anti-Trump Republicans). He tried to convince
the CIA’s proxy war in Syria and was eager to expand that countless media outlets to publish a long memo he had
war, while Trump denounced it. Clinton clearly wanted a written filled with explosive accusations about Trump’s
harder line than Obama took against the CIA’s long- treason, business corruption and sexual escapades, with the
standing foes in Moscow, while Trump wanted improved overarching theme that Trump was in servitude to Moscow
relations and greater cooperation. In general, Clinton because they were blackmailing and bribing him.
defended and intended to extend the decadeslong
international military order on which the CIA and
Despite how many had it, no media outlets published it.
Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while Trump — through
That was because these were anonymous claims
a still-uncertain mix of instability and extremist conviction
unaccompanied by any evidence at all, and even in this
— posed a threat to it.
more permissive new media environment, nobody was
willing to be journalistically associated with it. As the New
Whatever one’s views are on those debates, it is the York Times’ Executive Editor Dean Baquet put it last
democratic framework — the presidential election, the night, he would not publish these “totally unsubstantiated”
confirmation process, congressional leaders, judicial allegations because
proceedings, citizen activism and protest, civil
disobedience — that should determine how they are
“we, like others, investigated the
resolved. All of those policy disputes were debated out in
allegations and haven’t corroborated them,
the open; the public heard them; and Trump won. Nobody
and we felt we’re not in the business of
should crave the rule of Deep State overlords.
publishing things we can’t stand by.”
Yet craving Deep State rule is exactly what prominent
The closest this operative got to success was convincing
Democratic operatives and media figures are doing. Any
Mother Jones’s David Corn to publish an October 31
doubt about that is now dispelled. Just last week, Chuck
article reporting that
Schumer issued a warning to Trump, telling Rachel
Maddow that Trump was being “really dumb” by
challenging the unelected intelligence community because “a former senior intelligence officer for a
of all the ways they possess to destroy those who dare to Western country” claims that “he provided
stand up to them: the [FBI] with memos, based on his recent
interactions with Russian sources,
contending the Russian government has
And last night, many Democrats openly embraced and
for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump.”
celebrated what was, so plainly, an attempt by the Deep
State to sabotage an elected official who had defied it:
ironically, its own form of blackmail. But because this was just an anonymous
claim unaccompanied by any evidence or any specifics

23
(which Corn withheld), it made very little impact. All of the allegations,” on the ground that they want to leave it to
that changed yesterday. Why? the public to decide whether to believe it.

What changed was the intelligence community’s

resolution to cause this all to become public and to be
viewed as credible. In December, John McCain provided a
copy of this report to the FBI and demanded they take it
seriously.

At some point last week, the chiefs of the intelligence

agencies decided to declare that this ex-British intelligence
operative was “credible” enough that his allegations
warranted briefing both Trump and Obama about them,
thus stamping some sort of vague, indirect, and deniable
official approval on these accusations. Someone — by all
appearances, numerous officials — then went to CNN to
tell them they had done this, causing CNN to go on-air
and, in the gravest of tones, announce the “Breaking But even if one believes there is no such case where that is
News” that “the nation’s top intelligence officials” briefed justified, yesterday’s circumstances presented the most
Obama and Trump that Russia had compiled information compelling scenario possible for doing this. Once CNN
that “compromised President-elect Trump.” strongly hinted at these allegations, it left it to the public
imagination to conjure up the dirt Russia allegedly had to
blackmail and control Trump. By publishing these
accusations, BuzzFeed ended that speculation. More
importantly, it allowed everyone to see how dubious
this document is, one the CIA and CNN had elevated into
some sort of grave national security threat.

Almost immediately after it was published, the farcical

nature of the “dossier” manifested. Not only was its author
anonymous, but he was paid by Democrats (and, before
that, by Trump’s GOP adversaries) to dig up dirt on
Trump. Worse, he himself cited no evidence of any kind,
but instead relied on a string of other anonymous people in
Russia he claims told him these things. Worse still, the
CNN refused to specify what these allegations were on the
document was filled with amateur errors.
ground that they could not “verify” them. But with this
document in the hands of multiple media outlets, it was
only a matter of time — a small amount of time — before
someone would step up and publish the whole thing.
Buzzfeed quickly obliged, airing all of the unvetted,
anonymous claims about Trump.

Its editor-in-chief Ben Smith published a memo explaining

that decision, saying that—- although there “is serious
reason to doubt the allegations” — Buzzfeed in general
“errs on the side of publication” and “Americans can make
up their own minds about the allegations.” Publishing this
document predictably produced massive traffic (and thus
profit) for the site, with millions of people viewing the
article and presumably reading the “dossier.”

One can certainly object to Buzzfeed’s decision and, as the

New York Times notes this morning, many journalists are
doing so. It’s almost impossible to imagine a scenario
where it’s justifiable for a news outlet to publish a totally
anonymous, unverified, unvetted document filled with
scurrilous and inflammatory allegations about which its
own editor-in-chief says there “is serious reason to doubt
24
While many of the claims are inherently unverified, some
can be confirmed. One such claim — that Trump lawyer
Michael Cohen secretly traveled to Prague in August to
meet with Russian officials — was strongly denied by
Cohen, who insisted he had never been to Prague in his life
(Prague is the same place that foreign intelligence officials
claimed, in 2001, was the site of a nonexistent meeting
between Iraqi officials and 9/11 hijackers, which
contributed to 70% of Americans believing, as late as the
fall of 2003, that Saddam personally planned the 9/11
attack). This morning, the Wall Street Journal reported
that

“the FBI has found no evidence that

[Cohen] traveled to the Czech Republic.”

None of this stopped Democratic operatives and prominent

media figures from treating these totally unverified and
unvetted allegations as grave revelations. From Vox’s
Zach Beauchamp:

BuzzFeed’s Borzou Daraghai posted a long series of tweets

discussing the profound consequences of these revelations,
only occasionally remembering to insert the rather
important journalistic caveat “if true” in his meditations:

25

Meanwhile, liberal commentator Rebecca Solnit declared
this to be a “smoking gun” that proves Trump’s “treason,”
while Daily Kos’ Markos Moulitsas sounded the same
theme:
26
While some Democrats sounded notes of caution — party
loyalist Josh Marshall commendably urged:
“I would say in reviewing raw, extremely
raw ‘intel’, people should retain their
skepticism even if they rightly think Trump
is the worst”
— the overwhelming reaction was the same as all the other
instances where the CIA and its allies released unverified
claims about Trump and Russia: instant embrace of the
evidence-free assertions as Truth, combined with
proclamations that it demonstrated Trump’s status as a
traitor (with anyone expressing skepticism designated a
Kremlin agent or stooge).
There is a real danger here that this maneuver can harshly
backfire, to the great benefit of Trump and to the great
detriment of those who want to oppose him. If any of the
significant claims in this “dossier” turn out to be provably
false — such as Cohen’s trip to Prague — many people
will conclude, with Trump’s encouragement, that large
media outlets (CNN and BuzzFeed) and anti-Trump
factions inside the government (CIA) are deploying “Fake
News” to destroy him. In the eyes of many people, that
will forever discredit — render impotent — future
journalistic exposés that are based on actual, corroborated
wrongdoing.
Beyond that, the threat posed by submitting ourselves to
the CIA and empowering it to reign supreme outside of the
democratic process is — as Eisenhower warned — an even
more severe danger. The threat of being ruled by
unaccountable and unelected entities is self-evident and
grave. That’s especially true when the entity behind which
so many are rallying is one with a long and deliberate
history of lying, propaganda, war crimes, torture, and the
worst atrocities imaginable.
All of the claims about Russia’s interference in U.S.
elections and ties to Trump should be fully investigated by
a credible body, and the evidence publicly disclosed to the
fullest extent possible. As my colleague Sam Biddle
argued last week after disclosure of the farcical
intelligence community report on Russia hacking — one
which even Putin’s foes mocked as a bad joke — the utter
lack of evidence for these allegations means “we need an
independent, resolute inquiry.” But until then, assertions
that are unaccompanied by evidence and disseminated
anonymously should be treated with the utmost skepticism
— not lavished with convenience-driven gullibility.
Most important of all, the legitimate and effective tactics
for opposing Trump are being utterly drowned by
27
these irrational, desperate, ad hoc crusades that have no
cogent strategy and make his opponents appear
increasingly devoid of reason and gravity. Right now,
Trump’s opponents are behaving as media critic Adam
Johnson described: as ideological jelly fish, floating
around aimlessly and lost, desperately latching on to
whatever barge randomly passes by.
There are solutions to Trump. They involve reasoned
strategizing and patient focus on issues people actually
care about. Whatever those solutions are, venerating the
intelligence community, begging for its intervention, and
equating their dark and dirty assertions as Truth are most
certainly not among them. Doing that cannot possibly
achieve any good, and is already doing much harm.
 How 4Chan McFooled John McCain, Buzzfeed, And The
CIA Into Believing Trump's Golden Showers
By The Real Fly
Jan 11, 2017 8:26 AM

Ok, there is a lot to go through with this story, which is

going to end up being one of the biggest embarrassments
for Buzzfeed, the CIA, and old man McCain ever.

First let's go over what happened, in reference to the

pesudo intelligence report aka 'dossier' published by the
high level retards over at Buzzfeed.

I know this appears to be unbelievable, but it's all

verifiable. The neocon shill of a reporter from Buzzfeed,
Rick Wilson, was catfished by some autist from the Hitler
loving 4chan message boards and made to believe Trump
enjoyed getting urinated on and all sorts of outlandish
stuff. Truly, this is incredible. Let me post some screen
shots.

28
 That right there is the head of Buzzfeed explaining why he
published a dodgy report of utter nonsense that was,
apparently, fished around to other news agencies and
summarily rejected -- because it's retard level was too high
even for The NY Times.

29
 Since the 4chan ruse was revealed, Rick Wilson has been
made out to be a top moron with a propeller helmet,
laughed at and derided as a person of very low standing.
The heat is, apparently, getting to him.

30
 Senator John McCain passed documents to the FBI
director, James Comey, last month alleging secret contacts
between the Trump campaign and Moscow and that
Russian intelligence had personally compromising material
on the president-elect himself.

Wikileaks calls bullshit on the report.
The material, which has been seen by the Guardian, is a
series of reports on Trump’s relationship with Moscow.
They were drawn up by a former western counter-
intelligence official, now working as a private consultant.
BuzzFeed on Tuesday published the documents, which it
said were “unverified and potentially unverifiable”.

The Guardian has not been able to confirm the veracity of

the documents’ contents, and the Trump team has
consistently denied any hidden contacts with the Russian
government.

The media ran with the 'explosive news' and will now get
to enjoy its explosion -- as they hold it near their tiny little
hearts.

Trump is now pissing all over these guys.

What sort of nonsense is in this top secret dossier? How

about this?

And now to the curious case of John McCain, war shill,

neocon lover of death of agony.

Source: Guardian Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com

31
 'I Did What Any Citizen Should Do':
Sworn Trump Enemy John Mccain Admits HE Handed
Smear Dossier To FBI - Because He Had
No Idea If It Was Credible
 Arizona senator who disowned Trump before election admits he handed document outlining claims of
Kremlin blackmail to FBI
 He was simply a concerned citizen, 80-year-old Republican claimed
 Brief statement claims that he received it and gave it directly to FBI Director James Comey because he was
'unable to make judgment about accuracy'
 But Washington reporter Carl Bernstein says former British ambassador to Moscow handed it to McCain
 Ambassador has not been named - and author of report also gave to FBI agent he knew at its station in Rome
months ago
 Report was apparently paid for first BY Republican enemies of Trump then by Democrats
By Darren Boyle for MailOnline
Published: 06:48 EST, 11 January 2017 | Updated: 15:21 EST, 11 January 2017

Sworn Donald Trump enemy John McCain admitted
Wednesday that he passed the dossier of claims of a
Russian blackmail plot against the president-elect - calling
it 'what any citizen should do'.
McCain - a longstanding anti-Trump Republican who had
disassociated himself from the candidate's campaign
weeks before the election - cast himself as an innocent and
concerned member of the public as he justified his move.
He claimed he had no idea whether it was accurate or not -
but that he believed the FBI should have it because it was
'sensitive'.
'What any citizen should do': The Arizona
senator, 80, claimed he was simply acting
as a concerned member of the public when
he had his face-to-face meeting with the
FBI Director
'That's why I gave it to the FBI. I don't know
if it is credible or not but the information I
thought deserved to be delivered to the
FBI, the appropriate agency of
government.'
He added:

'I did what any citizen should do. I received sensitive
information and handed it to the FBI,' he told CNN - the
network which broke the story that the document existed.
It was then published in full by Buzzfeed.
'It doesn't trouble me because I don't know
if it is accurate or not. I have no way of
corroborating that.
'The individual gave me the information. I
looked at it. After receiving that information
I took it to the FBI.'

He added that he was now aware from media reports that

the FBI was apparently already in possession of the
information.

The Arizona senator had issued a public statement amid

mounting questions of his exact role in the affair - and how
a document riddled with errors and unverifiable claims
came to be published.

'Late last year, I received sensitive

information that has since been made
public,' he said.

32
 'Upon examination of the contents, and
unable to make a judgment about their
accuracy, I delivered the information to the
Director of the FBI.
'That has been the extent of my contact
with the FBI or any other government
agency regarding this issue.'
But the 2008 Republican loser, who disowned his party's
candidate weeks before the election, may have been far
more intimately involved than that.
John McCain admits he handed the report w over to FBI
Director James Comey late last year. The agency were first
handed parts of it in August
Donald Trump, pictured, has denied allegations contained
in an explosive dossier compiled by a former British MI6
agent claiming on Twitter he is being subjected to a
'political witch hunt'
The dossier claims Russian authorities filmed Trump in a
Moscow hotel room with two prostitutes who 'defiled a
bed' which had previously been used by President Barack
Obama
33
Trump branded the leaked dossier as 'fake news' and 'a
total political witch hunt'
The chain of how the document reached the FBI is not
officially known.
However Carl Bernstein, the Watergate reporter who
contributed to the first story about its existence, published
by CNN on Tuesday afternoon, suggested that McCain
was handed it by a former British ambassador to Moscow.
Bernstein told CNN:
'It came from a former British MI6 agent
who was hired from a political opposition
research firm in Washington who was
doing work about Donald Trump for both
republican and democratic candidates
opposed to Trump.
'They were looking at Trumps business
ties, they saw some questionable things
about Russians, about his businesses in
Russia, they in turn hired this MI6 former
investigator, he then came up with
additional information from his Russian
sources, he was very concerned by the
implications of it, he then took it to an FBI
colleague that he had known in his
undercover work for years, he took it to this
FBI man in Rome who turned it over to the
bureau in Washington in August.
'And then, a former British ambassador to
Russia independently was made aware of
these findings and he took the information
to John McCain – Senator John McCain of
Arizona – in the period just after the
election, and showed it to McCain –
additional findings.
'McCain was sufficiently disturbed by what
he read to take it to FBI director James
 Comey himself personally, they had a five Trump has once again taken to Twitter in order to defend
minute meeting the two men, very little was himself from allegations
said, McCain turned it over to him and is
now awaiting what the FBI’s response is to
that information.'

The identity of the former British ambassador has not been

disclosed.

Only one former British ambassador to Moscow remains

in UK government service, Sir Tim Barrow, who went on
to be Foreign Office political director and is now Britain's
ambassador to the European Union.
He said 'crooked opponents' were trying to destroy his
McCain's long-standing opposition to Trump is well victory with 'fake news'
known although he only formally ended support for the
Republican candidate in October, when the notorious
'p****' tape emerged.

The Arizona senator said at the time:

'"Donald Trump’s behavior... concluding

with the disclosure of his demeaning
comments about women and his boasts
about sexual assaults, make it impossible
to continue to offer even conditional
support for his candidacy.'

US intelligence agencies have claimed that Russian spies

hacked the Democratic National Committee and leaked
damaging emails designed to undermine Hillary Clinton's
campaign for president.

Some of the allegations relate to a 2013 visit to Moscow of

the Miss Universe competition where Trump is alleged to
have paid two prostitutes to defile a bed during a bizarre
sex act

Trump claimed Russia said the report was a 'complete and

total fabrication'

The new information, which has not been independently

verified, claims that Russian officials also gathered highly
damaging information on Trump, but only released the
details attacking Clinton through the WikiLeaks website.

34
The Kremlin has denied all of the allegations, while Trump The Kremlin spokesman called the
tweeted: 'FAKE NEWS - A TOTAL POLITICAL dossier a 'total fake' and 'an obvious
WITCH HUNT'. attempt to harm our bilateral relations'.

However, McCain was so concerned about the information
contained within the 35-page dossier, which included
allegations that Trump had hired prostitutes in Moscow to
urinate on a bed that had previously been used by US
President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle, that he
passed the information onto the FBI
Earlier, the Kremlin had denied hacking the Democratic
National Committee and leaking information to
deliberately weaken Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Donald Trump's transition team has repeatedly denied
allegations that it had received any help from Moscow.

CNN reported that intelligence chiefs had presented Trump

with a two-page summary of the dossier late last week
following a briefing with President Obama.

It is not known if it included the most salacious details.

Trump has consistently denied that Russian intelligence

agencies had launched a massive cyber attack ahead of last
November's election.

The dossier which McCain passed to FBI Director James

Comey was compiled by the former MI6 man.

The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes

filmed during a 2013 visit by Trump to a luxury Moscow
hotel, supposedly as a potential means for blackmail.

They also suggest Russian officials proposed lucrative

deals in order to win influence over the Republican real
estate magnate.

One claim, that special counsel to Trump Michael Cohen

met with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016 has
been branded as 'fake news'.

Cohen denied that he was central

'to the ongoing secret liaison relationship The dossier was compiled by a former member of the
between the New York tycoon's campaign British Secret Intelligence Service, known as MI6, based
and the Russian leadership'. in Vauxhall Cross in central London, pictured.

Cohen tweeted a photograph of his passport and said he WHY DID BUZZFEED RUN UNVERIFIABLE
had never visited Prague. 'KREMLIN DOSSIER' CLAIMS?

According to reports, the former MI6 man had been hired Buzzfeed followed up a report by CNN which disclosed
to conduct 'opposition research' on the Trump campaign by the existence of the explosive dossier, but only gave a brief
first Republican enemies of Trump, then Democratic ones. outline of the contents.

Russia denied the claims, with President Vladimir Putin's
spokesman Dmitry Peskov telling journalists:
'The Kremlin does not have compromising
information on Trump.'
The 35-page document, which had been collated by a
former British Secret Intelligence Service agent had
initially been handed over to the FBI in August.
Buzzfeed's Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith wrote an email to
his staff shortly after publishing the document

35
 Editor-in-chief Ben Smith sent a memo to his staff outlining the reasons why he published the Trump dossier despite reservations over its accuracy
Smith said the dossier contained 'explosive and unverified
allegations about Donald Trump and Russia'.
He justified the decision to release the information to allow
Americans
'to make up their own minds about the
allegations' which had been circulated at
the 'highest levels of the US government'.
Smith claimed publishing the dossier was an example of
'transparent' journalism.
36
Further down in his memo, he appeared to discredit his
own story as
'there is serious reason to doubt the
allegations'.
He said Buzzfeed had been trying to stand up the
allegations for 'weeks' - suggesting that it had failed to do
so. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post said
they had been handed the material and been unable to
verify it.
 Christopher Steele, Ex-British Intelligence Officer,
Said To Have Prepared Dossier On Trump
Former Spy Is Director Of London-Based Orbis Intelligence Ltd.
By Bradley Hope, Michael Rothfeld And Alan Cullison
Jan. 11, 2017 2:22 P.M. ET
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump ahead of a press conference in
Trump Tower on Wednesday, where he dismissed the allegations in
the dossier. Photo: shannon stapleton/Reuters
A former British intelligence officer now working for a
private security-and-investigations firm produced the
dossier of unverified allegations about President-elect
Donald Trump’s activities and connections in Russia,
people familiar with the matter say.
Christopher Steele, a director of London-based Orbis
Business Intelligence Ltd., prepared the dossier, the people
said. The document alleges that the Kremlin colluded with
Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign and claims that
Russian officials have compromising evidence of Mr.
Trump’s behavior that could be used to blackmail him. Mr.
Trump has dismissed the contents of the dossier as false
and Russia has denied the claims.
Mr. Steele, 52 years old, is one of two directors of the
firm, along with Christopher Burrows, 58.
Mr. Burrows, reached at his home outside London on
Wednesday, said he wouldn’t “confirm or deny” that Orbis
had produced the report. A neighbor of Mr. Steele’s said
Mr. Steele said he would be away for a few days. In
previous weeks Mr. Steele has declined repeated requests
for interviews through an intermediary, who said the
subject was “too hot.”
A LinkedIn profile in Mr. Burrows’s name says he was a
counselor in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, with
foreign postings in Brussels and New Delhi in the 2000s.
The Foreign Office declined to comment. A LinkedIn
37
profile for Mr. Steele doesn’t give specifics about his
career. Intelligence officers often use diplomatic postings
as cover for their espionage activities.
Orbis Business Intelligence was formed in 2009 by former
British intelligence professionals, it says on its website.
U.K. corporate records say Orbis is owned by another
company that in turn is jointly owned by Messrs. Steele
and Burrows. It occupies offices in an ornate building
overlooking Grosvenor Gardens in London’s high-end
Belgravia neighborhood.
The firm relies on a “global network” of experts and
business leaders, provides clients with strategic advice,
mounts “intelligence-gathering operations” and conducts
“complex, often cross-border investigations,” its website
says.
The dossier consists of a series of unsigned memos that
appear to have been written between June and December
2016. Beyond creating the document, Mr. Steele also came
up with a plan to get the information to law-enforcement
officials in the U.S. and Europe, including the F.B.I.,
according to a person familiar with the matter.
Speaking about corporate-intelligence work in general
terms, Mr. Burrows said
“the objective is to respond to the
requirements set out by our clients. We
have no political ax to grind.”
He said when clients asked a firm like Orbis to investigate
something, you “see what’s out there” first and later
“stress test” your findings against other evidence.
No presidential campaigns or super PACs reported
payments to Orbis in their required Federal Election
Commission filings. But several super PACs over the
course of the campaign have reported that they paid
limited liability companies, whose ultimate owners may be
difficult or impossible to discern.
The dossier’s emergence—it was published online and
widely circulated Tuesday—has generated a firestorm less
than 10 days before Mr. Trump’s inauguration. U.S.
officials have examined the allegations but haven’t
confirmed any of them. The Wall Street Journal also hasn’t
corroborated any of the allegations in the dossier.
“It’s all fake news,” Mr. Trump said in a
news conference Wednesday. “It’s all
phony stuff. It didn’t happen.”
The dossier contains lurid and difficult-to-prove
allegations. The F.B.I. has found no evidence, for example,
supporting the dossier’s claim that an attorney for Mr.
Trump traveled to the Czech Republic to meet with
Kremlin officials, U.S. officials said. The attorney has also
denied the claim.
The author of the report had a good reputation in the
intelligence world and was stationed in Russia for years,
said John Sipher, who retired in 2014 after 28 years in the
CIA’s clandestine service, where he specialized in Russia
and counterintelligence. Mr. Sipher is now director of
client services at CrossLead Inc., a Washington-based
technology company set up by retired U.S. Army Gen.
Stanley McChrystal.
Private-intelligence firms like Orbis have a growing
presence. Major corporations use them to conduct due
diligence on potential business partners in risky areas, but
quality control can be loose when it comes to high-level
.
38
political intrigue, according to executives of private
intelligence companies.
When government intelligence agencies produce
clandestine political reports, they often include thick
sections about sources, possible motivations behind their
information and the methods used to approach them. Such
background helps decision makers determine how reliable
the information is.
Andrew Wordsworth, co-founder of London-based
investigations firm Raedas, who often works on Russian
issues, said the memos in the Trump dossier were “not
convincing at all.”
“It’s just way too good,” he said. “If the
head of the CIA were to declare he got
information of this quality, you wouldn’t
believe it.”
Mr. Wordsworth said it wouldn’t make sense for Russian
intelligence officials to be exposing state secrets to a
former MI-6 officer, because “Russians believe once you
are an agent, you’re an agent forever.”
—Jenny Gross and Jason Douglas contributed to this
article.
 PUTIN DENIES LEAK
Russia Slams ‘Nonsense’ Claims It Has ‘Compromising’
Info About Donald Trump’s ‘Perverted Hooker
Romp’ In Moscow Hotel Room’ –
And Warns It Will Damage Relations
Intelligence Bosses Revealed The Claims During Their Briefing On
Alleged Russian Interference In The Presidential Election
By JON LOCKETT, MARK HODGE And WILL STEWART
11th January 2017, 12:05 Am
RUSSIA has slammed claims it has compromising
material on US President-elect Donald Trump branding the
story “total nonsense.”
Yesterday it was reported that a Brit spy uncovered
evidence of shocking sexual information held by Russia on
Trump.
AP:Associated Press - Russia has denied it has uncompromising
material on President-elect Trump
A Kremlin spokesman insisted the unsubstantiated dossier
had been fabricated and also denied it had information on
Hillary Clinton.
Getty Images - A spokesman for Vladimir Putin called the claims
‘total nonsense’
39
Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for President Vladimir Putin,
spoke to reporters on a conference call and called the
dossier a ‘fake’ and ‘fiction’ which had been dreamt up to
further damage US-Russia relations.
He reportedly said:
“The Kremlin does not have compromising
information on Trump.”
American news giant CNN opened the political can of
worms by reporting that top US intelligence chiefs briefed
trump on the explosive claims during a meeting on alleged
Russian interference in the presidential election.
The full dossier of the British spy’s unverified claims
details allegations of “perverted sexual acts” by prostitutes
in a Russian hotel room containing Trump.
The report sensationally claims that President Obama and
First Lady Michelle Obama slept in the same suite at the
hotel and that Trump wanted to ‘defile’ the bed which they
slept on because “he hated” them.
The hotel room, at the Moscow Ritz Carlton, was
bugged by Soviet intelligence agencies, the report
alleged.b.
After the CNN report, Buzzfeed published the full
document which had reportedly been offered to a variety
of other news outlets who declined to publish the story
because the claims could not be verified.
Trump hit back at the claims branding them “fake” and
part of a “political witchhunt”.
He tweeted:

“FAKE NEWS — A TOTAL POLITICAL

WITCH HUNT!”

Trump is due to be sworn in as the 45th US President on

January 20.

He was reportedly shown the classified information during

a briefing by four of the most senior US spy chiefs —
including FBI director James Comey and CIA director
John Brennan.

Alamy - Plush . . . one of the bedrooms in the Moscow Ritz-Carlton’s

top suite

The FBI was given the information in August, more than

two months before the November 8 election, according to
CNN.

Shortly after CNN’s report, Buzzfeed published the full

dossier which the site said makes claims which their
journalists could not verify.

The full document also alleges that Russia has been

“cultivating, supporting and assisting” Trump for “at least
five years.”

Kellyanne Conway, one of Trump senior campaign

advisers, slammed the report during an interview on chat
Getty Images - Donald Trump and model Olivia Culpo are seen at show Late Night with Seth Meyers.
the Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow in November 2013

The first page of the leaked dossier which contains

unverified claims about Russian intelligence gathering on
Donald Trump

CNN said knowledge of its existence in Russian hands

originally came from a former British MI6 intelligence
operative.

The spook was reportedly hired by other US presidential

contenders to do political “opposition research” on Trump
in the middle of last year.

40
 McCain has now confirmed that he passed the material
directly to FBI Director James Come, reports the Mail
Online.

The Arizona senator and former Presidential candidate

said: "Late last year, I received sensitive information that
has since been made public.

"Upon examination of the contents, and unable to make a

judgement about their accuracy, I delivered the
information to the Director of the FBI.

"That has been the extent of my contact with the FBI or

Getty Images - Hearings . . . FBI Director James Comey any other government agency regarding this issue."
addresses Senate Armed Services committee

She then said: “I have to say as an American citizen… we

should be concerned that intelligence officials leaked to
the press but won’t go and tell the president-elect or the
President of the United States himself, Mr Obama, what
the information is. They would rather go tell the press.”

When Meyers said that the billionaire was reportedly

briefed on the claims, Conway said Trump “was never
briefed.”

Conway attempted to cast doubt on the dossier, saying that

it came from "unnamed sources".

She said: "Nobody has sourced it. They are all unnamed,
unspoken sources in the story.

"It says it was based on a Russian investigator... it also

says that groups that wanted Hillary Clinton to win may
have been behind the investigations themselves and most
importantly, it says the FBI is trying to confirm it."

But US intelligence agencies have now checked out the

former Brit spy and find him and his sources credible
enough to include some of the information in its briefing to
Trump, CNN said.

CNN reports that the dossier was “generated by political

operatives seeking to derail Mr. Trump's candidacy.”
Getty Images
The retired MI6 spy was reportedly hired by a political 7
research firm who worked for both Republican and Probe . . . James Clapper, US director of national
Democratic enemies of Trump. intelligence, testifying on Russian hacking

The Brit intelligence operative reportedly passed the
explosive material to an FBI colleague.
But in another twist, Senator John McCain, who clashed
with Trump during his divisive election campaign, was
also given the dossier by a UK diplomat last month,
reports the Guardian.
US intelligence also concluded President Putin launched a
cyber attack against Hillary Clinton's campaign to meddle
in the US election and to boost Trump's White House bid.
Trump has repeatedly dismissed the CIA's finding while
expressing the need to smooth over Russia-US relations
which have eroded during the Obama presidency.

41
Before the election it was rumoured that the Kremlin was
holding sensitive information on Trump.
Also last night Russia accused Britain of plotting an
“official anti-Russian witch-hunt” in an outburst posted on
its London embassy website.
It suggested some Brits are hoping to claim the Brexit vote
was hacked by Russia and it claimed the UK government
will try to turn Trump against Russian president Vladimir
Putin.
42
Meanwhile the Russian foreign ministry has blasted the
outgoing Obama administration.
Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: "Everyday I read
news from Washington - new sanctions against Russia,
supplying thugs in Syria with MANPADS, absolutely
senseless and malicious actions on all fronts of the foreign
policy.
"God created the world in seven days. Obama's
administration has two days more than that to destroy it."
 The Only Hookers In This Story Are The Cheap, Lazy
Journalists Who Ran With Fake Trump Sleaze
To Urinate On His Presidency
By Piers Morgan For Mailonline
Published: 14:43 EST, 11 January 2017 | Updated: 19:01 EST, 11 January 2017
It’s bulls**t.
President-elect Donald Trump didn’t pay prostitutes to
urinate on his bed in the presidential suite at the Ritz-
Carlton hotel in Moscow, three years ago.
Neither did Trump do this to deliberately defile a bed that
had been used by Barack and Michelle Obama.
And nor did Vladimir Putin secretly videotape the whole
thing to use as blackmail against Trump at a later date.
It’s all complete baloney.
No, Donald Trump didn’t pay prostitutes to urinate on his
bed in the presidential suite at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in
Moscow, three years ago
Horribly damaging, deeply offensive baloney which will
of course have caused huge distress to Trump, his wife
Melania, and their wider families.
That is my considered verdict on Watergate Scandal No2.
How can I be so sure?
First, Trump has categorically, furiously, emphatically
denied it.
43
(His ‘I’m a germaphobe’ defense alone at today’s press
conference is pretty compelling, given I’ve personally seen
him recoil from shaking hands many times).
Second, the Russians and Putin himself have equally
categorically, furiously, emphatically denied it.
Trump - a germaphobe - denies it, Russia denies it and
none of it is verifiable. Meanwhile it's horribly upsetting
and distressing to his wife family
Third, the 35-page dossier containing the bombshell claim
has done the rounds of many of America’s leading media
outlets for months and nobody’s been able to verify any of
it, even as they were champing at the bit to destroy
Trump’s presidential campaign.
Fourth, and perhaps most damningly of all, even Buzzfeed,
the website part-owned by NBC that broke ranks and
published it last night, admits it has no evidence to prove
it’s true, has not been able to independently verify it, and
may never be able to verify it.
‘Buzzfeed News is publishing the full document so that
Americans can make up their own minds about allegations
about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest
levels of the US government,’ it stated.
Its editor Ben Smith added: ‘There is serious reason to
doubt the allegations.’
Sorry?
So let me get this absolutely straight: they haven’t got a
Scooby-doo if this devastatingly embarrassing hookers-
and-urination claim is true or not?
Nor are they prepared to investigate it further to try to
verify it before publication?
Instead, Buzzfeed’s just chosen to fling it all into the
public domain like a farmer depositing a large truckload of
excrement into a field of ravenous pigs, so we can all
wallow in Trump’s humiliation – even if he never actually
did any of it.
There are many other anonymously sourced,
unsubstantiated allegations in this dossier about Trump’s
supposed links to Russia, all of which he also denies.
That doesn’t necessarily mean they’re all false, as Trump
has been known to be economical with the truth himself
when it suits him. And it absolutely right that reporters
should investigate them.
Buzzfeed, part-owned by NBC, admits it has no evidence
to prove any of it’s true. I know and respect Ben and he
was a regular on my CNN show, but saying, ‘Publishing
this dossier reflects how we see the job of reporters in
2017' makes me think we're all going to hell in a handcart
But he has vehemently denied them and that should be
noted.
However, of all the myriad claims in the dossier, it’s this
explicitly lurid and distasteful one about his supposed
sexual antics that ignited around the world via social and
mainstream media, and exposed Trump to instant global
ridicule.
The moment I heard about it, my gut reaction was that it
was utter nonsense.
As Trump said at his press conference, every high profile
person who goes to Russia is warned that Russian
intelligence agencies routinely bug hotel rooms in big
44
cities like Moscow and St Petersburg precisely to amass
such potentially damaging material with which to
blackmail people.
He may be many things, but he’s not stupid.
What I think we’re dealing with here is a variant on the
legendary story, also involving pigs, about Lyndon
Johnson when he was running for president.
Concerned about the race getting close, he told his
campaign manager to start a massive rumour about his
opponent having sex with a pig.
‘Christ, we can’t call him a pig-f***er!’ the campaign
manager protested. ‘Nobody’s going to believe a thing like
that.’
‘I know,’ said Johnson. ‘But let’s make the sonafab*tch
deny it!’
Trump has now had to publicly deny paying prostitutes to
urinate for him. A claim that was made, it has emerged, by
unnamed people who had been specifically tasked with
unearthing damaging information about a political rival.
That damage is now mostly done, and it’s outrageous
given it’s almost certainly untrue.
‘Publishing this dossier reflects how we see the job of
reporters in 2017,’ said Ben Smith, someone I know well,
and respect, from my time at CNN when he was a regular
guest on my show.
Really, Ben?
Then frankly, we’re all truly going to hell in a handcart.
Because if the new journalism is simply publishing
whatever comes across your newsdesk, without any
independent proof that it’s true, then that’s not journalism
– it’s exactly as Trump called it today: ‘cr*p.’
Or to put it more politely, it’s another blazing log on the
ugly bonfire currently fuelling ‘fake news’.

I am more sensitive than most to this phenomenon as an

alleged form of it once cost me my job.

I ran British newspaper Daily Mirror for a decade and was

fired in 2004 for publishing supposedly fake photographs
of British troops abusing Iraqi civilians. (The Mirror had
vociferously opposed the Iraq War).

Ironically, the images depicted those troops urinating on

their victims.

Years later, many of the troops we accused were

prosecuted for abuse, and in one case jailed, and the Trump’s has helped fuel the fake news crisis by
veracity of those photos remains, to me at least, an aggressively promoting absurd conspiracy theories such as
unresolved mystery. Barack Obama being born in Africa

But the more relevant point for the purposes of this column
is that my reporting staff worked on verifying them for two
months.
We established that the two soldiers who brought them to
us were who they said they were, had been fighting in Iraq
when the incident occurred, and that the veracity of the
incident itself was inconvertible.
So for him to cry ‘foul’ now will strike many as pretty rich
and I would absolutely urge him when he’s President to
stick to facts in his public pronouncements, not wild
rumours.
Just as I would urge him to repair relations with the US
intelligence agencies because this current war of mutual
attrition helps nobody.

Finally, when we felt we were ready to publish, we
presented the photos to the Ministry of Defence in London
ten hours before publication and they raised no issues of
authenticity.
Nevertheless, after a two-week firestorm following
publication, led by Tony Blair’s government who insisted
the pictures were fake, I was unceremoniously fired.
I sincerely believed then and I still believe now, that those
photos, as with the abuse they depicted, were genuine.
Buzzfeed, by contrast, don’t know or seemingly care if
their published documents are genuine. They want the
public to decide.
BUT, and it’s a vital ‘but’, that doesn’t make the behaviour
of Buzzfeed any more acceptable.
If they can do this to the new President, and get away with
it, then anyone in the US mainstream media can now
publish anything without bothering to even check if it’s
true.
That will, I guarantee it, be the death of US mainstream
media.
And yes, Buzzfeed is absolutely now mainstream media,
given its huge financial support from NBC.

That way, surely, lies the death of real journalism?

Fake news is a massive problem in the modern media

landscape.

It is eroding all trust in all news media.

Trump’s undoubtedly helped fuel some of this crisis by

aggressively promoting absurd conspiracy theories such as
Barack Obama being born in Africa.

My former employers CNN, who first reported yesterday

on the dossier, but crucially didn’t include the details of
45
the specific allegations, are not as culpable as Trump The stakes are very high here.
believes in all this, but they’re not blameless either.
A free press is the very cornerstone of any democracy.
They gave an official gloss to a dossier that looks
extremely flimsy and full of wild badly-sourced If fake news goes mainstream like this, without any checks
allegations, thus making it seem more important and and balances, then the pivotal place of the free press in
accurate than it was, and of course, prompting Buzzfeed American culture will be over, toast, defunct, kaput.
into running with the full works.
So shame on you, Buzzfeed.
And the real villain here is whoever leaked it to Buzzfeed
and other media in the first place, if the motivation was
As Trump said at his press conference, what you did to
purely to damage Trump at the expense of the truth, him was ‘an absolute disgrace’.
particularly if that person works for the US intelligence
community.
And that’s a fact.

46
 Tripwire Alert –
The Intelligence Shadow War Final Act…
by sundance
Posted on January 11, 2017
transparent as the GOPe “splitter strategy” which preceded
it.

After closely watching the planning and forethought after

Trump announced his candidacy. We stated in September
2015:
[…] Donald Trump, a serious student of the
entire decades long game, is waging a
360° war against the entire DC apparatus,
on every single level of its construct. And
yes, that also means the monolithic media
empire which facilitates all of the
aforementioned usurpations.
Donald Trump is campaigning against
EVERY ADVERSE INTEREST to the
U.S.A. This is the essential underpinning of
the “Make America Great Again” campaign.
Trump is not just taking on the construct of
progressive ideology that has undermined
the essence of American exceptionalism;
Trump is not just exposing the immense
number of faux-conservatives in media and
political punditry; Trump is not just allowing
us to see the scope of anti-American
interest; no, he’s taking on the very selfish
foundation they’ve all used to sell out our
country. Heck, he’s taking on all the
“Decepticons” simultaneously.
Those adverse interests are both outside
and inside our borders. He’s intent on
tearing down the machine, all of it. By now
that should be obvious to everyone. (more)
To fully understand what just took place, you must remind
yourself of the visible shadow war which became
abundantly evident several months ago:
[…] With General Mattis as Secretary of
Defense, Michael Flynn as National
Security Advisor, General John Kelly the
Department of Homeland Security, a top-
of-class West Point graduate in Mike
Pompeo brought in to take over and
undoubtedly purge the CIA, and a lame
duck struggle breaking out over NSA with
Admiral Mike Rogers, the implications are
pretty obvious.
[…] The white hats we have needed within
the national security and intelligence
departments are responding from a very
select group within the Defense
Department.
[…] Mounting evidence supports the
ongoing thesis that DoD has actually
seceded from the political elites; and with
the election of President Donald Trump,
they are poised on the horizon to
reconstruct a nationalist-minded defense,
intelligence and security apparatus. This is
the fundamental paradigm shift many have
discussed, yet few imagined possible.
(more)

Slightly more than a week after winning the 2016

Toward that end, today’s final exposure of the corrupt
Presidential Election, the head of the NSA Cyber
media, specifically CNN and Buzzfeed, surrounding the
Command, Admiral Mike Rogers, went to New York and
false intelligence reports they used to create a completely
met with the new President-Elect Donald Trump inside
false narrative – brings the end to a series of events as
Trump Tower.
47
A month prior to that specific visit, DNI Director James which destroy the narrative assembled by CNN on the
Clapper advised President Obama to fire Admiral Mike basis of their exclusive intelligence leaks:
Rogers.

There is every indication, every reason to believe, that

Admiral Rogers gave President-elect Donald Trump a very
specific “head’s up“; warning the incoming president of
actions which would be undertaken by political operatives
within the intelligence community to undermine the
construct of the incoming administration.

All activity from that mid-November meeting through to

now, points to Rogers giving advanced notice to Trump of
a political intelligence scheme which culminated today
with the public embarrassment of the those politicized
intelligence agencies, operatives and their vessels for
disinformation – the media.

Following the meeting with Donald Trump, it clearly

appears Admiral Mike Rogers went back into the matrix
and, as an outcome of his position, followed orders – but
did so with an arms length approach. The NSA (Rogers)
did not support the political intelligence “high confidence”
narrative as it was constructed by James Clapper (DNI)
and John Brennan (CIA). ♦ President-elect Donald Trump was never
briefed on the allegations that Russian
We’ll never know what subtle action was taken, or not intelligence services have collected
taken, by Rogers which ultimately culminated in a compromising information on him,
according to NBC and Trump’s transition
completely false assertion from “leakers” within the
team.
“intelligence community” about a fake report promoted by
CNN. –SEE HERE– ♦ Officials prepared a two-page summary
of unverified reports that have been
However, we can be certain the details of the claim by circulating Capitol Hill for months in
CNN was entirely disinformation -false information- advance of their Friday meeting with
perhaps intended to discover internal intelligence agency Trump, an intelligence official told NBC, but
leakers/operatives. never discussed it with him.
♦ The briefing was shared with Trump
There never was an “addendum report” within the verbally, the report said, and no
presidential intelligence briefing on Russia’s involvement, documents were left with the president-
or any discussion of a ridiculous 35 page dossier. Both elect. (link)
NBC and The Hill have now directly published articles

48
Against this backdrop, perhaps the “quiet FBI release” of
documents and evidence surrounding the FBI investigation
of Hillary Clinton and Classified Documents also points to
a similar intelligence approach….
….”and then he pulled down their briefs
and exposed their fake news”.

49
 The Final Takedown Of Trump Begins In Earnest
US Intelligence Agencies Conspire To Implement A Coup D’état
By State Of The Nation
Posted On January 11, 2017
There is now a highly coordinated conspiracy afoot to take
down President-elect Donald Trump.
This deliberate scheme to execute a soft coup has been
orchestrated at the highest levels of the Obama
Administration, Democratic and Republican National
Committees, as well as the major intelligence agencies and
special secret services.
Such a coup d’état has all the hallmarks of the CIA, DIA,
NSA, DHS, FBI, as well as many other organizations
which comprise the “17 Agencies of the US Intelligence
Community“.
The essence of their scheme is to fabricate the appearance
of collusion between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
They especially strive to put out fraudulent and contrived
evidence that Putin possesses salacious material on Trump
that is substantive enough that it can be used to blackmail
him. Wait, it gets worse … or, rather, this CIA
implementation plan will continue to evolve so that the US
Congress is forced to take unprecedented action.
Special Note:
What follows is just one example of how
much Donald J. Trump is upsetting the
NWO apple cart. Robert Kennedy Jr.
agrees to ‘chair a commission on
vaccination safety and scientific integrity’
for Trump It ought to be obvious by this
critical appointment that Trump is willing to
take on a central pillar of the NWO social
engineering agenda. In fact the super-
vaccination agenda is as BIG as it gets in
terms of controlling the entire human
population. RFK Jr. is well known among
health advocates to be a zealous truth
seeker regarding the inherent dangers of
vaccines, and especially of the overly
aggressive vaccination regimens that
young children are now exposed to. The
50
bottom line concerning this extraordinary
appointment by Trump is that he is showing
a courageous willingness to go after one of
their sacred cows. You don’t ever go after
their sacred cows and expect to succeed
given the current institutional arrangements
which make up the Global Control
Matrix. Big Pharma is an extremely
powerful corporate NWO player that has
always gotten their way, so they will NOT
play nice. A soft coup was initiated on the
very same day!
The Last Peaceful Overthrow Attempt Before The
Putsch
The final push to revoke the results of the 2016
presidential election has begun in earnest.
With the publication of more fake news about Trump’s
hidden relationship with Russia, the Mainstream
Media (MSM) has been enlisted by the CIA to disseminate
completely fictitious accounts to undermine his victory.
That the MSM was so easily conscripted to report such
patently false information is beyond comprehension. They
have taken the extremely reckless initiative to distribute
obvious falsehoods about Trump’s non-existent
relationship with President Vladimir Putin and the Russian
Federation.
The very dissemination of such dangerous fake news, in
this particular context, constitutes high treason, corporate
sponsored sedition among a number of other very serious
felonies. Not only have the MSM traitors acted against the
American Republic, they have betrayed the U.S. citizenry
in ways that require their criminal prosecution. The whole
array of MSM organs of propaganda may have just sealed
their fate—perhaps a total takeover of the MSM by the
appropriate presidential oversight commission.
That many of the major MSM news outlets have trumpeted
these false claims against Trump could only have occurred
with the blessing of the Obama Administration. Obama
himself has politicized the outcome of this election
which clearly indicates that he has no intention of leaving.
 His many unprecedented disruptions to a smooth
transition are so reprehensible and feckless that he will
surely be called to account when this ongoing coup has
been short-circuited.
Would you?
From now until Inauguration Day
Make no mistake about it: from now until Inauguration
Day will be the most dangerous times for Donald Trump
and his transition team. The very future of the United
States of America now hangs in the balance as never
before. Hence, it is imperative that every American citizen
stays vigilant and does what the Turks recently did to avert
the CIA-directed coup against President Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan and his government.
The people went out in the streets and shut that violent US-
coordinated coup down in an Ankara minute. That’s
where we are at this very moment; for if the soft coup is
not successful for the traitors, they will not stop until they
have violently removed Donald Trump from the picture.
Now that so many agencies of the U.S. Federal
Government have graphically exposed themselves, there is
.
51
no going back for them. The culpability of the C.I.A. and
other intelligence agencies etc. is so obvious for the whole
world to see, that they have no choice but to be successful
however they must; otherwise, many will face the gallows
for high treason.
Herein lies the real challenge for the American people: to
terminate this coup-in-progress once and for all before it
terminates any semblance of the American Republic.
What are you, American citizens, going to do?
Conclusion
There can be only one reason for the fake dossier that was
fabricated by rogue elements within the U.S. intelligence
community. To use it as a pretext to delegitimize the
presidency of Donald Trump by traitors within the Obama
Administration and DNC, as well as rogue intelligence
agencies.
That this unvetted fraud was then quickly disseminated
throughout the global MSM provides further evidence of a
highly organized coup against the president-elect. Because
the inauguration is only 9 days away, look for many other
desperate attempts to bring down Trump before he even
steps in the Oval Office.
The Company, also known as the C.I.A., has had more
experience than any other US agency in conducting color
revolutions across the planet. However, the agents of the
C.I.A. really work for Deep State not We the People.
Therefore, if not very watchful, the American people will
get to experience a Purple Revolution in their own back
yard.
…Courtesy of George Soros, the Clinton Crime Family,
and the Obama Administration.
 If Putin Likes Me, I Consider That An Asset, Not A
Liability - Trump (FULL VIDEO)
Published Time: 11 Jan, 2017 16:14Edited Time: 11 Jan, 2017 18:45

“Does anyone really believe that story?”

Trump asked the press, adding that he always told his

employees to be very careful when they travel, lest they
end up watching themselves on television.

The topic culminated with Trump calling BuzzFeed "a

failing pile of garbage" and refusing to answer a question
from CNN reporter Jim Acosta.

The president-elect then moved on to a wide range of

US President-elect Donald Trump answered a barrage of
questions ranging from his relations with Putin to the latest
report that Moscow may be blackmailing him – which he
called 'fake news' and criticized Buzzfeed and CNN for
running it.
At the very beginning of the conference Trump’s
spokesman Sean Spicer called BuzzFeed and CNN' s report
issues, from building factories to his inauguration.
“Big news is going to be announced over
the next couple of weeks,”
about companies going to build factories in the Midwest,
Trump said, citing recent announcements by Ford and Fiat
Chrysler as examples.

“outrageous” and “irresponsible” and “a sad
and pathetic attempt to get clicks.”
“This political witch-hunt by some in the
media is based on flimsy reporting, and is
shameful and disgraceful,” he said.
Big pharma is “getting away with murder,”
said the president-elect, adding that he intends to save
billions by overhauling the bidding system for medication.
The generals and admirals have “been fantastic” about
reducing the costs on the F-35, Trump said, referring to the
stealth fighter made by Lockheed Martin and plagued by
cost overruns and technical issues.

“I’m really proud of what we have done and

we haven’t even gotten [to the White
House] yet,” saidTrump.

Trump started his speech by thanking the

news organizations that "looked at that
nonsense that was released by maybe the
intelligence agencies – which would be a
tremendous blot on them; the thing like that
should have never been written – and
rejected it.”
“A group of my opponents got together,
sick people, and they got that crap
together,” Trump said.
52
The majority of questions from reporters focused on
Russia and the intelligence reports on Moscow's alleged
interference in the US election.

“Hacking’s bad, and it shouldn’t be done.

But look at what was learned from the
hacking: That Hillary Clinton got questions
to the debate, and didn’t report it? That’s a
horrible thing,” Trump said.

Answering questions about his relations with Russian

President Vladimir Putin, Trump said that “if Putin likes
Donald Trump, I consider that an asset, not a liability."

"Do you honestly believe Hillary would be

tougher on Putin than me? Give me a
break," he said.

Speaking of possible conflicts of interest from his business “President-elect Trump should not be
past business operations, Trump said that he has "no expected to destroy the company he built,”
loans, no deals, or no pending dealings with Russia.” Dillon said,

He said he was offered $4 billion for deals in Dubai over
the weekend, but turned it down.
“I have a no conflict-of-interest provision as
president,” Trump said. “So I could actually
run my business and run the country at the
same time.” He said he could do it, but did
not want to.
“My two sons, Don and Eric, are going to
be running the company,” Trump said,
turning over “complete and total control” of
the Trump Organization to his children.
Keeping the brand, relinquishing control
Trump “has relinquished leadership and
management” in the Trump Organization,
explaining why the Trump brand and the organization
were not liquidated, sold to his children, or opened to
public ownership.
To ensure no conflict, real or perceived, with the
Emoluments Clause of the Constitution,
Trump has decided he will “voluntarily
donate all profits from foreign government
payments made to his hotel to the US
Treasury,” Dillon announced.
Cabinet, Obamacare, SCOTUS and the Wall
Trump also threw his support behind former Exxon CEO
Rex Tillerson, who was testifying at that moment before
the Senate on his nomination to head the State Department.

and all his investments will be conveyed to a trust before
January 20, said Sheri Dillon, partner at the law firm
Morgan Lewis, who led the legal effort to structure the
handover to Trump’s sons. Trump’s daughter Ivanka will
have no involvement or management authority in the
Trump Organization.
“No new foreign deals will be made
whatsoever” during the Trump presidency,
Dillon added.
Domestic deals will be allowed, but without Trump’s
involvement or knowledge, and would be examined by an
ethics advisor.
“I think it’s brilliant, what he’s doing and
what he’s saying,” Trump said.
Several of Trump's Cabinet picks are undergoing
confirmation hearings in the Senate. Former Exxon CEO
Rex Tillerson, nominated to head the State Department,
is running the gauntlet on Wednesday morning, similar to
what Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions went through on
Tuesday. In comparison, the lawmakers went easy on
retired Marine General John Kelly, nominated to head
Homeland Security.
“I want to bring the greatest people into
government,” Trump said. “We don’t make
good deals anymore.”

53
 His pick to replace "the late, great Justice
[Antonin] Scalia" on the US Supreme
Courtshould be announced within two
weeks of the inauguration, the president-
elect said.

“You’re going to be very proud of what we

put forth having to do with healthcare,” the
president-elect said, answering a question
on his intent to repeal Obamacare, calling it
“a complete and total disaster.”
Of course, a Trump press conference would not be
“Obamacare is the Democrats’ problem… complete without questions about the border wall with
We’re doing the Democrats a great service” Mexico.
by taking it on, Trump said.
“It’s not a fence, it’s a wall. We’re going to
Trump also warned companies that they can move freely build a wall,” Trump said, adding he did not
within the United States, but if they want to take their want to wait for negotiations before the
business abroad, penalties are to come. construction starts. “Mexico will reimburse
us for the cost of the wall. That will
“Word is now out,” Trump said, to people happen.”
who want to move factories and jobs
overseas, “you’re going to pay a very large
border tax.”

.
54
 Trump Slams Buzzfeed As 'Failing Pile Of Garbage,'
Rejects CNN Question Over 'Fake' Report
Published Time: 11 Jan, 2017 17:16Edited Time: 11 Jan, 2017 18:56

On Tuesday, CNN reported that a memo claiming that

Russia had compromising materials on Trump was shared
with the outgoing president and the president-elect by the
US intelligence community.

Later in the day, Buzzfeed News published the entire set of

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump speaks during a news
conference in the lobby of Trump Tower in Manhattan,
New York City, U.S., January 11, 2017. © Lucas Jackson /
Reuters
memos, which were purportedly “prepared for political
opponents of Trump by a person who is understood to be a
former British intelligence agent.” The dossier had been
circulating among elected officials, journalists and the
intelligence community for weeks, according to
Buzzfeed’s Ken Bensinger.

President-elect Donald Trump called BuzzFeed a 'failing

pile of garbage' over the report that Moscow has been
blackmailing him over past sex adventures in Russia. He
also refused to answer a question from CNN, another
outlet that published the report.

“Be quiet. I’m not going to give you a question. You are
fake news,” Trump told CNN reporter Jim Acosta at the
press conference in New York on Wednesday, where he
announced transferring the company to his sons to avoid
conflicts of interest.
Included in the report was the accusation that Trump
has “personal obsessions and sexual
perversion,” including for graphic sex acts.

“It is disgraceful” that the US intelligence agencies

allowed the two-page report that was “false and fake and
never happened” to be made public, Trump said of the
report published by BuzzFeed, which he called a “failing
pile of garbage.”

55
CNN, which also published the report, said that they tried
to get a comment on the story from Trump's team for
"more than half a day."

“What I suspect you're seeing here is an attempt to

discredit” genuine news sources, said CNN host Jake
Tapper immediately after Trump's press conference.

CNN has sought some distance from BuzzFeed on

Wednesday, saying they were "fully confident" in their
own reporting and calling on Trump and his team to
"identify, specifically, what they believe is inaccurate" in
the network's coverage.

Tapper added that he could understand why the president-

elect was upset by uncorroborated accusations being
posted on the internet.

“I would be too,” he said. “That’s why we didn’t publish

any of the details.”

Acosta later tweeted that he got another reporter to ask the

question. He told CNN that Trump's spokesman Sean
Spicer threatened to eject him from the press conference if
he tried asking another question.

56
 Massive Security Preparations Under Way For
Inauguration, Amid Protest Threats To 'Paralyze' DC
By Joseph Weber
Published January 11, 2017
Dec. 8, 2016: Workers construct the viewing stands ahead of U.S.
President-elect Donald Trump's January inauguration at the U.S.
Capitol in Washington, U.S. (Reuters)
The stage is set for President-elect Donald Trump’s
inauguration – not just the traditional swearing-in platform
on Capitol Hill, but a massive security presence amid
protest plans to “shut down” the nation’s capital.
Most crowd estimates for the Jan. 20 festivities are far
short of the record-setting 1.8 million visitors for President
Obama’s historic 2009 inauguration. But the throngs of
spectators and protesters alike are enough to create transit,
security and hospitality challenges.
“Security is my greatest concern,” Missouri
GOP Sen. Roy Blunt, chairman of
the Joint Congressional Committee on
Inaugural Ceremonies, recently said. “No
question that on inaugural day, this would
be the most appealing target in the world.”
He suggested the city could have as many as 750,000
demonstrators alone.
More than three-dozen law enforcement agencies are
working together on security and safety plans in
anticipation, including the Capitol Police, FBI, Secret
Service and National Guard.
Roughly 7,500 Guardsmen from across the country will
come to Washington, along with about 3,000 police
officers from various states, with the Secret Service taking
the lead on security.
Essentially everybody involved already is rehearsing for
the big weekend, which kicks off next Friday morning
with the swearings-in on the Capitol’s West Front,
followed by official events including the traditional parade
57
on Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House and the
inaugural balls.
The Joint Task Force -- National Capital Region -- 58th
Presidential Inauguration has held several “table top”
sessions in which agencies plot strategy over a large-scale,
three-dimensional map.
“It’s a rehearsal, but in the military we call it
a drill,” Navy Cmdr. Jonathan Blyth, the
group’s spokesman, told FoxNews.com on
Wednesday. “We’ve been preparing for this
since the last inauguration. We’re focused
to protecting and honoring a new
commander in chief.”
The task force and its Capitol Hill counterpart are holding
a “dress rehearsal” this weekend for the swearings-in, the
Presidential Review of troops and the parade along the
roughly 2.5-mile stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Several protest groups planning large-scale demonstrations
have permits in place and have already held organizational
meetings, among them the collaborative DisruptJ20.
“We’re planning a series of massive, direct
actions that will shut down the inauguration
ceremonies and any related celebrations,”
the group says. “We’re also planning to
paralyze the city.”
Organizers say they are targeting everything from the
parade to the balls and plan to use blockades and protesters
to stop traffic, public transit and parties.
The group RefuseFacism.org is planning a small-scale
protest Saturday in the city’s McPherson Square, just
blocks from the White House, that organizers hope will
grow into larger inauguration-weekend protests.
The group burned U.S. flags this summer at the
Democratic and Republican national conventions and this
week tried to disrupt the Senate confirmation hearing for
Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions to become Trump’s
attorney general.
“I wouldn’t want to meet with [Trump], but I
would say to him, ‘You’re a fascist. Your
 regime is illegitimate.’ And it must not be
allowed to take power,” the group’s Carl
Dix told Fox on Wednesday on Capitol Hill.
Dix acknowledged the group doesn’t have
a federal or city permit to protest but still
intends to “stop the regime.”
The two major groups with permits are a pro-Trump
organization and the ANSWER Coalition, which turned
out the largest anti-war protests during the Bush years and
next weekend has a permit for a mass protest at Freedom
Plaza, near the parade route.
The other group is Bikers for Trump, a familiar presence
on last year’s campaign trail and visitors to both 2016
major-party conventions. The group’s permit shows
members at John Marshall Park, near the Canadian
Embassy and close to the parade route.
The biggest protest is expected to take place the following
day -- the Women’s March on Washington. Organizers
have finally received a permit and estimate 200,000
attendees, with celebrities such as Amy Schumer and
Scarlett Johansson reportedly among them.
Blyth said the big variable next weekend, as usual, will be
the weather.
Eight inches of snow fell the night before John F.
Kennedy’s inauguration in 1961.
.
58
“The weather is always the biggest
challenge,” Blyth said. “We’re reading the
Farmer’s Almanac and always checking
forecasts.”
The 58th Presidential Inaugural Committee will hold at
least two official -- or “sanctioned” -- balls.
Among the other balls that week will be the Deplorables
Inaugural Ball, at the Ronald Reagan Building and
International Trade Center, and the Salute to the Heroes
Inaugural Ball, at the Renaissance hotel downtown.
Trump boasted this week that so many people are
attending balls and other events that dress shops are sold
out. However, Calypso St. Barts women’s shop, in
Georgetown, said Wednesday it has plenty of options still
available.
“We still have many nice pieces, including
some cocktail dresses,” store manager
Briona Jackson said. “We have items on
sale and can get gowns from our other
stores.”
Fox News’ Griff Jenkins contributed to this report.
 Archived Posts Prove 4Chan Trolled CIA With Trump
Golden Shower Story - Entire Russian
Hack Narrative Imploding?
By Zeropointnow
Jan 11, 2017 3:57 AM
The entire Russian Hacking narrative may have just been
destroyed by trolls on the internet, after the 35 page hoax
dossier on Trump's relationship with Russia was "leaked"
by Buzzfeed today (after being heavily fluffed by CNN ).
If you're not up to speed on the 35 page report released
today, and it's intra-day dismantling, below is a recap
straight from ZeroHedge since they've been all over this
thing (if you're up to speed already, scroll down for
4chan proof).
First, CNN put out new Anti-Trump hit
piece today alleging that a former
British Spy compiled and delivered a 35
page report tciao US Intelligence.
59
In a report that will likely set much of the liberal media on
fire in the coming days, CNN reports, citing "multiple
US officials", that top intelligence officials last week
briefed President-elect Donald Trump about Russian
operatives' claims that they have compromised
Trump's personal and financial information. The two-
page document which was presented to Trump as an
appendix to last week's briefing on alleged Russian
interference in the presidential election, also noted
allegations that there was an exchange of information
between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the
Russian government during the campaign. -ZeroHedge
Then, Buzzfeed published the entire 35
page report - which began to unravel
immediately:
Note that Buzzfeed was one of the early adopters of the
phrase "Fake News, in April" parroting the newly minted
phrase" days after the Washington Post used it to discredit
Trump supporters).
As reported moments ago, CNN is leading with a story
about a 35-page dossier compiled by a former member of
British intelligence, which had been distilled into a 2-page
appendix presented to Trump last Friday by the US intel
community, and which contains "explosive, but
unverified, allegations" that the Russian government has
been "cultivating, supporting and assisting" President-
elect Donald Trump for at least 5 years and "endorsed by
Putin" gained compromising information about him, with
the aim of "encouraging splits and divisions in the western
alliance." -ZeroHedge
The memo has allegedly been circulating among elected
officials, intelligence agents, and journalists for weeks.
Trump chimed in, calling it FAKE NEWS:
 As the lascivious details  The central intelligence agency of the united states of
and inconsistencies in the report began america put this in their official classified intelligence
to emerge, Buzzfeed editor in chief Ben report on russian involvement in the election
Smith distanced himself - citing "clear  Donald trump and obama have both read this pol/acks
errors" fanfiction
 The cia has concluded that the russian plans to
blackmail trump with this story we made up

just let that sink in what we have become.

And in a bizarre twist, a 4chan user

claims to have fabricated the claims in
the 35 page report (via ZeroHedge):
In a story that is getting more surreal by the minute, a post
on 4Chan now claims that the infamous "golden showers"
scene in the unverified 35-page dossier, allegedly
compiled by a British intelligence officer, was a hoax and
fabricated by a member of the chatboard as "fanfiction",
then sent to Rick Wilson, who proceeded to send it to the Ok, so some guy just said that, but
CIA, which then put it in their official classified where's the proof?
intelligence report on the election.
RIGHT HERE, thanks to the 4chan archive of the original
Here is 4Chan's explanation of how the story came to light: post from November 1st, talking about the whole plan
to give the #FakeNews to Rick Wilson.
 /pol/acks mailed fanfiction to anti-trump pundit Rick
Wilson about trump making people piss on a bed
obama slept in
 He thought it was real and gave it to the CIA

First post:

60
Replies:

61
 These 4chan users had clearly
discussed OP giving Rick Wilson fake
information prior to November 1st,
which was partially or entirely included
in the 35 page report linking Trump
directly to Russia.

From here on out, assuming this is all true - it doesn't

matter how "legit" any report, document, or declaration is
from any agency regarding Russian involvement in the
US Elections. Even if there were credible evidence in the
case (there's not), it simply won't matter after today.
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com * Follow
on Twitter @ZeroPointNow
.

62
 Buzzfeed Publishes Unsubstantiated
Trump Report, Raising Ethics Questions
Site Posted Documents About His Purported Behaviour In Russia With A
Warning That They Contained Errors And Were ‘Unverified And
Potentially Unverifiable’
Rory Carroll In Los Angeles @Rorycarroll72
Wednesday 11 January 2017 06.35 EST
The documents alleged that the Kremlin was ‘cultivating, supporting
and assisting’ Donald Trump for at least five years. Photograph:
Rex/Shutterstock
BuzzFeed’s decision to publish an intelligence report filled
with salacious and unsubstantiated claims about Donald
Trump’s purported behaviour in Russia has triggered a
political storm and debate over media ethics.
The news website posted the unredacted documents on
Tuesday, just 10 days before Trump’s inauguration, with a
warning that the contents contained errors and were
“unverified and potentially unverifiable”.
The decision to put the claims in the public domain forced
other media outlets to repeat the allegations or ignore a
story that lit up the internet. Some critics rounded on
BuzzFeed, calling it irresponsible.
The documents, reportedly compiled by a British former
intelligence agent, alleged that the Kremlin was
“cultivating, supporting and assisting” Trump for at least
five years.
They also alleged that Russian spies had exploited the
president-elect’s “personal obsessions and sexual
perversion” to gather compromising material.
The president-elect denied and denounced the claims in a
series of tweets.
63
The memos were compiled by the former intelligence
officer on behalf of some of Trump’s Republican
opponents in the primaries, and later for Democrats.
Other media outlets including the Guardian had obtained
and reviewed the documents in recent weeks but declined
to publish because there was no way to independently
verify them.
The stakes rose on Tuesday when CNN reported that
America’s intelligence chiefs had given Trump and Barack
Obama a two-page summary of the reports last week. CNN
and the Guardian also reported that Senator John McCain
had delivered a copy to the FBI director, James Comey,
last month, but withheld the documents’ most eye-opening
details, citing lack of corroboration.
An hour after CNN’s initial story, BuzzFeed went ahead
and published the documents.
“Now BuzzFeed News is publishing the full
document so that Americans can make up
their own minds about allegations about the
president-elect that have circulated at the
highest levels of the US government,” the
site said in an accompanying note.
The news site noted the documents’ provenance and the
fact that they contained “some clear errors”, such as
misspelling the name of a Russian company.
Ben Smith, the editor-in-chief, followed up a few hours
later with a statement that defended publication as an act
of journalistic transparency in a hyper-partisan era.
 “Publishing this document was not an easy
or simple call, and people of good will may
disagree with our choice. But publishing
this dossier reflects how we see the job of
reporters in 2017.” Smith amplified the
warning in BuzzFeed’s original story by
saying there was “serious reason to doubt
the allegations”.
Some prominent journalists and media
excoriated BuzzFeed.
“Even Donald Trump deserves journalistic
fairness,” tweeted David Corn, Mother
Jones’s Washington bureau chief who
reported in October on the existence – but
not the contents – of memos from a “former
western intelligence officer”.
“Rare that a story stinks from every
possible angle: the source, the content, the
consequence, the messenger, the target,”
tweeted Wolfgang Blau, chief digital officer
of Condé Nast International and a former
Guardian executive.
“Not how journalism works: Here’s a thing
that might or might not be true, without
supporting evidence; decide for yourself if
it’s legit,” tweeted Brad Heath, an
investigative reporter for USA Today.
Adam Goldman of the New York Times blamed CNN for
opening the can of worms.
“Sequence of events: @CNN finds way to
talk about report and @buzzfeed uses that
as reason to publish. Media critics are
gonna be busy,” he tweeted.
On the other hand, Richard Tofel, the president of the
investigative news organization ProPublica, applauded
Buzzfeed, saying
“citizens should have evidence to consider
for themselves”.
And the blog Lawfare said the allegations, though
unproven, needed to be taken seriously because
intelligence chiefs appeared to be giving them some
credibility. Trump, it noted, had consistently rejected
executives intelligence reports that Russia had hacked the US
election.
“All of which is to say to everyone: slow
down, and take a deep breath. We
shouldn’t assume either that this is simply a
‘fake news’ episode directed at discrediting
Trump or that the dam has now broken and
the truth is coming out at last. We don’t
know what the reality is here, and the
better part of valor is not to get ahead of
the facts – a matter on which, incidentally,
the press deserves a lot of credit.”
In London, Jim Waterson, UK political editor of Buzzfeed,
told an audience at a previously planned event about fake
news:
“The documents are unverified and yet this
is a document which is being discussed
across media circles and across security
circles. If it is being briefed to the president-
elect then it’s better to be able to see what
he’s being briefed.”
64
Speaking at the same event, a panel on Fake News and the
Fallout presented by the Edinburgh international TV
festival and ITN, Brian Stelter, host of CNN’s Reliable
Sources, said:
“My gut reaction to this this morning was
that if Buzzfeed hadn’t decided to publish
the documents someone would have. I’m
not saying whether it’s right or wrong but …
this kind of raw material is always going to
end up somewhere on the internet.”
BuzzFeed co-founder Jonah Peretti said in a statement:
“We stand with Ben on his decision to
publish this newsworthy document, which
was reported on by multiple news outlets
and seen by high level government officials
including the president and president-
elect.”
A survey of UK coverage on Wednesday morning by the
UK Press Gazette found the Mirror, Mail, Sun and Express
had reported some of the lurid details in the dossier –
accompanied by denials from Trump and the Kremlin –
while the Independent and Guardian had reported some of
the detail and the denials. The Daily Telegraph had a story
based on denials with none of the detail, and the Times had
not yet covered the story online.
.
65
Roy Greenslade, who teaches journalistic ethics at City
University’s school of journalism and writes a column for
the Guardian, said the publication of the documents was an
error.
“I’m all for disclosure, but news outlets
must act responsibly and should also
beware of doing anything that undermines
their credibility,” he said. “On both counts,
Buzzfeed’s decision to publish the material
was an error. It is disingenuous to publish
the document on the grounds that
‘Americans can make up their own minds’.
Adopting that criterion would allow for the
publication of anything irrespective of its
authenticity.”
The New York Times, which goes by the slogan “all the
news that’s fit to print”, said it was “not in the business of
publishing things we can’t stand by”. Dean Baquet, the
executive editor, described the allegations as totally
unsubstantiated.
“We, like others, investigated the
allegations and haven’t corroborated them,”
he said, explaining why the newspaper did
not publish.
 Claims Of Russia Holding ‘Compromising
Data’ On Trump Not Reliable Says Wikileaks
Wikileaks Whistleblowing Website Said That Media Reports Alleging That
"Russian Operatives" Have Compromising Information On Us President-
Elect Donald Trump Are Not Reliable.
© Flickr/ Scott Beale World 08:53 11.01.2017(Updated 08:59 11.01.2017)
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Media reports alleging that
"Russian operatives" have compromising information on
US President-elect Donald Trump are not reliable, the
WikiLeaks whistleblowing website said on Wednesday.
"35 page PDF published by Buzzfeed on
Trump is not an intelligence report. Style,
facts & dates show no credibility,"
WikiLeaks said on Twitter.
Earlier in the day, the CNN broadcaster reported, citing
unnamed US officials, that US intelligence services
66
presented outgoing US President Barack Obama and
President-elect Trump with classified documents that
included allegations that Russian operatives had claimed to
have compromising financial and personal information on
Trump. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is
investigating the credibility of the data, according to the
media.
Later, the full version of the documents was published by
BuzzFeed News media outlet. "WikiLeaks has a 100%
record of accurate authentication. We do not endorse
Buzzfeed's publication of a document which is clearly
bogus," WikiLeaks commented. The US Intelligence
Community on Friday released a report saying it has "high
confidence" on Russia’s interference in the 2016
presidential election, but the National Security Agency
(NSA) has less confidence in the assessment than the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA). Russia has repeatedly denied
the US allegations of Moscow's interference in US
elections, calling them absurd and characterizing them as
an attempt to divert public opinion from revelations of
corruption as well as other pressing domestic issues.
 ‘Stinks From Every Possible Angle’:
Media Blasts Buzzfeed’s ‘Unverified’ Trump Dossier
Published Time: 11 Jan, 2017 12:44

“It is not just unconfirmed: It includes some

clear errors,” BuzzFeed admits.

The dossier had reportedly circulated among officials and

journalists for a few weeks, it said.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump © Mike Segar / Reuters

BuzzFeed’s decision to run a story about a dossier alleging

Moscow has been blackmailing President-elect Donald
Trump has been unmercifully panned by an array of
journalists.

BuzzFeed’s decision to publish the report has been

slammed by a number of prominent journalists, with Glenn
Greenwald highly critical of BuzzFeed’s citing of
anonymous sources.

The claims published by BuzzFeed relate to a dossier,

allegedly created by an anonymous former British
intelligence official, which claims Russia has information
on Trump that it's using to blackmail him, and that Trump
and Moscow have been in communication for years.

The allegations include claims about Trump’s “personal

obsessions and sexual perversion,” including the charge
that Trump had Russian prostitutes urinate on each other in
a Moscow hotel room which the Obamas stayed in during
an official visit.

It also alleges Russia has been “cultivating,

supporting and assisting,” Trump for years.

67
The website has been slammed for its lack of verification
in publishing the report, aiding in the spread of “fake
news,” something BuzzFeed itself has been critical of in
the past, as Guardian reporter Julia Carrie Wong noted.

The Atlantic's editor Jeffrey Goldberg again noted the

report's "unverified information" and "anonymous figures"
as being of major concern, while Conde Nast’s Chief
Digital Officer, Wolfgang Blau, said it was “rare that a
story stinks from every possible angle.”

One of the report’s glaring errors has already been

debunked. Michael Cohen, special counsel to Trump, was
named in the report as having met with Kremlin officials
in August 2016.

Cohen has flatly denied the allegation, providing an alibi

that he was visiting University of Southern California with
his son at the time, and met with its baseball coach, which
a USC baseball source confirmed. Cohen also said he has
never been to Prague, or Russia.

68
WikiLeaks blasted the dossier, saying it was not an
intelligence report and that the “style, facts and dates show
no credibility.”

Mother Jones published a story about the memos in

October, but didn’t go into the details of what had been
alleged. It reported the former intelligence officer had sent
the FBI memos, and that his findings were first funded by
a Republican client before switching to a Democrat-
aligned client.

David Corn, the author of the Mother Jones piece,

confirmed he did not publish the memo due to his inability
to confirm the allegations made in it.

69

Senior writer with Tablet Magazine Yair Rosenberg
acknowledged a number of journalists had been aware of
the report but "couldn't verify it" so did not publish it.
Without video proof, Rosenberg said it was "just
unsubstantiated innuendo."
70
“It’s so ridiculous on so many levels,”
Trump’s attorney, Michael Cohen said.
“Clearly, the person who created this did so
from their imagination or did so hoping that
the liberal media would run with this fake
story for whatever rationale they might
have.”
 NYT Accuses CNN, Buzzfeed Of Peddling
"Fake News" Over Russia Report
By Tyler Durden
Jan 11, 2017 3:49 PM
In a fascinating retort by the left-leaning NYT to the story
of the day, namely the CNN-BuzzFeed narrative based on
an unverified 35-page memo allegedly prepared by a UK
intelligence officer, even "the paper of record" takes the
two media outlets to town, and in an article titled
"BuzzFeed Posts Unverified Claims on Trump, Stirring
Debate" essentially accuses them of doing what CNN has
accused so much of the 'alternative media' in doing when
distributing "fake news."
Here are the key excerpts:
The reports by CNN and Buzzfeed sent
other news organizations, including The
New York Times and The Washington
Post, scrambling to publish their own
articles, some of which included
generalized descriptions of the unverified
allegations about Mr. Trump. By late
Tuesday, though, only BuzzFeed had
published the full document.
BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its
immediate political ramifications for a
president-elect who is to be inaugurated in
10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling
debate about the role and credibility of
the traditional media in today’s frenetic,
polarized information age.
And the punchline, where the NYT essentially accuses
both CNN and BuzzFeed of stooping to the level of "fake
news" disseminators:
Of particular interest was the use of
unsubstantiated information from
anonymous sources, a practice that
fueled some of the so-called fake news
— false rumors passed off as legitimate
journalism — that proliferated during
the presidential election.
It then continues its scathing critique of what now passes
as "journalism"
CNN said that its journalists had reviewed the full 35-page
compilation of memos, the same document later published
in full by BuzzFeed, but declined to include some details,
71
saying that the network “has not independently
corroborated the specific allegations.” CNN said its
reporters spoke with multiple high-ranking intelligence
and government officials before publishing its report.
Meanwhile, the NYT held off for one simple reason:
"In a brief interview in the Times newsroom
on Tuesday evening, Dean Baquet, the
executive editor of The Times, said the
paper would not publish the document
because the allegations were “totally
unsubstantiated.” “We, like others,
investigated the allegations and haven’t
corroborated them, and we felt we’re not
in the business of publishing things we
can’t stand by,” Mr. Baquet said.
But BuzzFeed could.
It wasn't just the NYT who lashed out at the "report" - on
social media, some left-leaning writers who generally
oppose Mr. Trump expressed skepticism about the
document published by BuzzFeed.
“An anonymous person, claiming to be an
ex-British intel agent & working as a Dem
oppo researcher, said anonymous people
told him things,” wrote Glenn Greenwald.
Immediately after BuzzFeed’s publication, some reporters
volunteered that they, too, had received copies of the
report.
“Raise your hand if you too were
approached with this story,” Julia Ioffe, a
journalist who has written extensively on
Russia, wrote on Twitter, adding that she
had not reported on the information in the
document “because it was impossible to
verify.”
Writers at the blog Lawfare, which covers national security
issues, said they had been in possession of the document
“for a couple of weeks” but opted not to publish because
the allegations were unproven.
 “Yes, they are explosive; they are also
entirely unsubstantiated, at least to our
knowledge, at this stage,” the site wrote on
Tuesday night. “For this reason, even now,
we are not going to discuss the specific
allegations within the document.”
To be sure, BuzzFeed’s move was welcomed by some
people, who expressed concern that news outlets and
government officials with access to the allegations had not
disclosed them sooner. Almost immediately, the report’s
publication prompted questions from Hillary Clinton’s
camp about why the claims had not surfaced earlier.
“Today has brought a gush of reporting that
outlets knew about and sat on prior to
November 8,” Brian Fallon, Mrs. Clinton’s
chief campaign spokesman, wrote on
Twitter.
He added, in a second message:
“I repeat: certain media outlets were told
this prior to November 8.”
Meanwhile, John Podhoretz takes it even further:
"At a moment when journalists are up in
arms about “fake news,” what BuzzFeed
has done here is take fake news to a
new level. Its editor, Ben Smith,
acknowledges “there is serious reason
to doubt the allegations.” In other words,
.
72
there is almost certainly fake news inside
these memos, and it might all be fake, or
some parts of it might be true but buried so
deeply under falsity that it would be
impossible to separate it out."
“Publishing this dossier reflects how we
see the job of reporters in 2017,” Smith
writes. This is an amazing thing to say,
because if you think it through, it means
publishing open libels and slanders is the
job of reporters in 2017.
“Fake news will become more
sophisticated, and fake, ambiguous, and
spun-up stories will spread widely,” warned
an important American editor at the end of
December 2016.
His name: Ben Smith.
His publication: BuzzFeed.
Ultimately, the reaction to the report simply confirmed just
how polarized US society has become, and that when it
comes to information, virtually anything can now pass as
"fake news" if not factually checked and corroborated by
evidence, which incidentally in the entire "Russia hacking"
means everything.
Finally, we would find it supremely delightful if, indeed, it
was 4Chan who hoaxed not only CNN and BuzzFeed but
the US intelligence agencies, into posting the "golden
showers" scene. If so, then faith in conventional US media
(and US intelligence) will fully disintegrate.
 'This Is Pulp Fiction': Kremlin Denies
Having Compromising Materials On Trump Or Clinton
The Kremlin Does Not Engage In Gathering Compromising Materials
On The US Politicians, Peskov Stressed
Russian Politics & Diplomacy
January 11, 12:21
MOSCOW, January 11. /TASS/. The Kremlin has no
compromising materials on US President-elect Donald
Trump or his former rival at the presidential elections
Hillary Clinton while reports to the contrary are absolute
nonsense and pulp fiction, presidential spokesman Dmitry
Peskov said on Wednesday.
The Kremlin spokesman thus commented on the reports
that Russia allegedly had compromising materials on US
top officials.
"No, the Kremlin has no compromising
materials on Trump," Peskov said.
The Kremlin spokesman also said the Russian leadership
did not have any compromising information on Hillary
Clinton either.
"This is absolutely fake information,
a fabrication and complete nonsense. The
Kremlin does not engage in gathering
compromising materials," the presidential
spokesman said.
"This is called pulp fiction," the Kremlin
spokesman said, characterizing the
relevant report by the US intelligence.
In Peskov’s opinion, such publications "are
an obvious attempt to harm our bilateral
relations."
73
"The quality of the unclassified part of the
previous report [on alleged Russian hacker
attacks on the United States] and the
quality of this fake information are
comparable," the Kremlin spokesman said.
"The quality of this paper speaks by itself,"
Peskov said.
As the Kremlin spokesman said, one has to respond to this
"with certain humor," "although there is also a sad side of
this: indeed, there are those who are instigating this
hysteria, who are going overboard to maintain this state of
the ‘witch hunt.’"
US President-elect Trump also characterized this new
fabrication as the continuation of the witch hunt, the
Kremlin spokesman said.
In Peskov’s opinion,
"the continuation of this hysterical
condition" is aimed at forcibly leaving the
Russian-US relations "in the course of
degradation and not allowing anyone
simply to think about how much this
corresponds to the interests of both
countries and how much this corresponds
to the interests of the global community
and what can be done to switch over from
total confrontation to constructivism in
relations [between Russia and the United
States]."
Media reports on compromising materials
The CNN reported earlier on Wednesday, citing US
officials with direct knowledge of the briefings, that
American intelligence chiefs briefed Trump last Friday
about the alleged evidence that Russian operatives had
comprising personal and financial information about the
US President-elect.
According to the CNN, the allegations were presented in a
two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on
.
74
Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 US presidential
election. The allegations came from memos compiled by a
former British intelligence operative whose past work US
intelligence officials consider credible.
The online news site BuzzFeed posted a document, which
was a full version of the former British intelligence agent’s
report, according to the site’s data. At the same time, the
web portal acknowledged the report as unverified and
prepared for Trump’s political foes.
 Russia Has No Compromising Info On Trump Or Clinton,
Report Is ‘Total Bluff’ – Kremlin
Published Time: 11 Jan, 2017 09:09Edited Time: 11 Jan, 2017 15:12
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and U.S. presidential candidate
Hillary Clinton © Mike Segar, Carlos Barria / Reuters
Moscow says documents alleging that Russia has
compromising information on Donald Trump are a
fabrication and a “total bluff.” Russia has never gathered
information of this kind on either the US president-elect,
or his former rival, Hillary Clinton.
“The Kremlin has no compromising
information on Trump. This report does not
correspond to reality and is nothing but an
absolute fiction,” the deputy head of the
Russian presidential administration, Dmitry
Peskov, told reporters on Wednesday.
“This is a total bluff, an absolute fabrication,
complete nonsense,” he said.
He reiterated that there is no compromising information on
Hillary Clinton either, and that the Russian authorities do
not accumulate this type of information.
“Of course not. The Kremlin does not
collect compromising information. The
Kremlin [and] the Russian president are
engaged in building relationships with our
foreign partners, firstly – in the interests of
the Russian Federation, in the interests of
the Russian people, secondly – in the
interests of global peace, stability and
security,” Peskov said.
75
On Tuesday, CNN published an article stating that US
intelligence handed over a two-page synopsis of classified
documents, which included claims that Russian operatives
have compromising personal and financial information
about Trump, to the president-elect and US President
Barack Obama.
The information was included as an annex to a classified
version of the report prepared by the Office of the Director
of National Intelligence on Russian influence on the 2016
presidential election, according to CNN.
Buzzfeed picked up the story, publishing the entire dossier
purportedly
“prepared for political opponents of Trump
by a person who is understood to be a
former British intelligence agent.”
The most appalling part of the dossier was the claim that
Donald Trump has “personal obsessions and sexual
perversion,” including graphic sex acts, and a report that
the president-elect once had Russian prostitutes urinate on
each other in a hotel bed that the Obamas previously
shared.
Apart from sex orgies, the dossier also suggests Russian
officials offered the Republican real estate magnate
lucrative deals in order to win influence over him ahead of
the election.
The story exploded on Twitter with the hashtag
#GoldenShowers shooting up the trending charts.
 Moscow considers the scandal a clear attempt to damage
relations with Washington and the president-elect
personally.

Later in the day, however, an anonymous member of the
chatboard on 4chan posted a refutation of the now
infamous “golden showers” story, calling it a hoax and
“fanfiction.” He or she claimed that several months ago,
the story was sent to Republican political strategist Rick
Wilson, who proceeded to send it to the CIA, which then
put it in their official classified intelligence report on the
election.
“This is an obvious attempt to harm our
bilateral relations,” Peskov said.
“Pulp fiction, that’s what it is called in
English. Of course, probably the best way
to react would be accordingly – with a
certain sense of humor."
“Although there is a downside – indeed,
there are those who are stirring up the
hysteria, who go out of their way to
maintain this state of a witch-hunt,” he
added.

.
76
 Gathering Of Compromising Data On Trump Financed By
Democrats, Republicans
© REUTERS/ Carlo Allegri/File Photo US 13:07 11.01.2017
Media reports that the gathering of alleged Russia-obtained
intelligence regarding compromising information on US President-
elect Donald Trump was funded by groups and donors supporting his
Republican opponents during the presidential primaries and
supporters of Democratic Party candidate and former Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The gathering of alleged Russia-
obtained intelligence regarding compromising information
on US President-elect Donald Trump was financed by the
supporters of his Republican and Democratic opponents,
local media reported on Wednesday, citing sources.
Earlier in the day, media reported that US intelligence
officials had told Trump and outgoing President Barack
Obama about suspicions that Russian intelligence agents
allegedly possess incriminating information about the
incoming president.
According to the CNN broadcaster, the initial information
gathering on Trump was funded by groups and donors
supporting his Republican opponents during the
Republican Party presidential primaries. Once Trump
.
77
became the single Republican candidate, further
investigations against him were funded by supporters of
Democratic Party candidate and former Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton.
Trump himself commented on the publication earlier in the
day by calling the news fake and "a total political witch
hunt."
The latest iteration of the Russia-related media storm
around Trump comes amid the Democratic National
Committee (DNC) hacking scandal in the United States.
US intelligence has accused Russia of hacking DNC
servers and leaking information compromising former
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton to WikiLeaks prior
to US presidental elections in an effort to boost her
opponent Donald Trump's chances of victory.
In Friday's report, US Intelligence released a public
version of a comprehensive intelligence report assessing
Russian activities and intentions related to the 2016 US
presidential election. The report accused Russia of trying
to influence the election. After being briefed on the report,
Trump said the DNC hack did not have an impact on the
election outcome.
Russia has repeatedly denied the US allegations calling
them absurd and characterizing them as an attempt to
divert public opinion from revelations of corruption as
well as other pressing domestic issues.
 ‘Nazi Germany’: Trump And The Clinton Elite
Who Amplified ‘Fake News’
Published Time: 11 Jan, 2017 17:14

Despite BuzzFeed failing to verify the report, a number of

establishment figures and Hillary Clinton insiders
amplified the claims to their substantial social media
following.

Evan McMullin, a former Republican who ran for

president as an independent, boasted he had warned about
a Trump-Russia connection on CNN in September.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump © Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

US President-elect Donald Trump denied allegations made

in an unverified report published by news website
BuzzFeed and slammed his opponents for taking “one last
shot” in an attack described as resembling life in “Nazi
Germany.”

While much of the media passed on covering the claims,

Trump accused “crooked opponents” of leading a political Clinton loyalists jumped on them, taking the opportunity to
witch hunt by spreading “FAKE NEWS” designed to partake in a self-congratulatory round of ‘I told you so’.
damage the businessman-turned-politician.

Trump also flat-out rejected allegations that Russia

leveraged information against him.

These allegations took center stage Wednesday when the

president-elect – due to enter the White House in nine days
– had his first formal press conference with reporters in six
months.

78

Clinton adviser Neera Tanden insinuated Republican
“support” for Trump and his failure to release his taxes
were further evidence of the story.
Former Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon called for
Trump to be “interrogated” about Russia at his upcoming
press conference, and urged the Senate majority leader
Mitch McConnell to investigate the allegations.

She claimed Trump “went after” intelligence agencies

because “he knew what they had,” and dismissed Trump’s
denials of the claims.

She also pointed to Trump’s appearance on Larry King’s

show on RT.
He also criticized journalists for not publishing the
unverified report.

Other former Clinton aides and campaign staff spread the

narrative across social media.

79
Clinton spokesperson Josh Schwerin implied that if Trump
had released his tax returns, he would not have been able
to be blackmailed.

Clinton talking head Star Jones equated the Trump story

with Clinton’s email scandal, and later claimed
BuzzFeed’s story being deemed “fake news” was an
example of chickens coming home to roost, as “TRUMP
campaign & election was built on BS #fakenews.”
Other prominent commentators, writers and Clinton
loyalists appeared to relish the news, with some focusing
on the salacious details of the dossier.

80
 Trump Declares War On MSM And
Corrupt Intelligence Operatives Helping Them
Elements Of Intelligence Community Now Directly Working With
Corporate Media To Steal The Election
By Alex Thomas -
01.11.2017 @8:19 PM EST

“I’m not going to give you a question,”

Trump responded. “Don’t be rude. I’m not
going to give you a question. You are fake
news!”.

After destroying the corrupt, intelligence community

supported mainstream media, Trump revealed that he had
actually conducted a sting operation of his own that ended
up proving that intelligence officials were LEAKING his
briefings to the mainstream media.

The Daily Mail reported:

(INTELLIHUB) — In an extraordinary sequence of
events, President-elect Donald Trump has declared full-
scale war against the “fake news” corporate media and the
intelligence operatives helping them to spread their
disinformation.
Just one day after Buzzfeed and CNN reported on the
laughable outright disinformation contained in a “dossier”
compiled by a former British intelligence operative and
Democratic opposition researcher, Trump held a press
conference where he destroyed CNN for their fake news as
well as revealed that he conducted his own sting operation
into leaks by the intelligence community.
During the press conference, Trump first took shots at the
pathetic disinformation spread by Buzzfeed, saying,
“Buzzfeed which is a failing pile of garbage
will suffer the consequences.”
He then moved on to CNN which had earlier Tuesday
given Buzzfeed the apparent cover it needed to actually
publish the entire dossier.
CNN “reporter” Jim Acosta asked Trump if
he would give CNN a question since he
was “attacking them”.
Trump’s response was an instant classic.
President-elect Donald Trump, after growing
suspicious that intelligence officials were leaking news
about their classified briefings with him, says he
conducted a sting operation to try to prove top spies
were behind the leaks.
Trump revealed the extraordinary scheme to try to
entrap the senior spies in a furious press conference
where he suggested the intelligence community had
been behind salacious and totally unproven
allegations against him.
‘I think it’s pretty sad when intelligence reports get
leaked out to the press. First of all, it’s illegal. These
are classified and certified meetings and reports,’
Trump said during a press conference at Trump
Tower – his first since getting elected.
Then he revealed the details of the stealthy sting he
says he conducted on the nation’s senior spooks.
‘I’ll tell you what does happen. I have many meetings
with intelligence. And every time I meet, people are
reading about it,’ Trump said, possibly referencing
reports on his classified briefings, which he has
chosen not to receive daily.
‘Somebody’s leaking them out,’ Trump said, after
inveighing against leaks generally.

81
 ‘So I said, “Maybe it’s my office. Maybe my office.”
Because I’ve got a lot of people … Maybe it’s them?’
‘What I did, is I said I won’t tell anyone. I’m going to
have a meeting, and I won’t tell anybody about my
meeting with intelligence,’ Trump continued.
He even shielded one of his closest aides from word
of the meeting.
‘Nobody knew – not even Rhoda, my executive
assistant for years. She didn’t know – I didn’t tell her.
Nobody knew,’ Trump continued.
Having set the trap, Trump says the word leaked
anyway
‘The meeting was held. They left, and immediately the
word got out that I had a meeting. So, I don’t want
that. It’s very unfair to the country. It’s very unfair to
our country what’s happening,’ he said.
We are truly witnessing the intelligence community
literally work with the corporate media in an attempt to
directly destroy the elected incoming president.
This unprecedented attack on our democracy was detailed
in an extremely important report by journalist Glenn
Greenwald in which he declared that the “deep state” was
directly going after Trump.
Greenwald wrote:
Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address
after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star
general chose to warn Americans of this specific
threat to democracy: “In the councils of government,
we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted
.
82
influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-
industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous
rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That
warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation
of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War
mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically
expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.
This is the faction that is now engaged in open
warfare against the duly elected and already widely
disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are
using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining
ingredients of what has until recently been denounced
as “Fake News.”
Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media,
much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes,
and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And
Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and
traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse
of their party, seemingly divorced further and further
from reason with each passing day, are willing —
eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align
with any villain, regardless of how unsupported,
tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.
This is it folks. We have warned for months that elements
of the intelligence community were working with the
corporate media to destroy Trump and the events of the
last 48 hours conclusively prove this at a level even we
didn’t think possible.
Elements of the CIA are
DIRECTLY working with the
mainstream media to STEAL
the election from the
American people. This is
now a documented fact.
 Trump Conducts His Own Sting Operation To Ensnare
Intelligence Briefers – And Says He Caught Them Leaking
 President-elect Donald Trump described a sting operation he says he conducted after becoming
infuriated by a series of leaks about his own classified briefings
 He says he decided to tell no one about a particular secret briefing, shielding even his longtime
scheduling aide, Rhona Graff, to rule out the possibility leaks were coming from his staff
 When word got out anyway, Trump concluded it was the intelligence community who was putting out
information
 He described the operation he conducted after suggesting intelligence officials leaked a fake dirty
dossier of information about him
By Geoff Earle, Deputy U.s Political Editor For Dailymail.com In New York
Published: 14:14 EST, 11 January 2017 | Updated: 23:30 EST, 11 January 2017

President-elect Donald Trump, after growing suspicious

that intelligence officials were leaking news about their President-elect Donald Trump said he set a trap for his
classified briefings with him, says he conducted a sting intelligence briefers and that they fell for it by leaking
operation to try to prove top spies were behind the leaks. word of a classified briefing he had with them

Trump revealed the extraordinary scheme to try to entrap
the senior spies in a furious press conference where he
suggested the intelligence community had been behind
salacious and totally unproven allegations against him.
‘I think it’s pretty sad when intelligence
reports get leaked out to the press. First of
all, it’s illegal. These are classified and
certified meetings and reports,’ Trump said
during a press conference at Trump Tower
– his first since getting elected.
'Somebody’s leaking them out,’ Trump
said, after inveighing against leaks
generally.
‘So I said, "Maybe it’s my office. Maybe my
office." Because I’ve got a lot of people …
Maybe it’s them?’
‘What I did, is I said I won’t tell anyone. I’m
going to have a meeting, and I won’t tell
anybody about my meeting with
intelligence,’ Trump continued.

Then he revealed the details of the stealthy sting he says he He even shielded one of his closest aides from word of the
conducted on the nation’s senior spooks. meeting.

‘I’ll tell you what does happen. I have many ‘Nobody knew – not even Rhona, my
meetings with intelligence. And every time I executive assistant for years. She didn’t
meet, people are reading about it,' Trump know – I didn’t tell her. Nobody knew,’
complained, possibly referencing reports Trump continued – drawing laughter from
on his classified briefings, which he has collected family members and staff.
chosen not to receive daily.
Having set the trap, Trump says the word leaked anyway.

‘The meeting was held. They left, and

immediately the word got out that I had a
meeting. So, I don’t want that. It’s very
unfair to the country. It’s very unfair to our
country what’s happening,’ he said.

83
 President-elect Donald Trump conducted the sting after growing
frustrated that word of his classified briefings were leaking. Pictured
are FBI Director James Comey, Director of National Intelligence
James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan (L-R) testifying
before the Senate Intelligence Committee

President-elect Donald Trump blasted 'phony stuff' contained in a

dirt dossier against him that was released and blasted whoever
leaked it – mentioning the intelligence agencies

OUT OF THE LOOP:

Trump says he didn't even tell his executive assistant, Rhona Graff

Thomas Barrett, chief of media relations for the Director

of National Intelligence, declined to comment on the
substance of Trump's alleged sting.
Degrading acts in bed used by president: The extraordinary - and
entirely unverified - allegations that Donald Trump ordered
prostitutes to commit degrading sex acts in the Ritz-Carlton in 'I’m sorry, we have nothing to offer on this
Moscow are contained in a dossier drawn up by a former British spy
matter,' he told DailyMail.com.

As president-elect, Trump is entitled to a daily briefing of

the 'crown jewels' of the intelligence community. The
briefings typically are conducted by high level intelligence
officers.

On Friday, he got a briefing that included James Clapper,

the Director of National Intelligence and other top
intelligence officials.

Trump blasted the intelligence community at his press At his Wednesday press conference, he went after the
briefing, saying it was behind the leak of a dossier of intelligence community as being behind the leak of a dirty
information about him, but without revealing evidence dossier of material alleging the Russians had

84
compromising information on him, saying it would be a
'blot' on the record if true.
'Who knows, it may be the intelligence
agencies – which would be a tremendous
blot of their record if they did that,' Trump
said, in just his latest shot at the
intelligence community.
'A thing like that should have never been
written … and it certainly should never
have been released,' Trump continued.

The office of Director of Intelligence James Clapper

declined to comment on Trump's purported sting operation

He blasted those who published it, but in a twist,

complimented outlets which stayed away from the claims.

'They looked at that nonsense that was

released by maybe the intelligence
agencies,' Trump said, referencing a dirt
dossier against him.
.

85
 Dead Giveaway The 35 Page Dossier Was A Hoax? The
British Don't Use "Confidential," They Use "Official"
By Zeropointnow
Jan 11, 2017 7:35 PM
The identity of the British intelligence officer responsible
for preparing and delivering the now infamous 35 page
hoax has been revealed as Christopher Steele, courtesy of
the Wall St. Journal. If you want to dig into his profile,
click here.
As people piece together this rapidly unfolding quagmire -
which will be in the history books, it's important to address
as many facets as possible in order to avoid perpetuating
#FakeNews. As Oliver Stone said, more or less, the MSM
is biased - and alternative news has the real deal, so let's
discuss.
A friend pointed this out earlier:
86
--------------------
It has come out that the dossier and supporting
documentation were fabricated by an anonymous 4Chan
user, who sent the hoax to a RINO named Rick Wilson
back in the Fall of last year. Rick Wilson is (in)famous for
his description of Trump supporters as “single white males
who masturbate to anime”. The 4Chan user wanted to
embarrass Rick Wilson, who apparently tried to shop the
fabrication to MSM without success (cuz they couldn’t
“source” it, given that the entire documentation is a fake).
The alleged origination of a British agent as the source can
be considered a “trap for the unwary,” which would easily
demonstrate the documentation was an obvious forgery
because the UK does not use the “Confidential”
designation, although US intelligence agencies do. In the
US, classified information is designated as “Confidential”,
“Secret” and “Top Secret” (along with a whole host of
other designations for more highly sensitive information
such as nuclear weapons designs). The British use
“Official”, “Secret” and “Top Secret”. Anyone who
checked on the story would instantly recognize this defect
if they knew (or discovered) anything about British
classification schemes, but if someone didn’t check they’d
simply assume the British uses the same classification
designations as the US.
[let's take a look]
US Designations:
UK Designations

HOAX Dossier:

Apparently, Wilson also sent the falsified documentation

to the CIA and they may, or may not have, bought it. The
CIA subsequently “leaked” it to various news agencies,
and both CNN and Buzz Feed bought the CIA leak. The
CIA also admitted to briefing both Obama & Trump on the
false documentation, but now claim they only cited it as an
example of “disinformation” that’s floating around out
there. Seemingly, whomever at the CIA leaked this story
and its documentation to CNN and Buzz Feed didn’t
identify it as “disinformation”. For extra brownie points
McCain claims he received a classified briefing on the bed
wetting episode in December and asked FBI’s head Comey
to investigate! It should be obvious McCain would not
have done so had the CIA had told him the information
was known to be fake.

--------------------

87
Now, it's possible that Steele - an ex-UK intelligence
officer in private practice, simply used the US designation
for the convenience of US intel (or to mask the
origination) - BUT, we're also talking about the same guy
who bought the #GoldenShower story that several
journalists and news outlets wouldn't touch.
So, by the transitive properties of "the guy who bought the
4chan hoax," I think we can assume Steele would have
defaulted to a career-long habit of using the UK
designation on this 35 page dossier he cobbled together.
On the other side of the pond, what are we left to assume?
Let's ignore the classification thing for a moment. For one,
the CIA could have easily looked into Michael Cohen's
travel records (the Trump lawyer the dossier accuses of
going to Prague to meet with Russians) and ruled that out -
immediately discrediting the document. Second, Trump is
apparently a bit of a germaphobe. I don't blame him,
people are filthy. Shouldn't the CIA know something that
obvious about such a well known figure?

We are left to conclude: What say you?

- The CIA figured out this was a hoax and just let McCain,
CNN, and Buzzfeed make McAss. That's an interesting
conversation, if so.

- The CIA didn't know - as in, nobody who handled this

document knew or checked into why a doc from a Brit
would have US classification markings, or the Prague visit,
or Golden Showers. A frightening thought.

- Steele didn't prepare the report.

88
 Chuck Todd Excoriates Buzzfeed's Editor In Chief:
'YOU PUBLISHED FAKE NEWS'
By The_Real_Fly
Jan 11, 2017 11:48 PM

Democrat shill, Chuck Todd, cannibalized the liberal

media tonight by ripping into the Editor in Chief of
Buzzfeed, Ben Smith, for publishing a 35 page dossier of
laughable content, such as germaphobe Trump having
Russian hookers urinate on him, or an irate Donald yelling
at Ivanka to respond to her mother, whilst devouring a
plate of chicken tenders, saying that if she didn't her
Mother would perish in a horrible accident.

Over the past day, all of the actors involved in leaking the
'dossier' to the public have been discredited and humiliated
-- from John McCain to the CIA and of course to the
Buzzfeed reporter, Rick "I'm a spy" Wilson -- who
published the trite piece of offal -- hoping it would derail
Trump's presidency and give solace to the cadre of his
fellow Never Trumpsters, who've been waiting for the
opportunity to discredit and rid themselves of his
orangeness.

Unfortunately, for him and his ilk, there are consequences

to publishing lies about the President elect of the United
States, especially when done in a manner that garnered
world wide exposure, galvanizing all of the snowflakes to
unite and form into a maniacal Snow Demon set out to
devour and crush President elect Donald J. Trump.

Once again, The Donald has proved to be resilient,

admonishing his enemies , taking a flame thrower to them
-- effectively reducing them to a small, sad, pond of liberal
misery to be pissed upon whenever he's in the mood for
golden showers.

Todd eats Smith.

89
 CNN, BuzzFeed Publish ‘Golden Shower’ Rumors,
Other Media Outlets Mock Them
© AP Photo/ Andy Kropa US 23:36 11.01.2017(updated 06:13 12.01.2017)

“At first this was something you saw

restricted to either partisan blogs and
spurious ‘news’ sites on one end of the
spectrum, and the billion dollar cable news
giants Fox and CNN on the other. But due
to new business models and the need to
publish first, jump on the viral bandwagon,
anything that is salacious and click/eyebait
is far game,”

Chambers told Sputnik News. Chambers explained that

BuzzFeed is subject to the same ethics standards as other
Despite being shopped around the DC journalism scene,
outlets, and therefore should not have published the
only CNN and BuzzFeed fell for the fake report on Donald
document in the manner in which they did.
Trump’s activities in Russia, and now they are being
slammed by other outlets for peddling the same “fake
“Buzzfeed is subject to the same ethics
news” that they accuse alternative media of spreading.
standards as any larger outlet. You don't
have to be balanced, but you must (1) be
In an article published on Wednesday in the New York
fair (2) substantiate things you are
Times, the paper took BuzzFeed to task on journalistic
presenting as fact to best extent you can. If
ethics, regarding their publication of the 35-page dossier.
you can't do that confirmation reasonably,
then you either don't publish it, or to hedge
“BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its and explain the context, and give the
immediate political ramifications for a subject of what might be wrong, or gossip
president-elect who is to be inaugurated in the chance to slam it.”
10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling
debate about the role and credibility of the
Following the release of the sloppy “report,” many
traditional media in today’s frenetic,
journalists took to Twitter to say that they too had been
polarized information age,” the Times
offered the story, but had declined as they could not
reported.
confirm its validity.
The paper of record then flat out accuses CNN and
BuzzFeed of stooping to the level of the so-called “fake
news.”

“Of particular interest was the use of

unsubstantiated information from
anonymous sources, a practice that fueled
some of the so-called fake news — false
rumors passed off as legitimate journalism
— that proliferated during the presidential
election,” the report continued. Lawfare, a blog, claimed that they have been in possession
of the document for “a couple of weeks,” but opted not to
Georgetown University journalism professor Christopher publish as there was no proof.
Chambers has described the BuzzFeed story as a
“metaphor for the race to the bottom” in American
journalism.

90

David Corn of Mother Jones referenced the dossier as far
back as October 2016, but chose not to publish the
contents of the report as he could not confirm the details
contained within it.
Other highly-respected journalists weighed in on the lack
of ethics.
“An anonymous person, claiming to be an
ex-British intel agent & working as a Dem
oppo researcher, said anonymous people
told him things,” award-winning journalist
Glenn Greenwald tweeted.
Brad Heath, an investigative reporter for USA Today
responded to the story, and the note contained within that
there is serious reason to doubt the allegations, and that
they had not been verified.
“Not how journalism works: Here’s a thing
that might or might not be true, without
supporting evidence; decide for yourself if
it's legit,” Heath tweeted.
.
91
Even the Huffington Post, openly hostile toward the
President-elect now and throughout the election season,
noted that
“there’s still no compelling public evidence
that the claims are true.”
During a Wednesday morning news conference, both the
incoming White House press secretary and
communications director Sean Spicer, as well as President-
elect Trump, slammed the report and the publications that
released it.
“The fact that BuzzFeed and CNN made
the decision to run with this
unsubstantiated claim is a sad and pathetic
attempt to get clicks. The report is not an
intelligence report, plain and simple,”
Spicer said.
Chambers has an explanation as to why some outlets
choose to run with unsubstantiated stories, and it all comes
down to ratings.
“But now everyone in corporate mass
media in America has decided that since
various outlets and people who deal on
bullhorn gossip and innuendo are beating
the legacy big boys in ratings. So to feed
their business models and their egos they
feel they must emulate it. Or function as
bullhorns themselves rather than the
‘watchdogs’ the press should be. That's the
yin and yang of our First Amendment:
protection in return for responsibility,”
Chambers told Sputnik News. “Soon
American may have neither.”
 Ivanka Trump Shifting Gears, Heading To Washington
She Steps Down In 'Formal Leave Of Absence' From
Positions At Trump Organization
By Associated Press
January 11, 2017 AT 6:06 PM Last Updated: January 12, 2017 11:23 Am
Ivanka Trump walks through the lobby of Trump Tower in New
York City on Nov. 11, 2016. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
DES MOINES, Iowa—Ivanka Trump plans to step aside
from her executive roles at the Trump Organization and
her lifestyle brand, but says she is confident both
businesses will continue to “thrive.”
In a post on her Facebook page Wednesday, Ivanka Trump
said she would take a “formal leave of absence” from her
executive positions at the Trump Organization and her
lifestyle brand—which offers shoes, clothes and messages
of female empowerment.
President-elect Donald Trump said Wednesday that he
would put control of his company in the hands of his sons
and an executive, put his business assets in a trust and take
other steps to isolate himself from his business.
Ivanka Trump said her company will be run by the current
president and a board of trustees. For now, she is not
taking a role in her father’s administration, but her
husband Jared Kushner will serve as a senior advisor.
As the family moves to Washington, Ivanka Trump said
she will be focused on getting her three children settled.
But she also stressed her ongoing interest in issues
affecting women and girls and said she would seek to
determine the “most impactful and appropriate ways for
me to serve our country.”
The Trump team has said Ivanka Trump will divest some
assets and will receive fixed payments rather than a share
.
92
of the profits from the Trump Organization. She will also
not be involved in the company’s Washington hotel. No
details have been released on her financial arrangement
with the lifestyle brand.
Transition officials also said Kushner will recuse himself
from any matters impacting the Trump Organization.
Richard Painter, who served as chief White House ethics
counselor for President George W. Bush, said separation
will be key because
“all of her assets and income are
attributable to him.”
Painter added that if Ivanka Trump continues to have a
financial stake in her business, then Kushner must recuse
himself from areas that impact it, like foreign trade.
Ivanka Trump’s independent lifestyle brand promotes her
image as a successful working mother and partners with
companies to make the branded blush pink dresses and
trendy booties offered in department stores.
Just how successful the business will be without her
actively involved is not clear. Brand licensing expert
Michael Stone, chairman of the agency Beanstalk, said that
celebrity-driven brands succeed best when consumers
aspire to be like the personality and believe the person is
involved with the developing the products.
“I don’t know if just being a role model is
enough to drive a product brand,” he said.
He also noted that it takes time to develop a personal brand
to the point that it survives without the person involved,
like with Paul Newman’s Newman’s Own products or
Perry Ellis fashion. While Ivanka Trump has been
successful, she does not have that kind of longevity in the
marketplace.
“Is it going to fail completely, I doubt it,”
said Stone. “But will it have the (same)
growth curve?”
 Sen. McCain Exposed As Traitor,
Gave Blackmail Hoax Dossier To FBI
Youtuber And Analyst Mark Dice Breaks It Down
By Staff Writer -
01.12.2017 @10:39 AM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — War monger and a traitor to the
American people Sen. John McCain admits that he is the
one that gave the 35-page fake dossier recently linked by
BuzzFeed to the F.B.I. back in December.
McCain said that he was “unable to make a judgment” of
the dossier’s accuracy so he decided to turn over the fake
report to the F.B.I. for a more thorough investigation.
Youtuber Mark Dice who posted his analysis on the
subject said that it’s likely these fake documents were
mere ‘Clinton Campaign opposition research.’
Donald Trump called out CNN at a press conference
Wednesday over the matter as previously reported by
Intellihub.

93
 Russian ‘Cyberattacking’ –
When The Most Flagrant Lie Becomes The Truth
Alliances May Form And Become Partners, If They So Choose.
– Mr. Trump Knows It.
By Peter Koenig
January 12, 2017
Russian ‘Hacking’ and tilting the American elections in
favor of Donald Trump’s is one of the most flagrant lies
the White House has thrown around the world. Yet, Mr.
Obama is desperate to make the American people and the
word believe it did actually happen.
As Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda
Minister, said some 70 years ago, and
many before and after him, “If you
repeat a lie often enough, it becomes
the truth”.
President Obama with John O. Brennan , the C.I.A’s Director
In a last-ditch effort, Mr. Obama ordered the nation’s top
intelligence (sic) agencies to fabricate a 25-page report,
‘proving’ that Vladimir Putin himself directed a
cyberattack ‘aiming at denying Hillary Clinton the
94
Presidency’. Thus, stated by the New York Times,
Washington’s key lie spreading mouthpiece – the ultimate
untruth is hammered down. It actually contradicts these
agencies’ – CIA, NSA, FBI et al – earlier declarations,
saying there was no evidence of Russian hacking. Now
they have to come forward with a testimony to the
contrary, that Russia, under Mr. Putin’s command hacked
the US to steal from Hillary the election.
What a primitive sham, if there was ever one! An
attempt at outright brainwashing US citizens and peoples
around the world. There were much more sophisticated
means at play than cyber-attacks, namely mind
manipulation by a small British data analysis firm, called
Cambridge Analytica, hired by Trump’s campaign team –
not to hack – but to analyze specific target groups’ mind
sets, specifically in swing states, to influence their votes by
highly sophisticated and targeted propaganda, either in
favor of Trump or against Hillary (see also
http://thesaker.is/mind-manipulations-to-influence-
election-results/).
The U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) consists of 16
agencies/organizations and one overarching entity, the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence.
With so much power and authority, like those attributed to
top intelligence agencies, proclaiming that President Putin
directed cyberattacks against ‘fair and democratic US
election’ – who would not believe it? – That’s heavy stuff.
You would think that such agencies must have serious
sources and made serious analyses to come unanimously to
the same results: Russia is guilty. It makes you forget or at
best confused in the light of their conclusion to the
contrary before.
So, all the doubters around the globe – reset your thinking,
the CIA says so – and they are most likely helped by their
pal in crime, Mossad, but that nobody is supposed to
know. Of course, it’s all baloney, as were previous
assertions to this effect. But as it is repeated at nauseatum
by Obama himself (what an authority!), by the MSM liar-
in-chief, the NYT, and now confirmed by the most
trustworthy intelligence agencies in the world, this
monstrous lie is supposed to become the truth.
—–
Let’s just pause for a moment. Who is talking?
Consider this: In how many elections around the globe
did the US interfere? – Including in Russia
(unsuccessfully) in the 2012 Presidential elections. They
are countless, from Europe, to Africa, to Asia, to Latin
America. Consider all the US meddling in foreign ballots,
and much worse – in ‘regime change’, and with ultimately
killing the ‘inconvenient’ candidate. Democracy, what was
left of it, has been gradually eviscerated throughout the
world by Washington and its handlers.
CIA has interfered with over 81 foreign elections in the past century
No, Mr. Putin did not interfere in the US elections, not
now, not ever. At best, he would have only smiled how
the candidates jumped at each other’s throats like fighting
cocks, to demolish one another.
What is the purpose behind this new slander? It is most
likely three-fold. First, it attempts to destabilize the
Trump camp. The President-elect should enter his
Presidency – if he is allowed to – on 20 January, under a
cloud of treason. He has always said, he would like to
work peacefully with Russia as a partner not an enemy –
which, under the ‘hacking’ circumstances is being looked
at as treason, an act that could call for impeachment as of
day one of his Presidency; and second, to once again
demonize and denigrate Mr. Putin and Russia, thereby
further increasing justification for continuing Cold War II
and for unrelentingly encircling of Russia. Eventually, the
world may be duped to the point that they welcome
Washington starting WWIII. At least that’s the plan. The
third world war within 100 years that would devastate, first
Europe, as did the previous two, then the entire world. And
third, this lie is casting a smokescreen over Hillary’s war
crimes, e-mails – and the Clinton Foundation fraud.
95
Remember, Washington needs constant
enemies to ratify constantly new wars
and conflicts, a never-ending spiral, in
order for its ailing, fatally sick economy
to survive. Without war, the US dollar
hegemony would collapse.
Eventually it will. It’s just a question of how much longer
the world buys the American lies and deceptions, and goes
along with all the wars and mass- killings. An estimated 12
to 15 million people have been murdered since 9/11, either
directly through US / NATO wars, or indirectly through
US proxy, mercenary-led conflicts and interventions.
The Plan for a New American Century (PNAC), the design
of which has started shortly after WWII by Washington’s
Zionist-led think tanks (sic), the very same that make US
foreign policy, is well alive and advancing. Initially called
“Pax Americana” – an allegory to “Pax Romana”,
portraying the 300 bloodiest years of the Roman Empire,
in the early nineties, the plan was renamed to the less
revealing PNAC. The objectives remain the same – Full
Spectrum Dominance – no holds barred, killing and
devastating without scruples whatever dares to stand in the
way. That’s what’s happening today.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) and Russian President Vladimir
Putin sign a joint statement pledging cooperation in all fields.
Russia and China, the two last serious vestiges for the
Zionist-Anglo empire to succeed, stand in the way. So,
they must be crushed. If this happens with Washington’s
duped allies and vassals consent, all the better. Hence, the
ever more flagrant lies and demonization of Washington-
made enemies. This is typical for a collapsing hegemon.
Then, there is another phenomenon complicating
matters. As already pointed out before by Michel
Chossudovsky, The Saker, and others, the Deep State,
those who pull the strings on leaders around the globe, is
divided. These elusive elitists don’t pull on the same
string. There are those leaning towards the lucrative war
industry in support of Hillary-type neocon ideologues, the
ones who want to dominate by sheer force, where massive
slaughter is but a by-product; and then, there are those
favoring the subtler dominance by Zionist-US-led banking,
using the fraudulent dollar-based monetary system to
subdue countries and entire continents by debt. The latter
seems to be more Mr. Trump’s business style, using the
world for wheeling and dealing in order to make America
Great again, and foremost, to keep Donald Trump’s own
riches flourishing. His various Wall Street appointments
for key cabinet and advisory positions seem to lean in that
direction.
Financial Times:Trump’s key economic picks | Opinion
The war monger strategists have hired
the old hand in war crimes, Henry
Kissinger, to advise Trump on dividing
to conquer.
96
The Art of Destruction
One of the first rather primitive deeds would be breaking
the Russia-China coalition to weaken the powerful eastern
alliance, SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization), as
well as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South
Africa), making them and their satellite nations more
vulnerable to military aggressions – and also to prevent
them from veering off the dollar course. No doubt, neither
Mr. Putin, or Mr. Xi will fall for this ploy.
Did Mr. Trump buy the soaped-up lie on Russian
‘hacking’ by the ‘intelligence agencies’? – Though he
apparently did say, he would reconsider, it is highly
doubtful that he would swallow this toxic bait.
Even if he wants to run the United States like a business,
rather than a peoples’ democracy, he needs Russia and
China, as partners, not as enemies. The vessel of economic
and military power is turning, gradually but steadily and
without fail, from the West to the East.
The New Future over the next perhaps several hundred
years is in the East. Just think of the monumental New Silk
Road, also called the OBOR – One Belt, One Road,
initiated by China’s President Xi Jinping. It has already
been launched and includes massive transportation,
infrastructure, industrial and high-tech research and
development investments, creating millions of jobs – and
will very likely prosper under a new dollar-delinked
monetary system, based on true socioeconomic output of
the region.
Alliances may form and become partners, if they so
choose. – Mr. Trump knows it.
 Could Trump Have Been
Caught In A Classic “Honey Trap”?
By David Macaray
January 12, 2017
Finally, some fun. Finally, something to off set the angst,
the fear, the crushing dread of a Trump presidency. Of
course, nothing has been verified as yet (and very likely
never will be), but given the Soviet Union’s history of
espionage, and Trump’s notorious impetuosity, the first
reports to leak out have proven to be tantalizingly
believable.
Basically, the story going around is that the Russians have
compromised Donald Trump. They did it by tricking him
into committing some fairly bizarre sexual indiscretions,
recording them on film (their standard Cold War modus
operandi), and filing them away for future use, which is to
say, for blackmail purposes.
All of this is said to have occurred while Trump was in
Moscow as part of the 2013 Miss Universe contest. What
makes the story so credible—besides men being men,
Trump being Trump, and the FBS being the FBS—is the
fact that using women as leverage (the “honey trap”) goes
back to before Mata Hari. In fact, it can be traced all the
way back to the Bible, where Delilah is said to have
betrayed Samson to the Philistines.
In an early TV interview, spy writer John Le Carre
explained how a garden variety honey trap = was
conducted. The KGB (today’s FBS) would set their sights
on a married, highly-placed embassy or consulate official,
and then go to work. It didn’t have to be an American
embassy or consulate; it could be any country whose
security the USSR wished to breach.
The operatives would follow the target for several weeks,
learn his habits and routine, get a feel for him. They would
then arrange to have an attractive woman ingratiate herself.
If the honey trap worked according to plan, the woman
would eventually seduce the man. The couple would
.
97
engage in sex in a hotel room designated by the KGB, a
room already set up with video equipment.
The official would later be shown graphic photographs of
the tryst, and be told that unless he cooperated by
betraying his country, the pictures would be shown to
everyone—his wife, his children, his parents, his church,
his Boy Scout troop, his bowling league, et al—and his life
would be effectively ruined.
Not only was the honey trap a very inexpensive and
uncomplicated espionage device, it had the additional
virtue of being fairly reliable. After all, it was based on the
male homo sapiens instinctual susceptibility to naked lust.
But before anyone turns all self-righteous and anti-
Russian, let’s be clear as to how big-time espionage is
conducted. It’s a dirty business. Our own CIA has used
variations of this insidious technique for decades.
In the 1950s, the CIA began staking out gay bars and
known haunts in Washington D.C. and New York,
shadowing Soviet homosexuals, photographing them, and
threatening them with exposure if they did not become
“double agents.” Seymour Hersh claimed that a Soviet
embassy employee, faced with the prospect of either being
“outed” or forced to betray his country, chose to commit
suicide.
Again, maybe this whole honey trap scenario involving
Trump is as phony as every other fake news story on the
Internet. When it comes to sex scandals, it’s not hard to
grab the public’s attention. Still, given the clandestine
community’s sordid history of mischief, and their
obsession with obtaining “leverage,” why on God’s earth
would they NOT do it if they had the means?
 Trump Blasts CNN's "FAKE NEWS",
Says "Credibility Will Soon Be Gone!"
by Tyler Durden
Jan 12, 2017 9:33 AM

One day after totally shutting down CNN's Jim Acosta at

his first press conference as President-elect, Trump
continues to hammer CNN tweeting that they're

"in a total meltdown with their FAKE

NEWS because their ratings are tanking
since election and their credibility will
soon be gone!"

***

For those who missed it, here are the epic exchanges from
yesterday.

In an epic (mutual) trolling between president-elect Trump

Of course this is likely, at least in part, a reaction to a clash
that occured last night between CNN's Anderson Cooper
and Kellyanne Conway in which Cooper, despite his
network's clear reporting errors, said
"I think you guys are feeling the heat.
[Our report] was actually backed up by
not only by multiple sources but other
news agencies."
Of course, Conway was quick to shut down Cooper's
deflection:
“What heat do we feel? That you’ve got
this raw information, this complete
ridiculous fake news?”
“I know CNN must be feeling the heat
today of having a headline yesterday at
around 6:30 p.m. that said, quote, ‘Intel
chiefs presented Trump with
information that Russia had information
to compromise him. That is just false.”
“It has not been backed up by credible
news sources. Actually, it’s just fake, it’s
not even news, I can’t even use ‘news’
for it.”
on one hand and BuzzFeed and CNN, on the other, the two
media organizations which issued yesterday's unsub-
stantiated report about Russia having compromising
information on the president-elect, Trump first addressed
the question of why he referred to Nazi Germany, saying it
is "disgraceful" that intelligence communities would allow
the release of any information.
"That's something Nazi Germany would
have done and did do," he says.
He then unleashed on Buzzfeed which alone published the
35-page memo behind the Russian allegations, saying
"Buzzfeed which is a failing pile of
garbage... will suffer the consequences"
And then, in an even more stunning episode, Trump
slammed CNN reporter Jim Acosta, who he also called out
during the presser over their report on a two-page synopsis
they claim was presented to Trump.
With Trump looking to call on other reporters, Jim Acosta
yelled out, “Since you are attacking us, can you give us a
question?”
“Not you,” Trump said. “Your organization
is terrible!”

98
Acosta pressed on,

“You are attacking our news organization,

can you give us a chance to ask a
question, sir?” Trump countered by telling
him “don’t be rude.”
“I’m not going to give you a question,”
Trump responded. “Don't be rude. I’m
not going to give you a question. You
are fake news!” Trump also had some "kind words" for the BBC:

Trump responded, before calling on a reporter from

Breitbart.

***

These exchanges followed an initial statement by Trump

A snubbed Jim Acosta then tweeted the following: spokesman Sean Spicer who said that

"Fortunately ABC's Cecilia Vega asked my
question about whether any Trump
associates contacted Russians. Trump said
no."
"for all the talk lately about 'fake news,' this
political witch hunt by some in the
media...is frankly shameful & disgraceful....
Highly irresponsible for a left-wing blog... to
drop highly salacious and flat out false
information on the Internet."

Following this, we expect the war between Trump and the

media in general, or at least CNN in particular, to reach
biblical proportions.
.

99
 Identity Of "Former Intelligence Officer" Who Prepared
The Trump Dossier, Has Been Revealed
by Tyler Durden
Jan 12, 2017 5:30 AM
While we learned earlier that John McCain was
responsible for handing over the 35-page "dossier" of
compromising, if arguably fake, revelations about Trump's
connections to Russia over to the FBI, the identity of the
actual creator, who was said to be an ex-British
intelligence service, remained a mystery.
No longer.
Courtesy of the WSJ, we now know his name: the former
MI-6 officer, now working for a private security-and-
investigations firm "who produced the dossier of
unverified allegations about President-elect Donald
Trump’s activities and connections in Russia" is
Christopher Steele, a director of London-based Orbis
Business Intelligence.... and before readers google him,
beware, there is a male gay porn star with the same name,
who may or may not be into "golden showers."
The real Chris Steele is profiled below, courtesy of
LinkedIn.
Steele, 52 years old, is one of two directors of Orbis, along
with Christopher Burrows, 58.
Burrows, reached at his home outside London on
Wednesday, said he wouldn’t “confirm or deny” that Orbis
had produced the report. A neighbor of Mr. Steele’s said
Mr. Steele said he would be away for a few days. In
previous weeks Mr. Steele has declined repeated requests
for interviews through an intermediary, who said the
subject was “too hot.”
According to Steele's LinkedIn profile, at least before he
scrubbed it, he was a counselor in the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office, with foreign postings in Brussels
and New Delhi in the 2000s. The Foreign Office declined
to comment to the WSJ. Furthermore, the LinkedIn profile
for Mr. Steele doesn’t give specifics about his career,
however notes that intelligence officers often use
diplomatic postings as cover for their espionage activities.
That, or they are dumb enough to actually reveal where
they are stationed.
Some more details courtesy of the WSJ:
100
Orbis Business Intelligence was formed in 2009 by former
British intelligence professionals, it says on its website.
U.K. corporate records say Orbis is owned by another
company that in turn is jointly owned by Messrs. Steele
and Burrows. It occupies offices in an ornate building
overlooking Grosvenor Gardens in London’s high-end
Belgravia neighborhood.
The firm relies on a “global network” of experts and
business leaders, provides clients with strategic advice,
mounts “intelligence-gathering operations” and conducts
“complex, often cross-border investigations,” its website
says.
The dossier consists of a series of unsigned memos that
appear to have been written between June and December
2016. Beyond creating the document, Mr. Steele also came
up with a plan to get the information to law-enforcement
officials in the U.S. and Europe, including the F.B.I.,
according to a person familiar with the matter.
The WSJ adds that "the author of the report had a good
reputation in the intelligence world and was stationed in
Russia for years, said John Sipher, who retired in 2014
after 28 years in the CIA’s clandestine service, where he
specialized in Russia and counterintelligence."
Private-intelligence firms like Orbis have a growing
presence. Major corporations use them to conduct due
diligence on potential business partners in risky areas, but
quality control can be loose when it comes to high-level
political intrigue, according to executives of private
intelligence companies. It appears they are also used to
create smear campaigns (for lots of money one assumes)
targeting potential presidential candidates, not to mention
president-elects
As for the fundamental question, are the memos in the
Trump dossier real, here is the answer:
Andrew Wordsworth, co-founder of London-based
investigations firm Raedas, who often works on Russian
issues, said the memos in the Trump dossier were “not
convincing at all.”“It’s just way too good,” he said. “If
the head of the CIA were to declare he got information
of this quality, you wouldn’t believe it.”Mr. Wordsworth
said it wouldn’t make sense for Russian intelligence
officials to expose state secrets to an ex- former MI-6
officer. “Russians believe once you are an agent, you’re an
agent forever,” he said.

Yes, a rational person wouldn't believe it, but BuzzFeed

and other fake news outlets certainly would.

101
 .
BREAKING: Trump Says Head Of US Intel Admitted To
Him Russia Report Is ‘Made Up, Phony Facts’
Claire Bernish
January 12, 2017
BuzzFeed faced ridicule and biting criticism after
publishing a flimsy and unsubstantiated dossier linking
President-elect Donald Trump with the Russian
government and cataloguing putatively lewd behavior —
without any solid evidence or investigation of the startling
accusations.
Now, it appears the decision may be even more foolhardy
than it first seemed, as Trump wrote in his first tweet of the
day:
“James Clapper called me yesterday to
denounce the false and fictitious report
that was illegally circulated. Made up,
phony facts.Too bad!”
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
January 12, 2017
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper did,
indeed, discuss the contentious report with the president-
elect on Wednesday evening, and released a press
statement, in essence, condemning mainstream media’s
careless handling of unsubstantiated and sensitive
information:
“This evening, I had the opportunity to
speak with President-elect Donald Trump
to discuss recent media reports about our
briefing last Friday. I expressed my
profound dismay at the leaks that have
been appearing in the press, and we both
agreed that they are extremely corrosive
and damaging to our national security.
“We also discussed the private security
company document, which was widely
circulated in recent months among the
media, members of Congress and
Congressional staff even before the IC
became aware of it. I emphasized that
this document is not a U.S. Intelligence
Community product and that I do not
believe the leaks came from within the IC.
The IC has not made any judgment that
the information in this document is
reliable, and we did not rely upon it in
102
any way for our conclusions. However,
part of our obligation is to ensure that
policymakers are provided with the fullest
possible picture of any matters that might
affect national security.”
Although Clapper’s statement doesn’t exactly denounce
the dossier as “phony facts,” his criticism and the fact
intelligence officials have not deemed it “reliable” erode
even further BuzzFeed’s feckless and inexplicable choice
to run the report.
CNN first alluded to the allegations contained in the
dossier, but did not provide the actual pages — but
BuzzFeed somehow took that as a cue to print the dossier
in full, despite editor-in-chief Ben Smith publicly doubting
whether the ruinous information was factual.
Mainstream media outlets rushed to ride the viral wave of
controversy sparked by BuzzFeed’s report, though none of
the rest provided the actual document. According to the
corporate media, this dossier — an unofficial, 35-page
compilation of alleged tawdry acts and suggestions Trump
maintained communication with Russian government
throughout the election — had been produced by a former
British intelligence officer and thus must be at least
somewhat legitimate.
However, the audacious and abrupt rush to publish the
document without a thorough investigation to vet the
contents quickly unraveled as the corporate press — who
had essentially done as much damage as BuzzFeed by
reporting the story without providing the document for the
public to evaluate — began lobbing Fake News
accusations at each other.
As this study in irony and pitfalls of irresponsible
journalism unfolded, Trump held a press conference, his
first of the year, to attempt damage control, calling
mainstream media’s reporting of “false” and “fake”
information “a disgrace.”
That press conference furthered the unseemliness of the
day’s events, and was most aptly described by Zero Hedge
as
 “an epic (mutual) trolling between “You are attacking our news organization,
president-elect Trump on one hand and can you give us a chance to ask a
BuzzFeed and CNN, on the other.” question, sir?”
“Don’t be rude,” Trump retorted. “I’m not
Understandably riled by the brash departure by the press going to give you a question.”
from journalism to articles befitting a tabloid, Trump
taunted,
Acosta continued loudly pressing to be granted a question,
but Trump sharply rebuked,
“Buzzfeed, which is a failing pile of
garbage … will suffer the consequences,
“Don’t be rude. No, I’m not going to give you a question.
and they already are.”
You are fake news!”

CNN reporter Jim Acosta, however, bore the brunt of the

Without the backing of the U.S. Intelligence Community
president-elect’s rage over the salacious allegations, after
or the findings of its own investigations of the allegations
he repeatedly failed to get Trump’s attention and finally
concerning the incoming president, CNN and BuzzFeed —
blurted out,
and the New York Times, Washington Post and others who
followed suit — did, indeed, publish the exact Fake News
“Since you are attacking us, can you give all those same outlets have been condemning for months.
us a question?”
“Not you,” Trump replied. “Your Now, the head of U.S. Intelligence has essentially said the
organization is terrible!” same. However you characterize the ill-considered choice
to print baseless accusations, it’s now clear the corporate
Unsatisfied, Acosta pressed further, media can no longer be considered a reliable source.

103
 Donald Trump’s Fake News Conference
By Mel Gurtov
January 12, 2017
The media waited with bated breath for Donald Trump’s
first news conference in 167 days. But I’m sure many
journalists knew what was coming: a show, orchestrated
by The Apprentice executive director so as to reveal
precisely nothing but used instead to revile his critics.
Vladimir Putin couldn’t have done better.
Trump was true to form, and character: He spent very little
time answering (actually avoiding) questions, he brought
along a small crowd of flatterers to applaud his lines, he
had three people (his communications spokesman, his vice
president-elect, and his tax lawyer) stand in to defend him,
and he bragged about how many jobs he will create and
how he had turned down a $2 billion business opportunity
with Dubai.
Probably sometime early in his youth, Trump learned that
the best defense is to attack. He denounced two media
outlets (BuzzFeed and CNN) for daring to publish a report
about a questionable Russian dossier on him—the work of
an ex-British spy—that other media had decided not to
publish. Trump refused to allow the CNN representative to
ask a question, angrily saying “you are fake news.” But
that remains to be determined, for in fact the intelligence
people who briefed him and Obama think the dossier might
contain reliable information. Trump is compromised
enough by his kissy-kissy relationship with Putin—and if
there’s a shred of truth in the dossier, Trump will be in
jeopardy.
Trump attacked on other fronts as well. He once again
insisted Mexico will pay for a wall—“not a fence”—in one
way or another. He allowed that the Russians probably
were responsible for hacking the Democratic National
Committee; but once more he veered away from
acknowledging the intelligence finding that Putin himself
had ordered the hacking and that Putin’s aim was to help
his campaign and hurt Hillary Clinton’s. And his statement
.
104
that he had “nothing to do with Russia” is patently false.
As the Washington Post points out, Trump’s Russian
connections go back 30 years, mainly related to his pursuit
of real estate opportunities. Still to be determined is
whether or not Trump’s associates met with Russian
counterparts during and after the campaign, as the dossier
alleges.
Trump also tried to preempt further discussion of his
financial conflicts of interest by putting the Trump
Organization in the hands of his two sons. As various
ethics specialists in and out of government have pointed
out, that decision is no solution. As one of them said,
Trump will be in violation of the Constitution on the day
he takes office. He actually had the audacity to say that he
has every right to run both his organization and the
presidency—implying that we should be grateful for his
choice not to do so, as though we don’t already know that
he has every intention to remain in charge of his empire.
He again refused to release his tax returns, saying that only
the press wants him to do so. Trump’s attitude is clear: I’m
the president and I’ll do what I want; try to stop me.
In short, what did we learn from the press conference?
First, that Trump will be the same
blustering, haughty president that he was
on the campaign trail.
Second, that access to him will be
extremely limited and produce very little
news.
Third, that any news he dislikes will be
labeled fake, and the messenger will pay a
price.
Fourth, that Trump will completely
disregard ethical guidelines at home just as
he disregards them abroad.
 US Intelligence Has Nothing To Do With Memos
Compromising Trump, Clapper Says
© AP Photo/ Pablo Martinez Monsivais US 06:25 12.01.2017(Updated 06:35 12.01.2017)
US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has
stressed that the recently circulated documents
compromising US president-elect Donald Trump have
nothing to do with the US Intelligence Community.
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) – On Tuesday, CNN and
BuzzFeed reported on memos, compiled by an unnamed
former intelligence officer from the United Kingdom,
which allege that Trump has been groomed and supported
by Russian intelligence for at least five years.
"I emphasized that this document is not a
U.S. Intelligence Community product and
that I do not believe the leaks came from
within the IC. The IC has not made any
judgment that the information in this
document is reliable, and we did not rely
.
105
upon it in any way for our conclusions,"
Clapper said in a Wednesday statement,
after speaking with Trump.
The documents, which BuzzFeed admitted were
unsupported and which the CNN did not fully disclose due
to lack of independent corroboration, also alleged that
Russian intelligence had compromising material on Trump
related to his "unorthodox behavior" during a visit to
Russia.
The Kremlin said earlier that Russia does not engage in
collecting so-called compromising material on political
figures.
Clapper stressed on Wednesday that the reports
compromising Trump are "extremely corrosive and
damaging to our national security."
The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that
Christopher Steele, a former intelligence officer from the
United Kingdom, has been identified as the author of the
alleged Russian dossier on Trump. Steele currently heads
the private security and investigations firm Orbis Business
Intelligence.
 Trump: Head Of US Intel
"Denounced Fictitious, Illegally Circulated Report"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 12, 2017 10:01 AM
In his first tweet of the day, Donald Trump said at 7:23am
on Thursday that Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper had called him to effectively apologize and
"denounce" the "false and fictitious" report containing
numerous unverified allegations about the president-elect
and Russia.
"Made up, phony facts.Too bad!" Trump
tweeted.
Trump's victory lap followed a statement issued late on
Wednesday night from Clapper, in which the head of the
DNI said he had spoken to Trump to express his
"profound dismay at the leaks that have
been appearing in the press, and we both
agreed that they are extremely corrosive
and damaging to our national security."
In other words, the US intel agencies, having been
slammed by Trump for being "overly politicized", blinked.
Clapper's full statement:
This evening, I had the opportunity to
speak with President-elect Donald Trump
to discuss recent media reports about our
briefing last Friday. I expressed my
.
106
profound dismay at the leaks that have
been appearing in the press, and we both
agreed that they are extremely corrosive
and damaging to our national security.
We also discussed the private security
company document, which was widely
circulated in recent months among the
media, members of Congress and
Congressional staff even before the IC
became aware of it. I emphasized that this
document is not a U.S. Intelligence
Community product and that I do not
believe the leaks came from within the IC.
The IC has not made any judgment that the
information in this document is reliable, and
we did not rely upon it in any way for our
conclusions. However, part of our
obligation is to ensure that policymakers
are provided with the fullest possible
picture of any matters that might affect
national security.
President-elect Trump again affirmed his
appreciation for all the men and women
serving in the Intelligence Community, and
I assured him that the IC stands ready to
serve his Administration and the American
people.
The detente followed the decision by BuzzFeed to post the
controversial document, which was compiled by a former
British intelligence officer. It alleges Russia’s government
possesses compromising financial and personal
information about Trump. It also claims people close to
Trump kept in touch with Moscow during the 2016
presidential race. In response, Trump slammed BuzzFeed
as a "failing pail of garbage" in his first press conference
of the year.
 Outrage At BBC Claims Of SECOND Russian 'Dirty
Dossier' On Trump Amid Claims They Are Trying To
Derail His Presidency Before It Starts
 BBC claim that former MI6 spy 'not the only source' about Trump sex tape
 Paul Wood says ex-agent spoke of 'more than one tape' on 'more than one date'
 Tory MP accuses corporation of bias - others say they're in 'Get Trump mode'
 President-elect refused question from BBC journalist at press conference
By Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter and Matt Dathan, Political Correspondent For Mailonline
Published: 05:14 EST, 12 January 2017 | Updated: 17:07 EST, 12 January 2017

The BBC was under fire today after it claimed a second

'dirty dossier' on Donald Trump exists and was accused of
attaching too much credibility to the first one.

Foreign correspondent Paul Wood said last night that

former British spy Christopher Steele is not the only
person to say the Kremlin has covert footage related to his
sex life.

He said a security source told him of 'more

than one tape' on 'more than one date'.
'BBC News - there's another beauty'
Buzzfeed has been widely castigated - including by Trump
himself - over publishing the salacious claims even though But Mr. Wood said in a BBC blog last night:
they have been unverified.
'The former MI6 agent is not the only
Last night Mr. Trump barracked BBC International source for the claim about Russian
Correspondent Ian Pannell,telling the reporter to stand up kompromat on the president-elect.
when he tried to ask a question and then said: 'Back in August, a retired spy told me he
had been informed of its existence by "the
'BBC News - there's another beauty'. head of an East European intelligence
agency".

Last night Mr. Trump barracked BBC International Correspondent

Claims: Foreign correspondent Paul Wood said last night that Ian Pannell, pictured, telling the reporter to stand up when he tried
former British spy Christopher Steele is not the only person to say to ask a question and then said: 'BBC News - there's another beauty'.
the Kremlin has covert footage related to his sex life 'Later, I used an intermediary to pass some
questions to active duty CIA officers

107
 dealing with the case file - they would not
speak to me directly. I got a message back
that there was "more than one tape", "audio
and video", on "more than one date", in
"more than one place" - in the Ritz-Carlton
in Moscow and also in St Petersburg - and
that the material was "of a sexual nature".'
But he did add:
'Nobody should believe something just
because an intelligence agent says it',
adding that no-one had aver seen the
video.
The BBC has come under criticism for their coverage.
in the hall, pointing at him and repeating:
‘Fake news.’
He also ignored questions from CNN and the BBC.
Ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele has been named as the
author of the salacious Russian dossier containing
outlandish claims about Donald Trump's sex life and
bizarre footage allegedly held by the Kremlin's blackmail
unit.
The 35-page briefing, which is littered with spelling
mistakes, includes an unsubstantiated and far-fetched
claim Trump watched prostitutes perform a 'golden shower
(urination) show' in the Presidential Suite of a Moscow
hotel.

Tory MP Philip Davies has accused the BBC of jumping Mr. Trump called the dossier 'fake' and 'phony', even
on the bandwagon and joining the attempt to smear Mr. suggesting that US secret services had leaked it to damage
Trump before he takes over in the Oval Office. his reputation before his inauguration.

He told MailOnline:

‘It seems to me that the BBC are still in

Brexit mode, it was a result they couldn’t
accept and understand and did everything
they could to get that overturned.
‘And it seems like they’re doing exactly the
same thing with Trump’s election as US
president.
‘It’s more to do with the BBC’s agenda than
news reports.’

After Mr. Wood appeared on TV news last night

journalist Iain Dale tweeted:
Missing: Steele, 52, was seen fleeing his gated Surrey home (pictured)
in his car yesterday and appears to have been in such a rush most of
'The BBC News at Ten just sank to the the lights were left on
level of Buzzfeed. An utter disgrace of a
report from Paul Wood'.

David Vance wrote:

'10 Minutes on the #BBC news and the

State Broadcaster is in full "Get Trump"
mode. The bias is visceral and utterly
impotent'.

Yesterday news website Buzzfeed published all 35 pages –

and Mr. Trump went on the attack.

He told reporters at his New York press conference that

Buzzfeed was ‘a failing pile of garbage’ and added:
Pictured: The offices of Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd in Belgravia,
central London, the security business run by Christopher Steele
‘They’re going to suffer the consequences’.
He started shouting at a Buzzfeed reporter
Saying the situation was ‘like Nazi Germany’, he ranted:

108
 ‘It’s all fake news. It’s phoney stuff. It didn’t
happen. And it was gotten by opponents of
ours – sick people, and they put that crap
together.
‘It was disgraceful that the intelligence
agencies allowed any information that
turned out to be so false, and fake, out. I
think it’s a disgrace and that’s something
that Nazi Germany would have done, and
did do.’ Mr. Trump ridiculed the notion of
being filmed with prostitutes, saying he
.
109
knew there were hidden cameras in hotel
rooms.
He said:
‘I am extremely careful. I always tell my
people be very careful, because in those
rooms you have cameras in the strangest
places – you can’t see them and you won’t
know. You better be careful or you will be
watching yourself on nightly television.’
 ‘It’s Not How Hacking Works’: Anonymous Activist
Deconstructs ODNI Report On ‘Russia Hackers’
Published Time: 12 Jan, 2017 01:14
A member of the hacktivist network Anonymous has
debunked the assertion that US intelligence report on
Russia’s alleged hacking of the DNC proves a particular
party’s guilt, explaining that such claims show a lack of
understanding of how hackers operate.
“The ODNI [Office of the Director of
National Intelligence] report wants you to
believe that Russian hackers hacked the
DNC [Democratic National Committee]
based on the evidence that the attacks
looked identical to methods used by the
same Russian hacking team. But this is not
how hacking works in the slightest,” video
journalist and Anonymous activist Alex
Poucher told RT.
“Hackers can either code their own tools to
use, or download pre-compiled scripts that
are readily available on any exploit
database. If two teams download the same
exploits and use them, then the attacks will
appear to be the same, identical even,”
Poucher, who has a degree in IT Security,
said.
He went on to explain that while a person is actually in
America, he or she can log into a VPN (Virtual Private
Network) located in Russia and launch attacks from
America.
“When this attack is investigated, it will
appear that it originated from Russia,” he
said.
Saying that the report “does not state
conclusively anything,” it also demonstrates
.
110
that the US intelligence officials “are still
not really sure who hacked the DNC,”
Poucher said.
Guccifer 2.0, the entity believed to have originally
distributed the leaked materials from the Democratic Party,
and claimed to have some ties to Russia, “is a deeply
suspicious figure,” the Anonymous activist said.
“At the end of the day, an insurmountable
heap of circumstantial evidence is all this
report is, without any proof to back up any
of the claims whatsoever, except hearsay,”
he told RT.
“I have personally [gone] over every aspect
of the attack and what I can tell you, what I
have found is that every aspect of the
attack, the entry or the payload, is not
particularly sophisticated. A 14-year-old
script kiddy with download capabilities
could have pulled off this hack,” Poucher
said.
Last week, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has also
said a teenager could have could have hacked the emails of
Hillary Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta.
“Podesta gave out that his password was
the word ‘p@ssw0rd’... a 14-year-old kid
could have hacked Podesta,” Assange said
while commenting on the DNC leaks and
Russia's alleged involvement in it in an
exclusive interview with Fox News.
Saying that President Obama’s administration has been
“behind all the anti-Russia and Cold War-2 buildup,” the
Anonymous activist suggested there might be “a complete
U-turn” on the subject of Russia’s alleged involvement
when President-elect Donald Trump is sworn in.
“He has already went on [with a] statement
and said he did not believe Russia has
anything to do with the DNC hacking
scandal,” Poucher said.
 Controversial Dossier On Trump Alleges
That Russia Targets Jewish-American Businessmen
One Report Within The Document Also Discusses Relationship Between
Putin And Alfa Group, Owned By Three Russian-Jewish Billionaires.
By Ian Greenhalgh
January 12, 2017

Russian intelligence has been targeting Jewish-American

businessmen with Russian backgrounds for use as
operatives in criminal cyber activity, alleges one of the
documents in the controversial dossier published by
Buzzfeed on Tuesday. The unverified documents in the
dossier, which claim that the Russians have compromising
personal and financial information on President-elect
Donald Trump, have been presented both to Trump and
President Barack Obama. Trump has condemned the
documents as being “fake news” and representing a “total
political witch hunt” against him.

The assertion regarding the Jewish businessmen is

[Editor’s note: If this dossier of reports on
Trump and his connections to Russia turns
out to be authentic and accurate, then it is
the greatest political scandal since
Watergate; if it isn’t, then it’s one of the
greatest smears ever attempted.
If it is authentic and accurate, Trump is
finished and US-Russian relations will
undergo a paradigm shift.
These are very interesting times and you
know the old Chinese curse….
contained in a dossier entitled “A Synopsis of Russian
State Sponsored and Other Cyber Offensive (Criminal)
Operations” and dated July 15, 2015.
The report asserts that the Russian intelligence bureau,
known as the FSB, “was approaching US citizens of
Russian (Jewish) origin on business trips to Russia.”
According to the document, these businessmen represented
the FSB’s “recruitment of capable cyber operatives to
carry out its ideally deniable, offensive cyber operations”
in a process that involved “using coercion and blackmail.”

You can read the full document here, and it

is worth a read:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents
/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-
Allegations.html

Ian]
The report described one specific case of a “US citizen of
Russian ethnicity” who was visiting Moscow to find
Haaretz investors for a new information technology program.
Controversial Dossier on Trump Alleges That Russian intelligence agents
Russia Targets Jewish-American
Businessmen
111
 “offered to provide seed capital to this “continuing sensitivity of the Putin-Alpha relationship.”
person in return for them being able to The middleman is named as Russia’s minister of regional
access and modify his IP with a view to development, Oleg Govorun.
targeting priority foreign targets by planting
a Trojan virus in the software.”
The businessman “was told that this was
common practice.”

The dossier of reports has “been circulating among elected

officials, intelligence agents, and journalists for weeks,”
Buzzfeed reported. The website said that the documents,
which are dated mainly from the second half of 2016, had
been prepared as research for Trump’s political opponents
by a man identified only as a former British intelligence
agent.

Although Buzzfeed reporters were unable to verify – nor

falsify – the assertions in the memos – and even found
several errors in them – the website stated that it decided to
publish “the full document so that Americans can make up Trump personally ordered spying for Russia
their own minds about allegations about the president-elect
that have circulated at the highest level of government.” In the 1990’s, the document claims,

“Govorun had been head of government

relationships at Alpha Group and in reality
the “driver” and “bag carrier” used by
Fridman and Aven to deliver large amount
of illicit cash to the Russian president, at
that time deputy mayor of St. Petersburg.”

A source close to the three businessmen told Haaretz the

Another report in the collection, dated September 14,
2016, focused on the relationship between Russian
President Vladimir Putin and the Alfa Group, the largest
financial and industrial investment group in Russia. The
company is headed by three Russian Jewish billionaires
with ties to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
and Jewish Agency head Natan Sharansky:
Mikhail Fridman, Pyotr Aven and German Khan.
Khan and Fridman, whose wealth Forbes estimates to be
over $13 billion, both hold Israeli citizenship, and Alfa has
a corporate presence in Israel which appears to be mainly
focused on real estate investments and media.
The report – which misspells “Alfa” as
“Alpha” – claimed that “significant favours
continue to be done in both directions and
Fridman and Aven still giving informal
advice to Putin, especially on the US.”
material on them in the memo was “untrue” and “fake
news,” denying that any of them gave cash to Putin or
offered him any advice on US affairs – and said that they
haven’t had contact with Govorun for “many years.”
The three billionaires are active and generous Jewish
philanthropists. Fridman co-founded the Russian Jewish
Congress. The trio is best-known for co-founding the high-
profile Genesis Philanthropy Group, which supports
Russian-speaking Jewish communities around the world as
well as the Genesis Prize, branded as “the Jewish Nobel.”
The $1 million prize to “honor those people who attribute
their success to Jewish values” has for past three years
held a glitzy ceremony in Jerusalem. Its recipients so far
have been former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg,
Hollywood actor-director Michael Douglas and Israeli-
American violin virtuoso Itzhak Perlman.

It cites a “top-level government official” in Russia as

saying that while Fridman has recently met directly with
Putin, their communication takes place primarily through a In early November, journalist Franklin Foer reported in
middleman for reasons of “plausible deniability” given the Slate that there was possible evidence that a computer
112
server owned by the Trump Organization “appeared to be
unusually configured, and to communicate almost
exclusively with two servers registered to Alfa Bank in
Moscow.” Alfa Bank is the largest private commercial
bank in Russia and is primarily owned and controlled by
Fridman.
113
The group of computer scientists Foer cited “found the
evidence strongly suggestive of a relationship between the
Trump Organization and the bank but not conclusive.” The
story was debunked by the Washington Post and several
other media outlets.
 Trump’s Pick To Head The CIA Wants To Collect Your
Personal Metadata—All Of It
The Right To Privacy
January 12, 2017 12:26 Pm

But even that’s too cumbersome for Pompeo, who

continues,

“Congress should pass a law re-

establishing collection of all metadata, and
combining it with publicly available financial
and lifestyle information into a
comprehensive, searchable database.”

In other words, they should have information about all

your calls, all your communications, supplemented with
whatever other color they’ve been able to gather about
That headline isn’t an exaggeration. Mike Pompeo, the
you. And they should be able to access it through a simple
Kansas congressman and Donald Trump’s pick to head the
search prompt.
CIA, who testified on Capitol Hill earlier today, wants the
government to collect all metadata from everyone,
regardless of whether they’re suspected of a crime or not. Senator Ron Wyden, one of the Upper Chamber’s
few privacy advocates, finds all this to be vexing, and
quizzed Pompeo about the Journal piece earlier today.
Pompeo’s expansive view of the surveillance state was
Pompeo responded by saying that he’d voted for the USA
made clear in an op-ed he wrote for the Wall Street Journal
Freedom Act (he did) and that it was now settled law.
earlier this year, titled “Time for a Rigorous National
Wyden objected that Pompeo had written his op-ed after
Debate About Surveillance.” That headline alone is a red
the Freedom Act was passed, meaning he was advocating
flag: “national debate,” and its more common cousin
an overhaul of present statutes. Could he really be
“national dialogue,” are among the most bullshit terms in
entrusted not to create his illegal database? Pompeo
our political discourse, em
assured he would “not engage in unlawful activity.” He
later declared that he takes “a backseat to no one with
ployed almost exclusively by those who desire the respect to protecting Americans’ privacy.”
opposite. In the case of surveillance, we already had an
extensive debate, between Edward Snowden’s revelations
You can watch the entire exchange here:
in 2013 and the passage of the USA Freedom Act in 2015.
What Pompeo really means is that he wants to suppress the
will of Congress and enshroud all discussion about signals
intelligence back within the hyper-secretive NSA.

Among the questionable claims in Pompeo’s Journal piece

is that

“[c]ollection of phone metadata under the

Patriot Act was banned by Congress.”

In fact, the Freedom Act merely rehoused metadata

collection from within the government to within the
telecom companies—all the NSA has to do for access is
obtain a warrant from the notoriously licentious FISA
court.

114
 Rosie O’Donnell Calls For Martial Law
To Stop Trump From Becoming President
Pathetic “Celebrity” Wants To Use Military To Steal
Election From American People
By Alex Thomas -
01.12.2017 @8:49 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — In the months since the election of

Donald Trump we have seen a plethora of attempts to stop
him from becoming president, whether it be plans for
massive riots on inauguration day or the intelligence
community working with the corporate media to spread
disinformation, we are truly in the middle of a war for the
future of the country.

Now, just days before Trump is set to take office, B-list

celebrity Rosie O’Donnell is publicly calling for martial
law in America to stop him. Or, in other words, O’Donnell
wants to use the force of the military to steal the election
from both Trump and the American people.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

According to O’Donnell, the one way to stop Trump is to

effectively end the Constitution and set up a military
dictatorship, all because of documented disinformation
spread by the corporate media about supposed Russian ties
to the president-elect.

“A group of radical leftists that includes

activists, entertainers, artists, professors,
writers, and at least one known terrorist
has launched what amounts to a sort of
soft coup attempt in America with the
release of a full page New York Times ad
and accompanying website that lays out a
concrete plan to prevent Donald Trump
from ever taking office,” I wrote in a report
O’Donnell continued with multiple follow up Tweets that published last week.
described her thought process which is either completely
“The website, refusefascism.org, makes it
brainwashed by corporate media disinformation or worse,
clear from the start that this is not about
is all part of a wider conspiracy to stop Trump from taking
simply protesting Trump’s inauguration but
office.
rather about actually preventing him from
being inaugurated to the office he rightfully
Remember, at the same time that low level celebrities are won.”
calling for military rule in America, a plan for massive
riots during the inauguration, with the same goal of
On top of that, the Senate Minority Leader has publicly
stopping Trump, are openly being planned.
threatened Trump that the CIA doesn’t take kindly to
criticism and could easily get him back. (which then

115
actually happened with the whole BuzzFeed dossier
disinformation)

“Let me tell you, you take on the

intelligence community, they have six ways
from Sunday at getting back at you,”
Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
“So even for a practical, supposedly hard-
nosed businessman, he’s being really
dumb to do this.”

Make no mistake, this is a major psychological operation

against both Donald Trump and the American people, all
with the intention of stealing the election.

You can add martial law to the ideas being floated to

achieve this now obvious goal.

116
 Obama, Biden Made Aware Of Dubious
Dossier Of Trump Allegations Before Leak
Foxnews.Com
Published January 13, 2017
Vice President Joe Biden said Thursday that he and
President Barack Obama were informed about the
unverified allegations about President-elect Donald Trump
by intelligence officials.
Biden said in an interview with the Associated Press that
neither he nor Obama asked U.S. intelligence agencies to
try to corroborate the unverified claims that Russia had
obtained compromising sexual and financial allegations
about Trump.
"I think it's something that obviously the
agency thinks they have to track down,"
Biden said. He added later, "It surprised me
in that it made it to the point where the
agency, the FBI thought they had to pursue
it."
Biden added that the briefing he and Obama received from
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and
others, there were “no conclusions drawn” from the leaked
dossier, which was produced in August and then released
publicly this week by the media. Biden said it was "totally
ancillary" to the purpose of the meeting, which was to
brief Obama on a report he ordered documenting Russian
interference in the U.S. campaign.
"As a matter of fact, the president was like,
'What does this have anything to do with
anything?'" Biden said. He said intelligence
leaders responded by saying "Well, we feel
obliged to tell you, Mr. President, because
you may hear about it. We're going to tell
him," referring to Trump.
Biden said intelligence leaders told him and Obama that
they couldn't say whether or not the allegations were true
or untrue. He said there was "hardly any discussion" about
the allegations in the briefing.
"Neither the president nor I asked for any
detail," Biden said. But he added of the
dossier: "I've read everything."
Trump confirmed earlier Thursday that Clapper spoke to
him by phone, apparently sometime after a press
conference in which Trump lashed out at media outlets,
117
including Buzzfeed and CNN, that ran the story and
speculated it was leaked by federal officials.
"James Clapper called me yesterday to
denounce the false and fictitious report that
was illegally circulated," Trump tweeted.
"Made up, phony facts. Too bad!"
On Wednesday, Clapper released a rare statement
addressing rising tensions between spy agency chiefs and
Trump, who believes the intel community has become
politicized and is working to undermine him. He also
acknowledged contacting Trump directly to express
"profound dismay" about the leaks to CNN and Buzzfeed
— the latter of which published the unverified allegations
in full.
"I emphasized that this document is not a
U.S. Intelligence Community product and
that I do not believe the leaks came from
within the IC," Clapper said. "The IC has
not made any judgment that the information
in this document is reliable, and we did not
rely upon it in any way for our conclusions."
Several media outlets reported that the salacious material,
originally compiled by a former British intelligence officer
turned political consultant, was relayed to Trump when he
was briefed on the intelligence community's evidence of
Russian hacking in the 2016 election.
But Trump never received any summary of unsubstantiated
allegations that Russian spies had collected compromising
financial and personal information about him, a highly
placed transition source told Fox News Wednesday.
The source said that intelligence officials who briefed
Trump on Friday brought up the allegations verbally, but
added that they were "barely mentioned in passing."
A government source told Fox News that the intelligence
community wanted to give Trump a heads-up that the
allegations had been widely circulating and that a lot of
media outlets were sitting on the story. The source said the
claims did not constitute a "central element" of Trump's
briefing.
CNN initially reported that Trump and President Obama "It's all fake news. It's phony stuff. It didn't
were presented with a two-page summary that detailed the happen," Trump said, later adding. "But I
allegations. The report said the summary was attached to a read what was released and I think it's a
broader report about Russian operatives' activities during disgrace. I think it's an absolute disgrace."
the 2016 election.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
At the Wednesday press conference, Trump said that he
had learned details of the allegations "outside of the
meeting" with intelligence officials.

118
 ‘Profound Dismay’:
DNI Clapper Meets With Trump Over
‘Unverified’ Dossier Leak
Published Time: 12 Jan, 2017 11:07Edited Time: 13 Jan, 2017 12:17
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump (L), U.S. Director of National
Intelligence James Clapper (R) © Reuters
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a
rare statement that he met with President-elect Donald
Trump to express “profound dismay” at the recent leak of
intelligence documents.
At the heart of the matter is a document first published by
BuzzFeed on Tuesday, which Clapper stressed was “not a
US Intelligence Community product” in his press release
Wednesday evening.
In their Wednesday meeting, Clapper says he and Trump
discussed how the documents were circulated around the
media and members of Congress before the intelligence
community (IC)
“became aware of it.”
Clapper also said the allegations had come from a
"private security company," and that US
spy agencies had "not made any judgment
that the information in this document is
reliable."
He went on to state, however, that
"part of our obligations is to ensure that
policymakers are provided with the fullest
possible picture of any matters that might
affect national security."
Clapper's statement that the dossier came from a private
security company aligns with a report from the Wall Street
119
Journal, which stated that Christopher Steele, a director of
the London-based Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd.,
compiled the report, citing
"people familiar with the matter." Steele's
business partner, Christopher Burrows,
said he would not "confirm or deny" that
claim.
However, users of the website 4chan – the largely
anonymous message board known for launching memes –
claims the story involving Trump, prostitutes, urination
and a Moscow hotel room previously occupied by the
Obamas originated on the site as a gag.
Calling the documents “fanfiction,” a user says that he
sent the document to “anti-Trump pundit” Rick Wilson,
who gave it to the CIA, which then classified the document
in its official intelligence reports on the election. Senator
John McCain (R-Arizona) also copped to his own role in
spreading the disinformation to the FBI.
While there is still confusion as to the exact source of the
story, the documents were nonetheless published by
BuzzFeed on Tuesday, prompting to the hashtag
#GoldenShowers to trend on Twitter.
In his press conference Wednesday morning, Trump called
BuzzFeed a “failing pile of garbage” for publishing the
unverified accusations.
He also lashed out at CNN reporter Jim Acosta when he
tried to ask a question, after accusing the network of
"going out of their way to build it [the report] up,"
referring to the outlet mentioning the report in an article.
"Your organization is terrible, I'm not going
to give you a question," Trump said to
Acosta, telling the reporter that he and his
channel are "fake news."
Following the exchange, Acosta said live on-air that he felt
it was "only fair" that CNN would have the chance to ask a
follow-up question since the network was being
"attacked."
 However, Acosta said that Trump
had "indicated that he was not going to call
on me or call on CNN, he sort of pointed at
me at one point and then waved his hand
as if 'you're not going to get a question...'"
Following the event, Trump tweeted that
the press conference was "great," stating
that "a couple of fake news organizations
were there but the people truly get what's
going on." But Trump wasn't the only person furious about
BuzzFeed's publishing of the unverified report. Journalists
and media executives from across the globe also chimed
in, with Mother Jones' Washington Bureau chief David
Corn tweeting that "even Donald Trump deserves
journalistic fairness."

Trump also vented his general frustration about the report

on Twitter ahead of the press conference, comparing the
actions of the IC to Nazi Germany.

The documents had circled for weeks around Washington

insiders and the press from an unknown source, but most
outlets steered clear of the story, as it had not be proven
true.
.

120
 Washington Seems On Brink Of ‘Civil War’ As Elites Fuel
Anti-Trump Hostility – Former German MP
Published Time: 12 Jan, 2017 05:42Edited Time: 13 Jan, 2017 13:58
The US establishment is working hard to make it
impossible for Donald Trump to ditch the warmongering
policies previous administrations pursued, and to deliver
on his pledge to mend relations with Russia, former CDU
defense spokesman Willy Wimmer told RT.
“When you see the situation in Washington,
I think they are not willing, those who lost
the election, to accept the new president
whose name is Trump… What’s going on
in Washington sounds like the beginning of
a civil war,” said Wimmer,
who is a former MP with Angela Merkel’s Christian
Democratic Union (CDU), and also served as vice
president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
(OSCE).
The former OSCE top official noted that not only members
of the Democratic Party, who staked everything on
Clinton’s victory, but also Republicans from the war
establishment camp, like Sen. John McCain, put up a
united front against US President-elect Donald Trump’s
plans to build good relations with other countries. Such
foreign policy strategy may deal a blow to their hawkish
worldview, Wimmer argues.
“There is a network of resistance against
the President who will be in office on the
20th of January and I think when you look
at the reality in Europe, people of all our
European countries – they want to live in
good [relations] with [the] Russian
Federation,” Wimmer said, adding that the
media campaign aimed at vilifying Trump
resembles the way the mainstream media
used to demonize Russia.
121
“There is no hostility [between Russia and
Europe], the hostility is organized in a very
artificial way and it is the same way of
organizing hostilities as we see nowadays
against Trump,” the former MP said.
Wimmer believes that the smear campaign against Trump
is running full tilt with scores of scathing articles popping
up
“in all leading newspapers this morning all
over the world.”
The main goal behind all this enormous effort is to
“just to make it impossible for the new US
President to go for a better policy, not leave
as a warmonger as others did,” Wimmer
said.
“This makes it very clear that there’s a
network of Democratic and Republican war
establishment in Washington and they are
not willing to accept the ballots,” the former
lawmaker explained.
Wimmer argued that while Russia-EU relations have
deteriorated in the past few years – following Crimea’s
reunification with Russia, which led to sanctions
encouraged by Washington – the EU and Moscow
“had excellent relations” before
“something… changed in the US policy.”
“Now we are in a situation that everything
they do, everything which can be done also
with regard of the next German elections is
to find reasons to go for conflict or even to
go for a war,” Wimmer said, describing the
tension existing in the increasingly
polarized world as “most dramatic days we
have in our lifetime.”
Wimmer suggested that to avert confrontation, instead of
sticking to narrow interests, one
“should look at the broad picture.”
“I think everybody in Europe wants to see
Trump in office pursuing the policy he
explained during the campaign – to go for
 good relationships with others, including
with the Russian Federation,” he said,
adding that there is “no reason” for Europe
“to perform hostility towards the Russian
population or to the Russian government.”
During his campaign and after winning the election,
Trump has been repeatedly accused by the US mainstream
media and Democratic Party politicians of having ties to
Russia and to Russian President Vladimir Putin, with
Washington officials painting the Russian government as a
pro-Trump, and capable of tilting the American election in
Trump’s favor with alleged “hacking attacks” on the
Democratic Party.
.
122
The president-elect repeatedly denied the claims,
dismissing it as fake news.
“Having a good relationship with Russia is
a good thing, not a bad thing. Only stupid
people, or fools, would think that it is bad!
We have enough problems around the
world without yet another one,” a
statement on Trump’s Facebook page said
on January 7, adding that he and the
Russian president may “work together to
solve some of the many great and pressing
problems and issues of the WORLD!”
 'Will You Look After My Cat?' Ex-MI6 Spy 'Who Worked
With Murdered Alexander Litvinenko' Flees His £1.5m
Home 'Fearing For His Life' Leaving His Pet With
Neighbours After Being Outed As The Man Behind The
Dirty Dossier On Donald Trump
 Christopher Steele named as ex-MI6 agent behind 'fake' Trump sex dossier
 35-page salacious file featured claims about Mr Trump's links with Russia
 It also includes gossip about a 'golden shower' sex game in a Moscow hotel
 Ex-spy has now fled his Surrey home 'terrified for his life' and may be abroad
 Steele now an intelligence consultant who worked with FBI to bring down FIFA
 Britain's top EU diplomat Sir Tim Barrow denies he handed over Trump dossier
 Nigel Farage says campaign to undermine him will only increase support in US
By Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter and Sam Tonkin For Mailonline
Published: 20:22 EST, 11 January 2017 | Updated: 10:09 EST, 13 January 2017

A former British spy has vanished after being named as the
author of a 'dirty' file smearing Donald Trump and fled
his £1.5million mansion in fear telling his neighbour:
'Look after my cat.'
Ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele has been named as the
author of the salacious Russian dossier containing
outlandish claims about Donald Trump's sex life and
bizarre footage allegedly held by the Kremlin's blackmail
unit.
The 35-page briefing, which is littered with spelling
mistakes, includes an unsubstantiated and far-fetched
claim Trump watched prostitutes perform a 'golden shower
(urination) show' in the Presidential Suite of a Moscow
hotel.
Mr. Trump called the dossier 'fake' and 'phony', even
suggesting that US secret services had leaked it to damage
his reputation before his inauguration.
He debunked the 'golden shower' claim by
saying: 'Does anyone believe that? I'm a
germophobe'.
Steele, 52, was seen fleeing his gated Surrey home in his
car yesterday and appears to have been in such a rush most
of the lights were left on.
A security source said: 'He is terrified for his safety',
adding he may now be abroad or in a safe house.
A neighbour told the Telegraph:
'He asked me to look after his cat as he
would be gone for a few days'.
Mr. Steele served MI6 for nearly two decades in Moscow -
and a stint in its Paris Station - and security sources say he
once worked with murdered Russian spy Alexander
Litvinenko who fled to Britain before he was poisoned in
2006.
Litvinenko's wife Marina said last night she did not
recognise the name Steele but admitted MI6 agents often
have a number of different identities.
Steele was employed by enemies of Trump to dig for 'dirt'
in Russia having previously worked for the FBI in helping
uncover corruption at FIFA, which led to the arrest of its
leadership including Sepp Blatter.
Senator John McCain was allegedly handed the incendiary
Trump file by a former British Ambassador to Moscow,
who has not yet been named.
Today it was revealed Sir Tim Barrow, a former British
Ambassador to Moscow who is now the UK's top EU
diplomat in charge of Brexit regotiations, worked in the
same office as Steele when the Soviet Union collapsed.
Sir Tim is understood to have told bosses he had 'nothing
to do with' leaking Steele's Trump memos, a Foreign
Office source told MailOnline.

123
 source, but another told The Times he is
'slightly more showy and less grounded in
reality than you might expect a former SIS
person to be'.

Missing: Steele, 52, was seen fleeing his gated Surrey home (pictured)
in his car yesterday and appears to have been in such a rush most of
the lights were left on

Friend: Mr Steele's business partner Christopher Burrows was also

named as a former MI6 agent, but has not been linked to the dossier
and refused to say if his colleague had written it

Married father-of-three Mr. Steele, 52, spent almost two

decades as one of MI6's Russia specialists, also working in
Paris.

A diplomatic service list shows that the ex-spy was posted

to the UK's Moscow embassy in 1990 with the title of
'second secretary', serving under ambassador Sir Rodric
It is believed that Christopher Steele once worked with murdered Braithwaite.
Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko (pictured, in hospital)

While Steele was there the current British Ambassador to

the EU Sir Tim Barrow, who was Ambassador to Moscow
before them, worked in the Russian capital for the Foreign
Office between 1990 and 1993.

After leaving the secret service Steele he set up a security

business based in a grand Belgravia office block.

Mr. Steele was reportedly hired by enemies of Donald

Trump and was asked to do a 'general' trawl on the
billionaire's links to Russia.

Speaking on his LBC radio show yesterday evening,

former Ukip leader and Trump ally Nigel Farage claimed a
member of the President-elect's team told him the
Pictured: The offices of Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd in Belgravia, allegations would just make more people think the
central London, the security business run by Christopher Steele 'establishment' were 'out to get Trump'.

The BBC has now claimed that there is a second dossier Mr. Farage added:
and despite allegations being widely rubbished one
journalist said 'the head of an East European intelligence
agency' insists the sex tape exists. 'I think he looks very much in control. I think
support for him across America is
growing.'
Steele has been described as 'reliable,
meticulous and well-informed' by one

124
Mr. Steele's business partner Christopher Burrows was A source said: 'Once his name came out the view was that
also named as a former MI6 agent, but has not been linked he could be under threat so steps are being taken to protect
to the dossier. him and put him in a more secure environment.'

Liverpool University-educated Mr. Burrows, 58, was a

Brussels and India expert with the security service.

He describes himself as a former Foreign Office

'counsellor' on his LinkedIn page.

The pair are now the co-directors of Orbis Business

Intelligence, a London-based firm which gathers 'strategic
insight and intelligence' for corporate clients. They were
named by the Wall Street Journal last night.

Speaking outside his Hampshire home, Christopher

Burrows said that in light of what has happened, it would
be 'inappropriate' to say anything further.
Only one former British ambassador to Moscow remains in UK
The 58-year-old was also quizzed on the welfare of his government service, Sir Tim Barrow, left with Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev, is now Britain's ambassador to the European
business partner Christopher Steele, who was said to be the Union. He has privately denied he is the source
author of the dossier, but said: 'I cannot possibly comment
on that.'

Reports this morning suggested Mr. Steele, 52, had fled his
Surrey home and 'feared for his life'.

Mr. Burrows was today asked if the dossier had been

written by his company, Orbis Business Intelligence based
in London, but he refused to comment, adding this would
be something which might be reviewed in the 'next couple
of days'.

Mr. Burrows said:

'I think in the light of what has happened it
would not be appropriate for me to make a
comment on whether Orbis was involved or
not.
'This is something we will review in the next
couple of days.
'I am not going to make any comment on
the dossier.'
Asked if Mr. Steele was involved in compiling the dossier,
Mr. Burrows responded:
'I cannot possibly comment on that.'
Workplace: Mr. Steele's business partner Christopher Burrows, who
is also based at the office, was also named as a former MI6 agent, but
has not been linked to the dossier
Next door neighbour Mike Hopper said Mr. Steele had
lived there with his wife and four children for about 18
months.
Mr. Hopper, who is looking after the family's three cats,
said his neighbour appeared 'normal' when he left on
Wednesday morning.
'He did not say where he was going or
when he was coming back,' he added.

A neighbour of Mr. Steele's said he was away for a few Mr. Steele served MI6 for nearly two decades, and is now
days. The Journal said it had also approached Mr. Steele the director of a private security and investigations firm
through an intermediary, who had said the subject was 'too called Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd, run out of plush
hot' for Mr. Steele to speak about. offices in Belgravia, central London.

MI6 bosses told the Mirror the former spy may now be He was hired to write a dossier on Mr.
hiding at a safe house, which could in a different country. Trump by one of the billionaire's rivals for

125
 the Republican candidacy for President.
The dossier was ultimately passed to US
politicians by a former UK ambassador to
Russia, reports said.
The involvement of a former British intelligence officer
and ambassador is embarrassing for the Government with
Theresa May under pressure to reassure the President-elect
that the UK had nothing to do with the 35-page briefing.
However, sources say that Mr. Steele did pass on a copy of
the 'dirty' dossier to MI6.
Yesterday Mr. Trump called the dossier, alleged to have
been handed to US Senator John McCain by a former
British ambassador, 'fake' and 'phony' and Moscow has
dismissed the claims as 'utter nonsense'.
US journalists have spent recent weeks trying to track
down Mr. Steele for an interview, however he declined
requests through an intermediary, who said the subject was
'too hot', reports the Wall Street Journal.
The British security services had originally tried to block
UK news organisations from naming Mr. Steele by issuing
a so-called D-notice, which requests certain revelations are
withheld for security reasons.
Meanwhile reports emerged last night that Mr. Steele
could have worked with Russian agent Alexander
Litvinenko.
The former KGB man was poisoned with polonium in
London in 2006, with an inquiry finding his murder was on
the orders of the Russian state.
A source told the Times:
'I think he [Mr. Steele] was one of the
people who was working with Litvinenko.'
There have been conflicting reports on Mr. Steele, with
one source telling the newspaper he was not 'hugely
impressed' with his expertise, while another said he was
'deeply expert' on Russian affairs.
His Linkedin profile is vague about his career history.
However, a diplomatic service list shows that the ex-spy
was posted to the U.K.'s Moscow embassy in 1990 with
the title of 'Second Secretary', serving under
ambassador Sir Rodric Braithwaite.
It is not known how long he was posted at the embassy for,
but he is later listed to have served at the UK's Foreign &
Commonweath Office in 2003, and as 'First Secretary' at
Britain's Paris embassy in 1998.
126
He founded Orbis in 2009 and a statement on the
company's website says:
'Ethical business practice is a fundamental
value for the Orbis Business Intelligence
team.
'Our documented procedures, developed in
conjunction with external legal counsel,
ensure compliance with relevant UK, US
and EU legislation.'
The firm also says it has a 'global network' of experts and
business leaders and is able to execute 'intelligence
gathering operations' and 'complex, often cross-border
investigations'.
The PM's official spokeswoman was asked today if
assistance was being given to the former agent - after a so-
called DA-notice was issued last night asking media not to
reveal his name.
'We are not commenting on this,' she
said, From the reports I have seen, those
all seem to be about former staff.
'There is a standard process that is
followed with regard to the naming of
people that have worked in certain roles in
the civil service, be they still serving or
former roles.
The spokeswoman said she was not aware Mr. Trump's
team had been in touch with Britain to seek clarification.
She added that preparations are continuing for Mrs. May's
crucial visit to Washington in the coming weeks - where
she is desperate to lay the groundwork for a post-Brexit
trade deal.
'We are in touch with the team to continue
the planning for the first meeting between
the Prime Minister and the President-elect,'
the spokeswoman said.
The BBC was under fire today after it claimed a second
'dirty dossier' on Donald Trump exists and was accused of
attaching too much credibility to the first one.
Foreign correspondent Paul Wood said last night that
former British spy Christopher Steele is not the only
person to say the Kremlin has covert footage related to his
sex life.
He said a security source told him of 'more
than one tape' on 'more than one date'.
Buzzfeed has been widely castigated - including by Trump 'more than one place' - in the Ritz-Carlton
himself - over publishing the salacious claims, after CNN in Moscow and also in St Petersburg - and
reported on its existence, even though they have been that the material was 'of a sexual nature'.'
unverified.
But he did add:
Last night Mr. Trump refused to take a question from a
BBC journalist telling the reporter to stand up and then 'Nobody should believe something just
said: because an intelligence agent says it',
adding that no-one had aver seen the
'BBC News - there's another beauty'. video.

The BBC has come under criticism for their coverage.

Tory MP Philip Davies has accused the BBC of jumping

on the bandwagon and joining the attempt to smear Mr.
Trump before he takes over in the Oval Office.

He told MailOnline:

'It seems to me that the BBC are still in

Brexit mode, it was a result they couldn't
accept and understand and did everything
they could to get that overturned.
Claims: Foreign correspondent Paul Wood said last night that 'And it seems like they're doing exactly the
former British spy Christopher Steele is not the only person to say same thing with Trump's election as US
the Kremlin has covert footage related to his sex life president.
'It's more to do with the BBC's agenda than
news reports.'

After Mr. Wood appeared on TV news last night

journalist Iain Dale tweeted:

'The BBC News at Ten just sank to the

level of Buzzfeed. An utter disgrace of a
report from Paul Wood'.

David Vance wrote:

Row: Last night Mr. Trump refused to take a question from a BBC
journalist telling the reporter to stand up and then said: 'BBC News -
there's another beauty' '10 Minutes on the #BBC news and the
State Broadcaster is in full 'Get Trump'
But Mr. Wood said in a BBC blog last night: mode. The bias is visceral and utterly
impotent'.
'The former MI6 agent is not the only
source for the claim about Russian
kompromat on the president-elect.
'Back in August, a retired spy told me he
had been informed of its existence by 'the
head of an East European intelligence
agency'.
'Later, I used an intermediary to pass some
questions to active duty CIA officers
dealing with the case file - they would not
speak to me directly. I got a message back
that there was 'more than one tape', 'audio
and video', on 'more than one date', in

127
Donald Trump has dismissed claims in a flimsy dossier of
'dirt' on him but reports that ex-MI6 agent Mr. Steele was
behind it has piled pressure on Theresa May to reassure
him Britain had nothing to do with it
Fury: This angry denial came in a post on the billionaire
tycoon's Twitter feed shortly after the report was published
by Buzzfeed
The row threatens to overshadow the Prime Minister's visit
to Washington later this month, at a time when she is
desperate to secure a post-Brexit free trade deal with his
administration.
The spokeswoman said No 10 would not be commenting
further on the controversy, which could undo work carried
out by Boris Johnson to build bridges with Trump's team
during a visit to Washington this week.
Boris Johnson has been urged to appear before MPs to
explain the credibility of allegations made against Donald
Trump in an explosive dossier.
Senior Labour MP Mary Creagh said it is clear the UK
Government has a “great deal of knowledge” about the
issues, with a need for the Foreign Secretary to also
explain how Britain is preventing cyber attacks from
hostile states.
Mr. Steele was reportedly hired by enemies of Donald
Trump and was asked to do a 'general' trawl on the
billionaire's links to Russia.
Russian sources allegedly told the operative that they had
extensive material on the now President-elect - including a
secret film of him in the suite where President Obama
stayed in Moscow, watching prostitutes committing
degrading sex acts, specifically 'golden showers
[urination]', on the bed where the president once slept.
Critics have questioned the credibility of the intelligence
dossier because it contains a number of key spelling
mistakes.
It also has mistaken references to areas of Moscow an
expert on the city would be expected to get right and its
claims are not backed up with evidence.
Rubbishing the dossier, Mr. Trump has claimed 'sick
people put that c**p together', even suggesting that US
128
secret services had leaked it to damage his reputation
before his inauguration.
Carl Bernstein, the Watergate reporter who contributed to
the first story about the dossier, claimed yesterday that
Senator McCain was handed it by the former British
ambassador to Moscow late last year.
The Guardian last night reported that McCain met a man,
who they describe as a 'western diplomat', at a conference
in Halifax, Canada, who informed him of the existence of
the dossier.
The Senator then dispatched an official to meet the
diplomat - who he found at a European airport after being
told to look out for a man clutching a copy of the Financial
Times.
The pair then drove to the diplomat's house and discussed
the document. It was unclear last night whether the
'western diplomat' referred to by the Guardian was the
former Russian ambassador referred to by Bernstein.
The identity of the former British ambassador has not been
disclosed. There have been nine since 1985.
Only one former British ambassador to Moscow remains
in UK government service, Sir Tim Barrow, who went on
to be Foreign Office political director and is now Britain's
ambassador to the European Union. There is no suggestion
he is the source.
Bernstein told CNN:
'It came from a former British MI6 agent
who was hired from a political opposition
research firm in Washington who was
doing work about Donald Trump for both
republican and democratic candidates
opposed to Trump.
Nigel Farage has urged Theresa May to reassure Donald
Trump that the UK government had nothing to do with an
ex-MI6 agent's claims about a 'dirty' Russian dossier.
The former Ukip leader also argued that the US president-
elect had been made stronger by the furore because
Americans could see the establishment was 'out to get
him'.
Downing Street is trying to distance itself from the row
after the British former spy who produced outlandish
claims about Trump's sex life and compromising material
held by the Kremlin was named as Christopher Steele.
 'Whether they say it in public or privately
say it to Donald Trump – I'm not really
bothered – but as long as the President-
elect knows none of this is being done on
behalf of the UK as a country or on behalf
of the UK as a Government.'

Former Ukip leader Nigel Farage said the US president-elect had

been made stronger by the furore because Americans could see the
establishment was 'out to get him'

The 52-year-old has fled his £1.5million mansion in west President-elect Donald Trump blasted 'phony stuff' contained in a
dirt dossier against him that was released and blasted whoever
London, telling his neighbour: leaked it – mentioning the intelligence agencies

'Look after my cat.'

There are also suggestions that a former UK ambassador to

Russia was involved in passing the dossier to Republican
Senator John McCain - a sworn enemy of Mr. Trump.

No10 has so far refused to comment directly on the row.

But senior sources insisted today there was no indication
that any serving officials were involved in producing or
spreading the material.

The extraordinary - and entirely unverified - allegations that Donald

Sir Tim Barrow, who is thought to have worked there with Trump ordered prostitutes to commit degrading sex acts in the Ritz-
Mr. Steele, is the only former ambassador to Moscow still Carlton in Moscow are contained in the dossier
in the civil service. He was appointed as the UK's envoy to
the EU this month.

However, he is understood to have assured Foreign Office

bosses he had 'nothing to do' with the memos.

The PM's spokeswoman has said preparations are

continuing for Mrs May's crucial visit to Washington in the
coming weeks - where she is desperate to lay the
groundwork for a post-Brexit trade deal.

Tory MPs have raised concerns that the controversy over
Mr. Steele's memos could derail efforts to rebuild the
'special relationship'.
Backbencher Philip Davies turned up the pressure on No
10 to reassure Mr .Trump that the UK Government had
nothing to do with the 'dirty' dossier.
He told MailOnline today:
Part of the document, allegedly compiled by former British
intelligence agent Mr. Steele, is seen above.
'They were looking at Trump's business ties, they saw
some questionable things about Russians, about his
businesses in Russia, they in turn hired this MI6 former
investigator, he then came up with additional information
from his Russian sources.
'He was very concerned by the implications
of it, he then took it to an FBI colleague that

129
 he had known in his undercover work for 'I hope the British Government confirm to
years, he took it to this FBI man in Rome President-Elect Trump that the actions of
who turned it over to the bureau in this individual do not reflect the UK as a
Washington in August. whole or the UK Government,' Mr. Davies
said.
'And then, a former British ambassador to
Russia independently was made aware of 'We look forward to the Trump presidency
these findings and he took the information re-establishing the special relationship
to John McCain – Senator John McCain of between the UK and the US.'
Arizona – in the period just after the
election, and showed it to McCain –
additional findings.
'McCain was sufficiently disturbed by what
he read to take it to FBI director James
Comey himself personally, they had a five
minute meeting the two men, very little was
said, McCain turned it over to him and is
now awaiting what the FBI's response is to
that information.'

Yesterday Donald Trump furiously denied he was ever

briefed on a dossier of claims passed to intelligence chiefs
that he was secretly taped watching degrading sex acts by
prostitutes in Moscow.
He said he was never shown or told about the claims -
published in full by Buzzfeed after a report by CNN - when
he met intelligence chiefs last week.
'Does anyone believe that story? I'm also
very much of a germophobe by the way,'
he said at a press conference in New York.
He stared down the assembled media for the first time
since he won the election Wednesday and opened with a
blistering attack on the press and the intelligence
community after the release of an unproven dirt dossier on
him.
'It's all fake news. It's phony stuff. It didn't
happen. And it was gotten by opponents of
ours,' Trump said.
'Sick people – and they put that c**p
together.'
British MPs told MailOnline that Mrs. May must act
swiftly to reassure the President-elect that the report was
not UK-sponsored.
No10 and the Foreign Office have flatly refused to
comment on the memos - which were apparently
commissioned by political opponents and have been
furiously denied by Mr. Trump.
Tory MP Philip Davies said Mrs. May's planned visit to
Washington in the coming weeks was a huge opportunity
to revive the Special Relationship, and nothing should be
allowed to overshadow it.
130
The Russian embassy in London said the government was 'panicking'
and trying to drive a wedge between US President-elect Donald
Trump and Vladimir Putin
Tory MP Andrew Bridgen said the timing of the
allegations pointed towards an effort to smear Mr. Trump
just nine days before he takes over in the Oval Office.
He told MailOnline:
'The question is why has this story come
out now? Everything happens for a reason.
Most things happen for a reason.
'It already appears to be unravelling.
Someone's released the story… I'm sure
the source will be revealed in time.'
Conservative backbencher Nigel Evans told MailOnline:
'It looks like this originated at a time when
somebody was trying to undermine his bid
for the presidency.
'There was enough stuff that did come out,
enough revelations about things that he
said – some of which probably did damage
his candidacy – that I would thought if there
was anything there (in this dossier) it would
have emerged.
'Trump is denying it. Putin is denying it. It
seems to be one of these fake news
things.'
Fellow MP Michael Fabricant said:
 'I can well understand the President-Elect's
concerns over these stories as they seek to
delegitimise his election to President.
There are some in the United States who
would like to see a re-run of their General
Election as part of an anti-Trump
campaign.
'They are like some of those in the UK who
seek to over-turn the Referendum result
and keep us in the European Union.'
Meanwhile, former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind
has said any Russian efforts to compromise Mr. Trump
would show they know he will be his 'own man'.
Sir Malcolm said Moscow's intelligence services see
gathering compromising material against politicians as
'what they are paid for'.
The Tory grandee, who also served as chair of the
powerful Intelligence and Security Committee, said he had
no idea whether the dossier was real.
'The Russians are not assuming that
Trump is going to be a friend,' he told
MailOnline.
He said that gathering 'dirt' on foreign politicians was a
key role for the Russian agencies.
'I have not the slightest doubt that the
Russian intelligence agencies assume that
is what they are paid for,' Sir Malcolm said.
'They have an interest, a role in finding out
as much as they can about the personal
lives of politicians.'
Sir Malcolm said he was not too concerned about the
tensions between the incoming US administration and the
intelligence agencies.
'I would have thought that the intelligence
agencies, when they met Trump, would
have made clear that their function is to
131
share the information they have with
whoever is the President.'
Mr. Trump - who is due to be formally installed as
president in nine days - has already dismissed the claims,
tweeting:
'FAKE NEWS - A TOTAL POLITICAL
WITCH HUNT!'
American intelligence agencies have also accused Russia
of directly interfering in the presidential election by
hacking the Democrat computer network and leaking
damaging material about Hillary Clinton.
Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson yesterday that Russia was
'up to all sorts of very dirty tricks'.
Some 35 pages of memos drawn up by the former MI6
agent - said to have served in Russia in the 1990s - was
published by Buzzfeed, which pointed out that it contained
errors.
Little of its contents can be independently verified, while
there has been no official confirmation of the details of the
briefing and Donald Trump has branded the claims as
'fake'.
2007: The Ritz-Carlton opens in Moscow in 2007
2009: Barack Obama and his family stay there when they travel
to the city
2013: Donald Trump visits Moscow to judge the Miss Universe
pageant
June 2015: Trump officially announces he is entering the race to
become Republican presidential nominee
2015-16: A Republican rival hires an investigative firm to uncover
dirt on Trump. By the time work has begun, Trump has won the
primary vote but now a Democrat wants the same service
July 2016: A large amount of material has been gathered on
Trump based on sources, which is believed to be of huge
consequence, if true. The allegations are passed to the FBI
September 2016: The FBI asks for more information but gets no
reply
October 28: FBI Director James Comey announces the bureau
will be investigating Hillary Clinton over mishandling of
confidential emails
October 31: The document on Trump is leaked to David Corn, of
the Mother Jones online political magazine who run a piece on
the dossier without revealing its details
November 9: Trump is elected President
Later in November: The documents are mentioned in an
intelligence report on Russian interference given to Barack
Obama and possbily Trump
November 18: John McCain discovers the contents of the
document
December 9: McCain hands the dossier directly to Comey
January 11: CNN publishes the story on Trump, followed by an
unredacted version by Buzzfeed
Britain's new ambassador to the EU has today told bosses
he 'had nothing to do with' the Russian 'dirty' dossier on
Donald Trump – as MailOnline reveals his remarkable
links to the former British spy who compiled the
document.
Sir Tim Barrow's name entered the frame as a potential
source of the leak to US politician John McCain after it
was suggested the Senator was handed the incendiary file
by a former British ambassador to Moscow.
The ambassador has not yet been publicly identified.
Sir Tim held the post of ambassador to Russia between
2011 and 2015, but also served in Moscow alongside ex-
MI6 spy Christopher Steele in the early 1990s.
The pair shared an office at the old British embassy - now
the ambassador's official residence - across the Moscow
River from the Kremlin.
Sir Tim is the only former Russian ambassador still
working as a diplomat for the British Government.
The man who held the role at the time Steele and Sir Tim
were posted there was Sir Rodric Braithwaite, an 84-year-
old retired diplomat who has since turned his hand to
writing books.
132
Sir Tim, who paid a visit to Washington in July last year,
denied being the source of the leak and is understood to
have told bosses he had 'nothing to do with it'.
However, MailOnline can reveal he has close links to
Steele, the ex-MI6 agent named as the author of the
salacious document.
Sir Tim and Steele are believed to have first crossed paths
almost 30 years ago in the cramped surroundings of a
Moscow office.
And ever since, the career trajectories of Steele and Sir
Tim have been remarkably similar.
They worked together for three years during a momentous
period that saw the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991,
having been posted to the old British embassy - now the
ambassador's official residence - across the Moscow River
from the Kremlin.
Steele, an ex-MI6 agent named as the author of the
salacious Russian dossier containing outlandish claims
about Donald Trump's sex life, was listed as a second
secretary (Chancery) between 1990 to 1993.
During the same period, Sir Tim - then a young diplomat -
was sent to the country as Second Secretary, a time he
would later look back on fondly by saying in 2011:
'I have good memories of working in
Moscow in the early nineties.'
Both Sir Tim and Steele returned to the Foreign Office the
same year, 1993, with the former named Head of Russia
Section and latter the second and later first secretary.
It is unclear how close a bond the two formed during their
time working together, but both have since hit the
headlines over the space of just a couple of weeks.
Sir Tim, 52, a former envoy to Moscow with a career as a
diplomat spanning three decades, was confirmed by the
Government as the new UK ambassador to the EU at the
start of the year.
Which Former Ambassador Gave McCain The
Dossier?
Below is a list of Britain's living ex-ambassadors to
Moscow.

Steele was posted to the UK's Moscow embassy in 1990 with the title
of 'second secretary', serving under ambassador Sir Rodric
Braithwaite, pictured
Sir Bryan Cartledge: 1985-1988. Sir Bryan served in
diplomatic posts in Sweden, the Soviet Union and Japan,
before becoming Private Secretary to Prime Ministers,
James Callaghan and Margaret Thatcher. He was also the
UK's ambassador to Hungary from 1980-83.
Sir Rodric Braithwaite: 1988-1992. Sir Rodric was the
ambassador during Christopher Steele's posting to
Moscow. His other appointments include Foreign Policy
Adviser to former Prime Minister, Sir John Major and
Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee.
Sir Brian Fall: 1992–1995. Sir Brian Hall served in
diplomatic posts in Moscow, Geneva and Washington and
was later High Commissioner to Canada from 1989-92. It
is also believed he introduced Vladimir Putin to Boris
Yeltsin, and organised the Queen's first Russian visit. His
daughter, Catherine Fall, was a key member of former
Prime Minister David Cameron's close team.
Sir Andrew Wood: 1995-2000. After serving a number of
diplomatic posts, including one in Moscow - Sir Andrew
became ambassador to Yugoslavia from 1985-99. After
retiring from diplomatic duties, he served as an advisor to
former Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Sir Roderic Lyne: 2000-2004. Sir Roderic was a member
of HM Diplomatic Service from 1970 to 2004 and later
served as Private Secretary to former Prime Minister Sir
John Major for foreign affairs, defence and Northern
Ireland from 1993 to 1996. He also served on the board of
the Iraq Inquiry.
Sir Anthony Brenton: 2004-08. Sir Anthony worked for 30
years in the Foreign Office, working in both London and
Brussels as well as spending three years in Cairo. He ran
UN issues in the Foreign Office and took charge of
preparation for the 1992 'Earth Summit'.
Dame Anne Pringle: 2008-2011. As well as being the first
ever female British Ambassador to Russia, Dame Anne
133
also served in diplomatic appointments in the US, Brussels
and at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. From 2001
to 2004 she was also the British Ambassador to the Czech
Republic.
Sir Tim Barrow: 2011-2016. Sir Tim was the British
Ambassador to Ukraine from 2006-2008 and was also
political director at the Foreign Office. He was the British
Ambassador to Russia between 2011 and 2015, having
previously been posted to Moscow as a young diplomat in
the early Nineties. Sir Tim is now Britain's Ambassador to
the European Union.
Ex-MI6 Spy Helped Bring Down FIFA So Trump's
Enemies Paid Him To Dig Dirt
Christopher Steele supplied the U.S. Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) with information on corruption at
FIFA, international soccer's governing body, it was
revealed today.
It was his work on corruption in international soccer that
lent credence to his reporting on Trump's entanglements in
Russia, US officials said.
Emails seen by Reuters indicate that, in the summer of
2010, members of a New York-based FBI squad assigned
to investigate 'Eurasian Organized Crime' met Steele in
London to discuss allegations of possible corruption in
FIFA, the Swiss-based body that also organizes the World
Cup tournament.
People familiar with Steele's activities said his British-
based company, Orbis Business Intelligence, was hired by
the Football Association, Britain's domestic soccer
governing body, to investigate FIFA. At the time, the
Football Association was hoping to host the 2018 or 2022
World Cups. British corporate records show that Orbis was
formed in March 2009.
Amid a swirl of corruption allegations, the 2018 World
Cup was awarded to Moscow and Qatar was chosen to
host the 2022 competition.
The FBI squad whose members met Steele subsequently
opened a major investigation into alleged soccer corruption
that led to dozens of U.S. indictments, including those of
prominent international soccer officials.
Senior FIFA officials, including long-time president Sepp
Blatter, were forced to resign.
134
 Report: US Intel Met Secretly With Mossad,
Plotting To Hide Intelligence From Trump
Chris Menahan - Informationliberation
Jan. 13, 2017
A bombshell report from Israeli news service Ynet says
Israeli and American intelligence officials are plotting to
hide intelligence from incoming president Donald Trump.
Trump needs to see this report. Our lying press is
completely ignoring it.
YnetNews reports:
Donald Trump’s upcoming inauguration
as the next president of the United
States is causing Israeli intelligence
officials to lose sleep as well.
Discussions held in closed forums
recently raised fears of a leakage of
Israeli intelligence top-classified
information, clandestine modus oprandi
and sources, which have been exposed
to the American intelligence community
over the past 15 years, to Russia – and
from there to Iran.
The cause of concern are the suspicions of unreported ties
between the president-elect or his associates and the
Kremlin, whose agents are also associated with
intelligence officials in Tehran.
These fears, which began upon Trump’s
election, grew stronger following a
meeting held recently between Israeli
and American intelligence officials (the
date of the meeting is not mentioned to
protect the sources of the report).
During the meeting, according to the
135
Israelis who participated in it, their
American colleagues voiced despair
over Trump’s election, as he often
lashes out at the American intelligence
community.
The American officials also told the Israelis that the
National Security Agency (NSA) had “highly credible
information” that Russia’s intelligence agencies, the FSB
and GRU, were responsible for hacking the Democratic
Party (DNC) servers during the elections and leaking
sensitive information to WikiLeaks, which hurt Democratic
presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
The American officials further added that they believed
Russia President Vladimir Putin had “leverages of
pressure” over Trump – but did not elaborate. They were
apparently referring to what was published Wednesday
about embarrassing information collected by the Russian
intelligence in a bid to blackmail the president-elect.
The Americans implied that their Israeli
colleagues should “be careful” as of
January 20, Trump’s inauguration date,
when transferring intelligence
information to the White House and to
the National Security Council (NSC),
which is subject to the president.
According to the Israelis who were
present in the meeting, the Americans
recommended that until it is made clear
that Trump is not inappropriately
connected to Russia and is not being
extorted – Israel should avoid revealing
sensitive sources to administration
officials for fear the information would
reach the Iranians.
Officials within our intelligence community are working to
undermine our own president.
They're actively putting the interests of Israel over
America.
Only Rolling Stone's anti-Trump Matt Taibbi has
mentioned this report, yet he cited it as though it's evidence
Trump is a Russian agent.
As we saw with the dodgy dossier BuzzFeed just released,
the reports US intelligence is relying on to claim Trump is
"compromised" are complete BS.

Every officer involved in this plot needs to be fired and

investigated. It doesn't get any clearer our intelligence
community – not Donald Trump – has been compromised.

136
 The Establishment Is Trying To Steal The Presidency
From Trump And The Liberal-Left Is Helping
Where Is The Liberal-Left’s Moral Conscience?
By Paul Craig Roberts
January 13, 2017
Senate Confirmation Hearings of Donald Trump’s Cabinet Picks –
James Mattis, Rex Tillerson, Mike Pompeo
Reuters reports that 2,700 US troops accompanied by tanks
are moving across Poland toward the Russian border. Col.
Christopher Norrie, commander of the 3rd Armoured
Brigade Combat Team, declared:
“The main goal of our mission is deterrence
and prevention of threats.”
U.S. troops arrive to Poland as part of NATO deployment.
Apparently, the colonel is not sufficiently bright to realize
that far from preventing threats, the force he is leading
presents as a threat. And to no less a military power than
Russia.
What is the point of this miniscule force? It woud not
constitute a threat to Russia if it were 100 times larger,
perhaps even one thousand times larger. Remember, Hitler
invaded Russia against an unprepared Stalin with the
largest and best military force the world had ever seen in
the largest military operation in human history. The
German invasion force was comprised of 3,800,000 troops,
600,000 motorized vehicles, 3,350 tanks, 7,200 artillery
pieces, and 2,770 aircraft. The Red Army, despite its
137
officer corps having been purged by Stalin, ate up this
magnificient force and won the war against Germany.
Compared to Stalin’s Russia, Putin’s Russia is prepared.
NATO is not capable of assemblying a large enough force
to invade Russia. So what is the point of the 2,700 US
troops moving across Poland toward Russia?
The answer is to keep alive the Western propaganda that
Russia is a threat and to make it as difficult as possible for
Trump to normalize relations with Russia. It is
extraordinary that the US military is conducting this
provocative exercise that contradicts the policy of the
incoming president.
The US military, the CIA, and their whores in the US
media are undemocratically pursuing their own agenda
independent of the policy of the president-elect. According
to the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, US intelligence officials
have even warned the Israeli government not to share
intelligence information with the Trump administration,
because Putin has “leverages of pressure” over Trump and
Trump will leak the information to Russia and Iran.
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.764711
President-Elect Trump’s First Press Conference
We can see how the military/security complex’s sabotage
of Trump’s policy works. Constant accusations have
forced Trump to say that possibly the Russians were
involved in a hacking that never occured, neither by Russia
nor anyone else.
Trump’s nominee for Secretary of State, Tillerson, has to
declare Russia to be a threat in his confirmation hearing in
order to be confirmed.
Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, Mattis, has
had to say in his confirmation hearing that the US needs to
be prepared to confront Russia militarily, adding that there
are few areas in which the US can cooperate with Russia
which he says is trying to break NATO.
We could dismiss Trump’s admission as throwing a bone
to the CIA so they can feel vindicated and get off his back,
and the statements by Tillerson and Mattis could be
dismissed as what has to be said in order to be confirmed.
Nevertheless, these statements from Trump’s top
appointments are being used as confirmations that
everyone except Trump, even Trump’s own government,
realize that Russia is a threat.
The propaganda picture of Russia that the Obama regime
worked so hard to create now has the luster of acceptance
.
138
by Trump’s nominees for State and Defense. Whether
Tillerson and Mattis mean it or not, clearly the US
Congress in thrall to the campaign donations from the
military/security complex is determined that Russia be
regarded as a threat.
The Russians watching all this must quickly be losing their
hopes for normalized relations. The US ruling
establishment is causing hope to fade and suspicion to rise
in the Russian government, thus raising barriers within
Russia herself to Trump’s policy of better relations.
Nothing speaks more clearly of the unbridled evil of the
US Establishment than its willingness to risk conflict with
Russia for the sake of its hold on power and profit.
Where is the liberal-left’s moral conscience? Why is the
liberal-left helping the military/security complex
delegitimize Trump and box him in so that his agenda is
dead on arrival and thermo-nuclear war remains an option?
 Ethics Fiasco: Trump, Divestment And
The Perversion Of Executive Politics
By Anthony Dimaggio
January 13, 2017
One of the biggest stories this week is the confirmation
controversy over the President Elect’s cabinet nominees.
This controversy was accompanied by discussions of
Trump’s own personal finances. Reporters are flooding
major news outlets with stories questioning whether
Trump and his nominees can be trusted to put the public
interest first, considering the black hole that is The
Donald’s finances, and the potential conflicts of interest
between his business holdings and his democratic
obligations to the country. The message from the
Democrats and media is that Trump and his nominees’
opposition to financial transparency are threats to good
governance. This narrative has some value, in terms of
spotlighting the dangers of official abuse of politics for
private gain. But this narrative is also stunningly naïve,
demonstrating a willful ignorance to the longstanding
perversion of American politics by corporate interests.
Of primary concern to journalists is the failure of
numerous Trump nominees to provide a full disclosure of
their financial assets, or a plan for how to divest from
holdings that could place them in situations where their
personal financial interests conflict with the common
good. The economic background of Trump’s nominees is
somewhat unique, in that never have so many people of
such opulence been nominated to key federal positions. As
the New York Times reported on January 6,
“Mr. Trump has selected what would be the
wealthiest cabinet in modern American
history, filled with millionaires and
billionaires with complicated financial
portfolios. Mr. [Rex] Tillerson [the Secretary
of State nominee] is worth at least $300
139
million, but is hardly the richest among
them; Wilbur L. Ross Jr., the Commerce
Secretary nominee; Betsy DeVos, the
Education Secretary nominee; and Steven
T. Mnuchin, the Treasury Secretary
nominee, each hold assets estimated at
more than a billion dollars.”
Echoing the concerns of Democratic leaders, the editors at
the New York Times write:
“Donald Trump’s transition team and
Senate Republicans are determined to
railroad several nominees to his cabinet of
billionaires and moguls through to
confirmation without fully revealing
business interests that could disqualify
them…This is unprecedented, potentially
illegal, and the clearest sign yet of Mr.
Trump’s cavalier attitude toward criminal
laws preventing federal officials from
profiting from public service. Mr. Trump’s
Senate allies are shirking their
constitutional duty, attempting to rubber-
stamp nominees without information that
would help determine whether they merit
the public’s confidence. The law doesn’t
require Mr. Trump to shed his business
interests, but the failure of his cabinet
officials to do so could land them in jail.”
As of January 7, the Office of Government Ethics (OGE)
expressed “cause for alarm” if the Senate was to begin
confirmation hearings prior to all Trump’s nominees
submitting the relevant financial disclosure paperwork.
The New York Times reports the Trump administration
“is behind where it should be in this
process of disentangling conflicts of
interest. This is partly a reflection of the
extraordinary complexity of negotiating
such conflict of interest agreements for
incoming government officials worth
hundreds of millions, or even billions, of
dollars.”
OGE director Walter Shaub warns:
“During this presidential transition, not all of
the nominees presently scheduled for
hearings have completed the ethics review
process. In fact, OGE has not received
even initial draft financial disclosure reports
for some of the nominees scheduled for
hearings.”
Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer
attacks Trump’s incoming administration for a lack of
transparency. He criticizes Republican Senators and
Trump for “collusion” in pushing hearings prior to
financial disclosures are complete:
“The Senate and the American people
deserve to know that these cabinet
nominees have a plan to avoid any
conflicts of interest, that they’re working on
behalf of the American people and not their
own bottom line, and that they plan to fully
comply with the law.”
Reiterating this concern with good governance, the New
York Times editorializes:
“Nominees face a long [vetting] process to
ensure they’ll be working for the American
people, not for their own enrichment. By
law, they must submit hundreds of pages of
financial disclosures, shed assets and jobs
and take other steps to avoid conflicts of
interest.”
The Times encourages Trump’s nominees to “divest [their
potentially compromising assets] and enter office free of
conflict.” The paper denigrates Trump for being “the only
incoming president in modern history who has refused to
do so.” The Times quotes Lawrence Noble, former counsel
at the Federal Election Commission, who argues nominees
should sell their investments and place the earnings in
treasury bonds or mutual funds:
“We don’t want the decisions that these
individuals make to be influenced by their
own financial interests.”
The above concerns about graft in the executive branch are
warranted in light of the longstanding plutocratic
dominance of U.S. politics. Numerous academic studies
find that business interests prevail over public concerns in
the policy process. In Affluence and Influence, political
scientist Martin Gilens provides evidence that policy
outcomes are significantly more likely to benefit the top 20
percent of income earners over the bottom 80 percent.
Gilens and Page conclude in another study, “Testing
Theories of American Politics,” that average citizens
140
have virtually no effect on policy outcomes compared to
wealthier Americans. Citizen’s groups have at times a
modest impact on policy, but much less than wealthy
individuals and business lobbies. In Representing the
Advantaged, political scientist Daniel Butler finds that the
grievances of Americans of higher socio-economic status
are more likely to be taken seriously by political officials
than those of lower-socio economic status, even when both
groups contact officials at equal rates. Considering these
findings, it would be extraordinarily naïve to claim that
political officials are not biased in favor of the wealthy.
Potential conflicts of interest between Trump’s business
holdings and his presidential responsibilities are real. I’ll
provide two examples, which have already been
acknowledged by journalists. One involves Trump’s role
in appointing the head of the General Services
Administration, which negotiates the lease for Trump’s
international hotel in Washington D.C. Of course, Trump
owns the hotel, and announced that he would place his
holdings in a “blind trust” for his daughter and other
children to run. But to argue that Trump doesn’t hold a
financial interest in seeing a favorable lease negotiated for
his business is outlandish. Trump also seems unaware of
what a “blind trust” is. Here’s a hint – it’s not placing your
holdings into the hands of your children, who are legally
free to communicate with you about business affairs at any
time. But this is not even the central point. Most
importantly, even if Trump didn’t communicate with his
children, he still has a financial interest in seeing a
favorable lease negotiated for his hotel, and his children, in
addition to his General Services Administration
appointment, obviously know this. A second example of a
conflict of interest involves Trump’s hotels and potential
disputes with the National Labor Relations Board. The
head of the NLRB is appointed by Trump, which could
mean undue pressure on the agency to bias rulings in favor
of the president. Even if Trump relies on his children to
run the hotels, this doesn’t remove the blatant conflict of
interest at play regarding executive labor policy.
For those who would downplay these concerns by
claiming that U.S. politics is already corrupted by money,
my response is simple: things can always be worse. The
corruption of politics by money via campaign donations is
just one form of political perversion. There are others, as
reflected in concerns over patronage, bribery, and conflicts
of interest such as those described above. One needs to
look no further than my home state, Illinois, to see how
political patronage and personal financial interests
compromise government. Illinois governors are notorious
for their blatant corruption. For example, former
Republican Governor and ex-convict George Ryan ran a
“pay-to-play” ring out of the Secretary of State’s office,
with driver’s licenses shamelessly sold for bribes. Many
Illinois citizens who benefitted from this program were
first generation immigrants with little to no command of
the English language or knowledge of the rules of the road
(I say this from experience, having numerous extended
family immigrating from Sicily and paying these bribes).
The scandal blew up in Ryan’s face after a tragic accident
involving a truck driver (who paid a bribe for his license),
who caused a fiery crash involving the deaths of six
children, after the driver’s taillight assembly fell off his
truck and ignited a minivan’s fuel tank. The truck driver
had been warned by numerous drivers on the road of his
loose taillight, but drove on undeterred. The incident came
to symbolize the extraordinary recklessness and
criminality of patronage politics under the Ryan regime.
Then, of course, there was the shameless patronage
criminality of former Governor and now-convict Rod
Blagojevich. Among Blagojevich’s best hits include: his
shameless horse trading of state bureaucratic nominations
for campaign donations; his attempt to shake down a
children’s hospital for campaign donations, accompanied
by a threat of cutting off state funding; his effort have the
Chicago Tribune’s editorial staff fired after they advocated
his impeachment, accompanied by the threat that state
renovation funds would not be available for the Cub’s
Wrigley Field, which Tribune owner Sam Zell also owned;
and finally, Blagojevich’s effort to sell Barack Obama’s
old Senate seat to the highest bidder, a prize which he
referred to as “fucking golden” – and which he had no
plans of “giving it up for fucking nothin.” Illinois’
patronage politics is a more shameless, brazen form of
corruption than the business-as-usual campaign donation
system driving national politics. In the national version,
pro-business candidates are empowered to win political
offices by a small group of wealthy donors seeking to
curry favor. In the Illinois version, the same campaign
contribution pressures exist, but government is viewed as
an ATM machine for political leaders, with patronage
allowing for repeated withdrawals of funds into officials’
personal piggybanks.
The path forward for Trump and his nominees is clearly
described by former President Bush’s chief ethics lawyer,
Richard Painter: divestment. Painter argues failure to
divest would be a violation of Article 1, Section 9 of the
U.S. Constitution, which prohibits presidents from
accepting “any present, emolument, office or title, of any
kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.” In
this case, the emoluments [defined as a fee or profit] are
illegally accrued any time Trump charges foreign leaders
to stay in his hotels. Trump’s attorney, Sherri Dillon,
absurdly insists that profits earned from foreign leaders do
not constitute “emoluments” – but rather are “value-for-
value exchange[s]” between parties that are of no concern
to supporters of transparency in government.
Dillon’s silly semantics aside, Trump’s nominees are also
at risk of violating federal ethics law by failing to divulge
and divest their financial assets. 18 U.S.C. §208 bars
executive branch employees from “personally and
substantially” participating in government activities having
an impact on their personal finances. Without a transparent
accounting of their assets, there is no way to know whether
141
nominees will engage in political activities that enrich their
own economic fortunes.
Disclosure and divestment are important. But it’s also
important to note that the Schumer’s narrative about “good
government” represents a romantic, mythic belief these
acts will magically cure political nominees of conflicts of
interest they hold between pursuing the public good and
private profits. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The American political process has been captured on a
system-wide level, going beyond ethics law, a single
president, or presidential nominees. This system-wide
corruption, however, is not as simple as common
portrayals of lobbyists “buying” off officials via campaign
donations. The reality of the matter is far worse. If it were
merely an issue of curbing money transactions between
officials and lobbyists, this could be dealt with by
reauthorizing the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of
2002, which banned issue ad spending, and by banning
campaign donations of any kind in favor of publicly
financed campaigns. But the rot of American politics
extends much further than campaign donations. The entire
political system has been captured by a plutocratic
ideology that envisions business elites as the rightful
drivers of public policy, due to their allegedly superior
wisdom and skills.
Many Americans will be surprised to learn that social
science studies regularly fail to uncover a consistent,
statistically significant relationship between campaign
donations on the one hand, and members of Congress
voting on legislation favored by donors on the other.
Furthermore, recent scholarship concludes that the most
common policy outcome is continuation of the status quo,
with lobbyists in Washington failing most of the time in
securing new benefits via legislation. Despite sizable
campaign donations, members of Congress are risk averse,
often seeking to avoid the negative exposure associated
with pushing unpopular reforms. The Chamber of
Commerce may wish to eliminate the minimum wage
entirely, but the negative public response would be so
large as to make it impossible. The beef industry would
probably like to eliminate USDA regulations entirely, but
the public backlash in terms of the heightened risk to
consumers would be unmanageable. Wall Street and the
health insurance industry are salivating over privatizing
Social Security and Medicare, but that doesn’t mean that
Republicans and Democrats will uniformly embrace these
proposals if they fear losing votes from seniors.
Complicating matters further, political scientists find that
lobbyists don’t even try to “buy” policy via campaign
donations. Rather, they seek to establish and strengthen
relationships with officials who already agree ideologically
with their demands. One of the main roles of lobbyists,
social scientists argue, is providing the information and
expertise officials need to advocate for policy changes that
benefit corporate interests. Within this framework of pre-
existing support for business elites, campaign contributors
(and contributions) are important because they cement into
place a relationship between lobbyists and officials.
Donations ensure that pro-business candidates get elected
over those who challenge business power. This conclusion
is hardly novel. It’s well known in political science that
nearly nine times out of ten, the candidate who spends
more money in electoral races wins, since they are able to
buy more public exposure via political ads.
Contrary to Schumer’s divestment narrative, it’s important
to identify how the entire political system has been
captured by wealthy interests. It may be the case that
corporate lobbyists fail most of the time in securing
benefits from Congress. But when changes to the law do
occur, wealthy Americans and business lobbies are much
more likely to get what they want than the average
American or citizen’s groups. Why is this so? Political
scientist Nicholas Carnes provides a simple explanation in
White Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in
Economic Policymaking. Carnes empirically documents
how more affluent political officials are consistently more
likely to support pro-business, conservative economic
policies, as compared to (the few) working-class
Americans who have historically served in Congress. The
point here is simple: beyond the concern with campaign
donations, government itself is captured by plutocratic
actors who now run Congress directly. Government is not
“controlled” by corporate America. Government is
corporate America. Most members of Congress are
millionaires, and their numbers have grown significantly in
recent decades. According to the Center for Responsive
Politics, the median net worth of U.S. lawmakers reached
$1 million in 2013, 18 times that of the average household.
The Schumer position on corruption in politics misses a
key point. Most officials are socialized to embrace elitist,
upper-class values, because they are part of the upper
class. The famous sociologist G. William Domhoff spent
years documenting how being socialized through elitist
social, economic, and interpersonal networks allows for
the perpetuation of the American upper class. Italian
Marxist Antonio Gramsci was right to focus on how the
hegemonic power of socialization drives the indoctrination
process. Socialization in favor of elite interests is
absolutely vital to perpetuating plutocracy.
.
142
The Marxian position that economics determines
consciousness, while seemingly crude, does explain how
elite values perpetuate themselves. When coupled with
elitist forms of socialization, one’s economic class (in this
case being affluent) works to reinforce elitist ideologies
that seek to enhance corporate power over politics. This
hegemonic process isn’t recognized, however, in simplistic
discussions of campaign donations “buying” officials, or
for that matter by those naively claiming that divesting
one’s financial assets guarantees they will act as honest
brokers of policy change.
In a rare admission of how deep the rabbit hole really goes,
the New York Times reports the insight of Sierra Club
director Lena Moffitt, who speaks derisively of the notion
that divestment will cure the Trump administration of their
elitist policies. Taking aim at Rex Tillerson, Trump’s State
Department nominee, Moffitt explained:
“It is impossible for this man to remove his
career, and frankly his personality, from the
oil and gas industry. He has been knee
deep in this industry for more than four
decades.”
Such is the way of things when political institutions are
captured by business elites.
Correcting the perversions endemic in American politics
requires more than disclosure and divestment from Trump
and his nominees. Even “getting money out of politics” is
unlikely to cure the problem of business dominance of
government. Rather, Americans must take the initiative
and purge the political system of the bi-partisan, wealthy
officialdom who currently dominate Congress, the courts,
and the White House. This project will require tremendous
effort and a decades-long fight to roll back capture of
government.
John Dewey was right say that “politics is the shadow cast
on society by big business.” To fight the plutocracy
requires a cultural, economic, and political revolution in
the way people think about politics. Government must be
transformed from an upper-class outfit into one dominated
by the working class. The only way to do this is to remove
the rot, from root to branch.
Planned Violence: Organizer Of Trump Inauguration Mass
Riots Doesn’t Believe In “Peaceful Transition Of Power”
Organizer Makes Clear That Planned Mass Disruption
Will Not Be Peaceful
By Alex Thomas -
01.13.2017 @12:03 AM EST
(INTELLIHUB) — An organizer for one of the numerous
hard left groups planning mass riots in and around
Washington D.C. during the inauguration of Donald
Trump has revealed that they do not believe in a peaceful
transition between Obama and the president-elect.
Legba Carrefour, an organizer for DisruptJ20, told Reuters
Wednesday that her group planned predawn blockades and
disruptions during the evening inaugural balls on top of the
protests during the actual inauguration.
It was then made clear that this is not about peacefully
protesting but rather part of a larger attempt to literally
steal the election.
“Some 300 DisruptJ20 volunteers will work
to mobilize demonstrators for a series of
protests the group has dubbed the “Festival
of Resistance,” reported Reuters.
“We are not in favor of a peaceful transition
of power, and we need to stop it,” Carrefour
continued.
“I can safely say that some groups are
likely planning actions that might result
in arrest scenarios”
The group has posted a manifesto on their website that also
reveals that they are planning widespread civil
disobedience and possible illegal actions. Calling on “all
people of conscience” to shut down the event, the groups
website even indicates that they believe they may be able
to stop Trump’s ascension to the presidency all together.
“If Trump is inaugurated at all, let it happen
behind closed doors, showing the world
that the vast majority of people in the U.S.
do not support his presidency or consent to
his rule,” reads the D.C. Counter-Inaugural
Welcoming Committees call to action.
143
When asked by World Net Daily why the groups meetings
were off limits to law enforcement and members of the
media, the spokeswoman continued,
“I can safely say that some groups are
likely planning actions that might result in
arrest scenarios.”
“Sorry, I cannot give specifics at this time,
due mostly to the fact that plans are still in
flux, but also due to the fact that not all
information is public.”
Amazingly, DisruptJ20 is not the only hard left group
openly planning what seems to be mass riots, as another
radical group, backed by former terrorist Bill Ayers, is also
planning a massive disruption.
The group includes leftist activists, entertainers, artists,
professors, writers, and at least one known terrorist and
has launched what amounts to a sort of soft coup attempt
in America with their release of a full page New York
Times ad and accompanying website that lays out a
concrete plan to prevent Donald Trump from ever taking
office.
The website, refusefascism.org, makes it clear from the
start that this is not about simply protesting Trump’s
inauguration but rather about actually preventing him from
being inaugurated to the office he rightfully won.
In other words, this is a direct attempt to
steal the election from both Trump and
the American people.
The homepage for the groups website starts out by
shouting “Bring DC to a halt!” and “Millions in the street
say no!” before laying out what they are actually calling
for.
“Going into the Inauguration, flood the
streets of Washington, DC with millions of
people, determined to stay on the streets to
 stop the Trump-Pence regime before it
starts,” the website reads.
“This starts January 14, the weekend of
Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, and
DOES NOT STOP till this regime is
prevented from ruling. This is the kind of
political crisis needed at this moment in
history. It has happened before, and it can
happen again,” it continues.
Interestingly, other leftist propagandists such as Rosie
O’Donnell are now publicly calling for martial law in
America as a means to stop Donald Trump from taking
office. One has to wonder if the planned mass riots are part
of a larger move to cause so much havoc that a declaration
of martial law actually becomes a viable option.
Regardless, we are in for what may go down as the most
intense week in recent American history.

144
 CIA Coup? Ex-Spook: Langley
‘Taking Traitor Trump Out Now’
Kristinn Taylor
Jan 13th, 2017 12:01 Am
Former spook John Schindler pronounced on Twitter
Thursday night that the CIA is trying to take out President-
elect Donald Trump before he is sworn in as president next
Friday, January 20. Schindler has long accused Trump of
being a Russian stooge.
Schindler’s bio for his Observer column reads,
“John Schindler is a security expert and
former National Security Agency analyst
and counterintelligence officer. A specialist
in espionage and terrorism, he’s also been
a Navy officer and a War College
professor. He’s published four books and is
on Twitter at @20committee.”
Schindler made his comment about the CIA in reaction to
a report by Washington Post columnist David Ignatius that
an Obama administration official told him Trump’s
national security adviser retired Lt. General Michael Flynn
made several calls to Russia’s U.S. ambassador the day
last month that President Barack Obama imposed sanctions
on Russia for allegedly interfering in the presidential
election to benefit Trump.
David Ignatius.
Ignatius reported in a column published Thursday night
about questions he has regarding Russia, Trump and the
election:
145
Question 3: What discussions has the
Trump team had with Russian officials
about future relations? Trump said
Wednesday that his relationship with
President Vladimir Putin is “an asset, not a
liability.” Fair enough, but until he’s
president, Trump needs to let Obama
manage U.S.-Russia policy.
Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump’s choice for national
security adviser, cultivates close Russian contacts. He has
appeared on Russia Today, and received a paid speaking
fee from the cable network, which was described in last
week’s unclassified intelligence briefing on Russian
hacking as
“the Kremlin’s principal international
propaganda outlet.”
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 and other measures in
retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it
undercut the U.S. sanctions? The Logan Act (though never
enforced) bars U.S. citizens from correspondence
intending to influence a foreign government about
“disputes” with the United States. Was its spirit violated?
The Trump campaign didn’t immediately respond to a
request for comment.
If the Trump team’s contacts helped
discourage the Russians from a counter-
retaliation, maybe that’s a good thing. But
we ought to know the facts.”
Schindler makes the point about monitoring phone calls
being the job of the intelligence community and that the
leak of alleged phone calls from Flynn to the Russian
ambassador would have come from the office of the
Director of the CIA John Brennan (aka the seventh floor at
Langley–CIA headquarters located in Northern Virginia).
Schindler concludes that the CIA is
trying to take out “traitor” Trump “now.”
This is the most important story in months. Proof that
Trump is a wholly owned Kremlin franchise.
Tell everyone.https://t.co/8rPj7mcCZm
— John Schindler (@20committee)
January 13, 2017
“This is the most important story in months.
Proof that Trump is a wholly owned Kremlin
franchise. Tell everyone.”
You know who monitors phone calls. IC
has had enough. Kremlin buttboi traitor
can't fill the shoes of Washington, Lincoln,
FDR, JFK, Reagan.
— John Schindler (@20committee)
January 13, 2017
“You know who monitors phone calls. IC
has had enough. Kremlin buttboi traitor
can’t fill the shoes of Washington,
Lincoln, FDR, JFK, Reagan.“
When @IgnatiusPost speaks, Langley's 7th
floor lips are moving. Zero disrespect, just
a fact.
They are taking traitor Trump out now.
.
146
— John Schindler (@20committee)
January 13, 2017
“When @IgnatiusPost speaks, Langley’s
7th floor lips are moving. Zero disrespect,
just a fact. hey are taking traitor Trump
out now.”
Schindler retweeted praise for his
comments that included a subtweet calling
what is going in D.C. a coup against
Trump.
The most important Twitter feed right now
is @20committee. https://t.co/oDagV17BRy
— Rocklin J Hellhammer (@rjhellhammer)
January 13, 2017
“The most important Twitter feed right now
is @20committee.”
How long before we start considering the
coup of DT as a coup de grâce instead of a
coup coup d'état?
— Rocklin J Hellhammer (@rjhellhammer)
January 8, 2017
“How long before we start considering the
coup of DT as a coup de grâce instead of a
coup coup d’état?”
 EXCLUSIVE: Intel Vets Say
Trump ‘Dossier’ Is A ‘Complete Fraud’
Richard Pollock - Reporter
3:38 PM 01/13/2017

The dossier purports to provide secret information about

President-elect Donald Trump’s links to Russian officials
and business interests, as well as his sexual proclivities.
The 35-page document reportedly was written by
Christopher Steele, a former British MI-6 official who co-
owns the London-based Orbis Business Intelligence, Ltd.
opposition research firm.

FusionGPS, a similar firm in Washington, D.C., reportedly

retained Orbis to write the document. Fusion GPS was
Veteran intelligence officials familiar with Russian
founded by former Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn
disinformation campaigns conclude the Trump “dossier”
Simpson. Steele reportedly has gone into hiding since
released by BuzzFeed earlier this week is fraudulent and its
BuzzFeed published the dossier.
author violated basic standards for intelligence reporting,
the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group has
learned. But multiple intelligence community sources interviewed
by TheDCNF said the dossier is almost certainly a
clumsily created fake.
.

147
 Confirmed: "Unknown" Republican,
Democrat Paid For Anti-Trump Report
By Tyler Durden
Jan 13, 2017 11:23 PM
Having learned previously both the identity of the former
British intelligence officer who compiled the "Trump
dossier", revealed by the WSJ earlier this week as former
MI-6 staffer Christopher Steele, currently director of
London-based Orbis Business Intelligence, and that John
McCain was the person who delivered the report to the
FBI, one question remained: who commissioned the
original report meant to uncover a material,i.e., campaign-
ending, weakness in Donald Trump's past.
We now have an answer, or least a partial one. But first, a
brief detour into just how Steele allegedly went about
compiling his data.
In a report in Mother Jones, David Corn, who first broke
the story that a former Western counterintelligence official
had sent memos to the FBI with troubling allegations
related to Donald Trump, writes about Steele's experience
shortly after being retained in June by a "private research
firm" to look into Trump's activity in Europe and Russia.
Steele recalls that
"It started off as a fairly general inquiry."
One question for him, he said, was, "Are
there business ties in Russia?"
Corn then writes that the former intelligence official went
to work and contacted his network of sources in Russia
and elsewhere.
He soon received what he called "hair-
raising" information.
His sources told him, he said, that Trump had been
"sexually compromised" by Russian
intelligence in 2013 (when Trump was in
Moscow for the Miss Universe contest) or
earlier and that there was an "established
exchange of information between the
Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual
benefit."
He noted he was "shocked" by these allegations. By the
end of June, he was sending reports of what he was finding
to the American firm.
148
The former spy said he soon decided the information he
was receiving was "sufficiently serious" for him to forward
it to contacts he had at the FBI. He did this, he said,
without permission from the American firm that had hired
him.
"This was an extraordinary situation," he
remarked.
Corn writes that the FBI's response to Steele's information,
was "shock and horror."
After a few weeks, the bureau asked him for information
on his sources and their reliability and on how he had
obtained his reports. He was also asked to continue to send
copies of his subsequent reports to the bureau. These
reports were not written, he noted, as finished work
products; they were updates on what he was learning from
his various sources.
But he said, "My track record as a
professional is second to no one."
Perhaps, although it does not explain either why the FBI
took no action when presented with this "hair-raising",
"shocking" information, despite his "track record as second
to none", nor why McCain had possession of the
document, and then also supposedly handed it off to the
FBI.
Steele told Corn that he "believed this
material was important, and he was unsure
how the FBI was handling it. Certainly,
there had been no public signs that the FBI
was investigating these allegations. (The
FBI at the time refused to tell me if it had
received the memos or if it was examining
the allegations.)"
Maybe the reason why the FBI had taken no action is
because they knew data was fake, and that Steele himself
was the subject of a hoax, one either perpetrated by 4Chan
as the message board has claimed, or he was the victim of
a counter-disinformation campaign by Russian "sources"
(yes, Russian spies don't always tell the truth to UK spies)
who meant to discredit Steele by providing him with
purposefully wrong material.
Corn then tries to further validate the credibility of his
source:
"A senior US administration official told me
that he had worked with the onetime spook
and that the former spy had an established
and respected track record of providing US
government agencies with accurate and
valuable information about sensitive
national security matters. "He is a credible
source who has provided information to the
US government for a long time, which
senior officials have found to be highly
credible," this US official said." Yet he
himself also admits that "I also was able to
review the memos the former spy had
written, and I quoted a few key portions in
my article. I did not report the specific
allegations—especially the lurid
allegations about Trump's personal
behavior—because they could not be
confirmed."
So if the actual underlying allegations - the very basis of
the report - could not be confirmed, what if any was the
story? This is how Corn spins it:
The newsworthy story at this point was
that a credible intelligence official had
provided information to the FBI alleging
Moscow had tried to cultivate and
compromise a presidential candidate.
And the issue at hand—at a time when the
FBI was publicly disclosing information
about its investigation of Hillary Clinton's
handling of her email at the State
Department—was whether the FBI had
thoroughly investigated these allegations
related to Russia and Trump. I also didn't
post the memos, as BuzzFeed did this
week, because the documents contained
information about the former spy's sources
that could place these people at risk.
That's not the end of it: now that his identity has been
revealed, there is little downside to pushing forward, and
Steele now says that
"these allegations deserved a was the following, in which Ted Malloch, a Trump insider,
"substantial inquiry" within the FBI. Yet
so far, the FBI has not yet said whether
such an investigation has been
conducted. As the former spy said to
me, "The story has to come out."
Of course, the implied allegation is that Trump, was not
only controlled by Putin due to the "kompromat" the
Russian secret services had on him, but was also being
149
protected by the FBI, which withheld this "shocking"
report from the public.
There is just one problem. Others had it too... and here we
go back to the original question:
who commissioned the anti-Trump
report in the first place?
Curiously, according to Steele, this spy whose
"track record is second to none", has no
idea. Says Corn, "the former spy said he
was never told the identity of the client."
Well, that's not exactly true. He does know that the private
research firm from the US
"was conducting a Trump opposition
research project that was first financed
by a Republican source until the
funding switched to a Democratic one."
In other words, while Steele didn't know the identity of the
actual source of funds, he did know their ideological
leanings.
However, someone who did seem to know the identity
emerged on Wednesday, when BBC News' Paul Wood
reported that
"the opposition research firm that
commissioned the report had worked first
for a superpac - political action committee -
supporting Jeb Bush during the Republican
primaries."
The interview in which the Jed Bush connection emerged,
said the following:
Let me tell you what the British
intelligence told me this morning.
[Christopher Steele] was also an FBI
asset at one point in time so he has an
intelligence background, but he was
paid for people that were working for
Jeb Bush in order to discredit him. The
 democrats took over the contract. He
kept adding to the dossier and using
information given to him by the FSB in
Russia, most of it fabricated, the more
he put into the dossier, the more he got
paid. So e made a sensationalist
dossier, as fat as possible just like your
lawyer charges you more billable hours
in order to get paid more.
Almost as soon as the BBC report and interview hit,
Charlie Spies, an attorney for Right to Rise USA, which
had supported Bush's presidential candidacy, disputed it.
"Right to Rise categorically denies the BBC
reporter's made up report and will be
demanding that he retract the made up
allegation," Spies told TPM. "Other than
enjoying James Bond movies, the PAC had
nothing to do with British Intelligence
officers."
He also proceeded with a rejection on Twitter.
Naturally, good luck proving either side of the allegations.
150
As the WSJ explained in its initial report, "no presidential
campaigns or super PACs reported payments to Orbis in
their required Federal Election Commission filings.
But several super PACs over the course
of the campaign reported that they paid
limited liability companies, whose
ultimate owners may be difficult or
impossible to discern."
Just as was intended, and surely no self-respecting spy
would allow a SuperPac to pay him directly... or for that
matter publicly.
So where do we stand now?
After a series of back and forths, Jeb Bush has been
accused of funding the report, with his own SuperPAC
immediately denying it, as it would of course, since there
is no definitive evidence (yet?) of Bush's involvement.
However, courtesy of Corn's report, who is writing on
behalf of Steele, we do know without dispute, that
"the American firm was conducting a
Trump opposition research project that
was first financed by a Republican
source until the funding switched to a
Democratic one."
And all this happened after a British spy was being worked
by the FSB, who provided him with fake intel, including
the glorious Golden Shower scene (hopefully the impact of
4Chan will eventually emerge somewhere here) to stuff the
report, and ask for even more cash from his client; a report
which was so incredibly not even the FBI could do
anything with it.
Could the Republican source have been Jeb Bush?
Certainly: after all, the Republican funding stopped at one
point - perhaps when Jeb dropped out of the primary - only
to be replaced with a Democrat source. Incidentally, we
also have very good sense of who the "Democratic source"
funding Steele's research may have been.
We are confident we will know more soon. After all, none
other than Trump earlier today promised his own Russia
hacking report in 90 days when he lashed out at
"sleazebag" Democrats and Republicans.
But the real point here is not who is behind it, but who had
this report before it was finally released by Buzzfeed on
Monday. And according to the latest information, not only
the FBI, but also at least one Republican and one
Democrat source had it. And yet nobody went public with
it to "crush" the Trump campaign; instead the best
"compromising" thing that could be dug up was the tape of
Trump "grabbing women by the pussy."
It goes without saying that if there was indeed some
Trump-crushing fact in the report, it would have emerged
long ago, and if not by the FBI, then certainly by Trump's
.
151
immediate competitors, both Republican and Democrat...
unless they too were "compromised" by Russia.
Which is why, no matter how this story ends, it should be
clear by now that nothing contained in the "Trump report"
was in any way actionable, or else it would have seen the
light of day long ago.
 Did The Russians Really Hack The DNC?
By Gregory Elich
January 13, 2017
Russia, we are told, breached the servers of the Democratic
National Committee (DNC), swiped emails and other
documents, and released them to the public, to alter the
outcome of the U.S. presidential election.
How substantial is the evidence backing these assertions?
Hired by the Democratic National Committee to
investigate unusual network activity, the security firm
Crowdstrike discovered two separate intrusions on DNC
servers. Crowdstrike named the two intruders Cozy Bear
and Fancy Bear, in an allusion to what it felt were Russian
sources. According to Crowdstrike,
“Their tradecraft is superb, operational
security second to none,” and “both groups
were constantly going back into the
environment” to change code and methods
and switch command and control channels.
On what basis did Crowdstrike attribute these breaches to
Russian intelligence services? The security firm claims
that the techniques used were similar to those deployed in
past security hacking operations that have been attributed
to the same actors, while the profile of previous victims
“closely mirrors the strategic interests of the Russian
government. Furthermore, it appeared that the intruders
were unaware of each other’s presence in the DNC system.
“While you would virtually never see
Western intelligence agencies going after
the same target without de-confliction for
fear of compromising each other’s
152
operations,” Crowdstrike reports, “in Russia
this is not an uncommon scenario.” [1]
Those may be indicators of Russian government
culpability. But then again, perhaps not. Regarding the
point about separate intruders, each operating
independently of the other, that would seem to more likely
indicate that the sources have nothing in common.
Each of the two intrusions acted as an advanced persistent
threat (APT), which is an attack that resides undetected on
a network for a long time. The goal of an APT is to
exfiltrate data from the infected system rather than inflict
damage. Several names have been given to these two
actors, and most commonly Fancy Bear is known as
APT28, and Cozy Bear as APT29.
The fact that many of the techniques used in the hack
resembled, in varying degrees, past attacks attributed to
Russia may not necessarily carry as much significance as
we are led to believe. Once malware is deployed, it tends
to be picked up by cybercriminals and offered for sale or
trade on Deep Web black markets, where anyone can
purchase it. Exploit kits are especially popular sellers.
Quite often, the code is modified for specific uses. Security
specialist Josh Pitts demonstrated how easy that process
can be, downloading and modifying nine samples of the
OnionDuke malware, which is thought to have first
originated with the Russian government. Pitts reports that
this exercise demonstrates “how easy it is to repurpose
nation-state code/malware.” [2]
In another example, when SentinalOne
Research discovered the Gyges malware
in 2014, it reported that it “exhibits
similarities to Russian espionage malware,”
and is “designed to target government
organizations. It comes as no surprise to us
that this type of intelligence agency-grade
malware would eventually fall into
cybercriminals’ hands.” The security firm
explains that Gyges is an “example of how
advanced techniques and code developed
by governments for espionage are
effectively being repurposed, modularized
and coupled with other malware to commit
cybercrime.” [3]
Attribution is hard, cybersecurity specialists often point
out.
“Once an APT is released into the wild, its
spread isn’t controlled by the attacker,”
writes Mark McAdle. “They can’t prevent
someone from analyzing it and repurposing
it for their own needs.” Adapting malware
“is a well-known reality,” he continues.
“Finding irrefutable evidence that links an
attacker to an attack is virtually
unattainable, so everything boils down to
assumptions and judgment.” [4]
Security Alliance regards security firm FireEye’s analysis
that tied APT28 to the Russian government as based
“largely on circumstantial evidence.”
FireEye’s report “explicitly disregards
targets that do not seem to indicate
sponsorship by a nation-state,” having
excluded various targets because they are
“not particularly indicative of a specific
sponsor’s interests.” [5] FireEye reported
that the APT28 “victim set is narrow,” which
helped lead it to the conclusion that it is a
Russian operation. Cybersecurity
consultant Jeffrey Carr reacts with scorn:
“The victim set is narrow because the
report’s authors make it narrow! In fact, it
wasn’t narrowly targeted at all if you take
into account the targets mentioned by other
cybersecurity companies, not to mention
those that FireEye deliberately excluded for
being ‘not particularly indicative of a
specific sponsor’s interests’.” [6]
FireEye’s report from 2014, on which much of the DNC
Russian attribution is based, found that 89 percent of the
APT28 software samples it analyzed were compiled during
regular working hours in St. Petersburg and Moscow. [7]
But compile times, like language settings, can be easily
altered to mislead investigators. Mark McAdle wonders,
“If we think about the very high level of
design, engineering, and testing that would
be required for such a sophisticated attack,
is it reasonable to assume that the attacker
would leave these kinds of breadcrumbs?
It’s possible. But it’s also possible that
these things can be used to misdirect
attention to a different party. Potentially
another adversary. Is this evidence the
result of sloppiness or a careful
misdirection?” [8]
“If the guys are really good,” says Chris
Finan, CEO of Manifold Technology,
153
“they’re not leaving much evidence or
they’re leaving evidence to throw you off
the scent entirely.” [9]
How plausible is it that Russian intelligence services
would fail even to attempt such a fundamental step?
James Scott of the Institute for Critical Infrastructure
Technology points out that the very vulnerability of the
DNC servers constitutes a muddied basis on which
determine attribution.
“Attribution is less exact in the case of the
DNC breach because the mail servers
compromised were not well-secured; the
organization of a few hundred personnel
did not practice proper cyber-hygiene; the
DNC has a global reputation and is a
valuable target to script kiddies, hacktivists,
lone-wolf cyber-threat actors, cyber-
criminals, cyber-jihadists, hail-mary threats,
and nation-state sponsored advanced
persistent threats; and because the
malware discovered on DNC systems were
well-known, publicly disclosed, and variants
could be purchased on Deep Web markets
and forums.” [10]
Someone, or some group, operating under the pseudonym
of Guccifer 2.0, claimed to be a lone actor in hacking the
DNC servers. It is unclear what relation – if any – Guccifer
2.0 has to either of the two APT attacks on the DNC. In a
PDF file that Guccifer 2.0 sent to Gawker.com, metadata
indicated that it was it was last saved by someone having a
username in Cyrillic letters. During the conversion of the
file from Microsoft Word to PDF, invalid hyperlink error
messages were automatically generated in the Russian
language. [11]
This would seem to present rather damning evidence. But
who is Guccifer 2.0? A Russian government operation? A
private group? Or a lone hacktivist? In the poorly secured
DNC system, there were almost certainly many infiltrators
of various stripes. Nor can it be ruled out that the metadata
indicators were intentionally generated in the file to
misdirect attribution. The two APT attacks have been
noted for their sophistication, and these mistakes – if that
is what they are – seem amateurish. To change the
language setting on a computer can be done in a matter of
seconds, and that would be standard procedure for
advanced cyber-warriors. On the other hand, sloppiness on
the part of developers is not entirely unknown. However,
one would expect a nation-state to enforce strict software
and document handling procedures and implement
rigorous review processes.
At any rate, the documents posted to the Guccifer 2.0 blog
do not necessarily originate from the same source as those
published by WikiLeaks. Certainly, none of the documents
posted to WikiLeaks possess the same metadata issues.
And one hacking operation does not preclude another, let
alone an insider leak.
APT28 relied on XTunnel, repurposed from open source
code that is available to anyone, to open network ports and
siphon data. The interesting thing about the software is its
failure to match the level of sophistication claimed for
APT28. The strings in the code quite transparently indicate
its intent, with no attempt at obfuscation. [12] It seems an
odd oversight for a nation-state operation, in which
plausible deniability would be essential, to overlook that
glaring point during software development.
Command-and-control servers remotely issue malicious
commands to infected machines. Oddly, for such a key
component of the operation, the command-and-control IP
address in both attacks was hard-coded in the malware.
This seems like another inexplicable choice, given that the
point of an advanced persistent threat is to operate for an
extended period without detection. A more suitable
approach would be to use a Domain Name System (DNS)
address, which is a decentralized computer naming system.
That would provide a more covert means of identifying the
command-and-control server. [13] Moreover, one would
expect that address to be encrypted. Using a DNS address
would also allow the command-and-control operation to
easily move to another server if its location is detected,
without the need to modify and reinstall the code.
One of the IP addresses is claimed to be a “well-known
APT 28” command-and-control address, while the second
is said to be linked to Russian military intelligence. [14]
The first address points to a server located in San Jose,
California, and is operated by a server hosting service. [15]
The second server is situated in Paris, France, and owned
by another server hosting service. [16] Clearly, these are
servers that have been compromised by hackers. It is
customary for hackers to route their attacks through
vulnerable computers. The IP addresses of compromised
computers are widely available on the Deep Web, and
typically a hacked server will be used by multiple threat
actors. These two particular servers may or may not have
been regularly utilized by Russian Intelligence, but they
were not uniquely so used. Almost certainly, many other
hackers would have used the same machines, and it cannot
be said that these IP addresses uniquely identify an
infiltrator. Indeed, the second IP address is associated with
the common Trojan viruses Agent-APPR and Shunnael.
[17]
“Everyone is focused on attribution, but we
may be missing the bigger truth,” says
Joshua Croman, Director of the Cyber
Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council.
“[T]he level of sophistication required to do
this hack was so low that nearly anyone
could do it.” [18]
154
In answer to critics, the Department of Homeland Security
and the FBI issued a joint analysis report, which presented
“technical details regarding the tools and
infrastructure used” by Russian intelligence
services “to compromise and exploit
networks” associated with the U.S.
election, U.S. government, political, and
private sector entities. The report code-
named these activities “Grizzly Steppe.”
[19]
For a document that purports to offer strong evidence on
behalf of U.S. government allegations of Russian
culpability, it is striking how weak and sloppy the content
is. Included in the report is a list of every threat group ever
said to be associated with the Russian government, most of
which are unrelated to the DNC hack. It appears that
various governmental organizations were asked to send a
list of Russian threats, and then an official lacking IT
background compiled that information for the report, and
the result is a mishmash of threat groups, software, and
techniques. “PowerShell backdoor,” for instance, is a
method used by many hackers, and in no way describes a
Russian operation.
Indeed, one must take the list on faith, because nowhere in
the document is any evidence provided to back up the
claim of a Russian connection. Indeed, as the majority of
items on the list are unrelated to the DNC hack, one
wonders what the point is. But it bears repeating: even
where software can be traced to Russian origination, it
does not necessarily indicate exclusive usage. Jeffrey Carr
explains:
“Once malware is deployed, it is no longer
under the control of the hacker who
deployed it or the developer who created it.
It can be reverse-engineered, copied,
modified, shared and redeployed again and
again by anyone.”
Carr quotes security firm ESET in regard to the Sednit
group, one of the items on the report’s list, and which is
another name for APT28:
“As security researchers, what we call ‘the
Sednit group’ is merely a set of software
and the related infrastructure, which we
can hardly correlate with any specific
organization.”
Carr points out that X-Agent software, which is said to
have been utilized in the DNC hack, was easily obtained
by ESET for analysis.
“If ESET could do it, so can others. It is
both foolish and baseless to claim, as
 Crowdstrike does, that X-Agent is used
solely by the Russian government when
the source code is there for anyone to find
and use at will.” [20]
The salient impression given by the government’s report is
how devoid of evidence it is. For that matter, the majority
of the content is taken up by what security specialist John
Hinderaker describes as “pedestrian advice to IT
professionals about computer security.” As for the report’s
indicators of compromise (IoC),
Hinderaker characterizes these as “tools
that are freely available and IP addresses
that are used by hackers around the world.”
[21]
In conjunction with the report, the FBI and Department of
Homeland Security provided a list of IP addresses it
identified with Russian intelligence services. [22]
Wordfence analyzed the IP addresses as well as a PHP
malware script provided by the Department of Homeland
Security. In analyzing the source code, Wordfence
discovered that the software used was P.A.S., version
3.1.0. It then found that the website that manufactures the
malware had a site country code indicating that it is
Ukrainian.
The current version of the P.A.S. software
is 4.1.1, which is much newer than that
used in the DNC hack, and the latest
version has changed “quite substantially.”
Wordfence notes that not only is the
software “commonly available,” but also
that it would be reasonable to expect
“Russian intelligence operatives to develop
their own tools or at least use current
malicious tools from outside sources.” To
put it plainly, Wordfence concludes that the
malware sample “has no apparent
relationship with Russian intelligence.” [23]
Wordfence also analyzed the government’s list of 876 IP
addresses included as indicators of compromise. The sites
are widely dispersed geographically, and of those with a
known location, the United States has the largest number.
A large number of the IP addresses belong to low-cost
server hosting companies.
“A common pattern that we see in the
industry,” Wordfence states, “is that
accounts at these hosts are compromised
and those hacked sites are used to launch
attacks around the web.” Fifteen percent of
the IP addresses are currently Tor exit
nodes. “These exit nodes are used by
anyone who wants to be anonymous
online, including malicious actors.” [24]
155
If one also takes into account the IP addresses that not only
point to current Tor exits, but also those that once
belonged to Tor exit nodes, then these comprise 42 percent
of the government’s list. [25]
“The fact that so many of the IPs are Tor
addresses reveals the true sloppiness of
the report,” concludes network security
specialist Jerry Gamblin. [26]
Cybersecurity analyst Robert Graham was particularly
blistering in his assessment of the government’s report,
characterizing it as “full of garbage.” The report fails to tie
the indicators of compromise to the Russian government.
“It contains signatures of viruses that are
publicly available, used by hackers around
the world, not just Russia. It contains a long
list of IP addresses from perfectly normal
services, like Tor, Google, Dropbox,
Yahoo, and so forth. Yes, hackers use
Yahoo for phishing and maladvertising. It
doesn’t mean every access of Yahoo is an
‘indicator of compromise’.”
Graham compared the list of IP addresses against those
accessed by his web browser, and found two matches.
“No,” he continues. “This doesn’t mean I’ve
been hacked. It means I just had a normal
interaction with Yahoo. It means the Grizzly
Steppe IoCs are garbage.” Graham goes
on to point out that “what really happened”
with the supposed Russian hack into the
Vermont power grid “is that somebody just
checked their Yahoo email, thereby
accessing one of the same IP addresses I
did. How they get from the facts (one
person accessed Yahoo email) to the story
(Russians hacked power grid)” is U.S.
government “misinformation.” [27]
The indicators of compromise, in Graham’s assessment,
were “published as a political tool, to prove they have
evidence pointing to Russia.” As for the P.A.S. web shell,
it is “used by hundreds if not thousands of hackers, mostly
associated with Russia, but also throughout the rest of the
world.” Relying on the government’s sample for
attribution is problematic:
“Just because you found P.A.S. in two
different places doesn’t mean it’s the same
hacker.” A web shell “is one of the most
common things hackers use once they’ve
broken into a server,” Graham observes.
[28]
Although cybersecurity analyst Robert M. Lee is inclined
to accept the government’s position on the DNC hack, he
feels the joint analysis report “reads like a poorly done
vendor intelligence report stringing together various
aspects of attribution without evidence.” The report’s list
“detracts from the confidence because of the interweaving
of unrelated data.” The information presented is not
sourced, he adds.
“It’s a random collection of information and
in that way, is mostly useless.” Indeed, the
indicators of compromise have “a high rate
of false positives for defenders that use
them.” [29]
Among the government’s list of Russian actors are
Energetic Bear and Crouching Yeti, two names for the
same threat group. In its analysis, Kaspersky Lab found
that most of the group’s victims “fall into the
industrial/machinery building sector,” and it is “not
currently possible to determine the country of origin.”
Although listed in the government’s report, it is not
suggested that the group played a part in the DNC hack.
But it does serve as an example of the uncertainty
surrounding government claims about Russian hacking
operations in general. [30]
CosmicDuke is one of the software packages listed as tied
to Russia. SecureList, however, finds that unlike the
software’s predecessor, CosmicDuke targets those who
traffic in “controlled substances, such as steroids and
hormones.” One possibility is that CosmicDuke is used by
law enforcement agencies, while another possibility “is
that it’s simply available in the underground and purchased
by various competitors in the pharmaceutical business to
spy on each other.” In either case, whether or not the
software is utilized by the Russian government, there is a
broader base for its use. [31]
The intent of the joint analysis report was to provide
evidence of Russian state responsibility for the DNC hack.
But nowhere does it do so. Mere assertions are meant to
persuade. How much evidence does the government have?
The Democratic Party claims that the FBI never requested
access to DNC servers. [32] The FBI, for its part, says it
made “multiple requests” for access to the DNC servers
and was repeatedly turned down. [33] Either way, it is a
remarkable admission. In a case like this, the FBI would
typically conduct its own investigation. Was the DNC
afraid the FBI might come to a different conclusion than
the DNC-hired security firm Crowdstrike? The FBI was
left to rely on whatever evidence Crowdstrike chose to
supply. During its analysis of DNC servers, Crowdstrike
reports that it found evidence of APT28 and APT29
intrusions within two hours. Did it stop there, satisfied
with what it had found? Or did it continue to explore
whether additional intrusions by other actors had taken
place?
156
In an attempt to further inflame the hysteria generated
from accusations of Russian hacking, the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence published a declassified
version of a document briefed to U.S. officials. The
information was supplied by the CIA, FBI, and National
Security Agency, and was meant to cement the
government’s case. Not surprisingly, the report received a
warm welcome in the mainstream media, but what is
notable is that it offers not a single piece of evidence to
support its claim of “high confidence” in assessing that
Russia hacked the DNC and released documents to
WikiLeaks. Instead, the bulk of the report is an unhinged
diatribe against Russian-owned RT media. The content is
rife with inaccuracies and absurdities. Among the heinous
actions RT is accused of are having run “anti-fracking
programming, highlighting environmental issues and the
impacts on health issues,” airing a documentary on Occupy
Wall Street, and hosting third-party candidates during the
2012 election.[34]
The report would be laughable, were it not for the fact that
it is being played up for propaganda effect, bypassing logic
and appealing directly to unexamined emotion. The 2016
election should have been a wake-up call for the
Democratic Party. Instead, predictably enough, no self-
examination has taken place, as the party doubles down on
the neoliberal policies that have impoverished tens of
millions, and backing military interventions that have
sown so much death and chaos. Instead of thoughtful
analysis, the party is lashing out and blaming Russia for its
loss to an opponent that even a merely weak candidate
would have beaten handily.
Mainstream media start with the premise that the Russian
government was responsible, despite a lack of convincing
evidence. They then leap to the fallacious conclusion that
because Russia hacked the DNC, only it could have leaked
the documents.
So, did the Russian government hack the DNC and feed
documents to WikiLeaks? There are really two questions
here: who hacked the DNC, and who released the DNC
documents? These are not necessarily the same. An earlier
intrusion into German parliament servers was blamed on
the Russians, yet the release of documents to WikiLeaks is
thought to have originated from an insider. [35] Had the
Russians hacked into the DNC, it may have been to gather
intelligence, while another actor released the documents.
But it is far from certain that Russian intelligence services
had anything to do with the intrusions. Julian Assange says
that he did not receive the DNC documents from a nation-
state. It has been pointed out that Russia could have used a
third party to pass along the material. Fair enough, but
former UK diplomat Craig Murray asserts: “I know who
the source is… It’s from a Washington insider. It’s not
from Russia.” [36]
There are too many inconsistencies and holes in the
official story. In all likelihood, there were multiple
intrusions into DNC servers, not all of which have been
identified. The public ought to be wary of quick claims of
attribution. It requires a long and involved process to
arrive at a plausible identification, and in many cases the
source can never be determined. As Jeffrey Carr explains,
“It’s important to know that the process of attributing an
attack by a cybersecurity company has nothing to do with
the scientific method. Claims of attribution aren’t testable
or repeatable because the hypothesis is never proven right
or wrong.” [37]
Russia-bashing is in full swing, and there does not appear
to be any letup in sight. We are plunging headlong into a
new Cold War, riding on a wave of propaganda-induced
hysteria. The self-serving claims fueling this campaign
need to be challenged every step of the way. Surrendering
to evidence-free emotional appeals would only serve those
who arrogantly advocate confrontation and geopolitical
domination.

Notes.
[1] Dmitri Alperovitch, “Bears in the Midst: Intrusion into the Democratic National Committee,” Crowdstrike blog, June 15, 2016.
[2] Josh Pitts, “Repurposing OnionDuke: A Single Case Study Around Reusing Nation-state Malware,” Black Hat, July 21, 2015.
[3] Udi Shamir, “The Case of Gyges, the Invisible Malware,” SentinelOne, July 2014.
[4] Mark McAdle, “’Whodunnit?’ Why the Attribution of Hacks like the Recent DNC Hack is so Difficult,” Esentire, July 28, 2016.
[5] “The Usual Suspects: Faith-Based Attribution and its Effects on the Security Community,” October 21, 2016.
[6] Jeffrey Carr, “The DNC Breach and the Hijacking of Common Sense,” June 20, 2016.
[7] “APT28: A Window into Russia’s Cyber Espionage Operations?” FireEye, October 27, 2014.
[8] Mark McAdle, “’Whodunnit?’ Why the Attribution of Hacks like the Recent DNC Hack is so Difficult,” Esentire, July 28, 2016.
[9] Patrick Howell O’Neill, “Obama’s Former Cybersecurity Advisor Says Only ‘Idiots’ Want to Hack Russia Back for DNC Breach,” The
Daily Dot, July 29, 2016.
[10] Janes Scott, Sr., “It’s the Russians! … or is it? Cold War Rhetoric in the Digital Age,” ICIT, December 13, 2016.
[11] Sam Biddle and Gabrielle Bluestone, “This Looks like the DNC’s Hacked Trump Oppo File,” Gawker, June 15, 2016.
Dan Goodin, “’Guccifer’ Leak of DNC Trump Research Has a Russian’s Fingerprints on It,” Ars Technica, June 16, 2016.
[12] Pat Belcher, “Tunnel of Gov: DNC Hack and the Russian XTunnel,” Invincea, July 28, 2016.
[13] Seth Bromberger, “DNS as a Covert Channel within Protected Networks,” National Electric Sector Cyber Security Organization,
January 25, 2011.
[14] Thomas Rid, “All Signs Point to Russia Being Behind the DNC Hack,” Motherboard, July 25, 2016.
[15] https://www.threatminer.org/host.php?q=45.32.129.185
[16] https://www.threatminer.org/host.php?q=176.31.112.10
[17] https://www.sophos.com/en-us/threat-center/threat-analyses/viruses-and-spyware/Troj~Agent-APPR/detailed-analysis.aspx
https://www.symantec.com/security_response/earthlink_writeup.jsp?docid=2015-062518-5557-99
[18] Paul, “Security Pros Pan US Government Report on Russian Hacking,” The Security Ledger, December 30, 2016.
[19] “Grizzly Steppe – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity,” JAR-16-20296, National Cybersecurity & Communications Integration Center,
Federal Bureau of Investigation, December 29, 2016.
[20] Jeffrey Carr, “FBI/DHS Joint Analysis Report: A Fatally Flawed Effort,” Jeffrey Carr/Medium, December 30, 2016.
[21] John Hinderaker, “Is “Grizzly Steppe’ Really a Russian Operation?” Powerline, December 31, 2016.
[22] https://www.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/publications/JAR-16-20296A.csv
[23] Mark Maunder, “US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware,” Wordfence, December 30, 2016.
[24] Mark Maunder, “US Govt Data Shows Russia Used Outdated Ukrainian PHP Malware,” Wordfence, December 30, 2016.
[25] Micah Lee, “The U.S. Government Thinks Thousands of Russian Hackers May be Reading my Blog. They Aren’t,” The Intercept,
January 4, 2017.
[26] Jerry Gamblin, “Grizzly Steppe: Here’s My IP and Hash Analysis,” A New Domain, January 2, 2017.
[27] Robert Graham, “Dear Obama, from Infosec,” Errata Security, January 3, 2017.
[28] Robert Graham, “Some Notes on IoCs,” Errata Security, December 29, 2016.
[29] Robert M. Lee, “Critiques of the DHS/FBI’s Grizzly Steppe Report,” Robert M. Lee blog, December 30, 2016.
[30] “Energetic Bear – Crouching Yeti,” Kaspersky Lab Global Research and Analysis Team, July 31, 2014.
[31] “Miniduke is back: Nemesis Gemina and the Botgen Studio,” Securelist, July 3, 2014.
[32] Ali Watkins, “The FBI Never Asked for Access to Hacked Computer Servers,” Buzzfeed, January 4, 2017.
[33] “James Comey: DNC Denied FBI Direct Access to Servers During Russia Hacking Probe,” Washington Times, January 10, 2017.
[34] “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections,” Office of the Director of
National Intelligence, January 6, 2017.
[35] “Quelle für Enthüllungen im Bundestag Vermutet,” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, December 17, 2016.
[36] RT broadcast, January 7, 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3DvaVrRweY
[37] Jeffrey Carr, “Faith-based Attribution,” Jeffrey Carr/Medium, July 10, 2016.
.

157
 Pulling A J. Edgar Hoover On Trump
Now, We Are Seeing What Looks Like A New Phase In This “Stop (Or
Damage) Trump” Strategy...
By Robert Parry
January 13, 2017

unproven allegations in the report under the rationale that

the Russian government might have videotaped Trump’s
misbehavior and thus could use it to blackmail him. But
the U.S. intelligence community also had reasons to want
to threaten Trump who has been critical of its performance
and who has expressed doubts about its analysis of the
Russian “hacking.”

After the briefing last Friday, Trump and his incoming

administration did shift their position, accepting the
J. Edgar Hoover – Legendary FBI Director intelligence community’s assessment that the Russian
The decision by the U.S. intelligence government hacked the emails of the Democratic National
community to include in an official Committee and Clinton’s campaign chief John Podesta.
report some unverified and salacious But I’m told Trump saw no evidence that Russia then
accusations against President-elect leaked the material to WikiLeaks and has avoided making
Donald Trump resembles a tactic out of that concession.
FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s playbook
on government-style blackmail: I have
some very derogatory information about
you that I’d sure hate to see end up in
the press.

In this case, as leaders of the U.S. intelligence community

were pressing Trump to accept their assessment that the
Russian government had tried to bolster Trump’s
campaign by stealing and leaking actual emails harmful to
Hillary Clinton’s campaign, Trump was confronted with
this classified “appendix” describing claims about him
cavorting with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room. President-Elect Trump’s First Press Conference
Still, Trump’s change in tone was noted
by the mainstream media and was
treated as an admission that he was
abandoning his earlier skepticism. In
other words, he was finally getting
onboard the intelligence community’s
Russia-did-it bandwagon. Now,
however, we know that Trump
simultaneously had been confronted
with the possibility that the unproven
stories about him engaging in
CIA Director John Brennan, along with Director of National unorthodox sex acts with prostitutes
Intelligence James Clapper. could be released, embarrassing him
barely a week before his inauguration.
Supposedly, Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan included the
158
The classified report, with the explosive appendix, was
also given to President Obama and the so-called “Gang of
Eight,” bipartisan senior members of Congress responsible
for oversight of the intelligence community, which
increased chances that the Trump accusations would be
leaked to the press, which indeed did happen.
Circulating Rumors
politicization in which its leadership feels that it has the
responsibility to weed out “unfit” contenders for the
presidency. During the general election campaign, a well-
placed intelligence source told me that the intelligence
community disdained both Clinton and Trump and hoped
to discredit both of them with the hope that a more
“acceptable” person could move into the White House for
the next four years.

The stories about Russian intelligence supposedly filming Hurting Both Candidates
Trump in a high-end Moscow hotel with prostitutes have
been circulating around Washington for months. I was
briefed about them by a Hillary Clinton associate who was
clearly hopeful that the accusations would be released
before the election and thus further damage Trump’s
chances. But the alleged video never seemed to surface
and the claims had all the earmarks of a campaign dirty
trick.

However, now the tales of illicit frolic have been elevated

to another level. They have been inserted into an official
U.S. intelligence report, the details of which were leaked
first to CNN and then to other mainstream U.S. news
media outlets.
Trump has denounced the story as “fake news” and it is
certainly true that the juicy details – reportedly assembled
by a former British MI-6 spy named Christopher Steele –
have yet to check out. But the placement of the rumors in a
U.S. government document gave the mainstream media an
excuse to publicize the material.
It’s also allowed the media to again trot out the Russian
word “compromat” as if the Russians invented the game of
assembling derogatory information about someone and
then using it to discredit or blackmail the person.
In American history, legendary FBI Director J. Edgar
Hoover was infamous for using his agency to develop
negative information on a political figure and then letting
the person know that the FBI had the dirt and certainly
would not want it to become public – if only the person
would do what the FBI wanted, whether that was to
reappoint Hoover to another term or to boost the FBI’s
budget or – in the infamous case of civil rights leader
Martin Luther King – perhaps to commit suicide.
James Comey, the F.B.I. director, testifying before a House
committee on Thursday. Credit J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
Though I was skeptical of that information, it did turn out
that FBI Director James Comey, one of the top officials in
the intelligence community, badly damaged Clinton’s
campaign by deeming her handling of her emails as
Secretary of State “extremely careless” but deciding not to
prosecute her – and then in the last week of the campaign
briefly reopening and then re-closing the investigation.
Then, after the election, President Obama’s CIA began
leaking allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin
had orchestrated the hacking of Democratic emails and
provided them to WikiLeaks to reveal how the DNC
undermined Sen. Bernie Sanders’s campaign and what
Clinton had told Wall Street bigwigs in paid speeches that
she had sought to keep secret from the American people.

However, in this case, it is not even known whether the

Russians have any dirt on Trump. It could just be rumors
concocted in the middle of a hard-fought campaign, first
among Republicans battling Trump for the nomination
(this opposition research was reportedly initiated by
backers of Sen. Marco Rubio in the GOP race) before
being picked up by Clinton supporters for use in the
general election. Electoral College Members to cast final vote for President and Vice
President Monday, December 19, 2016.

Still, perhaps the more troubling issue is whether the U.S.

intelligence community has entered a new phase of
159
The intelligence community’s assessment set the stage for
what could have been a revolt by the Electoral College in
which enough Trump delegates could have refused to vote
for him to send the election into the House of
Representatives, where the states would choose the
President from one of the top three vote-getters in the
Electoral College. The third-place finisher turned out to be
former Secretary of State Colin Powell who got four votes
from Clinton delegates in Washington State. But the
Electoral College ploy failed when Trump’s delegates
proved overwhelmingly faithful to the GOP candidate.
Now, we are seeing what looks like a new phase in this
“stop (or damage) Trump” strategy, the inclusion of anti-
160
Trump dirt in an official intelligence report that was then
leaked to the major media.
Whether this move was meant to soften up Trump or
whether the intelligence community genuinely thought that
the accusations might be true and deserved inclusion in a
report on alleged Russian interference in U.S. politics or
whether it was some combination of the two, we are
witnessing a historic moment when the U.S. intelligence
community has deployed its extraordinary powers within
the domain of U.S. politics. J. Edgar Hoover would be
proud.
 Are Democrats Still The Lesser Evil?
By Andrew Levine
January 13, 2017

against Trump. In a duopoly party system like ours, it

could hardly be otherwise.

This is why the fact that Democrats have taken the lead in
promoting anti-Russian animosities that could lead to
nuclear war is so disconcerting – and dangerous.

Until recently, Democrats were thought to be, and

probably were, less bellicose than Republicans. It is no
longer clear that they are.

Of course, by most, if not all, other measures, Republicans

are worse, sometimes a lot worse, than Democrats. But
Since Election Day, it has felt as if American politics is
those measures count for nothing in a world blown to
unfolding in a dream world; the old moorings have gone
oblivion.
missing and nothing any longer makes sense.
Does it follow, then, that the Democratic Party is no longer
But with Inauguration Day almost upon us, we have no
the Lesser Evil? The question is more complicated than
choice: either we wallow in the surreality of it all, or we
might appear.
recover our bearings and fight back.
***
To that end, it is vital that the anti-Trump resistance be
disabused of illusions about the Democratic Party.
Our “founding fathers” (all of them were men) included
slaveholders and merchants involved in the slave trade.
Even before the neoliberal turn of the Carter and Clinton
They were also ardent supporters of efforts to supplant
years, Democrats were a large part of the problem. At
and, if need be, wipe out the indigenous peoples of the
their best, they were never more than a small part of the
Americas.
solution.
Nevertheless, a remarkable number of them were
Then, decades ago, the Clintons and others like them
distinguished political thinkers in the Enlightenment
effectively purged the party of its always feeble left wing.
tradition.

Hillary and Bill are out of the picture for now; that is the
To this day, the incongruity hardly registers. When it is
silver lining in Trump’s victory. Their influence continues
pointed out, Americans, not all of them white, shrug it off,
to reverberate, however.
or blame the norms of the times.

Meanwhile, Republicans are, more than ever, beneath

Nowadays, slavery (though not its consequences) is
contempt. They are good for making Democrats seem like
finished, and genocide is no longer officially condoned.
the good guys, but nothing more.
On the downside, though, serious political thinkers in high
office are about as common as snowstorms in July.
The world would therefore be a better place without
Democrats or Republicans in it. But wishing won’t make
Work in political philosophy is now confined mainly to
it so. There is no way forward that does not take this
academic precincts where its effects upon real world
stubborn fact into account.
politics are, for all practical purposes, nil.

Neither is there any way around the fact that Democrats

are bound to play a major role in efforts to fight back

161
Even so, politicians do sometimes talk the talk. But even
when the words are the same, the ideas behind them
seldom are.
Pollsters tell us that a majority of Americans, though not as
many as in the recent past, call their political views
“conservative.” However, their thinking, such as it is, has
little to do with any of the major strains of conservative
political philosophy.
Republican politicians with philosophical pretensions are
especially at fault. Most of them are later-day classical
(nineteenth century) liberals.
Americans who identify with the Progressive tradition and
the New Deal-Great Society political settlement are on
sounder ground when they call themselves “liberals.” But
because many of them are too opportunistic to be
principled, the connection is highly attenuated. It is also
relevant that courage is rare in liberal circles; and that, as
Robert Frost famously remarked: “a liberal is a man too
broad-minded to take his own side in a quarrel.”
Then there are the disconnects that cluster around notions
of democracy.
There are many normative and descriptive democratic
theories, but they all agree that democracy is about the
people taking charge of their own affairs. That description
hardly fits democracy in America today.
What we have instead are Democrats and Republicans
peddling candidates bearing their brands to a passive
citizenry — in much the way that manufacturers of
consumer goods peddle theirs.
Like the parties that field them, the candidates on offer are
generally like-minded. This is no accident; for all practical
purposes, they are all owned by overlapping sectors of
what Bernie Sanders – remember him? — called “the
billionaire class.”
Nevertheless, for at least the past century, the Democratic
Party has been the friendlier of the two to Enlightenment
values. There were exceptions, however, especially before
the 1960s. Most of the exceptions arose out of efforts by
Democratic Party leaders to keep white supremacists in the
Solid South on board.
In recent decades, Democrats and Republicans have drifted
apart – mainly over social issues that do not bear directly
on their paymasters’ interests.
Therefore, our politics suffers simultaneously from an anti-
democratic, inequality exacerbating ideological uniformity
and a degree of party polarization that all but disables
effective governance.
162
In this worst of both worlds, it is no wonder that Trump
got enough votes in the right places to defeat Hillary
Clinton, a living embodiment of the status quo. To many
of those voters, anything seemed better than the system in
place.
Trump seemed to offer something new. He did indeed.
But as many of those voters will discover to their regret,
the changes he offers will only make things worse – not
just for the targets of his and their animosities, but for most
of them as well, and for nearly everyone who is not
obscenely rich.
***
One thing that Trump will not change is the fact that it
takes a lot of wishful thinking to discern more than Coke
and Pepsi differences between the two parties on matters
affecting the wishes of American capitalists. In this
respect, ours is a one party state – with two competing
electoral wings.
Nevertheless, it is practically axiomatic to anyone with any
sense at all that, in comparison with Republicans,
Democrats are the lesser evil.
They are — on social issues. Democrats are less
retrograde than Republicans. It isn’t even close.
It doesn’t follow, though, even for those for whom these
differences matter a lot, that it is always wisest to vote for
Democrats over Republicans.
The case for always voting for Democrats boils down to a
logical principle and an indisputable fact. The principle is
just that if the goal is to bring about the best possible
outcome by choosing between A and B, and if A is better
(or less bad) than B, choose A; the fact is that Democrats
and Republicans are equally bad on everything except
social matters where Democrats are better (less bad).
The argument is sound as far as it goes. But all it shows is
that one should vote for the Democrat if all that matters are
the issues on which Democrats are better. There are other
things that can and do matter — including the long-term
consequences of lesser evil voting itself.
In the 2016 Presidential election in the United States, there
were additional reasons not to vote for the Democrat:
among others, that it was not clear that Clinton actually
was the lesser evil all things considered, a point to which I
will return; and that, even if she was, there are thresholds
beneath which there are pragmatic as well as moral reasons
not to sink.
I have argued repeatedly, on this site and elsewhere, that,
in that election, concerns about the long-term
consequences of lesser evil voting, along with the failure
of both Clinton and Trump to exceed even minimal
threshold considerations, overcame the case for voting for
the lesser evil, whichever of the two that might be.
There is no point in repeating the arguments now, except
insofar as they shed light on what to make of, and do
about, the Democratic Party in the months and years
ahead.
The case against Hillary is moot; we dodged that bullet.
The case against Trump was never seriously in dispute.
There is therefore no need to demonstrate how awful he is
or how awful his presidency is likely to be.
With Obama still officially in charge, nothing really bad
has happened – yet. The task before us now is to prepare
for when it does.
Hillary is the devil we know — too well. Trump is one of
Donald Rumsfeld’s “known unknowns.” At this point, all
we can say for sure about him is that whatever he does will
be harmful to everyone except himself, his family, and his
class brothers and sisters, and that the Trump era will be
monumentally corrupt.
It will be reactionary and incompetent too, if his choices to
fill cabinet posts and other top-level positions are any
indication; and the policies that they and he will concoct
will be ridiculously inconsistent.
***
Even so, it is at least arguable that Clinton was a worse
choice – for a reason that does indeed shed light on the
role that the Democratic Party is likely to play in the
struggles ahead.
When Party honchos parachuted her into New York State
to be its Senator, the line was that, as a First Lady (official
wife), Clinton had garnered a lot of useful “experience.”
This was, to say the least, an exaggeration. In truth, all
she did – apart from her role in the Hillarycare fiasco –
was promote the neoliberal line championed by her
husband.
However, over the past decade and a half, Hillary’s fate
and neoliberalism’s came to be inextricably intertwined –
in the public mind and, to a considerable degree, in reality
as well.
The Clintons didn’t initiate the neoliberal turn in
Democratic Party politics; they may not even have
believed in it. But it was during Bill Clinton’s presidency
that the transfer of wealth from workers and everyone else
who is not obscenely rich to the few who are took off, with
dire moral and material consequences.
163
Progressive opponents of neoliberal policies have become
more militant and creative than they used to be; and wide
strata of the public, the young especially, have become
energized – to an extent not seen in nearly half a century.
Others have suffered in silence, and with less lucidity.
Many who did ended up voting for Trump – if not
enthusiastically, then for their own lesser evil reasons.
For this and more, Hillary has a lot to answer for. But this
is not the worst of it.
As Secretary of State, Clinton, with Obama’s
acquiescence, empowered “humanitarian” interveners hell
bent on overthrowing governments that resist American
domination — effectively guaranteeing that the United
States would continue to be a serial violator of
international law, and would remain enmeshed in never
ending wars in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Even so, Trump is so vile and so unsuited to the office of
the presidency that, running against him, she would still be
the lesser evil, hands down – but for her fondness for
military “solutions” to problems she and her neocon and
liberal imperialist co-thinkers helped create, and the fact
that her dedication to regime change isn’t confined, like
Reagan’s and the Bushes’, and her husband’s were, to
“enemies” that the United States could vanquish with
impunity.
Like Obama, whose thinking she influenced, she wanted to
“pivot” towards Asia – in other words, to take China on.
More dangerous still, she wanted to reduce Russia to the
miserable condition it fell into in the nineties, as its
regression to capitalism unfolded.
HRC has been a Russophobe her whole life; she is now a
neocon as well. Most of all, she is a Clinton; Clintons give
opportunism a bad name.
When she was taking on progressive poses in order to
squelch Bernie Sanders’ candidacy and coopt his
supporters, she wisely decided to muffle her
warmongering.
But when it was just her against Trump, it seemed
opportune to let it all hang out. Nobody saw it coming.
After all, the Cold War had been over for more than a
generation, and even someone as infallibly wrong-headed
as Hillary would know not to tempt fate by playing around
with the prospect of nuclear war.
But the “liberal” media picked up the ball. Could it be that
they like Hillary that much? Or is it guilt for all the free
publicity their revenue-driven executives lavished on the
Donald?
Whatever the explanation, the consequences are, in their
own way, as ridiculous as Trump’s cabinet appointments.
It is bad enough when people who should know better
take “intelligence” agencies, the CIA especially, at their
word. But then to broadcast the Democratic Party’s
Russophobic insinuations even while admitting that there
is no credible evidence supporting them, is something else
altogether.
Most nauseating of all, though, is the way that
warmongering “journalists” take RT, Russia Today, to task
for being a propaganda arm of the Russian government,
even as they work for outfits that are far more blatantly
propagandistic.
As I have written before on this site, I defy any fair-
minded viewer or listener, to compare, say, the evening
lineup on MSNBC or CNN with RT and then conclude
that the latter spreads propaganda, and the former does
not. RT does responsible journalism; MSNBC and CNN
make a mockery of the profession.
And it isn’t just them: The Washington Post is the most
disgraceful of all, but The New York Times is not far
behind. As it was during the build up to the invasion of
Iraq, NPR has become impossible to listen to even for
background noise.
The level of hypocrisy is appalling inasmuch as the United
States has intervened in nearly every election since the end
of World War II anywhere in the world that might not go
the way the empire’s leaders thought it should.
And when that was not enough, it would stage coups in
countries with refractory governments. Its agent of choice
has been, more often than not, the liberal Democrat’s post-
election love interest, the CIA.
There is a remarkable double standard at work as well.
Israel interferes in European and American elections with
impunity — most recently in Scotland and within the
British Conservative Party. And is there any plausible
impartial standard according to which Benjamin
Netanyahu is not more reprehensible than Vladimir Putin?
Yet in U.S. government and media circles, not a bad word
is said about Israel or its government, while Putin and
Russia cannot be demonized enough.
The New York Times has been especially noteworthy too
for the condescending way it has been reporting on
“ordinary” Americans who question the wisdom of taking
intelligence agencies, like the CIA, at their word; and who
wonder why so much fuss is being made about Wikileaks
publishing authentic documents that are indisputably
newsworthy, or, for that matter, why it would matter if
Russia actually were their source.
164
The transmission line, it seems, runs from Hillary and her
team to their flacks in corporate media, and then back to
the Democratic Party itself, “progressives” and all.
With a few conspicuous exceptions like John McCain,
Lindsey Graham and “Little Marco” Rubio, Republicans,
so far, have not been quite as bad. Most likely, this is
because they want to curry favor with the President-elect.
Even so, we owe it to them that not everyone in Congress
is a card-carrying member of the War Party.
Are the Democrats, then, no longer the lesser evil? It is
hard to listen to them and not draw that conclusion. It is
harder still, though, to see a Republican and not despair for
the human race.
***
Will Trump staunch the rush to war? Will he even try?
And what will happen as the consequences of his victory
sink in – not just with the majority of Americans who have
always understood what he is about, but also with the
voters who put him over the top in the Electoral College?
How will they react when they realize that Trump is the
Defender-in-Chief of the swamp he promised to drain?
What will Democrats and Republicans do then? When we
know that, we will know which party really is less awful.
Had Trump lost, as he ought to have, and as he would have
had Hillary not screwed up so spectacularly, he was on
track for smashing the GOP. Republicans knew it, and
hated him for it; they probably still do. But because he
won, they now find themselves flocking around him
shamelessly, eager for their share of the spoils.
Their abjectness must delight his egotistical soul. It could
be, though, that they are actually playing him – using him
to enact their own far-right agendas.
During the campaign, Trump’s vileness – and his
pandering to nativists, racists, and Islamophobes – were
reasons enough to reject his candidacy categorically.
But he did outflank Hillary from the left on many issues.
That all seems finished now; not only did he choose a
theocrat and craven reactionary for a running mate, but his
cabinet appointments are every bit as awful as Marco
Rubio’s or Ted Cruz’s would have been. The idea that the
Republican leadership is calling the shots and only letting
the Donald think that he is would account for that.
If it turns out that Trump is not running the show the way
he thinks he is, he will be the last to know. Having fought
back the Clinton juggernaut, the grandees of the
Republican Party, the scribblers and talking heads that
berate him in corporate media, and the near entirety of the
ruling class, the sick bastard must now be thinking that he
is invincible.
Why else would he feel emboldened enough to take on the
CIA and the rest of the deep state? Could he not know
that he is unleashing forces that can do him in, and that he
cannot control?
The effects of hubris — on those in its grip, and on those
affected by their folly — have been demonstrated time and
again by storytellers, poets and historians.
Could Trump be ignorant of all this, and unaware too of
the precariousness of his own situation? That is hard to
believe. But it is easy to believe that he is egomaniacal
enough to think that what applies to others does not apply
to him.
When he falls, he will fall hard; and it will be glorious to
behold.
165
It will also be dangerous, however; who knows what he
will do when he lashes out!
Hillary may be more disposed than he, ideologically and
psychologically, to end the world “as we know it,” but it
would not be beyond the Donald, an adolescent in a
septuagenarian’s body, to do the same.
Should it come to that, or if fortune shines on us and it
does not, will Democrats be of any use? If the answer is
No, as it almost certainly is, what are the implications for
what is to be done now?
The impending Trump presidency puts the urgency of this
question in sharp relief. This is why getting clear about
how awful Democrats are – in their own right and in
comparison with Republicans — is more than usually
urgent.
 US Report On Nonexistent Russian Hacking Made Its
Intelligence Community A Laughing Stock
Posted By Stephen Lendman
Date: January 13, 2017

Its editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan tweeted: “Aaa, the

CIA report is out! Laughter of the year! Intro to my show
from 6 years ago is the main evidence of Russia’s
influence at US elections. This is not a joke!”

The report lied, comparing the Russian Federation to its

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper Jr. testifies before a
Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on “Foreign Cyber
Threats to the United States” on Capitol Hill in Washington on
Thursday. (image: REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)
The scheme to blame Russia for US election hacking
failed. It laid an egg. It made Washington’s intelligence
community look like rank amateurs.
Americans overwhelmingly disbelieve its rubbish for good
reason. With no evidence cited, it lacks credibility.
It’s fake news, fiction, not facts, propaganda aimed at
delegitimizing Trump’s election and provocatively stoking
confrontation with Russia.
Last year, Sergey Lavrov said “(w)e have not seen a single
fact, a single proof” of Russian US election hacking.
Soviet predecessor, saying they have “a history of
conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US
presidential elections that have used intelligence officers
and agents and press placements to disparage candidates
perceived as hostile to the Kremlin.”
If Russia interfered in last November’s US election,
evidence would have been released to prove it. None
appeared because none exists.
At his yearend press conference, Obama lied, claiming
“(w)e will provide evidence that we can safely provide,
that does not compromise sources and methods.”
“But I’ll be honest with you, when you’re talking about
cybersecurity, a lot of it is classified and we are not going
to provide it, because the way we catch folks is by
knowing certain things about them that they don’t want us
to know.”
“The intelligence I’ve seen gives me great confidence in
their assessment that the Russians carried out this hack –
the hack of the DNC and the hack of John Podesta.”

Putin earlier said “(h)ysterics (were) whipped up to distract

Fact: Russia didn’t hack or otherwise interfere in
the attention of the American people from the essence of”
America’s election.
the content released. (N)obody talks about” the damning
information – just bashing Russia and Trump
irresponsibly. Fact: Obama lied like he always does. No US election
hacking occurred – not by Russia or anyone else.
Following Friday’s release of the CIA/FBI/NSA report,
Russia’s lower house State Duma International Affairs Fact: Information was leaked by one or more Democrat
Committee chairman Alexey Pushkov tweeted “(m)ountain party insiders, angry about Hillary stealing, not winning,
gave birth to a mouse: all accusations against Russia are her nomination.
based on ‘confidence’ and assumptions. US was sure about
Hussein possessing WMDs in the same way.” Senate Armed Services Committee chairman John McCain
sounded buffoon-like, saying “(e)very American should be
The report targeted RT (Russia Today) for its truth-telling alarmed by Russia’s attack on our nation.”
– exposing US propaganda for its millions of global
viewers.

166
Every American should be alarmed about the criminal humanity at home and abroad!
neocon gang infesting Washington, waging war on
.

167
 Is Trump Already Finished?
Paul Craig Roberts
January 13, 2017
It did not take long before we knew there was no hope of
change from President Obama. But at least he went into his
inauguration with an unprecedented number of Americans
on the Mall showing their support for the President of
Change. Hope was abundant.
But with Trump, we are already losing faith, if not yet with
him, at least with his choice of those who comprise his
government even before Trump is inaugurated.
Trump’s choice for Secretary of State not only sounds like
the neoconservatives in declaring Russia to be a threat to
the United States and all of Europe, but also sounds like
Hillary Clinton in declaring the South China Sea to be an
area of US dominance. One would think that the chairman
of Exxon was not an idiot, but I am no longer sure. In his
confirmation hearing, Rex Tillerson said that China’s
access to its own South China Sea is “not going to be
allowed.”
Here is Tillerson’s statement:
“We’re going to have to send China a clear
signal that first, the island-building stops,
and second, your access to those islands
also not going to be allowed.”
I mean, really, what is Tillerson going to do about it except
get the world blown up. China’s response was as pointed
as a response can be:
Tillerson “should not be misled into thinking
that Beijing will be fearful of threats. If
Trump’s diplomatic team shapes future
Sino-US ties as it is doing now, the two
sides had better prepare for a military
clash. Tillerson had better bone up on
nuclear power strategies if he wants to
force a big nuclear power to withdraw from
its own territories.”
So Trump is not even inaugurated and his idiot nominee
for Secretary of State has already created an animosity
relationship with two nuclear powers capable of
completely destroying all of the West for eternity. And this
makes the US Senate comfortable with Tillerson. The
168
imbeciles should be scared out of their wits, assuming they
have any.
One of the reasons that Russia rescued Syria from
Washington’s overthrow is that Russia understood that
Washington’s next target would be Iran and from a
destroyed Iran terrorism would be exported into the
Russian Federation. There is an axis of countries
threatened by US supported terrorism—Syria, Iran, Russia,
China.
Trump says he wants to normalize relations with Russia
and to open up business opportunities in the place of
conflict. But to normalize relations with Russia requires
also normalizing relations with Iran and China.
Judging from their public statements, Trump’s announced
government has targeted Iran for destabilization. Trump’s
appointees as National Security Advisor, Secretary of
Defense, and Director of the CIA all regard Iran
incorrectly as a terrorist state that must be overthrown.
But Russia cannot allow Washington to overthrow the
stable government in Iran and will not allow it. China’s
investments in Iranian oil imply that China also will not
permit Washington’s overthrow of Iran. China has already
suffered from its lost investments in Libyan oil as the
result of the Obama regimes overthrow of the Libyan
government.
Realistically speaking, it looks like the Trump Presidency
is already defeated by his own appointees independently of
the ridiculous and completely unbelievable propaganda put
out by the CIA and broadcast by the presstitute media in
the US, UK, and Europe. The New York Times,
Washington Post, CNN, and BBC have lowered themselves
below the National Enquirer.
Possibly, as I wrote earlier today
(http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/01/13/the-
establishment-is-trying-to-steal-the-presidency-from-
trump-paul-craig-roberts/),
these statements from Trump’s appointees are nothing but
what is required to be confirmed and are not operational in
any sense. However, it is possible to stand up to the
bastards in confirmation hearings. I stood up in my
confirming hearing, and the embarrassed Democrats
requested that the entire hearing be deleted from the
record.
If the Chairman of Exxon and a Lt. General are not
capable of standing up to the imbecilic Congress, they are
.
unfit for office. That they did not stand up is an indication
that they lack the strength that Trump needs if he is to
bring change from the top.
If Trump is unable to change US foreign policy, thermo-
nuclear war and the destruction of Earth are inevitable.

169
 The New Smell Of McCarthyism
Demands Faith Leaders Speak Truth To Power
By Rev. William Alberts
January 13, 2017
A primary role of faith leaders is speaking truth to power
on behalf of the rights and well-being of all people. With
the repressive smell of McCarthyism in the air today,
confronting political and corporate power with reality and
moral truth is even more of a prophetic imperative.
The smell of McCarthyism? A self-identified
“independent team of concerned American citizens,”
calling their website “PropOrNot” and refusing to identify
themselves, created a report blacklisting over 200
alternative online news sites. “The list” includes reputable
independent news sources, such as Consortium News,
Truthout, Truthdig, Black Agenda Report, Naked
Capitalism, Anti-war.com, Information Clearing House,
and also Counterpunch. PropOrNot accuses the sites of
being “Russian propaganda outlets,” spreading “fake
news,” reaching “tens of millions” of Americans that
helped tilt the 2016 presidential election to Russia-friendly
candidate Donald Trump. (“Black Friday Report: On
Russian Propaganda Network Mapping,” By The
PropOrNot Team, PropOrNot, Nov. 26, 2016) Note the
secretive PropOrNot authors of “Black Friday Report”
hide behind the word “Team.”
The invisible “concerned American citizens” of
PropOrNot “strongly suspect that some of the individuals
involved” in spreading Russian propaganda online have
committed espionage, “but determining that is up to the
FBI and the DOJ.” (“Frequently Asked Questions,”
propornot.com, Nov. 26, 2016) The “team” also states,
“To the extent any of these sites are involved in supporting
Russian objectives that run counter to Western interests,
they – and more to the point, the people who operate them
– should be of interest to the security services of the
Western countries in which they live, work, and acquire
services related to their websites.” (“Black Friday Report:
On Russian Propaganda Network Mapping,” Ibid)
The “concerned American citizens” of PropOrNot also
“call on Congressional leadership and the Obama
administration, to: immediately begin investigations to
determine whether any U.S. government action or inaction
has allowed Russia to manipulate the US domestic
political process, and interfere in the 2016 election,
through online propaganda;” and to “immediately begin
investigations to determine whether, by action or inaction,
170
the American public has been deprived of related
information that they need to vote in an informed manner.”
(“Russia is Manipulating US Public Opinion through
Online Propaganda,” propornot.com, Nov. 30, 2016)
Note, again, no individual is identified as the author of the
above PropOrNot article.
Subsequently, the CIA, the FBI and the National Security
Agency, “the nation’s top intelligence agencies,”
investigated Russia’s possible role in influencing the 2016
presidential election. Interestingly, their reported
“unanimous conclusions” are that “President Valdimir V.
Putin of Russia directed a vast cyberattack aimed at
denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing
Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office.” (‘PUTIN LED
SCHEME TO AID TRUMP, REPORT SAYS,’ By
Michael D. Shear and David E. Sanger, The New York
Times, Jan. 7, 2017)
A group that won’t identify itself is claiming independent
websites that do identify themselves are undermining
American democracy. PropOrNot hides from the very
transparency it charges independent news sites with
concealing.
One might think that PropOrNot consists of a group of
“concerned” Democrats seeking to justify the Party’s
failure to win the presidency from an impulsive,
narcissistic Republican candidate, whom Sen. Bernie
Sanders has rightly called a “pathological liar.” Or the
anonymous group could be “Cold War” warriors reviving
a tried-and-true anti-American “Red” bogeyman to assure
unending profits for America’s
military/industrial/intelligence/security complex.
The secretive “concerned American citizens” forming
PropOrNot are actually defenders of the status quo. They
see “on both the left and the right . . . a large scale
information campaign . . . deceptively injecting Russian
propaganda into American public discourse online.” They
discredit independent journalistic websites and their
editors and writers by lauding “actual journalism (that has
editors and fact checkers who impose accountability for
mistakes).” Thus they “call on the American public to . . .
obtain news from actual reporters, who report to an editor,
and are professionally accountable for mistakes.” They
even suggest the news sources that citizens should trust:
“NPR, the BBC, the New York Times, the
Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post,
Buzzfeed News, VICE, etc, and especially
your local papers and local TV news
channels. (“Russia is Manipulating US
Public Opinion through Online
Propaganda,” Ibid)
Never mind that mainstream media’s “actual reporters” are
“accountable” to editors, who, themselves, are held
accountable as guardians of the status quo – making sure
that the “news” is print to fit. Never mind that right and
wrong easily get lost in “left” and “right,” and that the
truth often lies not in the middle between two extremes,
but is judged as “extreme” when it threatens the status
quo. Never mind also that most mainstream newspapers,
including The Washington Post and The New York Times,
championed, with “fake news,” the George W. Bush
administration’s 2003 falsely-based, criminal, pre-emptive
invasion of Iraq. Certainly count on your “local paper and
local TV news channels” for accurate weather and sports
reports, but not necessarily their repeating of national
media news reports.
Intercept columnists Ben Norton and Glenn Greenwald are
believed to accurately identify PropOrNot’s primary
motivation in blacklisting “independent, completely
legitimate news sources.” They write, “The group
eschews alternative media outlets like . . . Truthout, Naked
Capitalism, Black Agenda Report, Consortium News, and
Truthdig . . . and instead recommends that readers rely
solely on establishment-friendly publications like NPR, the
BBC, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the
Washington Post, Buzzfeed, and VICE. That is because a
big part of the group’s identification for ‘Russian
propaganda outlet’ is criticizing U.S. foreign policy.”
(“The Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a
McCarthyite Blacklist From a New, Hidden, and Very
Shady Group,” The Intercept, Nov. 26, 2016)
CounterPunch editor Jeffrey St. Clair also believes today’s
smell of McCarthism is about defending the U.S. empire’s
predatory foreign policy. He writes, “We’ve published all
kinds of articles on Russia in the past decade: critical,
sympathetic, analytical, satirical, quizzical and
befuddled.” Then he states, “More to the point (and no
doubt the reason we achieved our illustrious ranking),
we’ve run articles about how in the dangerous geopolitical
climate of the last 20 years, Russia has often acted as the
last hedge against the US’s belligerent and provocative
foreign policy, which has nearly brought the world to the
brink of nuclear war.” (“Roaming Charges: The CIA’s
Plots to Kill Castro,” Counterpunch, Dec. 2, 2016)
171
The foul smell of McCarthyism here is not secretive
PropOrNot’s report blacklisting prominent independent
online new sites. The real odor of McCarthyism is
emanating from the venerable “political newspaper of
record,” the widely circulated Washington Post, which
gave PropOrNot’s report the air of legitimacy by
publishing it, in an article by reporter Craig Timberg, who
“specializes in privacy, security and surveillance.”
The mere title of The Washington Post’s article on
PropOrNot’s report gives it authenticity: “Russian
propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during
election, experts say.” Who are these “experts?” Reporter
Timberg identifies PropOrNot as “a nonpartisan collection
of researchers with foreign policy, military and technology
backgrounds.” (washingtonpost.com, Nov. 24, 2016.)
That description automatically attributes objectivity,
professionalism and diversity to this group of anonymous
“researchers.”
Throughout his article, Craig Timberg refers to PropOrNot
as “researchers” around a dozen times, lending further
credibility to their findings. It is as if PropOrNot is
reporting the truth, as Timberg matter-of-factly writes
without commentary: “PropOrNot’s monitoring report,
which was provided to The Washington Post in advance of
its public release, identifies more than 200 websites as
routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election
season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million
Americans.” And, “On Facebook, PropOrNot estimates
that stories planted or promoted by the disinformation
campaign were viewed more than 213 million times.”
(Ibid)
The Washington Post even allowed PropOrNot’s executive
director to hide behind anonymity while slandering
prominent independent new sites. “ ‘The way that this
propaganda apparatus supported Trump was equivalent to
some massive amount of a media buy,’ said the executive
director of PropOrNot, who spoke on the condition of
anonymity to avoid being targeted by Russia’s legions of
skilled hackers. ‘It was like Russia was running a super
PAC for Trump’s campaign. . . . It worked.’ ” (Ibid) From
what the secretive PropOrNot executive director is saying,
it appears that Americans have to depend on Russian
hackers for knowledge about the machinations of Hillary
Clinton’s campaign in sabotaging Bernie Sanders’ bid for
the Democratic nomination for president.
The extensive criticism and threats of lawsuits leveled at
The Washington Post for publishing PropOrNot’s report
led The Post to attach an “Editor’s Note” to the article.
The “Editor’s Note” itself contains a major falsehood:
“The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not
itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings
regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article
purport to do so.” (Ibid) “The political newspaper of
record,” in fact, “vouch[ed] for the validity of
PropOrNot’s findings”: first by publishing the secretive
“researchers” findings, and second by reporting the
“findings” as if they were factual.
Max Blumenthal, a senior editor of the Grayzone Project
at AlterNet, exposes PrpoOrNot’s McCarthyism-like anti-
Russian fixation. He writes, “Among the most ironic
characteristics of PropOrNot is its claim to be defending
journalistic integrity, a rigorous adherence to the facts, and
most of all, a sense of political levity. In fact,” Blumenthal
continues, “the group’s own literature reflects a deeply
paranoid view of Russia and the outside world.” He states
that, “according to PropOrtNot’s website, Russia is staging
a hostile takeover of America’s alternative online media
environment ‘in order to make Russia great again’ . . . The
message is clear: Stamp out the websites blacklisted by
PropOrNot, or submit to the malevolent influence of
Putin’s ‘new global empire.’ “ (“Washington Post
Promotes Shadowy Website That Accuses 200
Publications of Being Russian Propaganda Plants,
AlterNet, Nov. 25, 2016)
PropOrNot’s anti-Russian fixation accommodates The
Washington Post’s own role as a guardian of the status
quo’s prevailing belief that Russia remains America’s arch
enemy. The Post’s motivation for publishing the
anonymous PropOrNot’s report may be related to the fact
that the newspaper’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, also owns
Amazon, which recently received a $600 million contract
from the CIA. Since the CIA is a primary intelligence
watchdog against the perennial Russian menace,
publishing PropOrNot’s blacklisting of online websites,
that provide independent news and commentary on Russia,
could have been an easy call.
Norman Solomon, former director of the Institute for
Public Accuracy, points out the journalistic conflict of
interest involving The Washington Post’s owner and the
CIA: “As Amazon’s major owner and the Post’s only
owner, Bezos stands to gain a lot more if his newspaper
does less ruffling and more soothing of CIA feathers.”
Solomon then quotes former Washington Post reporter
John Hanrahan: “One thing is certain: Post reporters and
editors are aware that Bezos, as major owner of Amazon,
has a financial stake in maintaining good relations with the
CIA – and this sends a clear message to even the hardest-
nosed journalist that making the CIA look bad might not
be a good career move.” (“Jeff Bezos Is Doing Huge
Business with the CIA, While Keeping His Washington
Post Readers in the Dark,” AlterNet, Dec. 18, 2016)
A month after The Washington Post legitimized
PropOrNot’s report blacklisting independent online news
outlets, President Obama signed into law the 2017
National Defense Authorization Act, which includes a
provision that is right down President-elect Donald
Trump’s authoritarian alley. That provision is the
Encountering Disinformation and Propaganda Act, which
creates a truth squad-like federal government-directed
Global Engagement Center.
172
“The bipartisan Countering Disinformation and
Propaganda Act is organized around two main priorities,”
states Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), co-author of the
legislation. The Center will develop “a whole-of-
government strategy for countering THE foreign
propaganda and disinformation being waged against us and
our allies by our enemies . . . state actors like Russia and
China as well as non-state actors,” Portman explains. The
second priority is “establishing a fund to help train local
journalists and provide grants and contracts to NGOs, civil
society organizations, think tanks, private sector
companies, media organizations, and other experts outside
the U.S. government with experience in identifying and
analyzing the latest trends in foreign government
disinformation techniques.” (“Portman-Murphy Bill
Promotes Coordinated Strategy to Defend America, Allies
Against Propaganda and Disinformation from Russia,
China & Others,” Rob Portman, portman.senate.gov.)
The second priority is chilling. It echoes a tactic employed
by the Gestapo to maintain a smoothly running society in
Nazi Germany. History professor Robert Gellately’s
analysis of the accommodating behavior of German
citizens under the Third Reich helps one to understand
why funding American groups and citizens to identify
America’s disinformation enemies is so alarming.
Professor Gellately states that the prevailing myth was that
the Germany’s Gestapo police were believed to be
“everywhere.” He discovered that “there were few secret
police, and most were just processing the information
coming in.” He “found a shocking fact. It wasn’t the
secret police who were doing this wide-scale surveillance
and hiding on every street corner. It was the ordinary
German people who were informing on their neighbors.”
That discovery led him to write The Gestapo and the
German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy 1933-45 Oxford
University Press, 1990. (“Robert Gellately,” Faculty
Profile, Florida State University, fsu.edu/proflies/gellately)
Professor Gellately also found that the German people
were aware of the concentration camps, and what might
happen to people informed on. He cites numerous German
daily newspapers, with stories “with literal references in
the headlines to ‘concentration camps’ and other related
terms.” (Ibid)
The normalization of evil under Adolf Hitler’s rule offers a
lesson to us Americans as the Trump administration is
about to take over. Professor Gellately states about the
Third Reich: “They began with small violations of the
rights of Jews and other minorities, and then ratcheted up
their racism and persecution only when they saw implied
consent from the German people. His next words are also
instructive: “Many Germans disapproved of Hitler’s
fascism and brutality at first. But, after the long economic
depression following the First World War, the German
people allowed the thriving economy and return to law and
order under Hitler to mute their criticism. People had jobs
and the streets were safe. Hitler was managing a fine
balance of consent and coercion.” (Ibid) (See Robert
Gellately, Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi
Germany, 1933-1944, Oxford University Press, 2001)
(“Robert Gellately,” Faculty Profile, Ibid)
The new Encountering Disinformation and Propaganda
Act is taking a page from Nazi Germany. Local journalists
and media organizations, social groups, think tanks,
private companies, educational institutions and other
“experts” are being hired to join the crusade against the
propaganda efforts of foreign governments and “non-state
actors” bent on destabilizing American democracy. How
many of these non-governmental groups and other
“experts” will be informing on mainstream and
independent journalists and news outlets, civil rights and
social justice advocates, peace groups, interfaith activists,
and other private sector neighbors? And how many more
American “experts” and groups will be formed to cash in
on the funding provided by the new spy-on-your-neighbor
Truth Squad Act?
Chilling also is that this new legislation calls for the
director of the so-called Global Engagement Center to be
appointed by the president, which means Donald Trump.
And even more chilling is that the Center is mandated to
perform “such other duties as the president may
designate.” (“Fake News and the New McCarthyism,” by
John Buell, Common Dreams, commondreams.org, Dec.
22, 2016.) The fact that a narcissistic, insecure,
authoritarian submission-demanding Donald Trump will
soon be yielding presidential power is most concerning.
John Bellamy Foster, editor of independent socialist
magazine Monthly Review, points to the startup of the
Nazi-like “denunciation” campaign inspired by Donald
Trump’s election. Foster writes, “Shortly after the election
of Donald Trump, the alt-right organization Turning Point
USA introduced its notorious Professor Watchlist
(professorwatchlist.org), listing some 200 radical
academics in the universities [of which he is one] as
dangerous professors,” with “stories regarding this list . . .
soon being carried in major newspapers throughout the
country.” Unlike ”David Horowitz’s list of the ‘101 most
dangerous academics in America’ a decade ago,” Foster
states, “the current Professor Watchlist has behind it the
new sense of power on the extreme right provided by
Trump’s electoral victory.” Horowitz had no real political
power, but “there is real political power here and people
are being targeted by figures connected to the incoming
administration,” Foster says, adding, “There is a clear alt-
right agenda which requires bringing the universities in
line.” (“Notes from the Editors,” Monthly Review, January
2017)
Professor Foster issues a call that needs to be heard by
other professors – and by faith leaders and other citizens.
The present smell of McCarthyism leads him to speak truth
about power: “We should turn the tables, and fight with
173
courage and integrity. If we are going to stand with
professors who are under attack we have to defend their
right to express their views. And that means attacking the
witch hunt.” (Ibid)
Faith leaders need to join in “stand[ing] with the
professors,” who are being attacked for pursuing truth that
threatens the status quo. With funding from the status quo-
monitoring Global Engagement Center’s Truth Squad,
more Turning Point USA-like organizations may arise,
including reactionary “God and Country” Christian
committees. The witch hunts could target journalists,
scientists, Black Lives Matter members, immigration
activists, labor union leaders, Jesus-inspired
“peacemakers,” and social justice-minded faith and civic
groups.
The words of Pastor Martin Niemoller, “outspoken public
foe (italics added) of Adolph Hitler” and concentration
camp survivor, are relevant for today:
First they came for the socialists, and I did
not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists,
and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not
speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no
one left to speak for me.
(Martin Niemoller ‘First they came for the
Socialists . . .,” ushmm.org)
During the McCarthy era, those the House Un-American
Activities Committee (HUAC) came for included many
faith leaders. Methodist Bishop G. Bromley Oxnam was
interrogated by HUAC in 1953. “Accused of being a
communist by Donald L. Jackson,” his reported political
sin included “oppos[ing] compulsory military training and
the military reserves in peacetime [and] . . . the use of the
atom bomb by saying, ‘There is something morally wrong
with a weapon that destroys humanity.’ ” (“Garfield
Bromley Oxnam,” en.wikipedia.org.)
The McCarthyite inquisitors came for NAACP leader Rev.
Theodore R. Gibson. He was jailed by “a Florida
legislative committee for his reported “contempt of the
committee in refusing to produce membership lists of the
NAACP.” Also, “Arkansas, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia,
Georgia and Louisiana have all tried to destroy the
effectiveness of the NAACP by requiring the disclosure of
its membership lists.” (“Secret. Joe McCarthy Hearings
Opened after 50 Years,” By Joanne Kenen, Reuters,
ratical.org, May 6, 2003.)
Another faith leader the patriotic monitors came for was
Unitarian Universalist Donald Lothrop, minister of the
nonsectarian Community Church of Boston – the
congregation I was honored to serve as minister from 1978
to 1991. In the spirit of Monthly Review editor, John
Bellamy Foster, Lothrop “turned the tables, and fought
back with courage and integrity,” providing an inspiring
model for faith leaders today.
In 1953, The Community Church of Boston (CCB), with
its “Free Pulpit in Action,” was kicked out of John
Hancock Hall (where it held Sunday services) after
Professor Owen Lattimore presented an address. Sen.
Joseph McCarthy had branded Lattimore a communist
sympathizer and “extremely dangerous influence on
Americans.” Thus his presence at a reputable Boston
Church was judged subversive, and CCB had to go.
Rev. Lothrop found himself forced to appear before a
Massachusetts legislative committee to answer the charge
that he “had given comfort and aid to communists.” As
reported, he met the committee head on. “Gentlemen,” he
said, “I plead guilty to this charge. I have given aid and
.
174
comfort to all kinds of people: black and white, Jew and
Gentile, Catholic and Protestant, Mohammedan and
Buddhist, rich and poor, capitalist and communist,
democrat and anarchist.” Lothrop then said, “My
exemplar is one, “Jesus of Nazareth, who feared not to
associate with and minister to prostitutes, thieves and tax-
gatherers. He believed in virtue by association, not guilt
by association.” Lothrop continued, “I am proud that over
the years our people have been witnesses to the faith of the
American people and that we have been willing to provide
a platform for countless men and women who are debarred
elsewhere.” (“A Brief History of the Community Church
of Boston,” by Rev. Peter T. Richardson, community
church of boston.org.)
Rev. Lothrop’s final words to the Massachusetts legislative
committee speak to the challenge of today’s smell of
McCarthyism. ”Our country needs voices of dissent,
diversity and daring,” he said. “It is the stuff out of which
progress is made . . . the assurance against complacency
and error which lead all closed societies to their graves.”
(Ibid)
It is time for faith leaders to stand with Professor Foster
and the other 200 radical academics on the Professor
Watchlist, and, with “courage and integrity,” join them and
others in “fighting” the normalization of an authoritarian
president. Who knows when faith leaders themselves will
be on a radical Clergy Watchlist?
 Left-Wing Media Stunned That Trump Hits Back
By Sean Hannity
Published January 13, 2017
The liberal, alt-left media is in meltdown mode because
Donald Trump put them on notice that he's not going to
take their BS anymore.
The president-elect called out members of the mainstream
media who ran with a bogus story based on a phony
dossier that purported to include compromising
information on him. In fact, the whole story was just an
excuse for these disgraceful organizations to print
unconfirmed smears – and Trump saw it for what it was.
“It's all fake news,” he said at a press conference
this week. “It's phony stuff. It didn't happen.
“I think it's disgrace that information that was
false and fake and never happened got released
to the public,” he added. “As far as BuzzFeed --
which is a failing pile of the garbage -- writing it, I
think they're going to suffer the consequences.
They already are.”
And now, the media is pretending to be shocked that the
president-elect slammed BuzzFeed and CNN over their
stories. But here's what the corrupt media will not tell you:
BuzzFeed is nothing more than a political propaganda arm
of the Democratic Party. In June, the website terminated an
advertising deal with the Republican National Committee
because, as their CEO said,
"The Trump campaign is directly opposed to the
freedoms of our employees in the United States
and the world."
Two days later, BuzzFeed’s chairman, Kenneth Lerer,
hosted a $33,000-a-ticket Democratic National Committee
175
fundraiser in New York City that President Obama
attended. Lerer already had a long history of donating to
Democrats – since 2004, he's contributed almost a half a
million dollars to Democrats, including $2,700 to Hillary
Clinton in 2016.
It should be no surprise that, even after being exposed by
President-elect Trump, BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben
Smith is standing by the decision to publish what amounts
to fake news in a desperate attempt to smear the next
commander-in-chief.
“I think people love to throw the term "fake news"
around to diminish anything they don’t like,”
Smith told NBC’s Chuck Todd. “But I think this
was a real story about a real document that was
really being passed around.”
In that interview, Todd mentioned that NBC Universal has
direct ties to BuzzFeed, even though he said their news
divisions are, "separate." NBC Universal has invested $400
million in BuzzFeed over the last two years, according to
Bloomberg. What we're dealing with here is a giant,
corrupt media swamp. They're all interconnected and work
together to advance their alt-radical leftist agenda.
Trump also blasted a CNN reporter who rudely shouted
questions and demanded answers at the news conference
until Trump shut him down, declaring that the “Clinton
News Network,” like BuzzFeed, is a purveyor of “fake
news.” The media was aghast that Trump would dare lash
out at a media that WikiLeaks proved secretly colluded
with the Democratic Party, allowing its leaders to edit their
stories, giving debate questions in advance to Hillary
Clinton and now, publishing unvetted lies about Trump.
Yet for years, the radical alt-left media was silent when
President Obama attacked me, Rush Limbaugh and Fox
News.
“There's a reason few Republicans, you hear
them running up around about ObamaCare,” said
on Oct. 2, 2014. “Because while good, affordable
health care might seem like a fanged threat to
the freedom of the American people on Fox
News, it turns out it's working pretty well in the
real world.“
Or how about this, on June 1 of last year:
“And I haven't, you know, turned on Fox News or
listened to conservative talk radio yet today, but I
turned them on and off over these past seven-
and-a-half years to know I am not exaggerating
in terms of their story.”
.
176
And four days before the election last year, Obama told
HBO’s “Real Time,” that
“the problem is, we’ve got all these filters,” he
said. “And look, if I watched Fox News, I wouldn't
vote for me either, right, because, you know,
you've got this screen, this funhouse mirror
through which people are receiving information.”
Obama attacked me personally on 15 separate occasions,
but he finally stopped when someone pointed out to him
that I considered the attacks a badge of honor, and used
them in the introduction of my radio show.
Adapted from Sean Hannity’s opening monologue, airing
on “Hannity,” Jan. 12, 2017
Trump Says He Is Open To Lifting Russia Sanctions, Won't
Label China Currency Manipulator "On Day One"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 14, 2017 9:33 AM
In his first full interview of the new year, President-elect
Donald Trump explains his approach to foreign policy
from a "realpolitik" lens, when he told the WSJ overnight
that relations with China and Russia will depend on the
degree to which the two countries cooperate with U.S.
economic, diplomatic and military priorities.
The interview comes one day after China's incensed press
rebuked a statement by Rex Tillerson during his
confirmation hearing, when he said that China will not be
granted access to the disputed South China Sea islands,
responding that "such remarks are not
worth taking seriously because they are a
mish-mash of naivety, shortsightedness,
worn-out prejudices, and unrealistic
political fantasies" and "would set a
course for devastating confrontation
between China and the US."
Trump says he would keep intact sanctions against Russia
imposed by the Obama administration “at least for a period
of time”; says he is prepared to meet Russian President
Vladimir Putin after he is sworn in
Assuing further media vitriol, Trump told the WSJ he
wouldn’t commit to America’s "One China" agreement
with Beijing, i.e., he would continue to use Taiwan's
independence as a bargaining chip, until he saw what he
considered progress from Beijing in its currency and trade
practices. Asked if he supported the One China policy on
Taiwan, Mr. Trump said:
177
“Everything is under negotiation including
One China.”
Mr. Trump seemed impatient with diplomatic protocols
involving China and Taiwan. After his victory he took a
congratulatory phone call from Taiwan’s leader, triggering
objections from Beijing and stoking concerns among some
U.S. foreign policy experts who questioned whether he
understood the implications of such a conversation.
Speaking of Taiwan, he said:
“We sold them $2 billion of military
equipment last year. We can sell them $2
billion of the latest and greatest military
equipment but we’re not allowed to accept
a phone call. First of all it would have been
very rude not to accept the phone call.”
On the other hand, Trump also made a point of showing a
holiday greeting card he received from China’s leader, Xi
Jinping.
“I have a beautiful card from the chairman,”
he said.
Trump also made news when he said that he would not
label China a currency manipulator on his first day in the
White House. Previously Trump has said in the past he
would label China a currency manipulator after he takes
office.
In the interview, he said he wouldn’t
take that step on his first day in the
White House. “I would talk to them
first,” he said.
He added:
“Certainly they are manipulators. But I’m
not looking to do that.” But he made plain
his displeasure with China’s currency
practices. “Instead of saying, ‘We’re
devaluating our currency,’ they say, ‘Oh,
our currency is dropping.’ It’s not dropping.
They’re doing it on purpose.
 “Our companies can’t compete with them horrible shape and falling apart (not to mention crime
now because our currency is strong and it’s infested) rather than falsely complaining about the election
killing us.” results. All talk, talk, talk - no action or results. Sad!"...

As explained previously China is indeed manipulating its

currency, although over the past 18 months it has been
doing so in the other direction, intervening to support it
from weakening further as a result of hundreds of billions
in capital outflows, which have resulted in unprecedented
capital controls.

Naturally, Trump also discussed the ever present topic of

Russia and his relationship with Putin. Trump told the
WSJ that while he would be open to lifting sanctions on
Russian, “at least for a period of time,” he would keep
intact sanctions against Russia imposed by the Obama
administration in late December in response to Moscow’s
alleged cyberattacks to influence November’s election.

"But he suggested he might do away

with those penalties if Russia proved
helpful in battling terrorists and ... and then reverted back to the key political topic of last
reaching other goals important to the week, namely the US intel report on Trump, tweeting that
U.S."
“If you get along and if Russia is really "INTELLIGENCE INSIDERS NOW CLAIM THE
helping us, why would anybody have TRUMP DOSSIER IS "A COMPLETE FRAUD!" "
sanctions if somebody’s doing some really
great things?” he said.

***

On Saturday morning, Trump was once again active on

Twitter, first slamming Congressman John Lewis, who
made news on Friday saying that Trump is "not a
legitimate president", saying "John Lewis should spend
more time on fixing and helping his district, which is in
.

178
 Will the CIA Assassinate Trump?
“He’s Being Really Dumb For Questioning Russia Conclusions”
By Mac Slavo
Jan 14, 2017 11:20 PM
It isn’t just that Donald Trump routinely thumbs his nose
at the establishment, insults media figures he sees as unfair
and bucks conventional wisdom.
It is that President-elect Trump is
defying the will of the deep state,
military industrial complex base of
ultimate power in the United States.
That is why he is treading dangerous
waters, and risks the fate of JFK.
Trump publicly dissed the intelligence community
assessments on Russian hacking; they retaliated with a
made up dossier about the alleged Trump-Putin ‘golden
shower’ episode.
179
While it may be a silly falsehood, it may also be serving as
a final warning that they get to script reality, not him.
Perhaps they want Trump to feel
blackmailed and controlled by alluding
to fake dirt, while reminding him of the
real dirt they hold on his activities
(whatever it may be).
Insulting the credibility of the intelligence community in a
public way – as the man elected to the highest office in the
land – is liable to ruffle a few feathers, and it could
provoke a serious response.
Trump knows the power of the people he is taunting, but
he may not be aware of where the line is between play in
political rhetoric and actually irritating and setting off
those who control policy.
There is plenty of Trump misbehavior that can be simply
written off, or trivialized, but cutting into the war and
statecraft narrative of the shadow government steering this
deep state is a deviation too far.
It is one thing to play captain, but another to imagine that
you steer the ship. They are happy for Trump to take all
the prestige and privileges of the office; but not for him to
cut into the big business of foreign conflict, the
undercurrent of all American affairs, the dealings in death,
drugs, oil and weapons, and the control of people through
a manipulation of these affairs.
If President Trump takes his rogue
populism too far, he will suffer the wrath
of the same people who took out
Kennedy… there are some things that
are not tolerated by those who are really
in charge.
And now leaders in the Senate are warning President-elect
Trump about the stupidity of going against the national-
security establishment.
As Jacob G. Hornberger warns:
 In a truly remarkable bit of honesty and
candor regarding the U.S. national-
security establishment, new Senate
minority leader Charles Schumer has
accused President-elect Trump of
“being really dumb.”… for taking on the
CIA and questioning its conclusions
regarding Russia.
“Let me tell you, you take on the
intelligence community, they have six
ways from Sunday at getting back at
you…. He’s being really dumb to do
this.”
[…]
No president since John F. Kennedy has
dared to take on the CIA or the rest of
the national security establishment […]
They knew that if they opposed the
national-security establishment at a
fundamental level, they would be subjected
to retaliatory measures.
Kennedy… After the Bay of Pigs, he vowed
to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces and
scatter them to the winds. He also fired CIA
Director Allen Dulles, who, in a rather
unusual twist of fate, would later be
appointed to the Warren Commission to
investigate Kennedy’s murder.
Kennedy’s antipathy toward the CIA
gradually extended to what President
Eisenhower had termed the military-
industrial complex, especially when it
proposed Operation Northwoods, which
called for fraudulent terrorist attacks to
serve as a pretext for invading Cuba,
and when it suggested that Kennedy
initiate a surprise nuclear attack on the
Soviet Union.
[…]
Worst of all, from the standpoint of the
national-security establishment,
[Kennedy] initiated secret personal
negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita
Khrushchev and Cuban leader Fidel
Castro, both of whom, by this time, were
on the same page as Kennedy.
[…]
Kennedy was fully aware of the danger he
faced by taking on such a formidable
enemy.
And to the extent that President Kennedy consciously
stood up to the system, he paid the price for his attempt at
independent wielding of power from the Oval Office.
180
It is a shuddering thought. A sharp lesson in history that
must not be misinterpreted.
The implications for Trump are quite clear. If his refusal to
take intelligence briefings, or follow CIA advice is serious,
then serious consequences will follow. If Trump is serious
about peace with Putin when they insist on war, there will
be a problem.
There are several powers behind the throne that have
wanted to ensure that presidents don’t let the power go to
their head, or try to change course from the carefully
arranged crisis-reaction-solution paradigm.
True peace is not good for military industrial complex
business; true peace, without the persistence of grave
threats, and plenty of sparks of chaos to back it up, cannot
be tolerated.
As things have progressed today, making friendly with
Putin, and calling off the war with Russia may simply be
impermissible. If Trump is attempting to negotiate his own
peace – and sing along with Frank Sinatra’s “My Way” at
the inauguration, then he is in for a very rude awakening.
If, on the other hand, he is the Trump card being played by
this very same establishment, then things may develop
according to the same ultimate objectives, albeit through a
‘wild card’ path styled after the ego of President Trump.
With Goldman Sachs and neocon advisors filling up his
administration, Trump may be simply nudged in the right
direction. But the intelligence community is not willing to
take many chances – and there are clearly contingencies in
place.
As SHTF has previously reported, the
continuity of government “Doomsday”
command-and-control planes were
brought out after the election as a
public show of power to Trump and the
American people. The shadow government
is real, and for now, maintains dominance.
Former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul
warned of the shadow government taking control of
President Trump’s administration before it was even
formed:
You know, we look at the president, we
look at what he said, we look at what he
might do, and we look at his advisors,
but quite frankly, there is an outside
source, which we refer to as a deep
state or a shadow government. There is
a lot of influence by people that are
actually more powerful than our
government itself, our president and on
up.
I mean, you take for instance how our government gets
involved in elections around the world, whether it’s in the
Middle East or Ukraine.
Trump is reportedly retaining his own private security,
bucking the protocol of Secret Service detail… and this
clearly a sign that he and his team have thought through
security issues and the possibility of an inside job.
This is prudent, but these deep state guys have access
throughout the system at every level. They are anywhere,
and everywhere. Probably someone that Trump trusts.
There are certainly many threats.
For the sake of the stability of this country, and President-
elect Trump’s own life, let us hope that they stay several
steps ahead of anyone who might want to do him harm.
.
181
This is eerie, but real.
* * *
On a personal level, it seems wise to prepare for the possibility of
widespread unrest due to political instability.
Tread carefully at the scene of the inauguration, and any high
profile political gatherings or demonstrations.
Riots at the inauguration, or in cities throughout the country are
possible, maybe even likely, as is an attempted assassination.
Even if this scenario is a long shot, and taboo to even discuss,
the role of the CIA in past coups, revolutions and uprisings is
enough to warrant taking precautions.
There is an element of chaos present during this unprecedented
transfer of power to the 45th president, and a wounded animal in
the defensive-attack posture.
If you are at a protest, either as a participant, or as an observer,
remain aware of the larger actions of the crowd, identify potential
provocateurs and stay away from points of potential violence.
Police could use anti-riot gear and spray the crowd, fire rubber
bullet, use microwave heating or auditory devices, make mass
arrests, or block off large portions of the city.
If anything significant happens, use any available phone or
camera to film it, but be prepared for confiscation or technologies
to wipe phones. An EMF shielded bag could block this; live
stream or upload instantly to as many video platforms as
possible, but they have been known to jam cell phone signals at
mass gatherings and demonstrations. Make copies and store a
physical copy, and several back-ups.
If you are at home, do not wait for the all clear signal from the
authorities, shelter in place and prepare to ride out a storm, if
something sensational or deadly takes place and panic spreads.
Do not trust the media; and try to take notice if a coup has taken
place, and constitutional authority subverted.
 Zoe Saldana Believes
Hollywood Bullied Donald Trump
The ‘Guardians Of The Galaxy’ And ‘Avatar’ Star Says That The
Hollywood Community ‘Became Bullies’ In Their Treatment Of Candidate Trump.
Marlow Stern
01.14.17 1:57 AM ET
Zoe Saldana rose to the A-list after her compelling turns as
the communications officer Nyota Uhura in Star Trek,
filmmaker J.J. Abrams’s space adventure about a
multicultural crew spreading pluralism throughout the
galaxy, and that of Neytiri in Avatar, a sci-fi epic about
environmental preservation in the face of corporate greed.
She is also a Hispanic woman (birth name: Zoe Yadira
Saldaña Nazario) of Dominican and Puerto Rican descent,
with African and Haitian roots.
All of these credits and traits seem to be at odds with
President-elect Donald Trump, an orange-hued billionaire
who spent the lion’s share of his campaign alienating
minority groups, appointed a climate change denier as
head of the EPA, installed a former Exxon executive as
Secretary of State, and has expressed particular disdain
towards the Hispanic immigrant community.
And yet, Saldana—while not a Trump supporter herself—
has seemingly taken it upon herself to defend the
indefensible, placing some of the blame for Trump’s shock
election victory on Tinseltown for bullying the world’s
premier bully.
“We got cocky and became arrogant and
we also became bullies,” Saldana told AFP
of Trump, who’s mocked a disabled New
York Times reporter, called Megyn Kelly a
“bimbo,” accused Ted Cruz’s father of
assassinating JFK, and has himself been
accused of sexual assault by over a dozen
women.
182
“We were trying to single out a man for all
these things he was doing wrong,” she
continued, “and that created empathy in a
big group of people in America that felt bad
for him and that are believing in his
promises.”
There is this strange argument, one cooked up by the
Trump campaign and propagated by the conservative
media apparatus, that Hillary Clinton (and by extension her
Hollywood surrogates) ran an “ugly” campaign against
Trump. The reality, of course, is that virtually all of
Clinton’s attack ads against Trump consisted of montages
of Trump saying heinous things. Accusing someone of
running an ugly campaign for merely highlighting the
sexist, bigoted, hateful things her opponent’s said is
textbook gaslighting.
Saldana is no stranger to controversy. The 38-year-old
actress, who is currently starring in the Ben Affleck action-
thriller Live By Night, came under fire last year for
darkening her skin and donning facial prosthetics to play
the iconic singer Nina Simone in the biopic Nina. Saldana
and the filmmakers passionately defended the head-
scratching decision, claiming that other actors who more
closely resembled Nina had turned the project down, while
large segments of the media and moviegoing public
viewed it as another example of Hollywood’s racist
aversion to dark-skinned black actors.
“The very fact that there’s such a shallow
pool of actors who look like Simone is not a
non-racist excuse, but a sign of racism
itself—the same racism that plagued Nina
Simone,” wrote Ta-Nehisi Coates. “Being
conscious of that racism means facing the
possibility of Simone’s story never being
told. That is not the tragedy. The tragedy is
that we live in a world that is not ready for
that story to be told. The release
of Nina does not challenge this fact. It
reifies it.”
Saldana’s latest film, Live By Night, contains a sequence
where Ben Affleck’s bootlegger-gangster squares off
against the Ku Klux Klan—a white supremacist
organization that endorsed Donald Trump’s presidency. strong and educate ourselves and stand by equal rights and
The actress explained how if we all work together, we treat everyone with respect, we don’t go back to those
won’t regress culturally. times.”

“I’m learning from [the Trump win] with a lot of Easier said than done.
humility,” she told AFP. “If we have people continue to be
.

183
 Rothschild’s TNK-BP Intriguers
Drafted The Trump-Russia Report
By Yoichi Shimatsu
Exclusive To Rense
1-14-2017
There’s the irony of a divine comedy in the “fake news”
accusation coming full-circle to slam CNN and NBC-
Buzzfeed for their release of a false 35-page private-
intelligence brief on Donald Trump’s relationship with
Russia. Instead of facing up to the falsehood, the
mainstream media has chosen to ignore the slew of
purported contacts and factual errors, for instance,
allegations of attorney Michael Cohen’s secret meeting in
Prague, when his passport shows that he has never visited
the Czech Republic or Russia.
The nonsensical allegations about Donald Trump’s
involvement in “sexual perversion” involving a golden
shower at the Ritz Carlton in Moscow is a master stroke
from a campaign of high-level disinformation, which was
immediately disputed in our related Pizzagate series.
Despite the attempts of corrupt U.S. intelligence officials
to drag red herrings across the trail, numerous threads of
evidence have emerged to finger the prime suspects behind
the big lie at the Ritz.
A basic understanding of this comical if sinister plot
requires at least a quick review of Vladimir Putin’s
prosecution of the Yukos-Khordorkovsy attempt to
monopolize the Russian-Eurasian energy sector in league
with the BP oil company and banker Jacob Rothschild in
London. This core group is closely connected with Tony
Blair’s New Labour faction now led by David Miliband,
along with their retired agents from MI-6 with Orbis
Business Intelligence, which was one of the authors of the
falsified anti-Trump report.
The figurehead for the Russian disinfo team behind the
Ritz scandal is Mikhail Khordorkovsky, the disgraced
Yukos CEO who was early-released from a Russian prison
in 2013, The tycoon is now based in a luxury villa on Lake
Zurich in Rappwerswil-Jona village in the canton of St.
Gallen, Switzerland. The cabal’s stay-behind chieftains in
Moscow, who orchestrated the phony interviews
slandering Trump’s team, is Israeli-Russian businessman
Mikhail Fridman and his partner Petr Aven, a Yeltsin
crony and oligarch formerly with the Foreign Ministry
economic bureau.
The Jewish Russo-British cabal’s agent in the U.S. is BP
lobbyist Randy Scheunemann of Orion Strategies, who is
Senator John McCain's top adviser on national security.
Schenemann is a business partner of Mikhail
Khordorkovsky in the Corbiere Trust registered in
184
Guernsey island, UK. The Corbiere office funded
Khordorkovsky’s legal defense and also his Open Russia
foundation, which supports the NED-financed Golos
Associates, which “monitors” Russian elections using
intimidation against voters. Scheunemann is also affiliated
with the Caspian Alliance, an informal group of energy
executives founded by Dick Cheney.
Orion Strategies is a lobbyist on the payroll of the George
Soros Open Society Institute. (Sarah Palin kicked him out
of her campaign after discovering the Soros connection).
Scheunemann is longtime consultant to and close associate
of David Miliband, a leader of the Rothschild-sponsored
globalist New Labour faction in the UK Parliament. Orion
is also the spiritual home for writer Michael Goldfarb, the
rabid attack dog for John McCain.
The Rothschild-Khordorkovsky-Scheunemann alliance,
quietly supported by George Soros, is emerging as the
prime suspect in commissioning the Company Intelligence
Report drafted by Orbis Business Intelligence and
FocusGPS.
Orbis chief Michael Steele is the report “author” of the
Company Intelligence Report (CIR), but more specifically
the editor and commentator of translated notes from the
agents of TNK-BP bosses Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman.
The retired UK diplomat served as an MI-6 officer in
Moscow during President Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika
period in the early 1990s, when the Soviet Union broke
apart. A quarter century is a long time for geopolitical
analysts, and his failure to catch all the errors in the anti-
Trump report shows that the intelligence agent’s gone to
rust.
Fusion GPS in New York is run by former Wall Street
Journal reporters:
- Glenn Simpson, who is also posted at the
International Assessment & Strategy Center, which is
funded by the Defense Department, the American
Enterprise Institute (AEI) and the neocon Hudson
Institute
- Peter Fritsch, an associate with the Congress-funded
Wilson Center
 - Thomas Catan, a former reporter for The Times of
London and the Financial Times and a graduate of the
London School of Economics.
Based on his past reporting on money-laundering by
Russian emigres in New York state, Thomas Catan likely
wrote CIR sections on supposed transfers of funds from
Moscow to ethnic Russians under the guise of pension-
fund payments and also the libelous and utterly false
section of the report about a “conspiracy of cooperation”
between Russian spies and Trump advisers Carter Page
and Paul Manafort (detailed below).
What’s needed next is an independent inquiry by a special
prosecutor appointed by the incoming Attorney General to
subpoena witnesses and experts toward prosecution of this
subversive criminal network. Libelous allegations were
made in an attempt to depose Trump and his campaign
team, including his lawyer Michael Cohen, energy adviser
Carter Page, the new National Security Adviser Gen.
Michael Flynn, and former campaign manager Paul
Manafort, along with several Russian officials named in
the report.
The American agents in this bold attempt to undermine the
democratic system in violation of the Constitution must
face treason charges, while the foreign plotters should be
either extradited for trial in a federal court or be
appropriately dealt with under the strictest standards in the
UK and Russian Federation. Any of the ethnic Jewish
perpetrators who attempt to flee to Israel should be brought
to stern justice by the Netanyahu government, if for no
other reason than future relations with the USA. The
religio-ethnic composition of these conspirators makes it
all the more important for Israelis to deny them safe
harbor, a violation of their most important alliance, which
would also tarnish the moral-ethical record of the
worldwide Zionist community for eternity for harboring
criminals.
At the end of this article, there is a skeletal outline of the
“Company Intelligence Report” (abbreviated here as CIR)
titled “US Presidential Election: Republican Candidate
Donald Trump’s Activities In Russia And
Compromising Relationship With The Kremlin”.
Energy Focus in the Frame-up
In brief summary, the 35 pages of CIR consists of a series
of notes on supposed meetings with Russian officials in
the Putin government and other elite figures. The contents
include 16 separate sub-reports, filed by at least four
Russian authors/translators summarizing more than a
dozen different sources who claimed to have spoken with
high-level Kremlin officials. Here, passages and salient
points are numbered in order of the report and by their CIR
number. (The dates are not always in proper sequence, and
a few of the sub-reports are redacted, indicative of
surprisingly sloppy procedures.)
185
A careful examination of the ineptly written report reveals
an inordinate emphasis on energy issues targeting Trump’s
energy adviser Carter Page and Igor Sechin, CEO of
Rosneft Oil, which has just terminated its joint venture
with BP in Germany’s Ruhr Oil company.
Sub-report 14, filed on October 18 (CIR 134), claimed that
Carter Page met with a surrogate for Sechin, who offered
the trade-off of a major shareholding in Rosneft in
exchange for Trump lifting the sanctions on Russia over
the Ukraine crisis. First of all, industry-respected energy
expert Page can readily schedule an in-person meeting
with Sechin, so there was no need for an intermediate. The
report writer had to admit that the unnamed “associate” of
Sechin had failed to convince Page, who remained “non-
commital.”
The reluctance described in this fairy tale conflicts with a
previous sub-report by an “ethnic Russian associate of
Trump” (probably a false reference to Jared Kushner)
speaking to a Russian compatriot about a “conspiracy of
cooperation” with Putin “managed by Paul Manfort and
Carter Page”. In exchange for the alleged Wikileaks hack
of the DNC email trove, “Trump Has Sidelined The
Ukraine Issue.” (sub-report 3.1 July 19 (CIR 95). No
shares in Rosneft were ever transferred despite the alleged
cooperation to dump Hillary.
Here, a glance at the time-line of events is key to
comprehending the false claim of Carter Page’s “secret
meeting”. The July 19 sub-report is dated July 19, whereas
DNC computer staffer Seth Rich was murdered on the
night of July 10. Craig Murray, former UK envoy to
Uzbekistan, is on the press record in a Daily Mail
interview stating that he personally received the Wikileaks
files in a park near American University in Washington
D.C. from a DNC insider who was “disgusted at the
corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the
primary election field against Bernie Sanders.” The DNC
emails were delivered to Wikileaks before the alleged
“secret meeting” with Page, which probably never even
happened. This was obviously an attempt to link the DNC
emails to the fiction of a Russian hack.
Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen was framed with another
utterly false claim (No.8 October 20 CIR 136) that he flew
to Prague for a “secret meeting” with Konstantine
Kosachev, head of the Duma (parliament) foreign relations
committee under the auspices of Russotrudonichestvo, the
Russian outreach group to the CIS states. Presumably the
oil reserves of the Caspian Basin, most of them inside
Kazakhstan, were being offered as yet another prize in
exchange for an end to sanctions over Ukraine. Originally
planned for Moscow, the meeting was instead moved to
the “soft EU nation” to avoid attention, even though
Prague is host to a major CIA station in Eastern Europe.
The torpedo hole in this ludicrous story is that Cohen was
in Los Angeles at that very moment, and his passport
shows that he’s never been to the Czech Republic or
Russia.
One super-gaffe in the CIR report is the claim that Cohen
was personally involved as Trump’s operative in Russian
hacking and cyber warfare.
“XTV/Webzilla used botnets and porn to plant viruses on
DNC computers.” Plus, “computer experts Aleksei
Gubarov and Seva Kapsugovich involve in hacking
operation.” The writer claimed that in Prague Cohen
agreed to protect the Russian hacking operation against the
DNC with contingency plans, and that Cohen and his
Russian masters agreed to pull out ‘Romanian hackers’
into a bolt hole in Bulgaria.
Pardon this interjection, but Cohen was in Los Angeles at
that time and never set foot in Prague. Those are
staggering lies crafted with criminal intent.
Faking It in New York and London
The false report on lawyer Cohen required some
commentary from the retired British spies with Orbis
Business Intelligence in London, working on contract with
Focus BPS, a strategic research firm in New York.
“Company comment: based on October 19 report (missing
from this collection)” claimed that - Cohen had met
clandestinely in a European country with the Presidential
Authority Legal Department, with the purpose of “cleaning
up the mess” from Paul Manafort’s relationship with
deposed Ukraine president Viktor Yanukovych.
In the first week of January 2017, according to Japanese
television news, a representative of the government of
Ukraine apologized for meddling against Donald Trump’s
electoral campaign and pledged improved relations with
his upcoming presidency. That admission explodes the
false charges against Paul Manafort and Carter Page on the
Ukraine issue laid by the liars with the Yukos-BP cabal.
We could go on with picking apart the catalog of
falsehoods in the Company Intelligence Report, for
example, the claim of a rift between Foreign Ministry
heavyweights Sergei Kyslyak, the ambassador to the U.S.,
against the SVR foreign intelligence agency and
Presidential Authority chief Sergei Ivanov, who was fired
in August, supposedly for botching the anti-Hillary
propaganda. Nothing substantial in this report can be
confirmed other than as a pack of lies.
RT Ratings Insufficient to Swing the Vote
The most outrageous deception from the Soros-Hillary-
CIA nexus is that a disinformation campaign by Vladimir
Putin’s team stole the presidential election for Trump. The
best evidence against this baseless claim comes from the
pro-Democrat Daily Beast in its article “Putin’s
186
propaganda TV lies about its popularity” by Katie
Zavadski and Michael Weiss released in September 2015.
“RT is not present in Nielsen ratings for the U.S. for 2012,
which start with channels with an audience of 18 million
households. Nor does it (RT) make cable news channels
rankings, meaning that, according to documents, ‘the
average daily viewership of RT programs in the US does
not reach 30,000 people.’ As of 2015, RT is still largely
absent from cable news rankings.”
The tiny viewership in America cannot possibly have had a
decisive impact on national election or even local poll
outcomes. By contrast, home-grown American news
channels boast massive prime-time viewership levels as
shown in the 2015 ratings: Fox at 2.4 million, CNN at 1.3
million, MSNBC at 1.1 million. In total programming
including entertainment, CBS led the pack with 8.8 million
daily viewers, NBC with 8.4 million, and ABC at 6.3
million. Since the coverage of Trump by CNN, NBC and
CBS was largely negative, and ABC neutral at best, the
combined ratings show that Hillary easily had twice the
positive media exposure as Trump. RT was a flyspeck as
compared with these elephants.
This sort of ratings analysis on elections and major
controversies is supposed to be done by journalism
schools, for example, at Columbia, UC Berkeley, U
Missouri or Duke, or by institutes like Pew or Poynter. All
of these establishment “limousine liberals” deserve a grade
of “F” for political bias and dereliction of ethical duty. No
excuses are acceptable when the credibility of a president-
elect and his upcoming administration is on the line,
whatever his political viewpoints or economic policies
may be.
Telltale Timelines
In the Pizzagate series, I’ve repeatedly emphasized the
importance of timeline, or the sequence of events, in
determining the veracity of claims. In the Ritz affair, a
Russian Foreign Ministry official listed as Source A said
that Trump staged the Ritz bed-wetting in 2013 because he
“hated Michelle Obama”. The press record shows,
however, that the Donald-Michelle dispute originated in
October 2016 when the First Lady blasted Trump during a
speech in New Hampshire. Trump’s dislike of Michelle
Obama arose three-years after the bed-wetting incident,
which supposedly occurred in 2013, and therefore could
not have been the motive. At that visit to Moscow, Trump
was preoccupied with the Miss Universe contest in
Moscow, had no interest in political office, was still a
friend of the Clintons, and expressed no hostility toward
the Obama administration. The Ritz story collapses on
itself.
As for rumors from “Russian associates” that Trump came
to Saint Petersburg and Moscow to amuse himself with
prostitutes rather than to conduct business (No.12.
September 14 CIR 133), the erroneous perceptions were
probably based on his accompanying Miss Universe
contestants to publicity events and charity galas. Russians
weren’t familiar with beauty contests but certainly had
gotten used to seeing their own tycoons with shady ladies.
As for bed-wetting, Mr. Trump could have suffered from
incontinence, but that medical disorder is highly unlikely
given his active lifestyle and otherwise good health. The
female housekeeper at the hotel “recalled” hearing of
something, perhaps only the fact that Trump was a guest,
but made no mention of cleaning a smelly room or
replacing a king-size mattress.
“US Presidential Election: Republican candidate Donald
Trump’s activities in Russia and compromising
relationship with the Kremlin”.
1. June 20: Ritz Carlton affair CIR 080:
“Speaking to a trusted compatriot of . . . (the sources,
indicated by letters)
A Foreign Ministry official
B. Former intelligence agent

Therefore the strong possibility that the bed-wetting Sources of the Trump “sexual perversion” at the Ritz
incident is a deliberate act of character assassination raised Carlton due to hatred of Michelle Obama
the question: Who commissioned the intelligence report
from Focus GPS and Orbis? Time-line was toward In contact with Trump for 5 years (2011); feeding him
tracking down the guilty individuals named at the start of information on political opponents for years
this article.
C. Senior Financial official
The Stench of Rotten Red Herrings
D. “close associate” who organized and managed Trump’s
In a process of elimination, one has to plow through trips to Russia
disinformation. As stated at VR blog: “4chan Idiots Claim
They Invented the Trump Piss Report. Four posts within E. Ritz male staffer
that archived thread, all using the same user ID, were from
a 4chan user claiming he or she had leaked false F. Ritz female staffer recalled the Trump visit to 2013
information to Rick Wilson, a GOP political strategist. The
posts make no mention of any details specific to pissgate.” G. Senior Kremlin official - claims Putin’s press
Fake News. spokesman Dmitry Peskov has the Hillary Clinton dossier
From Heavy website: “The accused Republican media 2. July 26: Russian Cyber crime (by Catan, former WSJ,
strategist Rick Wilson, has made it clear that he does not FT?) CIR 086:
support Trump and worked for Evan McMullin during the
election, refutes these claims. ‘If you believe the - former senior FSB intel officer
Russian/4chan spin that this information came from them,
you can’t use a calendar, or common sense. This
- other sources from his past work
information on Trump’s various personal and business
dealings in Russia was being pursued by major campaigns
Telegram cipher program
and by major media to my knowledge as early as late July
of 2015, and the Ritz Carlton information was out in the
15 crime groups involved in cyber crime, Anunak, Buktel,
summer of 2016. The allegations I took the memo to the
Metel
CIA (or caused others to do the same) are utterly, entirely,
and profoundly false and risible.’”
3.1 July 19 (date on a blank page, out of sequence) CIR
95:
Risible means laughable. A spokeswoman for Jeb Bush
likewise rebutted a similar accusation posted at Breitbart.
Speaking to a compatriot, Source E: ethnic Russian
With their lame attempts to shuck the blame for the false
CIR scandal, the Jewish energy cabal has alienated their associate of Trump
erstwhile conservative allies. Now, that the culprits stand
naked in the light of truth, it’s all so risible. To put their “Conspiracy of cooperation” managed by Paul Manafort
current predicament and future prospects in Yiddish: and Carter Page
“Fercockt!” (Translation: FUBAR or SNAFU)
Russia behind the DNC email releases by Wikileaks
Yoichi Shimatsu is an investigative journalism and former
lecturer at three journalism schools. In exchange, Trump has sidelined the Ukraine issue

Outline of Company Intelligence Report Against Clinton campaign, the Trump-Russia cooperation

Planted agents inside the Democratic Party structure

187
Emigre and offensive cyber operatives (through Russ Jill Stein, presidential candidate of the Green Party
pension system)
Carter Page, Trump adviser on foreign policy
State-sponsored cyber operatives in Russia
Michael Flynn, former chief of Defense Intelligence
Trump team spying on Russian oligarchs in US, sending
info to Moscow 7. August 10 (2nd report on that date) CIR 102:

Trump pursuing prostitutes in Moscow instead of business Ethnic Russian associate of Trump:
investments
- leaking of DNC emails to Wikileaks aimed at Sanders
3.2 Attachment(?) on different subject supporters

Focused on Carter Page: - Trump underestimated the risk of liberal reaction to

Russian interference
- associate of Sechin:
- Republican resentment toward Putin
meeting with Igor Sechin on lifting sanctions over Ukraine
(Page non-committal) 8. October 20 (date is out of sequence) CIR 136:

- official close to S. Ivanov; on meeting of Divyekin, Kremlin insider:

internal political dept. of Presidential Authority (PA) who
offers kompromat dossier on Clinton
4. July 30 CIR 097:
- Trusted associate of a Russian emigre close to Trump
Russians want plausible deniability
- Lawyer Michael Cohen secret meeting in Prague in
August
- Russotrudonichestvo used a cover for the meeting
- Konstantine Kosachev, head of Duma ForRelations
Comm, organized meeting

Intel exchange between Trump team and Russia has lasted Company comment: (probably Orbis) based on October 19
for 8 years report (missing from this collection)

5. August 5 CIR 100: - Lawyer Michael Cohen met secretly in a European

country with PA Legal Dept. Clandestinely
- 2 well-placed Kremlin sources”
- Purpose was to “clean up mess” from Manafort’s
Sergei Ivanov, PA head, angry at Dmitriy Peskov for black relationship with Yanukovych in Ukraine
PR
- Cohen meeting originally scheduled for Moscow but
- Source close to Dmitry Medvedev moved to a “soft” EU country

Refused to cover up for Peskov in Trump operation 9. August 22 CIR 105:

6. August 10: (1st report on this date) CIR 101: Well-placed Russian figure:

Close colleague of Sergei Ivanov, head of the Presidential - secret meeting of Putin and Yanukovych - 15 August
Authority, near Volvograd

- on targeting “educated youth” with pro-Trump - Yanukovych said he paid kickbacks to Paul Manafort but
propaganda left no paper trail

- satisfaction with the anti-Clinton campaign, sufficient to - Putin responds with skepticism over effectiveness of the
have a drink with Putin cover-up

Kremlin official involved with U.S. relations had meetings
in early August in Russia with
Delegation from the Larouche organization
188
American political figure associated with Trump
- Manafort’s ouster partly due to Ukraine scandal but main
reason is Lewandowski’s opposition
10. September 14 (first report on this day) CIR 111:
Trusted compatriot of PA official (mid-Sept):
- Putin reaction to fallout of US revelations of Russian
influence on elections
- Putin received advice from 3(?) groups
Sergei Kyslyak, Russ ambassador to US, ex-amb. Yuri
Ushakov, ForMin urge caution
Sergei Ivanov, former PA chief (fired in Aug), and SVR
foreign intel agency promised no blowback
- the exposure of Russ influence caused Putin to fire
Ivanov, who was replaced by Anton Vaino
- Dmitriy Peskov appointed to head anti-Clinton project,
with more kompromat, only if needed
- Shift in objective, regardless of winner, to move Hillary
away from Obama foreign policy positions
- Finance ministry removed Mikhail Kulagin from US
embassy for veterans pension ruse
11. September 14 (2nd report on this date) CIR 112
Trusted associate of top-level official
- Mikhail Fridman, Petr Aven, German Khan of Alfa group
advising Putin on US
- dialogue was “mediated” by “bagman” Oleg Govorun,
Cooperation with CIS, former Alfa Group
[stop, Alarm Bell: Alfa Group Consortium is owned by
Israeli-Russ Fridman. The group includes TNK-BP oil,
which was major shareholder in Yukos and linked to Jacob
Rothschild, thus linking this report to BP consultant
Scheuenmann and Orbis UK)
12. September 14 (3rd report on this date) CIR 133
Trusted compatriot meeting with business elite person and
tourism person in St. Petersburg
- Trump participated in sex parties but all witnesses were
bribed into silence
- both say Azeri associate of Trump named Araz Agalarov
knows details
13. October 12 CIR 130:
Trusted compatriot of 2 officials (separately) in leadership
and other in ForMin
189
- Putin circle disappointed by results of attempt to discredit
Hillary
- hacked Clinton material “injected” into Wikileaks and
other outlets
- Putin angry at subordinates “overpromising” on Trump
chances and reliability, Lavrov next to go.
- Motive was to upset liberal international order on
sanctions over Ukraine
14. October 18 (Names and entire clauses are redacted)
CIR 134
Close associate of Rosneft (oil) president Igor Sechin who
met with Carter Page in July
- proposed trade-off of large stake in Rosneft for lifting of
Ukraine sanctions
- lawyer Michael Cohen’s key role, as wife is ethnic
Russian, her father a Moscow property developer
- Carter Page did not explicitly agree to Sechin’s proposal
15. October 19: CIR 135
Kremlin insider:
- lawyer Cohen engaged with Russians to cover Manafort
scandal and Page exposure
- dialogue ‘farmed out” to the Institute of Law and
Jurisprudence
Company Comment: “The Kremlin insider was unsure of
the PA officials Cohen met secretly in August and were
unsure of the date and location of the meeting.”
16. December 13 (no source) CIR 166
Repetition of previous reports on Cohen’s secret meeting
in Prague with 3 colleagues
On Russian side Oleg Solodukhin under cover of
Rossotrudnichestivo
XTV/Webzilla used botnets and porn to plant viruses on
DNC computers
Computer experts Aleksei Gubarov and Seva Kapsugovich
involve in hacking operation
Cohen in Prague agreed to protect the hacking operation
with contingency plans
Cohen and Russians agreed to pull out “Romanian
hackers” into a bolt hole in Bulgaria.
 Obama Fires General Of D.C. National Guard,
Effective 12:01 Pm, Inauguration Day
By Dr. Eowyn
Posted On January 14, 2017

The Left’s mental disorder is in over-drive with Trump and the safety of thousands of Americans attending the
Derangement Syndrome (TDS). inauguration.

They have vowed to make the upcoming inauguration of

Donald Trump as America’s 45th President, the most
chaotic Inauguration Day in U.S. history. There are plans
to disrupt and cause maximum chaos. A full-page ad in the
Wednesday, January 11 edition of the New York Times
points the Trump-deranged to the website of the
coordinating group refusefascism.org.

As reported by ZeroHedge, unlike in states where the

governor appoints the National Guard commander, in
Washington, D.C. it’s the President who
appoints. Schwartz, 65, an African American who was
appointed to head the guard by President George W. Bush
in 2008, had maintained the position through Obama’s two
terms.

In an interview with WaPo on Friday, D.C. Council

Chairman Phil Mendelson, a Democrat, observes that “It
doesn’t make sense to can the general in the middle of an
active deployment. The timing is extremely unusual.”
Mendelson adds that Schwartz’s dismissal is a long-term
loss for the District because
Knowing full well the Left’s plans,
Obama, that petulant malevolent piece “He’s been really very good at working with
of turd, has fired the commanding the community and my impression was that
general of the D.C. National Guard, Maj. he was good for the Guard.”
Gen. Errol R. Schwartz, to be effective at
12:01 p.m. on January 20 — that is
immediately after Obama’s term of
office expires, while thousands of D.C.
National Guardsmen are deployed to
help protect the nation’s capital.

But it isn’t just the D.C. National Guard. Schwartz would

be commanding an additional 5,000 unarmed troops sent in
from across the country to help, as well as overseeing
military air support to protect the nation’s capital during
the inauguration.

That’s Obama leaving a pile of his stinky excrement as his

parting gesture — a gesture that endangers Trump’s life
190
The memo firing Maj. Gen. Schwartz was obtained by the
Washington Post. Schwartz said his orders came from the
Pentagon but that he doesn’t know who made the decision,
nor is he told why he was asked to step down.
Schwartz said he would
“never plan to leave a mission in the middle
of battle” and that “My troops will be on the
street. I’ll see them off but I won’t be able to
welcome them back to the armory.” But
since “I’m a soldier” and follows orders, he
has no regrets — “I’m a presidential
appointee, therefore the president has the
power to remove me.”
The full-page ad in the Jan. 11 New York Times
hysterically declares:
.
191
“Stop the Trump/Pence regime before it
starts! In the name of humanity we refuse
to accept a fascist America!”
The ad is signed by thousands of activists, journalists,
intellectuals and entertainers, including
 Bill Ayers (domestic terrorist),
 Carl Dix (Communist Party USA),
 Chase Iron Eyes (Standing Rock Sioux),
 Marc Lamont Hill (CNN reporter),
 Alice Walker (author),
 Cornel West (professor), and
 Saul Williams (poet).
 H/t John Molloy, OSJ, Chairman, National Vietnam &
Gulf War Veterans Coalition
 Fake News: Wash Post Changes Story On Trump
‘Firing’ D.C. Nat’l Guard General
By Warner Todd Huston
14 Jan 2017

able to welcome them back to the armory.”

The general added he would “never plan to
leave a mission in the middle of a battle.”

The paper went on to quote Democrat D.C. Council

Chairman Phil Mendelson as saying,

“It doesn’t make sense to can the general

in the middle of an active deployment.”

The paper concluded its speculation, saying,

“Schwartz said that he has not been told

why he was asked to step down. ‘I’m a
The Washington Post wrote on Friday soldier,’ he said, noting that he was
that President-elect Donald J. Trump following orders and has no regrets. ‘I’m a
“fired” the commanding General of the presidential appointee, therefore the
D.C. National Guard who is heading up president has the power to remove me.'”
the military presence during the coming
inaugural event — in the middle of the
An earlier version of the story can still be seen at Stars
oath of office ceremony. Yet a second
And Stripes.
story on Saturday did not contain the
claim.
The fact is, of course, that the commander of the D.C.
National Guard serves at the pleasure of the president and
The Post’s original report set off a wave of stories across
is not put in place by the Pentagon or any of the federal
the world, causing raised eyebrows over Trump’s
branches of the military.
“extremely unusual” decision to fire a general in the
middle of the presidential oath of office ceremony,
especially during these dangerous times. But the Post’s early reporting on the “firing” of General
Schwartz contains no statements from the Trump transition
office and also leaves out key points such as the fact that
The paper reported that Major General Errol R. Schwartz,
the general of the D.C. National Guard traditionally
who has commanded the D.C. National Guard since his
supplies his letter of resignation to every new president
appointment to the position by George W. Bush, was told
who is about to take office.
to vacate his office the moment Trump says his “I dos” to
the oath of office. The decision was presented to readers as
unfathomable, if not dangerous, by a president who Subsequent to the publishing of the paper’s story making
doesn’t know what he is doing. Trump appear incompetent, news emerged that the
incoming Trump administration offered to let General
Schwartz keep his position through inauguration day, but it
In an interview, General Schwartz told the paper that his
was the general himself who refused the offer, preferring
firing was strange.
instead to quit at 12 noon on January 20, the hour Trump
takes his oath of office.
“The timing is extremely unusual,” the
general said.
The general then ran straight to the media to “argue his
“My troops will be on the street,” Schwartz case in the press,” as a recent Fox News report noted.
continued. “I’ll see them off, but I won’t be

192

In essence, while the incoming Trump White House did
accept General Schwartz’ resignation, it did not “fire him”
in “the midst of the presidential ceremony,” as the
Washington Post reported on Friday.
Meanwhile, on the day after its initial publication, the Post
made material edits to its story. And as of press time, the
paper had not added any notice that it had made the
alterations.
The current version of the story now on the paper’s
website added two important paragraphs that change the
flavor of its earlier story.
Among other changes, one of the paragraphs added makes
it clear that it is customary for such generals to submit
their resignation, and in this case Trump accepted it. The
paragraph also tries to cover for the paper’s poor reporting
.
193
by insisting that the Trump team “provided contradictory
versions” of the general’s situation — another fact not in
the original story.
Despite its changes, the Washington Post story did not
contain the statement — aired by Fox News on Saturday
— that the transition had asked the general to stay until
inauguration day was over, but it was the general who
decided to quit. According to the Fox News report, “It
appears the general would rather argue his case in the
press.”
Schwartz, who started his Army career in 1976 but has
never seen a deployment to a theater of war, was appointed
to head the D.C. Guard by George W. Bush in 2008.
According to his bio page, he was first commissioned in
1979 and has served his entire career in the D.C. Guard.
Schwartz has a Bachelor of Science in Electrical
Engineering and a Master of Science in Business
Management.
This is far from the first time the paper made a big splash
with a story only to quietly rewrite it the next day when it
found its assertions in question. The Washington Post
recently courted charges of “fake news” when it published
the shocking story that the Russians hacked and infiltrated
the computer systems of a Vermont power plant. By the
next day, the paper completely rewrote its story,
disavowing that any hack took place.
 More Democratic Legislators Plan
On Sitting Out Trump’s Swearing-In
President-Elect’s Twitter Rebuke Of Civil Rights
Leader John Lewis Increases Boycott Number
By Natalie Andrews And Harriet Torry
Updated Jan. 15, 2017 10:26 P.M. ET
NBC’s Chuck Todd interviewed Rep. John Lewis (D., Ga.) about
President-elect Donald Trump. Photo: NBC
WASHINGTON—The number of Democratic lawmakers
planning to skip Donald Trump’s inauguration ceremony
Friday is growing, with more joining in the boycott after
the president-elect took to Twitter over the weekend to
rebuke civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis (D., Ga.) for
saying Mr. Trump wasn’t a “legitimate president.”
At least 20 lawmakers, all Democratic members of the
House, have said they wouldn’t attend. Some are citing the
president-elect’s past lewd comments about women and
remarks about illegal immigrants; others, such as Mr.
Lewis, cite accusations of Russian-backed hacking of
political committees during the 2016 election.
“I don’t see this president-elect as a
legitimate president,” Mr. Lewis told NBC in
comments released Friday. “I think the
Russians participated in helping this man
get elected. And they helped destroy the
candidacy of Hillary Clinton.”
Mr. Lewis’ comments prompted Mr. Trump to say
Saturday on Twitter that the lawmaker should focus on his
district. He said Mr. Lewis, who marched with Martin
Luther King Jr. and was beaten during the Civil Rights era,
was
“all talk, talk, talk—no action or results.
Sad!”
Some Democratic lawmaker cited Mr. Trump’s comments
about Mr. Lewis in announcing they wouldn’t attend the
inauguration.
194
“For me, the personal decision not to
attend [the] inauguration is quite simple: Do
I stand with Donald Trump, or do I stand
with John Lewis? I am standing with John
Lewis,” Rep. Ted W. Lieu (D., Calif.) said in
a statement Saturday. He also cited
comments on other matters by Mr. Trump
that he termed “un-American.’’
Inaugural events are usually attended by lawmakers from
both sides of the aisle. A bipartisan committee known as
the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural
Ceremonies is responsible for the swearing-in ceremonies
and a luncheon at the U.S. Capitol.
Vice President-elect Mike Pence, speaking Sunday on Fox
News, said he was “disappointed” in Mr. Lewis’
comments and hoped the lawmaker would reconsider his
boycott.
“Donald Trump has the right to defend
himself,” Mr. Pence also said.
Reince Priebus, Mr. Trump’s choice to be
White House chief of staff, described Mr.
Lewis’s allegation about Russian influence
in the election as “insanity” and “wrong.”
He pointed to Director of National Intelligence James
Clapper’s recent statement that there was no information to
suggest Russian hackers changed vote tallies or interfered
with voting systems in the presidential election.
“I think it’s incredibly disappointing, and I
think it’s irresponsible for people like [Mr.
Lewis] to question the legitimacy of the
next United States president,’’ Mr. Priebus
told ABC. “I think putting the United States
down across the world is not something a
responsible person does.”
Denis McDonough, chief of staff to President Barack
Obama, defended Mr. Lewis but said he disagreed Mr.
Trump isn't “legitimate.” He noted that Mr. Obama said he
believes Mr. Trump is “the freely elected president.”
Still, Mr. McDonough said on CNN that intelligence
shows the Russians
“did intervene, and they did intervene with
the purpose of helping one candidate and
hurting the other. So, these are by no
means trivial concerns.”
Democratic Party leadership isn’t taking part in the boycott
of Mr. Trump’s inauguration. House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi told NPR on Friday that she would attend, to
mark
“the peaceful transfer of power and, in this
case, from one party to the next.”
In December, Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D., Ill.) became one of
the first to announce he wouldn’t attend, citing comments
Mr. Trump had made about women, immigrants and
people of color.
“I cannot go to [the] inauguration of a man
who’s going to appoint people to the
Supreme Court and turn back the clock on
women and turn back the clock on
immigrants and the safety and freedom that
we fought for them,” Mr. Gutierrez said last
month.
Other lawmakers who have said they wouldn’t attend
inaugural events are:
 Rep. Katherine Clark (D., Mass.),
.
195
 Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.),
 Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D., Wash.),
 Rep. Jared Huffman (D., Calif.),
 Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D., Calif.),
 Rep. Lacy Clay (D., Mo.),
 Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D., Ore.)
 Rep. Adam Smith, (D., Wash).,
 Rep. Barbara Lee (D, Calif.),
 Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D, Ariz.),
 Rep. Kurt Schrader (D., Ore.),
 Rep. José E. Serrano (D., N.Y.),
 Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D., N.Y.),
 Rep. Mark Takano (D., Calif.),
 Rep. Yvette Clarke (D., N.Y.),
 Rep. Judy Chu (D., Calif.),
 Rep. Jerry Nadler (D., N.Y.) and
 Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D., N.Y.)
Mr. McDonough, Sunday on CNN, suggested Mr. Lewis
and Mr. Trump work together on social policy.
“My hope would be that the president-elect
would reach out to somebody as
consequential and somebody who is such
a leader as John Lewis, who has done so
many things over the course of his life, to
try to work this out,” Mr. McDonough said.
Corrections & Amplifications:
Harriet Torry and Natalie Andrews wrote this article. An
earlier version of this article incorrectly said Harriet Torry
Andrews was one of the authors. (Jan. 15, 2017)
 One China Policy Nonnegotiable, Says Beijing
By Stephen Lendman
1-15-2017
The one China policy was first mentioned in the Shanghai
Communique on February 28, 1972 during Nixon’s visit to
China - stressing the importance for both countries to
normalize relations.
On January 1, 1979, the Joint Communique on the
Establishment of Diplomatic Relations agreed to by Jimmy
Carter and Deng Xiaoping formally established bilateral
relations, ending official recognition of Taiwan,
announced by Carter in December 1978.
The (1992 Consensus) one China principle affirms a single
sovereign China comprised of the mainland and Taiwan.
Trump saying “(e)verything is under
negotiation including one China” didn’t go
down well in Beijing. On Saturday, its
Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said
it’s “nonnegotiable.”
One China alone exists, Taiwan an inalienable part of it, he
stressed. The People’s Republic of China is its only
legitimate government, “an internationally recognized fact,
and no one can change it,” he explained.
“We urge the relevant party in the United
States to realize the high sensitivity of the
Taiwan issue and abide by commitments
made by previous US governments to the
.
196
one China policy and the principles of the
three joint communiques.”
Normalized relations depend on it. If Trump demands
Beijing play by Washington rules, trouble in the Pacific
awaits him, perhaps undermining chances for improving
relations with Moscow.
Sino/Russian ties stress unity. Each nation strategically
supports the other. Together they’re a powerful
counterweight to US hegemonic aims.
Harming the interests of one affects the other. Both
countries will rally to defend each other’s mutual interests.
Antagonizing Beijing by using the one China policy as a
bargaining chip is sure to adversely affect Sino-Russia/US
relations.
Trump has to decide if he wants mutual cooperation with
other nations or continuation of adversarial relations with
sovereign independent ones. Will he be a bully or
responsible leader?
It’s his call for good or ill. Much depends on what he
decides. China’s credibility at home and abroad depends
on the one China policy.
It’s fundamentally important. Challenging or in any way
disrupting it assures continuing Obama’s adversarial
policy, maybe recklessly escalating it.
 John Brennan: Trump's
'Nazi Germany' Tweet To US Agencies Was 'Outrageous'
The Outgoing CIA Director Admonished The President-Elect
For ‘Talking And Tweeting’ Without Fully Understanding
Russia’s Threat To National Security
Staff And Agencies
Sunday 15 January 2017 15.52 EST

Trump has repeatedly praised Russian president Vladimir

Putin and criticized American intelligence officers,
accusing them of letting “fake news”, about what
intelligence agencies believe to be Russian hacks on
political parties and alleged contacts with Trump’s
campaign, appear in press reports.

“One last shot at me,” Trump tweeted this

week. “Are we living in Nazi Germany?”

John Brennan: ‘There is no basis for Mr Trump to point fingers at

the intelligence community for leaking information that was already
publicly available.’ Photograph: J Scott Applewhite/AP

Departing CIA director John Brennan criticized Donald

Trump on Sunday for his approach to national security,
saying the president-elect should not be carelessly “talking
and tweeting” without understanding Russia’s threat to the
US.
Mike Pence insists Trump campaign has
not been in contact with Russia
Brennan also said he took “great umbrage” at Trump’s
suggestion that agencies biased against him were behaving
as if the US were “Nazi Germany”.
“Now that he’s going to have an opportunity
to do something for our national security as
opposed to talking and tweeting,” Brennan
told Fox News Sunday, “he’s going to have
tremendous responsibility to make sure
that US and national security interests are
protected.
“I think he has to be mindful that he does
not have a full appreciation and
understanding of what the implications are
of going down that road.”
Brennan called the comparison of the CIA, NSA, FBI and
the director of national intelligence offensive to American
officers.
“What I do find outrageous is equating an
intelligence community with Nazi
Germany,” he said. “I do take great
umbrage at that, and there is no basis for
Mr Trump to point fingers at the intelligence
community for leaking information that was
already available publicly.”
Undaunted, on Sunday Trump used Twitter to comment
further on this week’s publication by BuzzFeed of an
unsubstantiated intelligence dossier, writing:
“Thank you to [journalist] Bob Woodward
who said, ‘That is a garbage document … it
never should have been presented …
Trump’s right to be upset (angry) about that
…

197
 “Those Intelligence chiefs made a
mistake here, & when people make
mistakes, they should APOLOGIZE.
Media should also apologize.”
Obama aide: Trump should 'reach out'
to Democrats boycotting inauguration
After weeks of insisting that China or “a 400-pound guy”
could have hacked his political opponents, Trump
conceded this week:
“I think it was Russia.”
His transition team has denied, however, alleged contacts
between Trump aides and high-ranking officials in Russia.
.
198
On Sunday, vice president-elect Mike Pence insisted there
were no such contacts during the campaign.
Trump’s national security adviser, retired general Mike
Flynn, spoke with Russia’s ambassador to the US, Sergei
Kislyak, in late December around the time the US imposed
sanctions on Russian officials. According to Pence, the
men did not discuss those sanctions.
“It was strictly coincidental that they had a
conversation,” Pence told CBS’s Face the
Nation. “They did not discuss anything
having to do with the United States’
decision to expel diplomats or impose
censure against Russia.”
 Trump Team May Move
West Wing Briefings To Expand Capacity
 Pence Says Tremendous Interest In Covering New Administration
 Chief Of Staff Says Current Briefing Room Will Be Overwhelmed
By Ros Krasny
January 15, 2017, 12:10 PM CST January 15, 2017, 1:45 PM CST
President Barack Obama speaks during a news conference in the
Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House December 16, 2016.
Photographer: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The incoming Trump administration is considering moving
White House press briefings out of the West Wing to
accommodate more than the “Washington media elite,”
President-elect Donald Trump’s press secretary said.
“This is about greater accessibility, more
people in the process,” Sean Spicer said
Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “Media
Buzz.” Involving more people, including
bloggers and others who aren’t from the
mainstream media, “should be seen as a
welcome change,” he said.
Spicer and other Trump officials said no decisions had
been made.
Their comments followed a report Saturday by Esquire,
citing unidentified officials from the transition team, that
the new administration may move the press corps out of
the main White House building altogether because of
antagonism between Trump and the media.
Any change would be made for logistical reasons, in
response to heavy demand from media organizations, Vice
President-elect Mike Pence said Sunday.
199
Larger Venue
“The briefing room is open now to all
reporters who request access,” White
House Correspondents’ Association
President Jeff Mason said in a statement
Sunday. “We object strenuously to any
move that would shield the president and
his advisers from the scrutiny of an on-site
White House press corps.”
Mason said he was meeting with Spicer “to try to get more
clarity on exactly what” the proposal is.
“There’s such a tremendous amount of
interest in this incoming administration that
they’re giving some consideration to finding
a larger venue on the 18 acres in the White
House complex, to accommodate that
extraordinary interest,” Pence said on CBS
News’ “Face the Nation.”
“The interest of the team is to make sure
that we accommodate the broadest number
of people who are interested and media
from around the country and around the
world,” Pence said.
On ABC’s “This Week,” incoming White House chief of
staff Reince Priebus said demand for press-conference
credentials far exceeds the “49 people” who can fit into the
current briefing room.
‘Uptight’ Press
“The one thing that we discussed was
whether or not we want to move the initial
press conferences into the Executive Office
Building,” Priebus said, adding, “you can fit
four times the amount of people.”
“I know that some of the folks in the press
are uptight about this, and I understand,”
Priebus said.
He didn’t address whether a change was being mulled only
for briefings or also for the media’s daily working
arrangements. The briefing room sits between the offices
of White House communications staff and those of major
news organizations, and is steps from the president’s Oval
Office.
After “500 or 600” people attended Trump’s
press conference in New York on Jan. 11,
the president-elect’s first since the election,
.
200
“we started thinking, man alive, if we have
more people involved instead of less
people involved, wouldn’t that be a good
thing,” Priebus said.
Although located across the street, the
Executive Office Building is still “the White
House,” he said.
 Welcome To One of The Most
Pivotal Weeks In Modern American History
By Michael Snyder
January 15th, 2017
Many are anticipating that a wonderful new era of peace
and prosperity is just a few days away, but others are using
terms such as “civil unrest” and “civil war” for what they
believe is about to happen in America. Without a doubt,
Donald Trump is one of the most electrifying politicians in
modern American history, but he is also one of the most
polarizing. So will the next four years bring us together as
a nation, or will anger, frustration, strife and discord tear
us much farther apart? It is being projected that extremely
large crowds of supporters will attend Donald Trump’s
inauguration on January 20th, but the mainstream media is
also reporting that “hundreds of thousands of protesters”
are on their way to Washington. Many on the far left are
hoping to turn Trump’s inauguration into one of the
biggest riots in U.S. history, but thousands of law
enforcement personnel are going to do their very best to
prevent that from happening.
There are sites on the Internet that are literally counting
down the hours until Barack Obama leaves office.
Knowing that his time is short, Obama seems determined
to squeeze as much “change” out of his final hours as he
possibly can. Just check out what the Washington Post
says that he was able to accomplish on just one day last
week…
On Thursday alone, the administration designated three
new national monuments and expanded another two in
sites including a forest in the Pacific Northwest and a
school for freed slaves in South Carolina; took away one
of the special immigration privileges Cubans arriving in
the United States without visas have enjoyed for 50 years;
announced sanctions designations against 18 senior Syrian
officials for their role in the use of chlorine as a chemical
201
weapon in 2014 and 2015; awarded the Presidential Medal
of Freedom to Vice President Biden; and accused Fiat
Chrysler of cheating on national emission standards for
some of its diesel trucks.
And in the last few days of his presidency, there is a great
deal of concern about how much more damage he may be
able to do on his way out the door. Late last week he
enraged the Russians by moving U.S. troops into Poland,
and Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria
Zakharova is warning that Obama still has a few more
days left to “destroy the world”…
Zakharova charged that
“Obama and his illiterate foreign policy
team have dealt a crushing blow to
America’s prestige and leadership” and
described his administration as
“a bunch of geopolitical losers, enraged
and shortsighted.”
Obama’s administration still has a few
days left to “destroy the world,”
Zakharova wrote.
However, there is one piece of good news. According to
the Jerusalem Post, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has
told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that
Obama will not support any additional action against Israel
at the UN Security Council before Trump is inaugurated.
Of course politicians lie all the time, and John Kerry may
not have been entirely honest with Netanyahu, and so we
will keep a close eye on the UN Security Council when
they meet on Tuesday.
On Friday, the eyes of the entire world will be on
Washington. What once seemed so impossible is on the
verge of actually becoming a reality, and security officials
will be working overtime to make sure that nobody tries to
stop Trump from being inaugurated at the last minute.
Needless to say, the festivities on Friday would be a big,
fat juicy target for anyone that hates Trump, hates America
or that just wanted to make an unforgettable political
statement. In fact, Republican Senator Roy Blunt has
admitted that the inauguration of Donald Trump will be
“the most appealing target in the world”…
“Security is my greatest concern,” Republican Senator Roy
Blunt, chairman of the Joint Congressional Committee on
Inaugural Ceremonies, has said.
“No question that on inaugural day, this
would be the most appealing target in
the world.”
Even if there isn’t any violence on Friday, there will
definitely be plenty of angry protesters. And instead of
attempting to calm things down, many in the mainstream
media are actually promoting the protests. For example,
the Washington Post has even published a “guide to
inauguration demonstrations, marches and protests”.
It appears that most of those on the left plan to protest
peacefully, but there are definitely groups that are planning
to be as disruptive as they possibly can. I have previously
reported about an organization known as DisruptJ20, and
now audio has been released of one of their leaders saying
that they want to
“do everything we can to try and stop
people from being able to access the
inauguration”…
A conservative group also shared with FoxNews.com what
it said was audio from a Jan. 8 #DisruptJ20 meeting at a
Washington church, giving even greater insight into the
group’s planned D.C. “shutdown.”
The audio, recorded by Trevor Loudon with
Capital Research Center, purports to show
a female member detailing plans to “do
everything we can to try and stop
people from being able to access the
inauguration.”
It doesn’t take much imagination to figure out how they
are going to do that. According to the shocking new audio
recording obtained by Fox News,
DisruptJ20 plans to physically block “roads
and other modes of transit into the city”…
“We’re going to be doing blockades,”
the woman says in the audio. “We’re
going to [be] blockading checkpoints
into the security zones. We’re also
going to be blockading roads and other
modes of transit into the city.”
202
Traffic in the Washington D.C. area is a major headache
even at the best of times, and so even if everything went
perfectly transportation would be a major issue at Trump’s
inauguration. So it isn’t going to take much for these
anarchists to create a very real crisis.
And some leftists have been encouraging those that cannot
physically come to Washington D.C. to go online and help
take down the official White House website on January
20th…
PR Newswire, a global news-release distribution service,
circulated a release on Thursday highlighting a campaign
launched by Protester.io, a digital protest organizing
platform, to “take down” the White House website next
Friday in protest of Trump’s inauguration.
“On January 20th, hundreds of thousands
of Americans are going to Washington, DC
to march in protest of the inauguration of
Donald Trump. Millions more around the
country will be joining the cause from
home. If you can’t make it to Washington
DC on inauguration day, you can still
participate by occupying whitehouse.gov
online,” the release read.
Many on the left truly believe that Trump is the modern
equivalent of Adolf Hitler, and therefore he must be
resisted at all costs.
And one of the reasons why they want to be as disruptive
as possible is so that they can provoke an extremely harsh
response. If law enforcement officials can be filmed
treating protesters very harshly, that can be used as fuel to
inspire thousands of others to join the movement against
the “fascist” Donald Trump.
Following the “blockades” and other “actions” on the 20th,
there will be a “million woman march” on the 21st.
Michael Moore and a whole host of liberal celebrities will
be there, and it is being reported that there will be close to
300 “sister marches” in other cities around the nation…
Protesters are using the hashtag #WhyIMarch to explain
why they are heading to Washington — from calls for
equality to initiatives to curb gun violence to pleas for
health care reform.
Nearly 300 “sister marches” have been organized in other
US cities — including New York, Boston, Los Angeles
and Seattle — and around the world.
This is going to be a week that none of us will ever forget.
Many are hoping (myself included) that the protests will
soon fade and that Trump’s presidency will represent a
true turning point for America.
But there are many others that are literally gearing up for a
“war”, and they intend to fight for as long as it takes to
achieve their goals.
.
203
We are a nation that is deeply, deeply divided, and it isn’t
going to take much to push us over the edge.
So this week is definitely a beginning, but is it the
beginning of a wonderful new chapter in American history,
or is it the beginning of the end for our once great nation?
This story will unfold over the next four years, and let us
hope that it is a good one.
 Russian Foreign Ministry:
"Obama Still Has A Few Days Left To Destroy The World"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 15, 2017 3:21 PM
There is a reason Vladimir Putin and the Russian top
political echelon has been avoiding the media following
the onslaught of allegations lobbed at the Kremlin, and
Trump: as AP writes, careful not to hurt chances for a thaw
in U.S.-Russia relations, President Putin and other Russian
officials
"have deferred questions about their plans
for future contacts with Trump and any
agenda for those talks until he takes office
on Friday." In short, the "Kremlin is
counting the days to his inauguration and
venting its anger at Barack Obama's
outgoing administration, no holds barred."
Trump's desire to restore relations with Russia has brought
wide expectations of improved Moscow-Washington
relations, but Trump has not articulated a clear Russia
policy. His Cabinet nominees include both a retired
general with a hawkish stance on Russia and an oil
executive who has done extensive business in Russia. At
the same time, Russian officials are blasting the outgoing
U.S. administration in distinctly undiplomatic language,
dropping all decorum after Obama hit Moscow with more
sanctions in his final weeks in office.
Most recently, Moscow has called
Obama's team a "bunch of geopolitical
losers" engaged in a last-ditch effort to
inflict the maximum possible damage to
U.S.-Russia ties to make it more difficult
for Trump to mend the rift.
Doing its part to improve relations once Trump is sworn in
on Friday at noon, in a clear effort to avoid risking a
rapprochement with Trump, Putin showed a remarkable
restraint when the U.S. expelled 35 Russian diplomats over
accusations of meddling in the U.S. election campaign.
Instead of a usual tit-for-tat response, Putin invited U.S.
diplomats' children to a New Year's party at the Kremlin.
Sparking the latest diplomatic mini scandal in the US, late
last week it emerged that Trump's national security
adviser, Michael Flynn, and Russia's ambassador to the
U.S. were in frequent contact in recent weeks, including on
Dec. 29, the day Obama hit Moscow with sanctions in
retaliation for election-related hacking, according to a
senior U.S. official.
204
That call and others suggest that the
incoming administration is already
laying the groundwork for a possible
thaw with Moscow.
Moscow similarly refrained from retaliation when the
White House last week added five Russians, including the
chief of Russia's top state investigative agency, to the U.S.
sanctions list.
Still, while Putin and his aides hope Trump will open up to
Russia, they know any attempt to fix ties will face massive
obstacles, including possible strong resistance in the U.S.
Congress.
"Any future contacts will have to be
prepared quite accurately and thoroughly,
as they would follow a tense period," Putin
spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Fyodor Lukyanov, chair of the Council for Foreign and
Defense Policies, a group of Russian foreign policy
experts, said Syria is one area where a U.S.-Russian
rapport is likely. During the call with Flynn, the Russian
ambassador invited U.S. officials to a conference on Syria
to be held in Kazakhstan later this month, according to a
transition official, who was not authorized to publicly
discuss the matter. In an interview Friday with The Wall
Street Journal, Trump said he might do away with Obama's
sanctions if Russia works with the U.S. on battling
terrorists and achieving other goals.
One place where there could be a major breakthrough
between the US and Russia is Rysia:
The Kremlin would be eager to embrace a
U.S. offer of cooperation on Syria. Obama's
administration had refused to coordinate
action against the IS with Russia, saying
Moscow was bent on shoring up Syrian
President Bashar Assad. The complexity of
the conflict in Syria — where opposition
groups backed by regional players are
pitted against Assad's troops and often
fight each other — makes hopes for quick
progress elusive.
 "Russia and the United States are "absolving Russia of various actions it has
important players (in Syria) but not the taken in the past number of years is a road
only ones," Lukyanov said. that he needs to be very, very careful about
moving down."
He noted that nuclear arms control is another possible area
where Moscow and Washington could try to find common
ground. While new arms control treaties are unlikely, the
two countries may try to find ways to increase global
stability, Lukyanov said.

Putin has pushed for the U.S. to recognize Moscow as an

equal global heavyweight and to acknowledge that Russia's
ex-Soviet neighbors are in its sphere of "vital interests" —
demands rejected by the West. Many in Russia hope that
Trump could be more inclined to strike a "grand bargain"
with Putin, carving up spheres of influence and helping
cement Russia's role as a global power.
The Kremlin has rejected the hacking accusations and also
hotly denied reports that it has collected compromising
Alexander Lebedev, a multimillionaire Russian owner of information about Trump.
Britain's Evening Standard and Independent newspapers,
believes that Putin wants a "big deal" that would envisage
On the other hand, aware that an open show of support for
cooperation in Syria and possible cooperation in other
Trump would only make it more difficult for him to restore
spheres.
ties, Russian officials have mostly focused on blasting
Obama's administration.
Another major area of possible cooperation
is the fight against international financial
Konstantin Kosachev, the head of foreign affairs
crime. "$1 trillion a year is stolen by
committee in the upper house of parliament, described the
global banks and companies and moved
White House's decision to expel Russian diplomats as an
offshore," Lebedev said, adding that
Russia and the U.S. could launch a
worldwide crackdown on corrupt business "agony of not even lame ducks, but
practices. political corpses."

*** But the best comments to date belongs to Russian Foreign

Russia may be overly optimistic counting on a rapid thaw
in icy relations, however. While the Kremlin counts on
Trump to roll the sanctions back, many observers are
skeptical.
"In the current atmosphere, it's very difficult
to imagine how Trump could start canceling
the sanctions," Lukyanov said.
Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova.
"If 'Russian hackers' hacked anything in
America, there were two things: Obama's
brain, and, of course, the report about
'Russian hackers,'" she wrote on
Facebook.
Zakharova charged that

First and foremost, Trump would have to defuse the "Obama and his illiterate foreign policy
constant accusations that Russia "hacked the US election." team have dealt a crushing blow to
U.S. intelligence officials' accusations that Russian hackers America's prestige and leadership" and
— acting on Putin's orders — interfered into the vote to described his administration as "a bunch
help Trump win have put the U.S. president-elect in a of geopolitical losers, enraged and
difficult position. Trump has grudgingly conceded that shortsighted."
Russia was likely responsible for hacking the Democratic
National Committee, but emphasized there was no
evidence that hacking affected the U.S. election results.
Earlier today, outgoing CIA chief John Brennan warned
Trump to watch what he says, warning the president-elect
that

205
 Zakharova concluded that Obama's administration still has
a few days left to

"destroy the world."

***

With thousands of US troops entering

Poland last week "in the largest
deployment since the Cold War", it's
probably wise not to tempt him.

206
 Trump Team Considers Moving
Press Corps, Alarming Reporters
By Michael M. Grynbaum
JAN. 15, 2017
President Obama last month in the White House press briefing room.
Credit Al Drago/The New York Times
In the 1890s, journalists covering the president were forced
to stand vigil outside the White House fence, querying
visitors for scraps of information and appealing for
audiences with presidential aides.
Today’s reporters are concerned that President-elect
Donald J. Trump could send them back into the past.
The White House press corps was stunned on Sunday by
reports of a proposal by the Trump administration to eject
reporters from their home in the West Wing — a move
that, if carried out, would uproot decades of established
protocol whereby journalists are allowed to work in the
White House close to senior officials.
Reince Priebus, Mr. Trump’s incoming chief of staff,
appeared to backpedal on the idea after it was reported by
Esquire magazine, saying that only the location of the
press briefing room was being discussed and that the
administration was merely considering a larger area to
accommodate the hundreds of journalists seeking to cover
Mr. Trump.
But for jittery Washington reporters, it was yet another
salvo from an administration that has shown an unusual
willingness to berate and belittle the news media, at the
behest of a president-elect who has floated the idea of
rolling back libel protections and, in a volcanic appearance
last week, refused to take questions from CNN after it ran
a story he did not like.
The sense of alarm was clear last week when more than
100 reporters showed up to a routine meeting of the White
House Correspondents’ Association. The group, which
207
promotes reporters’ access to presidential administrations,
pledged to be vigilant about responding to any erosion of
press freedoms.
“We are all in this together,” said Jeff
Mason of Reuters, the group’s president.
Since the 1970s, reporters from broadcast, print and radio
outlets have worked in small cubicles on the former site of
a West Wing swimming pool. The reporters can walk,
without a security escort, to the offices of White House
press aides and the press secretary to check in on
developments or to pick up the latest gossip.
It was not clear on Sunday whether the administration’s
idea to relocate the White House press corps might extend
to evicting reporters from their office space.
“That hasn’t been determined,” Mr. Priebus
told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the
Press.” Later, on ABC’s “This Week,” Mr.
Priebus said, “The only thing that’s been
discussed is whether or not the initial press
conferences are going to be in that small
press room.”
Few presidents relish sharing their home with reporters
who are responsible for questioning their every move. But
journalists have been granted space in the White House
since the William McKinley administration, and their
presence is seen as a potent symbol of a president’s
willingness to be held to account.
Sean Spicer, the incoming White House press secretary,
issued a statement on Sunday that did not address the issue
of a dedicated work space.
“While no decisions have been made, there
is enormous interest in covering Donald
Trump,” he wrote. “The current briefing
room only has 49 seats, so we have looked
at rooms within the White House to conduct
briefings that have additional capacity.”
In a two-hour meeting on Sunday, Mr. Mason told Mr.
Spicer that it would be “unacceptable” to evict reporters
from their work space. Mr. Spicer did not appear to
disavow such a plan, only agreeing to discuss any changes
ahead of time.
“We object strenuously to any move that
would shield the president and his advisers
from the scrutiny of an on-site White House
press corps,” Mr. Mason wrote in an email.
Mr. Trump’s communications team has pledged to shake
up the status quo, inviting nontraditional journalists,
including talk radio hosts and conservative bloggers, to the
West Wing and prohibiting television coverage of daily
press briefings, an idea that is supported by some former
press secretaries of both political parties.
Mr. Spicer denounced the news media last week at a news
conference, describing CNN and BuzzFeed News as “sad”
and “pathetic” for reporting on unverified allegations about
Mr. Trump and Russia.
But initial discussions between the White House press
corps and the new administration have been described as
.
208
diplomatic, with Mr. Trump’s team pledging to retain
reporters’ access to the president’s motorcade and his
flights on Air Force One.
Bob Schieffer, a longtime CBS News anchor who has
covered eight presidential administrations, said he was not
surprised to see tensions between a new president and the
news media.
“They’re not the first administration that’s
come to office thinking they can control
every single word that’s said about them,”
he said in an interview. “It’s their call, they
can do what they want to do, and if the
public puts up with it, they’ll continue to do
it that way.”
But, he added:
“If they think they’re not going to get the
same intense coverage, they’ve been
smoking something.”
 Declaring Trump Illegitimate Part Of A Coup Plot
By Stephen Lendman
1-15-2017
Whatever his intended domestic and geopolitical agenda,
he’s America’s legitimately elected president. That won’t
change once in office and begins serving.
Calling him illegitimate is contemptuous and extremely
dangerous. Rep. John Lewis (D. GA) disgraced himself,
destroying his credibility, saying
“I don’t see the president-elect as a
legitimate president.”
“I think there was a conspiracy on the part
of the Russians, and others, that helped
him get elected.”
Lewis and everyone in Washington knows, or should
know, there was no conspiracy, no Russian hacking, no
attempt on the part of Russia or any other country or group
or individuals to get Trump elected by foul means.
Lewis flat-out lied on national television, a cheap pro-
Hillary stunt, hoping to benefit politically by joining the
anti-Trump bandwagon vocally.
He shamed himself, deceitfully ranting
“the Russians participated in having this
man get elected, and they helped destroy
the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. I don’t plan
to attend the Inauguration.”
“I think there was a conspiracy on the part
of the Russians, and others, that helped
him get elected. That’s not right. That’s not
fair. That’s not the open, democratic
process.”
.
209
That’s a Big Lie. So is claiming an open, democratic
process - in name only, not reality. Trump responded in
separate tweets, saying
“Congressman John Lewis should finally
focus on the burning and crime infested
inner-cities of the US I can use all the help I
can get!”
He “should spend more time on fixing and
helping his district, which is in horrible
shape and falling apart (not to mention
crime infested) rather than falsely
complaining about the election results,”
“All talk, talk, talk - no action or results.
Sad!”
Republican strategist Doug Heye blasted Trump
opponents, claiming the election wasn’t legitimate and
won’t be accepted, calling the reaction
“dangerous and unpatriotic. (The) same
people are trying to delegitimize Trump and
say that he shouldn’t be…president.”
Friday’s inauguration will be a uniquely partisan affair. It’s
unclear how many Democrat congressional members
aren’t coming - expressing sour grapes over Hillary not
attaining what she arrogantly believed she was entitled to.
Humanity exhaled with her defeat. A nuclear bullet was
dodged - provided Trump improves ties with Russia,
avoids confrontation with China, and cools his rhetoric on
Iran.
 Packing Up! Anti-Trump Protesters Plan Demonstration
Outside The New York City Home Of Ivanka Trump
And Jared Kushner To 'Help Ivanka Move'
 Activists behind the Dear Ivanka Instagram account have planned a demonstration outside the
couple's home on January 16
 The group are calling for protesters to attend the event with cardboard boxes bearing messages
for the future First Daughter
 Ivanka and Jared will soon be leaving Manhattan for Washington D.C. as Jared prepares for his
role as Senior White House Advisor
By Dailymail.com Reporter
Published: 17:03 EST, 15 January 2017 | Updated: 23:45 EST, 15 January 2017

Anti-Trump protesters are so excited for Ivanka Trump

and her husband Jared Kushner moved to Washington Dear Ivanka began last year by posting glamorous photos
D.C. that they are going to 'help' her move. of Ivanka and her family with serious and thought-
provoking captions such as:
The activists behind the Dear Ivanka Instagram have
recently announced their plans to stage a protest outside
the future First Daughter and her husband's home that they
have dubbed 'Help Ivanka Move' on Monday, January 16.

The Halt Action Group have put out a call online for
protesters to come to the event with cardboard boxes
bearing messages for Ivanka, Jared, and, in particular, her
father.

On her way: Protesters are planning on staging an event outside of

Ivanka Trump's home on Monday titled 'Help Ivanka Move'

In posters promoting the protest, boxes are shown bearing
phrases such as 'abortion rights', 'freedom of speech' and
'nuclear regulation'.
'The boxes represent freedoms that people
are fearful of losing,' the group said in a
press release.
Showing up: The event, organized by the activists behind the Dear
Ivanka Instagram account
'Dear Ivanka, I've been raped and I need to
have an abortion.'
The couple and their children are preparing to move
to Washington, D.C. as Jared is to take up a new role in the
White House alongside his father-in-law.

210
Having left her company behind, Ivanka is to focus on
raising her children in Washington.
Instructions: Protesters are encouraged to created boxes bearing
messages for Ivanka and her father about their concerns
Taking a stand: The group claim that the boxes and their messages
'represent freedoms that people are fearful of losing'
'My husband, Jared, and I will be moving with our family
to Washington, D.C., where Jared will serve as Senior
Advisor to the President,' Ivanka Trump wrote in a post on
Facebook.
'I plan to take time to settle our three young
children into their new home and schools.'
'When my father takes office as the 45th
President of the United States of America, I
will take a formal leave of absence from
The Trump Organization and my
eponymous apparel and accessories
211
brand,' she wrote. 'I will no longer be
involved with the management or
operations of either company.'
Attorney Sheri Dillon, who advised Trump on
relinquishing his role in an array of Trump Organization
companies, described Ivanka's new role at a press
conference Wednesday.
A new job: Ivanka is stepping back from her executive role to 'to
settle our three young children into their new home and schools' she
wrote
Heading out: Ivanka and her family will soon be moving to
Washington, D.C., as Jared prepares to join the White House as a
Senior Adviser
She said Ivanka would have 'no further involvement with
or management authority whatsoever with the Trump
Organization.'
'As she and Jared move their family to
D.C., Ivanka will focus on settling her
children into their new homes and their new
schools,' Dillon said, using nearly identical
language to that used by Ivanka in her
post.
Ivanka is resigning her role as Executive Vice President of
Development & Acquisitions after 11 years with the
organization.

Her withdrawal from the Trump Organization was brought

about by several factors. Her husband, Jared Kushner, is a
trusted advisor to her father, and is being brought onto his
West Wing staff.

Some ethics experts have warned that even this move

violates at least the spirit of anti-nepotism legislation
enacted after Bobby Kennedy served as his brother's
attorney general. THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOME: Ivanka Trump and Jared
Kushner are moving into a luxurious new home in DC's tony
Having Ivanka simultaneously running the family business Kalorama neighborhood
would have proved untenable.

THE TOUGHEST JOB IN THE WORLD: Ivanka Trump will focus

on raising her three children

Boy's club: Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr will run the family
business along with an executive. Ivanka Trump's husband, Jared, is
joining the White House staff

Letting her hair down: Ivanka Trump was photographed stepping

out of her Park Avenue apartment on Wednesday morning

212
 She also is expected to pick up some of the ceremonial
roles traditionally associated with the first lady while
Melania Trump remains in New York to raise her young
son, Baron.

Ivanka Trump is also stepping down from her role from

Glamorous look: Ivanka wore her long blonde hair in a very straight
style, allowing it to flow loose around her shoulders her Ivanka Trump fashion brand.

According to Kushner's attorney, Ivanka also will recuse

herself from participating from decisions around the new
Trump luxury hotel in Washington, Vanity Fair reported.

The withdrawal from professional work comes amid amid

a short-term professional blow to Ivanka (whose father and
husband are both billionaires).

According to Sheri Dillon, 'Through instructions in the

trust agreement ... President-elect Trump first ordered that
all pending deals be terminated. This impacted more than
30 deals, many of which were set to close by the end of
2016.'

'As you can well imagine, that caused an

immediate financial loss of millions of
dollars, not just for President-elect Trump,
but also for Don, Ivanka and Eric.'

Famous face: People stopped to take photos of the future First

Don and Eric will take over the Trump Organization, aided
Daughter as she walked out of her door by an executive.

213
 Fabricated Russian Hacking
Claim Getting Surreal
Posted By Stephen Lendman
Date: January 16, 2017
Repeat after me. No Russian hacking occurred. Neither
Russia or any other foreign or internal source interfered in
America’s election. No evidence proves it. None exists.
Claims otherwise are Big Lies. Information supplied
WikiLeaks was internally leaked by one of more Democrat
party insiders angry over her nomination theft, not gotten
by cyberattacks.
Pro-Hillary dark forces concocted the phony hacking
claim, complicit with Washington’s intelligence
community.
The aim is to delegitimize Trump’s election and maintain
adversarial relations with Russia – risking eventual
confrontation between the world’s dominant nuclear
powers, madness if ever happens.
The fake news Russian hacking story has legs, media
scoundrels pushing it relentlessly. So are congressional
Democrats.
214
Their so-called Protecting our Democracy Act calls for
creating a 9/11-type 12-member independent commission
to call witnesses, depose them, obtain documents, issue
subpoenas and examine (nonexistent) attempts by Russia
and any other nations or entities to influence last
November’s election.
You can’t make this stuff up. Despite no evidence of US
election hacking, pro-Hillary dark horses keep pursuing
the phony claim relentlessly. The goal blaming Russia for
what never happened repeatedly, whitewashing hard truths
about internally leaked information.
The scheme is a Democrat party initiative only. So far, no
Republicans back it. GOP leadership opposes it. With
control of both houses, they’ll decide what happens going
forward.
Before and after last November’s election, Trump was
relentlessly vilified. If the commission idea dies, expect
other disreputable schemes to follow, hounding him
without letup.
On Monday, bipartisan neocons said they’ll introduce
legislation to impose undefined “comprehensive” sanctions
on Russia for its nonexistent election hacking.
If passed by both houses after January 20, it remains to be
seen if Trump will veto the measure in the interest of
improving bilateral ties and world peace.
It would be his first big test straightaway in office,
revealing his political mettle.
It’ll show if he wants cooperative or adversarial relations
with Putin. It’ll set the tone for his geopolitical agenda
going forward – for good or ill.
 MLK’s Niece: I Voted For Trump
By Matt C. Abbott
January 16, 2017
The latest media-manufactured controversy surrounding
President-elect Trump involves Congressman John Lewis,
who won’t be attending the inauguration because he
believes Mr. Trump will be an illegitimate president. (He
reportedly believed the same about George W. Bush.)
American Thinker editor Thomas Lifson has written a very
good piece about how the congressman shouldn’t be
considered immune from criticism simply because of his
background as a civil rights leader.
Lifson writes:
The American left created a claque around
[Congressman Lewis], requiring any
serious discussion of the man to include a
disclaimer as to his heroic status and
infallibility…. This made him the perfect
voice to go where no elected
representative should go following the
operation of the constitutional machinery
for picking a president.
As a Catholic commentator and pro-life advocate, I asked
Evangelist Alveda C. King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther
.
215
King Jr. and a pro-life leader (she serves as director of
Civil Rights for the Unborn, the African-American
outreach for Priests for Life and Gospel of Life
Ministries), if she hopes Mr. Trump will be a pro-life
president.
Evangelist King graciously responded as follows:
‘I pray that all polar opposites learn to
Agape Love, live and work together as
brothers and sisters—or perish as fools.
While I voted for Mr. Trump, my confidence
remains in God, for life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness. Prayers for President-
elect Trump, Congressman Lewis, and
everyone including leaders.’
Obviously Evangelist King believes Mr. Trump will be a
legitimate president.
God bless her for the work she does and for not being
afraid of the viciousness of the radical leftists who have
co-opted the civil rights movement to further their anti-life,
anti-family, libertine agenda.
 Trump Calls CIA Chief ‘Fake News Leaker’
After Brennan Warns Him About ‘Talking & Tweeting’
Published Time: 16 Jan, 2017 08:27Edited Time: 16 Jan, 2017 10:18

“Just look at Syria (red line), Crimea,

Ukraine and the build-up of Russian
nukes,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Not good!
Was this the leaker of Fake News?”

On January 11, the day after the dossier was released by

BuzzFeed, Trump also said on Twitter that intelligence
agencies

“should never have allowed this fake news

to ‘leak’” before asking, “Are we living in
CIA Director John Brennan © Reuters / Reuters Nazi Germany?”
Donald Trump branded outgoing CIA chief Brennan “the
leaker of fake news” after he told Trump to grasp the
“Russia threat” instead of “talking and tweeting,” stirring
up another feud between the incoming administration and
the intelligence community.

Tensions between US President-elect Donald Trump and

the intelligence community escalated once again this
weekend as outgoing CIA Director John Brennan fiercely
attacked Trump’s views on US-Russia rapprochement.

“I don’t think he has a full understanding of

Russian capabilities and the actions they
are taking on the world,” Brennan said on
Fox News Sunday.
With just several days to go until his
inauguration, Trump “has to recognize that
his words do have impact,” the CIA chief
said. The BuzzFeed publication triggered a week of finger-
pointing between Trump and intelligence leadership. On
“He’s going to have the opportunity to do Fox News, Brennan said Trump’s reference to Nazi
something for national security as opposed Germany was an insult to US intelligence officers.
to talking and tweeting.
“Spontaneity is not something that protects
national security interests,” Brennan said in
an apparent reference to the widespread
perception of Trump as an inexperienced
and impulsive politician.

In a matter of hours, Trump responded with a two-tweet

outburst questioning whether the CIA director had leaked a
recent unsubstantiated dossier to the media. The dossier
claims that Russia had gathered compromising personal “What I do find outrageous is equating an
information about Trump. intelligence community with Nazi
Germany,” he said. “I do take great
umbrage at that, and there is no basis for
216
 Mr. Trump to point fingers at the
intelligence community for leaking
information that was already available
publicly.”
The credibility of the file has been questioned by various
top-tier officials. Last Wednesday, Director of National
Intelligence James Clapper said after a meeting with
Trump that US spy agencies had
“not made any judgment that the
information in this document is reliable.”
.
217
Last week, UK Prime Minister Theresa May
commented on BuzzFeed’s statement that the dossier was
compiled by a person who is understood to be a former UK
intelligence agent. Speaking at a press conference in
Downing Street, May said:
“It is absolutely clear that the individual who
produced this dossier has not worked for
the UK government for years.”
 Americans Will Get The Trump
They Elected As President
By JULIE PACE - AP White House Correspondent
Jan 16, 3:30 AM EST
WASHINGTON (AP) -- After 10 weeks, dozens of tweets
and one rollicking news conference, Donald Trump's
transition into the White House has left little doubt that the
man Americans elected in November is the president
they'll get.
The immense responsibilities of the office and the
daunting decisions that await Trump when he takes office
Friday have not appeared to change the confrontational,
divisive Republican.
Just days away from his inauguration, Trump is still
litigating old campaign fights and picking new ones with
intelligence agencies and Rep. John Lewis, the Georgia
Democrat and civil rights movement veteran. Trump is
refusing to be boxed in by the conservative ideology his
party prefers and he's battling with journalists, yet still
craves their attention.
To supporters, Trump's handling of this transition period is
proof that the political novice-turned-president-elect plans
to follow through on his campaign promises to take a
sledgehammer to Washington's traditional ways.
"The American people voted for change,"
Trump spokesman Sean Spicer said. "He is
the instrument of that change."
It's clear, however, that a solid majority of Americans are
not behind him. Trump is poised to enter the Oval Office
with a far lower approval rating - 42 percent - than his
three predecessors, according to Gallup, which only has
comparable data going back to 1992. The previous lowest
was George W. Bush, who won positive marks from 59
percent during his transition to office. Bush, like Trump,
also lost the popular vote in a tightly contested race.
Gallup found just 44 percent of those questioned approve
of the way the incoming president has handled his
transition, compared with 83 percent approval of Barack
Obama's transition. Sixty-one percent approved of Bush's
transition.
That leaves a hefty task ahead for Trump, who must take
the stage on Friday and, after swearing the oath, address
perhaps his largest, broadest audience to date. Presidents
typically call for unity and common purpose.
218
David Axelrod, a longtime political adviser to Obama, cast
doubt on whether that was something Trump could do. He
pointed to Trump's postelection "thank you" tour that took
the Republican only to states he won.
"It might not be within his emotional range
to be a unifying figure," Axelrod said.
He acknowledged that some Democrats might resist any
overtures from Trump, though he said total resistance
would not serve his party well either.
Advisers and others who have spoken with Trump since
the election say that despite his combative public presence
during the transition, he's aware of the grand sweep of
history as he approaches the presidency. He's told friends
that he's drawn to both the ambition and style of Presidents
Ronald Reagan, a Republican, and John F. Kennedy, a
Democrat.
During a lunch with presidential historian Douglas
Brinkley and other guests at his South Florida club, Trump
said he was thinking about spending his first night in the
White House sleeping in the famed Lincoln Bedroom. A
participant in the lunch first recalled the conversation and
Brinkley confirmed its accuracy.
Several people detailed their recent interactions with
Trump on the condition of anonymity in order to disclose
private discussions with the president-elect.
Trump is said to have become particularly fixated on
veterans issues, evaluating numerous candidates to lead the
Department of Veterans Affairs before settling on David
Shulkin, an Obama nominee who is a VA undersecretary.
The president-elect said he interviewed "at least 100
people" for the job, though aides said that was an
exaggeration.
Between meetings at Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago in
Florida - and sometimes during them - Trump is said to be
constantly making and taking calls on his personal
cellphone from lawmakers, foreign leaders, aides and
journalists.
But any behind-the-scene diligence and focus has largely
been overshadowed by Trump's remarkably public battles -
against the intelligence agencies, Hillary Clinton, actress
Meryl Streep and, over the weekend, Lewis.
One of the biggest questions facing Trump as he prepares
to take office is how his confrontational and unpredictable
style will affect his ability to enact his agenda and manage
the inevitable crises he will face. He has the benefit of a
Republican-led Congress, but potential intraparty
disagreements loom over spending and entitlements.
Health care will be an early test for Trump and the GOP.
The president-elect says he expects Congress to repeal and
replace Obama's signature health care law "essentially
simultaneously," though he has not specified for
lawmakers what he expects to be in a new measure. Some
Republicans believe the complexity of the current system
makes a fast overhaul nearly impossible.
Trump's relationship with Russia will shadow his
inauguration. The Senate Intelligence Committee says it
will investigate possible contacts between Russia and the
people associated with U.S. political campaigns as part of
a broader investigation into Moscow's purported meddling
in the 2016 presidential election. The investigation will
include interviews, and potentially subpoenas, for Trump
aides.
During a freewheeling news conference last week, Trump
acknowledged publicly for the first time that he accepts the
intelligence community's assessment that Russia was
behind the election-year hacking of Democratic groups.
But one person who spoke with Trump following his full
.
219
briefing with intelligence officials said the president-elect
was still raising questions about what proof there was of
Russia's role.
Democrats are yet to decide how they plan to approach a
Trump presidency.
Lewis, who worked alongside Martin Luther King, Jr.
during the civil rights movement, said he does not view
Trump as a legitimate president, leading Trump to criticize
the congressman in several tweets. Lewis and a small
number of other Democratic lawmakers plan to skip the
inauguration celebrations.
Obama, who has been offering advice to Trump both
publicly and privately since the election, questioned
whether a president can be "improvisational" in office. But
in an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes," he also
suggested his successor's unorthodoxy should not be
misjudged.
"Don't underestimate the guy," Obama
said. "He's going to be the 45th president
of the United States."
---
AP Polling Director Emily Swanson contributed to this
report.
 Globalists To Hold Emergency
Meeting In Washington DC On Trump
Matthew Boyle Reports For Breitbart:
Monday, January 16, 2017
The World Economic Forum’s annual gathering of
globalist political, financial and cultural elitists is
underway in Davos, Switzerland, but the organization’s
founder is planning an emergency Washington, D.C.,
meeting in 2017 for worried elites worldwide to discuss
how to deal with President-elect Donald J. Trump.
“The World Economic Forum is listening to
Donald Trump,” Bloomberg’s Stephen
Morris and Erik Schatzker wrote on
Sunday. “The organization will convene a
special meeting in Washington this year to
discuss issues raised during the president-
elect’s campaign and the populist wave
that swept him to victory, WEF founder
Klaus Schwab told Bloomberg Television
on Sunday. The gathering will explore U.S.
investment and job-creation opportunities
for companies that participate in the forum,
he said.”
Klaus Schwab, who in 1971 founded the group that
eventually became the World Economic Forum which
hosts the annual retreat for business, political and cultural
.
220
elites in the Swiss Alps, told Bloomberg that the event in
Washington, D.C.—which was previously not planned—is
going to be meant to address globalist concerns with the
rise of populism as evidenced by the election of Trump to
the presidency.
“It’s very natural that with the new
administration we plan a major event in the
U.S. to see what are the implications of the
new president and how the business
community could engage,” Schwab said,
adding that in Davos in 2017 there are
populists present who the globalists plan to
hear from to try to assuage a “silent fear” of
the masses.
“People have become very emotionalized,
this silent fear of what the new world will
bring,” Schwab added. “We have populists
here and we want to listen. We have to
respond to these individuals’ fears and to
offer solutions. It’s not just enough to listen;
we have to provide answers and that’s
what we’re here for in Davos.”
 Trump's Twitter: Could Hackers
Wreak Havoc From The White House?
By James Rogers
Published January 16, 2017

Blair told FoxNews.com that something as simple as

Trump clicking on a link in a Twitter feed via his Android
phone could potentially open the door to hackers.

“All you need is one click,” he said. “If he

clicks on a malicious link, it could put
malware on his phone.”

Trump’s Twitter account has already been hacked, albeit

briefly, in 2013, when an unknown attacker tweeted out an
offensive lyric by rapper Lil’ Wayne.
President-elect Donald Trump may have turned his Twitter
"My Twitter has been seriously hacked---
account into a powerful political weapon, but experts warn
and we are looking for the perpetrators,"
that hackers could potentially use the same account to
tweeted Trump, in response to the incident.
wreak havoc from the White House.

Trump will continue using his @realDonaldTrump account

when he takes office, he told The Times of London in an
interview published Monday. Trump, who has 20.1 million
Twitter followers, said that he won’t personally be taking
over the @POTUS government account used by President
Obama.

Attackers are likely already eyeing the @realDonaldTrump

account, according to experts.
“I think there will be people that will do their
best to try to hack his account,” social
media expert and President of JRM Comm
Jason Mollica, told FoxNews.com. “It would
not surprise me in the least to see people
try to hack him - his team at the White
House will have to be very vigilant to make
sure that that doesn’t happen on their
watch.”
“Hackers could cause major scandals or
major international issues if they simply
posted a message,” added Evan Blair, co-
founder and chief business officer of social
media cybersecurity company ZeroFOX. “If
the account were ever to be compromised,
we could have military tensions flare up, we
could have civil unrest.”
Other high-profile figures whose Twitter accounts have
been hacked include singer Katy Perry, Facebook CEO
Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter chief Jack Dorsey.
Companies Sony and Netflix have also seen their Twitter
accounts hacked recently.
Even the U.S. military has fallen victim to social media
hackers. In 2015 the U.S. Central Command’s Twitter and
YouTube accounts were briefly taken over, prompting the
military to tighten its social media password security.
Trump’s transition team has not yet responded to a request
for comment on this story from FoxNews.com, so it is not
clear how exactly they plan to protect the 45 th President
from hackers.
ZeroFOX’s Blair thinks Trump’s team could use specialist
management software to keep his Twitter account locked
down, ensuring that only tweets from a specific device are
allowed. The software could also harness multi-factor
authentication and even use location-based security
controls, according to Blair.

221
Multi-factor authentication uses a combination of account will become available to the 45th President on Jan.
passwords, personal information, and device verification. 20, with a tweet-free timeline. The account will retain all
its followers, according to a White House blog post.
Additionally, Blair says that a “peer review” component
could be built into the software, enabling the President-
elect’s team to ensure that the tweet has been posted by
Trump himself.

“It’s going to be a matter of his team using

the right platform,” added Mollica, noting
that constant monitoring of emerging
hacking threats will also be key. “It’s a
twenty-four/seven, three-hundred-and-
sixty-five [day] proposition -- if the
administration doesn’t take it seriously,
we’re going to see hackers get in there and
do some damage,” he said. President Obama began tweeting from @POTUS in June
2015 and the account has racked up 13.5 million followers.
The White House announced its digital transition plan The outgoing President also has the @BarackObama
before last year’s Presidential election. The @POTUS account, which is run by staff at his Organizing for Action
campaign group, and has 80.6 million followers.
.

222
 Revelers, Rally-Goers To
Clog DC For Trump's Inauguration
By JESSICA GRESKO
January 16, 2017
WASHINGTON (AP) — Hundreds of thousands of people
are expected to clog the nation's capital for Donald
Trump's inauguration and a major demonstration the day
after, but how many will actually arrive to party or protest
is an open question.
Officials estimate that 800,000 to 900,000 people will be
present Friday for the inauguration, a celebration that takes
over the city, closing roads, taxing the city's Metro transit
system and making getting around difficult. Trump himself
has promised "massive crowds" but just what that will
mean is unclear.
Hundreds of thousands of others are expected Saturday for
the Women's March on Washington.
Trump showed he could draw crowds during the
campaign, but his supporters weren't so quick to make
plans to be in Washington for his inauguration.
Elliott Ferguson, the president of Destination DC, the city's
convention and tourism bureau, said that before Election
Day hotels had more events tentatively planned for a
Hillary Clinton victory than a Donald Trump one. And
when Trump won, the "level of enthusiasm" and demand
for hotel rooms did not immediately reach that of past
recent inaugurations, he said.
"No one's phones were ringing" on the day
after the election, he said.
223
Things started to pick up after New Year's but some hotels
have cut back minimum-night stays from four nights to
two. Some hotels are only 50 percent full, though higher-
end hotels apparently have more bookings, he said.
"It's been much, much slower than anyone
would have anticipated for a first-term
president," he said.
Saturday's march has helped drive more reservations, he
said.
"The moment it was confirmed it was
happening in the city our hotels were
seeing reservations take place," he said.
City planners are betting that Trump's inauguration is more
like President Barack Obama's second inauguration in
2013, which drew more than 800,000, rather than Obama's
first in 2009, which drew 1.8 million people. But while
officials have experience and historical data to draw on to
estimate crowds for Friday, guessing how many people
will show up for Saturday's demonstration is harder.
Women's March on Washington organizers said in
applying for a demonstration permit that they expected
200,000 people.
Christopher Geldart, the District of Columbia's homeland
security director, thinks the march will draw more than
that. Some 1,800 buses have registered to park in the city
on Jan. 21, which would mean nearly 100,000 people
coming in just by bus, Geldart said. Amtrak trains into and
out of the city are also fully booked on that day, Geldart
said.
"Usually when I look at things like that, that
tells me we've got a pretty substantial
crowd coming in. That leads me to believe
we're definitely above the 200,000-person
mark," Geldart said.
In contrast, approximately 400 buses have registered to
park in the city on Inauguration Day, said Terry Owens, a
spokesman for the District Department of Transportation,
though he said that number is growing daily.
For their part, march organizers are trying to get a
headcount by asking people who plan to participate to fill
out a questionnaire on their website. That will help ensure
they have the right number of things like portable toilets,
medical tents and food trucks, said Janaye Ingram, who is
handling march logistics. More than 100,000 people have
already registered using the form, Ingram said.
Rally, a New York City-based transportation company that
connects people with bus rides to events, has organized
many of the buses coming to Washington for Saturday's
march. The tally includes buses from more than 200 cities
in 26 states. The company's president and co-founder
Siheun Song said the northeastern portion of the United
States has "largely become sold out of motor coaches" for
the day. Demand is so great the company is using school
buses to bring people to the march from Maryland, she
said.
224
"In six years of doing business we've never
seen buses get sold out so quickly," she
said.
For its part, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority, which runs the city's rail and bus system, is
planning an all-day effort to move people on Inauguration
Day. The system is opening at 4 a.m. — an hour earlier
than normal — and running rush hour service for 17 hours
until 9 p.m. But the system hasn't seen a need to change its
usual Saturday operations. The rail system will open at 7
a.m., its normal time for the day, and run on a regular
Saturday schedule.
___
Associated Press reporter Ben Nuckols contributed to this
report.
 Donald Trump Won't Be Using
The POTUS Twitter Account
New York Post
Published January 16, 2017
Donald Trump plans to keep using his personal Twitter
account, the president-elect confirmed in a weekend
interview, noting that he “can go bing bing bing” and make
national news using his social media accounts.
“@realDonaldTrump I think, I’ll keep it,”
Trump told the Times of London in the
interview published Monday, saying he
won’t personally be taking over the
@POTUS account used by the president.
“I’ve got 46 million people right now —
that’s a lot, that’s really a lot — but 46
million — including Facebook, Twitter and
225
ya know, Instagram, so when you think that
you’re 46 million there, I’d rather just let
that build up and just keep it
@realDonaldTrump,” he added, referring to
the cumulative followers he has across all
social media platforms he uses.
Trump admitted that he thought he’d be utilizing social
media less frequently but claimed “it’s working.”
“I thought I’d do less of it, but I’m covered
so dishonestly by the press — so
dishonestly — that I can put out Twitter —
and it’s not 140, it’s now 280 — I can go
bing bing bing . . . and they put it on and as
soon as I tweet it out — this morning on
television, Fox — ‘Donald Trump, we have
breaking news,’” the president-elect said.
On Twitter alone, Trump has 20 million followers. By
contrast, the @POTUS account has 13.5 million.
However, Trump’s Twitter account is not the most
followed presidential account. Barack Obama’s personal
account, @barackobama, boasts 80.6 million followers.
 Trump Slams Outgoing CIA Director
Brennan After Criticism Over Russia Threat
Foxnews.Com
Published January 16, 2017

community since it concluded Russia and Putin tried to

influence the elections, in an apparent effort to help Trump
defeat Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Brennan said Trump likening the U.S. intelligence

community to Nazi Germany for presumably leaking the
content of an opposition-research dossier on him is
“outrageous.”

President-elect Donald Trump blasted outgoing CIA

Director John Brennan on social media Sunday after
Brennan said Trump does not have a “full understanding”
of Russia’s power and threat to the world.

“I don’t think he has a full understanding of

Russian capabilities and the actions they
are taking on the world,” Brennan told “Fox
News Sunday.”

He also suggested that Trump lacks a “full appreciation” of

Russia’s aggression or about why President Obama
imposed sanctions on the Kremlin for meddling in the
2016 presidential election.

“Mr. Trump has to understand that

absolving Russia is a road that he needs to
be very, very careful about moving down,”
Brennan said.
Trump responded with a two-tweet message that criticized
the CIA's record under Brennan and questioned whether
the director had leaked a dossier of unverified allegations
that Russia spies had obtained compromising personal and
financial information about Trump.
The day after the dossier's contents were
published by BuzzFeed, Trump posted on
Twitter that intelligence agencies "should
never have allowed this fake news to 'leak'"
before asking "Are we living in Nazi
Germany?"
Trump has repeatedly hoped for better U.S. ties with
Russian President Vladimir Putin, and he has been
particularly suspicious of the entire U.S. intelligence
"There is no interest in undermining the
president elect,” he said. “Our responsibility
is to understand dangers on the world
stage so (Trump and his Republican
administration) have the intel we have so
they can make the best decision.”
However, he said Trump “needs to be disciplined” and that
he’ll face numerous challenges” in his presidency that
begins Friday -- with terrorism, cybersecurity, North Korea
and Middle East instability among those at the top.
“So many issues on Day One,” said
Brennan, who President Obama appointed
to lead the CIA in 2013.
Fox News' Joseph Weber contributed to this report.

226
 White House Reporters To 'Fight' Trump Team's
Plan To Limit Their 'West Wing Access'
Foxnews.Com
Published January 16, 2017

To be sure, the wealthy businessman and first-time

candidate’s unexpected White House victory is among the
most compelling stories in U.S. political history.

But Trump’s repeated arguments that much of the

mainstream media is dishonest and unfair to him has led to
concerns that he’ll deny reporters the traditional levels of
White House access.

The incoming White House press secretary’s repeated

suggestions that reporters covering a Trump administration
may be moved out of the executive mansion left the White
House Correspondents’ Association vowing Sunday to
“fight” such a change.

“We object strenuously to any move that

would shield the president and his advisers
from the scrutiny of an on-site White House
press corps,” WHCA President Jeff Mason
said in a statement.
Mason, a White House correspondent for Reuters, also
said he would meet Sunday with incoming Press Secretary
Sean Spicer in an attempt to “get more clarity on exactly
what they are suggesting.”
“The briefing room is open now to all
reporters who request access,” he said.
“We support that and always will. The
WHCA will fight to keep the briefing room
and West Wing access to senior
administration officials open.”
Spicer told Fox News’ “Media Buzz” hours earlier that the
potential change is in response to the “off the chart”
demand to cover Trump.
.
“I think sometimes change is scary,” Spicer
told Fox News. “But change can be good,
and good for the better.”
He said thousands of reporters have sought White House
credentials for a briefing room that has space for just 49
people.
“Let’s try it for the first few weeks, maybe
we see what the demand is, see what the
upsides are,” Spicer continued. “The idea
that you can involve more people, be more
transparent and have more accessibility
should be seen as a welcome change.”
Spicer earlier told Esquire magazine that another
possibility was moving the press corps to the White House
Conference Center, near Lafayette Square.

227
228
 Meet The Trumps:
America's New First Family
Jennie MATTHEW - AFP
January 16, 2017
The Trumps, America's super-rich new first family, are a tight-knit
celebrity clan (AFP Photo/MANDEL NGAN
New York (AFP) - The new first family is a tight-knit
celebrity clan, wealthy beyond the wildest dreams of
most Americans and well used to the public eye.
Here is a breakdown on the 45th US president's nearest
and dearest:
Melania
Brought up in Slovenia, Donald Trump's third wife is the
first foreign-born US first lady in two centuries:
England's Louisa Adams was the last from 1825-1829.
A former model who speaks five languages, Melania
makes only fleeting public appearances but has stood by
her man, dismissing as "boy talk" his boasts of groping
women just months into their marriage.
Unusually she is not moving straight into the White
House, staying in New York at least until the couple's 10-
year-old son Barron finishes the school year.
It is unclear how public a role she will play, though she
promises to be a "traditional" first lady "like Jackie
Kennedy" and says she wants to advocate against internet
bullying and to help women in poverty.
She came under fire for plagiarizing Michelle Obama in a
speech last July and suffers lackluster approval ratings
compared to the sky-high popularity of the outgoing first
lady.
229
Eyebrows were also raised over nude modeling in the
past and US media have questioned whether she worked
illegally after first arriving in America. She was mocked
for her strong accent at the American Music Awards.
Born Melanija Knavs in then Yugoslavia, she modeled in
Paris and Milan before becoming a US citizen in 2006, a
year after marrying Trump.
Ivanka
Trump's 35-year-old daughter Ivanka is moving to
Washington, suggesting that America can expect a
prominent first daughter: businesswoman, mother-of-
three and favorite child of the incoming president.
No formal role has been announced, but with husband
Jared heading to the White House as special advisor and
the couple swapping Park Avenue for the capital's
swanky Kalorama district, expect her to take on
hostessing duties and first lady style causes.
During the campaign she was a key surrogate among
women and called for affordable childcare and equal pay
-- championing traditionally Democratic Party causes.
She is a conduit to her father, particularly across the
aisle, but has come under fire for sitting in on a meeting
with the Japanese prime minister and for conflict of
interest fears since the election.
Lawyers say she will step down as vice president of the
Trump Organization and from direct running of her
eponymous fashion company to focus on settling her
young children into Washington.
Beautiful, well-dressed and polished, she posts glossy
photographs of her family to 2.1 million Instagram
followers, maintaining a carefully curated public image.
Considered charming and intelligent with a degree from
the Wharton School of Finance, she has been one half of
a New York power couple for years. Even Chelsea
Clinton is, or at least was, a friend.
Jared Kushner
Ivanka's husband, the 36-year-old baby-faced property
developer and magazine publisher has risen
stratospherically to become one of the most powerful
men in government with a starring role in his father-in-
law's White House.
The Jewish Orthodox grandson of Holocaust survivors,
he is considered a calming influence on Trump. Despite
concerns about nepotism, his lawyer says he will "divest
substantial assets" to comply with federal guidelines.
Credited with being the brains behind Trump's election,
the multi-millionaire scion of a New Jersey family of
Democrats married Ivanka in 2009.
Discreet and unflinchingly loyal, Kushner says he
underwent a political transformation after seeing Trump's
groundswell of support, defending him against alleged
racism and anti-Semitism.
He moved the family real estate business into Manhattan
after his father was jailed for tax evasion, witness
tampering and illegal campaign contributions.
Don Jr. and Eric
Trump's two eldest sons are officially staying in New
York and running the Trump Organization in their
father's absence. Technically they are not supposed to
discuss business with their father but his refusal to divest
completely from the sprawling group has been slammed
by an ethics watchdog.
Don Jr., 39, has described his father as his best friend and
like his sister studied at the Wharton School of Finance.
His speech at the Republican National Convention
sparked speculation that the father of five may seek a
political career of his own one day.
Eric, 33, has griped about having to cease fundraising for
his charitable foundation over fears about impropriety
and conflict of interest.
.
230
The brothers have courted controversy as hunters, after
posing for photographs with dead animals during a trip to
Zimbabwe.
Their wives, Vanessa and Lara respectively, also worked
the campaign trail, particularly Lara who put in the hours
in her home state of North Carolina.
Tiffany and Barron
Tiffany, 23, is Trump's daughter from his second
marriage and reportedly named after Tiffany & Co. the
jewelry store next door to Trump Tower.
She graduated from the University of Pennsylvania and
released music track "Like a Bird" in 2011, listened to on
YouTube by nearly one million people.
Brought up in California, she has modeled and is
reportedly eying up Harvard Law School.
Youngest child Barron lives at home and goes to school
in New York.
Ex-Wives Club
Trump is America's first twice-divorced president.
Trump began an affair with actress Marla Maples, 53,
while still married. They wed in 1993 and divorced six
years later. Maples moved to California.
Ivana, his Czech-born first wife, is a former model, skier
and businesswoman, who divides her time between New
York and Europe.
The 67-year-old is best known for coming up with
Trump's nickname "The Donald." They divorced in a
blaze of tabloid scandal in 1992.
 Complicity Of Sources Shows Mainstream Bias:
CIA And CNN Trolled With Made-Up Trump Story
By: JD Heyes
Date: January 16, 2017
If you had any doubt that the so-called “mainstream
media” is selling out its soul and any remaining credibility
it had before the November election, this should clear it up
for you.
In recent days, a “bombshell” report claiming, among
other things, that President-elect Donald J. Trump once
paid Russian hookers to stage a “golden shower” on a
Moscow hotel room bed where President Obama and the
first lady once stayed, has been attacked by those on the
Left and Right as little more than fabricated fantasy that
even the U.S. intelligence community grabbed onto.
As noted by The Free Thought Project, the entire “story”
was nothing short of an “epic troll:”
Defying all reason and journalistic duty,
BuzzFeed may have now topped the
Washington Post in the quickly burgeoning
Fake News market, publishing accusations
President-elect Donald Trump has “deep
ties to Russia” — but the astoundingly
baseless claim seems to have unraveled in
the most hilarious way possible.
The discredited site reported that a “dossier” assembled by
some mystical person who only “claimed” to be a “British
intelligence official” made the allegations, including the
“compromising information” mentioned above.
(RELATED: See more phony media exposed at
MediaFactWatch.com)
.
231
While the site noted that the allegations were “unverified”
and “contains errors,” BuzzFeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith
defended publishing the story and all 35 pages of the
document as a means of being “transparent.” In the past,
news organizations did not have to create dubious pretzel-
like justifications for publishing admittedly
unsubstantiated rumor, but apparently, because it’s Trump,
those journalistic standards no longer apply to some news
companies.
But BuzzFeed certainly wasn’t alone in jumping on this
bandwagon to journalistic irrelevance. CNN also joined in,
couching the story as, “Well, there’s this floating around
out there, but we’re not sure if it’s legitimate or not. …”
Again, though, no due diligence was performed, like fact-
checking, before the decision to publish was made.
So bad was this, that even a Leftist host on uber-liberal
MSNBC, Mika Brzezinski, slammed both news outlets for
their recklessness and anti-Trump bias.
“But you could say the same to some news
organizations: what’s the real story? What’s
the real story?” Brzezinski said. “Is there a
story, or is there just not a story there that
they want to put out because they hate
[Trump] so much? Or is the intelligence
community putting the screws to Donald
Trump because he insulted them? There’s
so many layers happening here. A lot of
possibilities here.”
There is no “real story,” which is the point. In fact, as
Trump noted in his Wednesday news conference, several
media outlets refused to take the story for the simple fact
that it was not verifiable or even remotely credible.
It’s bad enough that the Left-wing anti-Trump media
publish fake news stories about him, but what ought to
concern Americans is that U.S. intelligence agency
bureaucrats who obviously have the same bias are going
all-in with the effort to discredit him.
 Trump, Kissinger And Ma
Playing On A Crowded Chessboard
Place Your Bets On Who Will Be The Major Partner In The
Trump, Kissinger And Ma Law Firm.
By Pepe Escobar
January 16, 2017

terrorist groups and with what China is doing in the South

China Sea.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping (right) shakes hands with former US

Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at the Great Hall of the People in
Beijing on March 17, 2015. Kissinger, the puppet master of Donald
Trump’s foreign policy, sees China’s ‘Eurasian front,’ primarily with
Russia, as a threat to the US. Photo: AFP / Feng Li
Trump nominee James Mattis for Defense Secretary

Incoming US Secretary of State “T Rex” Tillerson told In principle, these outbursts spell out an unchanged script
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that China
for both the Pentagon and the US State Department as we
should be denied access to islands in the South China Sea.
approach the Donald Trump era. Pentagon doctrine rules
Militarization of the islands, he said, was “akin to Russia
that Russia and China, in that order, are the top “existential
taking Crimea” from Ukraine.
threats” to the US.

Yet in the shadow play of the New Great Game in Eurasia,

this is all sekala (the secular) — the tangible; the real
action is in the realm of niskala (the supernatural), in the
invisible shades of gray.

And that brings us once again to Henry

Kissinger, the putative dalang — puppet
master — of Trump’s foreign policy.
As leaked late last year in Germany’s
Bild Zeitung newspaper, Kissinger has
drafted a plan to officially recognize
Crimea as part of Russia and lift the
Rex Tillerson, President-elect Donald Trump’s selection for secretary Obama administration’s economic
of state. sanctions.

Incoming Pentagon head James “Mad Dog” Mattis told
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the established
world order is under its “biggest attack” since World War
I: from Russia, as Putin is trying to “break” NATO, “from
232
The plan fits into Kissinger’s overall strategy — call it a
traditional British Balance of Power, or Divide and Rule,
approach — of breaking up the Eurasian front (Russia-
China-Iran) that constitutes the real “threat” to what Mattis
defines as the “established world order.”
The strategy consists in seducing the
alleged weaker top “threat” (Russia)
away from the stronger (China), while
keeping on antagonizing/harassing the
third and weakest pole, Iran.
Kissinger is certainly more sophisticated than predictable
US Think Tankland in his attempt to dismember the
Shanghai Cooperation Organization, one of key nodes
of the Russia-China strategic partnership. The SCO has
been on the go for a decade and a half now. Iran, an
observer, will soon become a full member, as will India
and Pakistan; and Turkey — after the failed coup against
Erdogan — is being courted by Moscow.
German analyst Peter Spengler adds a juicy teaser — if
Kissinger’s “Metternichian approach would include some
degree of ‘harmonization’ with Russia, how will a Trump
presidency then manage to contain the re-engineered ally
Germany?” After all, a key priority for sanctions-averse
German industrialists is to vastly expand business with
Russia.
Russia a threat to China?
Kissinger’s strategy essentially tweaks
the early 1970s Trilateral Commission,
largely advanced by his rival dalang
Dr. Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard”
Brzezinski, according to which
geopolitics is to be managed by North
America, Western Europe and Japan.
A nice touch is that Kissinger, alongside “T Rex” Tillerson
and Dr Zbig himself, is on the board of trustees of
Washington think tank the Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS). It’s all in the family.
Former US national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski (left) and
former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger – CSIS | Board of
Trustees – Center for Strategic and International Studies
The US deep state plutocracy never sleeps. Admitting both
Russia and China, linked by a strategic partnership, as
233
equal stakeholders in the “established world order” is
anathema; that would imply the end of US hegemony.
And that’s where the top Western would-be dalangs
diverge, as they look for the most efficient Divide and
Rule opening. Kissinger privileges Russia; Dr Zbig
privileges China, painting it as a threat to Russia.
Meanwhile, Russian Eurasianists — in frontal opposition
to the Atlanticists — visualize the US, China and Russia
on an equal geopolitical footing.
It will be fascinating to watch how the New Great Game
develops in the Central Asian “stans”. That’s a privileged
theater in which to see the Russia-China strategic
partnership, or division of labor, in action: China goes no
holds barred on investment — via One Belt, One Road,
aka the New Silk Roads — while Russia remains
paramount in politics and security.
It’s crucial to identify the priorities. For Russia, they
are NATO encroaching on its Western borderlands, and
the threat posed by the possible return of Southern
Caucasus and Central Asian Salafi-jihadis from across
“Syraq” — as reflected in the fretting by Russian
intelligence that Aleppo is only 900 kilometers from
Grozny.
For China, the priorities are Taiwan; the South China Sea;
and the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands.
The bottom line: Moscow feels no existential “threat”
from Beijing because for China, Central Asia and the
Russian Far East register essentially as
economic/investment opportunities along the New Silk
Roads.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) and Russian President Vladimir
Putin sign a joint statement pledging cooperation in all fields.
Once again, Kissinger’s strategy will run into a solidified
Russia-China strategic partnership — already manifested
in Pipelineistan (multibillion-dollar oil and gas projects);
security deals; the SCO; cooperation inside BRICS;
exchange of cutting-edge military technology; and the
progressive interlocking of the New Silk Roads and the
Eurasian Economic Union.
When the New Silk Roads hit the next level, by the start of
the next decade, the Eurasian heartland, as well as the
rimland, will be deeply immersed in a connectivity frenzy.
Welcome to Mackinder and Spykman revisited — and
there’s no “offer” Washington can come up with to make it
go away.
It’s alright, Ma, I’m only schmoozing
Into this crucial juncture steps Jack Ma. The Trump-Ma
meeting at Trump Tower was niskala (the supernatural)
disguised as sekala (the secular).
Alibaba founder Jack Ma meets with Trump, pledges 1 million US
jobs.
The House That Ma Built — Alibaba — is no less than the
New Great Wall, resisting the assault of behemoth
Amazon.com in the ultimate commercial arena of the 21st
century: e-commerce.
Ma also happens to be very close to
Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Like an upgraded we-mean-business Deng Xiaoping, Ma
proposed, on the record, the creation of 1 million US jobs.
That’s an offer Trump cannot possibly refuse.
.
234
And this after shadow US Secretary of
State Jared Kushner had a Chateau
Lafite Rothschild-inundated lunch with
another Chinese tycoon, Anbang
Insurance Group’s Wu Xiahoui, who
married Deng’s niece and whose
company owns the Waldorf Astoria
hotel in Manhattan.
Jared Kushner, 666 Fifth Avenue and Wu Xiaohui of Anbang
Insurance Group
Ma’s business firepower should not be underestimated.
Alibaba is involved in a massive project to modernize even
rural China. He’s the face of Chinese business not only
internally but globally. Xi Jinping knows this all too well
— who better than Ma as China’s top business
ambassador?
This is not, as Japanese interests spin it, about the “death”
of Made in China; it is about globalized China exporting
business and jobs to the West.
All of the above points to a very crowded chessboard.
Trump will do business and clinch deals with China, while
his deep state-tinged cabinet barks the usually explosive
national security rhetoric, dalang Kissinger plots a Russia-
China split, and Moscow-Beijing secretly concoct
concerted moves.
Place your bets on who will be the major partner in the
Trump, Kissinger and Ma law firm.
 Can Trump Take Back
The Presidency From The CIA?
Paul Craig Roberts
Monday, January 16, 2017
If Trump intends to survive, he must break the CIA into a
thousand pieces as President John F. Kennedy intended
before the CIA assassinated him. Trump must arrest for
treason the neoconservatives and put them on trial. Trump
must curtail NSA’s spying, which is in complete violation
of the US Constitution, on all communications of all
Americans. Trump’s oath of office is to the Constitution,
not to war on the American public.
Trump must ban all presstitute print and TV media from
White House press conferences and only give credentials
to the alternative Internet media. The print and TV media
are operatives of the CIA and are totally devoid of
integrity. Indeed, perhaps the presstitutes should be
arrested for treason and put on trial along with the
neoconservatives and the CIA.
If Trump fails to take these decisive actions, he is too weak
to achieve any change.
The McClatchy news service is the only element in the
mainstream media that sometimes reports honestly. Below
is a McClatchy report that a Russian tech expert, whose
name was used to give credibility to the notorious fake
news dossier, says the dossier is a fake report.
“A Russian tech expert whose name and
company are mentioned in the now-
notorious document alleging connections
between the Donald Trump campaign and
Russian hackers says no intelligence
235
officers have ever contacted him about the
accusations, which he says are false.”
McClatchy Newspapers
www.Mcclatchydc.Com
January 11, 2016
Russian Tech Expert Named In Trump Report Says US
Intelligence Never Contacted Him
BY KEVIN G. HALL AND TIM JOHNSON
McClatchy Washington Bureau
A Russian venture capitalist and tech expert whose name
and company are mentioned in the now-notorious
document alleging connections between the Donald Trump
campaign and Russian hackers says no intelligence officers
have ever contacted him about the accusations, which he
says are false.
A report compiled by a former Western intelligence
official as opposition research against Trump was made
public Tuesday when BuzzFeed posted its 35 pages. The
document included unsubstantiated claims of collusion
between the Trump campaign team and the Kremlin.
It also alleged that global tech firm XBT Holding, with
operations in Dallas, was instrumental in the hack of
leaked Democratic Party emails that embarrassed Hillary
Clinton and fellow Democrats.
XBT, owner of Dallas-based enterprise-hosting company
Webzilla, is run by a successful Russian tech startup
expert, Aleksej Gubarev. In a phone interview from
Cyprus, where he said he’d lived since 2002, Gubarev said
he was surprised to see his name in the report.
“I don’t know why I was there,” Gubarev
said, adding that perhaps a competitor
sought to discredit him. “I still don’t
understand the true reason for this report.”
The salacious innuendoes in the periodic reports about
Trump’s personal life dominated social media headlines.
The mention of Webzilla and Gubarev was among the
more specific allegations:
that XBT and affiliates “had been using
botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses,
 plant bugs, steal data and conduct ‘altering
operations’ against the Democratic Party
leadership.”
Gubarev said he operated 75,000 servers across the globe
and got real-time information if there had been hacking or
illicit activity tied to his businesses. There is no evidence
of that, he said, adding that no one has contacted him.
“I have a physical office in Dallas. Nobody
contacted me,” said Gubarev, adding that
40 percent of his business is handled over
the servers it runs in Dallas and the United
States accounts for about 27 percent of his
global business.
President-elect Trump confirmed Wednesday at a news
conference that he had seen the 35-page report, and he
blasted it as “fake news” and an “absolute disgrace.”
McClatchy has reported that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,
gave the bulk of the report to FBI Director James Comey
on Dec. 9. The final pages of the report are dated Dec. 11.
McClatchy had the report earlier but couldn’t verify any of
its allegations.
A federal law enforcement source told McClatchy that the
document was being examined as part of a broader FBI
inquiry into Russia’s influence on the U.S. election but
wouldn’t characterize its credibility. A source familiar
with the former Western intelligence expert who compiled
the dossier told McClatchy that the ex-spy has extensive
experience in tracking activities in the Kremlin.
The report alleges that Gubarev and another hacking
expert were recruited under duress by the FSB, the Russian
intelligence-agency successor to the KGB. Gubarev said
he had not been threatened or blackmailed, nor had his
mother, who lives in Russia.
Gubarev’s Facebook page shows his wife, Anna Gubareva,
and him on the bow rail of a fast-moving luxury yacht. His
profile picture shows him behind the wheel of a vintage
236
convertible Citroen. He is the public face of a number of
tech companies around the globe.
XBT offers an array of tech services, from dedicated
hosting of servers and cloud-based storage to developing
apps for mobile phones and offering virtual private servers.
His company advertises specialized services to software
developers, advertisers, gaming companies and electronic-
commerce enterprises. It also operates data centers in
Russia, Asia, Europe and Dallas.
XBT has been on a buying spree in recent years,
accumulating companies in the web-hosting and related
fields, including:
 DDoS.com,
 1-800-HOSTING,
 SecureVPN.com,
 ColocateUSA,
 Server.lu in Luxembourg,
 Singapore’s 8 to Infinity,
 and a site used heavily to host pornography,
fozzy.com.
 It acquired Webzilla about a decade ago, which is a
medium-sized web-hosting company.
Although Webzilla operates from Texas, it has a “pretty
deep Russian client base,” analyst Carl Brooks of 451
Research, a Boston-based consultancy, said in a December
interview.
“They don’t have a bad reputation, by any
means.”
He said the same went for XBT Holding:
“To the best of my knowledge, XBT is not
particularly nefarious.”
He estimated annual revenues for XBT between $50
million and $200 million.
Gubarev suspected he might have been named in the report
because of comments to Bloomberg’s Russia business
columnist Leonid Bershidsky. Bershidsky wrote on Nov. 1
that Gubarev questioned allegations that the Trump
organization maintained a server found to have
communicated with two servers at Russia’s Alfa Bank,
which is also named in the 35 pages of unproven
allegations.
“Bloomberg asked me my expert opinion,”
he said, noting it was the only time he’d
ever commented about a U.S. election or
U.S. politics.
In that column, Gubarev expressed doubt about the
conclusions of outside experts who said they had studied
the server connections between Alfa Bank and the Trump
.
237
organization. These experts, Gubarev said, would not have
had access to the complete logs of a server they didn’t
control.
The Russian-born Cyprus resident may not be a household
name in the United States, but he is tied to millions of
iPhones belonging to ordinary Americans. Gubarev was a
major investor in the app now called Prism. It was one of
the most downloaded of 2016 and uses artificial
intelligence to turn ordinary cellphone photos into a wide
range of painting styles.
If law enforcement wants to talk with him, Gubarev said,
his door is open.
“I’m ready for any investigation. I’m ready
to cooperate with everybody, he said.
Greg Gordon and McClatchy special correspondent peter
stone contributed to this article.
 In Stunning Pair Of Interviews, Trump Slams NATO And
EU, Threatens BMW With Tax; Prepared To
"Cut Ties" With Merkel
By Tyler Durden
Jan 16, 2017 9:15 AM

according to Bild. According to Bloomberg, Trump’s

comments

"leave little doubt that he will stick to

In two separate, and quite striking, interviews with
Germany's Bild (paywall) and London's Sunday Times
(paywall), Donald Trump did what he failed to do in his
first US press conference, and covered an extensive
amount of policy and strategy, much of which however
will likely please neither the pundits, nor the markets.
Among the numerous topics covered in the Bild interview,
he called NATO obsolete, predicted that other European
Union members would join the U.K. in leaving the bloc
and threatened BMW with import duties over a planned
plant in Mexico, according to a Sunday interview granted
to Germany’s Bild newspaper that will raise concerns in
Berlin over trans-Atlantic relations. Furthermore, in his
first "exclusive" interview in the UK granted to the Sunday
Times, Trump said he will offer Britain a quick and “fair”
trade deal with America within weeks of taking office to
help make Brexit a “great thing”. Trump revealed that he
was inviting Theresa May to visit him “right after” he gets
into the White House and wants a trade agreement between
the two countries secured “very quickly”.
campaign positions and may in some
cases upend decades of U.S. foreign
policy, putting him fundamentally at odds
with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on
issues from free trade and refugees to
security and the EU’s role in the world."
Trump then attacked another carmarker, previosuly
unnoticed by the president-elect,
when he warned the United States will
impose a border tax of 35 percent on
cars that German carmaker BMW plans
to build at a new plant in Mexico and
export to the U.S. market.
A BMW spokeswoman said a BMW Group plant in San
Luis Potosi would build the BMW 3 Series starting from
2019, with the output intended for the world market. The
plant in Mexico would be an addition to existing 3 Series
production facilities in Germany and China. Trump said
BMW should build its new car factory in the United States
because this would be "much better" for the company.

Trump told the Times that other countries would follow

Britain’s lead in leaving the European Union, claiming it
had been deeply damaged by the migration crisis.

“I think it’s very tough,” he said. “People,

countries want their own identity and the
UK wanted its own identity.”

Elsewhere, quoted in German from a conversation held in

English, Trump predicted Britain’s exit from the EU will
be a success and portrayed the EU as an instrument of
German domination with the purpose of beating the U.S. in
international trade. For that reason, Trump said, he’s fairly
indifferent whether the EU breaks up or stays together,
238
He went on to say Germany was a great car producer,
borne out by Mercedes Benz cars being a frequent sight in
New York, but there was no reciprocity. Germans were not
buying Chevrolets at the same rate, he said, making the
business relationship an unfair one-way street. He said he
was an advocate of free trade, but not at any cost. The
BMW spokeswoman said the company was "very much at
home in the U.S.," employing directly and indirectly
nearly 70,000 people in the country.
Going back to foreign policy, Trump discussed his stance
on Russia and suggested he might use economic sanctions
imposed for Vladimir Putin’s encroachment on Ukraine as
leverage in nuclear-arms reduction talks, while NATO, he
said, “has problems.”
“[NATO] is obsolete, first because it was
designed many, many years ago,” Bild
quoted Trump as saying about the trans-
Atlantic military alliance. “Secondly,
countries aren’t paying what they
should” and NATO “didn’t deal with
terrorism.”
While those comments expanded on doubts Trump raised
about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization during his
campaign, he reserved some of his most dismissive
remarks for the EU and Merkel, whose open-border
refugee policy he called a “catastrophic mistake.” He
further elaborated on this stance in the Times interview,
where he said he was willing to lift Russian sanctions in
return for a reduction in nuclear weapons.
When asked about the prospect of a nuclear arms reduction
deal with Russia, Trump told the newspaper in an
interview:
"For one thing, I think nuclear weapons
should be way down and reduced very
substantially, that’s part of it.”
Additionally, Trump said Brexit will turn out to be a "great
thing." Trump said he would work very hard to get a trade
deal with the United Kingdom "done quickly and done
properly".
Trump praised Britons for voting last year to leave the EU.
People and countries want their own identity and don’t
want outsiders to come in and “destroy it.” The U.K. is
smart to leave the bloc because the EU “is basically a
means to an end for Germany,” Bild cited Trump as
saying.
239
“If you ask me, more countries will
leave,” he was quoted as saying.
While Trump blamed Brexit on an influx of refugees he
said that Britain was forced to accept, the U.K.’s number
of asylum applications in 2015 was a fraction of the
890,000 refugees who arrived in Germany that year at the
peak of Europe’s migrant crisis.
With Merkel facing an unprecedented challenge from the
anti-immigration Alternative for Germany as she seeks a
fourth term this fall, Trump was asked whether he’d like to
see her re-elected. He said he couldn’t say, adding that
while he respects Merkel, who’s been in office for 11
years, he doesn’t know her and she has hurt Germany by
letting “all these illegals” into the country.
Among Trump's other comments to Bild::
 the Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq
may have been the worst in U.S. history;
 that Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, is a
natural talent who will bring about an accord with
Israel
 Trump plans to keep using social media including
Twitter once he’s in the White House to sidestep
the press and communicate directly with his
followers
 People entering the U.S. will face “extreme”
security checks, possibly including some
European nationals
But perhaps the most troubling, if only to legacy US
diplomatic relations, was that, as the Times noted, "despite
all of Mr. Trump's expressions of admiration for Mr. Putin
and Mrs. Merkel, he revealed that he was prepared to cut
ties with both:
"Well, I start off trusting both - but let's see
how long that lasts. It may not last long at
all."
It is unclear if this litany of strategic and tactical
announcements, many of which quite shocking in their
audacity and scope, is merely meant to serve as a
launching pad for further negotiations, something Trump
has proven quite adept at doing by stunning his
counterparties into a state of abrupt silence, or if these are
actually meant to serve as a basis for future US policy; if it
is the latter, when US markets reopen they may have a
distinct case of indigestion because while the market had
desperately hoped for more clarity out of Trump on his
policies, what emerged in these two interview is hardly it.
 The Truth About Trump:
CIA Completely Discredited After Caught Peddling
Buzzfeed False Smears As Facts
By: JD Heyes
Date: January 16, 2017
If you truly wanted to know why President-elect Donald J.
Trump does not trust the intelligence community he is
about to lead, this should clear it up for you.
Last week, CNN’s formerly respected journalist-host, Jake
Tapper, reported on an unsubstantiated 35-page “dossier”
containing vile, disgusting charges against Trump, as well
as reams of data that the news network could not, and did
not, verify.
Shortly after CNN’s story was released,
BuzzFeed published the entire 35-page document – again,
despite the fact that not a single thing in it was verified,
confirmed or substantiated in any way (we aren’t going to
send clicks their way, so if you want to read the original
report, you’re going to have to search for it).
As bad as this is, the unverified report, which also claimed
that Russia definitely “hacked the election” in favor of
Trump and has been working on his behalf for years, was
also picked up as legitimate by careerist bureaucrats inside
the U.S. intelligence community.
As reported by The Daily Beast, longtime Republican
operative Rick Wilson – one of those diehard #nevertrump
types who refuse to accept reality – shopped the invented
allegations to the CIA.
240
He had help. No less than Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,
another #nevertrump oaf who has become a poster child
for congressional term limits, admitted that he passed the
document and all its phony allegations to the FBI.
One of the worst claims made in the document – that
Trump hired Russian hookers to perform a “golden
shower” (urinating) on a bed that President Obama and
first lady Michelle Obama slept on during a visit to Russia,
was completely fabricated, as Zero Hedge noted.
Mind you, the CIA and the FBI both bit on this garbage,
according to reports from some of the players involved in
creating the false report in the first place (RELATED:
Keep up with the latest on fake news at NewsFakes.com).
In fact, Zero Hedge says, citing the source, that the CIA
even put the phony “data” into its classified intelligence
report on how Russia “hacked” the election.
And you want to know why President-elect Trump is
suspicious of anything the U.S. Intelligence Community
bureaucrats and careerists are saying? This spells it out
about as plainly as it can get.
Not all outlets bit on this. In fact, most didn’t, to their
credit – a fact not lost on the president-elect.
“I must say that I want to thank a lot of the
news organizations here today because
they looked at that nonsense that was
released by … who knows … maybe the
intelligence agencies, which would be a
tremendous blot on their record if they in
fact did that. … [A] thing like that should
never have been written … should certainly
never [have] been released,” he said during
his press conference Wednesday.
“I want to thank a lot of the news
organizations … [T]hey came out so
strongly against that fake news and the fact
that it was written about by primarily one
group [BuzzFeed] and one television
station [CNN]. I just want to compliment
many of the people in the room … there
 were some news organizations with all that
was just said that were so professional –
that I’ve just gone up a notch as to what I
think of you.”
241
The Left-wing hack media has no shame, no conscience
and no credibility whatsoever at this point, as is so
demonstrably obvious. Anyone who believes otherwise is
just not being serious. (RELATED: Find more news about
left-wing media propaganda at Propaganda.news)
 Nuking The Inauguration (20 January 2017)
Jim Fetzer
Monday, January 16, 2017

MY NIGHTMARE NUCLEAR SCENARIO FOR 20

JANUARY 2017:

THE TARGET: DONALD TRUMP'S INAUGURATION

(20 JANUARY 2017)

CIA CANNOT TAKE HIM OUT POLITICALLY. IT INTEL EXPERTS HAVE ALREADY DISCREDITED
MUST BE LITERALLY. THE FAKE DOSSIER

242
 SHE WILL BE SACRIFICED FOR "THE GOOD OF
THE CAUSE".

HILLARY HAS USED BODY DOUBLES BEFORE IN

NEW YORK;

IF YOU THINK EYE/TEETH RATIOS CAN BE

MANIPULATED,

THEN HOW ABOUT THE ENTIRE BODY MASS

DIFFERENCE?
PROPAGANDA WEBSITES, LIKE "THE DAILY
SOMEONE LOOKING LIKE HILLARY WILL BE
KOS", STILL PROMOTE IT
THERE. BARACK

HILLARY HAS A VERY GOOD DOUBLE USED ON AND MICHELLE OBAMA, ALAS, WILL BE UNABLE
TELEVISION. TO ATTEND.

SHE WILL ATTEND AS THINKING THIS IS A

"SPECIAL TREAT".

243
 Report: Terrorists, Cartels
Plan Border Attack For Inauguration
'Trump Is Causing So Much Disruption In Mexico That They're
Partnering To Send A Message'
January 16, 2017
(Photo: Twitter)
Islamic terrorists and drug cartels in Mexico are planning
attacks against U.S.-Mexico border ports
around Inauguration Day, according to a report by the
Washington watchdog group Judicial Watch.
Jihadist and cartel groups reportedly attacked near the site
of a new U.S. Consulate last week in Nuevo Laredo,
Mexico, which is located directly across the border from
Laredo, Texas. The attacks are part of an effort to send
incoming President Donald Trump a message about who is
in control, the report states.
A deadly shootout took place last week at the construction
site of a new $155 million U.S. Consulate building, which
is scheduled to be completed in September.
“The Mexican military responded to the
attack, law enforcement sources on both
sides of the border confirm insisting that
their identities be kept confidential for
security reasons, and at least three soldiers
were either killed or critically wounded in
the ambush,” Judicial Watch reported Jan.
12. “A local newspaper in Tamaulipas
reported that 13 people died during a
shootout in Nuevo Laredo, referring to the
deceased as heavily armed ‘delinquents’
with an arsenal that includes 12 automatic
weapons, a rocket launcher, grenade,
loads of ammunition and drugs in three
vehicles, one of them armored. The
deceased have not been identified and
244
Mexican authorities will continue to
investigate, the article states, attributing the
information to a press release issued by
Mexico’s Defense Secretary.”
Judicial Watch’s law enforcement and intelligence sources
said the recent assault is part of a joint effort of Islamic
terrorists and drug cartels in Mexico.
“Cartels usually don’t work with jihadists for
fear of having the border shut down,” a
veteran federal law enforcement official
reportedly told Judicial Watch. “But Trump
is causing so much disruption in Mexico
that they are partnering to send a message
as to who is in control. This is as
outrageous as a small group of guys
crashing planes into U.S. buildings.”
Another unnamed official, who Judicial Watch says has
worked in the region for years, said Trump
“is causing a huge amount of fear in
Mexico throughout all sectors; private,
government, business, criminal, police.”
Judicial Watch noted Nuevo Laredo is among the border
towns that terrorists and narcotraffickers plan to attack,
according to intelligence gathered by law enforcement
agencies in the U.S. and Mexico. Others include
Matamoros, Reynosa and Ciudad Juárez, which is adjacent
to El Paso, Texas.
WND reported in 2015 when U.S. government agencies
strongly denied another Judicial Watch report claiming
there were ISIS camps near the U.S. border with Mexico.
But lawmakers expressed fears the global jihadist
organization was linking up with deadly Mexican drug
cartels. It wasn’t the first Judicial Watch report claiming
ISIS was using Mexico as a base to stage attacks in the
U.S.
In August 2014, the watchdog reported Islamic terrorist
groups were operating in Ciudad Juarez and planning to
attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle-
borne improvised explosive devices,” citing anonymous
high-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other
sources.
And on Jan. 4 of this year, Judicial Watch reported:
“[A] jihadi-cartel alliance in the Mexican
state of Nuevo León is collaborating to
carry out attacks in American cities and
ports of entry along the southern border.
Confidential U.S. and Mexican law
enforcement sources said that, as part of
the plan, militant Islamists have arrived
recently at the Monterrey International
Airport situated in Apodaca, Nuevo León,
about 130 miles south of the Texas border.
An internal Mexican law enforcement report
obtained by Judicial Watch confirms that
Islamic terrorists have ‘people along the
border, principally in Tijuana, Chihuahua,
Coahuila, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas.’
Cartel informants tell law enforcement
contacts that ‘they are only waiting for the
order and the times to carry out a
simultaneous attack in the different ports of
entry or cities of the United States of
America.'”
As WND reported, Trump has promised to build a wall at
the U.S.-Mexico border, and he has presented a range of
policy proposals to stop the influx of illegal immigrants
entering America.
Trump outlined the following plan in August 2016:
 “We will build a great wall along the southern border.
And Mexico will pay for the wall. 100%. They don’t
know it yet, but they’re going to pay for the wall.” On
Day 1, Trump said he will begin working on an
impenetrable, tall, powerful, beautiful southern wall. He
promised to use above and below-ground sensors,
aerial surveillance and increased manpower. He said
he will find and destroy underground tunnels.
 “We are going to end catch and release. Under my
administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border
will be detained until they are removed out of our
country and [sent] back to the country from which they
came.”
 “Zero tolerance for criminal aliens, zero, zero, zero!
They don’t come in here.” Trump said, according to
federal data, there are at least 2 million “criminal aliens”
inside America. “We will begin moving them out, Day 1,
as soon as I take office, Day 1, in joint operation with
245
local, state and federal law enforcement. … Day 1, my
first hour in office, those people are gone. You can call
it deported if you want. The press doesn’t like that term.
You can call it whatever the hell you want, they’re
gone!”
 “We will issue detainers for illegal immigrants who are
arrested for any crime whatsoever and they will be
placed into immediate removal proceedings, if we even
have to do that.” Trump said he will terminate the
Obama administration’s non-enforcement policies that
allow illegal aliens to roam the streets of America
committing crimes without consequence. “My plan also
includes cooperating closely with local jurisdictions to
remove criminal aliens immediately.”
 On his first day in office, Trump said he will ask
Congress to pass Kate’s Law, named for Kate Steinle.
He also pledged to push for passage of the Davis-
Oliver Act to enhance cooperation between
authorities and ensure criminal aliens are deported
quickly.
 Trump pledged to triple the number of ICE deportation
offices across America: “We will turn the tables, and
law enforcement and our police will be able to clear up
this dangerous and threatening mess.”
 “We’re also going to hire 5,000 more border agents …
and put more of them on the border instead of behind
desks.” He said his administration will expand the
number of Border Patrol offices “significantly.”
 Trump vowed to fight to block funding for sanctuary
cities: “We will end the sanctuary cities that have
resulted in so many needless deaths.”
 He promised to cancel unconstitutional executive
orders and enforce all immigration laws: “We will
immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal
executive amnesties.”
 “Suspend the issuance of visas to any place where
adequate screening cannot occur.” Trump said, as
soon as he enters office, he will ask the Department of
State, Homeland Security and the Department of
Justice to develop a list of countries from which
immigration must be suspended until an “extreme”
vetting process can be put in place. Such countries
include Syria and Libya, he said. “We are going to stop
the tens of thousands of people coming from Syria.”
Trump called for new screening tests for all applicants
that include an “ideological certification to ensure that
those admitted to our country share our values and
love our people.”
  “We will ensure that other countries take their people
back when we order them deported. There are at least
23 countries that refuse to take their people back after
they have entered the United States. … Not gonna
happen with me, folks. Not gonna happen with me.”
 “We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa
tracking system, which we need desperately. … We will
ensure that this system is in place. It will be in land, it
will be on sea, in air.”
 “We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet. We will
ensure that E-verify is used to the fullest extent
possible under existing law.” Trump said he will work
with Congress to expand E-verify.
 “We will reform [the] legal immigration [system] to serve
the best interests of America and its workers, the
forgotten people, workers.”
246
Trump said,
“As you know, I love the United States very
much, and I want to make sure the people
of the United States are protected.”
He added,
“No one wins in either country when human
smugglers and drug traffickers prey on
innocent people, when cartels commit acts
of violence, when illegal weapons and cash
flow from the United States into Mexico or
when migrants from Central America make
a dangerous trek, and it is very very
dangerous, into Mexico or the United
States without legal authorization.”
 That’s Strange: Weapons Caches
Found Stashed In DC Days Before Inauguration
Piper Mcgowin
January 16, 2017

What is clear at this point is that inauguration day is only

four days away and people are amped up like they think
it’s going to be the film The Purge.

The radical left is threatening riots like this nation hasn’t

seen in modern times. Organized protests to “shut it
down!” will be held not just around the city or the country
but the globe, with anti-Trump protesters holding press
conferences to say they aren’t supportive of a peaceful
transition of power.

In an unprecedented move, one of the top inauguration day

security planners and head of the DC National Guard, was
Some lady out for a walk happened upon a couple of guns
asked to step down immediately one minute after Trump is
stashed in a violin case in the woods near the C&O Canal
sworn in and right in the middle of the ceremony. Has that
along the Potomac River in Washington, DC.
ever happened before? The Major General himself said it
was “highly unusual” and he wasn’t given a reason for his
After the police were called in, more weapons caches were sudden departure.
found, including long guns, pistols, and ammunition in
pails and garbage bags tucked away in an area of the
No matter what goes down, it is already shaping up to be
woods hikers aren’t known to frequent.
one of the most bizarre transitions of power probably in
the history of the nation.
“At this point, we don’t know how they got
there, why they’re here or when they got
Maybe these weapons caches found in DC are nothing, but
here,” police spokeswoman Sgt. Anna
when you throw it on the pile of red flags fluttering around
Rose told ABC News.
this thing, it’s hard not to wonder if something bad is about
to go down on Friday.
Could be nothing, but it seems like another red flag.

247
 Will There Be War On The Streets Of Washington D.C.
During The Inauguration On Friday?
By Michael Snyder
January 16th, 2017
The stage is set for a potentially very ugly confrontation
between radical leftist protesters on one side and law
enforcement authorities and Trump supporters on the other
side. It is being estimated that hundreds of thousands of
supporters will be arriving in D.C. to celebrate the
inauguration of Donald Trump, but it is also being
estimated that hundreds of thousands of people will be
coming to D.C. to specifically protest the inauguration of
Trump. These protesters plan to set up blockades, disrupt
inaugural balls and generally cause as much chaos as they
possibly can. In fact, a spokesperson for #DisruptJ20 says
that the goal of his organization is for Trump to be
inaugurated “amid complete chaos”…
“We would like the headline the next
day to be Donald Trump inaugurated
amid complete chaos, not Donald
Trump, inaugurated amid applause,”
said Legba Carrefour, who is an organizer
with #DisruptJ20.
Needless to say, causing “complete chaos” is going to
bring many of these protesters into direct confrontation
with law enforcement. If these anarchists do what they say
they are going to do, law enforcement personnel with be
forced to physically intervene. The following comes from
#DisruptJ20’s official “call to action”…
Trump’s success confirms the bankruptcy of representative
democracy. Rather than using the democratic process as an
alibi for inaction, we must show that no election could
legitimize his agenda. Neither the Democrats nor any other
political party or politician will save us—they just offer a
weaker version of the same thing.
248
If there is going to be a positive change
in this society, we have to make it
ourselves, together, through direct
action.
From day one, the Trump presidency will be a disaster.
#DisruptJ20 will be the start of the resistance.
We must take to the streets and protest,
blockade, disrupt, intervene, sit in, walk
out, rise up, and make more noise and
good trouble than the establishment can
bear.
The parade must be stopped. We must delegitimize Trump
and all he represents. It’s time to defend ourselves, our
loved ones, and the world that sustains us as if our lives
depend on it—because they do.
In addition to law enforcement, many Trump supporters
have made it quite clear that they are not going to put up
with physical obstruction or intimidation by radical
leftists. “Bikers for Trump” is one such group, and they
are anticipating that 5,000 of their members will be
attending the inauguration. According to Bikers for Trump
founder Chris Cox, his organization is
“prepared to form a wall of meat” if
necessary…
“The bikers are certainly used to being
outnumbered and we are prepared to
form a wall of meat. We’re anticipating a
celebration here. We don’t anticipate any
problems. We have a strict code of conduct
where we don’t condone violence. But
again in the event that we’re needed, you
can certainly count on the Bikers for
Trump.”
“We’ll be shoulder-to-shoulder with our
brothers and we’ll be toe-to-toe with
anyone that is going to break through
any police barriers, that’s going to be
assaulting women, spitting on them,
throwing things at them. We are
anticipating a peaceful transition of power.”
 “The backbone of the biker community
is the veteran. So these are guys that
aren’t really used to backing down. You
certainly won’t see bikers out there
screaming, calling for destruction of private
property or the death of police officers.”
Tensions will be running extremely high in D.C. over the
next week, and it isn’t going to take much to spark a major
incident.
On Monday, an incredibly shocking undercover video was
released that shows three members of the Anti-Fascist
Coalition talking about how they could potentially use
butyric acid to disrupt an inaugural ball that is scheduled
for Thursday evening. The following is from a Lifezette
article about this undercover video…
“I was thinking of things that … that would
ruin the evening, ruin their outfits or
otherwise make it impossible to continue
with their plans. Make sure they get nothing
accomplished,” Green says in the video.
“If you had … a pint of butyric acid, I don’t
care how big the building is, it’s closing,”
says Kuhn. “And this stuff is very efficient,
it’s very very smelly, lasts a long time and a
little of it goes a long way,” Green chimes
in eagerly.
If you have not seen this video yet, you can view it right
here. These radicals clearly do not have any problem
harming people in order to make a political statement. If
you are not familiar with butyric acid, it is often used to
create “stink bombs”, but in higher concentrations it can
actually be quite dangerous…
“Inhalation of butyric acid may result in
soreness of throat, coughing, a burning
sensation, and laboured breathing.
Ingestion of the acid may result in
abdominal pain, shock, and collapse.
Physical exposure to the acid may result in
pain, blistering and skin burns, while
exposure to the eyes may result in pain,
severe deep burns and loss of vision.”
Just like Islamic terrorists, these radical leftists want to
create fear and they want to get as much attention as
possible.
249
One of the attention grabbing stunts that they have planned
is to literally block people from getting to the
inauguration. If protesters are able to successfully block a
few of the main roads and a couple metro lines, they
literally will be able to paralyze transportation throughout
the entire city. And according to one of the main
organizers, this is precisely what they plan to do…
“Early in the morning, we’re going to be
doing blockades. We’re going to be
blocking checkpoints into the security
zones. We’re also going to be blocking
roads and other modes of transit into the
event.”
“We are going to do everything we can
from trying to stop people from being
able to access the Inauguration.”
The good news is that tens of millions of dollars is being
spent on security, and officials are closely monitoring what
these radical leftist groups are trying to do. So it is
unlikely that the protesters will be able to completely
disrupt the inaugural celebrations. The following comes
from the Washington Post…
By week’s end, the nation’s capital will have transformed
into a virtual fortress of roadblocks, fences and armed
police. Streets will be barricaded with trucks filled with
sand. Five Metro stations will close Friday. Crossing
Pennsylvania Avenue will be next to impossible.
The peaceful transfer of power is made possible by
overlaying a tight security grid using 28,000 security
officials over 100 square blocks of prime downtown real
estate — from the White House to the Capitol and beyond,
with a price tag in the tens of millions of dollars.
Let’s hope that law enforcement personnel are able to keep
the protests relatively bottled up over the course of this
week, because the potential exists for things to spiral out of
control very rapidly. Sometimes there is a temptation to
allow protesters a little space so that they “can blow off
steam”, but if scenes of chaos and violence start appearing
on television there is a very real possibility that the streets
of Washington D.C. could quickly come to resemble a war
zone.
 Report: Anti-Trump Activists Plotting To
Disrupt Inaugural Events With Butyric Acid, Stink Bombs
Antifascist Coalition Claims It Knew Cameraman In Video Was Actor
By Jack Phillips, Epoch Times
January 16, 2017 AT 1:38 PM

with their plans. So they get nothing

accomplished,” says a man identified in the
video as Scott Green, the leader of the
D.C. Anti-Fascist Coalition.

Another man, identified as Luke Kuhn, described their

potential plans.

“If you had a pint of butyric acid, I don’t

Members of the D.C. Anti-Fascist Coalition, which is part of the anti-
Trump inauguration group called #DisruptJ20, are caught on camera
by undercover reporters from Project Veritas in this screenshot.
(YouTube/Project Veritas)
A video released Jan. 16 by Project Veritas shows activists
talking about using butyric acid to potentially disrupt an
event planned around President-elect Donald Trump’s
Inauguration Day on Jan. 20.
care how big the building is, it is closing,”
he says in the clip, which was captured in a
sit-down meeting at the Comet Ping Pong
pizza restaurant in Washington.
Butyric acid is commonly used to produce stink bombs. If
the plan to use the substance to disrupt the event fails, the
alleged activists say they would try to trigger the sprinkler
system.

Update: According to the Washingtonian,

“But the Antifascist Coalition says it knew

the cameraman in the video was an actor
in O’Keefe’s Project Veritas group, and
concocted a phony plan in order to throw
him off. It may have worked more
effectively than the Antifascist Coalition
anticipated, as O’Keefe’s video is being
reported by Breitbart, the Drudge Report,
and other Trump-friendly outlets as proof
that left-wing protesters plan to engage in
“criminal activities” to disrupt the Green then responds:
inauguration and its associated events.”
“And this stuff is very efficient. It’s very,
Specifically, the D.C. Anti-Fascist Coalition, which is part very smelly, and it lasts a long time.”
of the anti-Trump inauguration group called #DisruptJ20, “I’m trying to think through how to get all
wants to force the cancellation of the DeploraBall—a sold- the sprinklers to go off at once,” a man
out gathering of Trump supporters slated for Jan. 19 at the identified as Colin Dunn says. Furthermore,
National Press Building. Organizers of the coalition were he says he wants to ensure it is “made to
captured discussing the plans on video by Project Veritas, look like an accident.”
the brainchild of controversial conservative firebrand
James O’Keefe. Another activist in the video can be heard issuing tacit
threats to the District of Columbia city government.
“I was thinking of things that would ruin
their evening, ruin their outfits, and He says:
otherwise make it impossible to continue
250
 “The message has to be, we do not
recognize the city government either. If you
try to close us down, we will look for your
house, we will burn it. We will physically
fight the police if they try to steal one of our
places. We will go to war and you will lose.”
But in a Jan. 16 post on its website, #DisruptJ20 dismissed
the Project Veritas video and suggested that O’Keefe used
“sad aspiring actors to go undercover to get
video of leftists in order to chop up the film
to make up a news story. Hilariously
enough, we have nothing to hide.”
251
It, however, did not refute that the men in the video were
associated with #DisruptJ20 and the D.C. Anti-Fascist
Coalition.
According to the #DisruptJ20 event website, they’re
seeking to
“protest the fascist alt-right ‘DeploraBall'”
because activists “absolutely” won’t let
“white supremacists, rape-culture sexists,
and fascists celebrate hate in our city.”
Those attending the DeploraBall include conservative
commentators Lauren Southern, Milo Yiannopoulis, and
Mike Cernovich.
 CIA's Brennan Rejects Donald Trump's Criticism, Says
Dossier Didn't Come From Intel Community
Foxnews.Com
Published January 17, 2017
John Brennan, the outgoing Central Intelligence Agency
director, rejected President-elect Donald Trump’s
suggestion that he may have leaked the unsubstantiated
dossier that claimed Russia had compromising allegations
about Trump.
“First of all, this is not intelligence
community information,” Brennan said
Monday.
Brennan said he did not read the document and, according
to the Wall Street Journal, gave it no particular credence.
Trump blasted outgoing director on social media Sunday
after Brennan said Trump does not have a “full
understanding” of Russia’s power and threat to the world.
“I don’t think he has a full understanding of
Russian capabilities and the actions they
are taking on the world,” Brennan told “Fox
News Sunday.”
He also suggested that Trump lacks a “full appreciation” of
Russia’s aggression or about why President Obama
imposed sanctions on the Kremlin for meddling in the
2016 presidential election.
“Mr. Trump has to understand that
absolving Russia is a road that he needs to
.
252
be very, very careful about moving down,”
Brennan said.
Trump responded with a two-tweet message that criticized
the CIA's record under Brennan and questioned whether
the director had leaked a dossier of unverified allegations
that Russia spies had obtained compromising personal and
financial information about Trump.
The day after the dossier's contents were published by
BuzzFeed, Trump posted on Twitter that intelligence
agencies "should never have allowed this fake news to
'leak'" before asking "Are we living in Nazi Germany?"
Brennan was reportedly indignant that Trump attacked his
fellow spies, according to The Journal. He mentioned
Trumps tweet on Nazi Germany in particular.
“Tell the families of those 117 CIA officers
who are forever memorialized on our wall
of honor that their loved ones who gave
their lives were akin to Nazis,” Brennan
said. “Tell the CIA officers who are serving
in harm’s way right now and their families
who are worried about them that they are
akin to Nazi Germany. I found that to be
very repugnant, and I will forever stand up
for the integrity and patriotism of my
officers who have done much over the
years to sacrifice for their fellow citizens.”
 Dear Anti-Trump Protesters:
Show Your Commitment. Quit Your Jobs
Posted by Daisy Luther
Date: January 17, 2017
Dear Anti-Trump Protesters:
I think it’s time that you really show your commitment.
That you really prove how vehemently you disagree with
soon-to-be President Trump.
Stop messing around with these silly protests and put your
money where your mouth is.
Quit your jobs. Stage a walk-out. Buh-bye.
You have principles, right?
With all of the discussion of principles whirling around the
internet as you hysterical liberals try in vain to “stop
Trump,” here’s one thing to which you should adhere.
You should quit your jobs. If you don’t, then you’re all
talk.
After all, you are making a vow of “refusing to
accommodate or work with the administration.” If you
feel this strongly, then go for it.
Common dreams.org quoted an excerpt from the Refuse
Facism website:
Countering Trump and Pence’s “regime” will require a
month of resistance leading up to the president-elect’s
inauguration on January 20, the ad states.
253
That means refusing to accommodate or
work with the administration, as well as
taking part in “protests that don’t stop—
where people refuse to leave, occupying
public space, and more and more people
stand up with conviction and courage.” (my
emphasis)
This is excellent news.
If all you anti-Trump people quit your jobs because they
are directly tied the government or your company has a
role that supports or provides a service for the
government, there would be tons of job vacancies for hard-
working, non-hysterical people.
Here’s the criteria to help you decide if
you should quit your job.
I’m talking to you:
 Anti-Trump protesters working for any company that
holds a government contract – you need to start typing
your resignation letters.
 Anti-Trump protesters who work for any company that
sub-contracts services to the government – you need
to do likewise. Get with it.
 Anti-Trump protesters who provide any type of good or
service for people who may be Trump supporters. You
don’t want their stinkin’ business.
Here’s the thing you don’t understand.
You have made the grave error of believing you’re
irreplaceable.
After all, you have a row of participation trophies on a
shelf in your room. Your mommies have told you how
special you are for your entire lives.
But there are hundreds of thousands of people who will
happily replace the jobs you vacate if you adhere to your
standards and refuse to work in any capacity that could
provide any type of service or value to the Trump
administration.
There will be jobs available in every sector from Then, Trump will have improved the economy of
hospitality to groundkeepers. supporters without doing anything, because there are many
less-whiny people who would be happy to have
From catering to dry cleaning. employment.

From armaments and military hardware suppliers to The irony is, shortly after you do this, you’ll be lining up
floristry services. at the welfare office.

The list of companies that deal with the government is And guess who you’ll have to ask for money.
MASSIVE. Hundreds of thousands of jobs will become
available overnight. Oh.

Go ahead, anti-Trumpers. The government.

Have the courage of your convictions. Do the decent thing You know, the one run by President Trump.
and quit your jobs.

254
 Trump Anti-Communist
Counter Revolution
By SARTRE
January 17, 2017
"Reign for our glory, reign to strike fear in
our foes, Orthodox tsar. God save the tsar!"
- Vladimir Zhirinovsky
The century anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution
occurs this year. Any serious examination of The Russian
Revolution and the Soviet Union must conclude that the
systematic eradications of millions and the ruthlessness of
the Communist commissars rule was a miserable failure,
even by Marxist postulates. Russia today is quite different
from the Gulag Archipelago that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
experienced and wrote about.
“And those who, like you and me, dear
reader, go there to die, must get there
solely and compulsorily via arrest.”
Yet with all the moronic obsessions that proliferates the
warmonger establishment and the mass media, the true
Fake News echo chambers, the world is being pushed into
the danger zone of oblivion. Any well schooled observer
of geopolitics understands that conflicts are instituted or
fabricated to achieve certain contrived political objectives.
Ideology of theoretical and academic distinctions among
varied systems for the social order, are as remote to the
thinking of abused sheeple as any intellectual integrity
among ivory tower hypocrites.
Nevertheless, the gradual indoctrination of the non critical
public, absorb the cultural socialism of the last century,
255
while distorting their debased brains into thinking they are
anti-communists. Sorry my fellow Americans, the
Communist Manifesto , has long ago been adopted by
countless collectivist betrayers. Totalitarianism has been
accepted as the official implementation conduct to
perpetuate and expand the globalist empire.
How did this happen and what awaits a nation that refuses
to face reality? James Perloff lists several developments in
the methodical destruction of Russia and asks DO
AMERICANS FACE A RED TERROR?
“Though America would never have
accepted outright communist revolution, it
is now adopting measures accurately
termed socialism. The Illuminati are
employing a timeworn principle: To boil a
frog, don’t toss him in boiling water – he’ll
jump out. Instead, put him in lukewarm
water and gradually raise the heat; the frog
never realizes he’s been boiled. This slow
warming is “Fabian socialism” (gradual
communism).”
Oh, what a succinct description why Bernie Sanders
comrades drank the hemlock of Bolshevik progressivism.
Radio Free Europe, not exactly a friendly surrogate outlet
of Russia Today asks, A Century After Russian
Revolution, Will Putin Bury Lenin?
“Putin has drawn on aspects of both the
tsarist and Soviet eras in his efforts to
shape Russia. Many critics accuse him of
echoing practices of Soviet times -- and
even of dictator Josef Stalin -- in his quest
to tighten his grip over Russia.
But he has done more to link his image to
the long history of tsars than to the
relatively brief, badly checkered Soviet
experiment -- seven oppressive decades
that began with the kind of upheaval Putin
seems bent on ensuring does not threaten
his rule.
"We've seen a long-term buildup of the
sense that the real model is to be found not
so much in the Soviet times, but actually in
 tsarist times," says analyst Mark Galeotti, a
senior policy fellow at the Institute of
International Relations in Prague.
"And I can't help but wonder if while once
upon a time Putin was willing to say that
the collapse of the Soviet Union was the
greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the
20th century, he might well now actually be
saying that 1917 was," Galeotti adds.”
When Senator “Bomber” John McCain wants to sabotage
any Donald Trump initiative to engage in a non belligerent
foreign policy with Russia, one has to conclude that his
globalist masters use their Manchurian Candidate stooge to
keep and expand NATO’s brinkmanship and deployed
encirclement of Russia.
Vladimir Putin Nemesis of the New World Order poses
“The essential question that has existential
consequences is whether Russia (or much
of the non-NWO governance bodies) is
willing to revert to their serfdom heritage
and accept a technocratic subservient
peasantry.”
The NeoCons, NeoLibs and careerist State Department
globalists have abandoned any semblance of a traditional
non-interventionist foreign policy. Justin Raimondo is
always consistent to articulate the argument.
In Trump’s Revolution he states “Trump
rode into office promising that “we’ll get
along with everybody” who wants peace
with the United States, as he said in his
victory speech. He campaigned on a
platform of “America First” that his enemies
derided as “isolationist” and which was, in
reality, simply the foreign policy of the
Founders of this country.”
The necessary inquiry that will be resolved over the course
of the Trump administration is whether a serious anti-
Communist Counter Revolution will come out of his
stewardship? In a recent “Reign of Terror” essay Trump's
Self-Inflicted Policy Failures, the obvious influence of
placing a tribal faction of Wall Street banksters in charge
of monetary authority and a fraternity of dual loyalists and
Israel First followers in key policy positions for foreign
policy was made.
For doubters in the wisdom of this position, read Michael
Scheuer, an ex CIA alumnus who no longer appears in the
corporate media. Just maybe they cannot handle the truth
or allow the public from hearing the uncensored reality.
Mr. Trump, stop being an ass. America First and support
for Israel are polar opposites.
256
“The American republic was not formed to
be the cats-paw of any foreign power —
especially one irrelevant to U.S. interests,
like Israel — or any disloyal gaggle of
Americans. Neither is there anything manly
or self-respecting in you authorizing such
Israel First goals as are signified by your
ambassadorial choice and the plan to move
the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem.
Remember that the supporters of both
goals are the same people and
organizations who hysterically vilified you,
lied about you, and advised all Americans
to vote for Hillary Clinton. You owe them
nothing, Mr. Trump, and America owes
neither them nor Israel another dollar or
another military life. It is time, Mr. Trump, to
stop playing the fool for Israel, Israel First,
the Neoconservatives, and at U.S.
Congress that is controlled by all three.”
Whether Trump can maintain his promise of establishing a
counter revolution will be judged by this acid test of
shifting away from globalist governance and putting forth
a genuine nationalism that breaks the chains of
internationalism.
Purging the popular culture of their fellow traveler
sentiments and apparatchik subversives is not likely when
the country is contaminated with an authoritarian
censorship assault coming from not just the usual suspects,
but adopted by the very pillars of the crony establishment
elites.
The overwhelming and vocal voice from forgotten loyal
Americans in the last election put Trump in office. Taking
his oath of office is not a mere detail of showmanship. It is
probably the last opportunity to put into motion an honest
attempt to implement rightful truth to power.
President Trump will be confronted by a junta or status
quo collaborators, whose identity is indistinguishable from
the imperial hegemony that dominates the world. Most of
the spooks in the intelligence community are devoted
globalists and view an America at peace as a threat to their
power.
A Counter Revolution to the tyrannical Communist
overseers that attend Davos will not get support out of the
beltway crowd. The populist movement needs to be based
upon authentic conservative principles that are founded
upon a limited government, not a corporate dominated
playing field of privileged titans.
The people who rallied to put Trump in the White House
must not be stonewalled from seeing and experiencing real
world economic improvements to their lives and
circumstances. Only a revitalized economy that produces
widespread prosperity for those who are willing to
improve their own plight can win this war against the
welfare state.
Trump has the potential of being the greatest domestic
proponent in history if the opposition from the
establishment would get religion and become patriotic.
Nonetheless, the forces of malicious wickedness are
prepared to unleash their pandemic coup against the
peoples of our republic.
It is so obvious that the shadow state has declared war
against Donald Trump. The panic that has overtaken the
power elite should be evidential proof that Trump
represents a terminal threat to their feudal system of
perdition. The bourgeois has been explicitly stripped of
their wealth and independence over the last century. Now
elite’s within our own country, not the post Soviet
Russians would become the U.S. version of the Bolshevik
Cheka.
.
257
When the conspirators in the corridors of sedition want to
charge that Trump is a Putin agent, we get into the area of
rarified delusional vilification. The malady of
disinformation knows no bounds when it comes out of the
mouth of a government hired gun. Can Trump survive
from such an onslaught? Especially, when the character
assassins have little hesitation to go ballistic, can the next
hundred years chronicle the success of the Trump
movement counter revolution?
The Red Terror that imperils our constitutional republic is
home grown; much like the merchants of death came out
of the money-lender NYC offices that financed the
Bolshevik Revolution. Continuity of Government requires
that Donald Trump is the legitimate president. Those who
advocate violence or a coup to prevent him from governing
are traitors. Judas was the keeper of the finances. So too
his same fate should apply to any snakes of our nation.
 The DNC Hands The Democratic Party Over To David
Brock And Billionaire Donors
By Michael J. Sainato
January 17, 2017
Photo by DonkeyHotey | CC BY 2.0
The Democratic Party establishment has responded to
Hillary Clinton’s election loss the same way they would
have responded had Hillary Clinton won, by changing
absolutely nothing. Clinton’s overt embrace of wealthy
donors and establishment figures from both political
parties repelled thousands of voters toward third parties,
voting for Trump, or apathy.
This trend embodied by Clinton’s candidacy has resulted
in Democrats losing over 900 state legislature seats and
failing to recoup majorities in both houses of Congress.
Instead of figuring out how to reconnect with working and
middle class voters across the country, Democrats are
handing the keys of the party directly over to wealthy
billionaire donors while attempting to maintain the facade
they care about the common voter.
Despite formal complaints, a lawsuit, and ethical concerns,
billionaire donor and close ally to former DNC
Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Stephen Bittel
was elected by the Florida Democratic Party establishment
to serve as its new Chair on January 14. Next weekend in
Florida, billionaire donors will gain even more ground in
the Democratic Party at a private retreat hosted by Clinton
propagandist David Brock, where each candidate for the
new DNC Chair will participate in a forum to woo support
from the Democratic Party’s donors.
David Brock became notorious after his attacks on Anita
Hill, who accused 1991 Supreme Court nominee Clarence
Thomas of sexual harassment, and passed a polygraph test
258
in addition to testifying in front of the U.S. Senate
Judiciary Committee. Thomas was confirmed anyways,
and David Brock became rich off a book he wrote
smearing Anita Hill. In 2001, Brock admitted he based the
book on lies, part of his transition from Republican hit man
to Hillary Clinton’s propaganda henchman.
Now that Hillary Clinton’s machine has broken
down, Brock is depending on bundling his donor network
with that of billionaire George Soros’ Democracy Alliance
to push back against the direction Bernie Sanders and his
supporters want to pull the party in, away from wealthy
donors, with the support of the Democratic Party
establishment. The DNC has allowed Brock’s Super-Pac,
American Bridge, to develop strategy for a “Trump War
Room,” and the next DNC Chair will likely be chosen by
billionaire donors at the private retreat Brock is hosting
under the distraction veil afforded by Trump’s
Inauguration Ceremony.
If Democrats want to constructively hold Donald Trump
accountable and recoup, they need to disavow themselves
from David Brock’s incompetence. Relying on smear
campaigns, propaganda, and hyperbolic attacks, in an
attempt to portray a stark contrast between Republicans
and Democrats will backfire as it did for
Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election.
The Clinton Campaign, David Brock, and the
mainstream narrative focused their campaign on
manufacturing outrage toward Donald Trump rather than
try to make meaningful connections with working and
middle class voters, especially in areas like the rust belt
that have suffered increasing economic anxiety over the
past decade.
David Brock won’t be a part of any viable solution for the
Democratic Party. As Bernie Sanders Aide Michael
Briggs said during the Democratic Primaries, Hillary
Clinton,
“should be ashamed of her association
with Brock.”
The same goes for the Democratic Party if they continue to
provide Brock a platform and network to perpetuate his
awful ideas and strategies along with out-of-touch
wealthy donors.
“Their top-down approach to politics — a
service model animated by an unwavering
belief in their own superior intelligence —
leaves us defenseless in the face
of Trump and the right-wing forces he’s
.
259
empowered,” wrote Alex Press for Jacobin
in November.
“Their existential dread of radical change
renders them suspicious of precisely the
policies that could unite workers of all races
and blunt Trump’s appeal. In short, the rich
can’t save us.”
 You Won’t Believe What CNN And The
Mainstream Media Are Doing Now (VIDEO)
By: The Voice Of Reason
Date: January 17, 2017

I also review an article

With abysmal ratings, and after being
embroiled in yet another “fake news”
controversy, it’s not unreasonable for
people to begin wondering if CNN or
other left-wing media outlets are EVER
going to learn their lesson, and begin to
at least ACT like they’re attempting to
exercise some journalistic integrity, or if
they’re content to lose the few
remaining viewers and readers they still
have to what they refer to as” “fake
news” websites.
By now, most people have heard about
the fireworks that went off during
President-Elect Trump’s first official
press conference. What you may not
know, is that other left-wing media
outlets, like USA Today, are deliberately
altering the sound on their version of
what took place, or that the reporter
involved in the dust-up, Jim Acosta, has
been lying on the air at CNN about what
really happened.
Do the people at CNN or USA Today not
realize that other media outlets have
video of what actually happened?? Will
the far-left mainstream media ever learn
their lesson?
In the first video below, I demonstrate
how media outlets like USA Today are
deliberately attempting to mislead the
American people about what transpired
during Trump’s press conference by
using a doctored version of the video.
published today by Rick Wells
appropriately titled, Press Secretary
Spicer Puts CNN On Notice For Attempt
To Sabotage Trump. Enough is enough
already! It’s time for “We the People” to
make it known that we’ve had enough of
this garbage once and for all, and there
is only one way to do that!
There have been attempts to address
the fact that if something is not done to
curb the lawlessness, reckless, and
dangerous behavior we’ve seen
continue to escalate from the far-left, we
only embolden them to be more defiant.
Therefore, It’s Time “We the People”
Starve the Beast, and hit far-left political
and media elites where it hurts
them most, in their wallets. Simply put,
at this point whoever does not do their
part to starve the BEAST, has no right to
complain about it.
In the first video below from Donald
Trump’s press conference, the audio is
crystal clear for the entire room, giving
you an understanding of what actually
took place between President-Elect
Donald Trump and CNN’s Jim Acosta.
As you watch the video, imagine if it
was a Breitbart reporter doing that to
Barack Obama. Wow.

260

In the second video below from Donald
Trump’s first press conference, taken
directly from USA Today’s YouTube
Channel, notice how the audio was
blatantly doctored… It’s despicable.
As you heard in the video that contains
the full audio, President-Elect Donald
Trump told CNN’s Jim Acosta, “Don’t be
rude. No, I’m not going to give you a
question,” but like a petulant child, Jim
Acosta kept raising his voice, and was
almost shouting over Donald Trump
demanding that his question be
taken. CNN doesn’t seem to EVER learn
from their mistakes, because after their
shouting match ended with Donald
Trump telling Acosta, “No, I’m not going
to give you a question. You are fake
news,” Acosta later went on the air and
said the following about his dust-up
with the President-Elect:
“At one point during the news
conference, an in the interest of full
disclosure, and so everyone knows
what’s going on, and what was
happening in the room, after I asked, or
might say demanded that we have a
question, Sean Spicer, the incoming
Press Secretary did say to me that if
were to do that again I would be thrown
out…”
261
Isn’t that nice of Jim Acosta. All of a
sudden he’s interested in giving “full
disclosure” to the four viewers CNN still
has watching (and even those four are
only watching because they’re in
airports somewhere, and it’s the only
channel playing). There’s just one
problem with his story: Even his version
of “full disclosure” is a combination of
lies, and just part of the full story.
In the video below, you’ll see that when
Acosta went on the air post dust-up,
he gave the impression that CNN was
totally ignored by the President-Elect,
and he made it sound as if Trump’s
Press Secretary, Sean Spicer, came
over and tapped him on the shoulder
like a bar bouncer would, right in the
middle of the press conference. Sorry
Jim, but nice try!
In reality (you know, that place CNN
reporters rarely visit), Donald Trump
had already taken a question from CNN,
and what Acosta also fails to mention, is
that there were over 400+ other
reporters in the room who were all being
respectful, and patiently waiting their
turn to ask questions at the same time
Acosta was having his temper tantrum.
If you listen carefully to the video with
the shouting match, you can barely hear
her, but a female reporter was trying to
ask Donald Trump a question while
Acosta was carrying on like an infant.
Finally, as you’ll learn in the second
video below, on Fox and Friends Sean
Spicer said, “Jim Acosta has a false
recollection of the facts!” As 399+ other
reporters in the room could verify,
Spicer says he did not approach Acosta
in the middle of the press conference,
but rather he waited until it was over, at
which time he did have some choice
words for the disgraced CNN host.
 As you saw above, after his post dust-
up with Donald Trump at the press
conference, Jim Acosta went on the air
at CNN, and said the following:
“At one point during the news
conference, an in the interest of full
disclosure, and so everyone knows
what’s going on, and what was
happening in the room, after I asked, or
might say demanded that we have a
question, Sean Spicer, the incoming
Press Secretary did say to me that if
were to do that again I would be thrown
out…”
On Fox and Friends, Trump Press
Secretary Sean Spicer set the record
straight on what really happened…
Rick Wells reports:
Incoming White House Press Secretary
Sean Spicer had a few words to say about
the fake news that was released by
BuzzFeed and publicized by CNN
regarding supposed events in a bedroom in
Russia.
Spicer said,
“Before we start, I want to bring your
attention to a few points on the report that
was published in BuzzFeed last night. It’s
frankly outrageous and highly irresponsible
for a left-wing blog that was openly hostile
to the President-elect’s campaign to drop
highly salacious and flat-out false
information on the Internet just days before
he takes the oath of office.”
262
Spicer says,
“According to BuzzFeed’s own editor,
there are some serious reasons to
doubt the allegations in the report. The
executive editor of the New York Times
also dismissed the report by saying it
was ‘totally unsubstantiated,’ echoing
the concerns that many other reporters
expressed on the Internet.”
“The fact that BuzzFeed and CNN made
the decision to run with this
unsubstantiated claim is a sad and
pathetic attempt to get clicks. The report
is not an intelligence report, plain and
simple.”
CNN was in that audience and their reporter, Jim Acosta,
would later attempt to talk over the President-elect in
demanding that he be allowed to ask a question. The
debates are over, being mentioned in a news conference
doesn’t carry with it an automatic right of rebuttal. CNN
and BuzzFeed made an error in judgment.
The Trump team has been fighting back
against this kind of brazen “make it up
on the fly” kind of attack since the day
he announced. They’re going to fight
back, they’ve had enough and quite
frankly, so have the American people.
As Mr. Trump went on to describe them in his exchange
with Acosta, they are a terrible organization. They are fake
news. They seriously damaged what was left of their
credibility and their reputation with this one. It will be
interesting to see how this affects their access to the
President-elect in the future, but it certainly won’t be
helpful, nor should it be.
 Putin Warns Of "Maidan-Style" Attempt To Delegitimize
Trump; Doesn't Believe Trump Used Hookers In Moscow
By Tyler Durden
Jan 17, 2017 1:17 PM
Warning that a "soft coup" is being waged against Donald
Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he sees
attempts in the United States to "delegitimize" US
President-elect Donald Trump using "Maidan-style"
methods previously used in Ukraine, where readers will
recall president Yanukovich was ousted in 2014 following
a violent coup, which many suspect was conducted under
the auspices of the US State Department and assorted US
intelligence operations.
"I have an impression they practiced in
Kiev and are ready to organize a Maidan
in Washington, just to not let Trump
take office," Putin said,
apparently referring to anti-government protests in the
Ukrainian capital in 2014, which resulted in the leadership
being ousted. The campaign to discredit the president-elect
shows that certain "political elites in the West, including in
the US," have "significantly" worsened, the Russian
president added.
Putin said he doesn’t believe that Donald Trump met with
prostitutes in Russia, calling the accusations part of a
campaign to undermine the election result, and said reports
spread in the Western media accusing Trump of frolicking
with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel, the Russian president
said he doubted that a man who had been organizing
beauty pageants for years and had met
"some of the most beautiful women of
the world" would hire call girls in the
Russian capital.
The Russian leader also called the allegations that Moscow
might have blackmail material on the US president-elect
"evidently fake."
"When Trump visited Moscow several
years ago, he wasn't a political figure. We
didn't even know about his political
ambitions, he was just a businessman, one
.
263
of America's richest people. So does
someone think that our intelligence
services go after each American
billionaire? Of course not, it's complete
rubbish," Putin said.
Unsubstantiated allegations made against Trump are
“obvious fabrications,” Putin told reporters in the Kremlin
on Tuesday.
“People who order fakes of the type now
circulating against the U.S. president-
elect, who concoct them and use them
in a political battle, are worse than
prostitutes because they don’t have any
moral boundaries at all,” he said.
The Russian president, cited by BBG, said that Trump
wasn’t a politician when he visited Moscow in the past and
Russian officials weren’t aware that he held any political
ambitions.
Putin, who reiterated he had never met Trump, said he
hoped that Moscow and Washington could eventually get
their troubled relations back to normal, adding he has no
reasons to "attack or defend him."
"I don't know Mr. Trump personally, I have
never met him and don't know what he will
do on the international arena. So I have no
grounds to attack him or criticize him for
anything, or protect him or whatever," Putin
said.
Putin noted that there is a category of people who leave
without saying goodbye,
"out of respect for the present situation,"
while others say goodbye all the time, but
do not go away. "The outgoing
administration, in my opinion, belongs
to the second category," he said.
 Putin Blasts Anti-Trump Prostitutes
By Stephen Lendman
1-17-2017
Putin diverged from his usual measured diplomatic
rhetoric to blast what he called anti-Trump prostitution.
Washington’s criminal class and supportive media
scoundrels are worse than street whores, without moral
scruples, Putin stressed.
He spoke candidly and straightforwardly after remaining
largely silent during months of groundless accusations of
Russian US election hacking - absurd and hugely offensive
charges only brainwashed or dim-witted people believe.
“I don’t know Mr. Trump personally. I have
never met him and don’t know what he will
do on the international arena. So I have no
grounds to attack him or criticize him for
anything, or protect him or whatever,” Putin
stressed.
Despite his “solid win,” anti-Trump forces want him
“undermine(d)” and delegitimized for their own dark
purposes.
“I have an impression they practiced in
Kiev and are ready to organize a (US-style)
Maidan in Washington” - a coup to prevent
“Trump (from) tak(ing) office.”
264
Political conditions in America and Europe “significantly”
worsened in recent years, extremists replacing cool heads.
Putin called alleged Russian compromising material on
Trump utterly “fake.”
When he “visited Moscow several years
ago, he wasn’t a political figure.”
We didn’t even know about his political
ambitions. He was just a businessman, one
of America's richest people. So does
someone think that our intelligence
services go after each American
billionaire? Of course not, it’s complete
rubbish.”
Putin scoffed at the notion of a man involved in organizing
beauty pageants in America with “some of the most
beautiful women of the world” would come thousands of
miles to Moscow for sex with call girls.
Make sense? Of course not, especially given months of
relentless Trump bashing. He called the allegation a
“complete fraud.” So did Putin and every other thinking
person.
 ‘Worse Than Prostitutes’:
Putin Slams Those Behind Trump ‘Leak’
Published Time: 17 Jan, 2017 13:19
Russian President Vladimir Putin (L), U.S. President-elect Donald
Trump (R) © www.globallookpress.com
Russian President Vladimir Putin said he has no grounds to
attack or protect US President-elect Donald Trump, since
he does not know him personally. He added though that
those behind the recent allegations against Trump have "no
moral scruples."
"I don't know Mr. Trump personally, I have
never met him and don't know what he will
do on the international arena. So I have no
grounds to attack him or criticize him for
anything, or protect him or whatever," Putin
said.
Despite the fact that elections in the US are over and ended
with a "solid win" for the Republican candidate, an intense
political struggle continues in the US, the Russian
president observed, adding that there are certain forces that
aim
"to undermine the legitimacy of the
president-elect."
"I have an impression they practiced in
Kiev and are ready to organize a Maidan in
Washington, just to not let Trump take
office," Putin said,
apparently referring to anti-government protests in the
Ukrainian capital in 2014, which resulted in the leadership
being ousted.
Those anti-Trump forces in the US also want to "bind hand
and foot" the newly-elected leader, Putin added. He said
that in this way, they aim to interfere with the domestic
and international policies outlined in Trump's presidential
campaign.
265
By doing so, these forces "severely harm
US interests," Putin said.
The campaign to discredit the president-elect shows that
certain
"political elites in the West, including in the
US," have "significantly" worsened,
according to the Russian president.
"Prostitution is an ugly social
phenomenon," he told reporters, adding
that people who stand behind "fabrications"
being used against Trump "are worse than
prostitutes."
"They have no moral scruples," he said.
The Russian leader also called the allegations that Moscow
might have blackmail material on the US president-elect
"evidently fake."
"When Trump visited Moscow several
years ago, he wasn't a political figure. We
didn't even know about his political
ambitions, he was just a businessman, one
of America's richest people. So does
someone think that our intelligence
services go after each American
billionaire? Of course not, it's complete
rubbish," Putin said.
Commenting on reports spread in the Western media
accusing Trump of frolicking with prostitutes in a Moscow
hotel, the Russian president said he doubted that a man
who had been organizing beauty pageants for years and
had met "some of the most beautiful women of the world"
would hire call girls in the Russian capital.
Last week, a report on what was claimed to be a secret
dossier, reportedly compiled by former UK intelligence
officer Christopher Steele, was published by CNN and
BuzzFeed. It alleged that Trump was groomed and
supported by Russian intelligence and that the Kremlin
was in possession of compromising material on the
president-elect.
The dossier reportedly contained a bizarre story of Trump
allegedly hiring prostitutes to
.
266
"perform a ‘golden showers’ show in front
of him"
on a hotel bed in the Ritz Carlton presidential suite in the
Russian capital, where Barack Obama and his wife had
previously stayed.
The US president-elect, who will be inaugurated on
January 20, has branded the dossier a "complete fraud,"
saying that intelligence insiders have confirmed to him that
the allegations were fake.
 The Issue Is Not Trump. It Is Us
By John Pilger
January 17, 2017
Photo by Diego Torres Sylvester | CC BY 2.0
On the day President Trump is inaugurated, thousands of
writers in the United States will express their indignation.
“In order for us to heal and move forward
…,” say Writers Resist, “we wish to bypass
direct political discourse, in favour of an
inspired focus on the future, and how we,
as writers, can be a unifying force for the
protection of democracy.”
And:
“We urge local organizers and speakers to
avoid using the names of politicians or
adopting ‘anti’ language as the focus for
their Writers Resist event. It’s important to
ensure that nonprofit organizations, which
are prohibited from political campaigning,
will feel confident participating in and
sponsoring these events.”
Thus, real protest is to be avoided, for it is not tax exempt.
Compare such drivel with the declarations of the Congress
of American Writers, held at Carnegie Hall, New York, in
1935, and again two years later. They were electric events,
with writers discussing how they could confront ominous
events in Abyssinia, China and Spain. Telegrams from
Thomas Mann, C Day Lewis, Upton Sinclair and Albert
Einstein were read out, reflecting the fear that great power
was now rampant and that it had become impossible to
discuss art and literature without politics or, indeed, direct
political action.
267
“A writer,” the journalist Martha Gellhorn
told the second congress, “must be a man
of action now . . . A man who has given a
year of his life to steel strikes, or to the
unemployed, or to the problems of racial
prejudice, has not lost or wasted time. He
is a man who has known where he
belonged. If you should survive such
action, what you have to say about it
afterwards is the truth, is necessary and
real, and it will last.”
Her words echo across the unction and violence of the
Obama era and the silence of those who colluded with his
deceptions.
That the menace of rapacious power — rampant long
before the rise of Trump — has been accepted by writers,
many of them privileged and celebrated, and by those who
guard the gates of literary criticism, and culture, including
popular culture, is uncontroversial. Not for them the
impossibility of writing and promoting literature bereft of
politics. Not for them the responsibility to speak out,
regardless of who occupies the White House.
Today, false symbolism is all.
“Identity” is all. In 2016, Hillary Clinton
stigmatised millions of voters as “a basket
of deplorables, racist, sexist, homophobic,
xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it”.
Her abuse was handed out at an LGBT rally as part of her
cynical campaign to win over minorities by abusing a
white mostly working-class majority. Divide and rule, this
is called; or identity politics in which race and gender
conceal class, and allow the waging of class war. Trump
understood this.
“When the truth is replaced by silence,”
said the Soviet dissident poet
Yevtushenko, “the silence is a lie.”
This is not an American phenomenon. A few years ago,
Terry Eagleton, then professor of English literature at
Manchester University, reckoned that
 “for the first time in two centuries, there is
no eminent British poet, playwright or
novelist prepared to question the
foundations of the western way of life”.
No Shelley speaks for the poor, no Blake for utopian
dreams, no Byron damns the corruption of the ruling class,
no Thomas Carlyle and John Ruskin reveal the moral
disaster of capitalism. William Morris, Oscar Wilde, HG
Wells, George Bernard Shaw have no equivalents today.
Harold Pinter was the last to raise his voice. Among
today’s insistent voices of consumer-feminism, none
echoes Virginia Woolf, who described
“the arts of dominating other people… of
ruling, of killing, of acquiring land and
capital”.
There is something both venal and profoundly stupid about
famous writers as they venture outside their cosseted world
and embrace an “issue”. Across the Review section of the
Guardian on 10 December was a dreamy picture of Barack
Obama looking up to the heavens and the words,
“Amazing Grace” and “Farewell the Chief”.
The sycophancy ran like a polluted babbling brook through
page after page.
“He was a vulnerable figure in many ways
…. But the grace. The all-encompassing
grace: in manner and form, in argument
and intellect, with humour and cool ….[He]
is a blazing tribute to what has been, and
what can be again … He seems ready to
keep fighting, and remains a formidable
champion to have on our side … … The
grace … the almost surreal levels of grace
…”
I have conflated these quotes. There are others even more
hagiographic and bereft of mitigation. The Guardian’s
chief apologist for Obama, Gary Younge, has always been
careful to mitigate, to say that his hero
“could have done more”: oh, but there were
the “calm, measured and consensual
solutions …”
None of them, however, could surpass the American
writer, Ta-Nehisi Coates, the recipient of a “genius” grant
worth $625,000 from a liberal foundation. In an
interminable essay for The Atlantic entitled, “My
President Was Black”, Coates brought new meaning to
prostration. The final “chapter”, entitled “When You Left,
You Took All of Me With You”, a line from a Marvin
Gaye song, describes seeing the Obamas “rising out of the
268
limo, rising up from fear, smiling, waving, defying despair,
defying history, defying gravity”. The Ascension, no less.
One of the persistent strands in American political life is a
cultish extremism that approaches fascism. This was given
expression and reinforced during the two terms of Barack
Obama.
“I believe in American exceptionalism with
every fibre of my being,” said Obama, who
expanded America’s favourite military
pastime, bombing, and death squads
(“special operations”) as no other president
has done since the Cold War.
According to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in
2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72
bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people on earth,
in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq,
Pakistan.
Every Tuesday — reported the New York Times — he
personally selected those who would be murdered by
mostly hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings,
funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those
attempting to collect the body parts festooning the
“terrorist target”. A leading Republican senator, Lindsey
Graham, estimated, approvingly, that Obama’s drones
killed 4,700 people.
“Sometimes you hit innocent people and I
hate that,” he said, but we’ve taken out
some very senior members of Al Qaeda.”
Like the fascism of the 1930s, big lies are delivered with
the precision of a metronome: thanks to an omnipresent
media whose description now fits that of the Nuremberg
prosecutor:
“Before each major aggression, with some
few exceptions based on expediency, they
initiated a press campaign calculated to
weaken their victims and to prepare the
German people psychologically … In the
propaganda system … it was the daily
press and the radio that were the most
important weapons.
Take the catastrophe in Libya. In 2011, Obama said
Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi was planning
“genocide” against his own people.
“We knew… that if we waited one more
day, Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte,
could suffer a massacre that would have
reverberated across the region and stained
the conscience of the world.”
This was the known lie of Islamist militias facing defeat by
Libyan government forces. It became the media story; and
Nato – led by Obama and Hillary Clinton – launched 9,700
“strike sorties” against Libya, of which more than a third
were aimed at civilian targets. Uranium warheads were
used; the cities of Misurata and Sirte were carpet-bombed.
The Red Cross identified mass graves, and Unicef reported
that “most [of the children killed] were under the age of
ten”.
Under Obama, the US has extended secret “special forces”
operations to 138 countries, or 70 per cent of the world’s
population. The first African-American president launched
what amounted to a full-scale invasion of Africa.
Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late 19th
century, the US African Command (Africom) has built a
network of supplicants among collaborative African
regimes eager for American bribes and armaments.
Africom’s “soldier to soldier” doctrine embeds US officers
at every level of command from general to warrant officer.
Only pith helmets are missing.
It is as if Africa’s proud history of liberation, from Patrice
Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, is consigned to oblivion by
a new master’s black colonial elite whose “historic
mission”, warned Frantz Fanon half a century ago, is the
promotion of “a capitalism rampant though camouflaged”.
It was Obama who, in 2011, announced what became
known as the “pivot to Asia”, in which almost two-thirds
of US naval forces would be transferred to the Asia-Pacific
to “confront China”, in the words of his Defence Secretary.
There was no threat from China; the entire enterprise was
unnecessary. It was an extreme provocation to keep the
Pentagon and its demented brass happy.
In 2014, the Obama’s administration oversaw and paid for
a fascist-led coup in Ukraine against the democratically-
elected government, threatening Russia in the western
borderland through Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, with a
loss of 27 million lives. It was Obama who placed missiles
in Eastern Europe aimed at Russia, and it was the winner
of the Nobel Peace Prize who increased spending on
nuclear warheads to a level higher than that of any
administration since the cold war — having promised, in
an emotional speech in Prague, to “help rid the world of
nuclear weapons”.
Obama, the constitutional lawyer, prosecuted more
whistleblowers than any other president in history, even
though the US constitution protects them. He declared
Chelsea Manning guilty before the end of a trial that was a
travesty. He has refused to pardon Manning who has
suffered years of inhumane treatment which the UN says
amounts to torture. He has pursued an entirely bogus case
against Julian Assange. He promised to close the
Guantanamo concentration camp and didn’t.
269
Following the public relations disaster of George W. Bush,
Obama, the smooth operator from Chicago via Harvard,
was enlisted to restore what he calls “leadership”
throughout the world. The Nobel Prize committee’s
decision was part of this: the kind of cloying reverse
racism that beatified the man for no reason other than he
was attractive to liberal sensibilities and, of course,
American power, if not to the children he kills in
impoverished, mostly Muslim countries.
This is the Call of Obama. It is not unlike a dog whistle:
inaudible to most, irresistible to the besotted and
boneheaded, especially “liberal brains pickled in the
formaldehyde of identity politics,” as Luciana Bohne put
it.
“When Obama walks into a room,” gushed
George Clooney, “you want to follow him
somewhere, anywhere.”
William I. Robinson, professor at the University of
California, and one of an uncontaminated group of
American strategic thinkers who have retained their
independence during the years of intellectual dog-
whistling since 9/11, wrote this last week:
“President Barack Obama … may have
done more than anyone to assure [Donald]
Trump’s victory. While Trump’s election
has triggered a rapid expansion of fascist
currents in US civil society, a fascist
outcome for the political system is far from
inevitable …. But that fight back requires
clarity as to how we got to such a
dangerous precipice. The seeds of 21st
century fascism were planted, fertilized and
watered by the Obama administration and
the politically bankrupt liberal elite.”
Robinson points out that
“whether in its 20th or its emerging 21st
century variants, fascism is, above all, a
response to deep structural crises of
capitalism, such as that of the 1930s and
the one that began with the financial
meltdown in 2008 …. There is a near-
straight line here from Obama to Trump …
The liberal elite’s refusal to challenge the
rapaciousness of transnational capital and
its brand of identity politics served to
eclipse the language of the working and
popular classes … pushing white workers
into an ‘identity’ of white nationalism and
helping the neo-fascists to organise them”..
The seedbed is Obama’s Weimar Republic,
a landscape of endemic poverty, militarised
police and barbaric prisons: the
 consequence of a “market” extremism
which, under his presidency, prompted the
transfer of $14 trillion in public money to
criminal enterprises in Wall Street.
Perhaps his greatest “legacy” is the co-option and
disorientation of any real opposition. Bernie Sanders’
specious “revolution” does not apply. Propaganda is his
triumph.
The lies about Russia — in whose elections the US has
openly intervened — have made the world’s most self-
important journalists laughing stocks. In the country with
constitutionally the freest press in the world, free
journalism now exists only in its honourable exceptions.
The obsession with Trump is a cover for many of those
calling themselves “left/liberal”, as if to claim political
.
270
decency. They are not “left”, neither are they especially
“liberal”. Much of America’s aggression towards the rest
of humanity has come from so-called liberal Democratic
administrations — such as Obama’s. America’s political
spectrum extends from the mythical centre to the lunar
right. The “left” are homeless renegades Martha Gellhorn
described as “a rare and wholly admirable fraternity”. She
excluded those who confuse politics with a fixation on
their navels.
While they “heal” and “move forward”, will the Writers
Resist campaigners and other anti-Trumpists reflect upon
this? More to the point: when will a genuine movement of
opposition arise? Angry, eloquent, all-for-one-and-one-for
all. Until real politics return to people’s lives, the enemy is
not Trump, it is ourselves.
 Report: Obama Administration Targeting
Journalists And Trump Operatives For Murder
Evidence Of Lethal Attacks Soon To Be Released
By Staff Writer -
01.17.2017 @1:48 AM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — In a series of cryptic social media

posts, Infowars Alex Jones has revealed that he will be
releasing bombshell news about violence directed towards
journalists and Trump operatives by the outgoing Obama
administration.

Saying that this could be the biggest story they have ever
covered, Jones released the following Tweet and
accompanying video about the shocking news.

While corporate media operatives and trolls throughout the

“Alex Jones delivers critical information and
reveals he will be breaking bombshell news
tomorrow about violence directed at
journalists by the Obama administration.”
.
internet are sure to attempt to cast doubt on this story, one
can safely assume that Jones wouldn’t put something out
like this if he didn’t have the evidence, especially
considering how closely the corporate media is watching
Infowars every move.
Stay tuned as Intellihub will obviously be covering this
breaking news as it is released. One can only hope that
something doesn’t happen to stop this information from
coming out.

271
 Four Reasons Trump Will Quit
By David Macaray
January 17, 2017
As startling and unprecedented as it may be, there’s a good
chance Donald Trump won’t finish out one term as
president. Yes, Richard Nixon resigned from office, so
technically, there was a “precedent,” but Nixon’s case was
different. Nixon resigned in disgrace to avoid being
impeached—to avoid being exposed as the Machiavellian
felon and borderline neurotic he was. Trump won’t face
impeachment. He’ll just quit.
Here are four reasons:
1. The job will simply prove to be too much of a grind.
Even priding himself on being an accomplished
delegator, the amount of work required of a sitting
president—much of it tedious and enervating—will
overwhelm him. He can delegate all he likes, but he’s
still going to be president when he wakes up in the
morning, and the demands of the job are going to put
the zap on his head. They will crush him.
The fact that Trump himself has said he was “surprised” to
have won (not nearly as surprised as the rest of us, Donald)
indicates that running for president was, for him, just one
more splashy opportunity to assert his ego and bask in the
limelight. As for hard-boiled political commitment, there
was never the barest trace of it.
People will argue that Ronald Reagan, who served two full
terms, was a notorious, often distracted, delegator, and
that’s true. But Reagan was not only governor of
California, he was a seasoned political animal with a
consistent and well-oiled three-pronged mantra:
deregulation, low taxes, anti-communism. Trump has no
such mantra, and no bedrock ideology to sustain him. Go
back and look at what Trump has said. He’s been all over
the map.
.
272
Once he settles into the job, and the novelty and luster
wears off, he will not only grow restless and bored, he will
realize that being president isn’t what he thought it was.
Being U.S. president is not so much like being Emperor as
is it like being Head Bureaucrat. And one thing Trump
ain’t is a bureaucrat.
2. The economy will tank and he will get blamed. To
paraphrase Alan Greenspan, circa 2007, the stock
market is “irrationally high.” The Dow-Jones is now
close to 20,000. Let us not forget that when Obama
took office it was less than 6,600. Cycles being cycles,
the market will fall, fortunes will be lost, new religions
will be formed, and Trump, rightly or wrongly, will get
blamed. And we already know how thin-skinned he is.
3. The media have a prodigious memory and are
vindictive bastards. They will ravage him. After all the
shoot-from-the-hip insults and nasty, juvenile remarks
Trump leveled at the media during the campaign, there
will be a veritable shit-storm of payback. These people
don’t forget.
As gutless and co-opted by the Establishment as the MSM
is, even presidents who are somewhat liked and respected
occasionally get nipped up. And once the honeymoon is
over, Trump will realize that he is neither liked nor
respected. As a consequence he will remain squarely in the
media’s crosshairs. It will be open season, a feeding
frenzy.
4. He’s a quitter. Look at his history. Trump is a real
estate tycoon, a mogul, an opportunist who buys when
it’s low and sells when it’s high. Yet, even adhering to
that practice, Trump has filed for bankruptcy protection
four times and walked away from numerous ventures.
He has no staying power and no interest in the long
haul. He will quit. Mike Pence will become president.
And how weird will that be?
 Perhaps Proof of Election Fraud?
Trump Inaugurated with Historically Low Approval
Would He Be More Lovable With A
Pork Chop Around His Neck?
By Press TV
January 17, 2017
US President-elect Donald Trump waves toward the media after
meeting Martin Luther King III at Trump Tower in New York City
on January 16, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
Editorial note: “Elected” with the lowest
percentage in history, losing the
popular vote by nearly 3 million, he is
still way ahead of the Bush 12%
number. Obama leaves office with a
58% approval rating, 18 points ahead of
Trump.
US President-elect Donald Trump will
begin his term in office on Friday with
an approval rating of just 40 percent, the
lowest of any recent president,
according to a new poll. The 6% “drop”
is a nice way of trying to explain that
millions of votes were stolen, just like
the polls predicted.
Just days before their inauguration, Trump’s approval
rating has dropped 6 points since Election Day on
November 8, making it lower than that of the last three US
presidents, a CNN/ORC Poll released on Tuesday shows.
From The Hill:
President-elect Donald Trump will be one
of the most unpopular presidents to enter
office, several new polls have found.
In an ABC News/Washington Post poll out Tuesday
morning, 40 percent of Americans approve of how Trump
273
handled his transition. In 2009, 80 percent of Americans
approved of Barack Obama’s transition.
Former presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and
George H.W. Bush had similar ratings, with 72 percent, 81
percent and 82 percent approval, respectively, as
presidents-elect.
The ABC/Washington Post poll found that 54 percent of
Americans view Trump unfavorably. The unfavorable
ratings of former Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan,
George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Obama ranged from 9
to 20 percent when they entered office. The new poll
echoes similar ones produced from CNN and Gallup.
A CNN/ORC poll also released Tuesday also found Trump
had a 40 percent approval rating — a historically low
number for a president-elect.
A Gallup poll released over the weekend found similar
numbers, with Trump’s favorables historically low.
Trump’s approval rating is 44 points below
that of outgoing President Barack Obama,
who had an 84 percent approval rating
when he took office in 2009.
Former US presidents Bill Clinton and
George W. Bush had a 67 percent and 61
percent approval rating respectively when
they took office.
About 53 percent of Americans say
Trump’s statements and actions since he
was elected on November 8 have made
them less confident in his ability to handle
presidential duties.
The incoming president dismissed the survey’s results on
Tuesday.
“The same people who did the phony
election polls, and were so wrong, are now
 doing approval rating polls. They are rigged
just like before,” Trump tweeted.
Americans’ impressions of Trump have worsened across
three measures since he was elected, the poll found.
Disapproval of his handling of the presidential transition
has increased seven points to 52 percent, the percentage
who think he will do a good job as president has decreased
five points, and the share saying they have lost confidence
in Trump’s ability to be president climbed 10 points.
A Gallup poll released earlier this month found that less
than half of Americans were confident that Trump can
274
handle major presidential responsibilities, including
dealing with challenging foreign policy matters such as an
international crisis or using military force.
Trump was one of the most unpopular candidates ever
nominated for president, according to opinion polls. His
Democratic opponent in the 2016 presidential election
race, Hillary Clinton, also had high unfavorable ratings.
Although Trump defied political experts as well as some
historical election patterns in winning the presidency, it
appears likely that he will begin his administration with far
less support from the American people than other recent
presidents have.
 Video Exposes Anti-Trump Group Plans To
Shut Down DC Bridges And Highways
With "Clusterfuck Blockades"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 17, 2017 2:56 PM

Yesterday we noted Part I of a new Project Veritas
undercover series that exposed the efforts of several
protest groups to disrupt the Trump inauguration by
deploying butyric acid (aka "stink bombs") at the National
Press Club during the Deploraball event scheduled for
January 19th.
Part II of that series was just released
and exposes further plotting by a group
know as "DisruptJ20" to completely
paralyze various modes of
transportation on inauguration day.
"So, we figured out this, the trains pull
up...one person is going to lock one end of
a chain to an edge, and on the other end of
the chain the end of the car, so on and so
forth. Done."
"It takes 15 seconds and everyone can
leave and literally it can't go anywhere
at that point, it's anchored. And you can
use a really thin chain, you don't need a
heavy chain...that would require like a bolt
cutter to under, basically to shut down that
line."

Among other things, the protesters in the video plot to shut With that, here is the full video from Project Veritas:
down surface traffic with

"checkpoint blockades" and "a series of

clusterfuck blockades" intended to shut
down "all the major ingress points in the
city."

"So simultaneous to the checkpoint blockades in the

morning, we are also doing

a series of clusterfuck blockades, where

we are going to try to blockade all the
major ingress points in the city."
"Which include, they can include shutting
down major bridges and highway
access points as well as shutting down
metro rail. So to do that we are going to
try to break into several teams kind of like
the checkpoints."
"So fears in doing that, we don't think
these are going to be necessarily
arrestable actions but there is a
possibility you could be; so keep that in
mind if you want to participate."
***
For those who missed it, here is our post regarding Part 1
from yesterday:
In the latest undercover video from Project Veritas,
investigators uncovered a group of protesters known as the
DC Anti-fascist Coalition plotting to disrupt President-
Elect Donald Trump’s inauguration by deploying butyric
acid (aka "stink bombs") at the National Press Club during
the Deploraball event scheduled for January 19th.

Disruption efforts apparently also include plans to shut In a dose of irony, the planning meeting
down rail lines by attaching chains to metro cars... for the attack was held at Comet Ping
Pong, the DC pizza restaurant that recently
gained infamy as the location of the
"We have a plan for how to shut down a
Pizzagate controversy.
metro..."

275
Apparently "Plan A" of the disaffected agitators was to set usually a piece of like fusible metal or a
off "stink bombs" in the ventilation systems of the building piece of glass with liquid in it that will blow"
hosting the "Deploraball."
"And the added benefit, everybody is
going to walk outside in the freezing
"I was thinking of things that ruin, that cold."
would ruin the evening, ruin their outfits or
otherwise make it impossible to continue Because of the nature of the threats, Project Veritas notes
with their plans. Make sure they get that they notified the FBI, Secret Service and DC Metro
nothing accomplished." Police of the content of this video prior to its release.
"Yeah, if you had...a pint of butyric acid,
I don't care how big the building is, it's With that, here is the full video:
closing...And this stuff is very efficient,
it's very very smelly, lasts a long time a
little of it goes a long way."
"If you get it into the HVAC system it will
get into the whole building."

Meanwhile, "Plan B" entailed an effort to simultaneously

set off the sprinkler systems throughout the building which
had the

"added benefit" of sending party goers

"outside in the freezing cold."
"I'm trying to think through how to get all
the sprinklers to go off at once. There's
.

276
 Secret Service Taking Extraordinary Measures To Protect
Against "Unprecedented" Inauguration Threats
by Tyler Durden
Jan 17, 2017 1:20 PM
Just yesterday we noted the latest undercover video from
Project Veritas which revealed anarchist groups plotting to
disrupt the Trump inauguration by dumping butyric acid
into the heating and ventilation systems of buildings
expected to be used for this weekend's festivities. Add to
that, the fact that ~750,000 protesters are expected to
descend upon Washington D.C. with a stated intent to
"paralyze the city" and Obama's "extremely unusual"
move to fire the D.C. National Guard Chief just days
before the inauguration ceremonies and you have a recipe
for disaster.
Describing the situation to Washington Top News, Secret
Service Director Joseph Clancy acknowledged that the
threat level at this ingratiation is "different" from
previous ones saying that, after a contentious 2016
campaign cycle,
people "are willing to do things they
may not have been willing to do in the
past."
“I think people today are willing to do
things they may not have been willing to
do in the past,” Clancy said.
He cited several episodes that took place
during the campaign, “where people
jumped over those bike racks or
security zones into our buffer. In the
past, it was very rare for somebody to
do that. Today, in this past campaign,
people were willing to do it.”
277
Maness says, however, “From what we have seen the
security measures and first-responder preparations have
been excellent for the event.”
In addition to D.C. being a perpetual high-profile target for
terrorist attacks, Clancy notes that, as confirmed by the
latest Project Veritas video,
the bigger threat is likely coming from
anarchist groups who will stop at
nothing to disrupt the inauguration
ceremonies in some way.
“We know that this (Washington region)
is a high-profile [terror] target.
It’s been attacked in the past, historically,” said Paul
Abbate, the FBI’s executive assistant director for the
Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch.
"The bigger threat is probably coming
from anti-government/anarchist groups
who are likely to try and disrupt the
inauguration, and may engage in
violence to do so,” said Mike Maness,
director of Trapwire.
Other FBI officials have confirmed that Washington is
mentioned on a daily basis as a potential target in
intercepted terrorist chatter and communications.
“We, from the FBI standpoint, are ready to
counter terrorist attacks and are working
with our partners in building out the
intelligence picture,” Abbate said.
On Friday, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson
spoke to reporters about preparations for the inauguration.
“We know of no specific credible threat
directed toward the inauguration,” he said.
But in the same statement, he
acknowledged, “that is only part of the
story.”
Other parts of that story include the unknown, according to
Clancy, and that is causing him to lose sleep.
 “Every night I wake up and I wonder do
we have some issue covered,” Clancy
said.
Of course, extraordinary threats call for extraordinary
preparations and countermeasures as this year's
inauguration will include large perimeters that will be
heavily fortified with "trucks, dumpsters, buses and the
like" to defend against terrorist attacks similar to those
that struck Nice, France and Berlin, Germany in 2016 as
rogue trucks plowed through masses of people.
Soft perimeters will permit access to only those vehicles
belonging to people who live or work in the area. Hard
vehicle perimeters will be off limits to all but official
vehicles.
This year in particular, Johnson said,
278
“The hard vehicle perimeter will be
heavily fortified by trucks, dumpsters,
buses and the like, given the current
threat environment.”
That environment he spoke of is created by terror groups’
constant online prodding of sympathizers to conduct not
just spectacular attacks like those in Paris, Brussels,
Turkey, Germany and Orlando in the past year, but single-
casualty attacks as well.
Another key part of Secret Service attack prevention
planning started months ago, and is designed to cover large
and small incidents.
And, if all else fails, we're sure the "Bikers For Trump"
will be available on short order to form a "wall of meat" to
protect the President-elect.
 What to Expect from the Trump Administration:
A Protectionist and Pro-Corporate America Government
By Prof Rodrigue Tremblay
Global Research, January 17, 2017
“Fascism should more appropriately be
called Corporatism because it is a merger
of state and corporate power.” Benito
Mussolini (1883-1945), Italian politician,
journalist, and leader of the National Fascist Party. (As
quoted in Mats Erik Olshammar’s book Dragon Flame,
2008, p. 253)
“The dangerous American fascist is the
man who wants to do in the United States
in an American way what [Adolf] Hitler did
in Germany in a Prussian way. The
American fascist would prefer not to use
violence. His method is to poison the
channels of public information. — With a
fascist the problem is never how best to
present the truth to the public but how best
to use the news to deceive the public into
giving the fascist and his group more
money or more power.” Henry A. Wallace
(1888-1965),
American politician, 33rd Vice President of the United
States, 1941-1945, (in ‘The Danger of American
Fascism’, The New York Times, April 9, 1944, and in
‘Democracy Reborn’, 1944, p. 259)
“Demagogue: one who preaches doctrines
he knows to be untrue to men he knows to
be idiots.” H. L. Mencken (1880-1956)
American journalist and essayist, (in ‘Minority Report’,
1956, p. 207)
279
“With all that Congress has to work on, do
they really have to make the weakening of
the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as
unfair as it may be, their number one act
and priority. Focus on tax reform,
healthcare and so many other things of far
greater importance! “ Donald Trump
(1946- ),
on January 3, 2017, after House Republicans voted 119-74
to place the independent Office of Congressional Ethics
under the control of the House of Representatives. (N.B.:
They reversed their position after Mr. Trump’s criticism)
* * *
Presidential candidate Donald Trump raised the hopes of
many Americans when he criticized his political opponents
for their close ties to Wall Street and, above all, when he
promised to ‘drain the swamp’ in Washington D.C. He
may still fulfill that last promise, but as the quote above
indicates, he may have to fight House Republicans on that
central issue. Candidate Trump also raised the hopes of
many when he promised to end costly wars abroad and to
concentrate rather on preventing jobs from moving
offshore, on creating more middle-class jobs at home and
on preventing the American middle class from shrinking
any further.
No doubt the cabinet he has assembled is filled with well-
intentioned and capable persons. And, it is only normal
that a new president surrounds himself with loyal
supporters and people with whom he feels comfortable
ideologically and personally. And, let us be fair. Not many
progressives or academics supported Donald Trump during
the November 2016 election. However, on paper at least, it
can be said that Trump’s cabinet looks to be more to the
right than himself.
Nevertheless, the Trump administration will probably be
the most pro-business administration and the wealthiest in
American history. This is somewhat ironical because,
during the November 2016 presidential election, Mr.
Trump prevailed in poor, economically challenged cities,
while Ms. Clinton drew her support in more affluent cities
and counties.
The overall image that emerges, indeed, is a U.S.
government fit for an inward-looking industrial-financial-
military complex, made up, to a large extent, of
billionaires and of Wall Street financiers (Ross, Mnuchin,
Cohn, Clayton, etc.), of known warmongers (Mattis,
Flynn, etc.), and of known Zionists (Bolton, Friedman,
Greenblatt, etc.). However, this is a corporate government
that is hostile to large American international corporations
(GM, Coca-Cola, etc.), hostile to economic regulations and
to economic globalization in general.
There is a clear possibility, considering its composition,
that the pro-domestic-business Trump administration could
herald a new Robber Baron era of laissez faire capitalism
within the United States, somewhat similar to the one that
led, in reaction, to the passage of the Sherman Anti-Trust
Act in 1890. If so, history could repeat itself. Only time
will tell.
A genuine desire for radical change
There is no doubt that the 2016 U.S presidential election
revealed a desire for radical change on the part of a large
segment of the U.S. electorate, discontent and dissatisfied
with the way things are these days with the political
gridlock in Washington D.C. and with the relatively stalled
U.S. economy.
The economic policies espoused by the U.S. establishment
over the last quarter century have resulted in the rich
getting richer and the poor getting poorer, with the result
also that economic and social mobility for average
American families has declined and is now much lower
than in other advanced economies. This has been an
important cause for disillusion and anger among many
Americans who feel that the economic system is rigged
against them and in favor of the very rich.
Can President Trump succeed in bringing about
fundamental, even revolutionary change, especially in
reducing political corruption and in bringing more
economic and social justice for American workers, or will
he be engulfed in the morass of politics as usual in
Washington D.C.? Here again, only time will tell.
On the other hand, President Trump can hardly pretend to
have received an overwhelming political mandate for
change from the electorate, considering that he got
2,865,000 fewer votes than Democratic presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton. The last time that this happened
was in 2000 when Republican presidential candidate
George W. Bush received about 540,000 fewer votes than
his adversary Al Gore, but he was nevertheless elected
president by the U.S. Electoral College.
Moreover, by professing to want to cumulate his
responsibilities as U.S. President and those as a de facto
head of his own international real-estate company, and by
280
refusing to park his private business interests in a blind
trust, thus creating a permanent conflict of interests,
President Donald Trump is sending the wrong signal. And
transferring the daily executive responsibilities to his sons
does not pass the smell test.
During the 2016 campaign, candidate Trump clearly said
that
“[I]f I become president, I couldn’t care less
about my company. It’s peanuts… I
wouldn’t ever be involved because I
wouldn’t care about anything but our
country, anything.”
Public interest, indeed, is not the same as private personal
interests, and it is difficult to believe that Mr. Trump has
had a change of mind on such an important issue. People
should expect their politicians not to use their positions,
directly or indirectly, to enrich themselves. Period.
Let us consider how a strong pro-business Trump
administration could have some beneficial results in the
short run, but could also be very disruptive in the long run,
both for the United States and for the world.
1. Donald Trump’s authoritarian
approach may endanger American
democracy
American democracy may be seriously tested in the
coming months and years, as a President Donald Trump
administration begins implementing a fundamental shift in
American domestic and foreign policies. This could be
either for better or for worse.
That is because the new U.S. president, Donald J. Trump
(1946- ), is a businessman, in fact, an international real-
estate mogul who owns hotels, golf courses and casinos in
many countries, who has no government experience of his
own and who has run his family business with total
control. Moreover, businessman Donald Trump has tended
to trust his business instincts more than his head in making
important decisions, and he is also inclined to act in a self-
serving manner. He is a person who, temperamentally and
on occasion, does not hesitate to denigrate, humiliate and
bully people around to get his way. Indeed, his modus
operandi in his dealings with people seems to rely on
intimidation and on bluffing in order to exact concessions
on their part and to obtain some benefits for himself.
Some fifteen years ago, another businessman was elected
to the American presidency, i.e. Texan oilman George W.
Bush (1946- ), who also boasted that he made decisions
with his guts. That did not turned out too well for the
United States, as Bush II ended up being one of the worse
presidents the U.S. ever had.
 Presidential candidate Trump even said
publicly that George W. Bush was “the
worst President in history”,
and said he should have been impeached because he lied
about the presence of weapons of mass destruction
(WMDs) in Iraq with the clear intention of tricking the
American public into supporting a war against that
country.
It’s true that George W. Bush did not hide his intentions of
governing in an authoritarian way when he declared,
“I’m the commander in chief, see, I don’t
need to explain, I do not need to explain
why I say things. That’s the interesting part
about being president. Maybe somebody
needs to explain to me why they say
something, but I don’t feel like I owe
anybody an explanation”,
as this was documented in Bob Woodward’s book ‘Bush
at War’, 2002. Will President Trump take such a statement
as a precedent, or will he be more open to outside ideas to
improve things?
2. Fears of trade wars and disruptive
protectionism looming ahead
President Donald Trump has made no qualms about being
a trade protectionist. His spokespersons have repeatedly
said that the new administration is a protectionist one. It is
one thing to adopt ad hoc protectionist measures; it is
another matter to adopt an overall protectionist policy that
could lead to widespread economic disintegration, and
trigger costly economic dislocations, uncertainty and,
possibly, risk a worldwide economic depression.
This could also mean bringing forward destructive laws,
similar to the protectionist 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff,
which imposed high tariffs and other barriers to the
importation of foreign-produced goods.
There are, however, international trade laws that prevent
one country from singling out another country for punitive
tariffs or trade impediments without cause. If the Trump
administration were to violate those laws, other national
governments could be expected to retaliate, and this could
wreak havoc with international trade and world prosperity.
In the 1930s, protectionist “beggar-thy-neighbor policies”
raised unemployment and intensified the Great Depression.
Nobody can be absolutely sure that this would not be
repeated if similar policies were pursued today.
In fact, it is far from certain that increasing duties on
imports would be beneficial to the U.S. economy. Such
impediments to trade would push up the prices of goods in
the United States, thus making it harder for workers on low
281
salaries to buy them. American exports could also suffer
when other countries retaliate and raise tariffs on goods
produced in the U.S. and shipped from the U.S., creating
unemployment in many American exporting industries,
notably in the agricultural sector.
With American protectionist policies raising prices, the
Fed could then be expected to raise interest rates faster,
thus slowing down interest-rate sensitive industries such as
the construction industry, while higher U.S. interest rates
could appreciate the U.S. dollar vis-à-vis other currencies,
resulting in a further decline of U.S. exports abroad and
negating the expected objective of protectionism.
Indeed, President Trump and his advisers could learn some
lessons in economics in 2017-2018, when they see an
extraordinary strong U.S. dollar, boosted by their expected
protectionist policies, destroying American exports and
possibly also tanking the stock market. Large American
international companies could be expected to suffer the
most, and those who work for them or own stocks in them
would also suffer, both from the artificially strong dollar
and from retaliations from other countries.
Therefore, it is far from a sure thing that the jobs created in
American import-substituting industries would not be
counterbalanced by the loss of jobs in American export
industries. The result could be net negative for the U.S.
economy as a whole. Protectionist policies could also
lower American overall productivity, in the long run,
because of a reduction in economies of scale caused by a
contraction of U.S. export industries and in their
investments.
3. The North American economy could
be disturbed and political relations
could possibly turn sour
The United States needs allies and friends in the world,
and there is no better friend of the United States than
neighboring Canada. In 1988, the Reagan administration
reached a free trade agreement (FTA) with Canada, a
country with a similar free market economy and standard
of living, which has benefited both countries. In 1994, the
Clinton administration enlarged the Canada-US free trade
Agreement to include Mexico, the latter country having a
standard of living that is less than one third the American
standard of living. That was NAFTA.
The Trump administration intends not only to cancel the
already signed trade agreement (TPP) with Asiatic
countries and to end negotiations for establishing a
transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP), but
President Trump would also like to reopen and renegotiate
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Such isolationist moves are bound to create unnecessary
economic and political frictions besides creating a lot of
uncertainty. For neighboring Canada and Mexico, this has
the potential of disrupting their economies. Let us hope
that cooler heads will prevail and that the baby of
economic cooperation won’t be thrown out with the
bathwater of trade irritants.
Mr. Trump and his advisers should know that trade is a
two-way street and that a country pays for its imports with
its exports. They must know, therefore, that Canada is the
U.S.’s number one trading partner and that there are 35
U.S. states (New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, New
Hampshire, Wisconsin, Alaska, etc.) for whom the number
one export country for their goods and services is Canada.
In 2015, for the record, the United States exported goods
and services to Canada for a total value of $337.3 billion,
and imported from Canada goods and services valued at
$325.4 billion, for a net U.S. surplus equal to $11.9 billion.
In 2015, Canada was the United States’ number-one goods
export market. Moreover, American companies had direct
investments worth $386.1 billion in Canada, in 2014, while
Canadian companies had direct investments in the United
States worth $261.2 billion in the same year.
The Trump administration should know that, in 2015,
nearly 9 million American jobs depended on U.S. trade
and investment with Canada. Therefore, Canada is not a
country posing a trade problem to the United States and
Mr. Trump and other U.S. politicians should know it. The
Canadian and American economies are well integrated and
are complementary to each other.
The motto should be: If it’s not broken, don’t fix it.
4. Drastic U.S domestic policy changes
may hurt the poor and enrich the
already super rich, thus exasperating
inequality, if they are not replaced by
better policies
Presidential candidate Trump promised to lower U.S.
corporate tax on corporate profits from 35% to 15%. Even
though the real corporate tax rate paid by most American
corporations is much lower than the posted rate, being
closer to 12%, such a drastic drop in the official corporate
282
taxation rate is bound to make the rich richer. In fact, the
post-November-8 stock market rally is largely a reflection
of that promise to lower the corporate tax rate.
Similarly, candidate Donald Trump has promised to
deregulate U.S. mega banks, which were at the center of
the 2008 subprime loan financial crisis, and especially end
the Dodd-Frank rules, which require banks to hold more
capital as an insurance against catastrophic failures. Here
we go again: politicians pandering to those who can give
them money, while risking the stability of the entire
financial system and the jobs of millions of Americans. If
this comes to pass, the next financial crisis may be called
the ‘Trump financial crisis’.
On the social side, Trump’s promise to dismantle the
Obamacare program, without advancing a credible
replacement, may end up hurting the poorest Americans.
Indeed, what would happen to the some 20 million
Americans who previously had been left out of secured
access to health services through employer-sponsored
insurance? In politics, it is usually easier to dismantle
something than to build something of value.
5. U.S. economic and political clashes
with China may be very disruptive to
world peace
The Chinese government is a communist and authoritarian
government, even though it has moved, since 1978, under
the leadership of Deng Xiaoping (1904-1997), to a more
decentralized market-oriented socialist economy. The
biggest economic step for China came on December 11,
2001, when it officially abandoned protectionism as a
policy and joined the World Trade Organization (WTO),
thus integrating the world economy.
It is true that the U.S. has a trade deficit with China. In
2015, for example, American exports to China amounted
to $116.1 billion while the U.S. imported goods from
China valued at $483.2 billion, leaving a trade deficit equal
to $367.1 billion. That is party due to the fact that many
U.S. companies have invested in China, and they imported
goods from China. This is partly due to the fact that the
U.S. government has a large fiscal deficit, and some of it
translates into an external trade deficit. Of course, it is true
that China is also a large low-wage country, and its
products are very price-competitive.
An important point of contention between the U.S. and
China has been the value of the latter country’s currency,
the Yuan. Critics have argued that the Chinese currency
has been kept artificially undervalued, thus reducing the
price of Chinese goods on international markets and
stimulating its exports. The Chinese government has
argued that the Yuan exchange rate reflects its own
economic conditions, i.e. low labor costs, and that the
value of the Yuan, in fact, has been appreciating over the
last twenty years and that the country runs trade deficits
with other countries.
Such an issue should be settled by a panel of international
monetary experts, and should not be a pretext for a trade
war.
6. The Trump administration, by siding
even more openly with Israel than
previous American administrations, may
make matters worse in the Middle East
During the electoral campaign, candidate Trump said, on
many occasions, that he wanted to reduce congressional
term limits, fight political corruption and stop the influence
of the tens of thousands of lobbies in Washington D.C.
Ironically, on Monday evening, March 21, 2016, Mr.
Trump appeared in front of the most powerful foreign
policy lobby in the U.S., the pro-Israel American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), an umbrella lobbying
organization that boasts of having access to a vast pool of
political donors. He then delivered the most demagogic
and the most pandering speech that a politician can make
to get votes and money from a lobbying organization. So
much so that, the next day, AIPAC president Lillian
Pinkus had to apologize for some of Mr. Trump’s remarks.
During his speech, Mr. Trump went on to please his
listeners by declaring that he was prepared to turn a blind
eye to the issue of illegal Israeli settlements that the Israeli
government has allowed on the occupied lands Palestinians
want for their future state. He went even further and said
that he would veto “100 percent”, as U.S. President, any
attempt by the United Nations to impose a Palestinian state
on Israel, provoking cheers and applause.
Mr. Trump went on promising to “move the
American embassy to the eternal capital of
the Jewish people, Jerusalem”,
a shift of policy that would be denounced by most other
countries, even if this was met with cheers and applause by
the AIPAC delegates.
283
Soon after his AIPAC speech, not surprisingly, prominent
American billionaires, such as casino magnate Sheldon
Adelson, casino owner Phil Ruffin, activist investor Carl
Icahn, etc. became prominent donors to the Trump
campaign. So much for draining the swamp!
7. President Trump has made incendiary
and false statements about Iran
Candidate Trump, in his pandering speech to AIPAC,
promised to “dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran”. He
even repeated the lie that the U.S. government “gave”
$150 billion to Iran. In fact, that sum was Iran’s own funds
that had been frozen in American financial institutions
because of unilateral sanctions. This was not a “gift”. It
was restitution.
It was said of the George W. Bush administration that it
made “its own reality”. Would the Donald Trump
administration be on the same track in creating “its own
facts”?
Let us remind ourselves what the Iran Deal was.
It was an agreement reached by six countries (France,
Germany, the U.K., Russia, China, and the United States),
which removed the possibility that Iran develop nuclear
weapons in the foreseeable future. Would President Trump
insult all these countries and opt to go to war with Iran to
please his rich donors? I hope not. That would be crazy. I
doubt very much that this is the type of “change” that
American voters want, i.e. more neocon-inspired wars of
aggression abroad.
8. The Trump administration is expected
to show little respect for the
environment
Scott Pruitt, the new Head of the Environmental Protection
Agency (APA) is openly a denier of climate science and of
clean air legislation. As Attorney General of the state of
Oklahoma, he opposed the Environmental Protection
Agency (APA) over its Clean Power Plan. He can be
expected to encourage highly polluting coal burning.
Indeed, it is one thing to be a climate change skeptic, and
another to be pro- air pollution. There are economic
activities that generate pollution costs to the entire
population and cause diseases. Such social external costs
are not included in the market prices of private goods.
They should be.
People have only to look at some Chinese cities, like
Beijing, to see how destructive air pollution can be, when
people have to wear masks when going outside their
homes. In particular, burning coal on a large scale creates
smog and is a recipe to generate deadly air pollution. That
is what China is learning the hard way, as this results in
thousands of premature deaths.

Numerous members of the Trump administration are

climate change deniers and are opposed to climate
scientists’ recommendations. For one, Rick Perry, the
former Republican Governor of Texas and President
Trump’s choice for Energy Secretary, denies that climate
change is happening or that it is caused by greenhouse gas
emissions. It is undeniable, for example, that the year 2016
was the warmest ever and that the trend toward a warming
climate will continue as CO2 emissions keep increasing.
On the environment, therefore, the Trump administration
can be expected to be anti-intellectualism and anti-science.
9. After statements made to that effect,
the Trump administration is expected to
pack the U.S. Supreme Court with far-
right judges
Presidential candidate Donald Trump is on record as
willing to pack the U.S. Supreme Court with far right pro-
life judges. Mr. Trump is known to have been, for most of
his life, pro-choice, although he has expressed a personal
dislike for abortion, except for three exceptions, i.e. when
the health of a woman is in danger, in case of rape, and in
case of incest. In 1999, for example, he told NBC ‘Meet
The Press,
“I’m very pro-choice.”
However, during the last presidential campaign, on August
1, 2016, Mr. Trump went further and said that
“I will pick great Supreme Court Justices”,
…similar in philosophy to the late Justice Antonin Scalia
(1936-2016), one of the most far right judges ever to have
sat on the U.S. Supreme Court.
The most contentious proposals of the Trump
administration will undoubtedly be the type of judges it
nominates for confirmation by the U.S. Senate.
10. On the positive side, the Trump
administration is bound to end the
Washington Neocons’ New Cold War
with Russia
In international affairs, the main positive contribution that
the Trump administration could bring to the world would
be to put an end to the artificially created New Cold War
with Russia that Washington Neocons have initiated from
scratch in recent years, within the Obama administration.
Indeed, President Donald Trump has been most clear in
expressing his desire to adopt a more peaceful approach to
Russia and President Vladimir Putin. In many areas, he
even considers Russia to be an ally of the U.S., not the
dangerous adversary that the Neocon establishment in
Washington D.C. has tried to portray it to be in recent
years. If this New Détente with Russia can be achieved, it
would be a major accomplishment for world peace and for
American prosperity.
Conclusion
One of the weak characteristics of democracy is that, in
practice, it pushes politicians to pander to special interests
for votes and money, at the expense of public interest and
the common good.
From what we know so far, the Trump administration is
geared to be the most pro-domestic-business, the most
economically isolationist and protectionist, and the most
pro-special interests American administration, ever. This
could spell trouble for the United States and for the world
if it truly acts in that direction.
As an economist, indeed, I fear that an inexperienced
Trump administration would go too far, too fast in
dislocating American international corporations and in
raising domestic tariffs on imports. The end-result could be
some disastrous trade wars that would create stagflation
and that would hurt both the American and foreign
national economies.
This is an administration that should heed a few words of
caution, and it should refrain from being an extremist
administration.

Stay tuned.
.

284
 A Deep State Orchestrated
Storm Awaits Trump In Office
By Stephen Lendman
1-17-2017
After the most unprecedented denigration of a presidential
candidate in US history, the worst may be yet to come,
beginning Friday with Trump’s inauguration as America’s
45th president.
Pro-Hillary dark forces call him illegitimate. Media
scoundrels beat on him relentlessly. Whatever he does or
says or doesn’t do or doesn’t say is criticized.
Nothing in memory resembles what’s gone on since mid-
2015. The problem isn’t Trump. It’s America’s debauched
system - fantasy democracy, not the real thing.
Leaders like Obama govern by the script handed them,
doing the bidding of powerful dark forces running the
country. Trump’s anti-establishment sounding rhetoric
scares them, especially talk of getting along with Vladimir
Putin - anathema in neocon infested Washington.
Days before his inauguration, a disgraceful Huffington
Post article contemptuously headlined “Hillary Clinton Is
The Legitimate President,” saying:
“The evidence is clear. Hillary Clinton is the
rightful president-elect, and courts must
use the broad discretionary powers with
which they are vested to enjoin an
illegitimate president from taking office.”
Shocking stuff, here in America, not in some faraway
tinpot dictatorship. The evidence is very clear. Trump won
convincingly. Hillary lost whining, whimpering, simpering
and groaning, believing it was her turn as a woman to
claim the nation’s highest office.
Her defeat let humanity dodge a possible nuclear bullet.
Huffpo saying US courts should intervene on her behalf is
seditious or treasonous - despicably promoting coup d’etat
action to prevent an elected US president from taking
office.
Huffpo:
.
285
“Every major intelligence agency in the
country has reached the same conclusion:
Russian hackers engaged in cyber attacks
with the express purpose of helping Donald
Trump win the election.”
“They operated at the directive of Russian
President Vladimir Putin, apparently
motivated by his hatred for Clinton.”
Fact: This is what passes for
mainstream news and information -
utter rubbish, knowing, or should know,
not a shred of evidence suggests
Russian US election hacking.
The whole dirty story was fabricated - a disgraceful
scheme to delegitimize Trump and prevent normalizing
ties with Russia.
Promoting the notion of Hillary as America’s legitimate
president is scandalous, stuff commonplace in banana
republics or despotic monarchies.
It’ll likely continue after Trump enters office - instead of
focusing solely on how he governs, judging him by what
he does or doesn’t do for good or ill.
A rough ride awaits him. Fidel Castro’s advice to Hugo
Chavez before his death applies to Trump, saying
“(t)ake care what you eat, what they give
you to eat. They inject you with I don’t
know what.”
Watch your back is also sound advice, including carefully
vetting security personnel assigned for protection.
Threatening dark forces make survival Trump’s top
priority.
 Russia Expects To Talk With Donald Trump
About Nuclear, Hypersonic And Space Weapons
Mr. Trump Said He Will Consider Reviewing US Sanctions On Russia If
Moscow Is Prepared To Reduce Its Stockpile Of Nuclear Weapons
Samuel Osborne @Samuelosborne93
Tuesday 17 January 2017
Vladimir Putin's Russia is keen to talk to Donald Trump about
nuclear weapons Getty
Russia expects to have a dialogue with the Trump
administration on nuclear weapons, the Russian Foreign
Minister has said.
Sergei Lavrov said the agenda for such negotiations should
also include new hypersonic weapons, a US missile shield
in Europe, space weapons and nuclear testing.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, Mr. Trump said he
will consider reviewing US sanctions on Russia if
President Vladimir Putin is prepared to reduce its stockpile
of nuclear weapons.
"For one thing, I think nuclear weapons
should be way down and reduced very
substantially, that’s part of it," he said.
"But Russia’s hurting very badly right now
because of sanctions, but I think something
can happen that a lot of people are gonna
benefit."
286
Dress rehearsal takes place ahead of Donald Trump's
inauguration
The Russian minister also commented on Mr. Trump's
statement suggesting he might consider lifting sanctions
against Russia if it is willing to make nuclear arms cuts.
Mr. Lavrov said he saw Mr. Trump's statement as an offer
to engage in nuclear arms control talks and help lay the
groundwork for them by reviewing the issue of US
sanctions against Russia.
He argued some commentators misinterpreted Mr. Trump's
remarks, saying he didn't see them as an offer to cut arms
in exchange for cancelling the sanctions.
Mr. Lavrov said Russia was ready to meet with Donald
Trump's administration to discuss these issues after the US
President-elect takes office.
He also described as a charlatan the former British spy
who wrote a dossier on Mr. Trump's alleged links to
Russia.
He said allegations of Russian cyber attacks are fabricated,
and suggested US intelligence agencies who tried to prove
the President-elect had links to Russia should be fired.
 CIA Director Slams Trump For Slamming CIA
Note To Readers: If The List Of Names And Phrases In This Article
Doesn’t Ring Any CIA Bells, A Refresher Course Is In Order…
By Jon Rappoport
January 17, 2017

In case you hadn’t noticed, uttering a politically incorrect The CIA is a criminal agency.
comment is now a bigger crime than decimating thousands
in a war. Is that clear enough?

You can bomb a country into submission and chaos, Long ago, the CIA criminally stepped outside its mandate,
leaving dead and wounded from shore to shore, and that in order to shape world events it had no business
might be counted as a “mistake in judgment”; but using a participating in. Is that clear enough?
few loaded words—or in this case—criticizing an
intelligence agency—is an earthshaking event that could
In that regard, do these names and phrases mean anything
make the planet spin off-course…
to you, Mr. Brennan?
Case in point:
 The Gehlen Org.
 Operation Gladio.
The lame-duck outgoing CIA director, John Brennan,  MKULTRA.
lectured Donald Trump Sunday, on FOX. NBC News  Operation CHAOS.
reports:  Nugan Hand Bank.
 BCCI Bank.
“Trump has repeatedly called for a better  Golden Triangle. Asian heroin.
relationship between the U.S. and Putin’s  Air America.
government. He suggested in an interview  Central American cocaine. Mena.
with the Wall Street Journal on Friday that  The Contras.
he’d consider easing the latest sanctions  Henry Luce. William Paley. Arthur Sulzberger.
on Russia.”  Operation Mockingbird.
“’I think he has to be mindful that he does  Overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh (Iran).
not have a full appreciation and  Overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz (Guatemala).
understanding of what the implications are  Murder of Patrice Lumumba (Congo).
of going down that road’, Brennan said.”  Bay of Pigs.
 JFK.
“The CIA chief roundly denounced Trump’s  Diem assassination.
approach to Russia and other national  Rafael Trujillo assassination.
security threats, suggesting the president-  Sukarno. Suharto.
elect has much to understand before he  East Timor genocide.
can make informed decisions on such  Military coup—Greece.
matters.”  Allende.
“’The world is watching now what Trump  Gulf of Tonkin.
says and listening very carefully. If he  Operation Phoenix.
doesn’t have confidence in the [US]  Laos bombing.
intelligence community, what signal does  Sihanouk.
that send to our partners and allies as well  The Khmer Rouge.
as our adversaries?’ Brennan said.”  El Salvador death squads.

Signal? On and on it goes…

Mr. Brennan, the signal was sent to our partners, allies, See Mark Zepezauer’s book. The CIA’s Greatest Hits.
and adversaries decades ago:

287
Overthrow, assassination, regime change, mind control,
covert war, mass destruction, drugs, financial theft, co-
opting the press…
Do you recall any of this, Mr. Brennan?
Trump (or any president) is sending a negative signal
about the US intelligence community to our friends, allies,
and adversaries? Are you kidding, Mr. Brennan? Are you
telling some kind of inside joke?
People all over the world have known, for decades, what
the CIA has been doing.

And you’re worried about the effect of a little tweak from

Trump?

The murderous history of the CIA has been a cat out of the
bag for a long, long time.

Professional amnesia may be your friend, Mr. Brennan, but

it doesn’t convince the victims and targets of your
agency’s actions since 1948.
.

288
 Lavrov Blasts Voice Of America’s
Report On Alleged Russian Hacker Attacks As ‘Lie’
"This Nonsense Is Transmitted By A Radio Service Financed By The US
Department Of State," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Said
Russian Politics & Diplomacy
January 17, 14:46
MOSCOW, January 17. /TASS/. Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov castigated a Voice of America radio report as a lie
that Russian officials did not comment on Washington’s
accusations of Moscow’s alleged role in the hacker attacks
against US political organizations.
"This nonsense is transmitted by a radio
service financed by the US Department of
State," Lavrov said during his annual press
conference on Tuesday.
Both Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, Foreign Ministry’s
official spokeswoman Maria Zakharova and representatives of
foreign affairs committees made their comments by January 9
when the allegations by the Voice of America were made, he
said.
.
Lavrov Dismisses Allegations Of Cyberattacks
On Western Countries As 'Cooked-Up Evidence'
Moscow Is Not Going To Prove Anything On The Matter,
According To Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
Russian Politics & Diplomacy
January 17, 13:24
MOSCOW, January 17. /TASS/. The allegations of Russian
cyberattacks on Western countries is "cooked-up evidence",
Moscow is not going to prove anything on the matter, Russia’s
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said during his annual press
conference.
"As for the cyber security allegations, I am not
going to prove to you that this is not true. The
ball is in your court to prove it," Lavrov said,
answering a question.
"We have seen attempts at cooking up evidence, from which the
US and the UK are now trying to distance themselves, trying to
discredit the new US administration" Lavrov said.
The top diplomat noted that Moscow believes international
cybersecurity should concern everyone. "Russia has always stood
for establishing a sustainable partnership to restore order in the
289
"Probably, someone wanted to forget that
(Edward) Snowden said three years ago how
the US National Security Agency hacked into Al
Jazeera, the Aeroflot tickets booking system,
the domestic conference communication at the
UN and wiretapped on (French President
Francois) Hollande, (German Chancellor
Angela) Merkel and the EU leadership," he said.
"Remind your readers that these episodes that
became known and are confirmed by facts were
unnoticed by those who now cry based on
nonsense and lie that Russia poses a cyber
threat," Lavrov stressed.
fight against cybercrime," Lavrov stated. According to him, those
who refuse to cooperate on universal rules to restore order in
cyberspace, "groundlessly accuse Russia of taking control of
almost the entire world through their actions.
The foreign minister also said that he had recently read about the
creation of a special group within the CIA, made up of
representatives from the FBI, the NSA, the US Department of
Treasury, the Justice Department, the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence. This group, according to Lavrov, was to
gather evidence of financial ties between US President-elect
Donald Trump and Russia.
"If the whole team of these respected agencies
has dug up only what they have trotted out
before the public, then they should obviously be
fired, because they are being paid for nothing,
they’re not worth a dime for what they’re doing,"
Lavrov said.
 New York Times Warns "Budget Cuts Are Coming", Will
Invest $5 Million To Cover Trump
By Tyler Durden
Jan 17, 2017 11:17 AM
On Tuesday, the New York Times unveiled its "2020
report", a self-assessment by the newspaper of its ongoing
operational progress, accompanied by a note by top editors
Dean Baquet and Joe Kahn, which also presents the
company's outlook on the future. Unlike previous years,
when The NYT was worried that it was falling behind its
digital competition like other liberal websites including
Vox, WaPo, and BuzzFeed, this time the evaluation was
more chipper, suggesting the NYT feels relatively good
about its prospects.
Based on the report, the NYT's stated goal to double its
digital revenue to $800 million by 2020 seems within
reach, after $500 million in 2016, and an trend line shows
that revenue from consumers has far outstripped ad dollars.
Additionally, the Times now counts more than 1.5 million
paying digital subscribers and more than 1m print
subscribers.
“We are, in the simplest terms, a
subscription-first business. We are not
trying to maximize clicks and sell low-
margin advertising against them. We are
not trying to win a pageviews arms race,”
the 2020 report said. “Our focus on
subscribers stems from a challenge
confronting us: the weakness in the
markets for print advertising and traditional
forms of digital-display advertising.”
And yet not all was good news, because in the report was a
warning that budget cuts are coming, a notice which
followed the newspaper's announcement several weeks ago
that it would rent out floors in its headquarters to other
companies to beef up its cash flow. To wit:
Some of these initiatives stem directly from
consultations with the 2020 group; others
result from the realities of the media
business in a period of rapid change.
Nothing can disguise the fact that the
continued shift from print to digital
demands a somewhat smaller and more
focused newsroom.
There will be budget cuts this year. We
will lay out the specifics in the coming
weeks and months. We cannot pretend to
be immune from financial pressures but
290
we view this moment as a necessary
repositioning of The Times’s newsroom,
not as a diminishment.
The jobs impacted will be mostly in the editing vertical:
We must move away from duplicative
and often low-value line editing.
It slows us down, costs too much, and discourages
experiments in storytelling. Backfielders, department
heads, News Desk editors and, yes, the masthead spend too
much time line editing and copy editing, moving around
words with little true impact on a story. Copy editors,
meanwhile, spend too much time editing and re-editing
stories that should be posted quickly.
Yet in an ironic twist, it appears that Trump will lead to
even more investing in the US, because the NYT
announced it would invest some $5 million to cover
Trump.
We are deeply committed to protecting our investment in
the original newsgathering and storytelling that make The
Times so indispensable in our readers’ lives. Our
journalists reported from the ground in more than 150
countries last year, often at great personal risk. Our
commitment to expert journalism will not waver. Instead
we will focus cuts on the multilayered editing and
production systems, a legacy of our newspaper traditions
that remains much bigger and more complex than at our
competitors.
To that end, you should know the company is investing
more than ever in accountability journalism.
As we explain later in this document,
the business side will provide us an
additional $5 million so we can produce
even more coverage of the incoming
Trump administration.
It adds that
"even in these difficult financial times for
our industry, the entire company has a
commitment to this story. It is not only our
 mission. It is vital to our business. Our
dominance on this story of a changing
America will ensure our position as the
essential news organization for years to
come." It is unclear what would happen to
this investment if Trump were to call out the
NYT out as the next source of "fake news."
The biggest change coming to the NYT however, is that it
is becoming more visual.
..The majority of our report is fairly traditional, and we
should broaden the ways we tell stories. The broader
mobile landscape is increasingly a visual one — think of
Snapchat, Instagram, YouTube — and we know that our
mobile audience wants Times journalism to incorporate
visuals even more fully into our work. This will make our
report better, but it will require significant focus.
.
291
The goal: to gain even more subscribers.
"by focusing on subscribers, The Times will
also maintain a stronger advertising
business than many other publications.
Advertisers crave engagement: readers
who linger on content and who return
repeatedly. Thanks to the strength and
innovation of our journalism — not just
major investigative work and dispatches
from around the world but also interactive
graphics, virtual reality and Emmy-winning
videos that redefine storytelling — The
Times attracts an audience that advertisers
want to reach."
And now, after all that good news, if only the "2020
Report" also had an explanation why the company is
vacating 8 floors in its HQ to generate "significant rental
revenue."
 Putin Accuses Outgoing US Administration
Of Attempting To Undermine Trump’s Legitimacy
Vladimir Putin And Barack Obama Thanked Each Other For Their Joint
Work At Their Latest Bilateral Meeting In Peru In November And
There Are No Other Meetings In Plans, According To The
Kremlin Russian Politics & Diplomacy
January 17, 16:35
MOSCOW, January 17. /TASS/. Russian President
Vladimir Putin has accused the outgoing US
administration of trying to undermine the legitimacy of US
President-elect Donald Trump.
"What we see is the continuing sharp
domestic political struggle although the
presidential elections are over and they
ended with a convincing victory of Mr.
Trump," Putin told reporters after talks with
Moldovan President Igor Dodon.
This struggle has several goals, Putin said, adding that the
first of them is to "undermine legitimacy of the US
president-elect."
"Whether the people who have been doing
that really wish it or not, they do cause
harm to the interests of the United States
.
292
and that harm is enormous," Putin said.
"One has the impression that upon gaining
the required experience they may go as far
as staging Maidan type of protests in
Washington in a bid to prevent Trump from
taking office."
"Another aim they pursue is to bind the
president-elect by hand and foot to not let
him act on home and foreign policy election
pledges," Putin said.
"Look, how can anything be done to
improve the Russian-US relations if such
hoax as the interference of some hackers
in the election campaign emerges?" Putin
said.
He noted that hackers did not invent anything but they
only got access to the materials of the US Democratic
Party’s campaign headquarters.
Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama thanked
each other for their joint work at their latest bilateral
meeting in Peru in November and there are no other
meetings in plans, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry
Peskov has added.
"They have thanked each other for their
joint work, it was their concluding meeting
[on the sidelines of the APEC summit in
Peru] and they have bid farewells during
that bilateral meeting," Peskov said. "There
are no other contacts in plans.
 Outgoing CIA Director Hypes
Nonexistent Russian Threat
By Stephen Lendman
1-17-2017
America needs enemies to advance its imperial agenda.
None exist so they’re invented - a pretext for current wars,
future ones, color revolutions, old-fashioned coups and
assassinations.
It’s been the American way from the republic’s inception,
a culture of violence persisting at home and abroad since
the 18th century, far more dangerous with today’s super-
weapons able to kill us all.
Neocon lunatics infest Washington, Trump’s tenure
perhaps destined to be the most turbulent in US history
since the Civil War, how he’ll fare yet to be determined.
Dark forces far more powerful than the office of the
presidency confront him. If he diverges from longstanding
practice, especially geopolitically, he may not last a full
term, maybe not a full year.
Working with Russia cooperatively, instead of maintaining
adversarial relations, could seal his fate.
Interviewed on Fox News Sunday, January 15, host Chris
Wallace asked outgoing CIA director John Brennan if
disparaging comments by two former agency heads wasn’t
just cause for Trump to believe Langley is out to get him.
Former acting CIA director Mike Morell said
“(i)n the intelligence business, we would
say Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as
an unwitting agent of the Russian
Federation.”
Former agency head Michael Hayden called Trump a
“useful fool…manipulated by Moscow,
secretly held in contempt, but his blind
support is happily accepted and exploited.”
Brennan neither “defend(ed) or explain(ed)
what they said.”
Claiming the intelligence community will support Trump
depends entirely on how his agenda unfolds, especially his
policy toward Russia.
Hyping its nonexistent threat, Brennan
claimed Trump doesn’t have a full
appreciation of (its) capabilities, (its)
293
intentions, and actions (it’s) undertaking in
many parts of the world.”
Fact: Putin champions world peace and stability, abhors
war and violence, wants cooperative relations with all
nations, deplores America’s imperial madness.
Brennan:
Russia must “change (its) behavior, change
(its) actions.”
Translation:
Russia must play by Washington rules, be
subservient to its wishes or else.
Brennan opposes Trump and Putin working together
cooperatively. He’s against lifting sanctions, no matter
their illegality.
He lied about what’s happening in Ukraine, in Syria, in
“the cyber realm.” Trump needs to step back from
“absolving Russia of various actions” it never undertook,
he said.
No “Russian aggression” exists in Ukraine,
Syria or anywhere else. US wars of
aggression rage in multiple theaters,
responsible for millions of casualties
Brennan ignored.
He recited a laundry list of nonexistent threats, ones
Washington uses as pretexts for raping and destroying one
country after another.
US national security hasn’t been
threatened since WW II. Brennan lied
claiming otherwise.
Asked to name his greatest
accomplishments and regrets, he
shamelessly expressed pride in being part
of an administration involved in
“advanc(ing) the interests of peace and
stability,” along with related issues.
Obama’s disgraceful record speaks for itself - the most
ruthless regime in US history, the most lawless, the most
contemptuous of humanity at home and abroad.
As for regrets, Brennan named Syria, shamelessly claiming
his “heart…bleeds over what happened” there - ignoring
US naked aggression against a sovereign independent
country threatening no one, the CIA under his direction
playing a major role.
294
Brennan is an unindicted war criminal,
unaccountable for Nuremberg-level
crimes of war and against humanity.
.
 Trump As Lightning Rod (Not Just For Disaffected
Progressives, But For Panicked Insiders)
Submitted By Charles Hugh-Smith Via Oftwominds Blog
Jan 17, 2017 11:00 AM
The Eastern Establishment fears and loathes Outsiders,
and seeks to destroy them, usually via the mainstream
media.
Political agnostics who are skeptical
about Big Government "solutions," left
or right, view the current hullabaloo
about the Trump presidency with some
detachment.
What's remarkable to us is the extremism, not just of those
bitter about Clinton's loss, but by insiders who are
threatened by the possibility Trump may upset their insider
skims and scams.
As an opening observation, I don't recall bitter Nixon
supporters issuing death threats to performers at John
Kennedy's inauguration in 1961--and the 1960 election
was extremely close.
I also don't recall bitter Gore supporters issuing death
threats to performers at G.W. Bush's inauguration in 2001-
-even though the 2000 election came down to a few
hundred votes in Florida.
Trump is a lightning rod for a spectrum of people and
organizations. Let's see if we can separate the spectrum
into socio-political groups.
In times of turmoil, identifying a
bogeyman/woman as the cause of the
295
turmoil is a classic mechanism for
shirking responsibility and agency.
This is the psychological source of witch-hunts (it's all the
witches' fault!), scapegoating, show trials, and so on: it
isn't our fault things are falling apart, or the fault of our
institutions--it's ther bogeyman/woman's fault.
This transference/projection concentrates the blame and
responsibility on The Other--a scapegoated group, or even
better, one individual or a small group. Those making the
accusation reckon pointing the finger at some target lets
them off the hook: I am blameless, it's all his/her fault.
Trump is tailor-made for the part of Bogeyman--ditto the
Russians. Decades of films depicting the heroic Americans
besting the low-down dirty Commies seem to have seeped
into the American Id: when in doubt, blame the Russians.
If they are temporarily unavailable for scapegoating, then
blame an Asian bogeyman.
For Progressives, symbolism is more
important than substance.
Never mind that the incomes, wealth and opportunities of
the bottom 95% have steadily eroded in the eight years of
the Obama presidency, or that an American neocon-
neoliberal foreign policy was running amok globally. To
Progressives steeped in the mythology of political
correctness,
the symbolism of the speech acts being
uttered mattered far more than the
substance or the consequences.
President Obama did not just promise hope and change--he
was a legal-eagle master of delivering the symbolic speech
acts that Progressives longed to hear, because they
confirmed the world-view of legalisms, "rights," and all
the other high points of the mythology of political
correctness.
In other words, we don't actually have to threaten the status
quo by changing anything, all we have to do is utter the
correct phrases, and the erosion of civil liberties,
opportunity and wealth will all magically vanish in the
warm and fuzzy phraseology of political correctness.
 No wonder Trump is like a fingernail on
a chalkboard to progressives lulled into
somnambulance by eight years of
symbolic speech acts.
Politically correct speech acts are out the window, and this
refusal to wear the robes of correct mythology is deeply
upsetting to those seeking the reassurances of symbolic
speech acts.
Even more interesting is the reaction of
the Eastern Establishment--you know,
Washington, D.C., Yale, Harvard, the entire
Deep State of Eastern Establishment
cronies.
In the long narrative of American
history, presidents are either Insiders or
Outsiders.
Insiders go the Right Schools, meet the Right People, work
in the Right Companies and serve in the Right Government
Agencies. Outsiders grew up in The Outside World, and
did not meet the Right People or work in the Right
Companies or serve in the Right Government Agencies.
Franklin Roosevelt was a classic insider, Harry Truman, a
classic outsider. John F. Kennedy was a classic insider,
Richard Nixon, a classic outsider. G.W. Bush and Al Gore
were both insiders. Jimmy Carter was a classic outsider.
The Clintons masterfully worked their way into the Insider
Circle, despite starting on the Outside.
President Obama also worked his way into the Insider
Circle via Harvard Law, etc.
Once you understand this narrative, you
realize the party affiliation of the
candidate is simply a matter of
convenience;
what really matters is their standing within the traditional
Eastern Establishment. Will they faithfully carry water for
the Establishment, i.e. be a loyal Insider, or do they pose a
threat to the power and wealth of the Insiders, i.e. an
Outsider?
The Eastern Establishment fears and
loathes Outsiders, and seeks to destroy
them, usually via the mainstream media.
.
296
That the corporate media targeted Nixon is well-known.
Though few discuss it now, it was equally true that the
corporate media ceaselessly bashed and ridiculed Jimmy
Carter, "peanut farmer," goofy grin, etc. After he was
safely out of office and couldn't threaten the Eastern
Establishment's power, skims and scams, Carter was
quickly rehabilitated.
Though his wealth and New York base
suggests Insider to many, Trump is a
classic outsider--someone the
Establishment fears and loathes
because he might diminish their power,
their skims and their scams.
The Establishment's skims and scams are rentier skims
and scams--wealth and income that is skimmed from the
productive elements of the economy by virtue of the
Establishment's power to impose the gatekeeper's toll on
virtually every aspect of American life.
The Establishment's fear and loathing is
laughably obvious.
Why else drum up the hysterical, absurd narrative that
Russia is responsible for Trump's election?
The entire media blitz was a transparent
attempt to discredit the results of American
democracy because the Insider
unexpectedly lost. Now the
Establishment--from academia to the
C.I.A.--is in full-blown panic, because all
their precious skims and scams are for the
first time in decades, at risk of being
throttled or reduced.
Trump isn't just a lightning rod for
delusional Progressives who were happy
to see their real-world fortunes erode away
as long as the Insiders in charge kept
muttering the desired symbolic speech
acts; he is also a lightning rod for Insiders
fearful that their Insider apple cart is
about to be upended, and they might
actually have to work for a living, or
actually compete in the real world--
something they know they are ill-
prepared to survive.
 Interior Nominee Zinke
Disputes Trump On Climate Change
Associated Press
Published January 17, 2017
Donald Trump's choice to head the Interior Department on
Tuesday rejected the president-elect's claim that climate
change is a hoax, saying it is indisputable that
environmental changes are affecting the world's
temperature and human activity is a major reason.
"I don't believe it's a hoax," Rep. Ryan
Zinke told the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee at his confirmation
hearing.
"The climate is changing. The debate is
what is that influence and what can we do,"
said the Montana Republican.
Trump has suggested in recent weeks he's keeping an open
mind on the issue and may reconsider a campaign pledge
to back away from a 2015 Paris agreement that calls for
global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
In contradicting Trump, Zinke cited Glacier National Park
in his home state as a prime example of the effects of
climate change, noting that glaciers there have receded in
his lifetime and even from one visit to the next.
Still, he told Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., that there is debate
about how much humans have influenced the climate.
Likely to win Senate confirmation, Zinke sketched out a
variety of purposes for the nation's vast federal lands, from
hiking, hunting, fishing and camping to harvesting timber
and mining for coal and other energy sources.
An admirer of President Theodore Roosevelt, Zinke said
management of federal lands should be done under a
"multiple-use" model set forth by Gifford Pinchot, a
longtime Roosevelt associate and the first chief of the U.S.
Forest Service.
Zinke also pledged to tackle an estimated $12 billion
backlog in maintenance and repair at national parks, saying
parks and other public lands should be a key part of
Trump's infrastructure improvement plan.
Zinke has said he would never sell, give away or transfer
public lands -- a crucial stance in his home state of
Montana and the rest of the West where access to hunting
and fishing is considered sacrosanct.
297
Zinke feels so strongly that he resigned as a delegate to the
Republican National Convention last summer because of
the GOP's position in favor of land transfers to state or
private groups. But Zinke's commitment to public lands
has come into question in recent weeks.
The Interior Department and other U.S. agencies control
almost a third of land in the West and even more of the
underground "mineral estate" that holds vast amounts of
coal, oil and natural gas.
Zinke's position on public lands came under fire after he
voted in favor of a measure from House Republicans that
would allow federal land transfers to be considered cost-
free and budget-neutral, making it easier for drilling and
development.
Zinke
"says he's against transfer of federal lands,
but there's a big gap between what he says
and what he does in that regard," said
Michael Brune,
executive director of the Sierra Club, the nation's oldest
and largest environmental group.
Zinke told senators Tuesday that he flatly opposes all sales
or transfer of federal lands.
Indeed, his support for public lands was a crucial reason
why Zinke was chosen by Trump. The president-elect and
son Donald Trump Jr. both oppose sale of federal lands.
The younger Trump, an avid hunter, has taken a keen
interest in Interior Department issues and played a key role
in Zinke's selection.
Zinke also reiterated his support for coal production on
federal lands as part of an all-of-the above energy strategy
Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, the top
Democrat on the energy panel, asked Zinke about
modernizing the federal coal program, saying it was
important "to make sure American taxpayers aren't short-
changed for the benefit of corporate interests
Zinke promised to review the coal program and said he it's coal, wind power or other energy sources.
thinks taxpayers "should always get fair value," whether
.

298
 Reagan And Trump:
American Nationalists
Submitted By Patrick Buchanan Via Buchanan.Org
Jan 17, 2017 2:20 PM
Since World War II, the two men who
have most terrified this city by winning
the presidency are Ronald Reagan and
Donald Trump.
And they have much in common.
Both came out of the popular culture, Reagan out of
Hollywood, Trump out of a successful reality TV show.
Both possessed the gifts of showmen — extraordinarily
valuable political assets in a television age that deals
cruelly with the uncharismatic.
Both became instruments of insurgencies out to
overthrow the establishment of the party whose
nomination they were seeking.
Reagan emerged as the champion of the postwar
conservatism that had captured the Republican Party with
Barry Goldwater’s nomination in 1964. His victory in
1980 came at the apogee of conservative power.
The populism that enabled Trump to crush 16 Republican
rivals and put him over the top in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
and Michigan had also arisen a decade and a half before —
in the 1990s.
A decisive advantage Reagan and Trump both enjoyed is
that in their decisive years, the establishments of both
parties were seen as having failed the nation.
Reagan was victorious after Russia invaded Afghanistan;
Americans were taken hostage in Tehran; and the U.S. had
endured 21 percent interest rates, 13 percent inflation, 7
percent unemployment and zero growth.
When Trump won, Americans had gone through years of
wage stagnation. Our industrial base had been hollowed
out. And we seemed unable to win or end a half-dozen
Middle East wars in which we had become ensnared.
What is the common denominator of
both the Reagan landslide of 1980 and
Trump’s victory?
Both candidates appealed to American
nationalism.
299
In the late 1970s, Reagan took the lead in the campaign to
save the Panama Canal.
“We bought it. We paid for it. It’s ours. And
we’re going to keep it,” thundered the
Gipper.
While he lost the fight for the Canal when the GOP
establishment in the Senate lined up behind Jimmy Carter,
the battle established Reagan as a leader who put his
country first.
Trump unapologetically seized upon the nationalist slogan
that was most detested by our globalist elites, “America
first!”
He would build a wall, secure the border, stop the
invasion. He would trash the rotten trade treaties
negotiated by transnational elites who had sold out our
sovereignty and sent our jobs to China.
He would demand that freeloading allies in Europe, the Far
East and the Persian Gulf pay their fair share of the cost of
their defense.
In the rhetoric of Reagan and Trump
there is a simplicity and a directness
that is familiar to, and appeals to, the
men and women out in Middle America,
to whom both directed their campaigns.
In his first press conference in January of 1981, Reagan
said of the Kremlin,
“They reserve unto themselves the right to
commit any crime, to lie, to cheat. … We
operate on a different set of standards.”
He called the Soviet Union an “evil empire” and the “focus
of evil in the modern world.”
The State Department was as wary of what Reagan might
say or do then as they are of what Trump might tweet now.
But while there are similarities between these outsiders
who captured their nominations and won the presidency by
defying and then defeating the establishments of both
political parties, the situations they confront are
dissimilar.
Reagan took office in a time of Cold War clarity.
Though there was sharp disagreement over how tough the
United States should be and what was needed for national
defense, there was no real question as to who our
adversaries were.
As had been true since the time of Harry Truman, the
world struggle was between communism and freedom, the
USSR and the West, the Warsaw Pact and the NATO
alliance.
There was a moral clarity then that no longer exists now.
Today, the Soviet Empire is gone, the Warsaw Pact is
gone, the Soviet Union is gone, and the Communist
movement is moribund.
NATO embraces three former republics of the USSR, and
we confront Moscow in places like Crimea and the
Donbass that no American of the Reagan era would have
regarded as a national interest of the United States.
.
300
We no longer agree on who our greatest
enemies are, or what the greatest
threats are.
Is it Vladimir Putin’s Russia? Is it Iran? Is it
China, which Secretary of State-designate
Rex Tillerson says must be made to vacate
the air, missile and naval bases it has built
on rocks and reefs in a South China Sea
that Beijing claims as its national territory?
Is it North Korea, now testing nuclear
weapons and ballistic missiles?
Beyond issues of war and peace, there are issues at home
— race, crime, policing, abortion, LGBT rights,
immigration (legal and illegal) and countless others on
which this multicultural, multiracial and multiethnic nation
is split two, three, many ways.
The existential question of the Trump
era might be framed thus: How long will
this divided democracy endure as one
nation and one people?
 Analyzing Mainstream
News Anti-Logic
By Jon Rappoport
January 17, 2017
Thousands of articles have been written about the so-called
Russian hack of the US election. The term “Russian hack”
suggests the Russkies actually found a way to subvert the
results of voting machines.
But of course, no convincing evidence has been presented
to support such a charge. In fact, when you drill down a
few inches below the surface, you find this charge instead:
Russia hacked into email accounts and scooped up Hillary,
DNC, and Podesta emails, and passed them to WikiLeaks,
who then published them.
No chain of evidence supporting this claim has been
presented to the public, either. But even assuming the
assertion is true, an important factor is intentionally being
ignored:
THE CONTENT OF THOSE LEAKED
EMAILS.
In other words, if making all this content publicly available
cost Hillary the election, and if no one is seriously
questioning the authenticity of the emails, then THE
TRUTH undermined Hillary. However, no major media
outlet is reporting the story from that angle.
After all, how would this headline look?
TRUE CONTENT OF LEAKED EMAILS
SINKS HILLARY CLINTON. Or this?
HILLARY COULDN’T REFUTE CONTENT
OF LEAKED EMAILS AND SO SHE LOST
THE ELECTION.
Those headlines would attract millions of clicks. Why
weren’t they printed? It’s reasonable to assume big news
outlets didn’t want readers to think about the story from
that perspective.
Why not? Why was the heavy emphasis put on the hacking
of the emails? To obscure the importance of their content:
for example, DNC collusion to obstruct and undermine the
campaign of Bernie Sanders.
“Let’s make the story all about WHO we
claim stole the emails, rather than WHAT
THE EMAILS CONTAINED.”
301
When a tape surfaced in which Trump spoke about women
who were eager to have sex with famous men, did major
media make the story all about who had the tape and who
released it to the press?
No.
Perhaps you remember this 2009 email-hack controversy.
Wikipedia sums it up:
“The Climatic Research Unit email
controversy (also known as “Climategate”)
began in November 2009 with the hacking
of a server at the Climatic Research Unit
(CRU) at the University of East Anglia
(UEA) by an external attacker, copying
thousands of emails and computer files, the
Climatic Research Unit documents, to
various internet locations several weeks
before the Copenhagen Summit on climate
change.”
One of the most revealing elements in the email
exchanges: an obvious attempt to sideline scientific critics
of global warming. But major media quickly began to
reframe the story. It was all about illegal hacking, and
investigations were launched to determine the criminal.
The contents of the emails were brushed off as
“proprietary work product” and “misleading” because
“context was missing.”
The case of Edward Snowden was somewhat different.
There the media felt compelled to expose the CONTENT
of the NSA documents Snowden stole. They also gave
considerable space to Snowden himself. To some degree,
this was a fait accompli, because The Guardian newspaper
was committed, from the beginning, to publishing NSA
documents and an analysis of their meaning—so other
media outlets followed suit.
Getting the picture?
Big news media decide whether to focus on the WHO or
the WHAT, in each case.
“Should we give primary coverage to the
leaker or what he leaked?”
But that is not a choice you are making. It’s a choice being
made for you.
Government agencies and spokespeople leak news to the
press all the time. In these instances, the press doesn’t turn
around and launch a probe aimed at exposing the WHO
and discovering WHY a particular tidbit was passed along
for publication. Newspapers and television news
departments simply run with the stories.
“Okay, Bob. Here’s a little gem for you. The
White House and the Congress are
cooperating on this one. In the next few
days, a piece of legislation is going to be
inserted into a current bill in the House. It’ll
establish a working group to combat ‘fake
news’ operations that confuse the public…”
Does Bob bite the hand that feeds him? Does he write a
story accusing the White House of trying to knock out
.
302
independent news competitors who contradict official
reality? Of course not. Bob plays along.
Sometimes, both the WHO and the WHAT are censored.
Such was the case with CDC whistleblower, William
Thompson, who confessed publicly, in August of 2014,
that he and colleagues at the CDC committed fraud in a
2004 study of the MMR vaccine and its possible
connection to autism. Thompson admitted the study was
cooked, to make it seem the vaccine didn’t increase the
risk of autism, when in fact it did. The mainstream press
put a chokehold on the story. Aside from scattered
references, and official denials, the story faded quickly.
The leaker and what he was leaking remained in the
shadows. Independent news outlets (such as this one) kept
the story percolating.
In summary, there is no logic in the mainstream approach
to leaks and leakers. These days, the WHO and WHAT
are decided on the basis of serving official interests and
agendas—and repressing the public interest.
 New ABC / Wapo Poll Shows Drop In Trump Favorability
Courtesy Of Aggressive "Oversamples"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 17, 2017 3:42 PM

In the month leading up to the election on November 8th,

we repeatedly demonstrated how the mainstream media Of course, as we've repeatedly pointed out, these sampling
polls from the likes of ABC/Washington Post, CNN and mixes couldn't be further from reality.
Reuters repeatedly manipulated their poll samples to
engineer their desired results, namely a large Hillary
Clinton lead (see "New Podesta Email Exposes Playbook
For Rigging Polls Through 'Oversamples'" and
"ABC/Wapo Effectively Admit To Poll Tampering As
Hillary's "Lead" Shrinks To 2-Points").

In fact, just 16 days prior to the election

an ABC/Wapo poll showed a 12-point
lead for Hillary, a result that obviously
turned out to be embarrassingly wrong
for the pollsters.
And while a quick 2 second review of the methodology of
But, proving they still got it, ABC/Washington Post and these polls immediately reveals their obvious bias, here are
CNN are out with a pair of polls on Trump's favorability some of the results.
this morning that sport some of the most egregious
"oversamples" we've seen. The ABC/Wapo poll showed an
8-point sampling margin for Democrats with only 23% of ABC latched on to the conclusion that
the results taken from Republicans... Trump is just being super mean to the
media...

...while the CNN poll showed a similar 8-

point advantage for Democrats with
only 24% of respondents identifying as
Republicans.
"A total of 1,000 adults were interviewed by
telephone nationwide by live interviewers
calling both landline and cell phones.
Among the entire sample, 32% described
themselves as Democrats, 24%
described themselves as Republicans,
and 44% described themselves as
independents or members of another
party.

303
 ...while his cabinet picks were apparently equally disliked
by ABC/Wapo's disaffected Hillary supporters.

Even though they found that the media is treating him

"fairly."

Meanwhile, ABC/WaPo found that President-elect Trump

is the least popular candidate to take the White House in
modern history, with a 40% approval rating...

In conclusion, this seemed to sum up today's polls

perfectly:

304
 Trump Vs. The CIA
Paul Craig Roberts
January 17, 2017
When I read Trump’s defenders, such as Daniel Lazare,
having to balance their defense with denunciations of
Trump, I think the CIA’s propaganda is working. In his
article, Lazare asks the rhetorical question,
“Is a military coup in the works?”
He then goes on to describe the CIA and presstitute coup
against Trump unfolding before our eyes.
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/01/14/the-scheme-to-
take-down-trump/
Having described the unprecedented frame-up of the
president-elect of the United States by the CIA and the
Western media, Lazare has to square himself with those
doing the frame-up:
“This is not to say that the so-called
President-elect’s legitimacy is not open to
question. . . . Trump is a rightwing
blowhard whose absurd babblings about
Saudi Arabia, Iran and Yemen reveal a
man who is dangerously ignorant about
how the world works.”
Note that Lazare goes beyond the CIA and the presstitutes
by elevating Trump from someone not sufficiently
suspicious of Vladimir Putin to “dangerously ignorant.” I
suppose Lazare means dangerously ignorant like Bill and
Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama. If this is
what Lazare means, why is Trump any less qualified to be
president than his three most recent predecessors and his
opponent in the election?
Of course, Lazare has no idea what he means. He is simply
afraid he will be called a “Trump deplorable,” and he stuck
in some denuciatory words to ward off his dismissal as just
another Russian agent.
At other times I conclude that the CIA is discrediting itself
with its fierce and transparently false attack on the
president elect. The attack on Trump from the CIA and its
media agents at the New York Times, Washington Post,
CNN, the network TV channels, the BBC, the Guardian,
and every other Western print and TV source with the
305
exception of Fox News, is based on no evidence
whatsoever. None of the US 16 intelligence agencies can
produce a tiny scrap of evidence. The evidence consists of
nothing but constant repetitions of blatant lies fed into the
presstitute media by the CIA .
We have witnessed this so many times before:
“Tonkin Gulf,” “Saddam Hussein’s weapons
of mass destruction,” “Iranian nukes,”
“Assad’s use of chemical weapons,”
“Russian invasion of Ukraine.”
General Smedley Butler, the most decorated Marine in the
history of the US military said that he and the US Marines
spent their lives defending the interests of the United Fruit
Company and some lousy investment of the banks in Latin
America. That’s all the attack on Trump is about. Trump is
saying that “America first” doesn’t mean a license for
America to rape and plunder other countries.
Normalized relations with Russia removes the orchestrated
“Russian threat” justification for the $1,000 billion
taxpayer dollars taken annually from ordinary Americans
and given to the military/security complex via the federal
budget.
Trump’s question about the relevance of NATO 25 years
after the collapse of NATO’s purpose—the Soviet
Union—threatens the power and position not only of the
US military/security complex but also of Washington’s
European vassals who live high in money and prestige as
Washington’s servants. All European governments consist
of Washington’s vassals. They are accustomed to
supporting Washington’s foreign policy, not having had a
policy of their own since World War II.
Trump is taking on a policy world long under the influence
of the CIA. Little wonder WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange and
a number of other clued-in people say that the CIA will
assassinate Trump if he cannot be brought into line with a
Western alliance organized for the power and profit of the
few.
So what is Trump to do?
There are various alternatives. Trump could fire CIA
director John Brennan, have the Attorney General indict
him for treason, have the FBI locate all participants in the
intelligence agencies and presstitute media who aided and
abetted the attempted frame-up of the president-elect of the
United States and put them all on trial. This would be the
best and surest way for Trump to clean out the snakepit
that is Washington, D.C. To call a snakepit a “swamp” is
to use an euphemism.
Another alternative is for Trump to make the obvious point
that despite the allegations of the CIA and the presstitutes,
any hacking that occurred was not the fault of Trump and
Russia, but the fault of the US intelligence agencies who
were too incompetent to prevent it. Trump’s trump
question to the CIA, NSA, FBI is:
So, you know the Russians hacked us and
you did not prevent it? If you repeat your
incompetence, I am going to fire everyone
of you incompetents.
The same goes for terror attacks. Trump should ask the
intelligence agencies:
“How were you so totally incompetent that
a handful of Saudi Arabians who could not
fly airplanes brought down three WTC
skyscrapers and destroyed part of the
Pentagon, humiliating the world’s sole
super-power in the eyes of the world?”
Trump should make the point that the huge amount of
money spent on security does not produce security. The
massive security budget cannot prevent hacking of an
American election and it cannot prevent humiliating
attacks on the SuperPower by a handful of Saudi Arabians
operating independently of any intelligence service.
.
306
Trump should raise the obvious question:
Has the Saudi’s oil trillions purchased the
CIA and the presstitutes so that the CIA
and the corrupt Western media now serve
foreign interests against the United States?
The story is being established that the
Saudis are responsible or 9/11 and nothing
is done about it. Instead the Saudis are
supplied with more weapons with which to
murder women and children in Yemen.
All of the CIA’s propaganda can be turned against the
agency. 9/11 was due to CIA failure, and to nothing else.
Putin’s theft of the US presidential election was due to
CIA failure, and to nothing else. All the bombings in
France, UK, and Germany are due to intelligence failings,
and to nothing else, as is the Boston Marathon bombing
and every other alleged “terror event.”
I mean, really, the CIA is a sitting duck for Trump. He has
every reason to abolish the agency that has traditionally
operated in behalf of narrow interests. In his book, The
Brothers, Stephen Kinzer documents the use of the CIA
and State Department in behalf of the clients of the Dulles
brothers’ law firm’s clients. The CIA serves no American
purpose, only the private purposes of the ruling elites, who
are the real deplorables who have used corrupt Western
governments to solidify all income and wealth in a few
greedy hands.
There is no reason for Trump to tolerate spurious charges
against him by the CIA. At best the CIA is incompetent. At
worst the agency is complicit in, or organizer of, terrorist
events.
 BBC’s Trump-Kremlin Documentary Is Like An ‘Austin
Powers’ Film, Says Galloway
Published Time: 17 Jan, 2017 17:27Edited Time: 18 Jan, 2017 13:27
The credibility of a BBC documentary about US President-
elect Donald Trump called ‘Trump: The Kremlin
Candidate?’ has been questioned by ex-MP George
Galloway.
The former Labour and Respect politician likened the
broadcast, and the whole furore over Russia’s alleged
influence on the US election and Trump, to an “Austin
Powers film.”
307
Speaking to RT, Galloway also questioned why the BBC
would commission such a prominent show when there was
no concrete evidence to back up any of the assertions.
The Panorama documentary was broadcast on Monday and
saw journalist John Sweeney travel to Russia, Ukraine, and
the US to investigate whether Moscow’s cyber-warriors
influenced the US election and whether it’s true the
Federal Security Service (Russian FSB) is blackmailing
Trump with compromising material.
The latter claim comes from a much-hyped dossier
compiled by ex-MI6 spy Christopher Steele.
In the broadcast, Sweeney also speculates that the only
thing worse than Trump getting along well with Putin is if
they don’t.
“As Shakespeare once put it, it was ‘much
ado about nothing.’ The thesis of the
problem was that it is really dangerous if
Trump and Putin get along well and it’s
 really dangerous if they fall out,” Galloway
said.
“It shows just how surreal this whole affair
has become. Not so much a James Bond
film as an Austin Powers film. Frankly,
much of the ruling elite in the US and in
Britain, across the road from me, across
the river, at MI6, they really are making
themselves look ridiculous.”
Galloway, a long-time critic of US foreign policy, went on
to question why the broadcast was made at all given the
scant proof.
In the documentary, former US Navy Intelligence officer
Malcolm Nance states that everything in the Steele dossier
“fits hand in glove with how Russian
intelligence works.”
.
308
“That doesn’t mean it’s true,” Sweeney
adds.
Galloway seizes on this.
“If it doesn’t mean it’s true and you have no
evidence it’s true, why are you making a
big flagship documentary program about
it?” he said.
“Isn’t it an essential of broadcasting
journalism that you have something to go
on? Not just a piece of paper written by a
superannuated spy from England who’s
neither in Moscow nor in New York in
Trump Towers, whose writing through
second, third hand sources.”
 Trump’s Cat Among European Pigeons
EU Citizens Are Fed Up With Governments
That Are In Hock To A Foreign Power – Washington.
By Finian Cunningham - SPUTNIK
January 17, 2017
EU’VE HAD IT’ Donald Trump’s candid interview with the
Sunday Times
Incoming US President Donald Trump
threw a cat among the European
pigeons this week after he said that the
EU was heading for breakup and that he
didn’t care much if that were to happen.
In interviews with British and German newspapers, Trump
said a whole lot more too. He described Britain’s decision
to split from the EU as a “great” move, and that more
countries would follow the Brexit; he called German
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door immigration policy
a “disaster”; and on the NATO military alliance, the new
president said it was “obsolete”.
Merkel Says EU’s Fate is in Its Own Hands After Trump’s Remark
on ‘Smart’ Brexit – SPUTNIK
The following day, EU leaders were huffing and puffing
with rage and exasperation that Trump should dare be so
disrespectful. “Trump’s NATO, EU comments spark fury,
fear across Europe,” reported the Washington Times.
309
Germany’s Merkel and French President Francois
Hollande told Trump to mind his own business. EU
foreign policy chief Federica Morgherini claimed that
European states followed their own independent course
and did not need Washington anyway. Former French
prime minister Manuel Valls, always prone to histrionics,
even went as far as decrying Trump for “declaring war
on Europe”.
The hilarious thing is that Trump’s
predecessor, Barack Obama, and the EU
leaders have been for months claiming
that Russian President Vladimir Putin is
the one who is secretly plotting the
breakup of the European bloc and the
transatlantic alliance.
But after all this rabid scaremongering against Russia, it is
an American president, Donald Trump, who is publicly
declaring that the days are numbered for the transatlantic
status quo.
Kremlin Agrees With Trump on Assessing NATO as ‘Obsolete’ Relic
– Kremlin – SPUTNIK
Russia did indeed welcome Trump’s comments
about NATO being “obsolete”. Kremlin spokesman
Dmitry Peskov said:
“NATO is truly a relic of the past… its entire
structure is dedicated to the idea
of confrontation; of course, it can hardly
be called a modern structure that meets
the ideas of stability, sustainable
development and security.”
Moscow also said that it welcomed the opportunity
to normalize relations with Washington as Trump has
indicated. He has intimated that he is prepared to lift
economic sanctions that Washington imposed on Russia
since 2014 over the Ukraine conflict.
Despite their pretentious bluster, the
truth is that European leaders of all
political shades have been absolute
lackeys to Washington for the
past several decades. Not one European
state has dared to stand up to American
foreign policy misconduct.
In reaction to Trump’s latest broadsides, European leaders
are piously claiming to be independent from Washington.
Nothing could be further from the truth about the current
and past crop of European politicians.
Trump’s Promise to Facilitate Brexit ‘an Element of His Anti-
German Game’- SPUTNIK
Germany’s deputy Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel hit back
at Trump’s savaging of Merkel’s “disastrous” immigration
policies. He said that the real cause of the refugee crisis
in Europe was America’s military interventions in the
Middle East and Central Asia. Well, yes, that is true. But if
Sigmar Gabriel knew that was the real cause, then why
hasn’t Germany – the most powerful EU member – stood
up to Washington to oppose its relentless warmongering.
The fact is that the EU has gone
along with each and every US-led war
around the world over the past 25 years.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya among others.
Look at Syria, for instance. The EU has
imposed economic sanctions on that
forsaken country, in line
with Washington’s agenda for regime
change, thus exacerbating the exodus
of refugees.
If the EU had some independent backbone, as it likes
to pretend, then it should have firmly opposed the US-led
covert intervention in Syria. But it didn’t. The EU is fully
complicit.
310
The pernicious role of Britain has to be acknowledged
here. No other member of the EU has been such an avid
cheerleader for NATO and American atlanticist sway
over European affairs. Britain has loyally followed the US
into foreign wars, thereby dragging Europe into such
follies. If Britain had not been a member of the EU,
perhaps the bloc might have had more critical foreign
policy, one that was more critical of Washington’s lawless
depredations.
Ironically now, Britain is leaving the EU
after 43 years of membership.
But it bequeaths a legacy of subservience to Washington
that all remaining EU members find themselves bound by.
Perhaps the clearest example
of European servility to US foreign
policy is its acquiescence
to Russophobia and the hostile
expansion of US-led military forces
along Russia’s borders.
European governments have colluded with Washington
to meddle in the affairs of Georgia and Ukraine and then
seek to cover up the tracks of conflict by blaming Russia
for the unrest. Moreover, the EU slavishly followed
Washington’s lead to slap economic sanctions on Russia.
Those sanctions have caused minimal disruption
to America’s economy, but they have wreaked havoc
on European farmers, workers and businesses.
The incumbent European governments are pathetic.
Special mention must be given to French President
Hollande, the most unpopular leader ever. To illustrate the
puppet status, recall the Mistral helicopter-ship deal worth
about $2 billion with Russia. Hollande axed the contract
and hence hundreds of French jobs because the Americans
instructed him to do so, allegedly to maintain a unified
sanctions policy on Moscow.
Europe is facing several key national
elections this year, in the Netherlands,
France and Germany. As with other EU
countries there is a popular revolt
against the status quo. The mainstream
media paint the opposition parties
as extremist and racist. The media also
claim that Russia is covertly subverting
European democracies. This is just
scapegoating. Closer to the truth is that
ordinary EU citizens are fed up with
governments that are in hock to a
foreign power – Washington.
The atlanticist “alliance” has been nothing but a
euphemism for Washington to dominate politically,
financially and militarily over Europe. To the point where
Europe has trashed its historic links and natural relations the interests of their citizens instead of Uncle Sam’s
with Russia. atlanticist designs.

Trump’s indifference towards European subservience and

the NATO project is a potentially promising new direction
to a more balanced international configuration, especially
with regard to restoring relations with Russia.

Trump Has ‘Tremendous Amount of Respect’ to Putin, Merkel –

Adviser – SPUTNIK

After decades of kowtowing to Washington, there is now a U.S. Asistant Secretary of State Department diplomat,
new US president who is snubbing the “loyal Europeans” Victoria Nuland’s telephone intercept on Ukraine – The
and showing disregard for atlanticism. Trump’s comment Guardian, UK.
that he trusts Vladimir Putin equally with Angela Merkel is
surely a sharp putdown to Europeans who have allowed his It may not work out, of course. Trump
predecessors to dictate disastrous policies for the EU. has plenty of enemies at home
among the Washington establishment
Under Trump, the US may well move who see atlanticist domination
to cancel its sanctions on Russia. What of Europe and antagonism
will European lackeys do then? Keep towards Russia as a cornerstone of US
their own futile anti-Russian sanctions global hegemonic ambitions.
that are wrecking their economies, or
sheepishly repeal the sanctions Nevertheless, Trump’s skepticism towards the EU and
because the Americans have done so? NATO is setting the cat among the European pigeons.
Because it is exposing them as impotent flunkies who have
But by then it will be too late for the EU. The European ruined their countries by prostrating themselves as pathetic
Union is already teetering on implosion because dependents on American patronage.
for decades its leaders had no courage or vision to serve
.

311
 Anonymous Warns Trump:
‘You Will Regret The Next 4 Years’
Published time: 17 Jan, 2017 13:37Edited time: 18 Jan, 2017 04:43

“You are implicated in some really heavy

sh*t,” read the warning. “Roy [Cohn] and
your daddy aren't here to protect you
anymore,” it continued, in an apparent
reference to his friendship with lawyer Roy
Cohn, who represented Trump during the
’70s when he was accused of violating the
Fair Housing Act.

Donald Trump has been threatened by Anonymous on

Twitter, with the hacktivist group accusing him of having
links to organized crime and told him he will

“regret the next 4 years.”

In a series of tweets sent from @YourAnonCentral, a

Twitter account associated with the group, to the president-
elect, Anonymous said:

“This isn't the 80's any longer, information

doesn't vanish, it is all out there. You are
going to regret the next 4 years."
The tweets from Anonymous came in response to a tweet
The group also claimed he has from Trump in which he attacked CIA Director John
Brennan, accusing him of being a “leaker of fake news.”
“financial and personal ties with Russian
mobsters, child traffickers, and money
launderers.”

312
Anonymous does not threaten to hack Trump directly, generate automated responses, telling him not to waste his
instead asking its followers to “Go get him.” money.

“We gave you the resources, use them,” it

tweeted.

The group previously attacked Trump before he became

Anonymous also implied in one tweet that it suspects
Trump of attempting to attack them with “bots,” which
.
the Republican party’s nominee, leaking information from
his phone, including voice mails and telephone numbers in
operation #OpWhiteRose.

313
 Trump To Ainsley Earhardt:
'I Don't Want Celebs At Inauguration,
I Want Theth People'
January 18 , 2017

"Many of the celebrities that said they are

not going...they were never invited," Trump
said. "I don't want the celebrities there. I
want the people there."

Ainsley Earhardt had a must-see sit-down with President-

elect Donald Trump, Wednesday on "Fox & Friends."

Earhardt interviewed Mr. Trump at Trump Tower just days

before his inauguration as the 45th President of the United
States.
When Earhardt asked what's the first thing Trump wants to
do upon entering the White House, he kept it simple:
"I wanna go to work."
On his use of Twitter, Trump said it's his only way to
counteract what he called the "dishonest press."
"I don't like tweeting. I have other things I
could be doing," Trump said. "But I get very
dishonest media."

He also stood by his campaign promise that he would build

The conversation then turned to Democratic members of
a wall to halt illegal immigration across the U.S.-Mexico
Congress, mainly Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who have
border.
announced they will be skipping the inauguration.

"We're going to build a wall; Mexico is

"He (Lewis) got caught in a very bad lie, so
going to reimburse us. ... In order to get the
let's see what happens. As far as other
people not going, that's OK because we wall started sooner than we can do the
deal, we have to do it this way," Trump
need seats so badly," Trump said.
said.
Trump also discussed celebrities that said they will not be
attending the inauguration.
314
 Trump then discussed his plans to enact a new affordable
health care system to replace Obamacare.

"Nobody is going to be dying on the streets

with a President Trump. We want to take
care of everybody," he said.

315
 Florida Man Charged With
Making Online Threat Against Trump
The Associated Press
January 18, 2017 11:58 AM

MIAMI - A South Florida man has been charged with
threatening to kill President-elect Donald Trump in a video
posted online.
A Miami Beach police report released Wednesday
identified the suspect as 51-year-old Dominic Puopolo. Jail
records show Puopolo is being held without bail on state
charges of threatening harm against a public servant. Court
records do not list a lawyer for him.
The police report says Puopolo on Monday posted a video
on his Twitter account stating that he would "be at the
review/inauguration and I will kill President Trump,
President-elect Trump" while in Washington.
The report says he was arrested a short time later at a
Miami Beach Subway restaurant and admitted to officers
he had posted the threatening video. Police say Puopolo
told them he is homeless.

316
 In An Epic Final Speech, Joe Biden Warns That The
Progressive Democratic World Order
Is At Risk Of Collapse
Jay Yarow | @Jyarow
January 18, 2017
Vice President Joe Biden delivered an epic final speech Wednesday to
the elites at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The gist of his speech was simple:
At a time of "uncertainty" we must double
down on the values that made Western
democracies great, and not allow the
"liberal world order" to be torn apart by
destructive forces.
Biden went after Russian President Vladimir Putin by
name, saying he is using "every tool" in his power to
whittle away the European project, and undermine
Western democracies. Biden accused Putin of wanting to
"roll back decades of progress."
Biden said Russia used "cyber aggression" to meddle in
the U.S. election, an assertion supported by 17 U.S.
intelligence agencies. He also warned that we will see
further interference from Russia in the future and said the
"purpose is clear" — that Putin wants to
see a "collapse of the international order."
.
317
"Simply put, Putin has a different vision of
the future," the vice president warned.
At the outset of his speech, Biden implored the media to
not hear his speech as a shot at President-elect Donald
Trump, who takes office on Friday. And, while what Biden
said applies broadly to leaders in Europe, as well as the
United States, there is no mistaking that his comments
were a rebuttal to Trump's friendly statements about the
Russian president.
At a time when Trump and his advisors are
talking about shaking up NATO, Biden
said, we must "support our NATO allies. An
attack on one is an attack on all. That can
never be placed in question."
Biden also warned that unlike Trump's call for building a
wall between the U.S. and Mexico, it's not the time to
build walls and live in fear.
Biden implored world leaders to work together to protect
democracy from encroachments by Russia, Iran and others.
Yet, Trump's world view is "America First," which runs
counter to Biden's view.
Biden didn't merely urge the world leaders at Davos to
maintain the status quo. He warned that the reason for the
pressure on the democratic order is the rise in income
inequality and the hollowing out of the middle class, as the
rich get richer and people in developing nations see their
lives gradually improve.
He said the top 1 percent is not paying their fair share, and
as a result we are seeing social instability increase.
"We need to tap into the big heartedness,"
Biden said. "This is a moment to lead
boldly."
 Trump The Disruptor
The Only Uncertainty That Trump’s America First Foreign Policy
Imposes Is Uncertainty As To Where The War Profiteers’
Next Meal Ticket Is Coming From.
By Justin Raimondo
January 18, 2017
Trump with Gove and Kai Diekmann from the German newspaper
Bild
If the New York Times is to be believed –
a problematic proposition – then it looks
as if Trump Derangement Syndrome has
gone international. In a front page
article headlined “As Trump Era Dawns,
A Sense of Uncertainty Grips the
World,” we are told:
“The Germans are angry. The Chinese
are downright furious. Leaders of NATO
are nervous, while their counterparts at
the European Union are alarmed.”
Oh heavens-to-Betsy, whatever shall we do?
So what’s the source of this latest Trumpanic?
It’s an interview with Tory mandarin Michael Gove and
Kai Diekmann, a former editor of the German newspaper
Bild, in which the President-elect reiterates what he’s been
saying to the American people for the past year, and on the
basis of which he won the election: US foreign policy is
going to change, and in a big way.
However, to Times reporter Steve Erlanger, this all comes
as a big revelation, evidence that “Trump has again
focused his penchant for disruption on the rest of the
world.” Oh, the poor babies! Perhaps they need to find a
318
safe space in which to park themselves for the next four-
to-eight years.
This being the Times, there’s the requisite Russia-
baiting:
“No one knows where exactly he is
headed – except that the one country he
is not criticizing is Russia and its
president, Vladimir V. Putin. For now.
And that he is an enthusiastic
cheerleader of Brexit and an unaffiliated
Britain. For now.”
If this reads like a paragraph torn out of one of the Hillary
Clinton campaign’s strategy memos, well then consider the
source. And speaking of the source, what exactly did
Trump say in this supposedly “disruptive” interview that
has the Powers That Be in such a tizzy?
They ask him about Brexit, and he endorses it, as he has in
the past. They ask him if he’d vote for Angela Merkel in
the upcoming German elections, and he demurs: “I don’t
know who she’s running against.” Besides which, isn’t it a
bit unseemly for an American President-elect to endorse a
candidate for office in a foreign country? It surely would
be in bad taste if the situation were reversed. They press
him on Merkel’s open invitation to the entire nation of
Syria to emigrate to Germany: was it “insane,” as he said
during the campaign? Or has he changed his mind for
some reason? He reiterates his often-stated view that “it
was a big mistake for Germany,” and then broadens out his
answer to include an analysis of the regional chaos caused
by the administration of George W. Bush, whom he
doesn’t mention by name but it’s clear where he places the
blame:
“Look, this whole thing should never
have happened. Iraq should not have
been attacked in the first place, all
right? It was one of the worst decisions,
possibly the worst decision ever made
in the history of our country. We’ve
unleashed – it’s like throwing rocks into
 a beehive. It’s one of the great messes
of all time. I looked at something, uh, I’m
not allowed to show you because it’s
classified – but, I just looked at
Afghanistan and you look at the Taliban
– and you take a look at every, every
year its more, more, more, you know
they have the different colours – and
you say, you know – what’s going on?”
Republican Bush era Neocon – Architects of Iraq war
More good news: Trump is taking direct and very public
aim at their patrons, the Military-Industrial Complex that
Dwight David Eisenhower so presciently warned
us against. Even as he pledges to upgrade the US military,
the President-elect clearly knows who his enemies are:
“Boeing and Lockheed Martin are you
know big contractors for this country
and we have an F-35 program that has
been very, very severely over budget
and behind schedule. Hundreds of
billions of dollars over budget and
seven years behind schedule. And, uh,
they got to shape up.”
Employees of both Boeing and Lockheed-Martin gave
record amounts to the Clinton campaign: indeed, the entire
industry went for Hillary in a big way.
Asked about his top priority as commander-in-chief,
Trump had one word to say: “ISIS.” Asked how he’d deal
with ISIS, he demurred. Yet it isn’t at all hard to imagine
what his strategy will be: he’s not saying we should “get
319
Those pathetic Republican “foreign policy experts” who
are now complaining about being on an “enemies list” kept
by the Trump transition team deserve to be on that list:
they, after all, were the architects of the ongoing disaster
described by Trump, and he clearly doesn’t care to reward
failure. This is precisely why the GOP foreign policy
Establishment campaigned so hard against him: that these
losers are now locked out of the administration is good
news indeed.
along with Russia” because he’s a secret Putinite, as our
crazed conspiracy theorists would have it. Clearly he
means to enlist Russia’s support in what he envisions as a
short but effective campaign to eliminate ISIS entirely, at
least when it comes to the Syrian “Caliphate.” After all,
Russia is already in Syria in a big way: and Trump’s
hostility to the Obama administration’s campaign to
overthrow Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad indicates
he’s likely to align with both Syria and Russia to restore
some sort of order to the region. As to what degree he’ll
farm out this task to the Russians and the Syrians, we’ll
see.
We’ll also see how “quick” this joint campaign will be:
history does not bode well, in any case. Yet it’s clear he
wants to minimize our involvement.
This segues into what is the most controversial part of
the interview:
“Q: Talking about Russia, you know that
Angela Merkel understands Putin very
well because he is fluent in German, she
 is fluent in Russian, and they have
known each other for a long time – but
who would you trust more, Angela
Merkel or Vladimir Putin?
“Trump: Well, I start off trusting both –
but let’s see how long that lasts. It may
not last long at all.”
Oh, how the “experts” and the political
class went ballistic over that one! How
dare Trump equate our “ally” Germany with
our evil “adversary,” the perfidious Putin!
And yet the reality is that neither Germany
nor Russia is inherently either friend or foe:
they are simply actors on the world stage
whose relations to the US are based
entirely on what is in America’s interests.
As George Washington warned in his
Farewell Address:
“[N]othing is more essential than that
permanent, inveterate antipathies
against particular nations, and
passionate attachments for others,
should be excluded; and that, in place
of them, just and amicable feelings
towards all should be cultivated.”
Trump’s “realist” value-free characterization of our
relations with the leaders of both Germany and Russia
represents a return to the foreign policy of the Founders,
from which we have strayed to our great detriment. It is, as
Trump proclaimed so often during the campaign, a foreign
policy that puts America first.
As he’s being interrogated by a Brit and a German, much
of the interview deals with Europe, and specifically policy
toward Russia. Asked if he can “understand why eastern
Europeans fear Putin and Russia,” he says “Sure, oh sure,”
and then goes very quickly into a critique of NATO, which
he says is “obsolete.” It’s obvious he thinks the fears of the
east Europeans are vastly overblown, as indeed they are.
Trump complains that “the countries aren’t paying their
fair share. So we’re supposed to protect countries but a lot
of these countries aren’t paying what they’re supposed to
be paying, which I think is very unfair to the United States.
With that being said, NATO is very important to me.”
Yes, but how important is “very important” in
TrumpWorld? Europe’s welfare cases shudder as they
contemplate the answer.
Gove avers that “Britain is paying,” and Trump agrees, but
says:
“There’s five countries that are paying
what they’re supposed to. Five. It’s not
much, from twenty-two.”
320
And as Trump no doubt realizes, the costs of NATO
involve more than money: we are obligated to defend
twenty-two countries in case they are attacked. That’s
twenty-two tripwires that could set off a major war: the
price of that is incalculable. Is it worth it?
Trump clearly has his doubts, and it’s this that has the
Euro-weenies in an uproar. After all, they’ve been coasting
along on Uncle Sam’s dime for all these years, financing
extensive welfare programs for their own citizens as well
as a horde of migrants: the idea that the gravy train is
going to dry up has them up in arms.
And of course the issue of NATO is
really about the Russian question – is
Putin really intent on annexing his “near
abroad” and re-establishing the Soviet
empire? This nonsensical fantasy,
based on nothing but rejuvenated cold
war hysteria, is clearly doubted by
Trump and his advisors. So when he’s
asked if he supports the continuation of
European sanctions against Russia,
Trump replies:
“Well, I think you know – people have to
get together and people have to do what
they have to do in terms of being fair.
OK? They have sanctions on Russia –
let’s see if we can make some good
deals with Russia. For one thing, I think
nuclear weapons should be way down
and reduced very substantially, that’s
part of it. But you do have sanctions
and Russia’s hurting very badly right
now because of sanctions, but I think
something can happen that a lot of
people are gonna benefit.”
In short: sanctions can be ended as part of a grand bargain
with Russia to reduce nuclear weapons arsenals on both
sides and guarantee European security. Ambitious? – Yes.
Praiseworthy? – Certainly. Can he do it? Only by
overcoming the War Party’s opposition in Congress, led by
Mad John McCain and joined by the now-Russophobic
war-crazed Democrats out to obstruct anything and
everything Trump does, even at the cost of world peace.
It’s absolutely wonderful how Trump’s offhand remarks
rub the commentariat the wrong way, especially because
what he says is indisputable. Asked which number he dials
if he wants to talk to Europe – a riff off a remark by Henry
Kissinger – he names Merkel on the grounds that “you
look at the European Union and it’s Germany. Basically a
vehicle for Germany. That’s why I thought the UK was so
smart in getting out.”

Trump Has ‘Tremendous Amount of Respect’ to Putin, Merkel –
Adviser
Zing! Poor Angela Merkel – she can’t get no respect!
Elaborating his view of the EU, Trump averred:
“People, countries want their own
identity and the UK wanted its own
identity but, I do believe this, if they
hadn’t been forced to take in all of the
refugees, so many, with all the problems
that it, you know, entails, I think that you
wouldn’t have a Brexit. It probably could
have worked out but, this was the final
straw, this was the final straw that broke
the camel’s back.
“I think people want, people want their
own identity, so if you ask me, others, I
believe others will leave.”
We can’t forget that the interviewers are Europeans who
have been sucking at the American teat since the end of
World War II, as one of the final questions makes all too
clear:
“Your policy platform of America First
implies you’re happy to see the rest of
the world suffer. Do you?”
Spoken like a true dependent, and yet
Trump lit right into them with the
unvarnished truth:
“I don’t want it to be a disruption – I love
the world, I want the world to be good
but we can’t go – I mean look at what’s
.
321
happening to our country – we are $20
trillion [in debt] – we don’t know what
we’re doing – our military is weak –
we’re in wars that never end, we’re in
Afghanistan now 17 years … it’s the
longest war we’ve ever been in.”
Endless wars, endless payments to feckless “allies,”
endless hectoring by these ungrateful wretches who accuse
us of wanting to “see the rest of the world suffer” – Trump
would put an end to all this, and I have no doubt that the
American people will support him wholeheartedly. Shall
we take a poll on the popularity of the US bearing the
brunt of Europe’s “defense” against an enemy that
disappeared in 1989? Shall we have a national referendum
on the prospect of going to war over whether Montenegro
– a nation the size of the metropolitan New York area –
shall have a “pro-Western” government?
Neoconed Architects of Endless “Regime Change” Wars
If you wonder why our “intelligence community” is
waging open warfare against the forty-fifth President of
these United States, you have only to look at this
interview. He is challenging the “liberal” international
order which has paid out liberal amounts of moolah and
unearned prestige to a whole class of government
contractors, thinktank poobahs, useless spooks, and their
ancillary business enterprises for decades.
Without this “international order,” we’re told, the world
will be plunged into “uncertainty,” if not complete chaos.
This is a lie. The only uncertainty that Trump’s America
First foreign policy imposes is uncertainty as to where the
war profiteers’ next meal ticket is coming from. And that,
dear reader, is a cause not for panic but for celebration.
 Russian Hacking And
The Smell Test
By Clancy Sigal
January 18, 2017
A few days ago I urged friends to grow a pair of ears
sensitive to bullshit language. How about adding a new
nose?
That murky “Russian hacking” story fails – so far – to pass
the smell test.
So called “news items” after item have been found to be
false or half true. Newspapers like the Washington
Post (but not yet NYTimes) have “walked back” the
fabrications. (Putin cut off Vermont’s electricity supply,
Putin caught Trump in a honey trap etc etc. – O that it
were true!)
So we hate Trump for all the good reasons. Check. He’s a
cruel and reckless monster. Check.
He’ll make our daily lives more miserable. Check.
Here’s what we know so far which isn’t much:
Balancing the odds, and listening to
perhaps contradictory advice from his
secret service and tech experts, Putin
decided to mess with America in Trump’s
favor – in some as yet unspecified,
unsourced and unproven ways.
There is NO independent verification
EXCEPT secret reports from the CIA-FBI-
Homeland Security apparatus.
And we know how honest unblemished unbiased
unpolitical and disinterested they are in the current fevered
atmosphere. Oh, please.
322
It’s so hard for us to face the harsh, complicated reality
that Trump won due to a perfect storm of boring
sociological factors like the catastrophic decline in union
membership (up to now a shield against racism), “de-
industrialization” of whole regions, the plague of state
right to work laws, the loss of jobs through automation and
anti pollution regulations and massive outsourcing – and
oh yes an unpopular Democratic candidate running a dumb
campaign.
Until Putin comes crawling on his hands and knees before
a Congressional committee to confess his intervention
sins, you best go down to the corner grocery and buy a
barrel of salt to pour on this Russian-hacking story.
Haven’t we been here before with Saddam Hussein’s
invisible – except to neo-cons with eyes fixed on war –
chemical and nuclear weapons?
Fake, fake, fake – until we have MULTIPLY-SOURCED
EVIDENCE BASED proof that smells fresh and good.
That comes from other than the “intelligence community”.
Since when do we trust them on a political issue in which
they have their own pot to stir?
It takes no genius to figure out that any Russian, high or
low, bad or good, would prefer a blustering salesman like
Trump who has money interests to protect in Russia over
Hillary a high minded war hawk who, rightly, has
condemned Putin’s bloody imperialist adventures in the
Crimea and Ukraine.
Paging Judith Miller!
 NATO, An Obsolete Cold War Military Construct:
Donald Trump And The History Of The Atlantic Alliance
By Dr. Binoy Kampmark
Global Research, January 18, 2017
It should be a point of some delicious
reflection for peace activists who have
fought for decades against the nature of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It
brought the US deep into West European
affairs, turning European states into
garrisons. It involved the stationing of
nuclear weapons. It compelled member
states to go to war if the security of any one
was threatened or breached.
Donald Trump, however, has little time for it. Selecting
the Bild newspaper and the Times of London as forums to
expand on his views on NATO, the President-elect decided
to shake the tree that much more.
America First as an idea means that the alliance system
needs to be reviewed. For one, Trump took issue with
military spending from the members, suggesting that it did
not even make 2 percent of gross domestic product.
But for Trump, the core issue was utility. What had the
alliance actually done? Ever in the zone of the next news
entertainment cycle, Trump felt that the alliance had done
little on the issue of dealing with terrorism.
It was, in his carefree words, “obsolete
because it wasn’t taking care of terror.” It
had been “designed many, many years
ago.” Just to confuse readers, and
perhaps himself, Trump then explained that
NATO was still “very important to me.”
323
Obsolescence is probably not quite the term. If it had just
been a museum piece, a historical reminder, little fuss
would be made. In actual fact, this was an alliance which
ballooned with aggressive enthusiasm, one that was treated
as a mechanism, not merely as a defence against the old
Soviet Union and its allies, but offensively to operate in
theatres far away from the area.
The one thing that stands out here is the momentum
NATO developed at the end of the Cold War, doing its bit,
less for stability than aggravating instability. With
gloating hubris, the US-led alliance began to move into
areas of influence in eastern Europe. Russian strategists,
ever sensitive to threats on its borders, wished to prevent
that matter in negotiations in 1990 which also featured the
re-unification of Germany.
As an old foe was set to merge, Washington and Moscow
were debating where traditional alliances would go. Would
a reunified Germany join hands with NATO, or embrace
the Soviet-dominated Warsaw Pact? The third option, that
it would have nothing to do with either in middle-
European distance, was also considered.
Meetings that took place in February 1990 show US
Secretary of State James Baker discussing that a
cooperative arrangement with Germany could be bought
by making “iron-clad guarantees” that NATO would not
enlarge “one inch eastward.”[1] Soviet President Mikhail
Gorbachev was sufficiently moved by the suggestion to
begin reunification talks within a matter of days.
The picture soon changed. US policymakers were
wondering whether they had given too much unnecessary
ground. An initial concession was made: the former
German Democratic Republic would be designated as an
area where NATO forces would have limited influence.
This was not a “status” that would last.
By March 1990, the State Department was pretending it
had never proffered an enticing olive branch to Soviet
officials. Eastern Europe, breathing gusts of the post-
communist air, would be gathered to Washington’s large
bosom. The odd remark would still be issued to reassure
Moscow that this process would take place in a
cooperative way.
None of this got away from the objective, as noted in a
National Security Council memo from October 1990, that
the US should “signal to the new democracies of Eastern
Europe NATO’s readiness to contemplate their future
membership.” In what seemed like a giddying rush, old
Soviet foes – the Baltic States, Poland, the Czech Republic
and Hungary – became card carrying NATO members,
happy to become forward bases for Washington’s
weapons. Murmurs of encouragement were then sent on
their merry way to Georgia and Ukraine.
As the sole superpower, and the Soviet Union unravelling,
promises were there to be ignored. The Russian bear had
repaired to the forest of desperate isolation to lick its
wounds, powerless to hold any sway over the decisions
being made to its west. Now resurgent, that bear remains
curious to see how a Trump administration will deal with
NATO.
Trump’s comments, for all their worth, will have to bear
up against the views of his own appointee for Defense
Secretary, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis. As he
reasoned in his Senate confirmation hearing last week,
324
“If we didn’t have NATO today, we’d need
to create it. NATO is vital to our
interests.”[2]
Mattis also sees old threats in newly fashioned bottles.
“We recognize that [Vladimir Putin] is trying
to break the North Atlantic alliance, and
that we take steps – the integrated steps,
diplomatic, economic, military and the
alliance steps – working with our allies to
defend ourselves where we must.”
Members of Congress, among them Senate Armed
Services Committee Chairman John McCain, have already
told European allies that the alliance will be a business as
usual affair, though German Foreign Minister Frank-
Walker Steinmeier concedes to there having been “no
easing of tensions.”[3] It is hard to envisage that much
will change on the ground, though it adds to the delightful
dysfunction that is abound to descend upon Washington
and various European capitals.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at
Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT
University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com
 Trump Warns Canada, Mexico He Will Begin NAFTA
Renegotiation "Within Days Of Inauguration"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 18, 2017 7:27 AM
In the latest unexpected and ad hoc announcement on
North American trade arrangements, the Globe and Mail
reports that Trump's Commerce Secretary pick, Wilbur
Ross, has informed Canadian officials that he plans to
reopen NAFTA talks within days of his inauguration, and
that rules of origin and independent dispute tribunals will
be central in negotiations of North American Free Trade
Agreement. Ross has indicated new administration will
send a formal letter notifying Canada and Mexico of plans
to renegotiate Nafta within days of Trump’s inauguration.
According to the G&M, Trump
"want to discuss country of origin rules and
the independent dispute-settlement
mechanism that are key features of the
1994 NAFTA pact, officials say."
Country of origin rules, which govern how much content
from outside NAFTA a product can contain and still
qualify to be shipped duty-free, are specific to each
product and spelled out in writing. They cover every kind
of good and service, from suits to cars. The Trump
administration is expected to take a harder line on exactly
what can cross the border duty-free.
NAFTA’s tripartite dispute panels are also on Mr. Ross’s
radar, officials say. The United States has long complained
these independent panels are unaccountable and give too
much power to Mexico and Canada.
However, in what is modest good news
for Canada, a senior government official
told The Globe and Mail the signals from
Mr. Trump’s trade team indicate the
trade focus will largely be aimed at
Mexico, essentially cutting the United
States’ southern neighbour out of many
NAFTA benefits.
The clear indication we have gotten from that side of the
operation is that they are targeting Mexico and not us,” the
official said.
“We are keeping an open line of
communication with them so we know what
things they are planning to do with Mexico
325
and that have a major knock-on effect with
us.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland has already
contacted Mr. Ross, although the Trudeau government is
relying heavily on former Progressive Conservative prime
minister Brian Mulroney to act as an intermediary.
Still, it remains unclear just how much a renegotiation will
have on Canada. Canada is the biggest trading partner of
the United States, and Mr. Mulroney has strongly pressed
the case about the importance of the Canadian economy to
Mr. Ross and others, including the president-elect, a source
said.
Mr. Trudeau sounded a positive note when asked at an
event in Fredericton, N.B., on Tuesday about the threat of
U.S. protectionist measures and a border tax on Canadian
products.
“We are focused on having a constructive
working relationship with the new
administration and one in which we
highlight the depth of integration and inter-
connectedness between our two
economies,” he told reporters. “Obviously,
there are millions of Canadian jobs that
depend on the U.S. market, but there are
also millions of American jobs that depend
on smooth integration and trade back and
forth across the border of goods and
services.”
Ross will have his confirmation hearing before the Senate
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee on
Wednesday. He has been a vocal critic of free trade, and
long advocated renegotiating NAFTA and other deals. He
has called NAFTA the “poster child for unbalanced trade
and investment” and accused Mexico of importing auto
parts from China for vehicles it ships duty-free to the
United States.
In an interview with Bell Media’s BNN in October, Mr.
Ross said Canada would not have a “lot to fear” from a
Trump presidency.
“You don’t hear him voice huge complaints
about Canada, and there’s a good reason
 for that,” he said. “In the case of the trade As for Mexico, keep an eye on the USDMXN which has
between the U.S. and Canada, it is been rising all session on the news.
relatively much better-balanced than is the
trade between the U.S. and Mexico.”
.

326
 Bashing Trump’s Justifiable Outrage
Over Disgraceful Press
By Stephen Lendman
1-18-2017
With few exceptions, media scoundrels relentlessly bashed
him throughout the political season.
Vilification continues daily post-election, inventing
reasons to denigrate him, an unprecedented example of
political presstitution at its worst.
An open letter to him from the US press corp, written by
Columbia Journalism Review editor-in-chief and publisher
Kyle Pope, warrants a reader response. Trump and his
team can speak for themselves.
Pope: “You’ve banned news organizations
from covering you.”
Fact: False! He leveled sharp criticism as
justified, including blasting CNN as fake
news. He should have applied that label to
the entire scoundrel media establishment,
suppressing hard truths, substituting
managed news misinformation and Big
Lies - about him and on virtually all other
important issues.
Any news organization and their members are free to cover
him. He’s free to ignore any ones he wishes.
Pope: “(Y)our press secretary is
considering pulling news media offices out
of the White House…”
Fact: False! Incoming press secretary
Sean Spicer said space is being sought to
accommodate a larger number of
journalists - not change the workspace for
White House reporters.
At the same time, Trump is entitled to challenge members
of the press spreading malicious lies about him. No one
should put up with abusive practices.
Pope: “You’ve taken to Twitter to taunt and
threaten individual reporters and
encouraged your supporters to do the
same.”
Fact: Western media scoundrels are a
national disgrace. Trump should respond
when they blast him irresponsibly.
327
Twitter is his favorite way of communicating. He’s able to
reach millions, free from misquotes and distortions. Earlier
I called him America’s tweeter-in-chief, encouraging him
to keep tweeting.
Pope: “You’ve avoided the press when you
could and flouted the norms of pool
reporting and regular press conferences.”
Fact: Advice referees give prize fighters to
protect themselves at all times especially
applies to presidents and other heads of
state. If he wishes, Trump is entitled to
avoid press corp members denigrating him
maliciously.
He’s yet to assume office, so it’s unknown how often he’ll
hold press conferences. Franklin Roosevelt, serving nearly
four terms, held far more than any other president. They
were more informal affairs in pre-television days than how
they’re held today.
Pope: “You’ve ridiculed a reporter who
wrote something you didn’t like because he
has a disability.”
Fact: Trump debunked the accusation as a
malicious lie.
Pope: Press “access is preferable, but not
critical.” Lacking it is “a challenge we
relish.”
Fact: Trump has no problem with
responsible reporting. Denigrating him
without just cause is another matter
entirely.
Pope: “Ground rules are the prerogative of
the press.”
Fact: That type attitude would antagonize
anyone.
Pope: “We decide how much airtime to give
your spokespeople and surrogates.”
Fact: How much time isn’t the issue.
Responsible truth-telling matters most -
what’s sorely lacking in mainstream
 Western reporting, turning journalism into
presstitution.
Pope: “Facts are what we do…”
Fact: Media scoundrels suppress them,
substituting fake news.
Pope: “(W)hile you may seek to control
what comes out of the West Wing, we’ll
have the upper hand in covering how your
policies are carried out.”
Case closed!
.
Fact: If reporting on Trump follows the
pattern seen throughout the political
season and post-election so far, expect
endless rubbish substituting for responsible
journalism.
Pope: We’ll set higher standards for
ourselves than ever before.”
Fact: Presstitutes make street whores look
good by example.

328
 Obama's Chelsea Manning 'Pardon' Proves The "Russian
Election Hack" Story Was One Big Lie
Submitted by Alex Christoforou via The Duran.com,
Jan 18, 2017 1:20 PM

Russian "election hack" narrative falls Keep in mind that Chelsea Manning has
apart in light of Chelsea Manning pleaded guilty and admitted to the
clemency. intelligence breach. No evidence has
ever been provided to the public that
proves the Russian state was behind
the Podesta or DNC document leak.

Which brings us to this argument.

The Democrat Party, and their outgoing President Barack

Obama, are gravely concerned about “Russian election
hacking”, concerned enough to impose sanctions on
Russia, expel Russian diplomats, and even call for a “war-
like” response towards Russia, with no evidence.
We applaud Obama for commuting the prison sentence of
Chelsea Manning from 35 years to 7 years. How does Obama, and his party, explain
the sudden about face on Manning, and
their forgiveness for
Army soldier, Chelsea Manning was convicted in 2013 of Manning’s intelligence “betrayal”, that
leaking hundreds of thousands (some counts have the jeopardized the “fabric of US
number at 750,000) classified documents about US democracy” and “endangered US
national security activities to WikiLeaks. national security”?

Those documents included diplomatic cables, military Are we to believe that John Podesta’s
emails as worthy enough for conflict
intelligence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and video files
with Russia, but Manning’s classified
showing US strikes against “terrorists”, and in one instance
showing strikes that killed two Reuters journalists. document release, that exposed the
highest level of US military intelligence
information, is now considered
By granting Manning clemency, Obama forgivable?
admits that the massive leak of
classified intelligence information
Or can we simply conclude that Obama’s “red scare” is
(arguably the most damning US
intelligence leak ever) was damaging, simply a political ploy to damage President-elect
Trump, and excuse Hillary Clinton (and the Democrat
but not so damaging as to warrant a 35
Party) from running the most pathetic election in
year prison sentence.
history…because the false narrative that John Podesta’s
email leak threatens to destroy “US democracy”, has know
Certainly Manning’s intelligence leak is magnitudes worse fallen completely apart.
a leak (in relation to US national security) than the John
Podesta emails, that have the entire US establishment up in
arms and pleading for a heavy retaliation.

329
 58% of Americans Don’t Think Russian “Hacking”
Changed Election … 56% Believe U.S. Should
Improve Relations with Russia
By Washingtonsblog
Posted on January 18, 2017

Despite the evidence–free drumbeat of propaganda and released (58% say that). Further, 56% say that despite this
hysteria, a new CNN/ORC poll finds that Americans are situation, the US ought to continue its efforts to improve
remaining level-headed about the Russian hacking relations with Russia rather than take strong economic and
allegations: diplomatic steps against Russia.

Majorities say that … that the outcome of the election It’s almost enough to restore my faith in the American
would have been the same regardless of the information people.

330
 Corporate Media Now Pushing The Idea That
The Entire Trump Administration Could Be Killed
Obama Cabinet Member Would Take Over Presidency
By Staff Writer -
01.18.2017 @9:29 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — In yet another stunning development
in the lead up to the Inauguration, multiple corporate
media outlets are seemingly getting the public ready for
the possibility that Donald Trump, Mike Pence, and
Congressional leaders could all be killed.
An ABC News report in Arizona even included an
interview with a past designated survivor while
nonchalantly speaking about the president-elect possibly
dying.

The truly shocking report from CNN’s Brian Todd on the

“designated survivor” continuity of government program
leaves viewers with the impression that there is a real
possibility that the president-elect and his cabinet could be
murdered at the inauguration.

When you consider that a series of violent protests are

planned throughout Washington D.C. in the next two days,
as well as the fact that a large cache of weapons was
literally found near the inauguration site just two weeks
ago, this corporate media programming of a possible major
attack looks all the more sinister.

The report details the confusion that would ensue if an
attack were to happen as the transfer of power was
underway, complete with the claim that an Obama cabinet
member would actually take the Oval Office in this
scenario!
While security is in place and there is no
specific, credible threat, a quirk in
America’s rules for succession raises
questions about who would be in charge if
an attack hit the incoming president, vice
president and congressional leaders just as
the transfer of power gets underway.
Interestingly, random reports on the designated survivor
have popped up in local news broadcasts as well, further
making it appear as if the corporate media is getting the
public ready for something big.
“A walker came across two guns hidden in
a violin case before calling the police who
eventually found “several” other weapons,
reported Alex Thomas.
“U.S. Park Police said a woman walking in
the woods near the C&O Canal, which runs
along the river, found the case. When law
enforcement officers arrived, they found
more guns and ammunition — some in
pails, others in plastic garbage bags.”
Intellihub’s Alex Thomas also reported late last week that
organizers of one of the main protests have openly
admitted that they do not believe in a peaceful transfer of
power and are therefore planning criminal acts to stop
Trump.
Legba Carrefour, an organizer for DisruptJ20, told Reuters
Wednesday that her group planned predawn blockades and

331
disruptions during the evening inaugural balls on top of the “John Schindler not only confirmed that the
protests during the actual inauguration. CIA is leading a massive, possibly illegal,
operation against the president-elect, he
It was then made clear that this is not about peacefully also revealed that a noted Washington
protesting but rather part of a larger attempt to literally Post columnist is getting the information he
steal the election. reports from the intelligence community
and thus at least indirectly supporting the
coup attempt against Trump,” Intellihub
“Some 300 DisruptJ20 volunteers will work
reported.
to mobilize demonstrators for a series of
protests the group has dubbed the “Festival “The intelligence community spies on
of Resistance,” reported Reuters. Flynn’s calls, then anonymously reports
what they claim to have been in them
“We are not in favor of a peaceful transition
through a Washington Post columnist.”
of power, and we need to stop it,” Carrefour
continued.
Additionally, celebrities such as Rosie O’Donnell have
openly called for the end of the Constitution in America by
On top of that, Trump is also dealing with a massive
publicly supporting martial law as a means to stop Trump
disinformation campaign aimed at him by elements of the
from becoming president. According to O’Donnell, the one
intelligence community who have leaked numerous details
way to stop Trump is to effectively end the Constitution
to the eager corporate media while also threatening Trump
and set up a military dictatorship, all because of
through the same mockingbird media outlets.
documented disinformation spread by the corporate media
about supposed Russian ties to the president-elect.
It has gotten so bad that one former intelligence officer
even publicly admitted that the CIA is attempting to take
We are truly in for an intense next two days and one can
down Donald Trump.
only hope that the establishment and their Deep State
bosses don’t actually take this to a whole new level….
.

332
EXCLUSIVE: Florida Man Charged With Threatening To
Kill President-Elect Trump At His Inauguration On Twitter
Was A Close Family Friend Of Bill And Hillary Clinton
 Dominic Puopolo, 51, is being held without bail on charges of threatening harm against a
public servant
 Hillary Clinton was especially close to Puopolo's sister Sonia and mother, also named Sonia
 Puopolo once gave $20,000 to the Democratic National Committee, DailyMail.com has
learned
 His mother was among 92 people on American Airlines Flight 11 on Sept. 11, 2001, when it
crashed into the World Trade Center's north tower
 Puopolo posted a video on his Twitter account that said, 'This is the 16th of January 2017, I
will be at the review/inauguration and I will kill President Trump'
 He was arrested a short time later at a Miami Beach Subway restaurant and admitted to
officers he had posted the threatening video
By Jose Lambiet In Miami, Florida For Dailymail.com
Published: 16:33 EST, 18 January 2017 | Updated: 01:05 EST, 19 January 2017

The man arrested by Miami Beach police Tuesday for
allegedly threatening President-elect Donald Trump
online is a member of a prominent northeast family close
to Bill and Hillary Clinton.
He once gave $20,000 to the Democratic National
Committee, DailyMail.com has learned.
mother, Sonia, who died in one of the jets that flew into
the World Trade Center on 9-11.
During that eulogy on Oct. 6, 2001 in Boston, the former
presidential candidate referred to 'Dom Jr.'s latest
computer wizardry.'
The 'wizard' is now being held in a Miami-Dade County
jail after using Twitter to threaten Trump's life.

Trump is scheduled to be sworn in Friday in Washington,

D.C. as Puopolo remains incarcerated on a charge of
threatening to harm a public servant.

Puopolo reportedly admitted to posting a video to Twitter,

saying:

'This is the 16th of January 2017, I will be

at the review/ inauguration and I will kill
President Trump, President elect Trump
today.'

Hillary Clinton sits with the Puopolo family at the funeral

Dominic Puopolo, 51, is being held without bail in Miami
on charges of threatening harm against a public servant
Suspect Dominic Puopolo Jr., 51, sat near Hillary Clinton
when she delivered the eulogy at the funeral of Puopolo's
of Dominic Puopolo's mother Sonia, who was among 92
people on American Airlines Flight 11 on Sept. 11, 2001,
when it crashed into the World Trade Center's north tower
He was nabbed after leaving a Washington Avenue
Subway sandwich shop about 4 p.m. Tuesday.
Puopolo, however, may not be the average Trump hater.

333
On various social media platforms, where he posts as She was once a professional ballet dancer and became a
JesusChrist1701, the computer consultant claims to have major philanthropist and political donor.
testified in terror cases as an expert witness in a German
federal court in Hamburg from 2003 to 2008.

He also says he served in the Navy.

However, Sonia was among 92 people on American

Airlines Flight 11 on Sept. 11, 2001, when it crashed into
the World Trade Center's north tower in New York City.

She was two seats away from terrorist Mohammad Atta.

In an amazing twist of fate, Ground Zero cleanup crews

recovered the wedding ring that Sonia's husband had given
her 40 years earlier.

The suspect's sister, Miami resident Sonia Tita Puopolo,

wrote a book in 2010 about the ring called Sonia's Ring: 11
Ways To Heal Your Heart, Miracles Do Happen, and even
ended up on Ellen DeGeneres' show to discuss it.

He once posted a photo of himself holding an image of his

mother in front of a wall that sports a picture of him with
Colin Powell and a famous shot of Ronald Reagan.

Puopolo has published a number of pictures of outgoing

Secretary of State John Kerry, whom he calls a friend.

Both Hillary and Bill are close friends of the Puopolo

family. The suspect, according to federal elections
records, gave $20,000 to the Democratic National
Committee in 1996

According to news archives his mother, Sonia Mercedes

Morales Puopolo was married to the wealthy Nantucket
businessman Dominic J. Puopolo Sr.

334

Sonai gave $4,000 to Hillary Clinton's various campaigns
Dominic Puopolo posted this picture of President Clinton
with his sister Sonia (left) and his mother Sonia, who was
killed in one of the planes that flew into the World Trade
Center
The suspect's sister, Miami resident Sonia Tita Puopolo
above with Hillary at left, wrote a book in 2010 about the
ring called Sonia's Ring: 11 Ways To Heal Your Heart,
Miracles Do Happen about her mother, at right with
Hillary
335
The family is also known in political circles for its
generosity toward Democratic organizations and
candidates.
The threat suspect, according to federal elections records,
gave $20,000 to the Democratic National Committee in
1996. He also contributed to Kerry and deceased Sen. Ted
Kennedy in the mid-1990s. His name popped up again in
contributions in 2006 when he gave $4,000 to Florida Sen.
Bill Nelson's campaign.
His sister Sonia gave $4,000 to Hillary Clinton's various
campaigns.
In Miami, meanwhile, Dom Puopolo was arrested four
times for petty crimes since 2006, twice for petty theft and
once for defrauding an innkeeper.
There's also evidence he was the target of mental health
court proceedings in 2016 although the details are not
public.
When he was arrested in March, the judge ordered
Puopolo to be represented by a tax-funded public defender
after declaring him 'indigent.'
Property records, however, indicate Puopolo sold a family
home in Dover, Mass. in 2013 for $4 million. And in 2004,
he sold a condo in downtown Miami for $3.3 million.
He currently lives in a run-down $60,000, one-bedroom
flat in Miami Beach.
Neither Puopolo's sister, nor dad or brother returned calls
for comment.
 Obama Parting Shot Aims At Brennan, Clapper, Clinton:
"The DNC Emails Were Leaked"
Source: Moon Of Alabama H/T - Shuaib M. Almosawa
Published: January 19, 2017

Three U.S. Intelligence Agencies (CIA, NSA and FBI) Here is President Obama in his final press conference
claim that IT-Systems of the Democratic National yesterday (vid @8:31):
Committee were "hacked" in an operation related to the
Russian government. They assert that emails copied during First of all, I haven't commented on
the "hack" were transferred by Russian government related WikiLeaks, generally. The conclusions of
hackers to Wikileaks which then published them. the intelligence community with respect to
the Russian hacking were not conclusive
President Obama disagrees. as to whether Wikileaks was witting or not
in being the conduit through which we
He says those emails were "leaked". heard about the DNC emails that were
leaked.
Wikileaks had insisted that the emails it published came The DNC emails "that were leaked" - not
from an insider source not from any government. The "hacked" or "stolen" but "leaked".
DNC emails proved that the supposedly neutral
Democratic Party committee had manipulated the primary
One wonders if this is a parting shot is primarily aimed at
presidential elections in favor of the later candidate Hillary
the involved Intelligence Agencies led by James Clapper
Clinton. This made it impossible for the alternative
and John Brennan. Or is dissing Hillary Clinton and her
candidate Bernie Sanders to win the nomination. Hillory
narrative the main purpose?
Clinton, who had extremely high unfavorable ratings, lost
the final elections.
The presidential judgement could change the political
pressure towards a new cold war with Russia if the
The President of the United States
mainstream media would pick it up and discuss it. But the
disagrees with those Intelligence Services.
media are widely invested in the "hacking" claims (and
He says that the DNC emails were
even create their own ones from hot air). They are also
"leaked", i.e. copied by an insider, and then
furthering the anti-Russian narrative. We therefore can not
transferred to Wikileaks.
expect that they will report this presidential parting shot at
all.
(At the time around the leaking the DNC IT-administrator
Seth Rich was found murdered for no apparent reason in
the streets of Washington DC. The murder case was never
solved.)

336
 Nothing Is Real:
When Reality TV Programming
Masquerades As Politics
By John Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
Published: January 19, 2017
“There are two ways by which the spirit of a
culture may be shriveled. In the first—the
Orwellian—culture becomes a prison. In
the second—the Huxleyan—culture
becomes a burlesque. No one needs to be
reminded that our world is now marred by
many prison-cultures…. it makes little
difference if our wardens are inspired by
right- or left-wing ideologies. The gates of
the prison are equally impenetrable,
surveillance equally rigorous, icon-worship
pervasive…. Big Brother does not watch
us, by his choice. We watch him, by
ours…. When a population becomes
distracted by trivia, when cultural life is
redefined as a perpetual round of
entertainments, when serious public
conversation becomes a form of baby-talk,
when, in short, a people become an
audience, and their public business a
vaudeville act, then a nation finds itself at
risk; culture-death is a clear possibility.”—
Professor Neil Postman
Donald Trump no longer needs to launch Trump TV.
He’s already the star of his own political reality show.
Americans have a voracious appetite for TV entertainment,
and the Trump reality show—guest starring outraged
Democrats with a newly awakened conscience for
immigrants and the poor, power-hungry Republicans eager
to take advantage of their return to power, and a
hodgepodge of other special interest groups with dubious
motives—feeds that appetite for titillating, soap opera
drama.
After all, who needs the insults, narcissism and power
plays that are hallmarks of reality shows such as Celebrity
Apprentice or Keeping Up with the Kardashians when
you can have all that and more delivered up by the likes of
Donald Trump and his cohorts?
337
Yet as John Lennon reminds us, “nothing is
real,” especially not in the world of politics.
Much like the fabricated universe in Peter Weir’s 1998
film The Truman Show, in which a man’s life is the basis
for an elaborately staged television show aimed at selling
products and procuring ratings, the political scene in the
United States has devolved over the years into a carefully
calibrated exercise in how to manipulate, polarize,
propagandize and control a population.
Indeed, Donald Trump may be the smartest move yet by
the powers-that-be to keep the citizenry divided and at
each other’s throats, because as long as we’re busy
fighting each other, we’ll never manage to present a
unified front against tyranny in any form.
This is the magic of the reality TV programming that
passes for politics today.
It allows us to be distracted, entertained, occasionally a
little bit outraged but overall largely uninvolved, content to
remain in the viewer’s seat.
The more that is beamed at us, the more inclined we are to
settle back in our comfy recliners and become passive
viewers rather than active participants as unsettling,
frightening events unfold.
Reality and fiction merge as everything around us becomes
entertainment fodder.
We don’t even have to change the channel when the
subject matter becomes too monotonous. That’s taken care
of for us by the programmers (the corporate media).
For instance, before we could get too worked up over
government surveillance, the programmers changed the
channels on us and switched us over to breaking news
about militarized police. Before our outrage could be
transformed into action over police misconduct, they
changed the channel once again to reports of ISIS
beheadings and terrorist shootings. Before we had a chance
to challenge what was staged or real, the programming
switched to the 2016 presidential election.
“Living is easy with eyes closed,” says
Lennon, and that’s exactly what reality TV
that masquerades as American politics
programs the citizenry to do: navigate the
world with their eyes shut.
As long as we’re viewers, we’ll never be doers.
Studies suggest that the more reality TV people watch—
and I would posit that it’s all reality TV—the more
difficult it becomes to distinguish between what is real and
what is carefully crafted farce.
“We the people” are watching a lot of TV.
On average, Americans spend five hours a day watching
television. By the time we reach age 65, we’re watching
more than 50 hours of television a week, and that number
increases as we get older. And reality TV programming
consistently captures the largest percentage of TV
watchers every season by an almost 2-1 ratio.
This doesn’t bode well for a citizenry able to sift through
masterfully-produced propaganda in order to think
critically about the issues of the day, whether it’s fake
news peddled by government agencies or foreign entities.
Those who watch reality shows tend to view what they see
as the “norm.” Thus, those who watch shows characterized
by lying, aggression and meanness not only come to see
such behavior as acceptable and entertaining but also
mimic the medium.
This holds true whether the reality programming is about
the antics of celebrities in the White House, in the board
room, or in the bedroom.
It’s a phenomenon called “humilitainment.”
A term coined by media scholars Brad Waite and Sara
Booker, “humilitainment” refers to the tendency for
viewers to take pleasure in someone else’s humiliation,
suffering and pain.
“Humilitainment” largely explains not only
why American TV watchers are so fixated
on reality TV programming but how
American citizens, largely insulated from
what is really happening in the world
around them by layers of technology,
entertainment, and other distractions, are
being programmed to accept the brutality,
surveillance and dehumanizing treatment
338
of the American police state as things
happening to other people.
The ramifications for the future of civic engagement,
political discourse and self-government are incredibly
depressing and demoralizing.
This not only explains how a candidate like Donald Trump
with a reputation for being rude, egotistical and narcissistic
could get elected, but it also says a lot about how a
politician like Barack Obama—whose tenure in the White
House was characterized by drone killings, a weakening of
the Constitution at the expense of Americans’ civil
liberties, and an expansion of the police state—could be
hailed as “one of the greatest presidents of all times.”
This is what happens when an entire nation—bombarded
by reality TV programming, government propaganda and
entertainment news—becomes systematically desensitized
and acclimated to the trappings of a government that
operates by fiat and speaks in a language of force.
Ultimately, as I make clear in my book Battlefield
America: The War on the American People, the reality
shows, the entertainment news, the surveillance society,
the militarized police, and the political spectacles have one
common objective:
to keep us divided, distracted, imprisoned,
and incapable of taking an active role in the
business of self-government.
If “we the people” feel powerless and apathetic, it is only
because we have allowed ourselves to be convinced that
the duties of citizenship begin and end at the ballot box.
Marching and protests have certainly been used with great
success by past movements to foment real change, but if
those marches and protests are merely outpourings of
discontent because a particular politician won or lost with
no solid plan of action or follow-through, then what’s the
point?
Martin Luther King Jr. understood that politics could never
be the answer to what ailed the country. That’s why he
spearheaded a movement of mass-action strategy that
employed boycotts, sit-ins and marches. Yet King didn’t
march against a particular politician or merely to express
discontent. He marched against injustice, government
corruption, war, and inequality, and he leveraged
discontent with the status quo into an activist movement
that transformed the face of America.
When all is said and done, it won’t matter who you voted
for in the presidential election. What will matter is where
you stand in the face of the injustices that continue to
ravage our nation: the endless wars, the police shootings,
the overcriminalization, the corruption, the graft, the
roadside strip searches, the private prisons, the surveillance police state, or will you merely sit back and lose yourself
state, etc. in the political programming aimed at keeping you
imprisoned in the police state?
Will you tune out the reality TV show and join with your
fellow citizens to push back against the real menace of the
.

339
 CNN: If Trump/Pence Is Killed During Inauguration,
Obama Appointee Would Be President
(Article by Paul Joseph Watson InfoWars.com)
Date: January 19, 2017
CNN has been criticized for airing a report which revealed
that an Obama appointee would become president if
Donald Trump was killed during an attack on the
inauguration tomorrow.
Entitled Disaster could put Obama cabinet member in Oval
Office, the report admits that there is no specific threat
targeting the inauguration, but goes on to speculate about
“who would be in charge if an attack hit the
incoming president….just as the transfer of
power is underway”.
An individual named the
“designated presidential successor” will not
attend the inauguration as a security
precaution, “but it won’t be a Trump cabinet
secretary….it will be an Obama appointee,”
reports CNN.
340
The report emphasizes that “a president from the prior
administration” will take power if there is an attack due to
the fact that none of Trump’s cabinet secretaries have been
confirmed yet.
According to CNN, the designated presidential successor is
likely to be Tom Shannon, the Under Secretary For
Political Affairs, and an Obama appointee.
The report teases the potential for an attack on the
inauguration by asserting it would create “chaos” and
“high theater,” before airing clips from ABC’s Designated
Survivor show in which Kiefer Sutherland plays an
obscure cabinet secretary who is
“unexpectedly thrust into the presidency
after an attack at the capitol during a State
of the Union address.”
Given the huge number of death threats leveled at Trump –
including one family friend of Hillary Clinton who was
arrested after he threatened to assassinate Trump at the
inauguration – is CNN irresponsible in drawing attention to
this issue?
Respondents to the video on YouTube, which was heavily
thumbed down, slammed CNN for almost encouraging a
violent attack against Trump.
“Totally not suggesting anything here, huh
CNN?” commented one.
“So leftist terrorists know who they need to
take out, so that dems can stay in power?
This is irresponsible journalism,” added
another.
“I flagged this video as dangerous to the
president elect, and that it might foment
violence,” wrote another.
The charges are not without precedent. After Thomas
DiMassimo tried to rush the stage to violently confront
Trump during an event in Ohio last year, CNN gave him a
platform to denounce Trump as a “bully”.
 Obama Makes Incredible Admission About
Wikileaks In Final Press Conference
Alice Salles
January 19, 2017

President Barack Obama’s last press conference was a
success, but only if you consider journalistic
incompetence worthy of praise.
To Craig Murray, an author, broadcaster, and human rights
activist,
Obama’s comment clarified that the U.S.
government has “no evidence of how
WikiLeaks got the DNC material.”

Obama’s statement is important, Murray continues,

because it

“undermines the stream of completely

evidence-free nonsense that has been
emerging from the [U.S.] intelligence services
this last two months, in which a series of
suppositions have been strung together to
make unfounded assertions that have been
During the one-hour affair, Obama answered questions
repeated again and again in the mainstream
ranging from the commutation of whistleblower Chelsea
media.”
Manning’s sentence to personal queries concerning his and
First Lady Michelle Obama’s approach when talking to
Referring to the emails “that were leaked” and not the
their daughters about the 2016 election —
servers that were hacked, Murray adds, Obama appears to
agree with several experts on this subject, making it clear
not quite a hard-hitting last inquiry for an
the entire ordeal revolving around the alleged Russian
outgoing president who, as the Los Angeles
interference in the 2016 presidential election is but a
Times recently noted, managed to keep U.S.
smokescreen.
military forces “at war for all eight years of
[his] tenure.”
“I have been repeating that this was a leak,
not a hack, until I am blue in the face,” Murray
But despite the media’s toothless strategy — showing the
added. But he isn’t the only one. William Binney,
established press doesn’t understand its own role in a free
a whistleblower who previously worked as
society —
Technical Director of the National Security
Agency (NSA), has also stated this incident
the outgoing president made at least one wasn’t a hack. It was a leak.
admission most of the media has also
ignored.
If it had been a hack, Binney said, the NSA would be able
to provide the public with details regarding the actual
Around the eight-minute mark of the press conference, attack. But from the reports presented so far, that’s clearly
Obama says he hasn’t “commented on WikiLeaks not the case.
generally,” and that the “conclusions of the intelligence
community with respect to the Russian hacking were not
Adding that Obama’s reference to the leaked
conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in
material “appears very natural, fluent and
being the conduit through which we heard about the
unforced,” Murray celebrates, saying that it
[Democratic National Committee] DNC e-mails that were
“is good to have the truth finally told.”
leaked.”

341
 President Trump's Inaugural Address
Was The Shortest Since Carter
By Tyler Durden
Jan 20, 2017 12:56 PM

Trump's 16 minute, 12 second, 1455 word inaugural Source: The American Presidency Project
address is the shortest since President Carter in 1977
(and second shortest to Kennedy since the end of World Butthe following word cloud makes it very clear what the
War II). The brevity, however, did not hide the tone... focus of his speech was...

Carter and Kennedy were the closest in terms of brevity...

h/t @BBCBarbaraPlett

America, First!
.

342
 Trump Publicly Lynches Past
Administrations For Selling American Out
...And Already, Trump Has Proven Himself To Be The Worst Of Them
With The Most Conflicted, Least Qualified And Most Heavily "Special
Interest" Loaded Cabinet In American History.
By Jim W. Dean, Managing Editor
January 20, 2017
[ Editor’s Note:Flabbergasted, with a new administration of
racists, Wall Street thieves, big polluters and an oil company
thief, utterly unqualified, as Secretary of State, Trump tells
America how he is fighting special interests. His allegiance to
Israel, to Saudi Arabia, to organized crime, his lifelong history of
bankruptcies and lawsuits, of defrauded investors, of endless
lies, of sick sexual proclivities and ignorance of the real world
around him…and now this.
I wonder who wrote this crap?g
I had predicted we would have to hang onto our hats when
Trump took over, and I could not see his not using his
inauguration speech to set the tone. And set it he did, a public
whipping that the media people were shocked as they listened to
it. He put the blame for America’s decline directly on the
leadership of both parties having served special interests.
He did not use that term, but a euphemism for it, that they has
“served themselves”. He did this while the past presidents sat in
shock as they watched him launch his presidency by rubbing
their faces into their failures.
Trump has bet his administration on this speech, and sent a not
to subtle message that anyone, politically, in business or
otherwise, that stands in the way, he is going to unleash the
mythological Greek harpies on them. I would remind him that
talking about it, and doing it, are two entirely different things.
343
He will be challenged on his sincerity, of course, that the
banksters and billionaires he has brought into his administration
hardly have any record of serving anything but special interests.
Was this a threat to them, also? We shall see. There is no way to
bluff it, as Trump put himself squarely on the hook, and if it turns
out he was just grandstanding, then he will have his 2020
opponent running on his own failure, using his own words against
him.
Yes, it is going to be one hell of a ride with Trump. Whether it will
be up or down, or both as the same time, roller coaster style, we
will have to wait and see. The first 100 days will tell us a lot
…Jim W. Dean ]
______________
The following is the full transcript/text of President
Trump’s inaugural speech, as prepared for delivery:
Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President
Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow
Americans, and people of the world: thank you.
We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great
national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its
promise for all of our people.
Together, we will determine the course of America and
the world for years to come.
We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But
we will get the job done.
Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out
the orderly and peaceful transfer of power, and we are
grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle
Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition.
They have been magnificent.
Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning.
Because today we are not merely transferring power
from one Administration to another, or from one party to
another – but we are transferring power from
Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the
American People.
For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has
reaped the rewards of government while the people have
borne the cost.
Washington flourished – but the people did not share in
its wealth.
Politicians prospered – but the jobs left, and the factories
closed.
The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of
our country.
Their victories have not been your victories; their
triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they
celebrated in our nation’s Capital, there was little to
celebrate for struggling families all across our land.
That all changes – starting right here, and right now,
because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.
It belongs to everyone gathered here today and
everyone watching all across America.
This is your day. This is your celebration.
And this, the United States of America, is your country.
What truly matters is not which party controls our
government, but whether our government is controlled
by the people.
January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the
people became the rulers of this nation again.
The forgotten men and women of our country will be
forgotten no longer.
Everyone is listening to you now.
You came by the tens of millions to become part of a
historic movement the likes of which the world has never
seen before.
At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction:
that a nation exists to serve its citizens.
Americans want great schools for their children, safe
neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for
themselves.
These are the just and reasonable demands of a
righteous public.
344
But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists:
Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner
cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones
across the landscape of our nation; an education
system, flush with cash, but which leaves our young and
beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime
and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives
and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.
This American carnage stops right here and stops right
now.
We are one nation – and their pain is our pain. Their
dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our
success. We share one heart, one home, and one
glorious destiny.
The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to
all Americans.
For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at
the expense of American industry;
Subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing
for the very sad depletion of our military;
We’ve defended other nation’s borders while refusing to
defend our own;
And spent trillions of dollars overseas while America’s
infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay.
We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth,
strength, and confidence of our country has disappeared
over the horizon.
One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores,
with not even a thought about the millions upon millions
of American workers left behind.
The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from
their homes and then redistributed across the entire
world.
But that is the past. And now we are looking only to the
future.
We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to
be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in
every hall of power.
From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.
From this moment on, it’s going to be America First.
Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on
foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers
and American families.
We must protect our borders from the ravages of other
countries making our products, stealing our companies,
and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great
prosperity and strength.
I will fight for you with every breath in my body – and I
will never, ever let you down.
America will start winning again, winning like never
before.
We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our
borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring
back our dreams.
We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and
airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our
wonderful nation.
We will get our people off of welfare and back to work –
rebuilding our country with American hands and
American labor.
We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and Hire
American.
We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of
the world – but we do so with the understanding that it is
the right of all nations to put their own interests first.
We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but
rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to
follow.
We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones – and
unite the civilized world against Radical Islamic
Terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the
face of the Earth.
At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to
the United States of America, and through our loyalty to
our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.
When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no
room for prejudice.
The Bible tells us, “how good and pleasant it is when
God’s people live together in unity.”
We must speak our minds openly, debate our
disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity.
When America is united, America is totally unstoppable.
There should be no fear – we are protected, and we will
always be protected.
345
We will be protected by the great men and women of our
military and law enforcement and, most importantly, we
are protected by God.
Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger.
In America, we understand that a nation is only living as
long as it is striving.
We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and
no action – constantly complaining but never doing
anything about it.
The time for empty talk is over.
Now arrives the hour of action.
Do not let anyone tell you it cannot be done. No
challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of
America.
We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again.
We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to
unlock the mysteries of space, to free the Earth from the
miseries of disease, and to harness the energies,
industries and technologies of tomorrow.
A new national pride will stir our souls, lift our sights, and
heal our divisions.
It is time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will
never forget: that whether we are black or brown or
white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all
enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the
same great American Flag.
And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit
or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the
same night sky, they fill their heart with the same
dreams, and they are infused with the breath of life by
the same almighty Creator.
So to all Americans, in every city near and far, small and
large, from mountain to mountain, and from ocean to
ocean, hear these words:
You will never be ignored again.
Your voice, your hopes, and your dreams, will define our
American destiny. And your courage and goodness and
love will forever guide us along the way.
Together, We Will Make America Strong Again.
We Will Make America Wealthy Again.
 We Will Make America Proud Again. And, Yes, Together, We Will Make America Great Again.
Thank you, God Bless You, And God Bless America.
We Will Make America Safe Again.

346
 President Trump Orders A Standing Ovation For Hillary
And Bill Clinton - And Finally Gets Them To Smile After
Humiliated Couple Sit Glumly Through His Swearing-In
And Hear Crowd Chant 'Lock Her Up'
 Donald Trump used a short speech at the end of a luncheon at the Capitol in his honor to thank the
Clintons
 He says of them being at inauguration: 'I was very honored. I'd like you to stand up.'
 President had already shaken hands with both Clintons on the way in and voiced 'thank you' to
Hillary
 Clintons did not join the Democratic boycott and she rebuked those who did on Twitter
 They couldn't muster a smile as they arrived at the Capitol - and in the crowd there were 'lock her
up' shouts
 Clinton and Trump did not shake hands during the ceremony but she exchanged greeting with Mike
Pence
 She later came face-to-face with the new president inside the Capitol building at the inaugural lunch
 Husband Bill helped her put on a plastic poncho as rain began to fall at the Capitol
By David Martosko, Us Political Editor For Dailymail.com At The U.s. Capitol and Nikki Schwab,
U.s. Political Reporter For Dailymail.com
Published: 11:01 EST, 20 January 2017 | Updated: 16:31 EST, 20 January 2017

Donald Trump extended an olive branch to Hillary Clinton

on Friday afternoon in the form of a 30-second standing
ovation for his political nemesis after a luncheon with
members of Congress.

And at long last, she offered a broad smile.

Trump's moment of generosity came after Clinton, the

Democratic Party's unsuccessful White House candidate,
braved an inauguration ceremony that she had expected
would mark the beginning of her own presidency.

She and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, sat

through that ceremony stone-faced, betraying little of the
regret and disappointment that comes along with losing the
world's most consequential election. 'I'd like you to stand up': President Trump asked the
audience at the luncheon to give the Clintons a standing
Adding insult to injury, a pocket of Trump supporters in ovation
the crowd chanted 'Lock her up!' when the Clintons were
introduced.

347
'I was very honored': Trump thanked both Bill and Hillary
Clinton for coming to the swearing-in

Thanks: Hillary Clinton gestured to the President and to

the rest of the attendees at the luncheon as they clapped

Smiling at last: The difference in the Clintons' mood was

clear as they left the Capitol

Praying: Bill and Hillary Clinton prayed with the

President-elect as he and the First Lady were honored at
the Capitol with a luncheon

348
First standing ovation: This was the scene as the Trumps
arrived for the luncheon at the Capitol
President Donald Trump embraces ex-President Bill
Clinton as first lady Melania Trump greets Hillary Clinton,
her husband's general election rival

President Donald Trump is seen gripping the hand of his

rival, Democrat Hillary Clinton, who attended today's
inauguration as a former first lady

I looks...: Hillary Clinton made no attempt to smile as

Donald Trump waited to be sworn in

Hillary Clinton and President Donald Trump meet face-to-

face at the inaugural luncheon inside the U.S. Capitol
Building today

349
 Unsmiling: Mike Pence reached across to shake hands
with Hillary Clinton as he made his way from the podium

Watching the swearing in: Hillary Clinton was in her seat Hand of greeting: President Obama reached across to greet
as Donald Trump stood to take the oath of office which she Hillary Clinton with a handshake
had wanted to

Working the line: President Obama reaches across to shake

hands with the woman who will not succeed him

Fixed stare: Hillary Clinton remained frozen-faced as the

45th president was sworn in by Chief Justice Roberts

350
A fixed grin for the victor: Hillary Clinton watches as
Donald Trump walks past her then kisses his wife Melania
before being sworn in as 45th president

Sending an email: Hillary Clinton used her smart phone as

she waited for the swearing in

Downcast: The Clintons were grim faced as they stood on

the platform

Keep your grin fixed: Hillary Clinton was careful not to let
her expression slip was the president-elect - in his final
moments before becoming president - went past her

Warp up dear: Bill Clinton helped his wife put on a poncho

as the rain began just after President Trump was sworn in

Glum and glummer: The Clintons walk through the

Capitol towards their seats on the podium to watch Donald
Trump's arrival

351
Getting ready for the rain: The former First Lady reached
for a see-through poncho as the ran began to fall

Could have been mine: Bill and Hillary Clinton stood hand
in hand,their faces betraying their feelings about the
ceremony

Watching history: Hillary was situated between her

husband Bill and successor George W. Bush to watch the
swearing-in

This was her moment: Hillary Clinton's expression told the

story as Donald Trump arrived on the podium and was
greeted by President Barack Obama. Minutes later, he
became Presidenrt Trump

352
 Fixed stare: Hillary Clinton walked through the Capitol
looking ahead to the stage where she expected she would
be standing

Greeting: Hillary did not embrace Michelle Obama, her

successor as First Lady

Cheerier Bill: The former president was more relaxed than

his wife as he walked to the podium

The eyes have it: George W. Bush seems amused as

Michelle Obama is greeted by Hillary Clinton

353

+40
Should have been me: Hillary Clinton wore a white coat
over a white pantsuit for the Inauguration and was
accompanied by her husband Bill. All the living presidents
except George H.W. Bush are present
Holding on carefully: Hillary Clinton grasped the handrail
as she walked down the stair to the riser on the west
portico of the capital
That slogan, which made its debut at the Republican
National Convention, later became an unavoidable anti-
Clinton campaign battle cry.
Trump seemed to erase it all with a gesture that was
beamed around the world.
'I was very honored – very, very honored – when I heard
that President Bill Clinton and Secretary Hillary Clinton
was coming here today,' Trump told lawmakers packed
into Statuary Hall inside the U.S. Capitol.
354
'And I think it's appropriate to say. And I'd like you to
stand up. I'd like you to stand up.'
Trump kept the sustained applause going by clapping
enthusiastically himself.
'And honestly,' he added, 'there's nothing more I can say,
because I have a lot of respect for those two people.'
The president had already shaken Mrs. Clinton's hand at
the start of the traditional lunch event as they came face-
to-face.
That moment closed a chapter in American political
history that saw Clinton's aspirations swamped by Trump's
populist victory.
Bill Clinton remained glum during the noontime inaugural
swearing-in. Hillary looked glummer, telling a wordless
story of how she felt.
Some Democrats, including many in Congress, questioned
the Clintons' decision to attend, saying it tended to validate
President Trump at the very moment their party aims to
ostracize him.
Trump had it both ways in less than 24 hours, mocking
Clinton during a dinner speech before figuratively
embracing her.
Following a Thursday night candlelight dinner inside
Washington's Union Station, he jabbed at the Clinton
campaign for planning a fireworks display in New York
City when they thought they had the presidency locked up.
Ultimately, Team Clinton canceled its fireworks permit as
Election Day closed in.
'They spent $7 million on fireworks. And they canceled it
– and that's because history has proven that if you're going
to lose, you don't want fireworks, right?' Trump joked.
 Relax: George W. Bush seemed to be breaking the tension
as he made a thumbs up prompting the Clintons to finally
laugh

Grip and grin: Bill held Hillary by the left elbow as the
Clintons walked out of the Capitol and into the open

Long walk: Bill and Hillary went along the same route as Fixed grin: Hillary managed a smile for those she was
they would have expected to walk if she was becoming passing as she made her way to her seat
45th - and second Clinton - president

355
 Breaking the tension: George W. Bush was all smiles on
the podium - unlike Hillary Clinton

Good to see you: One friend apparently raised Clinton's

spirits as she entered the podium

At last, a wave: Hillary perked up as the former first

couple waited for the inauguration to begin. Dick Cheney.
George W. Bush's vice-president, was behind them with
his wife Lynne

It could have been: Hillary Clinton's expression made clear

her thoughts about the place on the podium she found
herself at

White House memories: Hillary Clinton exchanged words

with George W. Bush as they stood together waiting for
Trump

356
'And that was a good sign.'
Hillary showed up in a white pantsuit and coat, alongside
Bill and their daughter Chelsea, for an appearance she
never thought she would make without hearing 'Hail to the
Chief' played in her honor.
And she used Twitter to issue a veiled to rebuke to those
who boycotted it - saying: 'I'm here today to honor our
democracy & its enduring values. I will never stop
believing in our country & its future.'
Clinton won points from a former adversary for bucking
up for the occasion.
'I think it takes a lot to show up in that situation after the
kind of campaign that was run against her,' said Tad
Devine, a top adviser to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders,
who challenged Clinton in the Democratic primaries.
Devine said Clinton's attendance 'is [a] testament to her
strength of character. I really think she should be praised.'
Trump famously castigated Mrs. Clinton repeatedly as
'Crooked Hillary,' interrupting her during debates and
projecting a generally belligerent attitude as he unseated
the would-be first female president.
357
On Friday afternoon he also praised the military men he
recruited to join his cabinet, including retired Gen. James
'Mad Dog' Mattis – and hinted that Democratic Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer would warm to him.
'Those generals are going to keep us so safe,' Trump said.
'They're going to have a lot of problems, the other side.
They're going to look at a couple of them. This is central
casting. If I'm doing a movie, I'd pick you, general.'
Trump pointed to Mattis and declared that he is 'doing
really well. Even – even Chuck likes General Mattis, and
General Kelly.'
'We're going to have four great years, hopefully, of peace
and prosperity,' the new president told the lawmakers. 'And
we'll be working very, very hard.'
And we're all dealing together. We all want the same thing.
We're all good people,' he added.
'Whether you're a Republican or Democrat, doesn't make
any difference. We're going to get along.'
 Donald Trump Eviscerated
Washington In His Inaugural Address
By Circa News
January 20, 2017

Trump made a point in his speech to use the phrase

"radical Islamic terrorism" when describing conflicts
abroad.

Traditionally, other presidents and congressmen have shied

away from using the phrase for its inflammatory nature.

Donald Trump became the 45th president of the United

States on Friday, and quickly put official Washington on
notice that business as usual was about to busted.

"Today we are not merely transferring

power from one administration to another,
or from one party to another, but we are
transferring power from Washington, D.C. WATCH |Trump says that he will fight "radical Islamic
and giving it back to you, the American terrorism."
people," he said in his inaugural address
which lasted less than 20 minutes.
UPDATE 12:18 pm:
With the outgoing president, Barack Obama, and the
congressional leadership sitting right behind him, Trump Trump finished his speech on a bombastic note, playing on
used his trademark bluntness to indict the way the nation's his campaign slogan by saying that he and his supporters
capital has operated for the last decade will make America great again.

"For too long, a small group in our nation’s
capital has reaped the rewards of
government while the people have borne
the cost," he argued. "Washington
flourished - but the people did not share in
its wealth," he added.
“We will make America great again, thank
you, God bless you, God bless America,"
said Trump.
And with that, Trump's first speech is over. Trump spoke
for under 20 minutes, as was expected.

"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."

And that was just the beginning. See below other highlight
from the opening minutes of the Trump administration.

Watch highlights of the Trump speech below.

UPDATE 12:29 pm:

358
WATCH | Trump finishes his speech by echoing his
campaign promise, saying he'll make America great again.

UPDATE 12:16 pm:

Trump has emphasized that America's interests will be put

first no matter what.

"We will seek friendship and goodwill with

the nations of the world, but we do so with
the understanding that it is the right of all
nations to put American interests will
always come first. WATCH | Trump says that America has made other
countries rich.

UPDATE 12:06 pm:

Trump opened his speech by thanking his predecessor,

Barack Obama, for his help during the transition of power.

Next, he criticized those in Washington who he said had

forgotten those who bore the cost of the actions of
politicians.

"We are transferring power from Washington DC and

giving it back to you, the people," said Trump.

WATCH |Trump decried the challenges facing the nation

today.

UPDATE 12:12 pm:

Trump has moved onto specifically describing issues he

sees in the country today, including the breakdown of
American manufacturing, drugs, gang violence, and the
unreciprocated protection of countries across the world.

“The wealth of the middle class has been ripped from their
homes and redistributed across the world," said Trump.

"This American carnage stops right here and stops right

WATCH | Trump says that America is facing hardships
now," Trump said emphatically.

359
 Completing The Criminal Takeover Of The United States
The Majority Of Americans Look On Today's Events, The Inauguration Of The Most Hated Man In The
World As President Of The United States As Akin To Losing World War II, A National Disaster. Seldom
Have The American People Been This United. Few, However, Know What It Is Really About. Oh, This Is An
Invasion, Not Russia, Not Aliens, Just The Mob, And They've Been Around A Long Time.
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor & Ian Greenhalgh, Managing Editor
January 20, 2017

was more than broke, he was totally in debt, busted

entirely. However, with a CIA orchestrated influx of
stolen cash from the Soviet commercial banking system,
Trump became a front for what is now the most powerful
criminal empire on earth, one that now certainly controls
the United States, an empire centered in Israel for those
who didn’t know already. First, catch this 9 minute video
on Felix Sater, the man behind Donald Trump, at least
since mob boss Roy Cohn died (1984). In the first 5
minutes you will understand, America’s intelligence
agencies are controlled by organized crime, in particular,
the gang that was just sworn in, headed by real president
Felix Sater, whose rabbi “spills the beans.”
“Trump delivers his inauguration address
Friday with historically low popularity. A
new CBS News poll puts him at 32 percent,
the lowest approval rating for an incoming
president in the poll’s history, and a
majority disapproval of the way he’s
handling the transition.”
Trump began his day with a religious
service at the hands of Klan preacher,
Pastor Robert Jeffress, who joined
Trump in prayers to end heresies like
Catholicism, which Jeffress described
as “Satanic.” Trump is quoted as
saying: “I love this guy.” If you think we
are kidding: Hold on, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
When Trump told the nation of his anger
when thousands of New Jersey Muslims Some time ago, we had examined some of the unpleasant
danced in the streets on 9/11, hidden truths of the last century where control of education
celebrating the event, we were listening and media, particularly in the West, had created an
to the delusional ramblings of a alternative reality that became official history. Each day
madman controlled by a handler named the imaginarium is rebuilt and reinforced, almost as though
Felix Sater, the man who now controls we were all in a Matrix film, through control of everything
the nuclear arsenal of the United States, we see and hear and by those around us incapable of
the man behind Trump, a very public discernment.
melding of CIA, Mossad and Khazarian
Mafia. Here is where this goes, the world is being eaten by a
criminal “super-state,” resisted unsuccessfully by the
Today we are seeing a president take office with a 32% Kaiser, perhaps by Hitler, both resisted and served by
approval rating, who lost the popular vote by nearly 3 Franklin Roosevelt, a state that killed JFK and now has a
million (perhaps as much as 10 million more) and is far total stranglehold on America.
less popular than the outgoing president. In 1990, Trump
360
 No, the American military isn’t going to save us, if
anything they are the weakest link.

For those that don’t think the world is burning down

around us right now, you’re simply not paying attention;
there are however, positive things that can be taken from
even the worst of times and let me assure you, this is the
worst of times – we will be lucky if any of us survive.

We are not going on a tiresome journey into the world of

Fake News, instead we are going to advance a now proven
hypothesis; let us start with a few bullet points:

What if the Soviet Union were originated not as Russian
but a Bolshevik (read “Neocon”) experiment to create the
real “Jewish state.” Taken down by Stalin during his
purges, reborn in the 70s, where the “dog,” and we mean
the Soviet Union, became a colony of “Soviet Israel.”
We can follow the trails, they are exhaustive but lead to
inexorable truths. We follow the FBI through Hoover and
Meyer Lansky, an agency controlled by organized crime
from day one, and a CIA far worse. Add to the mix the
Neocon takeover with 9/11 and the mix of agencies,
recently under “Clapper,” all controlled from outside the
US, and events around us, not just today, but in particular a
world racing into poverty and slavery, things fall into place
easily.
 Discussions of ‘Deep State’ that recently came to light
in the United States refer to a powerful criminal empire
that rules America.
 The mechanism for this empire, as most long
suspected, originates with PNAC in the 1990s.
 PNAC is the political expression for the criminal cartel,
which includes the major intelligence agencies – KGB,
CIA, ‘Mossad’ and others that began erasing the last
vestiges of world governments.
 The programme probably started in earnest with the
non-presidency of actor and ‘useful idiot’ Ronald
Reagan.
 A cabal that almost immediately tried to whack Reagan
elevated the level of controls over not just world
currencies, but a broader programme including access
to resources, control of military technology, control of
space, control of world media and control of all world
industry.
 Destroying two nations was key to this – Russia and
the United States.
 To destroy the United States it was necessary to
destroy the banking system, beginning with the thrifts,
the mortgage banking system and to central all power
in the big five Wall St. banks, all Rothschild controlled
of course, ending any threat to the Federal Reserve.
 What happened in Russia requires understanding the
bifurcation that began in 1917 when a Zionist
conspiracy (and that is precisely the correct term)
known as the October Revolution, placed, and please
forgive me for saying this, the authors of the Protocols,
real or imagined, you decide for yourself, in charge of
Russia.
 Stalin’s purges, as it is increasingly beginning to seem,
were in actuality, part of a de-Bolshevification, in order
to free Russia from a brutal Zionist enslavement.
Toward that end, it becomes necessary for us to re-
assess everything bad ever said about Stalin. If we are
dealing with a false historical narrative, and Stalin is
being presented to the world as a cartoonish
monstrosity, it is very likely true that almost nothing
said about Stalin can be believed. Why do you think the
Russian people want Stalin back? Why do you think
historians that challenge the Holocaust, or
who describe a very different Adolf Hitler, are silenced
and even imprisoned? Why do you think, decade after

361
 decade, we are inundated with an endless narrative
where eventually everyone is to be smeared and
destroyed.
 It’s 1990, George H.W. Bush makes his New World
Order speech, but what is that New World Order? Let’s
see, Bush and Carlos Salinas give us NAFTA. Turn the
clock back to the Reagan 80s for a second, remember
Iran-Contra, the real creation of the CIA’s arms,
banking and drugs empire, first controlling
cocaine/crack and in the process wiping out America’s
inner cities and then, as time moves on, opium and
then heroin and total control of that world market as
well.
 We can trace this effort through those little things no-
one notices, where the false narrative fails, through the
banking efforts of Jeb Bush in Venezuela and
Colombia building the cartels and Mitt Romney’s
partnership with Salinas and Raul Castro.
 1990, with the US deep in it’s bloodletting and
restructuring, was nothing to what happened to Russia;
anyone who thinks that the oligarchs of the 1990s
appeared out of nowhere is insane, the real downfall of
Russia was staged through the deal cutting to help the
Jewish emigres leave Russia.
 Israel has always been a communist country, a Kibbutz
is nothing more than a collective farm, Israel was and is
Communist; furthermore, Zionism and Bolshevism are
exactly the same thing – the religion of the Likudists
and let’s be clear, Likudists are not religious Jews, they
are communists and they are atheists. During the
1980s, what we know of as Israel became something
very different, every nation on earth was guided by the
global considerations of the east-west dialectic, the
potential for nuclear war and their own survival.
 One instance is Libya – we see Gadaffi getting Russian
military aid and overtly attack the United States while
harbouring a huge CIA-Mossad presence, partnering in
the Israeli-South Africa nuclear programme and being
the headquarters for NATO’s Gladio operations. Those
IRA terrorists ‘seen all over Libya’ and even portrayed
in Hollywood films, were CIA and special forces,
Reagan’s attack on Libya was pure theatre, Gadaffi’s
dead daughter, oh, wait, Gadaffi never had a
daughter.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8loKEw-
wlA&list=PLCA14F3F13CF284B3&index=6
362
 While Gadaffi played East against West in order to
survive, what we know as Israel, in reality, the nominal
capital of a worldwide financial criminal cabal set it’s
goals much higher; during the 80s, Israel gained
control of the FBI and CIA and began bleeding key
intelligence into Russia as both Russia and America
reduced nuclear arsenals, the weapons being
dismantled and stored in the US in actuality began
disappearing – 300 we know of and can prove,
shocking to even then-president Bush – this is Israel’s
nuclear arsenal.
 Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor cooked out in 1985,
therefore the massive amounts of uranium ore needed
to build the 300-400 warheads Israel supposedly has
cannot be traced as it never existed. There is a well-
defined and very public market for uranium ore with
trading desks, Israel never bought any of it and
everyone knows it. There are no ships, no shipments,
no banking transactions, none of it. Israel penetrated
the US, the Dept of Energy, the intelligence agencies &
FBI and stole 350 or more nuclear pits, transported by
Viktor Bout – we can prove it and hold all of the
evidence. The key to Israel’s power here was the
insidious way they moved back into Russia, ostensibly
to cut deals to move Russian Jews to Israel.
 The name Andropov comes onto our radar in 2012
when we received leaked FBI files and a photograph of
the daughter of Yuri Andropov – Maria Perez
Andropov, mistress of Mitt Romney, the presidential
candidate, first Romney, then Trump, no wait, first
mcCain, then Romney then Trump, a three-fer of
‘Russian controlled stooges?’ McCain, the Manchurian
Candidate, blackmailed for aiding the enemy during
Vietnam (so documented); Romney, taped by the FBI
in Cuba with Raul Castro, Carlos Salinas of Mexico and
Maria Perez Andropov planning the cartel takeover of
much of America’s financial industry; VT has the
interview tapes with the FBI’s agent in charge.
 Was this when the Bolsheviks came back into Russia,
culminating in Gorbachev, who according to Lee Wanta
took a 300 million dollar payoff to turn that nation over
to the oligarchs, and just guess who those people
were/are? Picture Netanyahu on his endless trips to
Moscow, carrying the Pollard intelligence, according to
Gwyneth Todd, that was hand the US to the Soviet
Union on a silver platter.
 Netanyahu, as UN Ambassador, was Pollard’s
personal handler, but in the end as it may well be
today, Russia was every bit the target, as is the United
States, now prostrate after a third successful attempt to
put a Zionist president in place. Now we are watching
the same thing in Europe. There is a key piece to the
puzzle that differentiates who pays attention and who is
real, a popular narrative pushed forward by the Fake
News is that George Soros, working with the neocons
and his ‘Zionist allies’ organised Maidan; proof lies in a
solitary, poorly forged March 2014 ‘source-less leak’
where in a meeting transcript, Viktoria Nuland’s input is
attributed to Soros. Those who follow the nasty real
 world know that Soros runs the world’s largest and
most powerful anti-Zionist organisation and spent the
1990s and many billions of dollars fighting the Neocons
and Netanyahu; this is when the Israelis tried branding
him as a ‘Nazi war criminal’, when that didn’t work they
started accusing him of something even worse – of
being a Zionist!
 These are the areas we are working on now – key is
when the Soviet Union stopped being the Soviet Union
and, as with the United States, became something
else; we see the methodologies quite easily, how few
the bribery and blackmail of a few key individuals, an
entire continent can be controlled, power is that
centralised. With Russia, the key figure was probably
Yuri Andropov. Andropov is a ghost, or a remnant if
you prefer, or a Golem, created of mud and lies. There
is evidence that after the initial SALT treaties of 1971-2,
the Cold War may well have been nothing but empty
theatre.The estimations made of Russia’s conventional
military strength were greatly overestimated, this is why
both nations went for the theatre-based nuclear
solution, with the US deploying first the Pershing
missiles and then the F-111 and B-52 bombers being
designated as nuclear strike aircraft.
 Today, if anything burns us down, it will be the failure,
even in Russia, of identifying the bifurcation; this is why
Trump is so important, as seen below where we learn
about Trump’s relationship with Felix Sater and the
Russian oligarchs. In 1990, Trump was bankrupt, it was
then that he was chosen as the conduit by those who
really took down Russia.
Calibrated Confidence, December 2011
http://calibratedconfidence.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/chapter
-5-russians-their-friends-bernie.html
Chapter 5: The Russians, Their Friends, & Bernie
Madoff’s Bear Market
As Bernie Madoff’s former secretary noted in an article
that she wrote for Vanity Fair magazine, right before
Madoff turned himself over to the FBI, he made a point of
flying to Switzerland to meet with Marc Rich. In fact,
Marc Rich, the fellow who had been indicted for trading
with Iran, was the last person Madoff met before going to
jail.
Madoff and Rich would have had much to discuss. They
had done business together for decades, going back to the
time in the 1980s when Rich and a man named Edmund
Safra were among the most important Western business
partners of the regimes in Iran and Russia. Safra first came
to fame in the Iran-Contra affair, which saw him selling his
contacts with the Iranian regime to the Israelis, and he later
became a billionaire due largely to the business he
conducted with Marc Rich in Russia.
363
In the 1990s, Safra controlled the Republic National Bank
and countless other financial entities that were heavily
focused on Russia. And much of the business that Safra
and Rich conducted in Russia was done with the people
who were the real power in Russia, the people who make
Russia’s foreign policy and direct its economic activities.
Safra has been widely credited with having been among
the small clique of billionaires who orchestrated the 1999
rise to power of Russian president (now prime minister)
Vladimir Putin.
That clique was led by two Russian oligarchs, Boris
Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich. At the time,
Berezovsky was the most powerful man in Russia,
famously named the “Godfather of the Kremlin” by Forbes
journalist Paul Klebnikov, who authored a book by that
name and was then murdered on the street outside his
Moscow offices.
In 1999, Abramovich was relatively obscure, but he was an
important business partner for Berezovsky. The two men
effective co-managed a single business empire. They were,
as we will see, also involved in various ventures with the
Russian Mafia kingpin Semion Mogilevich. Abramovich,
like Mogilevich, earned billions siphoning money (with
the apparent consent of Vladimir Putin) from the Russian
state oil firm, Gazprom.
It should be understood that Gazprom is
much more than an oil company. It is
one of the most important instruments
of state power in Russia, a key tool of
Putin’s foreign policy and the source of
cash that Putin uses to cement
relationships between himself and
shady businessmen, most notably
Abramovich and Mogilevich.
Moscow police arrested Mogilevich in 2008, and some
interpreted this as a sign that President Dmitry Medvedev
was asserting his power by taking on the friends of Prime
Minister Putin. More likely, the arrest was meant to
placate the United States, which, after all, had Mogilevich
as #2 on its Most Wanted list. Either way, Mogilevich was
quickly released, with the Russian Interior Minister
announcing that the charges against the world’s most
notorious Mafia boss were “not of a particularly grave
nature.”
As of 2011, reports from Moscow suggest that Mogilevich
may face no charges whatsoever. This was not a surprise,
given Mogilevich’s importance to the Russian government.
As I mentioned, Mogilevich was implicated in massive
money laundering scheme that saw more than $7 billion
laundered through the Bank of New York. Much of that
money was said by prosecutors to have been filched by
Russian government officials, including president Boris
Yeltsin, who had just named Vladimir Putin as his
successor thanks in large part to the support of
Abramovich, Berezovsky, and quite likely, Mogilevich.
More recently, U.S. diplomatic cables obtained by
Wikileaks in 2010 reinforced the statements (which I
quoted at the outset of this story) of National Intelligence
Director Admiral Blair that the Russian government and
organized crime outfits (the most prominent of which is
the Mogilevich organization) are closely intertwined.
As one cable from the U.S. embassy in Moscow noted, the
Russian government “operates more as a kleptocracy than
a government. Criminal elements enjoy a ‘kryshna’ (a term
from the criminal/mafia world literally meaning roof or
protection) that runs through the police [and] the Federal
Security Service [Russia’s spy agency]…”
Until his death, Edmund Safra was clearly part of this
nexus. His Republic National Bank was among those that
were implicated (though never charged) in the Russian
Mafia and money laundering scandal that focused on the
Bank of New York. Soon after that scandal became big
news in 1999, two masked men arrived at Safra’s home in
Monaco, locked him in a bathroom, lit the place on fire,
and left Safra to die a terrible death from smoke inhalation.
That murder has never been solved, but one theory is that
it was part of the Russian government’s effort to cover up
a money laundering and stock manipulation network that
was, in fact, much bigger than the Bank of New York
scandal that broke in 1999. As we will see in an upcoming
chapter, that theory is correct.
Many of the people involved were among Michael
Milken’s closest associates. Two of these associates were
Bruce Rappaport and Abbas Gokal, owners of Inter
Maritime Bank, which became the Bank of New York
affiliate most responsible for building ties to Russia.
Gokal, you will recall, was also a key BCCI figure, closely
linked to Pakistan’s spy services and tied up in the Iran-
Contra scandal. Later, Gokal (in addition to being an
official advisor to the regime in Iran) would also be
implicated in assisting Pakistan’s nuclear weapons
proliferation, including the transfer of nuclear weapons
expertise to Iran.
One of the Russian oligarchs whom Gokal and Rappaport
introduced to Bank of New York was Mikhail Fridman,
head of Alfa Bank, who is a close associate of Abramovich
and Mogilevich. Currently, Fridman and Alfa Bank are the
principal financiers of Iran’s Buhsher nuclear facility,
which is widely believed to be part of Iran’s efforts to
obtain nuclear weapons. In 1999, Fridman, like Safra, was
among the small clique of billionaires (led by Berezovsky
and Abramovich) who orchestrated Vladimir Putin’s rise
to power.
364
After the Bank of New York scandal hit the front pages in
1999, Berezovsky purportedly had a falling out with Putin
and went into “exile” in London. Some Russian
journalists, noting that Putin has met with Berezovsky
since then, argue that the falling out was not real – that it
was yet another example of the smoke and mirrors that
Putin uses to conceal the nature of his relationships. Aside
from the meetings, there is no strong evidence to support
this theory, but anything is possible when it comes to the
affairs of Russia.
Whatever the case, Berezovsky and Abramovich split up
their business empire in 1999 in a deal that is still being
mediated by Abu Dhabi royal Sheikh Sultan bin Khalifa al
Nahyan (he of the same family that co-founded BCCI).
That same year, Putin’s government charged Berezovsky
with various crimes, and Berezovsky emerged as the
leading figure in “the London Circle”, a strange group of
Russian exiles that seems to be opposed to Putin’s regime.
Abramovich remained in Russia, and is now perhaps that
nation’s most powerful man. He is Russia’s fourth richest
oligarch, having earned billions not only from siphoning
money from the Russian state oil company, Gazprom, but
also from companies that are involved in everything from
financial services to radioactive isotopes. And he
maintains a private army of at least 100 former KGB
operatives and mercenaries.
Such private armies are not mere security companies; they
are the bonds that tie oligarchs like Abramovich to the
siloveki – the former KGB operatives and current spies
who feature prominently in Putin’s government. Putin
himself is a former KGB operative, and before becoming
president, he was the head of the KGB’s successor outfit,
the FSB.
People like Mogilevich and Abramovich should be viewed
as being part of the intelligence apparatus that controls
Russia. Indeed, Russian commentators note that Putin
and Abramovich have something approximating a father-
son relationship, with there being some dispute as to
which man is the father figure.
In 2010, I began to take an interest in Abramovich because
he seemed to be tied to a network of brokerages in the
United States, including the criminal operation run by
Bernard Madoff, and also, Tuco Trading, the little,
unregistered brokerage that employed the jihadi Zuhair
Karam (whom I introduced at the outset of this story).
Indeed, I had taken such a close interest that I was
beginning to wonder whether someone was going to put
radioactive polonium in my tea.
Of course, I joke – that seemed unlikely, but there was the
odd case of a former KGB operative named Alexander
Litvinenko, who had been an employee of Berezovsky and
a member of the London Circle. In 2006, Litvinenko was
making what seemed like outrageous claims about Putin,
stating, for example, that Putin’s government had
extensive contacts with Al Qaeda.
Putin’s government responded that it was, in fact,
Litvinenko and Berezovsky who were funding jihadis,
including the same Al Qaeda-tied Chechen terrorists who
had, in 2004, taken hostage hundreds of children (many of
whom were subsequently killed when Russian forces
attacked the hostage-takers) at a school in the Russian city
of Beslam.
Litvinenko, in turn, said that the Russian intelligence
services had orchestrated the “Chechen” terrorist attacks as
part of an effort to enhance Putin’s power, the theory being
that the Russian people would embrace a strongman like
Putin if they believed their children were being killed by
Chechens. Litvinenko’s claims were echoed by Russia’s
most prominent journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, who was
promptly murdered in the elevator of her apartment
building.
Since then, it has been concluded even by the Russian
courts that the Russian intelligence services did stage at
least one Chechen “terrorist attack”, a bombing that killed
an unspecified number of people and collapsed a bridge.
The FSB says that it was merely a training exercise to
prepare Russia’s intelligence operatives for real Chechen
attacks. As for the other attacks, the evidence remains
circumstantial, and the truth may never be known.
Whatever the truth, though, Litvinenko (who was on close
terms with Chechen nationalists) claimed again in 2006
that he had evidence that the Russian government had
developed a working relationship with Al Qaeda. Soon
before he was to release this evidence (or, at any rate, soon
before the date on which he claimed he was going to
release this evidence) Litvinenko was poisoned by
radioactive substance called polonium-210, which had
apparently been dropped in his tea. Two weeks later, in
November 2006, Litvinenko was dead.
Berezovsky’s spokesman said the murder was the work of
Putin’s thugs. Others said it was the work of Abramovich.
Moscow newspapers aligned with Putin duly accused
Berezovsky of orchestrating the radioactive polonium
attack as part of a conspiracy to discredit the Russian
government. Still others said that Litvinenko had been
trying to blackmail some powerful business people in
Moscow and was killed as a result. Meanwhile, the
Russian government claimed that Litvinenko was building
a nuclear bomb for Al Qaeda and accidentally poisoned
himself with the polonium.
None of these theories have been supported by solid proof.
Such are the mysteries of present day Russia. But even
more concerning than the murder itself is the fact that the
murderers were able to easily smuggle polonium 210 into
Britain, suggesting that this substance could quite easily
get into the hands of people such as “Specially Designated
365
Global Terrorist” Yasin al Qadi (Osama bin Laden’s
favorite financier), Al Qaeda Golden Chain member
Sheikh Mahfouz, and all the jihadis who not only
supported outfits such as Benevolence International (which
was in contact with people shopping for nukes) but also
have close business relationships with leading Russians,
including Abramovich and Berezovsky.
In 2003, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a
lengthy report on the real possibility that terrorists could
deploy “dirty bombs” made of radioactive material. The
report listed polonium 210 (the substance used to kill
Litvinenko) as one of the 10 radioactive materials of
“greatest concern”. A dirty bomb would not be nearly as
lethal as a full-fledged nuclear device, but one dirty bomb
could contaminate much of lower Manhattan with cancer-
causing radiation and precipitate wide-spread panic, with
millions of people fleeing major cities.
A dirty bomb coupled with an effective attack on the
financial markets could potentially bring the United
States to its knees.
This is why I think it is generally a good idea to be on the
lookout for people who are in any way mixed up with both
radioactive polonium poisonings and unregistered little
brokerages, like Tuco Trading, which transacted
manipulative trading equal to twenty percent of the volume
of the biggest brokerage on the planet. And this is why I
kept telephoning Zuhair Karam, the jihadi who worked for
Tuco Trading.
I really did believe Zuhair when he said he was “just one
of the little guys” but I figured he knew something about
the big guys who were trading through Tuco in the month
before the collapse of Bear Stearns in 2008. I also
suspected that this trading might have been connected to
trading through a larger network of brokerages that
included not just Madoff’s crooked operation, but also
ostensibly upstanding outfits like Credit Suisse, the giant
investment bank.
In fact, the New York district attorney’s ongoing
investigation of Assa Corporation seems to overlap with a
current Justice Department investigation focused on Credit
Suisse. The Assa Corporation, recall, is the Iranian
espionage and business outfit indicted in 2009 for funding
Iran’s nuclear program. It was a unit of the Alavi
Foundation, which owned the building that had housed the
offices of Ivan Boesky and Marc Rich. The Iranian agents
who ran Alavi and Assa Corp., we know, took their orders
from diplomats working out of Iran’s mission to the United
Nations in New York.
The misdeeds of Credit Suisse could fill several books, but
for our purposes, it is enough to know that the bank had
several key relationships. One was with Bernard Madoff.
Credit Suisse’s raised at least $1 billion for Madoff’s scam
(the bank denies that it knew that it was a scam).
Meanwhile, Credit Suisse’s most important client was
Leon Black (the Milken crony whose father fell through a
plate glass window in the Pan Am building). The
relationship between Black and Credit Suisse is, to this
day, so close that Black has played a role in deciding
which executives should run its key departments.
Credit Suisse’s other key relationship is with the regime in
Iran. Indeed, it is fair to say that the Islamic Republic has
had few better friends than the executives of Credit Suisse.
In December 2009, Credit Suisse was fined $536 million,
or around 10 percent of the bank’s profits for that year, for
deliberately helping Iranian banks, including Bank Melli
and Bank Saderat, hide their identities and conduct secret
transactions valued at more than $1 billion. Amazingly,
however, no Credit Suisse executives faced criminal
charges.
It is amazing because Credit Suisse’s executives conducted
these secret transactions for Iran knowing full well that
they were transferring the $1 billion directly to the Atomic
Energy Organization of Iran and the Aerospace Industries
Organization, the Iranian government entities responsible
for the regime’s covert production of nuclear weapons and
long-range missiles.
According to the U.S. Treasury Department, while Credit
Suisse was helping to finance Iran’s nuclear weapons
program, the bank was also using code names to conceal
securities trading though other brokerages on behalf of
financial firms in Sudan and Libya. A former employee of
the Manhattan district attorney’s office (who now runs a
private intelligence firm that specializes in tracking
suspicious financial transactions) suspects that the Libya
and Sudan trading was tied to similar trading originating
out of Iran and involving executives of the Alavi
Foundation and the Assa Corporation, the Islamic
Republic’s espionage and business operations in New
York.
So far, the Justice Department has not described the nature
of that trading, nor has it revealed the names of the Credit
Suisse employees and the other brokerages involved. But
when I called Zuhair Karam of Tuco Trading, I knew that
his family was on close terms with Palestinian Islamic
Jihad leader Sami al Arian, the fellow who was, like the
Assa Corp, taking directions from Iranian operatives
working out of the UN headquarters in New York. I also
had received a tip that much of the massive volume that
went through Tuco in 2008 was tied to a certain Iranian
fellow who was an associate of the Palestinian Islamic
Jihad leadership and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.
I figured Zuhair could tell me more about this, but he was
not cooperative. Not yet, anyway. At this stage in 2010, I
knew only that thereport by Tuco’s bankruptcy receiver
stated that 2,000 anonymous accounts in China and one
other account had traded 2 billion shares through Tuco in
366
the month before the March, 2008 collapse of Bear
Stearns.
In fact, Tuco certainly traded far more shares than that, but
the receiver’s report only mentioned the trading out of the
2,000 anonymous accounts in China and that one other
account. In any case, those 2 billion shares alone were, I
must stress, equal to around 20 percent of the volume of
the largest brokerage on the planet.
I knew that the people behind those anonymous accounts
were not Chinese, and I suspected that Zuhair Karam could
tell me more about the people who were behind the
accounts. But, as I say, Zuhair was not initially
cooperative. Only later would he provide the confirmation
I needed to know the full story.
But while Zuhair was still refusing to cooperate, I had
begun a discussion with another person tied to Tuco, a
trader in Moscow by the name of Alexey Ivin, who, along
with several other Russian traders, held an account at Tuco
called “Orange Diviner.” We do not know how many
shares were traded through this account because Tuco’s
bankruptcy receiver had a stroke before he could finish his
report, but Orange Diviner was interesting on many levels.
For starters, it seemed surprising to me that Tuco, an
obscure, little brokerage in Chicago that had not even
bothered to register with the authorities, had attained such
international prominence . When Orange Diviner came on
board at the beginning of 2008, Tuco had been in business
for only a few months. And the international attention that
Tuco had received was by no means insignificant. The
Orange Diviner group was comprised of some seriously
heavy players, most of whom appeared to be top
henchmen of either Roman Abramovich (Putin’s right-
hand man) or Semion Mogilevich (the Russian Mafia
kingpin).
One of the “Orange Diviner” Tuco traders was named
Sergey Maksimov, and according to a man familiar with
Orange Diviner, this was the same Sergey Maksimov
(sometimes spelled “Sergei Maximov”) who worked at a
high level for Semion Mogilevich at an outfit called YBM
Magnex, which was a massive stock fraud and one of the
big reasons why Mogilevich ended up in second place on
the FBI’s Most Wanted list, just below Osama Bin Laden.
YBM Magnex was tied to the larger stock manipulation
and money laundering network that was identified after the
Bank of New York scandal became public.
An FBI report from 1999 (since declassified) noted that
Czech authorities had reported that Sergey Maksimov was
dead, the victim of an execution-style murder. However,
he is alive and well. With help from Russian journalists
and an organized crime expert in Boston who has provided
assistance to the Deep Capture investigation, we located
him in Ukraine, where he now runs a big financial
institution called VAB Bank.
I couldn’t get in touch with Mr. Maksimov, but Alexey
Ivin agreed to answer my questions about Tuco and
Orange Diviner with the stipulation that his answers would
be translated into English by his girlfriend. His answers –
well, to summarize, he said everything at Tuco was on the
up and up, so far as he knew.
Later, I sent Mr. Ivin an email with the following question:
“I notice that other people in Orange Diviner [all of whom
had accounts at Tuco] include Sergey Maksimov of VAB
Bank, Sergey Pavlov of EvrazRuda, and Evgeny Potapov,
formerly of Evrazruda, and Alesandr Romanov of Evraz
Group. A few others — altogether an impressive group.
How did you all come together to form Orange Diviner?”
Mr. Ivin responded, “sergey maksimov – he was my friend
who invite my person from orange-diviner and he is my
partner of business. sergey pavlov and evgeny potapov –
they was investors in orange-diviner. romanov was just a
student. other people—was just students too, they don’t
have enough experience in trading business.”
I couldn’t think of any clever way to get more information
out of Mr. Ivin, and though it seemed that he was lying
about the students, I felt like he might be willing to help
me, so I asked him rather bluntly, “Since Sergey
Maksimov previously worked with Semion Mogilevich, do
you think you could help me learn more about Mogilevich
and mafia involvement in U.S. markets. I know this would
be risky for you, but it would be a good deed…”
Mr. Ivin replied, “Maksimov never was work with
Mogilevich, and we (maksimov and i) don’t know this
man…I don’t know what you toking [sic] about”. When I
wrote back to Mr. Ivin, noting that he had not disputed that
Maksimov worked for VAB Bank, and the Maksimov who
worked for VAB was definitely the same Maksimov who
worked for Mogilevich, Mr. Ivin replied that the
Maksimov in Orange Diviner did not work for VAB Bank
after all. Then Mr. Ivin sent me an email that said, “Sergey
Mikhaylov, Timofeyev’s heir to the leadership of
Orekhovskaya, Igor “Max” Maksimov, was killed in
February…”
I do not know what that was supposed to mean, and to
make a long story short, I never did get to the bottom of
this. But I’ll go out on a limb, and say that since Mr. Ivin
did not initially dispute that Maksimov worked for VAB
Bank, and since I am certain that Maksimov at VAB is the
same guy who worked for Mogilevich, and since Mr. Ivin
refused to tell me where his Maksimov currently worked
(if not at VAB), it is likely the case that the Maksimov
who co-founded Orange Diviner was, indeed, a top
Russian Mafia boss with links to the Russian government.
As I continued to ask questions about the other members
of Orange Diviner, Mr. Ivin became even less
communicative, saying at one point that he had never
heard of a fellow, Alexandr Lyssenko, who was listed
367
clearly in Tuco’s account books as being a member of
Orange Diviner. When I followed up with questions stating
that the other members of Orange Diviner were not
students, but had, in fact, worked at high levels for Roman
Abramovich’s most important companies, including the
Evraz Group, Mr. Ivin did not deny it. Rather, he
answered vaguely, “I don’t know about cooperation
between [Orange Diviner] and Evraz.”
In fact, one of the Orange Diviner traders at this obscure,
unregistered brokerage in Chicago was the Moscow-based
Evgeny Potapov. He had been president of Abramovich’s
Evraz Group. That is, he was the top-henchman to Russian
prime minister Vladimir Putin’s right-hand man, Roman
Abramovich (the fellow who is like a father to Putin).
Potapov has also served as a board member and head of
overseas assets for the giant Russian metals concern
Norilsk Nickel. In that capacity, Potapov had Norlisk
launch a program in 2007 with the Russian foreign
ministry to combat terrorism and organized crime.
That a metals company suspected of having ties to the
Mafia and to jihadis (who use Russian metals like they
use diamonds – as currency) is directing the Russian
foreign ministry’s battle against organized crime and
terrorism should give you an idea of how things work in
Russia.
Another member of Orange Diviner, Alesandr Romanov,
had been the director of transportation at Abramovich’s
Evraz Group. Meanwhile, Orange Diviner member Sergey
Pavlov had been both head of investment planning at
Evraz, and head of investments at Rusal, another big
company then owned by Abramovich.
As for Alexandr Lyssenko, the fellow whose name did not
ring a bell with Mr. Ivin – he was working for Alfa Group,
the outfit run by Mikhail Fridman. Alfa is best known for
having helped Iraq skirt UN sanctions during the reign of
Saddam Hussein. But, as I mentioned, Fridman, a close
associate of Abramovich and Mogilevich, is also the
principal financier and developer of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear
power plant, the facility that has much of the Western
world in hysterics because it is assumed to be a front for
the Islamic Republic’s secret efforts to acquire nuclear
bombs in preparation for the coming of the Hidden Imam.
Yet another member of the Orange Diviner Tuco Trading
group was Evgeny Chernov, who was working for ITP Rus
AG, a company that has been linked to Gazprom scandals.
Mr. Chernov also served for some time as Russia’s deputy
trade representative in Armenia. Then there was Orange
Diviner member Maxim Mishin, who was working for
MDM Group, a company that was implicated in the
scandal that saw Mogilevich and the Russian government
manipulating the markets and laundering money through
the Bank of New York.
As for Mr. Ivin himself, he works as the “head of
international” for BrokerKreditServis (BKS, sometimes
called BCS), a Moscow brokerage that is a joint venture
with Russia’s state development bank, Vnesheconombank,
or VEB. According to the Heritage Foundation, a
respected think tank, VEB is an instrument of Russia’s
intelligence services. BKS’s chief operating officer,
Dmitry Peshnev Podolskiy was formerly the head of the
above-mentioned Alfa Group, Iran’s favorite nuclear
proliferator.
All in all, this was an interesting group of “day traders” –
traders who should be watched closely, especially given
that they were, in 2008, availing themselves of the services
of this strange brokerage in Chicago, Tuco Trading. Since
Tuco Trading was shut down by an “Emergency Order” of
the SEC soon after the Orange Diviner account was set up,
it is possible that the account did not have a chance to
conduct much trading through Tuco.
But, as we will see, there is good reason to believe that it
might have done so, and even better reason to believe that
these same people transacted large volumes through
Tuco’s partner brokerages, which were not shut down by
the SEC.
In any case, we have to wonder why a group of illustrious
Russians who sat at the nexus of the Russian Mafia-
intelligence apparatus (an apparatus that also happens to
have extensive ties to Iran) was involved with this
obscure brokerage in Chicago.
So, yes, in the Fall of 2010, I found this odd, and I turned
my attention back to trying to figure out who was behind
those anonymous accounts in China. I was intrigued by the
tip I had received that it was an Iranian with ties to the
Revolutionary Guard, but it would be another couple
months before Zuhair Karam would help me confirm the
identity of this Iranian, and his ties to the Russian Mafia.
Meanwhile, I learned more about Bernie Madoff’s
criminal operation, and it was beginning to look a lot like a
massive market manipulation enterprise that catered to
Russian oligarchs, the Mafia, and other people who are
likely hostile to the United States.
In December, 2008, shortly after Bernard Madoff went to
lengths to pay one last visit to Marc Rich (friend of Iran)
then turned himself in to the FBI, a Frenchman named
Thiery Magon de la Villehuchet was found dead in his
Manhattan office, Xanax on the desk, his wrists slit open,
blood drained into a carefully placed garbage can. The
police ruled it a suicide.
Monsieur de la Villehuchet has been described in the press
as a “victim” of Bernard Madoff’s famous Ponzi scheme.
In other words, he put a lot of money into Madoff’s hedge
368
fund, lost all that money, and couldn’t take the stress. As
matter of honor, he killed himself, and did so with such
composure that he thought to position that garbage can so
nobody would have to clean up after him.
A few months after Monsieur de la Villehuchet’s death,
another man, Jeffrey Picower, was found dead, floating in
the swimming pool at his Palm Beach mansion. They said
it was a heart attack. The press reported that Picower was
another “victim” of the Madoff Ponzi scheme.
Meanwhile, the press continued to report that while
Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a colossal fraud, his giant
brokerage and market making operation was legitimate.
After all, Bernard Madoff was a “prominent” businessman.
For a time, he had been the chairman of the Nasdaq stock
exchange, and he even roamed the halls of the SEC, which
invited him to help it write some of its rules governing
brokerages and hedge funds. Surely, Madoff’s rise to
“prominence” suggested that his best-known business, the
brokerage, was on the up and up.
This recalls Mark Twain’s observation that “it has become
a sarcastic proverb that a thing must be true if you saw it in
a newspaper.” Indeed, as Twain saw it, the fact that people
believed what they read in the newspapers was evidence
that civilization was in decline. I think it is fair to say that
civilization has, indeed, taken a beating since the time of
Twain, and unless the media gets its act together, things
will only become worse.
The truth is, Picower and Monsieur de la Villehuchet were
not victims – they were perpetrators. As we now know
from multiple lawsuits that have been filed against the
Madoff estate, Picower alone personally pocketed more
than $5 billion from the Madoff Ponzi fraud. Monsieur de
la Villehuchet and Marc Rich also profited from Madoff’s
criminal operation.
What these men had in common was that they were, of
course, among Michael Milken’s closest associates.
Monsieur de la Villehuchet had co-founded Apollo
Management with Leon Black, the fellow who had helped
Milken run Drexel, Burnham. This is the same Leon Black
whose fund employs Lance Milken (Michael’s son), and
does business with Felix Sater, the Russian Mafia boss
who was ostensibly going to buy Stinger missiles from
Osama bin Laden.
In addition to knowing how to get in touch with Al Qaeda,
Felix has relationships with other powerful people. For a
time, he was trying to broker a deal whereby the U.S.
investment bank Salomon Brothers would be bought by
Felix’s friend Boris Berezovsky (then still the “Godfather
of the Kremlin” and Roman Abramovich’s key business
partner). Nothing came of the Salomon deal, but Felix’s
partner says the deal almost closed, and Felix has not
disputed this account.
Mr. Picower, the fellow found floating in his swimming
pool, had formerly been the largest investor in the
arbitrage fund run by Milken’s famous criminal co-
conspirator, Ivan Boesky, who, with Marc Rich, had been
among the biggest investors in the fund run by Michael
Steinhardt (son of the “biggest Mafia fence in America”).
Boesky and Rich, recall, also both worked out of the
offices owned by the Alavi Foundation, the Iranian
espionage outfit.
After Boesky was released from prison in the 1990s, he
headed to Moscow and hooked up with Berezovsky,
Abramovich and members of the Mogilevich organization.
Sources close to Felix Sater tell Deep Capture that as of
2008, Boesky, Felix and other Russian Mafia characters
to be introduced shortly had become the key clients of an
offshore hedge fund called Lines Overseas Management.
Lines Overseas, meanwhile, was a key feeder to the
Madoff criminal operation.
Another key client of Lines Overseas Management was Ali
Nazerali, the fellow who once worked at a high-level for
the Gokal family (tied to the Iranian regime and Pakistani
intelligence). This is the same fellow who ran the BCCI
outfit First Commerce Securities with his relatives, one
being the BCCI treasurer who set up the Capcom Saudi
intelligence outfit that manipulated the U.S. markets in the
1980s with help from Michael Milken.
Another key Lines Overseas client, introduced by Nazerali,
was Christopher Metsos, who was a Russian spy. In 2010,
the FBI arrested Metsos along with nine other Russian
spies, all of whom were charged with espionage and
deported back to Moscow.
I realize that at this stage in the story, the mention of
Russian spies, Milken cronies, the Mafia, and BCCI in the
same breath will seem a bit nutty. But read on, and you
will see that such relationships are by no means unusual or
incidental.
Another person who helped perpetrate Madoff’s fraud was
Ezra Merkin, who fed billions into the Ponzi scheme
while concurrently running Cerberus Capital, the hedge
fund founded by Stephen Feinberg, who had formerly been
one of Michael Milken’s top employees at Drexel
Burnham before being reassigned to work with Felix Sater
at Gruntal.
We also know that other big Madoff feeders included
“made” members of the Mafia, such as Ralph Mafrici
(perpetrator of “The Barbershop Hit”), who had a joint
account with Madoff’s hedge fund in the name of Eleanor
Cardile, a relative of Madoff’s right hand man, Frank
DiPascali.
369
Meanwhile, one of the biggest feeders to the Madoff fraud
was Bank Medici, an outfit in Austria that catered mostly
to shady characters tied to Russian prime minister
Vladimir Putin. One of Bank Medici’s big clients – and a
likely participant in the larger Madoff operation – was
Roman Abramovich (the guy whose relationship with
Putin is like that of a “son” or a “father”, depending on
whom you ask; the same guy whose top henchmen, along
with some Mogilevich henchman, had those odd accounts
at Tuco Trading).
After Madoff’s fraud was exposed, and Bank Medici was
implicated in the fraud, its founder, Sonja Kohn,
disappeared. The Wall Street Journal speculated that she
feared being killed by her Russian clients, who had lost
money in Madoff’s Ponzi scheme. The speculation,
however, was false. Ms. Kohn might well have been
targeted for assassination, if only because she knew a great
deal about Madoff’s larger operation, but her Russian
clients did not lose a dime in the Ponzi scheme. Nor did
Sonja Kohn herself.
According to the Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, in fact, Ms. Kohn and Bank Medici were
receiving large payments from an outfit called Cohmad
Securities, which was a unit of Madoff’s brokerage.
That is an extremely important piece of information. It is
one of several pieces of information that show that the
Madoff’s brokerage was tied into the criminal activities of
Madoff’s Ponzi scheme.
Cohmad Securities was co-owned by Madoff partner
Robert Jaffe, and played an instrumental role in managing
Madoff’s brokerage services. According to the Boston
Globe, Jaffe was a once a key money manager for the
Angiulo Brothers, who were then the bosses of the
Genovese Mafia family in Boston.
The other key figure in the Madoff brokerage was
Genovese Mafia capo Ralph Mafrici’s pal, Frank
DiPascali, who seems to have been a point man for
Madoff’s larger criminal operation.
Jaffe also helped raise money for the Ponzi scheme. And,
importantly, it is clear that a lot of the money from the
Ponzi was used to finance the operations of Madoff’s
brokerage. By piecing together numbers cited in just a few
lawsuits, it seems that at least $1 billion was diverted from
the Ponzi to Madoff’s brokerage. And since I haven’t
come close to getting through all the paperwork that has
emerged from the Madoff case, it seems fair to assume that
the figure might well be, in fact, much larger than $1
billion.
Why would Madoff transfer money from his fund to his
brokerage? One hypothesis is that some of the Ponzi’s
feeders (i.e. the people whom I have just named and their
clients) wanted Madoff’s brokerage to engage in
manipulative naked short selling, generating phantom
stock to drive down the markets.
Indeed, an off-shore businessman who has seen some of
Madoff’s records says that Madoff’s investment fund (his
Ponzi) would place orders for stock, and these orders
would be filled by Madoff’s market making operation (his
brokerage), which would sell the stock to the “buyer”
without first purchasing or borrowing it, thereby creating
phantom supply.
Such naked short selling, though, creates large liabilities in
the form of “securities sold but not yet delivered.” The
fraud that brought down the giant brokerage, Refco, in
2005, saw Refco CEO Santo Maggio hide precisely the
same sorts of naked short selling liabilities with help from
an Austrian Bank called BAWAG (another operation tied
to Roman Abramovich, the Mogilevich organization, and
other Milken cronies whom we will meet in an upcoming
chapter).
Just as Refco tried to hide its naked short liabilities with
help from the Austrian bank BAWAG, so too did Madoff,
most likely with help from Bank Medici, which was
receiving payments from Cohmad, a key component of
the Madoff brokerage.
There are several other reasons to believe that the $1
billion or more that was transferred from the Madoff Ponzi
to the Madoff brokerage was used to cover up naked short
selling liabilities.
One reason is that Madoff’s “stock loan” department (as
Madoff’s former secretary has testified) was housed on the
same floor of the Lipstick building as his Ponzi fund.
Multiple former employees of the Madoff operation have
said that visitors were prohibited from visiting that floor,
precisely because it was the center of Madoff’s criminal
enterprise. And “stock loan” – i.e. the brokerage function
that was responsible for borrowing (or, in the criminal
scenario, not borrowing) stock for (naked) short sellers —
would have been key to any phantom stock scheme
perpetrated in league with the Ponzi.
As confirmation that Madoff’s brokerage was a criminal
outfit dependent on the Ponzi, we need only know that
Daniel Bonventre, the brokerage’s director of operations,
was charged in February 2010 with helping to ensure that
“more than $750 million of [the Ponzi] investor fund were
used to support [Madoff’s] market making [i.e. brokerage]
and proprietary trading operations, but were
accounted…so as to conceal the true source of the funds.”
And Bonventre’s chief function at Madoff’s operation was,
according to his indictment, to supervise “settlement and
clearing of trades executed by the market making and
proprietary trading operations.”
In other words, the guy who secretly transferred a lot of
the “Ponzi” cash to the brokerage seemed to be doing so
370
specifically to cover “settlement and clearing” – i.e. to hide
the fact that stock was not “settling and clearing” because
it was stock that had been sold “naked.” That is, it was
stock that had been sold even though Madoff and his
clients had not purchased or borrowed any stock to sell. It
was phantom supply, meant to manipulate (and perhaps
even crash) the markets.
No doubt, it was not a coincidence that Madoff had long
courted the SEC and had even managed to wangle himself
into the position of actually writing some of the SEC’s
most important rules governing short selling. Indeed, SEC
officials named one of its short selling rules after the
SEC’s favorite crony – Bernard Madoff. The rule was
called “The Madoff Exemption” – and it permitted market
makers, such as Madoff, to sell short on a downtick.
The SEC rule prohibiting others to short sell on a downtick
(which was scrapped entirely, at the behest of Madoff and
others in his network, right at the inopportune moment in
2007 when the markets had begun to weaken) was meant
to prevent traders from inducing death spirals and crashing
the markets. But thanks to “The Madoff Exemption”, the
clients of Madoff could induce death spirals without a
word from the SEC.
Madoff also helped write the SEC rule that allowed market
makers, such as Madoff, to engage in naked short selling
so long as the purpose was to maintain “liquidity” in the
markets, and so long as real stock was eventually
delivered. Given that Madoff was, after all, a criminal of
monumental proportions, it boggles the mind that neither
the SEC nor the media ask whether Madoff might have
“rented out” his market making exemption to hedge funds
wishing to use naked short selling to drive down the
markets.
It is more than likely that Madoff not only rented out his
exemption, but abused it, never “clearing”, or delivering
the stock he had “temporarily” sold naked.
The fact that Madoff actually helped write the SEC rules
governing short selling (rules that contained precisely the
sort of loopholes that would allow miscreant traders to
crash the markets) should give you a sense of just what
sort of agency the SEC was in 2008. In fact, the utter
failure of the SEC and the all-important Depository Trust
and Clearing Corporation, or DTCC, to prevent naked
short selling caught the attention of the people who were
hired by the Defense Department Irregular Warfare
Support program to analyze the causes of the 2008
financial crisis.
The report that was produced for the Defense Department
(the same report I cited at the outset of this story) states
that there is a possibility that the SEC and the DTCC (a
self-regulating body responsible for ensuring settlement of
short sales and other transactions) were compromised by
organized crime or even foreign enemies of the state. The
report concludes: “Implications that these parties [the SEC,
the DTCC, and other Wall Street institutions] have been
complicit [in acts of financial terrorism] or otherwise co-
opted cannot be ruled out.”
That statement is not preposterous. Bernard Madoff was
not the only suspect character roaming the halls of the
nation’s regulatory bodies. We have seen that Sheikh
DeLorenzo (he with the Al Qaeda partner linked to the
military spy scandal) also received favorable treatment
from the SEC, which allowed him to set up Al Safi Trust’s
naked short selling machine in 2007. And as we will see,
there were still other, equally dangerous people who
“captured” officials at both the DTCC and the SEC.
Given the people whom Bernard Madoff serviced, it is
clear that he was not just a monumental criminal, he was
also a threat to national security. Consider that he had just
a few other key “feeders” who profited from his scam, one
of whom was the Abu Dhabi royal family, another of
whom was Al Qaeda Golden Chain member Sheikh
Mahfouz. The Abu Dhabi royals and Sheikh Mahfouz, of
course, came to be on close terms with Madoff and his
network when they were perpetrating the BCCI criminal
enterprise.
Sheikh Mahfouz is the man who set up Blessed Relief (an
Al Qaeda front) with “Specially Designated Global
Terrorist” Yasin al Qadi (Osama bin Laden’s favorite
financier). Remember that he also had ties to the folks at
Benevolence International (who tried to obtain nukes for
Al Qaeda). Sheikh Mahfouz fed the Madoff Ponzi through
EFG Bank in Dubai, an outfit with close ties to Dubai’s
ruler, Sheikh Mo, who, in 2007, helped set up Al Safi
Trust’s naked short machine with Sheikh DeLorenzo.
Some associates of the Milken network say that Sheikh
Mahfouz had some ownership stake in EFG (which, like
the other feeders, claims, improbably, to have been a
“victim”), but I have been unable to confirm that.
Whatever the case, in 2010, EFG’s affiliate, EFG
Hermes,bought Credit Libonais, a bank that was majority-
owned by Sheikh Mahfouz’s family. Given that the feeders
to Madoff’s Ponzi were likely participating in this fraud in
order to help cover up naked short selling, it seems
probable that Sheikh Mahfouz and the Abu Dhabi royals
were among Madoff’s short selling clients in 2008.
It is also likely that some of the naked short selling
handled by Madoff’s brokerage originated from Tuco
Trading (the little outfit tied to the jihadi Zuhair Karam,
the Russians and others to be discussed). This is because
371
Tuco Trading had a partnership with Man Financial, which
was a unit of Man Group, a giant hedge fund that was
(though it, too, claims to be a “victim”) one of the
principal feeders to the Madoff Ponzi fund. Man Financial
also had member accounts at Tuco and provided Tuco with
one of its trading platforms.
The managing director of the Man Group, also known as
MF Global, is Thomas Harte, and he (like Shiekh Mahfouz
and the other Madoff feeders) is one of Michael Milken’s
closest associates. Mr. Harte had been a vice president of
Milken’s operation at Drexel Burnham. A number of MF
Global’s other top executives, such as senior vice
presidents Fred Demler and Fred Ulmann, are also Drexel
alumnae. Further evidence that the Man Group is part of
the Milken network emerged when the media published
reports in 2010 that the Man Group was thinking about
buying Steve Cohen’s SAC Capital.
Steve Cohen, we know, was investigated in the 1980s for
trading on inside information given to him by Milken’s
shop while Cohen was running Gruntal Securities with
Felix Sater, Feinberg and others. Nowadays, the media is
reporting that Cohen is the main target of the largest FBI
insider trading investigation in history. Most likely Man
Group’s stated plan to buy SAC Capital was designed to
discourage the FBI from investigating the hedge fund and
its role in a larger criminal enterprise.
This, we will see, is a familiar pattern – members of the
Milken network purchasing or offering to purchase funds
and companies run by other Milken cronies who are under
federal investigation. The idea seems to be to keep
investigators focused on individuals rather than the funds
or companies. Once the funds or companies are purchased,
investigators tend to assume the new owners will run them
in a more honest fashion.
As for the Man Group’s credentials, it is worth noting that
its subsidiary, Man Financial, not only had a partnership
with Tuco Trading, but also had a similar partnership with
BrokerKreditServis, the Russian outfit where Orange
Diviner’s Mr. Ivin works as “head of international.”
BrokerKreditServis, you will recall, is run by the former
head of Alfa Bank (financier to Iran’s nuclear program),
and Orange Diviner’s other traders were henchmen of
Roman Abramovich and Mogilevich.
Meanwhile, Man Financial had other key clients. One key
client was the Lucchese Mafia family. This has been well
documented by lawyers representing a company called
Eagletech, and it has been confirmed by others.
Another key Man Financial client in 2008 – Al Qaeda.
 The Not-Hillary President
Source: Moon Of Alabama
Published: January 20, 2017
It is impossible to know what the Not-Hillary inauguration
will bring. Not-Hillary because putting up Hillary as
candidate was the most stupid thing the Democratic party
and it paymasters could do. She had extremely high
negative ratings and stood for everything that one could
dislike with the party's policies. Many who ended up not
voting or voted for Trump could have been easily won by a
different Democratic candidate even with much of the
same general policies (see: Obama, Barack).
Hillary would surely have lost against any middle-of-the-
road Republican candidate. History will note that she was
an arrogant but incompetent Democratic candidate who
lost against a rather bad Republican candidate, one who
lacked support even from his own party. Trump won
barely, but she lost completely.
Seen from the perspective of power centers Clinton once
had all the support she needed. But she then lost a decisive
group due to her uncompromising neo-conned foreign
policy. Here is an interesting take based on a theory from
the 1950s:
[T]he power elite can be best described as
a “triangle of power,” linking the corporate,
executive government, and military
factions: “There is a political economy
numerously linked with military order and
decision. This triangle of power is now a
structural fact, and it is the key to any
understanding of the higher circles in
America today.”
The 2016 US election, like all other US
elections, featured a gallery of pre-selected
candidates that represented the three
factions and their interests within the power
elite. The 2016 US election, however, was
vastly different from previous elections. As
the election dragged on the power elite
became bitterly divided, with the
majority supporting Hilary Clinton, the
candidate pre-selected by the political
and corporate factions, while the
military faction rallied around their
choice of Donald Trump.
That is only a rough take. The corporate factions are
divided within. The oil industry does not like it when wars
disturb its long term businesses (see Russia and Libya).
372
Boeing wants to sell planes to Iran. Other corporate parts
don't mind such wars as long as they create new markets or
easy access to cheap labor. The media love war as it
creates ever thrilling content around which they can sell
advertisements.
The decisive political point in this election round was the
fight between neo-conservatives/liberal-interventionists
and foreign policy realists. One side is represented
exemplary by the CIA with the U.S. military on the other:
A schism developed between the Defense Department and
the highly politicized CIA. This schism, which can be
attributed to the corporate-deep-state’s covert foreign
policy, traces back to the CIA orchestrated “color
revolutions” that had swept the Middle East and North
Africa.
The CIA created bloodthirsty future enemies the military
will later have to defeat. Fascists in Ukraine and Takfiris
all over the Middle East are used by the CIA to further
neocon aims but then require relative cheap military
intervention at high human costs. The Generals do not like
that. (The precedence of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was
enough for them.) Neither does the military industry.
Fighting Takfiris does not require big ticket items.
Ratcheting up the rhetoric against peer competitors
(without ever fighting a real war) is the best justification
for a two million strong military and huge military
contracts.
It is still astonishing that the military Trump faction of the
power triangle could win the fight. Trump made that
possible when he used a hostile media for his gain. The
corporate media stood strongly behind Clinton but that was
not enough to hide her negative sides. Trump's salesmen
bluster proved too fascinating to not be reported. In the end
the media that hated him ended up making the very best
advertisement for him. For weeks the neoconned
Washington Post editorial page ran five or six anti-Trump
pieces per day. That alone was for some reason enough to
vote for Trump.
Trump will now have to win over other parts of the power
triangle. The corporate part is the easy one. He will lower
its taxes. He will also, in one form or another, reinstate
tariffs along the U.S. borders. His confrontational position
against main exporting countries, China, Germany, Mexico
etc, will also transfer into higher U.S. corporate profits. It
may even create some additional jobs in the U.S. which
would help him to get reelected.
The military will demand its due beyond the three generals
now in Trump's cabinet. But soldiers do not like to go to
war. That means that Trump will increase conflict rhetoric
against some foreign countries but also that he will not
start any serious war. Expect the announcement of some
super nifty, new but useless military wonder weapon for
which Trump will promise trillions (Reagan's star wars
redux).
The most difficult faction to win over to his view is the
political/executive/secret services side including many
people within his own party. Neoliberalism has inflicted
those on all levels. Trump will have to neutralize or fire
people in their upper ranks early and often. If he fails to do
that all his plans will be challenged and stymied in their
early implementation.
Trump is a highly gifted salesman, one of the best I have
ever seen. His general business skills are more average. He
373
is full of bluster before going into negotiations. His current
rhetoric in relations to other countries should be seen as
opening shots. Such threats and offers alike are to him just
parts of a negotiation process. His main aim with those
will be to get some manufacturing back into the United
States. He needs some success in this, in creating jobs,
jobs, jobs and raising wages, to secure his reelection.
Economically Trump will lower taxes and increase
spending (after some minor for-show cuts.) U.S. national
debt will rise significantly. Interest rates will rise in
conflict with his aim to lower the dollar value in exchange
markets. His U.S. centric protectionism will allow other
countries to also take steps in such a direction. At one
point Trump will have to take up a fight with speculative
Wall Street banking. It is an impediment for all his other
aims. This will be his most difficult fight and the one he
will probably lose.
Over all I do not expect anything exceptional from Trump.
His time in the White House will probably turn out to be
minor remake of Reagan's.
 Trump’s Declaration of War
Paul Craig Roberts
January 20, 2017
President Trump’s brief inaugural speech was a declaration
of war against the entirety of the American Ruling
Establishment. All of it.
Trump made it abundantly clear that Americans’ enemies
are right here at home: globalists, neoliberal economists,
neoconservatives and other unilateralists accustomed to
imposing the US on the world and involving us in endless
and expensive wars, politicians who serve the Ruling
Establishment rather than the American people, indeed, the
entire canopy of private interests that have run America
into the ground while getting rich in the process.
If truth can be said, President Trump has declared a war far
more dangerous to himself than if he had declared war
against Russia or China.
The interest groups designated by Trump as The Enemy
are well entrenched and accustomed to being in charge.
Their powerful networks are still in place. Although there
are Republican majorities in the House and Senate, most of
those in Congress are answerable to the ruling interest
groups that provide their campaign funds and not to the
American people or to the President. The military/security
complex, offshoring corporations, Wall Street and the
banks are not going to roll over for Trump. And neither is
the presstitute media, which is owned by the interest
groups whose power Trump challenges.
Trump made it clear that he stands for every American,
black, brown, and white. Little doubt his declaration of
inclusiveness will be ignored by the haters on the left who
will continue to call him a racist just as the $50 per hour
paid protesters are doing as I write.
Indeed, black leadership, for example, is enculturated into
the victimization role from which it would be hard for
them to escape. How do you pull together people who all
their lives have been taught that whites are racists and that
they are the victims of racists?
Can it be done? I was just on a program briefly with Press
TV in which we were supposed to provide analysis of
Trump’s inaugural speech. The other commentator was a
black American in Washington, DC. Trump’s
inclusiveness speech made no impression on him, and the
show host was only interested in showing the hired
protesters as a way of discrediting America. So many
374
people have an economic interest in speaking in behalf of
victims that inclusiveness puts them out of jobs and
causes.
So along with the globalists, the CIA, the offshoring
corporations, the armaments industries, the NATO
establishment in Europe, and foreign politicians
accustomed to being well paid for supporting
Washington’s interventionist foreign policy, Trump will
have arrayed against him the leaders of the victimized
peoples, the blacks, the hispanics, the feminists, the
illegals, the homosexuals and transgendered. This long list,
of course, includes the white liberals as well, as they are
convinced that flyover America is the habitat of white
racists, misogynists, homophobes, and gun nuts. As far as
they are concerned, this 84% of geographical US should be
quarantined or interred.
In other words, does enough good will remain in the
population to enable a President to unite the 16% America
haters with the 84% America lovers?
http://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/
Consider the forces that Trump has against him:
Black and hispanic leaders need victimization, because it is
what elevates them to power and income. They will turn a
jaundiced eye toward Trump’s inclusiveness. Inclusiveness
is good for blacks and hispanics, but not for their leaders.
The executives and shareholders of global corporations are
enriched by the offshored jobs that Trump says he will
bring home. If the jobs come home, their profits,
performance bonuses, and capital gains will go away. But
the economic security of the American population will
return.
The military/security complex has a 1,000 billion annual
budget dependent on “the Russian threat” that Trump says
he is going to replace with normalized relations. Trump’s
assassination cannot be ruled out.
Many Europeans owe their prestige, power, and incomes
to the NATO that Trump has called into question.
The financial sector’s profits almost entirely flow from
putting Americans into debt bondage and from looting
their private and public pensions. The financial sector with
their agent, the Federal Reserve, can overwhelm Trump
with financial crisis. The New York Federal Reserve Bank
has a complete trading desk. It can send any market into
turmoil. Or support any market, because there is no limit
on its ability to create US dollars.
The entire political ediface in the US has insulated itself
from the will, desires, and needs of the people. Now
Trump says the politicians will be accountable to the
people. This, of course, would mean a big drop in their
security in office and in their income and wealth.
There are a large number of groups, funded by we-know-
not-who. For example, RootsAction has responded today
to Trump’s forceful commitment to stand for all of the
people against the Ruling Establishment with a request to
“ask Congress to direct the House Judiciary Committee to
open an impeachment investigation” and to send money
for Trump’s impeachment.
Another hate group, human rights first, attacks Trump’s
defense of our borders as closing “a refuge of hope for
those fleeing persecution.” Think about this for a minute.
According to the liberal-progressive-left and the racial
interest group organizations, the US is a racist society and
President Trump is a racist. Yet, people subject to
American racism are fleeing from persecution to America
where they will be racially persecuted? It doesn’t make
sense. The illegals come here for work. Ask the
construction companies. Ask the chicken and animal
slaughter houses. Ask the vacation area cleaning services.
.
375
This list of those on whom Trump has declared war is long
enough, although there are more that can be added.
We should ask ourselves why a 70 year old billionaire with
flourishing businesses, a beautiful wife, and intelligent
children is willing to give his final years to the
extraordinary stress of being President with the stressful
agenda of putting the government back in the hands of the
American people. There is no doubt that Trump has made
himself a target of assassination. The CIA is not going to
give up and go away. Why would a person take on the
grand restoration of America that Trump has declared
when he could instead spend his remaining years enjoying
himself immensely?
Whatever the reason, we should be grateful for it, and if he
is sincere we must support him. If he is assassinated, we
need to take up our weapons, burn Langley to the ground
and kill every one of them.
If he succeeds, he deserves the designation: Trump the
Great!
Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and any
other country on the CIA’s hit list should undersand that
Trump’s rise is insufficient protection. The CIA is a
worldwide organization. Its profitable businesses provide
income independent of the US budget. The organization is
capable of undertaking operations independently of the
President or even of its own Director.
The CIA has had about 70 years to entrench itself. It has
not gone away.
 Area 51 & Other Government Secrets
Trump Is About to Discover
From Spy Planes To Cyberattacks To The Private Lives Of Foreign
Leaders, The President Gets Access To More Confidential Material Than
Anyone Else On The Planet. Now, It’s All In Donald Trump’s Hands.
By Garrett M. Graff - www.politico.com
Friday, January 20, 2017
When Dwight Eisenhower was elected president in
1952, outgoing president Harry Truman informed him of
an important secret: Days before the election the United
States had tested the world’s first hydrogen bomb in the
Pacific. The nation now possessed a weapon roughly a
hundred times as powerful as any before—and almost
nobody else knew.
Eight years later, when Eisenhower handed the keys to
John F. Kennedy, his administration passed along its own
secret: America had a covert plan underway to invade
Cuba. Kennedy let the Bay of Pigs mission proceed, and
the result was a fiasco that would take the world to the
brink of nuclear war.
The president of the United States has more access to
official secrets than any other human being in the
country—and the potential to know more about the world
than anyone else on the planet. And on January 20, the
person being handed access to all of those secrets will be
Donald J. Trump.
376
While much attention has been focused on Trump’s access
to the nuclear launch codes and the President’s Daily
Brief—the classified intelligence report delivered inside a
locked briefcase each morning to the Oval Office—those
represent only a tiny sliver of the massive top-secret
universe that Trump personally will suddenly be privy to.
He will have the ability to see inside the most sensitive and
covert programs run by the United States and its allies
around the world; he will have access to surveillance tools,
covert payrolls and personal secrets about foreign leaders.
He will know about blacked-out special forces raids and
UFO-like spy planes, the next-generation cyberattacks that
would come in the opening minutes of a new war, and the
dozens of secret classified procedures and laws written
down by his presidential predecessors. He’ll even be first
in line for some mundane but important things: As
president, Trump will be one of just four senior officials to
learn sensitive market-moving economic data from the
Labor Department up to 12 hours before it is released
publicly.
The United States has invested trillions of dollars to ensure
that its president can know more than anyone else on
Earth—knowledge meant to be deployed to the country’s
advantage in trade negotiations, military posturing and a
thousand other ways big and small. Given Trump’s
behavior so far, it seems almost assured that he will deploy
and weaponize those same secrets in “unpresidented”
ways, to win personal fights and minor PR battles.
Already, before taking office, he has tweeted out claims
about his meetings with intel agencies, asserted that he
knows information the rest of the government doesn’t and
tried to embarrass and undermine rivals or critics through
insinuation. And that’s all before he has learned any of
what President George W. Bush once called “the good
stuff.”
What is the good stuff, and how might Trump use it?
Many of the specifics are cloaked in deep shadow—that’s
obviously the point—but thanks to decades of dogged
reporting, lawsuits and historical archives, we do know a
significant amount about the types of secrets a president
learns. It’s anyone’s guess what Trump might do to
embarrass intransigent foreign leaders, or what late-night
or early-morning tweetstorms might erupt from the White
House if he senses hypocrisy from an ally—or what will
happen when a president whose family will still control his
complex business empire has access to important
geopolitical developments or early market data.
The Kill List
One of the relatively new powers of the presidency is the
ability to sign off on strikes from Predator and Reaper
drones run by the CIA and the Pentagon. While political
assassination is forbidden by Executive Order 12333,
Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush have
enjoyed wide latitude in designating suspected terrorists
for lethal strikes in areas like Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen,
Iraq and Afghanistan. The exact process for such “kinetic”
attacks, never publicly revealed in depth and not beholden
to any judicial oversight, will be explained carefully to the
new president. We’ll never know who exactly will be
named to the new administration’s “kill list,” and we may
never know what happens to them. But Trump will: After
such attacks, the president and vice president are also
among the select group of government officials who can, if
they choose, watch the high-tech videos of the drone
strikes themselves. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney
regularly watched such “kill videos” during their morning
intelligence briefings. As president, Trump will also have
sway over the opaque process itself, so he could well
tweak or expand the lethal authorities of the commander in
chief without any public disclosure that the rules have
changed.
Covert Action
Whereas most people tend to think of classified
information as broad categories like Confidential, Secret
and Top Secret—the three levels of security clearance that
individuals are typically granted—the nation’s most
sensitive secrets occupy their own category of “Special
Access Programs” of “Sensitive Compartmented
Information,” labels colloquially known as “beyond top
secret.” These SAPs include information like specific
National Security Agency technological surveillance and
hacking capabilities, as well as ongoing intelligence
projects and joint operations with allies. In one of his early
such briefings, Obama was told of the joint U.S.-Israeli
efforts to disable the Iranian nuclear program through
cyberattacks like the Stuxnet malware. Eight years later,
the NSA’s elite hacking unit, as well as its British and
Israeli counterparts, has an even broader suite of tools and
operations underway, both spying and sabotage. And the
United States doesn’t spy on just its enemies: Leaks from
Edward Snowden revealed that U.S. intelligence regularly
listened to the telephone calls and read emails of foreign
officials, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel,
and top overseas business leaders—transcripts and
documents that Trump could routinely access if he so
desired.
377
Secret Agents
Those beyond-top-secret files would also include details
about which foreign officials are on the payroll of agencies
like the CIA or the Drug Enforcement Administration.
These payments can run into the millions and last for
years; President Jimmy Carter was shocked to discover
that the CIA had been paying King Hussein of Jordan six
and seven figures annually for nearly two decades to
ensure his cooperation with American interests. Presidents
have traditionally refrained from asking the identities of
specific sources, but that’s just a custom: If Trump asks for
a briefing on the clandestine payroll, the agency would
almost certainly comply. The DEA, whose drug-fighting
efforts give it a broad global footprint, also works closely
with foreign governments and deploys its own powerful
surveillance tools. WikiLeaks, for instance, exposed how
Panama’s leader pressured the agency in 2009 to use its
wiretapping program, codenamed Matador, to uncover
who was “sleeping with his wife.” (The agency demurred.)
The Nukes
In addition to the “nuclear football”—the briefcase carried
close to the president by a military aide that contains the
nation’s nuclear war plans—the president will
automatically gain access to what’s known as “Q
clearance” information from the Department of Energy.
This includes the operational details of the nation’s nuclear
weapons program: its weapons stockpiles, damage
estimates, technological specifications and the procedures
for securing and launching the nation’s nuclear triad—the
bombers, submarines and silo-based ICBMs that can rain
nuclear destruction on the nation’s enemies in as little as
30 minutes.
Spy Satellites and Secret Aircraft
Beyond the secrets buried in missile silos, Trump will also
receive briefings—if requested—on the constellation of
spy satellites and detection technologies that watch the
Earth from above, many of which are run by the National
Reconnaissance Office, an intelligence agency so secretive
that its very name and existence were classified from its
creation in 1960 until 1992. According to people who have
been briefed on such technologies, the nation’s spy
satellite capabilities, while not quite at the read-the-
newspaper-over-your-shoulder level implied by movies
like Enemy of the State, are vastly more advanced than the
public realizes. There are also a number of classified
aircraft with unique capabilities (including a growing
number of drones) whose existence has never been
acknowledged; one such helicopter, a stealth version of the
Black Hawk, was only made public when it crashed during
the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad,
Pakistan. Such aircraft are often tested at Nevada’s Area
51—where conspiracy theorists claim the government
holds its fleet of captured UFOs—and experts estimate that
there are upward of a dozen aircraft that the United States
has never publicly acknowledged, the modern successors
of earlier secret programs like the U-2, the SR-71 spy
plane and the B-2 stealth bomber. (And, if the government
does have a secret set of UFOs captured from Roswell and
other close encounters, Trump might be soon learning that,
too.)
Secret Law
In 2015, when Obama released his new hostage policy—
known as Presidential Policy Directive No. 30—close
watchers of the administration realized the last publicly
announced PPD had been No. 28, which meant that
sometime between January 17, 2014, and June 24, 2015,
he had signed yet another directive whose very existence
was classified. Whatever it is, PPD 29 is one of dozens of
secret presidential national security orders, some of which
stretch back decades. Each president has called these
documents something slightly different, but collectively
they deal with high-level strategic and policy decisions
around national security and, more recently, homeland
security. While the subject matter or title of most such
documents are made public upon signing, or declassified
rather quickly, dozens remain classified even years or
decades later. From the titles, we know that most classified
directives appear to deal with nuclear weapons, continuity
of government, the war on terror or relationships with
foreign countries, but we have no idea what some of these
documents are even about. Together, these represent an
increasingly broad body of “secret law” opaque to the
outside world, including Congress. The whole point of
these laws and procedures is to grant the president power
the public doesn’t even know he has—and might not know
until it’s unveiled to us in the midst of a crisis, either real
or invented.
Counterterrorism Reports
The two most recent occupants of the Oval Office received
regular briefings on unfolding domestic terror threats and
potential suspects; in the wake of 9/11, Bush met every
morning with FBI Director Robert Mueller to review an
Excel-like spreadsheet of possible plots known as the
“threat matrix.” Obama, for his part, often devoted
.
378
Tuesday afternoons to what the White House called
“Terror Tuesdays,” reviewing unfolding investigations and
larger strategic questions. Both presidents were regularly
informed about individual terror plots; Bush even tracked
individual suspects day to day. Given Trump’s campaign
obsession with the Islamic State, terrorism and
immigration—and his habit of self-congratulation when
horrific attacks unfold around the world—it’s not hard to
imagine him personally dictating raids and arrests and then
announcing them via Twitter.
World Leaders’ (and Americans’) Personal Lives
One of the favorite presidential perks in decades past was
reading the FBI surveillance reports on other politicians
and prominent Americans, collected and delivered to the
White House by an eager-to-please J. Edgar Hoover.
While, in theory, the FBI no longer serves up personal
secrets for prurient entertainment or political blackmail,
presidential aides do get to review the results of
background investigations for classified clearances.
Moreover, intelligence agencies like the CIA and NSA
regularly provide the White House and high-level
diplomats with information on the drug habits, sexual
preferences, financial shenanigans, criminal associations,
allegations of corruption or family squabbles of other
world leaders, foreign business figures or other prominent
individuals. WikiLeaks, for example, made public a U.S.
diplomatic cable hinting at Libyan dictator Muammar
Qadhafi’s relationship with his “voluptuous blonde”
Ukrainian nurse.
These reports lead to interesting moments across the
negotiating tables: For instance, the president will know
whether, the night before an Oval Office grip-and-grin, a
Middle Eastern prince spent the previous evening
carousing with call girls in Georgetown (a frequent enough
occurrence in Washington). Historically, such information
has been kept tightly held, but given Trump’s flair for the
theatrical and his proclivity for scorched-earth tactics with
his opponents—to say nothing of his friendship with
National Enquirer publisher David Pecker—perhaps we’ll
soon be learning a lot more about our allies and foes
around the world.
 President Donald Trump
By Stephen Lendman
1-20-2017
Months earlier, who could have imagined the Alfred
Hitchcock ending to America’s 2016 presidential race.
An outsider defied predictions to become the nation’s 45th
president. His inaugural address pledged to serve all
Americans. “It all begins today right here, right now,” he
said.
“We are transferring power from Washington,
DC, and giving it back to you, the people.” While
privileged Americans prospered, ordinary ones
struggled to get by, he explained.
“That all changes starting right here and right
now because this moment is your moment. It
belongs to you…What truly matters is…whether
our government is controlled by the people.”
“The forgotten men and women of our country
will be forgotten no longer…The American
carnage stops right here and stops right
now…The oath of office I take today is an oath of
allegiance to all Americans.”
Trump’s rhetoric was full of lofty rhetoric and promises.
He claimed he won’t impose our way of life on anyone,
while
379
“unit(ing) the civilized world against radical
Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate from
the face of he earth.”]
He expressed no promise to end US imperial wars, raging
in multiple theaters. Was his pledge to combat Islamic
terrorism real or a pretext to continue imperial madness?
“(W)e will make America strong again…wealthy
again…proud again…safe again…great again,”
he said.
It’s the wealthiest, strongest nation on earth. Key is
distributing its riches more equitably, fostering world
peace and stability, renouncing imperial wars, respecting
the sovereign rights of all nations - including getting along
with Russia, China, Iran, Syria and other independent
countries.
Trump made lofty promises. As America’s 45th president,
it’s time to deliver right now. Otherwise his rhetoric is
empty like most others in Washington, saying one thing,
doing another.
It’s his obligation to show straightaway he meant what he
said. Words are meaningless. Actions alone matters.
Looking ahead, it’s hard feeling optimistic after being
betrayed so many times before. It’s your turn, Mr.
President. It’s show me time.
 Trump To Sign Executive Orders Straightaway
By Stephen Lendman
1-20-2017
According to Reuters, he’ll sign them on day one in office
- on immigration (based on nationality, not religion),
building a wall on the US/Mexico border, and rescinding
various Obama era policies.
Precisely what he’ll order is unknown until published on
the White House web site. He promised to fulfill campaign
promises, the above issues among many others he’ll
address.
According to incoming press secretary Sean Spicer,
“(h)e is committed to not just Day 1, but Day 2,
Day 3 of enacting an agenda of real change, and
I think that you’re going to see that in the days
and weeks to come.”
On Saturday, he’ll visit CIA headquarters in Langley. He
criticized how it treated him under outgoing director John
Brennan, asking “(a)re we living in Nazi Germany?” It’s
unknown whether incoming head Mike Pompeo will try
changing any agency practices.
According to Reuters,
“Trump’s advisers vetted more than 200 potential
executive orders for him to consider signing on
.
380
healthcare, climate policy, immigration, energy
and numerous other issues, but it was not clear
how many orders he would initially approve,
according to a member of the Trump transition
team who was not authorized to talk to the
press.”
Presidential historian Julian Zelizer believes
“(h)e wants to show he will take action and not
be stifled by Washington gridlock.”
He’ll officially abandon TPP and renegotiate NAFTA,
according to Spicer, saying
“I think you will see those happen very shortly.”
On Wednesday, Obama said he’ll challenge Trump on his
immigration policy as a former president. Trump should
challenge him for eight years of endless war on humanity
at home and abroad, genocide by any standard - and lots
more high crimes gone unpunished.
At midday on Friday, Trump will be sworn in as
America’s 45th president. Thankfully the deplorable
Obama era is over. What awaits going forward remains to
be seen.
 Russia’s Premier Blasts Obama
By Stephen Lendman
1-20-2017
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev used Facebook
to blast Obama’s duplicity, braking his promise like
virtually all others of importance.
Russia’s then president was assured of US nuclear missile
defense flexibility in bilateral talks. It wasn’t to be, or
phony reset in US/Russia relations.
They’ve been more adversarial under Obama than perhaps
any time during the Cold War years - one of numerous
despicable acts on his watch.
His agenda reflected pure evil, including making it hard
for Trump to repair things - his top geopolitical priority if
he’s up to the challenge, a key test of whether he’ll
continue imperial madness or step back from the brink in
the interest of world peace and stability.
Below are some of Medvedev’s comments. He didn’t hold
back, saying “US-Russia relations completely fell apart by
the end of the second term of the Obama administration.”
“Everyone is aware that the United States
has always tried to (control) global
processes, brazenly interfering in the
internal affairs of various countries and
waging multiple wars on foreign soil.”
“Iraq, the Arab Spring, Ukraine, and Syria
are just a few examples of such reckless
policies in recent years.”
“We can still see their consequences,
which range from the complete collapse of
the political systems in these countries to
wars which claimed tens of thousands of
lives.”
“There is only one explanation for such actions: the
interests of the United States” at the expense of targeted
countries.
.
381
“The Obama administration was completely
short-sighted on such an important and
complex issue as relations with Russia.
There was hope” for better bilateral ties.
“It is unacceptable to talk to a country
which is a permanent member of the UN
Security Council…(a) country with
defensive capabilities equal to the United
States” so contemptuously, so arrogantly.
Sanctions and other provocations
“reduced our cooperation to zero…And it
doesn’t get any dumber than restricting
entry to the United States”
for Russian officials and businessmen.
“Who benefitted…No one.” America’s
actions “didn’t work.”
“…The Obama administration has
destroyed relations between the United
States and Russia, which are at their
lowest point in decades. This is its key
foreign policy mistake which will be
remembered by history.”
“We do not know yet how the new US
administration will approach relations with
our country. But we are hoping that reason
will prevail. And we are ready to do our
share of the work in order to improve the
relationship.”
Medvedev’s comments reflected justifiable anger.
Obama’s tenure can be summed up in a few words:
disruptive, duplicitous, lawless, deplorable, disgraceful,
despicable, diabolical.
It’s Trump’s turn to repair things if he’s strong-willed
enough to try.
 New President, New World
Pat Buchanan
January 20, 2017
“Don’t Make Any Sudden Moves” is the advice offered to
the new president by Richard Haass of the Council on
Foreign Relations, which has not traditionally been known
as a beer hall of populist beliefs.
Haass meant the president should bring his National
Security Council together to anticipate the consequences
before tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, moving the U.S.
embassy to Jerusalem or shooting down a missile being
tested by Kim Jong Un.
In arguing against rash action, Haass is correct.
Where the CFR and the establishment are wrong, and
Donald Trump is right, however, is in recognizing the new
world we have entered.
The old order is passing away. Treaties and alliances
dating from the Cold War are ceasing to be relevant and
cannot long be sustained.
Economic patriotism and ethnonationalism, personified by
Trump, seem everywhere ascendant. Transnationalism is
yielding to tribalism.
The greater danger for President Trump is that the
movement he led will be abandoned, its hopes dashed, and
the agenda that Trump rejected and routed will be
reimposed by a Republican Establishment and its
collaborators in politics and the press.
Again, it was Trump who read the nation right, which is
why he is taking the oath today.
The existential threat to the West no longer comes from
the East, from a Russian army crashing through Poland
and Germany and driving for the Elbe and Fulda Gap.
The existential threat to the West comes, instead, from the
South.
The billion-plus peoples of the Maghreb, Middle East and
sub-Sahara, whose numbers are exploding, are moving
inexorably toward the Med, coming to occupy the empty
places left by an aging and dying Europe, all of whose
native-born populations steadily shrink.
382
American’s bleeding border is what concerns Americans,
not the borders of Estonia, South Korea, Kuwait or the
South China Sea.
When Trump calls NATO “obsolete,” he is saying that the
great threat to the West is not Putin’s recapture of a
Crimea that belonged to Russia for 150 years. And if the
price of peace is getting out of Russia’s face and Russia’s
space, maybe we should pay it.
George Kennan himself, the architect of Cold War
containment of Stalin’s Russia, admonished us not to move
NATO to Russia’s border.
Of Brexit, the British decision to leave the EU, Trump said
this week,
“People, countries want their own identity
and the U.K. wanted its own identity … so if
you ask me, I believe others will leave.”
Is he not right? Is it so shocking to hear a transparent
truth?
How could Europe’s elites not see the populist forces
rising? The European peoples wished to regain their lost
sovereignty and national identity, and they were willing to
pay a price to achieve it.
Apparently, the Davos crowd cannot comprehend people
who believe there are more important things than wealth.
Yet while President Trump should avoid rash actions, if he
is to become a transformational president, he will spurn an
establishment desperately seeking to hold onto the world
that is passing away.
Article V of the NATO treaty may require us to treat a
Russian move in the Baltic as an attack on the United
States. But no sane president will start a war with a
nuclear-armed Russia over Estonia.
No Cold War president would have dreamed of so rash an
action.
Rather than risk such a war, Ike refused to send a rifle or
bullet to the heroic Hungarian rebels in 1956. Painful, but
Ike put America first, just as Trump pledged to do.
And given the strength of ethnonationalism in Europe,
neither the eurozone nor the EU is likely to survive the
decade. We should prepare for that day, not pretend that
what is taking place across Europe, and indeed worldwide,
is some passing fever of nationalism.
Notwithstanding Secretary of State-designate Rex
Tillerson’s diktat, the United States is not going to force
China to vacate the fortified reefs in a South China Sea she
claims as her national territory.
Stick to that demand, and we best prepare for war.
As for the Taiwan card, it was played in 1972 by Richard
Nixon as the price of his opening to China. Four decades
ago, Jimmy Carter cut diplomatic ties to Taiwan and
terminated our security pact.
For Xi Jinping to accept that Taiwan might be negotiable
would mean an end of him and the overthrow of his
Communist Party of China.
383
The Chinese will fight to prevent a permanent loss of
Taiwan.
The imperative of the new era is that the great nuclear
powers — China, Russia, the United States — not do to
each other what Britain, France and Germany did to each
other a century ago over a dead archduke.
President Trump should build the wall, secure the border,
impose tariffs, cut taxes, free up the American economy,
bring the factories home, create millions of jobs and keep
us out of any new wars.
With rare exceptions, wars tend to be fatal to presidencies.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The
Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From
Defeat to Create the New Majority.”
 The Following Words Had Never Appeared In An
Inaugural Address, Until Today
By Tyler Durden
Jan 20, 2017 9:28 PM
That Trump's inaugural address was provocative is putting
it mildly. Nowhere was this more obvious than in the
initial reaction of the Financial Times. Consider the
following excerpt:
For most presidents, a first inaugural address
has been the occasion to set out a personal
vision of the American idea. You do not
necessarily lose points for failing to set out policy
in granular detail. You are playing mood-music,
making it as stirring as possible and positioning
yourself in the grand flow of American history:
reminding your audience of an essential
continuity. Mr Trump’s theme was the
opposite. From his first words, he stressed
discontinuity: that his presidency would be a
break.
“Today’s ceremony, however, has a very special
meaning because today we are not merely
transferring power from one administration to
another or from one party to another, but we are
transferring power from Washington DC, and
giving it back to you, the people.”
That audience-shaping attempt, at least, had the right idea.
Mr. Trump made a lot of play with the second and first-
persons plural:
“This is your day”; “We will bring back our jobs.”
But he positioned his “great movement” in a way
that suggested not that the Washington
government was the expression of democracy
but its enemy. It was an unusually rancorous,
backward look, given what he said about
unity and solidarity. It was a dismissal of,
rather than a humble doffing of the cap to,
history.
[R]ewarmed like a tray of unappetising leftovers, were the
familiar slogans of the campaigning Mr. Trump.
“The forgotten men and women of our country
will be forgotten no longer.” “America will start
winning again, winning like never before.” “All
talk and no action.” “America first, America first.”
They were greeted with what, at least on the television
relays, sounded like distinctly halfhearted applause.
384
And here — during his sporadic attempts at the high style
— were some awkwardly half-formed figures of speech.
To say “we stand at the birth of a new
millennium” sounds grand but, unless you have a
1,000-year regime in mind, if you can say that in
2017 you can say it any time you like. “We are
one nation and their pain is our pain” would have
worked if “they” had been specified. It wasn’t.
He spoke of “rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones
across the landscape of our nation”; of how “a new
national pride will stir ourselves (sic), lift our sights and
heal our divisions”; of how “a new vision will govern”; of
how “we will shine for everyone to follow”; of how “the
wealth, strength and confidence of our country has
dissipated over the horizon”. Each of those phrases is
intended to resonate — but each, like a bell cast with a
fault, makes a slight clunk.
And the punchline:
The speech’s most memorable phrase was
“American carnage”. As well as being,
unfortunately, the title of a thrash metal tour a
few years back, it is memorable because it
sounds slightly wrong. You want an audience to
associate pride, dreams, prosperity, unity,
freedom, hope and suchlike with the word
“American” — not “carnage”.
Etc.
While we won't comment on the FT's visceral reaction to
the speech - clearly the establishment mouthpiece was not
happy with the words that came out of Trump's mouth -
and while readers can make up their own mind about
Trump's address, we do want to point something out.
Like everything else about him, Trump's speech was
indeed a break from established tradition, and nowhere
was this more obvious than in the selection of words that
had never appeared previously in any US inaugural
address. Some of them: bleed, carnage, depletion,
disrepair, flush, Islamic, ripped, sad, rusted, sprawl,
stealing, stolen, subsidized, tombstones, trapped,
trillions, unstoppable.
The full list is below.
Indeed, the speech was so unorthodox it even stunned
Trump advisor Carl Icahn. As he told CNBC,
"Donald surprised me coming on so strongly
about the establishment. I admire him for
doing that."
"I admire him for not just trying to say, 'Wow.
Let's smooth it over. Let's be buddies.' I mean,
385
he came on extremely strongly and he's giving
you a look at what the future, I think, is going to
be," Icahn added.
Icahn, Trump's special advisor on regulatory reform, said
he expects the 45th president of the United States to take a
confrontational approach, to some extent. Yet he argued
that may be a good thing because it will promote change.
"I think you have to break up this establishment.
You have to stop the perception which we have
in this country that the government is at war with
business, that the government doesn't like
business and that's what you've had for eight
years with Obama," Icahn said.
We have yet to see if Trump will indeed follow up with his
promises, or his belligerent speech. We do have one last
question, however: did Trump really "borrow" a part of his
address from... Bane?
Wait... what!?#Inauguration
pic.twitter.com/zs8rx1MjMc
— Jahova (@JahovasWitniss) January 20, 2017
 Trump And A New Gold-Backed Dollar
Submitted By Nick Giambruno Via Internationalman.Com,
Jan 20, 2017 6:05 PM
On August 15, 1971, President Nixon
killed the last remnants of the gold
standard.
Since then, the dollar has been a pure fiat currency,
allowing the Fed to print as many dollars as it pleases.
Removing the US dollar’s last link to gold eliminated the
main motivation for foreign countries to store large dollar
reserves and to use the dollar for international trade.
At this point, demand for dollars was set to fall… along
with the dollar’s purchasing power. So the US government
concocted a new arrangement to give foreign countries
another compelling reason to hold and use the dollar.
The new arrangement, called the
petrodollar system, preserved the
dollar’s special status as the world’s
reserve currency.
In short, the US government made a series of agreements
with Saudi Arabia between 1972 and 1974, which created
the petrodollar.
The Saudis would use their dominant position in OPEC to
ensure that all oil transactions would only happen in US
dollars. And the US would guarantee the House of Saud’s
survival.
It worked… for a while.
The petrodollar filled the void after the US severed the
dollar’s last link to gold as the main prop to the dollar’s
status as the world’ premier reserve currency.
So far, the petrodollar has lasted over 40 years. However,
the glue is losing its stick.
I think we’re on the cusp of another
paradigm shift in the international
financial system, a change at least as
fundamental as what happened in 1971
when Nixon severed the dollar’s last link
to gold.
The relationship between Saudi Arabia and the US hit
historic lows in 2016. I only expect it to get worse. Trump
386
is the first president since the petrodollar system was
enacted to be openly hostile toward the Saudis.
The death of the petrodollar system is
my No. 1 black swan event for 2017.
It raises the question: What will fill the
void when the petrodollar inevitably
dies?
When that happens—and it may be
imminent—something has to replace it. I
think there are only two options.
Naturally, the global elite want to centralize more power
into global institutions. In this case, that means the
International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The IMF issues a type of international
currency called the “Special Drawing
Right,” or SDR.
The SDR is nothing new. The globalists
have been slowly building it up since
1969. In the near future, it could be used
as the premier international currency—
the role the dollar has played since the
end of World War 2.
The SDR is simply a basket of other fiat currencies. The
US dollar makes up 42%, the euro 31%, the Chinese
renminbi 11%, the Japanese yen 8%, and the British pound
8%.
It’s a fiat currency based on other fiat currencies… a
floating abstraction based on other floating abstractions.
The SDR is not based on sound economics or the interests
of the common man. It’s just another cockamamie
invention of the economic witch doctors in academia and
government.
The SDR is dangerous. It gives the government—in this
case, a global government—more power. It’s a bridge to a
powerful global monetary authority, and eventually a
global currency.
Most decent people would consider this a bad thing. That’s
why the global elite cloud their scheme with dull and
opaque names like “Special Drawing Right.”
It’s an old trick. Governments have used it for eons.
The Federal Reserve is an excellent example. After two
failed central banking experiments in the 1800s, anything
associated with a central bank became deeply unpopular
with the American public. So, central bank advocates tried
a fresh branding strategy.
Rather than call their new central bank the Third Bank of
the United States (the previous two were the First and
Second Banks of the United States), they gave it a vague
and boring name. They called it “the Federal Reserve” and
managed to hide it in plain sight from the average person.
Nearly 100 years later, most Americans don’t have the
slightest clue what the Federal Reserve is, what it does, or
how it has eroded their standard of living.
I think the same dynamic is at work with the IMF’s
“Special Drawing Right.”
The breakdown of the petrodollar is the
perfect excuse for the globalists to
usher in their SDR solution.
So that’s the first option. It’s the global elites’ preferred
outcome. It would be a very bad thing for personal and
economic freedom. It means more fiat currency, more
centralization, and less freedom for the individual.
The second option is to simply return to
gold as the premier international money.
Here’s how it could happen…
.
387
Trump might play along with the globalists’ schemes, but I
doubt it. He’s the first president who’s openly and
sincerely hostile toward globalism. He’s denounced it
repeatedly.
Trump recently said, “We will no longer surrender this
country, or its people, to the false song of globalism.”
In my view, there’s only one way Trump could fight the
global elites and their SDR plan: return the dollar to some
sort of gold backing.
Trump has said favorable things about
gold in the past. So have some of his
advisers.
It wouldn’t be easy. He’d face one hell of a struggle with
the globalists. And winning would be far from certain.
No matter what, the death of the petrodollar, just like the
end of the dollar’s link to gold, will be very good for the
dollar price of gold and gold mining stocks.
When Nixon took the dollar off gold in
1971, gold skyrocketed over 2,300%. It
shot from $35 per ounce to a high of
$850 in 1980. Gold mining stocks did
even better.
Gold is still bouncing around its lows. Gold mining stocks
are still very cheap. I expect returns to be at least as great
as they were during that paradigm shift in the international
monetary system.
 Trump’s Top Priorities
By Stephen Lendman
1-21-2017
What he should and will do may be world’s apart. His top
priorities should be world peace, stability, mutual
cooperation with all nations, making America a model
state, unlike its current pariah status, along with equity and
justice for everyone.
No president in US history reached that standard. Jack
Kennedy came closest. Franklin Roosevelt gave
Americans vital New Deal policies during the nation’s
Great Depression. In large measure, he also bore
responsibility for WW II.
Lyndon Johnson waged war on poverty while waging far
greater war abroad, dividing the nation in the process, his
unpopularity forcing him out of the 1968 race despite his
Great Society achievements.
Ignore what politicians say. Follow only what they do.
Trump delivered a promising inaugural address, striking a
far different tone than most of his predecessors,
refreshingly omitting phony rosy scenario hyperbole.
He pledged to serve all Americans straightaway. Saying
he’ll
“fight for you with every breath in (his)
body, and (he’ll) never, ever let you down”
is hollow rhetoric without meaningful policy initiatives
backing it.
Replacing corporate enriching Obamacare with something
worse is no way to fulfill his pledge. Nor is waging war on
social justice if that’s what he has in mind.
The pro-Hillary, anti-Trump New York Times outrageously
called his ascension to power “a hostile takeover” of the
nation’s capital. The self-styled newspaper of record is
unrelenting in its maliciousness - furious over an outsider
defeating its favorite, wanting revenge, disgracing itself
more than already.
Trump:
“We will no longer accept politicians who
are all talk and no action, constantly
complaining but never doing anything
about it.”
388
“The time for empty talk is over. Now
arrives the hour of action. Do not allow
anyone to tell you that it cannot be done.”
Strong stuff! Nothing Obama, Bush/Cheney, the Clintons
and most other US presidents matched it in words or
deeds.
Trump no longer is a private citizen. He’s America’s 45th
president and armed forces commander-in-chief, an
enormous responsibility for anyone.
He’s got bully pulpit power, along with the power and
influence of his incumbency.
 Will he back his lofty rhetoric with positive actions?
 Will he serve all Americans responsibly as promised or
just its privileged few - the way it’s largely worked
before?
 Will he be a warrior or peace president? Is his pledge
to combat terrorism real or just another ploy to continue
US imperial madness?
 Will he get along with Russia, China and all other
sovereign independent nations or maintain adversarial
relations?
 Will he do the right things or be just another dirty
politician? Will the Trump era be looked back on as
transformational or disturbing continuity?
According to Sputnik News,
“(t)he Trump Administration will consider
the invitation to (Syrian conflict resolution)
negotiations in Astana after its official
receipt, and will not participate in any
negotiations until the formation of a clear
US vision of a resolution to the Syrian
crisis.”
Earlier Trump complained about wasting trillions of
dollars on foreign wars, accomplishing nothing but
disaster. Will he curb imperial madness or continue it?
Pretexts are easy to create to do what he wishes.
He took dead aim at destructive trade deals sending US
jobs abroad. He wants NATO used to combat terrorism,
not wage war on other countries, so he said earlier.
He rhetorically challenged longstanding US tradition. Will
he initiate the most sweeping changes in American policy
since FDR’s New Deal, LBJ’s Great Society, and the
Reagan era?
Will his agenda improve things at home and abroad or
worsen them? As a newly inaugurated president, it’ll take
time to tell.
He deserves a chance to prove his mettle. He’s the first US
president letting ordinary Americans communicate with
his administration directly - via Twitter.
I’ve done it numerous times, urging him to do the right
things in brief comments and links to some of my articles.
He’ll get this one.
389
Incoming tweets are read by staff, checking for possible
threats, along with likely gauging public sentiment, other
than what polls reveal.
Trump used his inaugural address to communicate directly
with ordinary Americans, hoping for improved public
approval.
The only way to get it is through responsible governance -
legislatively and by executive actions as necessary.
On January 20, a new era in America began - the fullness
of time to tell if for good or ill.
Trump Admin Outlines Policy Priorities For First 100 Days
On Revamped WH Website
Published Time: 20 Jan, 2017 18:33Edited Time: 21 Jan, 2017 13:06
President Donald Trump is joined by the Congressional leadership
and his family as he formally signs his cabinet nominations into law,
in the President's Room of the Senate, at the Capitol in Washington,
D.C., U.S., January 20, 2017. © J. Scott Applewhite / Reuters
The White House web page maps out the Trump
administration’s plans for energy, foreign policy, jobs,
military and law enforcement, and trade deals, which will
likely shape the direction of his first 100 days in office.
The list of priorities was published at the White House
website after Trump was sworn in.
Under the energy plan, the White House said it is
committed to elimination policies such as the Climate
Action Plan and Waters of the US rule.
“Lifting these restrictions will greatly help
American workers, increasing wages by more
than $30 billion over the next 7 years,” according
the White House.
The Trump administration will support a program of
tapping the estimated $50 trillion worth of untapped shale
oil and gas reserves, especially on federal lands, and use
the revenue to support public infrastructure building.
Under its energy plan, the Trump administration says is
committed to clean coal technology and reviving the
nation’s coal industry.
The White House wants independence from the
OPEC cartel and “any nations hostile to our
interests.”
In a contradictory inclusion, however, the White House
said that
390
“protecting clean air and clean water, conserving
our natural habitats, and preserving our natural
reserves and resources will remain a high
priority.”
“President Trump will refocus the EPA on its
essential mission of protecting our air and water.”
Under foreign policy, the White House will focus on
American interests and national security.
“Defeating ISIS and other radical Islamic terror
groups will be our highest priority,” said the
Trump administration.
To accomplish this, the White House will pursue the
Obama administration’s strategy of joint and coalition
military operations, cut off funding for terrorist groups,
expand intelligence sharing, and engage in cyberwarfare to
disrupt and disable propaganda and recruiting.
The Trump administration will end the defense sequester
and submit a new budget to Congress to rebuild the
military. It wants to increase the number of US Navy ships
and expand the Air Force. There are few details on
whether this will involve recruitment, more equipment or
an increased budget.
“We will develop a state-of-the art missile
defense system to protect against missile-based
attacks from states like Iran and North Korea,”
said the White House.
At the same time, however, it will also “embrace
diplomacy.”
Concerning trade deals, the Trump administration will
pursue a policy of making sure American workers and
businesses come first. He will withdraw from the Trans-
Pacific Partnership (TPP) and will renegotiate NAFTA.
It will crack down on nations that violate trade agreements,
the White House said.
Under its job program, the Trump administration
promises “to create 25 million new American jobs
in the next decade and return to 4 percent annual
economic growth.”
To accomplish this, the administration will lower taxes for
Americans, reduce the US corporate tax rate, cut federal
regulations that are "job-killers" and negotiate trade deals
and help “Make America Great Again.”
'Disabilities' isn't accessible anymore at
https://t.co/CJfdiahQHC, and is no longer listed
under 'Issues.' pic.twitter.com/QaS8OaCo71
— Hugh Merwin (@hughmerwin) January 20,
2017
The administration says it will provide the best medical
care and support for service members and their families,
and get veterans what they need by transforming the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
.
391
“Our reforms will begin with firing the corrupt and
incompetent VA executives who let our veterans
down, modernizing the bureaucracy, and
empowering doctors and nurses to ensure our
veterans receive the best care available in a
timely manner,” it said.
Under law enforcement goals, the administration is
committed to reducing crime through more law
enforcement,
“more community engagement and more
effective policing.”
Those plans including building a border wall to stop illegal
immigration, stop gangs and the violence, stop drugs
pouring into the US, ending sanctuary cities and ending
lawlessness “associated with illegal immigration.”
 NYT Editors Bash Trump’s
Inaugural Address
By Stephen Lendman
1-21-2017
In contrast to Obama’s consistent demagogic doubletalk,
painful to hear, Trump delivered an admirable inaugural
address, abstaining from rosy scenario hyperbole, historic
if able to follow through on pledges made - no easy task
given enormous obstacles he’ll face.
He repudiated America’s interventionist agenda, while
vowing to put the nation’s interests first. His tone was
polar opposite longstanding policies pursued by bipartisan
neocons infesting Washington.
Confrontation between the executive and congressional
branches seems likely if he tries fulfilling pledges made.
After 24 deplorable Clinton co-presidency, Bush/Cheney,
Obama years, a leader seeking a new direction is a
refreshing change - if he means what he says and goes for
what he proposed whatever the obstacles, provided his
domestic agenda doesn’t wage war on social justice, what
progressive activists fear.
Times editors maliciously oppose whatever he
does or doesn’t do, assailing him relentlessly -
shamelessly calling his inaugural address
“graceless and disturbingly ahistoric,” a
disgraceful ad hominem remark.
They blasted his failure to highlight “the best in America’s
ideals…” It’s hard imagining what they mean given its
fantasy democracy, endless wars on humanity, exclusively
serving wealth, power and privilege, while cracking down
hard on nonbelievers.
Times editors:
“With sweeping exaggeration, Mr. Trump spoke
of ‘carnage’ in the inner cities. He deplored all of
this decline as a betrayal of America, implicitly
trashing the four former presidents who sat
listening behind him at the inaugural ceremony.”
Fact:
Tens of millions of Americans understand the
deplorable state of America Times editors
support to their disgrace.
392
Trump indeed “trash(ed) four previous presidents,” mostly
Obama’s wretched eight years, enriching privileged
Americans at the expense of most others, waging war on
humanity at home and abroad.
Trump said
“(t)hat all changes right here and right now…We
are transferring power from Washington, DC, and
giving it back to you, the people” - rhetoric riling
America’s privileged class and supportive media
scoundrels.
Times editors:
“The new president offered a tortured rewrite of
American history - ignoring the injustices of the
past as well as the nation’s economic resilience
and social achievements in recent decades.”
Fact:
Trump delivered straight talk rarely heard from
US politicians. He criticized policies benefitting
America’s privileged at the expense of most
others, vowing change.
Governance under the Clintons, Bush/Cheney and Obama
ravaged social justice, institutionalizing neoliberal
harshness - notably during protracted Main Street
Depression conditions throughout Obama’s tenure.
Times editors:
“As Mr. Trump spoke about the disappearance of
jobs, it would have noted that the unemployment
rate has fallen from 10 percent in 2009, the
height of the recession, to less than 5 percent.”
Fact:
Real unemployment is 23%, not the phony
4.7% rate, excluding around 100 million
working age Americans without jobs,
written off as non-people.
Fact:
 Most jobs created are rotten ones. Households America and supportive media scoundrels want
need two or more to survive. Class warfare suppressed.
created a wealth disparity chasm between
America’s privileged and most others. If he goes all out to improve things responsibly, even if
unsuccessful, his tenure will reflect an important change
Throughout his campaign and in his inaugural address, from deplorable earlier policies.
Trump touched important nerves powerful interests in
.

393
 Phantom Phixer: Priebus Betrays
st
Trump…Again
January 21 , 2017
Martin Armstrong: Trump Being Corralled by
Establishment
Trump’s pick for White House chief of staff Reince
Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee,
does call into question if the swamp will be
drained. Priebus has brought in Johnny DeStefano who
will work as the director of presidential personnel.
Mongoose: Is “The Family” Penetrating Donald Trump? Is
a Religious-Criminal Cabal
st
Securing Key Spots?
January 21 , 2017
No direct knowledge — circulating among the non-
evangelical alt-right.
Certain Trump picks point to a religious-criminal cabal
preparing for a Pence presidency. What do Vice President
Mike Pence, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and certainly
not least, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats,
have in common? Membership in ‘The Fellowship’, a
.
394
DeStefano will be the real person who fills the jobs in
Washington. The way this works, they will limit the
choices and pick all the people below the cabinet positions.
DeStefano is responsible for filling all the positions in
government made by the White House. DeStefano was
previously an aide to former House Speaker John Boehner
and according to direct sources, he is by no means a drain
the swamp type of guy. He was clearly tapped by Priebus
for this position. This is certainly not a revolution and
Trump may find himself being corralled in more and more
by Washington.
Phi Beta Iota: If Donald Trump does not dump Reince
Preibus, get a personal grip on presidential personnal, and
pass the Electoral Reform Party to unrig the system and
truly become the universal president, he will betrayed,
over and over, by Reince Preibus and the Republican
Party.
quasi-religious organization-unregistered lobby with
fingerprints all over past USA international crimes sprees.
These three significant personalities all are under the
‘spiritual’ tutelage of Doug Coe, leader of ‘The Family’
where if you are ‘chosen’ there is a different standard, an
unaccountable standard, where everything up to and
inclusive of child rape is excused.
Phi Beta Iota: Donald Trump knows he is being played
and he is himself playing for time and position. What he
does not seem to have in place is a proper vetting process
in the context of a grand strategy. All signs are pointing
toward Trump’s being pressured to resign or be
impeached. He is simply not doing enough to take down
the Establishment, and is instead allowing the
Establishment to place its Trojan Horses everywhere,
including the two most important positions: the
Establishment owns the White House via the Chief of Staff
and the Office of Presidential Personnel via the Director.
 Wapo Rains On Trump’s Inaugural Parade
By Stephen Lendman
1-21-2017
The neocon, CIA house organ Washington Post called
Trump’s inaugural address “a sharp disappointment” - no
surprise from a broadsheet maliciously denigrating him
throughout the political season and post-election period.
Instead of praising an admirable straight talk address,
omitting phony rosy scenario hyperbole, WaPo lied,
claiming he
“painted a false picture of an impoverished,
crime-ridden country that has been cheated and
victimized by Washington elites and grasping
interests abroad.”
Fact:
In his 16-minute address, Trump only touched on
how bad things really are for most Americans,
punished by state-imposed third world
conditions, cheated and abused by previous
administrations since the neoliberal 90s.
WaPo:
“America’s economy has rebounded from the
2008-2009 recession and is now outperforming
other advanced industrial democracies.”
Fact:
Protracted Main Street Depression conditions
resemble the 1930s for tens of millions of
Americans - out of work, out of luck, ignored and
abused by bipartisan complicity for far too long,
what WaPo and other media scoundrels won’t
admit and explain.
WaPo:
“(T)he Constitution…was ordained…to ‘establish
justice’ and to ‘secure the blessings of liberty.”
395
Fact:
America’s founders created a government of
men, not laws. “We the people” meant them, not
us.
Fact:
The Constitution was no masterpiece of political
architecture. Jefferson believed it should be
updated every 20 years to make it relevant to the
times. It’s way outdated.
Fact:
Mischaracterized as the Constitution’s father,
James Madison was unimpressed with the
document - disapprovingly calling it “better than
nothing.”
WaPo:
“The United States over the decades has done
well by doing good; American generosity, and its
support for fair global rules, fostered prosperity in
Europe and Asia and beyond, which in turn
redounded to the United States’ advantage at
home.”
Fact:
What nonsense! America does “good” for itself
by imperial wars, plundering resources of other
nations and exploiting their people, harming its
own population the same way.
WaPo saying Trump’s address reflected “a dark vision”
disparaged his impressive straight talk, rarely heard by
leaders anywhere.
 One Takeaway From Trump’s
Inauguration Speech: Gangs
By Jon Rappoport
January 21, 2017
I could list 10 interesting things Trump said yesterday.
And of course, words aren’t actions. Yet. But here is one
remark you’re not going to get, and never did get, from
any recent president:
“Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our
inner cities…And the crime and the gangs and
the drugs that have stolen too many lives and
robbed our country of so much unrealized
potential. This American carnage stops right here
and stops right now.”
To which Rachel Maddow (MSNBC) replied:
“It was militant and it was dark. The crime, the
gangs, the drugs, this ‘American carnage,’
disrepair, decay. You can’t imagine the outgoing
president giving a speech like that.”
She’s right, because the outgoing president never did
anything to stop the carnage. If she thinks Trump’s
language was too militant, she should try talking to
mothers who live in those inner cities, who are trapped and
held hostage by gangs, who want a nation of laws, and
can’t find a way to live safely with their children by eating
Obamas’s high-flying empty rhetoric.
Obama somehow managed to spend eight years in the
White House and never mention, with any significance,
GANGS. Eight years…and nothing. Yet he was The One
who was going rescue America’s inner cities.
Find an inauguration speech by any recent president in
which the word GANGS appears.
Is the whole point of being presidential an avoidance of
stark realities? Is that what all the Rachel Maddows want?
They’re not living in those neighborhoods. They’re not up
against the gangs and the crime and drugs every day and
every night.
The truth is, it’s offensive for a president not to mention
these things.
 Did Attorneys General Eric Holder or Loretta Lynch go
after gangs? Did they raise a finger to stop this
scourge?
396
 Did Obama form a plan and put it into action?
 Did any federal legislator or bureaucrat raise hell
because gangs are controlling large swaths of inner
cities?
 Did any major news outlet pound on this story month
after month?
Guess what? When you add up gun crimes, killings,
maimings, and drug overdoses in cities across America,
you come to the door of gangs. That’s a shocking
revelation millions of Americans already understand, but
for some reason presidents are clueless.
Yesterday, though, Trump wasn’t clueless.
We’ll see what he actually does and doesn’t do, but he
knows. And he talks.
Offended liberals take umbrage at his remarks, but as usual
they prolong decimation and destruction, and they take the
opportunity to fly their useless banners of care and concern
and opt for solutions that aren’t solutions. They want to
look and sound good.
After all, they wanted to elect a president who played a
major role in destroying an entire country for no reason
(Libya), and they didn’t even blink at the horror. It wasn’t
on their radar. That’s how much they really care.
If tomorrow, by some miracle, all gangs in America
disappeared, and the communities they ruled came back to
life, liberals would find a way to be offended. They would
yell and scream. Because some injustice hadn’t been
addressed. Because some reparation hadn’t been made.
Because they have an interminable itch that can never be
scratched out of existence.
Behind all their pronouncements, they must be able to see
victims, on whose blood they feed.
When they imagine individuals held hostage coming back
to freedom and strength and self-propelled power in
communities, liberated from the carnage of gangs, they see
silver bullets moving toward their own vampiric hearts.
 Pepe Escobar: Here's How
The Trump Presidency Will Play Out
Authored By Pepe Escobar Via The Saker
Published: January 22, 2017
The Trump era starts now – with geopolitics and
geoeconomics set for a series of imminent, unpredictable
cliffhangers.
I have argued that Trump’s foreign policy guru Henry
Kissinger’s strategy to deal with the formidable Eurasia
integration trio – Russia, China and Iran – is a remixed
Divide and Rule; seduce Russia away from its strategic
partnership with China, while keep harassing the
weakest link, Iran.
In fact that’s how it’s already playing out – as in the
outbursts of selected members of Trump’s cabinet during
their US Senate hearings. Factions of US Think Tankland,
referring to Nixon’s China policy, which was designed by
Kissinger, are also excited with the possibilities of
containment regarding at least one of those powers
“potentially arrayed against America”.
Kissinger and Dr. Zbig “Grand Chessboard”
Brzezinski are the two foremost, self-described
Western dalangs – puppet masters – in the geopolitical
arena. In opposition to Kissinger, Obama’s foreign policy
mentor Brzezinski, true to his Russophobia, proposes a
Divide and Rule centered on seducing China.
Yet an influential New York business source, very close
to the real, discreet Masters of the Universe, who
correctly predicted Trump’s victory weeks before the fact,
after examining my argument offered not only a scathing
appraisal of those cherished dalangs; he volunteered to
detail how the new normal was laid out by the Masters
directly to Trump. Let’s call him “X”.
The non-stop China watch
“X” starts by doing something US deep state-
connected regulars, who revere their idols,
never dare to, at least in public;
“It is important not to attribute too much
importance to either Kissinger or Brzezinski as
they are merely fronts for those who make the
decisions and it is their job to cloak the decisions
with a patina of intellectuality. Their input means
397
relatively nothing. I use their names on occasion
as I cannot use the names of those who actually
make the decisions.”
That’s the cue for “X” to detail the new normal;
“Trump was elected with the support of the
Masters to tilt towards Russia. The Masters
have their tools in the media and Congress
maintaining a vilification campaign against
Russia, and have their puppet Brzezinski also
come out against Russia, stating ‘America’s
global influence depends on cooperation with
China’. The purpose is to threaten Russia to
cooperate and place these chips on the
negotiating table for Trump. In a traditional good
cop-bad cop approach, Donald is portrayed as
the good cop wanting good relations with Russia,
and Congress, media, Brzezinski are the bad
cops. This is to aid Trump in the negotiations
with Russia as Putin sees the ‘precarious’
position of his friend and should be willing to
make major concessions as the line goes.”
And that brings us to how Taiwan – and Japan – got
into the mix;
“Donald shows the Russian tilt by talking to the
Taiwanese, demonstrating that the shift is
serious. But it was decided to throw Japan into
the mix as a predator against US industry, with
an attack on Toyota, thoroughly deserved. That
moderated the position as the Masters became
afraid that the perception of our building up
Japan against China would be too much of a
provocation.”
So expect China – as “not too much importance”
Kissinger prescribed – to be under non-stop scrutiny;
“The Masters have decided to reindustrialize the
United States and want to take jobs back from
China. This is advisable from the Chinese
viewpoint; for why should they sell their work to
the US for a dollar that has no intrinsic value and
 get really nothing back for the work. China
should have a car in every Chinese worker’s
garage and they will become a larger producer of
cars than the EU, US and Japan combined, and
their own nation will keep their wealth in their
own country.”
And why China over Russia?
“Russia in this sense being a natural resource
country with a gigantic military industrial complex
(the latter being the only reason she is secretly
respected) is exempt from any tough trade talk
as they hardly export anything but natural
resources and military equipment. The Masters
want jobs back from Mexico and Asia including
Japan, Taiwan, etc., and you see this in Trump’s
attack on Japan. The main underlying reason is
that the US has lost control of the seas and
cannot secure its military components during a
major war. This is all that matters now and this is
the giant story behind the scenes.”
In only a few words “X” details the reversal of an
economic cycle;
“The Masters made money out of transfer of
industry to Asia (Bain Capital specialized in
this), and Wall Street made money from the
lower interest rates on the recycled dollars
from the trade deficits. But now, the issue is
strategic; and they will make money on the
return of industries scaling down their
investments in Asia and returning them to the
United States as we rebuild production here.”
“X” remains quite fond of Henry Ford’s business strategy;
and that is the cue for him to address the crucial theme:
national defense. According to “X”,
“Ford doubled the wages he paid and made
more money than any other manufacturer. The
reason was that a living wage where the mother
can have many children on her husband’s wage
was psychologically good for productivity in his
car plants, and that his workers could then afford
his cars. He thus recognized that in a society
there must be a just distribution of wealth that his
admirer Steve Jobs could not. Henry’s mass
productivity was the wonder of the world and that
was what won World War Two for the United
States. Amazon does not contribute anything to
national defense, being merely an internet
marketing service based on computer programs,
nor Google which merely organizes data better.
None of this builds a better missile or submarine
except in a marginal way.”
398
It’s the Pentagon, stupid
So yes; this all has to do with reorganizing the US
military. “X” made a point to refer to a CNAS report I
quoted in my initial column;
“It is very important for what is visible between
the lines. And that is we are in deep trouble
being technologically behind Russia by
generations in weapons, which is a follow-up on
the Brzezinski quote that we are no longer a
global power.”
This is a thorough, wide-ranging analysis of how Russia
has managed to organize the best armed forces in the
world. And that does not even take into account the S-500
missile defense system, which is now being rolled out and
arguably seals the entirety of Russian airspace. And the
next generation – S-600? – will be even more powerful.
“X” does venture into deep state taboo territory, as in
how Russia, over the past decade, has managed to leap
far ahead of the US, “eclipsing it as the strongest military
power”. But the game may be far from over – wishful
thinking or otherwise;
“We hope Secretary of Defense James Mattis
will understand this and that the Deputy
Secretary of Defense has advanced
technological skills, organizational ability and the
foresight to understand that the weapons of
World War Three are offensive and defensive
missiles, and submarines, and not air power,
tanks and aircraft carriers.”
A realist, “X” admits that the warmongering
neocon/neoliberalcon status quo – represented by most US
deep state factions – will never abandon the default posture
of unremitting hostility towards Russia. But he prefers to
focus on change;
“Let Tillerson reorganize the State Department
along Exxon efficiencies. He may be worth
something in that. He and Mattis may be gutless
but if you tell the truth to the Senate you may not
be confirmed. So what they say means nothing.
But notice this about Libya. The CIA had a goal
of driving China out of Africa and so does
AFRICOM. That was one of the secrets to our
Libyan intervention.”
Not that it worked; NATO/AFRICOM turned Libya into a
wasteland run by militias, and still China was not driven
away from the rest of Africa.
“X” also admits, “Syria and Iran are red lines
for Russia. So is the eastern Ukraine from the
Dnieper.” He is fully aware Moscow will not
allow any regime change gambit on Tehran.
 And he’s also aware that “China’s with the Masters of the Universe that has Trump as the
investments in Iranian oil and gas imply that good guy and the Congress, CIA, etc. as the bad guy as
China also will not permit Washington’s a negotiating ploy. That is how they see it. They do not
overthrow of the Iranian government.” regard this circus as real.”

The going really gets tough when it comes to NATO; “X”
is convinced Russia “will invade Romania and Poland if
those missiles are not taken out of Romania and the missile
commitment to Poland rescinded. The issue is not the
worthless defensive missiles of the United States but the
substitutability of offensive nuclear missiles in these silos.
Russia will not tolerate this risk. These are not subject to
negotiation.”
The circus may be just an illusion. Or wayang – Balinese
puppet theatre – as I suggested. “X” advances a crisp
interpretation of the shadow play ahead from Moscow’s
point of view, allowing “several months to see if Putin can
work out a detente with Trump that essentially creates an
autonomous eastern Ukraine, a peace treaty in Syria with
Assad in place, and a withdrawal of NATO forces back to
their line of defense under Ronald Reagan.”

In contrast to the “perpetual threat” perpetual Who will prevail; the Masters, or the deep state? Brace
propaganda by the US War Party, Moscow focuses on for impact.
actual facts on the ground since the 1990s; the break up
of historic Slavic ally Serbia; Warsaw Pact nations and
even former USSR republics annexed by NATO, not to
mention attempts to also include Georgia and Ukraine; US
deployment of color revolutions; the “Assad must go “
fiasco, as in regime change forced on Syria even including
the weaponizing of Salafi-jihadis; economic sanctions, an
oil price war and raids on the ruble; and non-stop NATO
harassment.

“X”, fully aware of the facts, adds, “Russia has always

wanted peace. But they are not going to play a game
.

399
 National Park Service Belittles President Trump On
Official Twitter Account, Forced To Apologize
Government Agency Disparages The Newly Elected President
By Shepard Ambellas -
01.22.2017 @11:09 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — The U.S. Department of the Interior’s
National Park Service purposefully raised hell on its
official government Twitter account last Friday during the
Inauguration Ceremony when the NPS retweeted a tweet
belittling the newly elected President.
“Looks like the Trump administration hasn’t taken control
of the @NatlParkService Twitter feed just yet,”
Appelbaum tweeted.

The original tweet, made by Binyamin Appelbaum, a New

York Times correspondent, read, “Compare the crowds:
2009 inauguration at left, 2017 inauguration at right” and
featured a biased split image of Obama’s 2009
Inauguration vs. Trump’s 2017 Inauguration.

Despite the fact that the picture on the right depicting the
2017 Inauguration was taken early on, unfairly showing a
light crowd, some people on Twitter took it as fact, which
essentially started a shitstorm on Twitter, prompting
a temporary shutdown of the NPS Twitter account after the
agency issued an RT of Appelbaum’s tweet.
Of course, the guy who started all the havoc in the first
place by tweeting out the original propaganda, which was
later retweeted by the NPS, couldn’t resist a follow-up
tweet alerting the Trump Admin of the problem he had
inadvertently spawned.
However, the National Park Service reactivated the
account Saturday to issue an official apology.
“We regret the mistaken RTs from our
account yesterday and look forward to
continuing to share the beauty and history
of our parks with you,” tweeted the National
Park Service. The Tweet was posted along
with a beautiful picture of a buffalo walking
down a snow-covered road.

400
 Sadly, this is another clear example of how far these
mainline media attention whores will go to in an attempt to
remain relevant.

H/T: @Tabertronic/Twitter

After the NPS’ Twitter account came back online

Appelbaum again couldn’t resist another tweet stating,
“Welcome back @natlparkservice. Hopefully the results of
me retweeting you are different than the results of you
retweeting me.”

401
 Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
By John Wight
January 23, 2017
At the close of his inauguration speech, Trump stood in
front of the US Capitol Building and raised his right fist in
the air. In keeping with a speech that combined bombast
and fury, he appeared at that moment more conquering
king than elected president. Indeed all that was needed to
complete the image was a giant sword in his left hand.
As to the contents of his speech, we had classic right wing
tropes of national renewal seasoned with a populist leftist
tinge in the form of a pledge to prioritize the interests of
American labor. “America First” was the overarching
message of one of the most remarkable inauguration
speeches the American people have ever been treated to,
one that began with a declaration of war against the
Washington establishment on behalf of ‘the people’, thus
ramping up rather than tamping down the populism that
had fueled his election campaign.
For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has
reaped the rewards of government while the people have
borne the cost. Washington flourished — but the people
did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered — but the
jobs left, and the factories closed. The establishment
protected itself, but not the citizens of our country.
It was a message designed to resonate with America’s once
mighty industrial heartlands, giving hope to millions of
benighted workers denied a place a table at the banquet of
neoliberalism. Restoring lost manufacturing jobs and
replenishing the country’s crumbling infrastructure were
consistent themes throughout his campaign for the White
House, and during his inauguration speech Trump re-
emphasized it, to the point where you could almost hear
the clash of hammers on metal and roar of factory furnaces
in the background. Actually achieving would entail taking
the path of protectionism, which is where perhaps his
calculated decision to opt for peace with Russia and
confrontation with China is at least partly located. But
more on that later.
What should not be underestimated is the fact that millions
of people across America still refuse to accept Donald
Trump as their president. Hundreds of thousands of them
attended protests across the country, including at the
inauguration in Washington itself, while globally millions
participated in women’s marches, protesting what they
perceive to be the Trump’s misogyny and sexism. It is
worth making the point here that there were no such
402
protests when Obama was bombing Libya in conjunction
with Washington’s allies in 2011, bombs that killed Libyan
women along with men and children. Then there are the
women killed during Obama’s drone war, the women
slaughtered in Syria and Iraq at the hands of ISIS, which
exploded across the region under the previous president’s
watch.
The hypocrisy goes without saying.
On foreign policy, Trump railed against trade deals that in
his view had benefited other countries at the expense of
America, while also lambasting Washington’s self-
appointed role under his predecessors as the world’s
policeman.
For many decades…we’ve subsidized the armies of other
countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our
military; we’ve defended other nation’s borders while
refusing to defend our own; and spent trillions of dollars
overseas while America’s infrastructure has fallen into
disrepair and decay.
At this point you could almost hear the gnashing of teeth at
NATO headquarters in Brussels and in capitals across
Eastern Europe and the Balkan states, where anti-Russian
feeling has combined with the projection of cold war
nostrums to polarize relations between Moscow and
Washington in recent years.
Staying with foreign policy, Trump continues to shift
seamlessly between lucidity, incoherence, and
recklessness. In shorthand he is offering peace and
partnership with Russia but hostility and rancour towards
China and Iran. China in particular is being held up as a
bête noire, which given Beijing’s good and close relations
with Moscow is certain to pose a challenge for all
concerned in the months ahead.
China’s phenomenal economic growth relative to the US is
not the product of currency manipulation, as Trump
alleges, but rather the wholesale outsourcing of production
by US and Western multinationals to China in order to
exploit lower labor and production costs. It is important to
recognize that China and the United States have long been
engaged in a symbiotic if not harmonious relationship,
involving Beijing as the largest holder of US foreign debt,
and with the US the largest market for Chinese exports.
The US trade deficit with China in 2015 was $367 billion,
which tells its own story when it comes to relative US
economic decline. Without the dollar as the world’s
international reserve currency, the US economy would
have tanked way before now. However with China eager
to establish the yuan as a competing global currency, areas
of tension between both countries going forward are
clearly delineated.
Despite this, Trump has entered the White House absent of
any overarching project or design when it comes to
reshaping the world in America’s image, heralding in this
respect a significant break with the status quo. It is
reflective of the strategic defeats the US has suffered since
9/11 in Iraq and Afghanistan, the disaster of its actions vis-
à-vis the conflict in Syria, and a crisis in Ukraine and
Eastern Europe brought to us courtesy of the end of history
fantasies of neocon hawks.
Unlike the Washington establishment, Trump would
appear to understand that US hegemony and unipolarity
are no longer sustainable. He also knows that US
economic decline relative to its rivals, in particular China,
.
403
is approaching the point of critical mass. What he
apparently fails to understand though is that US economic
growth has long been predicated on unsustainable hyper-
consumption, benefiting an ever more bloated Wall Street
– the real enemy of American workers – to the detriment
of the real economy. If the rhetoric is to be believed, he
has arrived in Washington intent on making the enemies of
American labor his enemies.
It is why history may well record that on January 20 th
2017, the 45th President of the United States of America
declared war not on the country’s enemies abroad but on
its enemies at home – in other words on Washington itself.
Yet in the process of doing so he has unleashed ugly anti-
migrant and anti-minority sentiment in the land. It is why
despite making references to uniting the country during his
inauguration speech Donald Trump begins his time in
office as possibly the most divisive American president
since Abraham Lincoln.
At least Lincoln had the excuse of being elected on an anti-
slavery platform.
 Trump Triumphant
By Michael Shrimpton
January 22, 2017
The Inauguration Ceremony
Forget the media jibes about the crowd being ‘only’
900,000, (Editor’s note: 250k actually, confirmed through
hotel bookings and transportation usage figures as well)
which was probably an underestimate. The ceremony was
impressive, not just in itself, but in the very fact that it was
taking place at all. We know that the DVD pulled out all
the stops to stop Donald Trump being elected and there
was always the risk of his being assassinated before he
could be sworn in.
In an ill-mannered and unprofessional piece of journalism
CNN lovingly explained what would happen if both
President-Elect Trump and Vice-President-Elect Pence
were assassinated before they could be sworn in.
Thankfully CNN and the other illiberal ‘liberal’ media
outlets hoping for an assassination were to be
disappointed.
404
We are hearing whispers over here of a security alert
during the ceremony. There was a moment when a phalanx
of military gathered behind the President during his
speech, which I am not sure was planned. Whether it was
or whether it wasn’t, nothing bad happened, thank
goodness.
This may have been due to good work by NSA and DIA in
the days leading up to the inauguration. I gather that
certain security precautions were taken and certain
individuals close to the DVD who may have had an
interest in installing a German asset in the White House in
the place of Donald Trump were placed under an informal
form of house arrest. Well done NSA and the DIA! Not
everyone at CIA was best pleased, if reports circulating in
Moscow are to be believed, although the President was
given a warm welcome at Langley yesterday.
It’s noteworthy that Director Pompeo’s confirmation was
put back until after the inauguration. His first task at CIA
will probably be to find out what the heck went on last
week. No doubt he will carefully review the attendance at
the World Economic Forum in Davos. The WEF are a
well-known DVD front organization – with several of the
world’s most evil people there, including George Soros
and the Chinese kingpin Jinping, it would be interesting to
know what was discussed in the side meetings.
One thing the media are going to have to forget is the
sniping over President Trump’s lack of military
experience. The man has physical as well as moral
courage, and demonstrated it throughout the whole of
Friday’s ceremonies, when, as he well knew, he was a
walking target. As a Commander-in-Chief willing to stand
up for America he will be at constant risk of assassination.
I respectfully agree with your President that the media
have been engaged in outright deception over attendance at
the inauguration. Channel Four News in the UK were
typical – they showed pictures of the crowd after it had
started to disperse. Press Secretary Sean Spicer was right
to go after the mainstream media. Their behaviour has
been a disgrace. They have abandoned even the pretence
of impartiality. In their bias, unprofessionalism and lack of
integrity the MSM have demonstrated an absence of
commitment to a core principle of liberal democracy – fair
reporting of current affairs.
The President and Mrs Trump’s Grace
The handover was marked by gracious behavior from both
President and Mrs Trump. I expected nothing less. Neither
President Trump’s election nor his ability to be both
gracious and magnanimous to his political enemies has
taken me by surprise.
It was particularly sweet and thoughtful of Mrs Trump to
bring a gift for Michelle Obama. Since it was from
Tiffany’s we may fairly assume that it was more than a
trinket. I imagine that the gift was chosen with as much
thought and care as it was wrapped.
President Trump’s behavior towards both Barack Obama
and Hillary Clinton was perfectly proper and correct. If
there was any lack of grace it was shown by Hillary
Clinton, who might have shaken the President’s hand a
little more warmly, with respect. I was pleased to see
President Carter there. It was entirely right that he should
be.
The Music
It was very silly of stars to boycott the inauguration. Who
did they think they were kidding? Inaugurations are
occasions best suited to choirs rather than solo performers
anyway. The choir from Missouri were good, but the
Mormon Tabernacle Choir, suitably adorned with tartan,
were just superb. They are one of the finest choirs in the
world.
Jackie Evancho was nervous to start with. That is hardly to
be wondered at. The poor girl is only 16 and was
performing in front of no fewer than five presidents, a
crowd of a million people and a TV audience estimated at
one billion. She recovered well however and finished
strongly. She has a beautiful singing voice and if she
wasn’t a big-name star before the ceremony she is now!
Super Bowl next, I shouldn’t wonder.
Did you notice the quiet well-done the President gave
Jackie after she sang the National Anthem? This is a
president who believes in encouraging the young and for
all the hysterical accusations leveled against him is
prepared to encourage young women as well as young
men. I am sure that many Americans who did not vote, or
voted for Hillary or the minor candidates, will have been
reassured by their new president’s performance on his first
day in office.
The Threat from the DVD
The DVD are clearly the biggest threat to the Trump
Administration. Totally opposed to the idea of any country
running its own affairs, let alone a country as powerful as
America, with high-level penetration assets in Washington
and US law enforcement and intelligence and a
405
bloodthirsty record of murdering democratic politicians the
DVD are certainly an enemy to be reckoned with.
They are not however an enemy to be feared, or respected.
They are blackmailing, murderous scum and deserve no-
one’s respect. They can also be beaten.
2017 is not 1963. The DVD have two huge problems: they
no longer operate unknown in the shadows and unlike
1963 they don’t have an asset in place ready to take over.
In 1963 the Germans could assassinate whoever they
wished, confident in the expectation that no one would lay
a finger on them. The media were even more intelligence-
illiterate than they are now and nobody in Congress had
ever heard of the DVD. They had an almost endless supply
of tame judges like Chief Justice Warren whom they could
blackmail into signing off worthless reports. There was no
Internet.
For decades the American people were only ever permitted
to read junk about the Kennedy Assassination. Even today
there are tame outlets like Wikipedia and the New York
Times willing to drench themselves in the blood of
President John F. Kennedy by pushing the lies that he was
shot by Lee Harvey Oswald and that Oswald acted alone.
No one with any intelligence could seriously believe either
of these propositions. They are too absurd for words. Only
a cretin could believe that President Kennedy was shot by
one man when bullets of at least two different calibers
were used and he was hit from at least two different
directions.
Judges no longer command the respect they did in 1963, in
either Britain or America. Chief Justice Warren’s
ridiculous report is partly responsible for that. Most senior
judges are now seen as largely political animals, of
questionable integrity, lacking intellectual rigor. The
Supreme Court in particular has acquired a reputation for
handing down decisions which are more or less farcical,
although our own Supreme Court has joined it in a race to
the bottom.
If, God forbid, the DVD were to succeed in assassinating
President Trump it would be an Act of War by the Federal
Republic of Germany on the United States, as indeed the
assassination of President Kennedy was an Act of War on
the United States by West Germany. Successful
assassinations are invariably state-sponsored, which is why
the KGB and the Soviet leadership were so anxious in the
days following November 22nd. I am sure that it came as a
huge relief to Moscow when the KGB, in a brilliant piece
of intelligence work, discovered that the shooters were
French and had been brought in from Saigon (they didn’t
make all the shooters of course, but they didn’t do too
badly).
Germany is therefore faced with strategic calculations she
did not have to make in 1963. Berlin saw what happened
to Baghdad after 9/11 and they won’t be too anxious to see
B-52s overhead doing the Lord’s work.
The second big problem is that Vice-President Pence is no
LBJ. LBJ was a tyrant of a man, fully committed to the use
of assassination and willing to murder his way into the
White House. He had no qualms agreeing to German
demands that he relax America’s borders and lumber the
American economy with huge welfare expenditure. He
was also willing to throw away American lives in
Vietnam and was happy to pursue a losing strategy in the
war.
Only superb work by the CIA stopped the bastard from
getting even more Americans killed. That climb-down in
1968 was an historic moment and it has been my privilege
to work with two of the brilliant American intelligence
officers who helped bring it about.
Vice-President Pence is a good man, clearly loyal to the
President and the Constitution. No one should be under
any illusion that he was not serious about the oath he took
on Friday from that nice man Justice Thomas, who is, by
the way, an honorable exception to my comments above
about your Supreme Court.
Happily, double assassinations are far more difficult to pull
off than single assassinations, both operationally and in
terms of organising the cover-up. The Oswald ‘lone-
shooter’ nonsense would never have got off the ground in
1963 if LBJ had been working for you guys and the DVD
had been faced with the task of assassinating him as well.
The rough rule of thumb is that successful double
assassinations are about three times as difficult as single
hits.
Security however is going to need to be tighter than a
duck’s bottom, as it was on Friday. The best thing the
Administration could do, in my humble opinion, is to go
public on the DVD, preferably in concert with Moscow,
who know all about them. London also knows, but Prime
Minister May is Prime Minister Won’t when it comes to
being frank about security matters. (She’s just landed
herself in the soup by refusing four times to answer a
perfectly proper question from that nice man Andy Marr
on his politics show on BBC 1 this morning about that
Trident missile which was sent off course last year).
I wish President Trump and his Administration well. I
have of course conveyed my congratulations privately. If I
can be of any help they know they only have to call. My
prediction is that President Trump will be a great
.
406
President, who will change the course of history. His
election has probably doomed the People’s Republic of
China just as President Reagan’s election and strength in
surviving the DVD’s failed assassination attempt doomed
the bad old USSR. The foul German attempt to murder
President Reagan however should serve as a warning. As
President Trump knows only too well, there are some bad
hombres out there and they don’t all wear sombreros.
This Week’s TV Review: The Grand Tour, Amazon, First
Series
I know I’ve already reviewed the first episode, but this
show is so good it’s worth reviewing again! I watched
Episode 11 last night and it was a hoot.
For readers who don’t have Amazon Prime, get it! To
recap: in 2015 a monumental fool, Tony Hall, sacked the
BBC’s star presenter Jeremy Clarkson, in the single most
monumental error in British television history. Clarkson’s
fellow presenters on the long-running Top Gear show, the
BBC’s biggest export-earner by a mile, Richard Hammond
and James May, walked out with him, along with the
producer.
Lord Hall and the Cabinet Office, who doubtless cleared
the sacking (in practice the BBC is a state propaganda
organisation reporting to the Cabinet Office), seemed to
have been in a competition with our late community
partner the Kaiser to see who could win the booby prize
for the silliest sacking in history.
To say that it has blown up in the BBC’s faces would be an
understatement, a bit like saying that Hiroshima was a bit
hot after you guys successfully nuked it. The Grand Tour
has been a runaway ratings success, whilst the revamped
Top Gear flopped like the Ford Edsel.
The latest episode was based in Scotland, and featured a
hilarious clip about a tour of France in three beat-up
Maseratis, purchased for about $11,500, which doesn’t buy
you a lot of Maserati. As a team, Clarkson, May and
Hammond are superb. They dispense with political
correctness, but not with sound motoring advice, such as
needing to have a budget of more than $11,500 if you want
to buy a Maser.
The locations are great – Episode 11 featured some
charming towns in Normandy and the magnificent Pont du
Normandie, over which I was driven on my way back from
the D-Day commemoration in 2014. Above all, it’s good
clean fun, well apart from the plastic willy in the latest
episode, that is.
 Celebs Threatening Trump Doesn’t Help
Sure, On The One Hand, Lots Of Enthusiastic People. On The Other,
Madonna, Ashley Judd. Oy. Liberals And The Press Still Don’t Get Why
They Turn People Off.
Matt Lewis
01.23.17 12:00 AM ET
Just as Barack Obama drove conservatives crazy, Donald
Trump seems to be pushing his adversaries to the brink of
insanity.
During the celebration of the peaceful transfer of power
this weekend, we were treated to some crude and
irresponsible comments from liberal celebrities:
Madonna told Trump voters, “F—k you. F—
k you,” and added that she had “thought a
lot about blowing up the White House.”
Ashley Judd continued the trend, reciting a poem called
“Nasty Woman” that was written by a Tennessee teen.
“I didn’t know devils could be resurrected,
but I feel Hitler in these streets,” the poem
declared. In a tweet, Cher called Trump
spokesman Sean Spicer a “bitch.”
Meanwhile, some less famous progressives were getting
into the act.
“I will not stand idly by while a man named
Donald Trump and his team attempt to
thrust us back into slavery,” said Trump
protester Eric Myers, according to The
Washington Times.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing, and I
suspect it will have counterproductive results for a party
that might want to win back the White House someday
407
(which would, presumably, require convincing at least
some Trump voters to switch sides).
Here’s the problem:
The more Hollywood liberals produce
condescending videos, the more
pretentious and preachy celebs like
Madonna (or replace her with Lena
Dunham or Meryl Streep… they’re basically
interchangeable) lecture us at rallies and
awards ceremonies, and the more
protesters with signs and placards with the
word “p*ssy” on them—the more I find
myself liking Donald Trump.
And this is saying a lot. I’ve dedicated the last couple of
years to speaking out against Trumpism. But if his
adversaries are so odious as to drive me (an infamous
Trump critic) into thinking maybe he is the lesser of two
evils (or, at least, the less annoying!)―what do you think
it is doing to working-class Americans?
Instead of appealing to middle America, progressives are
using this opportunity to become more extreme and
exclusive. A broad coalition of Americans concerned
about the President Trump’s temperament and character
might have included a diverse alliance of voices. Heck, I
might well have been among them. Instead, pro-life
women were disinvited from what was ostensibly a
women’s parade.
The dirty little secret is that many on the left seem to
believe that Trump was onto something. They believe that
being nice and playing by the rules of civility and decency
(where truth matters) are obsolete concepts. They believe
that persuasion and bringing people together are just
slogans.
So they fly their freak flag proudly and continue to alienate
the working-class Americans who put Trump in the White
House. It doesn’t seem like a smart political strategy.
But progressives aren’t the only ones who risk turning off
middle America by overreacting to Trump’s flouting of
political norms. The media also risk becoming an
unwitting foil for Trump, and—in the process—further
alienating themselves from his supporters.
From day one, a lot of Trump voters ignored our warnings
about him because they had already tuned us out. They
know that media bias isn’t based primarily on how we
cover a story, but rather, which stories we choose to cover.
We cover the massive crowds at a women’s march but not
the massive crowds at the March for Life. We raise Cain
when an obscure GOP staffer posts something unflattering
about President Obama’s daughter, but we barely notice
when writers and celebrities mock Trump’s 10-year-old
son. Both stories get covered, but one story drives the
news cycle.
Let’s take this past weekend as an example. If a liberal
Democrat had been elected president and Republicans had
staged a counter rally, how might that have been covered?
What if, instead of Madonna talking about blowing up the
White House, it had been Ted Nugent saying that about an
Obama White House? What if Scott Baio had tweeted
about the Obama daughters? The coverage would have
been ubiquitous and breathless.
President Trump’s ill-advised obsession with the size of
his inaugural crowd might have been dismissed as
unimportant if Obama had done something similar. That’s
not to say it wouldn’t have been covered, but it would have
been relegated to second-tier status (“Inaugural crowds
obviously don’t correlate with electoral success!” we
might have said) in favor of wall-to-wall coverage of the
dangerous rhetoric being spewed at these protests.
Instead of historians and experts wringing their hands and
clutching their pearls about the first “post-truth” president,
we might have been treated to round-the-clock
commentary on what sort of dangerous ramifications this
violent rhetoric could have. This kind of rhetoric, we might
have been told, is dangerous, if for no other reason than
because it might inspire some dangerous person to try to
take matters into his own hands.
After years of being subjected to selection bias with little
recourse, a lot of Americans have caught on to the trick,
even if they don’t consciously realize what it is that
bothers them. They’re fed up with it. And now, they have
alternatives and options to traditional media outlets. Just as
they have tuned out Hollywood elites, they are tuning out
the mainstream media, too.
And if, like me, you believe healthy opposition political
movements make for a healthy democracy—and that the
Fourth Estate actually serves a valuable function when it
comes to holding a president accountable—this disregard
is dangerous.
408
And so, I have some unsolicited advice.
To liberals:
My counsel is that engaging in
irresponsible rhetoric, crazy conspiracy
theories (like the birtherism paranoia that
some were obsessed with during Obama’s
tenure), and protests is not the way to go.
Republicans lost two presidential elections,
and America became more divided. The
end result was the election of Donald
Trump. And while one could argue that
Republicans wound up controlling all the
levers of power, it would be a mistake to
assume engaging in an irresponsible game
of chicken where you end up nominating
Kanye in four years would be politically
prudent or productive.
To the press:
For your own good, check your media bias.
It seductively manifests in the form of
selection bias (which stories you cover)
and eye rolls. And while we must be
vigilant against the repression of free
speech, don’t be reflexively defensive when
Trump talks about our industry.
Yes, do fact check this new president and call him out for
being wrong, but be careful not to make it personal or
cross over to revenge or obsession, thereby reinforcing the
existing negative perceptions about media bias.
“These are mutually enforcing problems,”
observed The Washington Examiner’s Jim
Antle. “People rightly don’t trust media,
freeing Trumpies to spout nonsense.”
Avoid what New York Times columnist
Ross Douthat refers to as the temptation of
“hysterical oppositionalism, a mirroring of
Trump’s own tabloid style and disregard for
truth.”
Something else for all of us to do:
Spend some time thinking about people
you might not normally rub elbows with—
people who go to church on Wednesday
nights, people who drive pickups, and
people who shop at Wal-Mart. No, you
shouldn’t gear all of your coverage toward
these Americans; but yes, if you want to
remain relevant and credible to them, you
can’t ignore them.
Realize that the guy who is struggling to find work in
Michigan isn’t necessarily going to be receptive to the
insinuation that he’s a sexual predator who has benefitted
from “white privilege,” and yet, that is so often the
message he receives (albeit subtly) when he turns on his
television and listens to a lot of political panels.
America is facing some difficult times. What is needed is
not revenge or paranoia, but rather, honorable leaders who
.
409
earn the moral authority and high ground to summon us to
our better angels. Resist the impulse to freak out and
replicate Donald Trump’s path.
If Donald Trump turns out to be as bad as you think he is,
we are going to need a broad coalition of voices to vote
him out—and we’re going to need a trusted and respected
media to hold him accountable.
 America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
By Norman Pollack
January 23, 2017
Before the Inauguration, one was guarded about using the
term “fascist” to describe America, as if slanderous and an
exaggeration. No longer. It is not entirely Trump’s doing;
Obama and his predecessors were creeping up to that point
with each intervention, confrontation, weakening of civil
liberties, drone attack, regime change—a whole catalogue
of death, defiance, destruction. But it is Trump who pulls
America over the top, with the willing agreement of
millions of Americans, a self-conscious, articulate
mobocracy contemptuous of all who disagree with, yes, a
fascist agenda.
That agenda is simple: capitalism and militarism merged,
indivisible, monolithic, holding America in a death grip.
Squeezing, choking, bullying: experience gained abroad,
slowly taking effect at home. Root out the dissident.
Empty the social safety net, so that ordinary people begin
to think complicity, for fear of suffering hardship, a fusion
of surveillance and foreclosure or even penury and want of
basics. The Tale of Two Cities? No, two countries, with
police-state attributes riding roughshod over the people.
Through all of this, Trump poses as the quintessential
Nazi-like demagogue, giving assurances to the people,
celebrating their sovereignty, and meanwhile already—his
policies and personality an accurate preview—turning the
screws. Listen to his introduction in his speech, unashamed
playing up to The Folk, to ingratiate himself with them, as,
behind our backs, the Billionaires Club is busily writing
and presenting their wish list: the scrapping of every
decent thing a government, hostile in the first instance to
the needs and aspirations of working people and the poor,
has done.
Cut trillions from the Budget. Pour much of that back into
armaments, the remainder into reduced taxes for
America’s wealthiest. Strip away whatever is deemed
superfluous for the realization of Fortress America, a
Behemoth with the obsession of “greatness,” aka,
unilateral global domination behind high protective walls.
Only a complete militarization of political culture and
Nation carries forward that logic: Hitler’s “Strength
Through Joy,” a not-distant cousin. Win the people over,
give them bread and circuses (chiefly rhetorical), crank up
the machinery of patriotism, let the people think it is really
their country, when in reality…. (Just look at the Cabinet
appointments, and in the next few weeks and days, the roll
back with a hatchet, not a scalpel, of social legislation.)
410
Here, the speech—dishonesty, flattery, a people’s
presidency: “rebuild our country and restore its promise
for all of our people.” (The trickle-down theory, with
rouged cheeks.) The “orderly and peaceful transfer of
power,” heard ad nauseum on television, yet why not
peaceful and orderly, given the continuity, my emphasis
here on Obama, of bipartisan policy through
administrations from at least Kennedy forward? More
rightwing jive: “we are transferring power from
Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the people.”
Again: “Washington flourished, but the people did not
share in its wealth.” A clever projection: demonize the
source working hand-in-glove with plutocracy, the
selfsame plutocracy Trump personifies, represents, and is
determined to protect and enrich further. He speaks of
“struggling families all across our land,” yet is about to gut
the programs making their lives bearable. This is like the
Marquis de Sade politically: humiliate (the knife driven
deeper by pseudo-praise) the victims of America’s vast
differentiations in the distribution of wealth, power, and
social respect, and of course play up to those who have
already evinced fascist sympathies (we are probably
approaching the population half-way mark, including—
shameful to say—a large number of working people).
The seeds of proto-fascism run deep, a contagion found in
all classes, a shared responsibility in degradation and
national shame. This is not the time to recite American
history, present-day actions and attitudes tell the story,
Trump being a useful summary of past and future. The
USA “is your country…. [w]hat matters is…whether our
government is controlled by the people.” He captures the
energy and momentum of the mass-man phenomenon:
“You [‘the forgotten men and women’] came by the tens
of millions to become part of an historic movement, the
likes of which the world has never seen before. At the
center of this movement is a crucial conviction that a
nation exists to serve its citizens.” True, indeed, provided
it is understood that some citizens—e.g., Morgan, Chase;
Goldman, Sachs; Halliburton; Boeing, etc. etc.—are more
equal than others. For Trump to have come this far, and
not be laughed/booed off the platform, speaks volumes
about where the nation is at: in a moral sociopolitical void.
“A righteous people and a righteous
public,” collective self-flattery again, leads
to the theme of Solidarity, classic fascist
rhetoric, when he proclaims, “This
American carnage [poverty, drugs, poor
 education] stops right here and stops right
now. We are one nation…. We share one
heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.”
In other words, Don’t rock the boat, don’t
criticize, stand united against the Outsider,
whether within or without American society.
No longer shall we have “the very sad
depletion of our military.”
[The New York Times here interpolates the surprising, for
it, comment]:
“The Pentagon spends about $600 billion a
year on the American military, more than is
spent on the next six largest world
militaries combined. Hardly a depleted
force.”
There is more, worthy of Brecht’s Arturo Ui, Mel Brooks’s
The Producers, or run-of-the-mill Hitlerian dialogue:
“From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.
From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first.
America first.” Those of my generation shudder at the
phrase (even as a small child on the eve of World War II),
its crystal-clear Nazi overtones and associations
historically realized in practice, and now brought back to
life. Then into an American Paean: We will be self-
411
sufficient. We will rebuild America. “We will shine for
everyone to follow.” The city on a hill has never had a
greater champion, oozing with ethnocentrism and
xenophobia, not to say, organized within an authoritarian
framework. The best he can do, and we can turn now from
the speech, is:
“We must speak our minds openly, debate
our disagreements honestly [in both cases,
not only massive surveillance, but also the
Espionage Act to be used against
whistleblowers], but always pursue
solidarity.” Promises are meant to be
fulfilled, or broken, but there is no getting
around the last thought, “the pursuit of
solidarity,” no fudging the fascist mindset.
My title mentions the banana republic (Webster’s, “a small
dependent country; esp. one run despotically”), the last
part square on the mark, but this is more serious:
concentrated power to antisocial, antihuman ends, led by
the unscrupulous and wealth- and power-hungry, a matrix
of nihilism given a touch of glamor. Trump is for real.
Militarism is for real, given special meaning and intensity
by virtue of being inscribed within a fortress-like structure
and mentality. Heaven help any who dare cross the United
States of America.
 Trump’s Plan To Kill UN Begins
With Withdrawal Bill
By GPD
January 23, 2017

office shall not be carried out,”according to

the text of HR 193.

A Republican-proposed House Resolution has quietly

slipped past the public radar – proposing that the United
States withdraw its membership from the United Nations,
just as another bill was being concocted to cut US funding
to the body.
The bill, proposed by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), entitled
American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017, seeks a
complete US withdrawal from the UN, that the
international body remove its headquarters from New York
and that all participation be ceased with the World Health
Organization as well.
Rogers and other prominent Republicans have repeatedly
voiced the idea that US taxpayer money should not go to
an organization that does not promote US interests –
especially one that does not stick up for Israel together
with the US. The new document is merely the latest
manifestation of sentiment that has been brewing for some
time.
The bill was quietly introduced on January 3 and was
passed on to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. If
approved, the bill would take two years to take effect. It
would also repeal the United Nations Participation Act of
1945, signed in the aftermath of WWII.
“The President shall terminate all
membership by the United States in the
United Nations in any organ, specialized
agency, commission, or other formally
affiliated body of the United Nations…The
United States Mission to the United Nations
is closed. Any remaining functions of such
Senate bill proposes cutting funding to UN over Israeli settlement
resolution
The bill would also prohibit
“the authorization of funds for the US
assessed or voluntary contribution to the
UN,”
which would also include any military or peacekeeping
expenditures, the use of the US military by the UN, and the
loss of
“diplomatic immunity for UN officers or
employees” on US soil.
Rogers had tried to pass the same bill in 2015, albeit
unsuccessfully.
“Why should the American taxpayer
bankroll an international organization that
works against America’s interests around
the world?” Rogers asked at the time in
defense of his idea.
“The time is now to restore and protect
American sovereignty and get out of the
United Nations.”
Another supporter of HR 193, Rend Paul (R-KY) also put
it like this in January 2015:

412
 “I dislike paying for something that two-bit
Third World countries with no freedom
attack us and complain about the United
States… There’s a lot of reasons why I
don’t like the UN, and I think I’d be happy
to dissolve it,” added the Kentucky senator.
Later, in June 2015, Rogers had introduced his document –
then named HR 1205, but essentially the same USExit
idea he’s proposing now.
“The UN continues to prove it’s an
inefficient bureaucracy and a complete
waste of American tax dollars.” Rogers
went on to name treaties and actions he
believes “attack our rights as US citizens.”
These included gun provisions, the imposition of
international regulations on American fossil fuels – but
more importantly, the UN attack on Israel, by voting to
grant Palestine the non-member state ‘permanent observer’
status.
“Anyone who is not a friend to our ally
Israel is not a friend to the United States.”
413
Israel approves 560 new illegal homes in E. Jerusalem as Trump
takes office
That same logic was used this January when House
Republicans prepared a legislation that would decrease –
even potentially eliminate – US funding to the UN.
According to calculations by the conservative Heritage
Foundation, the US provides over 22 percent of all UN
funding.
The bill to cut the funding was introduced shortly after the
UNSC voted 14-0 to condemn the continued construction
of illegal Israeli settlements – the resolution Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu considered a backstab from
the US, which declined to veto it, as per former President
Barack Obama’s suddenly critical attitude to Israel at the
end of his presidency.
Still, the resolution vote came the same year the Obama
administration awarded Israel with its largest military aid
package ever, signing a memorandum of understanding in
September that would give it $38 billion over 10 years.
However, with Donald Trump now in power, many
Republicans seem to be attacking the idea of participating
in the UN or cutting funding with renewed fervor.
Each year, the US gives approximately $8 billion in
mandatory payments and voluntary contributions to the
international peace agency and its affiliated organizations.
About $3 billion of that sum goes the UN’s regular
peacekeeping budgets.
 Distracted Media Fails
To Catch Trump Policy Decisions
Source: Moon Of Alabama
Published: January 23, 2017
For two days the media have been busy counting people in
Washington DC. About 80-90% of the voters in
Washington DC tend to vote for the Democrats. A recent
gathering of a Republican aligned crowd on a rainy work-
day attracted many people. A gathering of a mostly
Democratic aligned crowd on a work-free day without rain
attracted more people.
The media watched and counted. Then thousands of lines
of "political analyses" were written to explain the
difference of the crowd size without mentioning the
significance of where it happened, what day of the week it
happened and the environmental circumstances. The result
was a lot of bullshit.
The new Trump administration was quite happy about this
diversion of attention. It additionally lampooned the media
when its new spokesperson condemned the press for not
counting the right way.
Just like during the election campaign the media fell for
the cheap stunt and thereby missed the serious processes
and the decisions that were taking place behind the
curtains.
Today the Trump administration announced the end of the
Trans Pacific Partnership agreement:
The president’s withdrawal from the Asian-Pacific trade
pact amounted to a drastic reversal of decades of economic
policy in which presidents of both parties have lowered
trade barriers and expanded ties around the world.
Although candidates have often
criticized trade deals on the campaign
trail, those who made it to the White
House, including President Barack
Obama, ended up extending their reach.
The NYT seems astonished that, unlike Obama, Trump
stands by his words. The media had expected different and
was distracted. It failed to report the issue until the
decision was taken.
The TPP would have imposed "free trade" on more
countries and products. The "free" in those trades would
have meant that private companies would have been free to
overrule national governments and their jurisdiction. They
414
could have sued for "compensation" if a country, for public
health or environmental reasons, rejected or hindered one
of their businesses. Everyone should be happy that this
monster died.
In another policy surprise a new coordination between
Russian and U.S. intelligence circles in Syria is bearing
fruits:
Russia has received coordinates of Daesh
targets in Al-Bab, Aleppo Province, from
the US via the 'direct line,' the Russian
Defense Ministry said Monday.
The United States has provided coordinates of the
terrorists' targets in the city of Al-Bab in Aleppo province
for Russian airstrikes. After the reconnaissance check,
Russia and two coalition jets have conducted joint
airstrikes on the Daesh targets in the region.
The U.S. military seems to deny:
Any involvement or participation of
American assets on the ground in country,
in support of a series of Russian airstrikes
against the northern Syrian town of al-Bab
was “100 percent false,” said Pentagon
spokesman Maj. Adrian Rankine-Galloway.
The U.S. coalition spokesperson also said it is:
"not coordinating airstrikes with the
Russian military in Syria"
Before jumping up and down and claiming that the
Russians are lying the media should take a fine comb and
reread the statements.
The DoD only denied it coordinated airstrikes or helped
with "assets on the ground". It does not deny the transfer of
coordinates. The Russians do not claim U.S. airplanes took
part in the mission - only "coalition jets". Turkey is part of
the U.S. coalition and coordinates airstrikes with the
Russian forces in Syria:
 Earlier, Russian and Turkish combat
planes have carried out a new series of
joint airstrikes against Daesh targets in
war-torn Syria, the Russian Defense
Ministry said on Monday.
"The Russian and Turkish planes carried
out joint airstrikes against Islamic State
terrorists in the outskirts of the town of al-
Bab in Aleppo province on January 21," the
ministry said in a statement.
The Russian statement is likely as correct as the DoD
statement.
The political significance here is the transfer of ISIS
targeting coordinates from some U.S. agency directly to
the Russian forces in Syria. That is something Russia has
asked for over a year and it now suddenly seems to
happen.
This is next to the TTP decision a second significant
change under Trump the media missed to report on as it
developed.
While the blustering against Trump in U.S. media as well
as in some countries abroad goes on and on, serious
decisions are taken and implemented by the new
administration. The media fail in some systematic way.
Minor diversions from "political correctness" are blown up
into big headlines while big policy decisions pass
unnoticed. It is simple:
415
The task with reporting on the Trump
administration is the same as with any
politician. Do not listen to what they say,
watch what they do. It is high time for the
media to get back to that basic rule.
Digression:
As a German I am embarrassed on how
much my government failed to anticipate
Trump and, since he is elected, fails to
prepare for the coming onslaught on its
export orientated economic model. Wages
in Germany were held down by all means
(including by importing additional workforce
from Syria and elsewhere) and a huge
export surplus was created that benefited
only a few moneyed pockets. The scheme
created a huge imbalance in Europe and
the credit crisis in Spain, Greece and
elsewhere. Trump's policies will finally blow
this model apart.
But neither of the ruling parties in Germany has yet
developed an alternative or prepared a way towards one.
Germany needs to re-orientate its industry from export to
local consumption. That requires higher buying power for
the general public via higher wages and lower taxes. A
lower degressive VAT compensated by higher progressive
taxes on non-work income would be a way to go. If such
steps are delayed the economic damage will be serious and
further open the way for a demagogic right.
 White House Chief Of Staff
Blasts Dishonest Media
By Stephen Lendman
1-23-2017
Media scoundrels are at war with Trump. As POTUS, he
has a bully pulpit to fire back. He’s not shy about using it,
nor administration officials.
A separate article discussed his press secretary Sean Spicer
and senior advisor Kellyanne Conway blasting media
misinformation.
On Fox News Sunday, White House chief of staff Reince
Priebus had his turn, criticizing media dishonesty, among
other issues discussed, saying:
“(T)he media, from day one, (have) been
talking about delegitimizing the election,
talking about the Russians, talking about
everything you can imagine, except the fact
that we need to move this country forward.”
“Now, we get done with the inauguration.
First thing out of the media is that president
Trump removed the bust of Martin Luther
King Jr. out of the Oval Office.”
“This is an explosive accusation which
could have had incredible ramifications,
given the history of the press and on this
subject matter.”
“It turns out, it’s completely false. I walked
back into the Oval Office, saw the MLK
bust to there, and what did the media say?
The media said, oh, our bad, someone was
standing in front of the bust. We didn't see
it.”
“Can you imagine tweeting that President
Trump removed the MLK bust? So, that’s
.
416
the first day. Day one. Not even day - I
mean, day like hour three.”
“Then, the next day, they put a picture, big
story, before the speech actually began,
showing all of this white space. It wasn't
true.”
The point isn’t crowd size, said Priebus. It’s dishonest
media, attacking Trump relentlessly - whatever he does or
doesn’t do, making stuff up, at other times grossly
distorting facts, anything to denigrate him instead of
sticking to factual reporting.
Based on what he does as president, he’s fair game for
criticism when deserved. Consistent media bashing is
disgraceful.
It’s virtually certain to continue ahead, part of a plot to
delegitimize him, perhaps setting him up for impeachment
or assassination.
Priebus:
“(W)e’re not going to sit around and take
it…(T)here’s an obsession by the media to
delegitimize this president…We’re going to
fight back tooth and nail every day, and
twice on Sunday.”
The battle lines are drawn, the power of the US presidency
and his key aides v. deplorable media scoundrels - a
campaign I wage regularly, The New York Times my
favorite target because of its influence and global reach.
The self-styled newspaper of record is a national disgrace -
fake news its specialty. The same goes for the rest of
America’s major media establishment.
 The Neocon Lament – Nobody
Wants Them In Trump’s Washington
How Fantastic It Would Be To See Lobbies And The Parasites
Who Work For Them Put Out Of Business.
By Philip Giraldi
January 23, 2017

really got off when they explained in some detail how The
Donald was a Russian agent. Nothing personal. It was only
business. So let’s let bygones be bygones and, by the way,
where are the jobs? Top level Pentagon or National
Security Council only, if you please!

Robert Kagan and his wife Victoria Nuland

There is no limit to the hubris driven hypocrisy of

America’s stalwart neoconservatives.

A recent Washington Post front page article entitled

“‘Never Trump’ national-security

Republicans fear they have been
blacklisted” shares with the reader the
heartbreak of those so-called GOP foreign
policy experts who have apparently been
ignored by the presidential transition team
seeking to staff senior positions in the new
administration. Author David Nakamura
describes them as “some of the biggest
names in the Republican national security
firmament, veterans of past GOP
administration who say, if called upon by Republican Bush era Neocon – Architects of Iraq war
President-elect Donald Trump, they stand
ready to serve their country again.” And yes, they did make a mistake about some things in
Iraq, but it was Obama who screwed it up by not staying
“But,” Nakamura adds, “their phones aren’t
the course. And then there was Libya, the war still going
ringing.”
on in Afghanistan, getting rid of Bashar and that funny
business in Ukraine. It all could have gone better but, hey,
And I wept openly as he went on to describe how they sit if they had been fully in charge for the past eight years to
forlorn in a “state of indefinite limbo” in their law firms, back up the greatly loved Vicki Nuland at the State
think tanks and university faculty lounges just thinking Department everything would be hunky dory.
about all the great things they can do for their country.
Yes, “serve their country,” indeed. Nothing personal in it
Oh yeah, some of the more introspective neocons are
for them. Nothing personal when they denounced Trump
guessing that the new president just might be holding a
and called him incompetent, unqualified, a threat to the
grudge about those two “Never Trump” letters that more
nation and even joined Democrats in labeling him a racist,
than 200 of them eventually signed. Many now believe
misogynist, homophobe, Islamophobe and bigot. And they
417
that they are on a blacklist. How unfair! To be sure, some
of the language in the letters was a bit intemperate,
including assertions about Trump’s personality, character
and intelligence. One letter claimed that the GOP
candidate “lacks self-control and acts impetuously,” that
he “exhibits erratic behavior,” and that he is
“fundamentally dishonest.” Mitt Romney, who did not sign
the letters but was nevertheless extremely outspoken,
referred to Trump as a “phony” and a “fraud.”
Neoconed Architects of Endless ‘Regime Change’ Wars
One of the first anti-Trump letter’s organizers,
Professor Eliot Cohen described presidential candidate
Trump as “a man utterly unfit for the position by
temperament, values and policy preferences.” After the
election, Cohen even continued his scathing attacks on the
new president, writing that
“The president-elect is surrounding himself
with mediocrities whose chief qualifications
seem to be unquestioning loyalty.” He goes
on to describe them as “second-raters.”
Cohen, who reminds one of fellow Harvard bombast artist
Alan Dershowitz, might consider himself as “first rate” but
that is a judgment that surely might be challenged. He was
a prominent cheerleader for the Iraq War and has been an
advocate of overthrowing the Iranian government by force.
He opposed the nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary
of Defense because
418
Hagel had “made it clear that he [did]
not want to engage in a confrontation
with Iran.”
Cohen, a notable Israel Firster in common with many of
his neocon brethren, has aggressively condemned even
well-reasoned criticism of the Israel Lobby and of Israel
itself as anti-Semitism. Glenn Greenwald has described
him as “extremist a neoconservative and warmonger as it
gets.”
One has to wonder at the often-professed intelligence and
experience of Cohen and his neocon friends if they
couldn’t figure out in advance that backing the wrong
horse in an election might well have consequences. And
there is a certain cynicism intrinsic in the neoconservative
whine.
Many of the dissidents like Eliot Cohen,
Robert Kagan, Max Boot, Eric Edelman,
Kori Schake, Reuel Gerecht, Kenneth
Adelman and Michael Morell who came
out most enthusiastically for Hillary Clinton
were undoubtedly trimming their sails to
float effortlessly into her anticipated
hawkish administration.
Gerecht, who has advocated war in Syria, said of the
Democratic candidate that
“She’s not a neoconservative, but Hillary
Clinton isn’t uncomfortable with American
power.”
Hillary backers – Israel Firsters
That the defeat of Hillary was also a defeat of the
neoconservatives and their alphabet soup of institutes and
think tanks is sometimes overlooked but was a delicious
dish served cold for those of us who have been praying for
such a result. It was well worth the endless tedium when
watching Fox News on election night to see Bill Kristol’s
face when it became clear that Trump would be victorious.
Back to the drawing board, Bill!
And there may be yet another shocker in store for the
neocons thanks to Trump. The fact that the new
administration is drawing on the business world for
staffing senior positions means that he has been less
interested in hiring think tank and revolving door academic
products to fill the government bureaucracies.
This has led Josh Rogin of the Washington Post to warn
that the death of think tanks as we know them could be on
the horizon.
He quotes one think-tanker as opining that
“the people around Trump view think tanks
as for sale for the highest bidder. They
have empowered who other centers of
gravity for staffing this administration.”
Rogin adds
“If the Trump team succeeds in diminishing
the influence of Washington think tanks
and keeping their scholars out of
government, policymaking will suffer. Many
of these scholars hold the institutional
knowledge and deep subject matter
expertise the incoming administration
needs.”
Josh Rogin – Washington Post, Paper of the Neocons
Rogin, who is himself a neocon who has been an
associated “expert” with the American Israel Public
.
419
Affairs Committee (AIPAC) affiliated Washington
Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), is peddling
bullshit. The record of the geniuses who have been
guiding U.S. foreign policy ever since the Reagan
Administration has not been exactly reassuring and can be
considered downright disastrous if one considers
Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. Think tanks have
agendas that in most cases actually work against the public
interest. Their designation of staff as “scholars” is a
contrivance as their scholarship consists of advocacy for
specific causes and ideologies. They should be seen for
what they are and what they are is not very pretty as they
are into endless self-promotion.
Danielle Pletka
Fear mongering Danielle Pletka, who is vice president for
foreign policy at the American Enterprise Institute, has
supported every war coming out of the past two
Administrations and has called repeatedly for more of the
same to close the deal on Syria and Iran. Like Cohen,
Rogin, Kagan, Gerecht and many other neocons she is both
Jewish and an Israel Firster. And her annual salary is
reported to be $275,000.
It is a pleasure to watch the think tanks begin thinking of
their own demises. It is also intriguing to speculate that
Trump with his populist message might just take it all one
step farther and shut the door on the K Street lobbyists and
other special interests, which have symbiotic relationships
with the think tanks. The think tanks sit around and come
up with formulations that benefit certain groups,
individuals and corporate interests and then reap the
rewards when the cash is handed out at the end of the year.
How fantastic it would be to see lobbies and the parasites
who work for them put out of business, particularly if our
much beloved neoconservatives are simultaneously no
longer calling the shots on national security policy and
their think tanks are withering on the vine. What a
wonderful world it would be.
 Trump At The CIA:
The Orwellian World Of Alternative Facts
By Melvin Goodman
January 24, 2017
There have been presidential administrations (Ronald
Reagan, George W. Bush) that have worked to politicize
intelligence, and there have been CIA leaders (William
Casey and Robert Gates as well as George Tenet and John
McLaughlin) who have cooperated with these efforts. In
doing so, these intelligence officials created integrity and
credibility problems for the CIA, which are once again at
hand. Indeed, President Donald Trump’s self-
aggrandizing and egomaniacal performance at CIA
Headquarters on January 21 marked a new low in
presidential efforts to politicize the most controversial
agency in the intelligence community.
Standing before a carefully selected crowd that was
bolstered by apparatchiks from the administration, Trump
faced two distinct sections of agency personnel. The main
section consisted of agency staff who provided cheers and
applause for the President’s embarrassing political
statements, particularly his efforts to intimidate the press.
A separate section in front consisted of senior agency
officials, including clandestine operatives, who stood
throughout but remained stoic and offered no obvious
support. The heaviest applause followed Trump’s
accusation that journalists were “among the most dishonest
people on earth.”
Trump’s random remarks, which resembled a campaign
appearance, were designed to ingratiate himself in the
wake of his attacks on former director John Brennan and
the agency itself during the transition period. On his
Twitter account, he had called the agency’s assessments
“ridiculous” and politically motivated, and found CIA
actions comparable to what had taken place in Nazi
Germany. Never before has there been a feud between a
president-elect and the intelligence community, and never
420
before has a president conducted such a blatant attempt to
manipulate agency personnel.
The President was accompanied by his choice to succeed
Brennan, Rep. Mike Pompeo, who was still awaiting
confirmation. Trump made a special point of linking
Pompeo to two retired general officers (Jim Mattis at
Department of Defense and John Kelly at Department of
Homeland Security) who had been confirmed. He noted
that the military provided great support in the election and
that he was confident that the intelligence community had
done the same. Trump is obviously comfortable with
authoritarian types, and he expressed confidence that the
military and intelligence communities overall were on his
“wave length.”
In anticipating total support from the military and
intelligence communities for his policies, President Trump
betrayed no understanding of the natural tension between
policymakers and intelligence officials. This tension has
been evident to some degree in virtually all U.S.
administrations, and on two prominent occasions it led to
the tailoring of intelligence. In the 1980s, Casey and Gates
committed themselves to providing intelligence to the
White House to justify hostile relations with the Soviet
Union and to engage in unprecedented spending of defense
in peacetime. In the run-up to the Iraq War, Tenet and
McLaughlin said it would be a “slam dunk” to provide
intelligence to justify the use of force against Iraq. The
handful of intelligence analysts who tried to block
politicization were moved aside or simply ignored.
The confirmation of Pompeo is troubling because previous
directors from the congress have been too willing to
provide their masters with the intelligence they were
seeking. In addition to Tenet, who actively participated in
preparing the phony speech that Secretary of State Colin
Powell delivered to the United Nations and falsely testified
to a “sinister nexus” between Iraq and al Qaeda prior to the
9/11 attacks, there was the short and troubled stewardship
of former representative Porter Goss. Goss surrounded
himself with members of his congressional staff who
conducted a witch hunt of CIA officials unwilling to
conduct the dirty business of politicization. Goss’s last
official act in this regard was orchestrating a leak
investigation within the CIA to find the source for the
Washington Post’s Pulitzer-prize winning articles on
CIA’s secret prisons in Eastern Europe and the
unconscionable rendition of an innocent German citizen.
Pompeo is already on record with positions that suggest
there will be efforts to politicize intelligence at CIA. He is
a vociferous critic of the Iran nuclear deal for which the
CIA provided essential intelligence support and
verification. He was a strong opponent of Senator Dianne
Feinstein’s devastating report on CIA torture and abuse,
and favored the return of waterboarding. When confronted
with pictures of hunger strikers at Guantanamo, he
facetiously remarked that it “looked like they had put on
weight.” Pompeo also favors a return to unrestricted
massive surveillance, and favors a death sentence for
Edward Snowden.
421
The stewardships of Tenet and Goss led to periods of
moral bankruptcy at the CIA. It has been noted that
President Trump gave a campaign speech in front of CIA’s
Memorial Wall, but he also stood near the biblical
inscription at the entrance to the Langley headquarters:
“the truth will set you free.” The Trump administration
has thus far demonstrated little interest in truth and one of
his top advisors, Kellyanne Conway, has introduced the
need for “alternative facts.” It will take courage at CIA
and oversight in Congress to ensure that the world of
intelligence doesn’t join the Orwellian world of alternate
facts (i.e., “pants-on-fire” lies).
 Why Impeach Donald Trump
By David Swanson
January 24, 2017
What Are The Grounds For Impeachment?
They will likely be piling up rapidly. President Trump did
use Day 1 to advise the CIA that the United States should
have stolen all of Iraq’s oil. But here is a place to start. We
already have a president who is violating two clauses in
the U.S. Constitution, one forbidding any gifts or benefits
from foreign governments, the other forbidding the same
from the U.S. government or any U.S. state. This is the
result of Donald Trump refusing to separate himself from
major business interests as past presidents have done.
Those interests will also inevitably involve Trump in
violating the STOCK Act which forbids the use of non-
public government information to make a private profit.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution states:
“The President … shall not receive … any
other emolument from the United States, or
any of them.”
This means that the President cannot receive personal
financial gains from the United States government or from
the governments of any of the 50 states while he is
president. This restriction is absolute and cannot be waived
by Congress. Trump is already in violation of it and will be
more so with every law, rule, regulation, enforcement, or
lack thereof that his subordinates, Congress, or any agency
of the federal government enacts to the benefit of Trump’s
businesses and possessions.
For example, Trump’s lease of the Old Post Office
Building violates an explicit clause in the General Services
Administration lease contract which states:
“No … elected official of the Government of
the United States … shall be admitted to
any share or part of this Lease, or to any
benefit that may arise therefrom.”
The GSA’s failure to enforce that contract is an
unconstitutional benefit to Trump.
Or, to take a state-level example: since 1980 Trump and
his businesses have garnered
422
“$885 million in tax breaks, grants and
other subsidies for luxury apartments,
hotels and office buildings in New York.”
Continuing or increasing those subsidies puts Trump in
violation of the Constitution.
Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution says that
“no person holding any office of profit or
trust under [the United States government],
shall, without the consent of the Congress,
accept of any present, emolument, office,
or title, of any kind whatever, from any king,
prince, or foreign state.”
This is essentially the same ban as above, but applied to
foreign governments.
The Trump Organization has licensing deals with two
Trump Towers in Istanbul. Trump himself says,
“I have a little conflict of interest, because I
have a major, major building in Istanbul.”
China’s state-owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of
China is the largest tenant in Trump Tower. It is also a
major lender to Trump. Its rent payments and its loans put
Trump in violation of the Constitution. Foreign diplomats
have begun shifting their D.C. hotel and event reservations
to Trump International Hotel. The Embassy of Kuwait was
reportedly pressured by the Trump Organization to do so.
Pressured or not, Kuwait’s business at a Trump hotel puts
Trump in violation of the highest law of the land.
In November, there were reports (denied by Trump) that
Trump had asked the president of Argentina for help with
a building permit in Buenos Aires. Whether he did or not,
and whether he receives that help or not, President Trump
will be frequently granted or denied similar approval for
his business ventures from numerous foreign and domestic
governments.
Why punish a successful business man?
We can set aside the legality and morality of Trump’s
business success, and the question of how successful he
has been. A campaign to impeach him for his violations of
the Constitution can hold the position that Trump is
perfectly welcome to keep all of his businesses and loans.
He just cannot simultaneously hold an office in which they
create gross violations of the U.S. Constitution. Past
presidents have sold off their assets or placed them in a
blind trust. A blind trust would not, however, be blind for
Trump who would inevitably learn of the approval of new
towers or the sale of properties. Selling (and using a truly
blind trust to do so) was Trump’s only option other than
not being president. He chose not to take his only
Constitutional choice.
Is this partisanship?
A great many people do anything political for partisan
reasons. As I’m unable to put an end to that, it is inevitable
that people will favor or oppose impeaching Trump for
partisan reasons. But they need not. The above charges
against Trump are unprecedented. They should apply to
him and any future presidents who engage in the same
abuses, regardless of party. Someone who voted for Trump
as a way out of corruption should want him impeached as
much as someone who voted against him for the same
reason. Trump is now the worst possible “insider” — using
public office for personal greed.
Is this morally worse than Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton taking Saudi government and Boeing funds into
her family foundation, and then working to waive legal
restrictions on Boeing selling weapons to Saudi Arabia —
weapons now being used to slaughter innocents? Some
will think so and others not, largely along partisan lines.
Personally I’m in favor of impeaching Clinton, Obama,
and George W. Bush right now and imposing the penalties
of a bar on holding future office and a denial of retirement
benefits. But those efforts are simply not the same priority
today as halting the presidency of the current president.
When I advocated for impeaching Bush I explained that if
he was not held accountable his successors would expand
further the abusive powers he had expanded. When I
argued that Obama was in fact doing this and should be
impeached, I was generally called worse things than
partisan. But the longer presidents are allowed to act
without a check on their powers, the more they will expand
and abuse them. Numerous government officials and
members of Congress would best serve the world by
resigning. But the place to start is with an unprecedented
and unique form and level of corruption in the single
highest office in the land.
Is this personal?
A great many people focus their political interest on
personalities rather than policies. They forbid themselves
to praise a good action by a politician who mostly makes
bad ones, or to condemn a bad one by a hero. They make
423
heroes of whoever is not their enemy, and vice versa. They
place greater importance on whether they’d like to be
friends with someone than on whether that person will
benefit or harm the world. Because I lack the strength to
change this, many will support or oppose impeaching
Trump based on whether they consider him obnoxious or
inspiring. They shouldn’t and need not. President Obama
oversaw activities that would have horrified his supporters
had they not been so focused on his style. History does not
look kindly on the impeachment of Bill Clinton for
personal flaws, something the majority of the public
opposed — while there were much better grounds on
which to have impeached him. (History may also frown on
Congress’s refusal to even attempt to impeach George W.
Bush, something the majority of the public supported.)
Is the point to make Mike Pence president?
The question of who is worse, the president or the vice
president, is a very different question from this one: Who
is worse, President Trump in an era of total unchecked
power and immunity, or President Pence in an age of
popular sovereignty with the threat of impeachment
looming behind every high-crime-and-misdemeanor that
comes up for consideration by the White House? I believe
changing the office of the presidency into one that can be
lost for substantive crimes and abuses — a radical change
from its current state — would be more significant than the
personality, ideology, or party of the presidents who come
next. I believe part of that significance would derive from
the benefits of building the movement that imposes
impeachment on a corrupt and partisan and reluctant
Congress. Cultural change comes principally from
movement building, and very little from the personalities
of elected officials.
Why not impeach Trump for being a Russian agent?
Both an impeachment in the U.S. House of
Representatives and a trial in the Senate will require public
evidence. The case made above relies on readily available
and public evidence in great abundance that will grow
daily, and may very well come to include benefits from the
Russian government.
In contrast, if there exists any evidence of the Russian
government hacking Democratic emails or of the Russian
government giving those emails to WikiLeaks, it has not
been made public. If there exists any evidence of Trump
being complicit in those actions, it has not been made
public. You may suspect that such evidence exists. If so, it
could certainly become the basis for additional articles of
impeachment once it is produced. Meanwhile the content
of the DNC emails could arguably form part of the basis
for a case against current or former civil officers among
Democrats involved in manipulating their own primary.
Why not impeach Trump for helping to destroy the
earth’s climate, or many other reasons?
I’m in favor of it, yes. But it should wait at least a week or
two to allow the damage to accumulate. Removing all
mention of climate change from the White House website
is not sufficient. And the case will never be as easy a sell
to the House of Misrepresentatives. The Constitution does
not prohibit destroying the earth’s climate, unless we so
interpret the preamble — or so interpret the mythical
language that a militarized government has rumored to
exist in the Constitution creating a presidential duty to
protect the country from danger.
Impeachment is a political process. Individuals and cities
and towns and organizations can demand it.
Representatives can pursue it. We can impeach for
continuing or accelerating the destruction of our natural
environment, even if presidential predecessors did the
same or similar. We can impeach for war or torture or
drone murders or warrantless spying or proclaiming the
needs to steal oil or kill families or ban Muslims, or for
any form of discrimination or cruelty that we find
sufficiently intolerable. And I wish we would. But which
charges can clear the hurdles of the House Judiciary, the
full House, and the Senate is not a simple moral question.
Why impeach Trump when he could prevent war with
Russia?
Yes, Trump seems to favor deescalating the dangerous
cold war created under Obama. He may favor this for
corrupt or environmentally destructive reasons.
Regardless, any steps away from confrontations with
nuclear governments are highly desirable. But Trump’s
vision is one of greater, not lesser, militarism. His
preferred targets just don’t include Russia. And
impeaching Trump for abusing his power hardly sends a
message to future presidents that they should pursue more
wars. Holding one president accountable creates a certain
level of accountability in the entire government going
forward. And that tends to move us away from war, not
toward it.
Is the point to empower the CIA and the corporate
media?
That might be the point of going after Trump over Russian
hacking rumors. The result might be a failure to impeach if
there is no evidence. It might be greater hostility with
Russia. And it might be a feather in the cap of a couple of
institutions worthy of mountains of scorn. But these are
not issues when Trump is impeached for public offenses
visible to the naked eye with no spying or journalism
required.
.
424
Do you really think Congress will impeach a president?
Yes, it certainly might, especially as the evidence of high-
crimes-and-misdemeanors accumulates and Trump’s
popularity sinks even lower than its current record level —
an effect that just opening an impeachment process has
usually contributed to (Bill Clinton’s unpopular
impeachment being an exception to the rule). But even an
unsuccessful impeachment, like Truman’s or Nixon’s can
have seriously beneficial results, including ending the
abuses for which Truman was almost impeached, and
ending the war and presidency of Nixon.
Do you really think everything is normal and nothing
radical is needed?
I think all potentially useful strategies are desperately
needed and that impeachment is one of them. Others are
marches, sit-ins, petitions, media production, legislation,
strikes, refusals to cooperate with illegal actions,
protection of those in danger, peace initiatives, local and
global moves toward sustainable economies, boycotts,
divestments, foreign exchanges, art work, parades, etc.,
etc. But a nonviolent movement seeking to overturn an
abusive government would fantasize about an
impeachment provision if it didn’t exist. It’s the best gift
that the drafters of the Constitution gave us. Much of the
rest of the document is horribly out of date, and many of
the best parts of it are routinely violated. Continuing to
neglect the power of impeachment would be a terrible
waste.
Do you really think something as radical as
impeachment is needed?
I think it’s needed in much less extreme situations than this
one. If it’s not needed now, when would it be?
Wouldn’t our time be better spent holding marches or
blocking pipelines or burning limos or educating
children or building a new party or designing bunkers
or . . . ?
Yes, there are lots of good ideas and bad. I’d like to see all
of the good ones pursued, with people putting their
energies where their passions and talents lie. But we
cannot ignore an out of control government. Taking it (not
“taking it back” since we never had it) has to be high on
our list of priorities. It is still what Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. said it was 50 years ago this spring: the greatest
purveyor of violence on earth. Leaving that entity in the
hands of an attention-starved man who wants primarily to
personally profit from it is playing with fire.
 The Women’s March Was A
Dismal Failure And A Hopeful Sign
By Ted Rall
January 24, 2017
Solidarity marches across the nation drew hundreds of
thousands, perhaps a million, more.
The turnout was impressive. It vexed the new president.
But what did the Women’s March mean?
Despite what pundits said, the Women’s March was not a
movement. Nor was it the beginning of a movement.
It was a moment: a show of hands:
“I’m against Trump,”
these women (and men) told the world. Question was,
who/what do they want to replace him?
As Occupy Wall Street instigator Micah White pointed out,
Women’s Marchers didn’t issue any demands, much less
posit a desire to achieve political power.
“Without a clear path from march to power,
the protest is destined to be an ineffective
feel-good spectacle adorned with pink
pussy hats,” he warned.
Like other protests of the last few decades, the Women’s
March was a spasm, a spontaneous expression of disgust
and outrage doomed to lead nowhere.
425
If you don’t demand anything, how will you get it?
If you don’t pose a threat to the establishment, why should
they feel scared?
Even so, at the risk of both mansplaining and leftsplaining,
a show of hands does matter. Events like the Women’s
March are significant because American politics is
centered (pun intended) around the fiction that leftist
political movements taken for granted in other nations —
communism, socialism and left anarchism — have no
presence at the ballot box or in the news media in the U.S.
because American voters aren’t interested.
Moments like Saturday prove that’s a lie.
The New Left was the last organized left-wing mass
movement in American history. Since the organized Left
collapsed in the early 1970s, we’ve seen other moments
like Saturday, indications that there are Americans, tens of
millions of them, whose politics fall to the left of the fake-
left Democratic party and the lockstep center-right
corporate media apparatus that props up it and its “rival”
Republican brand. Signs that this Left-in-waiting really
exists belie the party line that there’s no market for
hammers-and-sickles in the good ol’ U.S.A.
Even during the somnolent 1980s, hundreds of thousands
showed up to protest Reagan at demonstrations like
Solidarity Day. There were violent, effective eco-terrorist
attacks and anti-globalization/WTO protests like the Battle
of Seattle in the 1990s. Millions marched against the 2003
invasion of Iraq. This decade brought us Occupy Wall
Street and Bernie Sanders’ surprisingly popular
presidential primary challenge, and polls that find that 37%
of Americans would get rid of capitalism — the economic
system we’re constantly being told is more sacred and
popular than Jesus, mom and apple frappuccino.
These political impulses — opposition to war and
militarism, fighting job-exporting free-trade agreements
and suspicion of unfettered capitalism — have no place in
the Democratic or Republican parties. To the contrary:
war, free trade and letting business run wild are nastily
bipartisan.
So more than a third of Americans find nothing of interest
to buy in the American marketplace of political ideas.
That’s a vast untapped pool of potential “customers. These
people — I’d say voters, but many of them don’t bother to
vote because they hate both parties — represent an
inefficiency in the market. Moments like Occupy, Bernie
and the Women’s March remind us of the existence of this
Left-in-waiting. Someday, obviously, someone or
someones will build an organization that attracts
America’s long-ignored leftists and channels their energies
into something powerful enough to achieve power and
smart enough to govern.
Until then, the real left will be coopted by the Democrats.
Which is what happened to the Women’s March.
To be sure, many Women’s Marchers were Hillary Clinton
Democrats. The “Love Trumps Hate” signs, hand-lettered
rather than printed by the DNC as they were during the fall
campaign, and the Hillary buttons, evidenced that. Yet
many more of the demonstrators were Bernie Sanders
progressives, socialists and communists who want to see
radical change in society and the economy — and these
good leftists (a third of the country, most of the left
overall) allowed themselves to go unrepresented.
A good indication that the Women’s March got coopted
into a Democratic boo-hoo Hillary/Cory Booker-in-2020
.
426
pep rally was that the speakers were limited to celebrity
millionaire liberal Democrats like Michael Moore, Ashley
Judd and Gloria Steinem and defanged ex-radicals like
Angela Davis. Had this been a militant action (i.e., one that
might frighten Trump and the GOP), or a coalition of
liberals who welcomed and respected their leftist allies
rather than merely wanting to vampirize their righteous
anger and energy into midterm votes, the roster of speakers
would have included people calling for revolutionary
change and action outside of the existing system. There
would also have been some radical activists you’d never of
who do important work.
Celebrity liberalism and pleas to vote Democratic are
where the Left goes to die.
No wonder the Women’s March was doomed to join the
list of fruitless liberal marches! Because they’re
Democrats, none of the speakers suggested scrapping the
whole sick system of systemized poverty, industrialized
prisons, war and slave labor altogether. Instead marchers
got a washed-up documentary filmmaker urging them to
memorize a phone number they could use to call Congress
because, yeah, that’s going to do so much good, especially
these days with Republicans in charge of everything.
Still, despite the Democratic BS, those huge crowds were
glorious. They showed up, they were heard, they hint at the
better country we could have.
 The Deep State
In The Age Of Trump
SARTRE
January 24, 2017
Politics as usual, especially the party version of
Republicans and Democrats is the latest endangered
species to hit the bone yards of extinction. Now, that does
not mean that competing power factions have all merged
into a collegial stew of some imaginable melting pot. No
the literal power behind the government that embeds the
deepest recess of manipulated reality still maintains and
uses their influence and coercion force to remain in
control. What actual effect Donald Trump will have to
break the connections that keeps the deep state in charge
can only be judged with the passage of time. Some contend
that Trump is actually an integral component of an elitist
fraternity of financial magnates that sit at the table of the
deep state.
Well, assessing the appointees to his cabinet concludes that
talented and accomplished achievers often have
accumulated great wealth. Those who condemn capable
people, out of hand, because of their money acumen are
fools who reside in their fantasy theories. Much like the 68
House Democrats, who boycotted the Trump inauguration,
their irrelevancy in the actual mix of shaping world affairs
approaches the insignificance and lack of credibility from
the Corporatist Mass Media.
In the era of Trump America First, how will
divergent cliques and kindred insiders
react, respond or cooperate with the new
sheriff in town? The strange concept of
conducting affairs in a beneficial national
interest has not been tried in well over a
century. So when the Hill reported that the
Trump team prepares dramatic cuts
“Overall, the blueprint being used by
Trump’s team would reduce federal
427
spending by $10.5 trillion over 10 years”,
can only be viewed as a promising sign.
Notwithstanding, budgets do not translate directly into
political influence or clout. Consequently, understanding
the raw nature of power in this artificially concocted
construct that claims that globalization is the only course
for human endeavors requires an examination of a state
within a state.
With the long ongoing hubbub at the Central Intelligence
Agency, what better example of the deep state is there to
examine the conflict within? In case you missed the memo,
peel back the layers on the onion, CIA director John
Brennan is a Muslim convert? Understanding this
background puts Glenn Greenwald, not exactly a fan of
Trump, essay The Deep State Goes to War With President-
Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer, in
even a greater relevance.
“But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy
allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S.
election and impose its own policy dictates
on the elected president is both warped
and self-destructive.
For months, the CIA, with unprecedented
clarity, overtly threw its weight behind
Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and sought to
defeat Donald Trump. In August, former
acting CIA Director Michael Morell
announced his endorsement of Clinton in
the New York Times
In general, Clinton defended and intended
to extend the decades long international
military order on which the CIA and
Pentagon’s preeminence depends, while
Trump — through a still-uncertain mix of
instability and extremist conviction —
posed a threat to it.”
Presenting a different perspective Charles Hugh Smith
offers a simple, yet succinct definition of the deep state:
“It is the unelected government that
continues making and implementing policy
regardless of who is in elected office.”
He goes on to ask: Does a Rogue Deep State Have
Trump's Back?
“Given my thesis of a profound disunity in
the Deep State, and the emergence of a
progressive element hostile to neocons and
neoliberalism (including Wall Street), then
it's not much of a stretch to speculate that
this rogue Deep State opposed to neocon-
neoliberalism has Trump's back, as a new
administration is pretty much the only hope
to rid the nation's top echelons of the
neocon-neoliberal policies that have driven
the U.S. into the ground.
Rather than being the bad guys, as per the
usual Liberal world-view, the Armed Forces
may well play a key role in reducing the
This viewpoint might stretch the boundaries of normally
accepted interpretations, since the establishment has
seldom before needed to worry about an “Outsider”
gaining the Presidency of the United States. In light of the
desperate meltdown from intelligence agencies using their
unconvincing assets in the fake news media, a struggle for
the heart and soul of America is being played out between
the propaganda press and the real truth tellers.
So when President Trump Visits CIA:
428
utterly toxic influence of neocon-neoliberals
within the Deep State.
If you have wondered why academics like
Paul Krugman and the CIA are on the
same page, it's because they are simply
facets of the same structure. Krugman is a
vocal neoliberal, the CIA is vocally neocon:
two sides of the same coin. I invite you to
study the chart above with an open mind,
and ponder the possibility that the Deep
State is not monolithic, but deeply divided
along the fault lines of Wall-Street-
Neocons-Neoliberals and the progressive
elements that rightly view the dominant
neocon-neoliberals as a threat to U.S.
national security, U.S. global interests and
world peace.”
"I Am So Behind You", the natural
response is why does Ex-CIA chief
Brennan labels Trump 'despicable'? Well,
the struggle demonstrates that the vision of
the establishment is in a total panic to save
their imperial empire, while Trump’s
mission is to apply a nationalistic policy that
is diametrically in opposition to the
globalists that thrive on continued conflict.
When the deep state makes policy, the system destroys any
semblance of legitimacy.
Just how far are the forces of Machiavellian supremacy
within the deep state willing to go to eliminate opposition
to their power? When a lapdog publication like The New
Yorker runs a feature ROGER STONE VERSUS THE
“DEEP STATE”, you know that the cover-up can no
longer be contained or kept from the American public.
“Stone is intelligent and witty, and it is often
jarring to listen to him as he turns from a
sober analysis of politics to bizarre
conspiracy theories. He is a frequent guest
on Alex Jones’s Infowars radio show,
where he recently alleged that he was
poisoned by unspecified enemies in the
“deep state,” his term for American
intelligence operatives. He told me that the
C.I.A. invented the allegations of Russian
hacking and an influence campaign to help
elect Trump directed by Vladimir Putin
because the agency wanted to go to war in
Syria.
“The C.I.A. has their assessment,” he said,
emphasizing the last word. “Assessment
means guess. The President-elect hasn’t
been shown proof because there’s no proof
to be shown. The deep state needs to get
over it. Their candidate lost. They wanted a
wider proxy war in Syria, and Trump is not
for war. He is for détente.””
Nations always seek to develop their clandestine spying
networks. No rational citizen would argue to eliminate
intelligence acquisition on foreign countries or competing
interests. However, the progression of the deep state has
been fostered and enhanced by many elements in society.
Most have little respect for the constitutional separation of
powers delineated in the U.S. Constitution.
Espionage was a major factor in George Washington’s
victory in the American Revolution. Conversely, the CIA
.
429
has empirically established that the forces of imperium
have maintained control over the rightful authority of our
nation going back to the Allen Dulles era.
Donald Trump’s appointee, Mike Pompeo will become the
next DCI. It falls to him to defang the snake from making
policy. The role of intelligence is to gather, analyze and
interpret information. Black bag, covert wars and
overthrowing governments has no place under the auspice
of a band of Yale Skull and Bones internationalists.
The CIA must be restricted to providing superior and
accurate briefings to the President. The military command
needs to be placed in charge of any clandestine operations
that strictly follow an America First standard. Arrogant
civilians who profess to be connoisseurs of spy craft have
proven to be dilettantes of Operation Gladio
warmongering.
Pompeo would be well served if he would listen and heed
the wisdom of two ex-CIA patriots, Michael Scheuer and
Ray McGovern. Of course their counsel on the Middle
East would conflict with Jared Kushner love affair with
Israel. This example illustrates the complex twists that
complicate the feuds within the deep state.
Based upon the early direction in the Trump
administration, the deep state money changers will not be
challenged. Regretfully, the shadow governance is too
widespread and entrenched to be removed in one executive
action. This fundamental abdication of recognizing the
eternal enemy of the Republic will undermine any positive
attempts that revolve around the edges.
The deep state is the establishment which runs rough shot
over the lackeys in Congress who must beg for money for
re-elections. The entire executive branch of agencies and
departments has bred collectivist toadies among their ranks
of the welfare state. And the esquire class has perverted the
rule of law to mean whatever absurd pronouncement of
equity that the courts dictate. The deep state hates the
populist will of loyal Americans.
 Reflections On DC:
Promises And Pitfalls In The Anti-Trump Uprising
By Anthony Dimaggio
January 24, 2017
The first mass protests of President Donald Trump
represent a historic moment – one worth reflecting on so
we can understand where we are and where we’re going as
a nation. I traveled to Washington D.C. this weekend to
take part in the Women’s March on Washington. The
inauguration protests across the country provide an
opportunity to analyze what is positive about the emerging
anti-Trump movement, while also identifying weaknesses
that must be addressed in the future. Speaking in general
terms, the largest strength of this mass movement is its
diversity, as related to gender, race and ethnicity, age, and
economics. Such diversity is necessary for any meaningful
bottom-up push for social change. If there is one glaring
weakness coming out of these protests, it is the
underdeveloped sense of economic grievance, in terms of
the failure to spotlight the neoliberal, bi-partisan injustices
that have emerged in recent decades.
First, the basic details. In terms of turnout, the DC metro
service estimates that approximately 600,000 people
attended the protest events on Saturday, January 21 on the
national mall. This number likely under-estimates the
turnout, since it doesn’t include the more than 1,200 buses
that made it to DC, in addition to DC residents near the
downtown who participated, and those already in the
downtown, housed in hotels and other accommodations,
who did not use of the train. A more realistic estimate
would perhaps be between 700,000 to 800,000 protesters.
430
When accounting for demonstrations in Chicago, New
York City, Los Angeles, and other cities, estimates suggest
the number of protesters surpasses 3 million. These figures
appear to be unprecedented in American history
I bring up these numbers to emphasize the sheer magnitude
of these protests. I’ve been traveling to DC for mass
protests for the last decade and a half. I’ve taken part in
many demonstrations and marches, against the IMF, the
World Bank, the Iraq war, nuclear power, the “War on
Drugs,” sexism, and climate change. I’ve seen many
protests during my time as an activist, some with hundreds
of thousands turning out, but nothing equaling the size of
this demonstration. The size and scope was unprecedented.
Heading into the city from Arlington, Virginia, it was a
struggle simply to get on the metro, with rail cars filled to
maximum capacity and protesters packed in like sardines.
Upon arrival at the mall, I struggled to even get out of the
metro stop, and it was no better once I stepped out onto the
streets above. The demonstrations took place near the
Washington monument, but the streets were so incredibly
crowded that it was difficult to move at all. March
organizers predicted at least a few hundred thousand
would turn out, but the numbers were far larger.
Organizationally, the march was marked by, and ended in
chaos. But that was only because of the unprecedented
turnout. By noon, although the march wasn’t slated to start
for another hour, it was near impossible to get anywhere
near the event speakers, let alone move around with any
freedom. Once the march began, protesters were quickly
blocked because of the feeder marches, which created
choke points in main intersections. The spill over into
neighboring streets outside the march route was massive.
Between a half hour to hour into the rally, the planned
march route was largely abandoned. The critical mass of
people had grown so large that movement in any
systematic, planned way was no longer possible. I sat in
one intersection, waiting for nearly an hour, just to move a
few feet.
I’ve heard some left dissidents criticize anti-Trump
protesters for refusing to engage in radical disobedience
via shutting down major traffic arteries in cities, and
preferring instead to simply demonstrate and march along
pre-planned routes. I completely understand the sentiment
that civil disobedience is preferred to pre-planned “safe”
marches, but this criticism largely misunderstands just how
massive the DC protest was. Even if most demonstrators
traveled to DC without the intent to block traffic and shut
the city down, these outcomes were achieved nonetheless,
simply due to the massive number of people saturating the
downtown and the spillover outside the planned march
route into adjacent streets.
In the end, radical activists couldn’t have asked for much
more on this day than a pacified DC police force and a city
that was shut down via the size of the march alone. The
police presence in the national mall and surrounding areas
could be described as minimal. Any hope of “containing”
the protest to the pre-designated march route was futile,
and the police knew it. Reflecting on the quiescence of
local police, there is a radical message to be learned: how
quickly authority structures dissipate when the masses of
people use their bodies as weapons against repression. If I
drew any major lesson from this protest, it is just how
precarious systems of authority are when the masses of
people choose to disobey them. Any talk about enforcing
“permitted protest routes” was ultimately moot when
demonstrators flooded the streets of our nation’s capital in
historic numbers and greatly outnumbered the police
forces brought in to “contain” their presence.
The politics of the protesters could be best described as
mixed and eclectic. Contrary to silly outside caricatures of
the demonstrators as pawns of MoveOn.org and George
Soros, the ideologies of protesters were wide ranging, and
could not be boiled down to one or two main issues, or
simply to individuals being dupes of the Hillary Clinton
presidential campaign. Based on discussions with
protesters, placard messages, and various chants, it was
clear just how varied individuals’ grievances are. They
include anger over the Trump administration’s sexism,
racism, and xenophobia, opposition to repeal of the
Affordable Care Act and support for universal health care,
protests of the mounting climate change crisis,
condemnations of Trump’s proto-fascistic politics, support
for Planned Parenthood, opposition to Islamophobia,
support for Black Lives Matter, and distrust of Trump and
his appointees due to their plutocratic backgrounds. If I
had to pinpoint a single message that emerged from this
protest, it was the need for Americans to develop a much
deeper sense of empathy with all types of socially and
economically disadvantaged groups, including people of
color, women, the disabled, immigrants, and the poor. This
is as positive a message for progressive change as I can
think of, and it’s badly needed in a country with tens of
millions of people who support or tolerate a reactionary
political culture of narcissism, bigotry, extreme-
individualism, discrimination, and class prejudice against
the working class and poor.
The demographics in DC were quite diverse. Although
there were clearly more women than men, the male
presence was large, demonstrating that feminism is hardly
just a “woman’s issue.” Protesters were a healthy mix of
431
young and old, racially and ethnically diverse, and
ideologically pluralistic. In a positive sign of the
mainstreaming of protest in America, many parents
brought their children, aged from infants through teens.
Clearly, the battle against Trump is fundamentally linked
to the prospects for democracy and with the link to future
generations in mind.
The above points are not meant to romanticize the DC
protest. There were a few major shortcomings that should
be identified, if we’re to understand how this movement
must change as the Trump administration seeks to
implement its reactionary, pro-business agenda. First, the
anti-imperialist contingent of the protest was noticeably
absent. Very few protesters openly identified as a primary
concern any sort of opposition to U.S. militarism. To put it
bluntly, without a clearly articulated anti-imperialist
message, it will be difficult to impossible to build toward
any real progressive future for this country that challenges
the bi-partisan support for the military war machine.
Secondly, the sense of economic grievance, as reflected in
opposition to the mounting plutocracy and record
inequality in America, was noticeably lacking and
underdeveloped. Condemnation of corporate kleptocracy
and the dominance of politics and society by a bi-partisan
establishment of political-economic elites needs to be
central to future protest messages, and it simply wasn’t a
very strong part of this demonstration. Without developing
a coherent message that rejects empire and neoliberal
plutocracy, this movement will likely fall into the old trap
of being co-opted by Democratic Party elites with little
interest in addressing these grievances. This has already
happened to a significant extent, in that I think any honest
leftist would admit that the mass pre-inaugural protests
would have been extremely unlikely had Hillary Clinton
been the one sworn in.
Still, to dismiss the protesters as unwitting pawns of the
Democratic-Wall Street establishment is silly. The
messages sent to the incoming Trump administration and
Congressional Republicans are substantive, and need to be
taken seriously by the American people. Sexism, racism,
xenophobia, fascism, climate catastrophe, and the assault
on the social welfare safety net are real problems, and
those protesting them are voicing legitimate grievances.
They cannot be simply swept under the rug in favor of an
exclusive focus on anti-imperialism and opposition to
neoliberal economics. Rather, all these issues need to be
brought together in future rallies and demonstrations. It is
certainly fair to criticize many protesters for a naïve
romanticization of the Obama administration and Hillary
Clinton’s politics. There were, after all, a significant
contingent of protesters who visibly articulated a pro-
Democratic establishment message that is increasingly
tone deaf to recognizing the ways in which the party
contributes to economic inequality and corporate power,
and resists dismantling the American plutocracy.
Fortunately, the effort to further radicalize many protesters
on the liberal-progressive left may not be as difficult as
some think. My conversations with many progressives
who voted for Hillary Clinton over the last six months
reveals a group of people who are actually far to the left of
the Democratic establishment on issues such as
strengthening the welfare state, universal health care,
government regulation on Wall Street, climate change, and
mounting inequality. The politics of this liberal-left
contingent fit well within a Sanderist vision of political
change. What is missing is a realization from many people
that the Democratic Party, as currently constituted, is not
up to the task of fighting for progressive or radical
deviation from the status quo. Simply put, this is a “good”
problem to have, in that it’s much easier to influence vote
choices and future political behavior when engaging with
people who share a pre-existing agreement with the leftist
policy positions.
.
432
Contrary to many of the efforts from Democratic officials,
much of the country is refusing to normalize a kleptocratic
administration that openly flirts with fascist politics and
gives little indication of any commitment to helping the
masses of middle, working class, and poor Americans.
Ultimately, however, the anti-Trump movement must
morph into something much grander if we are to reverse
the march toward plutocratic politics. The protests of
tomorrow cannot simply be about how bad Trump is. To
limit protests to this issue means handicapping any
movement toward positive, progressive change. Rather, the
goal must be to oppose Trump by building an overarching
message that prioritizes bottom-up democracy, inequality
reduction, anti-imperialism, environmental sustainability,
poverty reduction, and a roll back of racism, sexism,
xenophobia, and protecting citizens’ basic rights.
 Senior Secret Service Agent Suggests
She Wouldn't Take 'A Bullet' For Trump
By Susan Crabtree (@Susancrabtree)
1/24/17 12:58 PM

A senior U.S. Secret Service agent posted Facebook
condemnations of President Trump during the past seven
months, including one in which she said she wouldn't want
to "take a bullet" for him.
She explained herself saying she viewed his presidential
candidacy as a "disaster" for the country, and especially for
women and minorities.
Kerry O'Grady, the special agent in charge of the Secret
Service's Denver district, oversees coordination with
Washington-based advance teams for all presidential
candidate and presidential trips to the area, including all
upcoming or future trips by the president, vice president or
Trump administration officials.
Despite her senior security role, she has made her disdain
for Trump and his incoming administration clear to her
Facebook followers, who included current and former
Secret Service agents and other people who were
employees at the time of the posts. O'Grady's posts
triggered at least one complaint to the office that oversees
investigations into Secret Service misbehavior, two
knowledgeable sources told the Washington Examiner.
bullet or an endorsement for what I believe
to be disaster to this country and the strong
and amazing women and minorities who
reside here. Hatch Act be damned. I am
with Her."
Secret Service employees are among those federal
employees subject to enhanced Hatch Act restrictions,
including these two rules:
 May not post a comment to a blog or a social media
site that advocates for or against a partisan political
party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan
political group.
 May not use any email account or social media to
distribute, send or forward content that advocates for or
against a partisan political party, candidate for partisan
political office, or partisan political group.

In one Facebook post O'Grady wrote at 11:07 p.m. on a

Sunday in October, she endorsed Hillary Clinton and said
she would endure "jail time" rather than "taking a bullet"
for what she regarded as a "disaster" for America.

The post didn't mention Trump by name but clearly

referred to him.

In the same post, she mentioned the Hatch Act, which bars
executive branch staff, except the president, vice president
and some other senior executive officials, from engaging
in certain political activities.

"As a public servant for nearly 23 years, I

struggle not to violate the Hatch Act. So I
keep quiet and skirt the median," she
wrote. "To do otherwise can be a criminal
offense for those in my position. Despite
the fact that I am expected to take a bullet
for both sides.
"But this world has changed and I have
Asked for comment, the U.S. Secret Service responded:
changed. And I would take jail time over a
433
 "The USSS is aware of the postings and
we are looking into the matter."
In a lengthy interview with the Examiner Monday,
O'Grady said she took down the post after two to three
days of greater reflection and wasn't trying to imply she
wouldn't take a bullet for Trump or any officials in the
Trump administration.
"It was an internal struggle for me but as
soon as I put it up, I thought it was not the
sentiment that I needed to share because I
care very deeply about the mission," she
said.
O'Grady repeatedly stressed that she would in no way shirk
her duties to protect the president because of her
opposition to Trump's candidacy and support for Clinton.
"No, not at all. I firmly believe in this job. I'm
proud to do it and we serve the office of the
president," she said.
At the time of the posting, she said she was reacting to
news about Trump sexually assaulting women. O'Grady's
Facebook post came in the wake of the release of a video
in which Trump and "Access Hollywood" host Billy Bush
engaged in a lewd conversation about women in which
Trump bragged about being able to grab women by their
genitals.
O'Grady said she had experienced sexual assault in college
and "there was a very emotional reaction to what was
said."
"But I recognize that the agency is the most
important thing to me. My government is
the most important thing to me," she said.
"I serve at the pleasure of the president,
but I still have the First Amendment right to
say things."
O'Grady's negative stance regarding Trump did not end
when he became president.
O'Grady posted the logo for the Women's March on
Denver as her Facebook cover backdrop on Inauguration
Day, Friday, Jan. 21 at 12:25 p.m.
When one of her Facebook followers commented that
"none of these women represent me #justsayin," O'Grady
countered that "all of these women represent me! Proud to
say it! #nasty." That back and forth, captured in a
screengrab of the post, no longer appears on O'Grady's
Facebook page.
434
Women anti-Trump activists have taken on the label of
"nasty woman" to demonstrate their opposition to him. The
phrase is a reference to Trump's remark calling Clinton
"such a nasty woman" in the final moments of the
presidential debate in late October.
At 11:23 p.m. on Inauguration Day, she updated her
profile picture to an artist's rendering of Princess Leia with
the words,
"A woman's place is in the resistance."
"The resistance," with its allusion to the
rebels in the "Star Wars" movies, has
become a moniker for those opposing
Trump's presidency.
Those posts remained on O'Grady's Facebook page as of
Monday afternoon. She took the posts down after her
interview with the Examiner and replaced them with a
backdrop of a snowy scene and a smiling photo of herself
sporting ski gear.
The Department of Homeland Security's Office of the
Inspector General, which investigates agency complaints
of misbehavior, received a complaint about O'Grady's
Facebook posts on Oct. 11, a source said.
It's unclear whether the Secret Service explicitly bans
agents and other employees from engaging in political
speech on social media or has written rules prohibiting it.
But in operational security training, instructors have long
warned agents or would-be agents against the use of social
media because it can make them vulnerable to threats by
exposing their personal information and their movements,
according to two knowledgeable sources.
In another pre-election post that no longer appears on her
Facebook page, O'Grady shared a Huffington Post story
with the headline: "Scott Baio Defends Trump's Sexism
with More Sexism." She accompanied her Facebook post
of the story with the words: "One Word: Douche. How
Do You Like Them Apples?!"
In a post in late November, O'Grady shared Facebook
remarks from the liberal news outlet Vox, which carried a
photo of Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and a story with the
headline, "Donald Trump Nominates Jeff Sessions To
Serve As Attorney General." The Vox Facebook post
commented,
"Just a few years ago, this would have
been unimaginable."
O'Grady added her own comment on the post:
 "We are moving our civil rights into a period ages. I am horrified and dismayed beyond
of bigotry, misogyny and racism that this words."
country has not tolerated for decades. Dark

O'Grady appears to have removed the pre-election posts according to two sources familiar with the timing of the
after fellow and former Secret Service agents complained posts' removal.
to her supervisors and the Office of the Inspector General,

435
At publishing time, O'Grady released the following
statement:
"I serve this country with pride and I
proudly diligently and fiercely protect and
support the institutions and pillars of our
republic established by the very same
document that allows my free expression. I
do so with every fiber of my being for the
very reason that those institutions are in
place to guarantee my right and the rights
of all our citizens to voice and express our
opinions and beliefs even when and
especially when those values may be
contrary to those of the party in power. My
devotion to mission and country is only
strengthened by the fact that the founders
.
436
recognize the value of dissent and the
freedom to assemble and voice those
opposing convictions.
"They enshrine those rights for future
generations so we avoid the path of
authoritarian regimes that shackle their
people with fear."
In response to whether her expression of her opposition to
Trump would affect her ability to do her job, she said:
"I hope you understand that's an emphatic
no and I need to make sure that's
resoundingly clear and just reinforces that
this job needs to done well."
 Mainstream Media Accidentally Admitted All The DNC
Email Leaks Were True… Stunning Revelations Of
Collusion And Corruption Run By The Clintons
By: JD Heyes
Date: January 24, 2017
For weeks since President-elect Donald J. Trump, now
confirmed as the 45th president by the Electoral College,
won the Nov. 8 election, the so-called “mainstream” media
has tried to de-legitimize his victory with a series of fake
news reports making wild claims.
Among them:
 The Russians “hacked” the election to harm
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton;
 the Russians used “alternative media” to “spread
propaganda” that helped Trump and harmed Clinton;
 this was all done because Russian President Vladimir
Putin “has a grudge” against Clinton;
 and so forth.
As to the Russian hacking charge, you’ll notice that
despite the blaring headlines, not one shred of proof is
offered to substantiate the claim. All we’re just supposed
to believe is that “hacking” occurred—we’re not supposed
to ask how it happened, what systems, precisely, were
hacked; what the hackers did to actually affect the outcome
of the election; etc.
Did hackers go in and change Hillary votes to Trump (and
if so, how would that work in battleground states like
Michigan—which a Republican hasn’t won in decades and
which uses paper ballots)?
437
Fake news, lies, and the lying media that tells them
What’s this “grudge” Putin has against Clinton—the
woman who, as secretary of state,
helped Putin and Russia gain control
over 20 percent of U.S. strategic
uranium, the element crucial to the
manufacture of nuclear weapons, while
millions flowed to the Clinton
Foundation?
The “Russian propaganda” accusation was probably the
most laughable. As the Washington Post reported, citing
dubious, unsourced “evidence” from some shady, never-
before-heard-of organization, the paper claimed that some
200 alternative news sites (including ours) were willing
dupes, being used by Russian intelligence to spread anti-
Clinton propaganda (a story that the Post’s editors had to
immediately walk back because they could not confirm
any of it).
Despite all of this noise and deception, the mainstream
media’s omission of certain documentable facts is a tacit
admission that
a) they are real; and
b) that their own stories attempting to discredit Trump’s
victory are not real.
For instance, none of the damning documents from the
Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign
that both claim were hacked by the Russians (without
offering any evidence and despite the fact that WikiLeaks
founder Julian Assange has said it was not the Russians)
have been proven false.
No one in either the DNC or the Clinton
campaign denied the validity of the
emails; they only decried the manner in
which they claim they were made public.
And no one in the mainstream media has asserted they
were false, either. Again, in covering for Clinton, the
MSM decried the fact that the emails and damning
documents were released, without refuting any of the
content within them.
‘We’ve done all we can to help her’
It is this lack of refutation that is the real story. As
Assange himself has said,
“There is no proof of that whatsoever. We
have not disclosed our source, and of
course, this is a diversion that’s being
pushed by the Hillary Clinton campaign.
That’s a meta-story. The real story is
what these emails contain and they
show collusion. The very top of the
Democratic party, Debbie Wasserman
Schultz, is now being forced to resign. And
other people from the party, which is meant
to be neutral, subverting the process in
order to make sure Hillary Clinton won the
campaign.”
.
438
By failing to refute what is very obvious in the
documents—the collusion by the DNC to shut out Sen.
Bernie Sanders and ensure Clinton got the Democratic
Party nomination—the mainstream media all but admits
they are true.
What’s more, as noted by AllNewsPipeline, the media has
admitted something else:
That it, too, was colluding against Trump by
doing all it could to promote Clinton, ignore
the email revelations, downplay the FBI’s
criminal investigation and so on.
This was laid bare by a stunning on-air admission by
CNN’s Chris Cuomo, who said,
“We couldn’t help her anymore than we
have. You know, she’s just got a free
ride so far from the media and we’re the
biggest ones promoting her campaign.”
Who, exactly, are the purveyors of ‘fake news’?
 Three Days In And Trump
Has Already Kept One Pledge
Paul Craig Roberts
January 24, 2017
On Trump’s third day Trump is one up on the
Establishment. Can this last?
I am not a Trump booster. I am a scorekeeper.
On the third day of his presidency Donald Trump signed
an executive order withdrawing the United States from the
Trans-Pacificic Partnership (TPP). Based on this we must
assume he will also deep-six the Trans-Atlantic
Partnership.
Trump and his advisors regard the Pacific and Atlantic
partnerships as trade deals like NAFTA, the North
American Free Trade Agreement that sent American jobs
to Mexico at the expense of Americans.
However, the most strategic part of these agreements is
that they make global corporations immune from the laws
of the countries in which they do business if those laws
adversely impact the profits of the global corporations.
Who decides the question? Not the courts of the countries
or a world court.
The question is decided by a corporate tribunal staffed
only by corporations.
In other words, the sovereign laws of sovereign countries,
such as France’s laws against GMOs, are subject to
damage suits decided by corporate tribunals, which means
the end of the legal sovereignty of countries.
The so-called trade partnerships are weapons of American
economic imperialism.
Whether Trump and his advisors are aware of this or not,
Trump has on his third day dealt a lethal blow to a power
lusted after by US global corporations.
How will this formidable force respond to this blow
inflicted upon them by Trump?
That remains to be seen if the blows that Trump has
promised against the interests of the elites continue.
439
Global corporations are Fifth Columns in the countries in
which they are incorporated and also in the foreign
countries in which they do business. They have no loyalty
to any country, only to the profits that comprise their
bottom line. Anything that increases those profits they
regard as legitimate. Anything that diminishes those profits
they regard as illegitimate.
Modern capitalism is a profit-driven world, in which
capitalists are devoid of the loyalty to their native countries
that Adam Smith and David Ricardo assumed them to
have. US global corporations have demonstrated their
disloyalty to the US by moving US jobs to Asia. Think
Apple, Nike, Levi, and all the rest. Jobs offshoring
separates consumers from the incomes associated with the
production of the goods that they consume, which leads to
penury.
The rewards for the offshoring global corporations have
been large profits from reduced labor and regulatory costs,
resulting in executive “performance bonuses” and capital
gains to shareholders and to executives with stock options
or some similar income booster.
The costs have been the dismantling of the ladders of
upward mobility that made the US an “opportunity
society.” High productivity, high valued added
manufacturing and professional skill jobs, such as software
engineering jobs, have been moved offshore, and in the
case of software jobs also given to foreign H1B work visa
holders. The consequence is the collapse of the state, local,
and federal tax base, and the consequent assault on Social
Security, Medicare, and state and local pensions.
A county like the US that gives its GNP away to other
countries is locked into a transformation from First World
to Third World. This is what Trump has said he will
reverse.
How can he do it? Is this something that he can deliver by
cutting corporate tax rates and by imposing an import or
border tax?
The US is a member of the World Trade Agreement,
which prohibits tarrifs or “border taxes.” If this is correct,
Trump would first have to pull the US out of the WTO,
something that might be difficult.
However, what Trump can do is to offset the labor cost
advantage to corporate profits from offshoring their
production for US markets by changing how corporations
are taxed.
If US corporations add value to their product in the US,
that is, if they produce the products that they market to
Americans in the US with American labor, they would
have a lower tax rate than if they produce the products
abroad with foreign labor. The difference in the tax rate
can be calculated to offset, or more than offset, the
advantage of the lower labor and regulatory costs abroad.
This is a matter of domestic taxation and not a matter of
tarrifs on foreign-produced goods, and, therefore, it is not
subject to WTO rules.
Because of the globalist propaganda, Americans have
forgotten that the strength of their economy was
domestically-based. The development of the US economy
was never based on foreign trade. It rested firmly in the
rise of consumer spending power from America labor
receiving the bulk of the productivity gains.
What jobs offshoring did was to transfer the income gains
from productivity to corporate profits by underpaying
Asian labor.
It was easy to pay Asian labor less than labor’s
contribution to profit, because of the immense excess
supply of Chinese, Indian, Indonesian, and other labor.
When labor is plentiful and jobs are scarce, labor goes
begging.
.
440
Even today the Chinese and Indian labor forces are under-
employed. The only way American labor can compete is to
accept a wage below the US standard of living.
Trump understands this, just as did Ross Perot and Pat
Buchanan.
Ross Perot was a billionaire; yet he stood up for ordinary
working Americans. Yet, the left says all billionaires are
evil.
Pat Buchanan was royalty in the Republican
Establishment; yet he deserted them and stood up for the
ordinary working American. And the left says he is a
“Nixon-Reagan fascist.”
Clearly, the pathetic remnant of the American left has
more hate for those who stand up for the working class
than they have for those oppressing the working class and
those fomenting war. Why did the women so quick to
march against Trump not march against the Clinton,
Bush/Cheney, and Obama regimes for killing, maiming,
orphaning, widowing, and dislocating millions of peoples
in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya,
and Syria?
That we see the left aligned with the ruling elites against
Trump is proof that the left has abandoned the working
class.
Chris Hedges doesn’t know how desperately revolution is
needed in the US. If revolution occurs, it is more likely to
be led by Donald Trump than by the left.
 Trump To Launch
"Major Investigation Into Voter Fraud"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 25, 2017 11:13 AM

Having stunned the media with his Monday night "In addition to winning the Electoral College
announcement before members of Congress during a in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you
private reception that Trump only lost the popular vote due deduct the millions of people who voted
to vote fraud, the president refused to back down the next illegally," he tweeted after Election Day.
day, when on Tuesday the White House said Trump stands
by his belief that millions of people voted illegally in the
U.S. election.

"The president does believe that," White

House spokesman Sean Spicer told
reporters. The press secretary said the
president had said "3 to 5 million people
could have voted illegally, based on the
studies that he's seen" although he did not
quote the studies.

Fast forward to Wednesday morning when anyone who

wondered if Trump would let go of this particularly
sensitive issues which attacks the legitimacy of his
presidency, got their answer with a series of two tweets by
the President, who shortly after 7am said that he will
request a probe into US voter fraud to resolve the ongoing
back and forth once and for all:
"I will be asking for a major
investigation into VOTER FRAUD,
including those registered to vote in two
states, those who are illegal and even,
those registered to vote who are dead
(and many for a long time). Depending
on results, we will strengthen up voting
procedures!"
Trump's proposed investigation will likely be undertaken
by the Department of Justice, whose new head, Jeff
Sessions, has yet to be confirmed.
As noted above, this "thread" started on Monday night
when Trump said he lost the popular vote because of
rampant voter fraud by "illegals." "He said 3 to 5 million
'illegals' voted so that's why he lost popular vote," a
Democratic aide said. The president made similar claims in
tweets he posted after his victory.
Several lawmakers and reporters have since disputed the
president's claims about rampant voter fraud, saying there
is no evidence to back up his allegations, which explains
Trump's insistence to get to the bottom of this.
Since the topic of voter fraud was widely cast by the
mainstream press as falling under the "fake news"
umbrella during the presidential campaign, Trump has just
waved red, dripping meat before the US media which will
dutifully focus on this one statement, while putting all the
other things to come out from the Trump administration on
its third working day, on the back burner especially since
on December 1, the Trump legal team, commenting on the
Stein recount, said
"all available evidence suggests that the
2016 general election was not tainted by
fraud/mistake" .

441
 Vast Majority of Americans Back Trump’s Blast Against
Washington Establishment
© REUTERS/ Joshua Roberts US
05:28 25.01.2017

The survey found that only 17 percent of the US public

disagreed with Trump’s claim while 11 percent were not
sure.

Trump in his inaugural address delivered on Friday

charged the Washington, DC political establishment
with profiting for many years at the expense of ordinary
Americans, pledging to end the practice immediately, the
release explained.

Nearly three quarters of all Americans agree with The survey of 1,000 likely voters was carried out on
President Donald Trump’s charge that a group of elitists Sunday by Rasmussen Reports, the company said.
in Washington has grown wealthy at the expense of the
United States, a Rasmussen national poll reported.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — "Seventy-two percent

of likely US voters agree with this statement," Rasmussen
said in a release on Tuesday.
.

442
 Your CIA At Work:
And The Media Trust Their “Russian Hack” Story
By Jon Rappoport
January 25, 2017
I recently wrote a piece highlighting the greatest hits of the
CIA’s 70-year history: its dirty tricks, major crimes, and
deceptions.
But because the CIA’s claim that Russia hacked the US
election and gave it to Trump is still fresh, I thought I’d
add another beautiful moment of CIA glory.
January 2014. This one involved the CIA hacking
computers belonging to the US Senate Intelligence
Committee.
Vice.com and Jason Leopold had the story (8/12/15).
Follow the bouncing ball:
“On July 28, 2014, the CIA director wrote a
letter to senators Dianne Feinstein and
Saxby Chambliss — the chairwoman of the
Senate Intelligence Committee (SSCI) and
the panel’s ranking Republican,
respectively. In it, he admitted that the
CIA’s penetration of the computer network
used by committee staffers reviewing the
agency’s torture program — a breach for
which Feinstein and Chambliss had long
demanded accountability — was improper
and violated agreements the Intelligence
Committee had made with the CIA.”
“The letter was notable in part because
Brennan initially denied the January 2014
[CIA] search [hack] of the Senate’s
computer network even took place. And
later, when it became clear that it had —
and that he had known of it while publicly
denying that it happened — he refused to
acknowledge that it was wrong. For
months, Feinstein and other committee
members were clamoring for a written
apology to make part of the official record.”
“Brennan’s [eventual] mea culpa was
prompted by a memo he’d received 10
days earlier from CIA Inspector General
David Buckley. After the Office of the
Inspector General (OIG) was tasked with
looking into the intrusion, it found that the
CIA employees who broke into the
Senate’s computer network in hopes of
443
tracking down CIA documents the Senate
wasn’t allowed to see (according to the
agency) may have broken federal laws.”
“’I recently received a briefing on the
[OIG’s] findings, and want to inform you
that the investigation found support for your
concern that CIA staff had improperly
accessed the [Intelligence Committee]
shared drive on the RDINet [an acronym
for rendition, detention, and interrogation]
when conducting a limited search for CIA
privileged documents,’ [CIA Director]
Brennan wrote. ‘In particular, the [OIG]
judged that Agency officers’ access to
the… shared drive was inconsistent with
the common understanding reached in
2009 between the Committee and the
Agency regarding access to RDINet.
Consequently, I apologize for the actions of
CIA officers…. I am committed to
correcting the shortcomings that this report
has revealed’.”
“But Brennan didn’t sign or send the
apology letter.”
“Instead, four days later, he sent Feinstein
and Chambliss a different letter — one
without an apology or admission that the
search of their computer network was
improper. He did say, however, that he was
going to ‘stand up’ an ‘independent’
accountability review board, whose
members would be appointed by Brennan,
to look into the OIG findings and determine
whether the CIA employees who conducted
the search should be punished.”
“Last December, that accountability board
issued a report and overturned nearly all of
[CIA Inspector General David] Buckley’s
findings and conclusions. It also
exonerated Brennan and the CIA personnel
who searched the Senate’s computer
network.”
“Brennan did verbally apologize to
Feinstein and Chambliss during an in-
person briefing about the findings of the
OIG report, but Intelligence Committee
members told VICE News it was
 unacceptable because there was not a
written record of it. The lawmakers also
noted that Brennan should have apologized
to them — and to the Senate staffers who
the CIA referred to the Justice Department
for criminal prosecution [!].”
—There’s much more to the story, and Jason Leopold
writes it. But that’s enough to make the point. This (CIA)
is the agency that demands to be believed when it says
Russia hacked the election. This is the agency that is to be
.
444
trusted. This is the agency that is so pure, supporters of
Hillary Clinton swallowed the Russian hack story whole.
As did the Washington Post, the leader of the pack in
promoting the Russian hack claim. Well, the Post and the
CIA are often hard to separate.
But don’t worry, the CIA is on the case. What case? Why,
any case they choose to investigate, so they can find out
the truth and then lie about it.
 ABC News Shockingly Claims
Ownership Over Trump’s Words And Likeness
Mainstream Media Now Trying To Control The Flow Of Key Information
By Alex Thomas -
01.25.2017 @3:26 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — In a blatant violation of fair use, ABC
News has released a ridiculous set of “rules” over the use
of their upcoming exclusive interview with President
Donald Trump.
The rules, published by the Drudge Report, seem to be
designed to control not only the flow of information but
also to hurt alternative media outlets who could now be
scared to even quote what the president has said.
regularly scheduled news program’s broadcast. Material
can no longer be used after February 1.
The rest of the usage rules seem designed for ABC News to
capitalize on their exclusive interview by making more
money off what is sure to be a total hit job on the
president-elect. At this point President Trump needs to
publicly let ABC News know that this little scheme will not
work.

The “usage” rules include the shocking demand that “They are trying to set a precedent right
nothing said in the Trump interview can ever be used after now, Trump needs to reverse that and
February 1st. Yes, you read that right. ABC News believes set a new precedent and school ABC news
they can censor every single word of their upcoming publicly.”
Trump interview after an arbitrary date set by the corporate
news outlet.

Following are usage rules for the ABC News special

‘President Trump: The First Interview,’ a one-on-one
interview with ‘World News Tonight’ Anchor David
Muir airing Wednesday, January 25, 2017 (10:00 — 11:00
pm ET) on ABC News.

1. Excerpts of no more than THREE MINUTES (3:00) of

actualities from ABC News may be incorporated in your

445
 The Women’s March In Washington D.C., As Broadcast
By Ann Garrison
January 26, 2017
I didn’t show up for the Women’s’ March on the day after
Donald Trump’s inauguration. I didn’t go to DC or join the
local Oakland and San Francisco manifestations. I was
way too sick to go anywhere, but I hadn’t been planning to
anyway. What were we going to protest? That Donald
Trump won the election? That Hillary lost? That Trump’s
in Putin’s pocket? That Trump is a pussy grabbing, wall
building, climate change denying, health care abolishing,
tax dodging, shit spewing demagogue? That his campaign
nevertheless struck a chord in the heartland that Hillary’s
did not and enabled him to win the electoral college? That
he promised to withdraw the U.S. from the Trans Pacific
Partnership? (As he did within his first few days in office.)
Were we to protest because Trump wants to create a
Muslim registry? That’s not good, but Bush did that.
It was called the National Security Entry-Exit Registration
System (NSEERS) or INS Special Registration. Obama
maintained it until December 22, 2016, when he
dismantled it so Trump would have to start over.
Were we to protest because Trump might withdraw U.S.
troops from Europe’s borders with Russia? During the
week of the inauguration, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow
reassured us that President Obama had greatly reduced the
risk of that by deploying thousands more troops to Norway
and Poland on his last two days in office, meaning that
there are now more troops deployed in Europe than at any
time since World War II.
“Here’s the question,” Maddow said, “Is the
new president gonna take those troops
out? After all the speculation, after all the
worry, we are actually about to find out if
Russia maybe has something on the new
president. We’re about to find out if the new
president of our country is going to do what
Russia wants once he’s commander-in-
chief of the U.S. military starting noon on
Friday. What is he gonna do with those
deployments? Watch this space.
Seriously.”
Even if I hadn’t been sick, I was disinclined to march, but I
switched on the broadcast reporting, alternating between
446
CNN, MSNBC, Democracy Now, and a raw video
livestream, so this is my response to the broadcast
spectacle, not to the event as experienced in the streets. A
number of my friends who were in the streets were elated
by the size and energy of the crowds and say they had a
more radical, more promising experience than what I saw
broadcast. Chris Hedges, speaking to TruthDig, described
the march as “tepid,” but said that this is how movements
start and that it might grow into a more radical challenge.
Not necessarily, but it might.
I hadn’t expected to be much interested in the broadcasts
for the same reasons I was disinclined to go, but I was
immediately mesmerized by what a carefully staged and
confined spectacle it was, by what it accepted and what it
didn’t, at least as broadcast. The most glaring exclusions
were opposition to U.S. wars, to NSA spying on our every
phone call and our daily lives, and to Wall Street
financialization schemes that led to the 2008 crash, the
bank bailout, the foreclosures and the destruction of
middle class wealth, including half that of the Black
population.
CNN and MSNBC had one overriding concern: whether
or not the Democratic Party could harness all this energy
into wins in 2018 and 2020, or whether it would simply
dissipate like Occupy and the Tea Party. Democracy Now
made no attempt to force that framework on it, but
included no alternate analysis either.
The speakers who came to the podium all appeared to
assume that the half million or more people present were
all members of the Democratic Party and no one was more
excited about this than filmmaker Michael Moore. He
urged everyone to start calling their Congressional reps
every single day, to make it a part of their morning routine,
as soon as they’d made the coffee. He urged them to run
for local office, city council, school board or, at the very
least, Democratic Party precinct delegate.
However, something happened as Michael Moore was
putting the finishing touches on his exhortation to push the
old Democratic leadership aside – despite all the good
things they’ve done – and take over the Party. When he
started a sentence with, “And when we take over the DNC.
. . ,” Ashley Judd suddenly burst on the stage, rudely
interrupting him, and starting her overwrought “I am a
nasty woman” performance. Before she was done, she had
saluted a list of heroic “nasty women,” including not only
Hillary Clinton but also Condolezza Rice.
Michael Moore did not say
“Excuse me, Ashley, but I haven’t finished
explaining how we’re going to take over the
DNC.” Instead he tried to save face
by shouting, “Oh my God, here’s Ashley
Judd!”
Here are a few more choice moments created by a few of
the other speakers:
America Ferrera:
“It’s been a heart-rending time to be both a
woman and an immigrant in this country.
Our dignity, our character, our rights have
all been under attack, and a platform of
hate and division assumed power
yesterday. His cabinet is not America.
Congress is not America. We are America.
And we are here to stay.”
What’s wrong with that? America Ferrera is the daughter
of Honduran immigrants. She endorsed Hillary Clinton in
the primaries and general elections, first in 2008, then in
2012. The overthrow of populist Honduran leader Manuel
Zelaya engineered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
did not change her mind. Neither did the ensuing flood of
Hondurans desperately trying to cross our borders to
safety, most of all children.
Gloria Steinem:
“I’ve been thinking about the uses of a long
life. And one of them is that you remember
when things were worse. We remember the
death of the future with Martin Luther King,
with Jack Kennedy, with Bobby Kennedy,
with Malcolm X. Without those deaths, for
instance, Nixon would not have been
elected and there would not have been
many of the wars that we have had.”
Huh? These assassinations of the 1960s brought on the
wars that destroyed Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya and very
nearly Syria? The ongoing 15-year Afghanistan War?
Madonna:
“It seems as though we had all slipped into
a false sense of comfort that justice would
prevail and that good would win in the end.
Well, good did not win this election but
447
good will win in the end. So what today
means is that we are far from the end.
Today marks the beginning, the beginning
of our story. The revolution starts here. The
fight for the right to be free, to be who we
are, to be equal.”
A “false sense of comfort” that “good” [Hillary Clinton
and the Democratic Party] would prevail in this election
and the certainty that, despite this setback, they will
prevail in the end?
Van Jones:
“When Barack Obama went flying away in
that helicopter, I felt like something
beautiful was dying. And I felt that
something that we had all worked for and
that we had all given our hopes and our
dreams to was dying. And yet, with every
breakdown, a breakthrough is possible,
and today, because of you, something
beautiful is being reborn in America.
Something beautiful is being born right
here and right now.”
The Democratic Party has obviously eaten Van Jones’s
brain.
Those notably absent from the stage included:
Chris Hedges, author of many books and
fierce critic of the Democratic/Republican
Party duopoly
David Swanson, Executive Director of
World Beyond War and author of “War Is a
Lie”
Ellen Brown, author and founder of the
Public Banking Institute
Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report Editor
and critic of capitalism, US wars, and the
“Black Misleadership Class”
Glenn Greenwald, journalist who, with
Edward Snowden, revealed that the NSA
has left us nowhere to hide
Jill Stein, Green Party presidential
candidate, who called for immediately
halving the military budget and instituting a
“Green New Deal” to create sustainable
infrastructure and employ all Americans
Michael Klare, scholar, author, and critic of
the U.S. war in Syria and the NATO buildup
on Russia’s borders
Naomi Klein, author and critic of disaster
capitalism and climate destruction
 Ralph Nader, public interest lawyer,
author, activist and three time Green or
independent candidate for president
In many ways, the DC march resembled the Democratic
National Convention, which CounterPunch Editor Jeffery
St. Clair called “a neutron bomb of identity politics.”
Aside from a few nods to climate change, it was all about
protection and equal opportunity for women and racial and
religious minorities, but that didn’t include protection from
predatory financial institutions, from all intrusive spying,
or from being sacrificed to foreign wars for resources and
global hegemony.
448
Nor did it include any concern for the protection of
women, families, and nations targeted by U.S. wars, drone
assassinations, and covert destabilization. I don’t know
how the Women’s March organizers and Soros or donors
so carefully confined protest, but it was very confined, at
least in the broadcast spectacle projected from the stage in
Washington D.C.
I’m sure there were more radical off stage expressions in
local marches and in D.C., but that’s what I saw on TV. I
hope Chris Hedges is right that it might contain the seeds
of a more radical challenge.
 Trump Prepares Orders Aiming
At Global Funding and Treaties
The Interpreter
By MAX FISHER
JAN. 25, 2017
The United Nations General Assembly in 2015. A proposed executive
order by President Trump that would decrease funding to
international organizations could severely curtail the work of United
Nations agencies, which rely on billions of dollars annually from the
United States. Credit Damon Winter/The New York Times
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is
preparing executive orders that would clear the way to
drastically reduce the United States’ role in the United
Nations and other international organizations, as well as
begin a process to review and potentially abrogate certain
forms of multilateral treaties.
The first of the two draft orders, titled “Auditing and
Reducing U.S. Funding of International Organizations”
and obtained by The New York Times, calls for terminating
funding for any United Nations agency or other
international body that meets any one of several criteria.
Those criteria include organizations that give full
membership to the Palestinian Authority or Palestine
Liberation Organization, or support programs that fund
abortion or any activity that circumvents sanctions against
Iran or North Korea. The draft order also calls for
terminating funding for any organization that “is controlled
or substantially influenced by any state that sponsors
terrorism” or is blamed for the persecution of marginalized
groups or any other systematic violation of human rights.
The order calls for then enacting “at least a 40 percent
overall decrease” in remaining United States funding
toward international organizations.
The order establishes a committee to recommend where
those funding cuts should be made. It asks the committee
449
to look specifically at United States funding for
peacekeeping operations; the International Criminal Court;
development aid to countries that “oppose important
United States policies”; and the United Nations Population
Fund, which oversees maternal and reproductive health
programs.
If President Trump signs the order and its provisions are
carried out, the cuts could severely curtail the work of
United Nations agencies, which rely on billions of dollars
in annual United States contributions for missions that
include caring for refugees.
The second executive order, “Moratorium on New
Multilateral Treaties,” calls for a review of all current
and pending treaties with more than one other nation. It
asks for recommendations on which negotiations or
treaties the United States should leave.
The order says this review applies only to multilateral
treaties that are not “directly related to national security,
extradition or international trade,” but it is unclear what
falls outside these restrictions.
For example, the Paris climate agreement or other
environmental treaties deal with trade issues but could
potentially fall under this order.
An explanatory statement that accompanies the draft order
mentions two United Nations treaties for review: the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women and the Convention on the
Rights of the Child.
Taken together, the orders suggest that Mr. Trump intends
to pursue his campaign promises of withdrawing the
United States from international organizations. He has
expressed heavy skepticism of multilateral agreements
such as the Paris climate agreement and of the United
Nations.
The draft orders, which are only a few pages each, leave
several unanswered questions. For example, it is unclear
whether they call for cutting 40 percent of United States
contributions to each international agency separately, or to
the overall federal funding budget.
The orders call for reviewing any funding that could go
toward the International Criminal Court, though the United
States currently provides no funding to that body. They
also call for terminating funding to United Nations bodies
that include full Palestinian membership, though this is
already United States law. Under former President Barack
Obama, the United States cut funding to the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
when it accepted Palestinians as full members.
450
The United States provides about a quarter of all funding
to United Nations peacekeeping operations, of which there
are more than a dozen, in Europe, Africa, Latin America,
the Middle East and Asia. At least one of these, the
operation in southern Lebanon, directly serves Israeli
interests by protecting the country’s northern border,
though the draft order characterizes the funding cuts as
serving Israeli interests.
 President Trump Tells ABC News' David Muir:
Construction of Border Wall Will Begin in 'Months'
By Arlette Saenz
Jan 25, 2017, 5:53 PM ET

"As soon as we can, as soon as we can

physically do it," he said. "I would say in
months, yeah. I would say in months --
certainly planning is starting immediately."

In the hours after the ABC News interview took place,

Trump issued two executive orders, one of which is about
the commission of the border wall. The order calls for the
secretary of homeland security to "

take all appropriate steps to immediately

plan, design, and construct a physical wall
In his first one-on-one television interview since being along the southern border."
sworn in as the 45th president of the United States,
President Donald Trump told ABC News anchor David The order calls for agency and department heads to
Muir that Mexico would be paying for the proposed border
wall and that negotiations between the two nations would
"identify and quantify all sources of direct
begin "relatively soon."
and indirect Federal aid or assistance to
the Government of Mexico."
"Ultimately, it will come out of what's
happening with Mexico ... and we will be in
It does not specifically state how or if those payment
a form reimbursed by Mexico, which I've
sources will be connected to the payment of the wall.
always said," Trump said.
Trump talked about these orders during a speech he gave
During the interview, which took place at the White House
at the Department of Homeland Security this afternoon,
this morning, Trump said that Mexico would pay the U.S.
saying that
back "100 percent."
"Beginning today, the United States of
He confirmed that U.S. taxpayer dollars would be used to
America gets back control of its borders."
start the construction but said reimbursement would
follow.
Talking about his executive orders, Trump predicted that
they will
"All it is, is we'll be reimbursed at a later
date from whatever transaction we make
from Mexico," he said. "I'm just telling you "save thousands of lives, millions of jobs,
there will be a payment. It will be in a form, and billions and billions of dollars."
perhaps a complicated form. What I'm
doing is good for the United States. It's also Catch more of the exclusive one-hour prime-time
going to be good for Mexico. We want to special "President Trump: The First Interview" with
have a very stable, very solid Mexico." David Muir tonight at 10 p.m. ET on ABC.

When asked about the start of construction, Trump said it

would happen in "months."

451
 A Time For Vigilance
By Camillo Mac Bica, Ph.D.
January 25, 2017
Perhaps vigilance and dissent, the responsibilities of
citizenship in a democracy, have never been more crucial
than at this perilous juncture in American history. Such
activism will require unity and dedication if we are to
counter the real and serious threat to human rights and
progressive values posed by the Trump Administration and
a conservative Republican Congress. But in addition to
taking to the streets and making our voices heard, we must
learn from the past and look to the future to ensure that the
mistakes which resulted in a Trump presidency are never
repeated.
While many factors probably contributed to the
unexpected victory of Donald Trump, much of the blame
has been attributed to the alleged hacks by the Russians
and the release of the Democratic National Committee’s
(DNC) and Clinton campaign officials’ emails by
Wikileaks. As a consequence, allegations have been made
that our democracy has been sabotaged by a malicious
foreign power, a serious charge for sure, perhaps even an
existential threat that should concern every American. As
there is absolutely no evidence, however, that the Russians
or anyone else hacked voting machines or altered voting
technology, perhaps “sabotage” is a dangerous
exaggeration that has unleashed a bipartisan frenzy
regarding America’s appropriate retaliatory response to
this “act of war.” I think even “influencing the election,”
though less provocative perhaps, still exaggerates the
impact of the hacking and email release. How we describe
these “leaks” is not just semantics. Language is important,
as it affects, perhaps even determines, how we move
forward. Such inflammatory rhetoric has real world
consequences as it further degrades our relationship with
Russia, increases tension, and ushers in a new era of cold
war (or worse). Most importantly, creating fear and
paranoia of Russian intent distracts from a legitimate,
452
meaningful inquiry into how such an unqualified, arrogant,
narcissist now occupies the White House.
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee
on foreign cyber security threats, former Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper affirmed that the
intelligence community has grown more “resolute” in its
assessment that Russian intelligence was involved in the
hacks aimed at the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign
chairman John Podesta. What is, however, of greater
relevance to our current predicament and to the integrity of
our electoral process is, unfortunately, hardly being
discussed amidst the enthusiasm of bipartisan Russian fear
mongering. That is, did the release of the emails affect the
outcome of the election by turning voters against Hillary
Clinton and giving the presidency to a Russian sycophant;
and if so how?
Since, as we’ve been told, all the “deplorables” in this
country were already committed to Donald Trump, if the
information allegedly hacked by the Russians and released
by Wikileaks truly impacted the election, allowed Trump
to win the electoral college, then it must have been by
influencing the “non deplorables,” the sane and reasonable
Americans, not to vote for Hillary Clinton. Certainly this
information, little if any of which has yet to be adequately
refuted, would not have been available were it not for the
Russians and Wikileaks, but what requires clarification is
how providing relevant information to voters poses a threat
to our democracy. Consequently, if the hacked emails did
in fact influence the outcome of the election, Trump’s
victory must be attributed not to Putin, the Russian
hackers, Wikileaks, or to ignorance, racism, misogyny,
homophobia and xenophobia, but to the subsequent disgust
and contempt of reasonable voters for the misconduct
documented in the emails of the DNC and the Clinton
campaign. Conduct that corrupted our electoral process
and marginalized Bernie Sanders, thereby ensuring that
Hillary Clinton receive her party’s nomination for
president. Conduct that arguably cost the Democrats the
election, and gave America and the world Donald Trump.
The Main Stream Media (MSM), the all important 4th
estate, much of which supported the candidacy of Hillary
Clinton, for all intents and purposes, ignored the election
tampering brought to light by Wikileaks choosing rather to
perpetuate the distraction of Russian interference. As an
informed citizenry is, after all, necessary for a vibrant, well
functioning democracy, American voters have a right to
know ALL information relevant to determining for whom
they will cast their ballot. The information released by
Wikileaks, then, served to augment the enthusiastic
reporting of the MSM of Trump’s many, many negatives.
By informing the voting public about the election
tampering, information that the MSM and our government
lacked or refused to share, perhaps Putin, the Russians, if
in fact they were behind the hacks, and Wikileaks in
releasing it, deserve praise for strengthening rather than
condemnation for sabotaging our democracy.
These observations in no way give Donald Trump
credibility, undermine concern for the dire situation this
.
453
country and the world faces as a consequence of his
Presidency, or diminish the importance of demonstration
and dissent. But as we struggle against the attacks on our
civil liberties and progressive values by a Trump
Administration, we must learn from past mistakes and
ensure that this fiasco never be repeated. We must not be
silenced or blinded to the corruption of those, no matter
their party affiliation, race, or gender, who, in their lust for
power, sabotage our democracy, undermine our electoral
process, and, to distract from the criminality of their
unscrupulous behavior, perpetuate a “wag the dog”
scenario that brings this country and the world to the brink
of nuclear war.
 The Entire Senior Management Team At The State
Department Just Resigned
By Tyler Durden
Jan 26, 2017 11:29 AM
Demonstrating just how ideologically alligned with the
Obama administration was the entire US State Department,
moments ago the WaPo reported that
"the entire senior level of management
officials resigned Wednesday, part of an
ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign
service officers who don’t want to stick
around for the Trump era."
The mass resignation took place as Rex Tillerson was
inside the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy
Bottom on Wednesday, taking meetings and getting the lay
of the land.
According to WaPo's Josh Rogin who suddenly has no
more senior level sources left at State:
"I reported Wednesday morning that the
Trump team was narrowing its search for
his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace
the State Department’s long-serving
undersecretary for management, Patrick
Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in that
job for nine years, was actively involved in
the transition and was angling to keep that
job under Tillerson, three State Department
officials told me."
Then suddenly on Wednesday
afternoon, Kennedy and three of his top
officials resigned unexpectedly, four
State Department officials confirmed.
Assistant Secretary of State for Administration Joyce Anne
Barr, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs
Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director
of the Office of Foreign Missions, followed him out the
door. All are career foreign service officers who have
served under both Republican and Democratic
administrations.
Additionally,
"Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic
Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and
the director of the Bureau of Overseas
Building Operations, Lydia Muniz, departed
454
the same day. That amounts to a near-
complete housecleaning of all the senior
officials that deal with managing the State
Department, its overseas posts and its
people."
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous
departure of institutional memory that
anyone can remember, and that’s
incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David
Wade, who served as State Department
chief of staff under Secretary of State John
Kerry. “Department expertise in security,
management, administrative and consular
positions in particular are very difficult to
replicate and particularly difficult to find in
the private sector.”
There were more: several senior foreign service officers in
the State Department’s regional bureaus have also left their
posts or resigned since the election. But the emptying of
leadership in the management bureaus is more disruptive
because those offices need to be led by people who know
the department and have experience running its
complicated bureaucracies. There’s no easy way to replace
that via the private sector, said Wade.
“Diplomatic security, consular affairs,
there’s just not a corollary that exists
outside the department, and you at least
can afford a learning curve in these areas
where issues can quickly become matters
of life and death,” he said. “The muscle
memory is critical. These retirements are a
big loss. They leave a void. These are very
difficult people to replace.”
Whether Kennedy left on his own volition or was pushed
out by the incoming Trump team is a matter of dispute
inside the department. Just days before he resigned,
Kennedy was taking on more responsibility inside the
department and working closely with the transition. His
departure was a surprise to other State Department
officials who were working with him.
Rogin's conclusion:
"By itself, the sudden departure of the State
Department’s entire senior management
 team is disruptive enough. But in the On the other hand, if Tillerson wanted a real clean slate, he
context of a president who railed against just got it.
the U.S. foreign policy establishment during
his campaign and secretary of state with no
government experience, the vacancies are
much more concerning."
.

455
 Alex Jones' InfoWars Offered White House Credentials
By Tyler Durden
Jan 26, 2017 10:31 AM
Things sure are changing in the White House press corps.
According to a video posted on Wednesday, radio show
host Alex Jones’s website Infowars, which has been
accused of being "conspiracy theory and alt-right" by
much of the established media, has been offered White
House press credentials.
In the clip Jones explains:
Here’s the deal, I know I get White
House credentials, we’ve already been
offered them, we’re going to get them,
but I’ve just got to spend the money to
send somebody there. I want to make
sure it’s even worth it. I don’t want to
just sit there up there like ‘m in the
media, look our people are there.’
People don’t understand this paradigm,
we’re devolving in a good way, power
from the federal government back to the
people, back from the centralized MSM
to the people, just like Trump said in his
speech.
On Monday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said
that four "Skype seats" would be made available to some
journalists who are outside of a 50-mile radius of
Washington, D.C.. It is not known when the Skype seats
will be deployed during daily press briefings.
He contined:
“[Trump]) keeps saying CNN is fake, and
I'm not going to any of your fake news.
What’s CNN doing in the front row, when
[White House press secretary Sean] Spicer
keeps going to them? And then the reporter
yesterday goes, “Oh, maybe Trump wasn’t
456
even elected. That’s why you say there’s
fraud.” So they’re like little kids up there.
These aren’t real journalists. Meanwhile,
it’s just crazy, you should see Breitbart and
Drudge, and also just reporters that are
known to tell the truth from mainstream,
whatever, promoted and put up at the front
of those briefings, to bring up real
questions, not just a battle where they’re
just attacking with fricking lies"
Jones, a supporter of President Trump, is the owner and
operator of popular web sites Infowars.com and
PrisonPlanet.com. He is also the author of "9-11 Descent
Into Tyranny" and "The Answer to 1984 is 1776."
The White House has not confirmed Jones' statement.
Meanwhile, members of the press on the opposite
ideological spectrum were quick to mock the
announcement, starting with Salon which said
"Truthers in the briefing room: Alex Jones
claims Infowars has been offered White
House credentials. Donald Trump has long
been cozy with the notorious conspiracy
theorist, and now it seems to be paying off"
Trump and Jones have a relationship going back a long
time. Despite being notorious for claiming that major
American tragedies were actually part of sinister
government-orchestrated conspiracies — including the
Oklahoma City bombings, the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks, the Sandy Hook elementary school shootings
and the Boston Marathon bombing — Trump has
appeared on Jones’ show, even saying,
“Your reputation is amazing. I will not let
you down.”
Trump has also adopted many of Jones’ own beliefs when
they’re politically convenient for him, such as his current
claim that he would have won the popular vote had it not
been for undocumented immigrants.
One thing is certain: should InfoWars have a presence
during the daily boring White House pressers, it will
certainly boost their Nielsen ratings overnight, something
which to the ad-savvy president is surely first and foremost
on his mind.
 The State Department’s Entire Senior
Administrative Team Just Resigned
By Josh Rogin
January 26 At 11:02 AM
Washington Post senior national security correspondent Karen
DeYoung talks about the unexpected resignations of senior State
Department officials, and what it means for the Trump
administration and international diplomacy. (The Washington Post)
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s job running the State
Department just got considerably more difficult. The entire
senior level of management officials resigned Wednesday,
part of an ongoing mass exodus of senior foreign service
officers who don’t want to stick around for the Trump era.
Tillerson was actually inside the State Department’s
headquarters in Foggy Bottom on Wednesday, taking
meetings and getting the lay of the land. I reported
Wednesday morning that the Trump team was narrowing
its search for his No. 2, and that it was looking to replace
the State Department’s long-serving undersecretary for
management, Patrick Kennedy. Kennedy, who has been in
that job for nine years, was actively involved in the
transition and was angling to keep that job under Tillerson,
three State Department officials told me.
Then suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, Kennedy and
three of his top officials resigned unexpectedly, four State
Department officials confirmed. Assistant Secretary of
State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant
Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and
Ambassador Gentry O. Smith, director of the Office of
Foreign Missions, followed him out the door. All are
career foreign service officers who have served under both
Republican and Democratic administrations.
Kennedy will retire from the foreign service at the end of
the month, officials said. The other officials could be given
assignments elsewhere in the foreign service.
In addition, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic
Security Gregory Starr retired Jan. 20, and the director of
457
the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Lydia Muniz,
departed the same day. That amounts to a near-complete
housecleaning of all the senior officials that deal with
managing the State Department, its overseas posts and its
people.
“It’s the single biggest simultaneous
departure of institutional memory that
anyone can remember, and that’s
incredibly difficult to replicate,” said David
Wade, who served as State Department
chief of staff under Secretary of State John
Kerry. “Department expertise in security,
management, administrative and consular
positions in particular are very difficult to
replicate and particularly difficult to find in
the private sector.”
Addressing a crowd of diplomats at a dinner event Jan. 17, Donald
Trump joked that secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson is finding
his Senate confirmation tougher than anticipated. (AP)
Several senior foreign service officers in the State
Department’s regional bureaus have also left their posts or
resigned since the election. But the emptying of leadership
in the management bureaus is more disruptive because
those offices need to be led by people who know the
department and have experience running its complicated
bureaucracies. There’s no easy way to replace that via the
private sector, said Wade.
“Diplomatic security, consular affairs,
there’s just not a corollary that exists
outside the department, and you can least
afford a learning curve in these areas
where issues can quickly become matters
of life and death,” he said. “The muscle
memory is critical. These retirements are a
 big loss. They leave a void. These are very
difficult people to replace.”
Whether Kennedy left on his own volition or was pushed
out by the incoming Trump team is a matter of dispute
inside the department. Just days before he resigned,
Kennedy was taking on more responsibility inside the
department and working closely with the transition. His
departure was a surprise to other State Department
officials who were working with him.
[‘They never saw this coming’: A Q&A with Kellyanne
Conway]
One senior State Department official who responded to my
requests for comment said that all the officials had
previously submitted their letters of resignation, as was
required for all positions that are appointed by the
president and that require confirmation by the Senate,
known as PAS positions.
“No officer accepts a PAS position with the
expectation that it is unlimited. And all
officers understand that the President may
choose to replace them at any time,” this
official said. “These officers have served
admirably and well. Their departure offers a
moment to consider their accomplishments
and thank them for their service. These are
the patterns and rhythms of the career
service.”
Ambassador Richard Boucher, who served as State
Department spokesman for Colin Powell and Condoleezza
.
458
Rice, said that while there’s always a lot of turnover
around the time a new administration takes office,
traditionally senior officials work with the new team to see
who should stay on in their roles and what other jobs might
be available. But that’s not what happened this time.
The officials who manage the building and thousands of
overseas diplomatic posts are charged with taking care of
Americans overseas and protecting U.S. diplomats risking
their lives abroad. The career foreign service officers are
crucial to those functions as well as to implementing the
new president’s agenda, whatever it may be, Boucher said.
[What’s the method in Trump’s madness?]
“You don’t run foreign policy by making
statements, you run it with thousands of
people working to implement programs
every day,” Boucher said. “To undercut that
is to undercut the institution.”
By itself, the sudden departure of the State Department’s
entire senior management team is disruptive enough. But
in the context of a president who railed against the U.S.
foreign policy establishment during his campaign and
secretary of state with no government experience, the
vacancies are much more concerning.
Tillerson’s job No. 1 must be to find qualified and
experienced career officials to manage the State
Department’s vital offices. His second job should be to
reach out to and reassure a State Department workforce
that is panicked about what the Trump administration
means for them.
 Top State Dept. Officials Exit After Tillerson Visit
By Daniel Halper And Bob Fredericks
January 26, 2017 | 12:12pm

All were long-time staffers who had served under both

Democratic and Republican administrations.

And they weren’t the first to go.

Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Gregory

Starr retired Jan. 20 — the day Trump was inaugurated — and
the director of the Bureau of Overseas Building Operations,
Lydia Muniz, left the same day.

Four top career officials at the State Department left the same day
CNN said they had all gotten letters from the White House telling
Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson paid a visit to Foggy
them their services were no longer needed.
Bottom to introduce himself, officials said Thursday.

“It’s the single biggest simultaneous departure

The four — including Patrick Kennedy, State’s long-time
undersecretary for management, who had been with the
department since 1973 — and the others left on Wednesday.
“As is standard with every transition, the
outgoing administration, in coordination with the
incoming one, requested all politically appointed
officers submit letters of resignation,” acting
State Department spokesman Mark Toner said.
“These positions are political appointments, and
require the president to nominate and the
Senate to confirm them in these roles. They are
not career appointments but of limited term.”
Toner went on to thank those who were canned for their service.
“These officers have served admirably and well.
Their departure offers a moment to consider
their accomplishments and thank them for their
service,” he said.
Kennedy, a nine-year veteran in his last post, had been active in
the transition from John Kerry to the former ExxonMobil chief,
and was said to want to remain in the job.
The Washington Post reported that he and Assistant Secretary of
State for Administration Joyce Anne Barr, Assistant Secretary of
State for Consular Affairs Michele Bond and Ambassador Gentry
O. Smith, director of the Office of Foreign Missions, had all
resigned rather than serve under President Trump.
of institutional memory that anyone can
remember, and that’s incredibly difficult to
replicate,” David Wade, who served as State
Department chief of staff under Kerry, told the
Washington Post.
“Department expertise in security, management,
administrative and consular positions in
particular are very difficult to replicate and
particularly difficult to find in the private sector.”
Ambassador Richard Boucher, the State Department spokesman
for Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, said there’s always
turnover when a new administration takes office and that top
officials work with the new appointees to see who should stay on.
But the mass exodus will make it harder for Tillerson to hit the
ground running, he said.
“You don’t run foreign policy by making
statements, you run it with thousands of people
working to implement programs every day. To
undercut that is to undercut the institution,”
Boucher said.
Meanwhile, the US Border Patrol chief has left the agency that’s
in charge of securing the country’s borders with Mexico and
Canada.
A current and former official told AP that Border Patrol agents
had been informed that Mark Morgan is no longer on the job.

But a source close to the White House denied that.

It was not immediately clear whether Morgan quit or was canned.

“Pat Kennedy was fired. He may be saving face

Morgan’s departure comes a day after Trump announced plans to
and pretending that he resigned but he was let
build a wall at the Mexican border and hire 5,000 Border Patrol
go. The poorly performing senior leaders at
agents.
State will also be pushed out. You should
expect other ‘resignations’ there, too,” the
source told The Post.
459
 At Least Four Senior U.S. State Department
Officials Leave Posts Say Officials
Reuters
January 26, 2017
Getty Images/ Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy
At least four senior U.S. State Department officials are
departing their posts by Friday, a senior department
official told Reuters, leaving vacancies at top policy-
making and management levels.
Republican President Donald Trump's nominee for
Secretary of State, former Exxon Mobil chairman Rex
Tillerson, was approved by the Senate foreign relations
committee. Tillerson, who has yet to be confirmed by the
full Senate, will be under more pressure to fill these senior
positions.
The departures were discussed at State Department
Thursday morning meetings and a statement said all
politically-appointed officers were asked to submit letters
.
460
of resignation by the outgoing administration of Democrat
Barack Obama in coordination with Trump's.
"Of the officers whose resignations were
accepted, some will continue in the Foreign
Service in other positions and others will
retire by choice or because they have
exceeded the time limits of their grade in
service," said a statement by acting State
Department spokesman Mark Toner.
Among those whom Reuters has confirmed are leaving, are
Gregory Starr, Assistant Secretary for State for Diplomatic
Security and Michele Bond, Assistant Secretary for
Consular Affairs.
Thomas Countryman, the acting undersecretary for arms
control and international security, was asked to leave by
Friday, U.S. officials said, as was Patrick Kennedy, under
secretary of state for management.
"This is not unusual, it's not a mass protest
or a show of indignation," said one senior
U.S. official.
Some of those asked to leave by Friday at 5 p.m. were
prepared to stay on "and do their jobs" until replacements
were confirmed, said one of the U.S. officials.
 Al Sharpton Cries Over Trump’s Presidency;
Claims The President Is ‘Not Legitimate’
By: JD Heyes
Date: January 26, 2017
Al Sharpton, a man who has spent his entire life dividing
the country along racial lines while cheating the
government out of tens of thousands of dollars through
delinquent taxes, now claims that our new president is “not
legitimate.”
The charge is fast becoming the angry Left’s new false
narrative. They know this to be untrue, but hope that if
they say it enough times, it will be repeated instinctively
by the uninformed crowd when they are asked anything
about the 2016 presidential election.
As reported by Breitbart, Sharpton elaborated further on
the false narrative, claiming that “the process” by which
Trump was elected – i.e., Russia hacked the election – was
also “not legitimate.”
“I think that there’s no question that the
process that elected him was not
legitimate,” Sharpton said during an
interview on MSNBC, a network that has so
little viewership it had to cancel Sharpton’s
nightly program recently because it had so
few viewers.
Mind you, no one bothered to ask how this “reverend”
divider of the masses and one-time (alleged) FBI snitch
had the expertise to make such a claim. It was also unclear
whether he was just repeating the same lie being told to the
media by careerists within the Deep State who are
#nevertrump fanatics. But we’re talking about asking one
of the same media sources repeating the same CIA-fed lies
that Sharpton again repeated, so we shouldn’t expect any
real probing questions about Sharpton’s expertise.
(RELATED: The only establishment media watchdog you
need is MediaFactWatch.com)
461
“When you look at the now evidence from
the intelligence agencies that there was the
influence from the Russians and involved in
the public discourse at the time of the
election, when you look at those that were
expunged from being able to vote, clearly
the process has serious questions about it,”
our resident intel expert opined. “And to
come from John Lewis, a man who was
beaten on the bridge in Selma, Alabama, to
get the Voting Rights Act that opened up
the voting process to everyone, he has
blood in this. He has some injury in this that
open the voting process up. You should not
take lightly his view at all.”
No one should take anything away from Lewis’ past,
because he stood up for what was right. But that was 50-
plus years ago; today, Lewis – like Sharpton – is nothing
more than a shill for the far Left. Both men are using
worn-out reputations that have no real relevance to today’s
political issues.
That said, it’s important to understand where this narrative
is coming from. Unable to derail Trump during the
campaign, unable to steal his massive Electoral College
vote, and unable to stop him from being inaugurated, the
angry Left has latched onto the phony “Russia hacked the
election” psyop that the Deep State has launched, Cold
War-style, because they don’t have arrows left in their
political quivers to launch at Trump.
Speaking of Lewis, if you recall, this “not a legitimate
president” because he was elected “by an illegitimate
process” began with him, in an interview with NBC News’
Chuck Todd recently. Since then, the belly that roared,
filmmaker Michael Moore, has joined the “not legitimate”
chorus, three chins and all.
None of these hacks are interested in the truth, and none of
them have really sought it. The truth is, there is not one
shred of evidence that Russia could hack the ballots, and
no one in the intelligence community is making that claim
anyway. The actual voting and vote-tallying processes
were not hacked. And there is dispute about whether the
information that came from the Democratic National
Committee and the Clinton campaign released through
WikiLeaks came from Russia or a disgruntled source
inside the DNC. (RELATED: What scam are they
running today? Find out at Hoax.news)
What’s more, no one has come forward
and claimed that any of the damaging
leaked DNC and Clinton data – most of it
emails from Clinton campaign manager
John Podesta – was false. It was all true,
in fact.
What Sharpton and the other Leftist hacks are trying to say
and do would be laughable were it not for the fact that they
.
462
are attempting to alter what will be taught to children in
five or 10 years in school. Those seeking and promoting
the truth are fighting against forces that want school
children in the future to be taught that 2016 was the year
that a foreign government stole America’s democracy by
interfering in the election process.
There is simply no publicly released
information to substantiate that claim.
But at least now you know why lackeys like Sharpton,
Lewis and Moore are saying what they’re saying.
 Can President Trump Overcome Republicans’ Deep
Collusion With Big Pharma, Monsanto
And The Pesticide Industry?
By: Ethan Huff
Thursday, January 26, 2017
During his first press conference after winning the
election, President Donald Trump made some very bold
statements that, generally speaking, are uncharacteristic of
the Republican Party. Rather than kowtow to
pharmaceutical interests as would be expected from an
establishment politician on either side of the aisle, Mr.
Trump actually called drug companies to task for ripping
off Americans, adding that the entire industry is “getting
away with murder” as it currently functions.
These piercing words from the president sent shock waves
throughout the drug industry, which saw massive drops in
stock value almost immediately after they were stated.
Clearly frustrated with the corruption between
pharmaceutical companies and the federal government that
keeps drug prices high, President Trump reiterated what
he’s been saying all along the campaign trail about the
need for reform — a message that was also heralded by
failed Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.
“Pharma has a lot of lobbies, a lot of
lobbyists, a lot of power. And there’s very
little bidding on drugs,” President Trump
remarked from Trump Tower in New York
City. “We’re the largest buyer of drugs in
the world, and yet we don’t bid properly.
We’re going to start bidding. We’re going to
save billions of dollars over a period of
time.”
463
President Trump also criticized the drug industry for
manufacturing drugs in other countries where they’re
cheaper to produce, only to ship them back to the U.S. to
sell to Americans at top dollar. This hallmark of crony
globalism, a major target in the president’s platform all
throughout his campaign, is something that’s most
definitely on the chopping block with the incoming
administration.
“Our drug industry has been disastrous,”
President Trump explained before the
press pool. “They’re leaving left and right.
They supply our drugs but they don’t make
them here, to a large extent. And the other
thing we have to do is create new bidding
procedures for the drug industry, because
they’re getting away with murder.”
(RELATED: Stay informed about Big
Pharma’s illegal practices at
BigPharmaNews.com)
RINO Republican Paul Ryan wants to maintain Big
Pharma monopoly over medicine
Going against an old-guard Republican establishment that
has long favored not only Big Pharma but a host of other
special interest groups, including biotechnology and
chemicals, won’t be an easy task. Top Republican kingpins
like House Speaker Paul Ryan, for instance, are already
challenging President Trump’s remarks, tacitly implying
that the system is working just fine and doesn’t need to be
changed.
In an interview with Mike Allen of Axios, Ryan
emphasized that he wants to “have more conversations”
about the issue to presumably redirect President Trump’s
agenda. He carefully sidestepped the gaping problems
stemming from Big Pharma’s monopolistic control over
medicine, instead offering up rhetoric in favor of
maintaining the status quo. When asked about the
president’s comments that drug companies are “politically
protected, but not anymore,” Ryan remarked:
“I don’t speak like that, generally speaking.
I’m always looking for win-win situations,
 and I believe there’s a lot more we can do
to bring down the price of drugs.”
In other words, Paul Ryan isn’t the type of guy to take a
stand against anything or anyone who pays his salary — in
this case, big money interests like Monsanto and Merck.
It’s the Republican way, perhaps, but not President
Trump’s way, which begs the question: will the president
be able to effectively overcome this deep-seated gravy
train funding Republicans-in-name-only (RINOs) like Paul
Ryan? (RELATED: See news about how everything is
rigged at Rigged.news)
‘Conservative’ nonprofit exposed for pro-Monsanto, pro-
Hillary agenda
Considering the fact that so-called “conservative” groups
often work in lockstep with “liberal” groups to advance the
same agenda — in this case, pushing the special interest
agendas of their mutual donors — accomplishing this feat
could be the biggest challenge of Mr. Trump’s life.
One such group, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI),
was exposed late last year for helping a billionaire donor
for the Hillary Clinton campaign secure — wait for it —
Republican support for failed presidential candidate
Hillary Clinton. Besides the seemingly contradictory
.
464
nature of such a union, the AEI, as revealed by GMWatch,
is closely aligned with biotechnology giant Monsanto.
No matter how you look at all this, President Trump
definitely has his work cut out for him. While the drug
industry is known to make large financial contributions to
candidates from both political parties, historically the
industry has been more focused on funding RINO
Republicans, with the exception of Democrat Hillary
Clinton who received, by far, the most financial support
from Big Pharma during the 2016 presidential election
season.
“Industry PACs have given at least $4.4
million to Republicans and $2.6 million to
Democrats in House Races across the
primary and general elections,” news
organization STAT reported back in
November. “In the most competitive House
contests — those rated as toss-ups or only
leaning toward either party by the Cook
Political Report — pharmaceutical PACs
have given more than $435,000 to
Republicans, a separate STAT analysis
found. By comparison, the committees
have given less than $70,000 to Democrats
in those races.”
 Bombshell: At Least 25 Million Dead
And Fraudulent “Registered Voters” In 2016
Trump Proven Right: Millions Of Dead And Invalid Voters Not
Included In Study Showing 800,000 Illegals For Hillary!
Kit Daniels | Infowars.Com
January 27, 2017
A study revealing that over 800,000 non-
citizens voted for Hillary Clinton doesn’t
account for dead and fraudulent voters,
which accounted for over 25 million
“registered voters” during the 2012
presidential election – and little has
changed since then.
Illegal alien voters combined with dead and “multiple
state” voters could easily explain Clinton’s “popular vote”
margin over Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential
election, especially considering that her “victory” came
from Democratic-controlled counties known for illegal
immigration and loose voter ID laws such as in New York
and California.
“A report by the Pew Center on the States
finds that more than 1.8 million dead
people are currently registered to vote, and
24 million registrations are either invalid or
inaccurate,” NPR reported in 2012, which is
ironic given how NPR is heavily controlled
by Democrats.
And many of the dead, registered voters somehow keep
voting Democrat from beyond the grave, most recently in
Philadelphia, Penn. and Colorado.
It’s also worth noting that the U.S. population has
increased since 2012, meaning that there’s likely
more dead and invalid voters than before.
“…The Pew study found that almost 3
million people are registered to vote in
more than one state,” NPR added.
That’s because when a new resident registers to vote in a
state, officials usually never bother to tell his former state
about the change in voter residency.
465
Under the “catch and release” immigration program by the
Obama administration, illegal aliens were routinely given
bus tickets to travel to other states by immigration
officials, so it was theoretically possible for non-citizens to
register to vote in a border country illegally, then register
to vote in another state after their taxpayer-funded bus
dropped them off.
Clinton won most of the 163 most populous counties in the
US that account for half of the total votes in the election,
including dense urban areas in New York and California,
yet she only won the popular vote by 2.5 million votes,
which reveals the lack of enthusiasm voters had for her in
comparison to Trump – and that Democrats would have
depended more on illegal votes.
A portion of the 24 million invalid voter registrations
combined with a portion of the 1.8 million dead voters and
the over 800,000 known illegal voters could explain the
difference of 2.5 million votes, and it’s worth noting that
the 800,000 figure could be a low, conservative estimate.
That said, a popular vote victory is meaningless; if the
president was elected by popular vote, then both Trump
and Clinton would have campaigned in entirely different
states because only densely population regions of the U.S.
would decide who would become president.
Without the electoral college, the United States of America
would be reduced to the United States of New York and
California, with 48 other vassal states.
Yet notice how Clinton campaigned in other, less
populated states. They knew the popular vote was
meaningless ahead of the election.
However, the popular vote is useful as a barometer for
voter fraud since the most populous countries are also the
most susceptible to election tampering by illegal, invalid
and dead voters.
February 14, 2012 — Approximately 24 million active voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or have significant
inaccuracies, according to the Pew Center on the States. Research in Pew's report, Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient, underscores the
need for registration systems that better maintain voter records, save money, and streamline processes. This is an effort that eight states are
spearheading with Pew’s support.

The report highlights the challenges nationwide:

 At least 51 million eligible citizens remain unregistered—more than 24 percent of the eligible population.
 More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active voters.
 Approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state.
 About 12 million records have incorrect addresses, meaning either the voters moved, or errors in the information make it
unlikely any mailings can reach them.

Since 2010, election officials from several states have been working with Pew on plans to upgrade their voter registration systems using
advanced technology. This new approach consists of three elements:

 Comparing registration lists with other data sources, such as motor vehicle and National Change of Address records.
 Implementing proven techniques and security protocols that use those data sources to better track and identify both inaccurate
records.
 Minimizing manual data entry by establishing ways voters can submit information online.

466
 Trump Argument Bolstered:
Clinton Could Have Received 800,000
Votes From Noncitizens, Study Finds
By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times
Thursday, January 26, 2017
Hillary Clinton is estimated to have collected 81 percent of
noncitizen votes, which may have helped her carry a state,
a researcher says. (Associated Press)
Hillary Clinton garnered more than 800,000 votes from
noncitizens on Nov. 8, an approximation far short of
President Trump’s estimate of up to 5 million illegal voters
but supportive of his charges of fraud.
Political scientist Jesse Richman of Old Dominion
University in Norfolk, Virginia, has worked with
colleagues to produce groundbreaking research on
.
467
noncitizen voting, and this week he posted a blog in
response to Mr. Trump’s assertion.
Based on national polling by a consortium of universities,
a report by Mr. Richman said 6.4 percent of the estimated
20 million adult noncitizens in the U.S. voted in
November. He extrapolated that that percentage would
have added 834,381 net votes for Mrs. Clinton, who
received about 2.8 million more votes than Mr. Trump.
Mr. Richman calculated that Mrs. Clinton would have
collected 81 percent of noncitizen votes.
“Is it plausible that non-citizen votes added
to Clinton’s margin? Yes,” Mr. Richman
wrote. “Is it plausible that non-citizen votes
account for the entire nation-wide popular
vote margin held by Clinton? Not at all.”
Still, the finding is significant because it means noncitizens
may have helped Mrs. Clinton carry a state or finish better
than she otherwise would have.
 The U.S. Plan To Topple
All 7 Countries On Trump’s Refugee Ban List
According To Four-Star General Wesley Clark, Shortly After The Attacks
Of 9/11, The Pentagon Adopted A Plan To Topple The Governments
Of Seven Countries; Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Syria,
Somalia, Sudan, And Iran.
By Darius Shahtahmasebi
January 27, 2017
According to four-star General Wesley Clark, shortly after
the attacks of 9/11, the Pentagon adopted a plan to topple
the governments of seven countries; Iraq, Libya, Lebanon,
Syria, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
According to Reuters, Donald Trump is set to sign an
executive order that would include a temporary refugee
ban and a suspension of visas for citizens of Syria and six
other Middle Eastern and African countries.
The list is expected to include Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. If those countries are starting
to sound familiar, there’s a reason for that.
According to four-star General Wesley Clark, shortly after
the attacks of 9/11, the Pentagon adopted a plan to topple
the governments of seven countries; Iraq, Libya, Lebanon,
Syria, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.
Although such a refugee ban is welcomed by many
frightened Americans due to the overplayed hype that the
media has reported on the threat of refugees sweeping into
Western nations, these Americans cannot turn their
attention away from the hand America has had in creating
these refugees in the first place.
468
Clark’s list of countries is not an irrelevant conspiracy
theory. These countries have seen heavy interference from
the United States in the last decade or so. In 2016, the
country Obama bombed the most was Syria. The United
States was spending approximately $1 billion a year
assisting rebels who have known ties to al-Qaeda, the
majority of whom share ISIS’ core belief system. The U.S.
air war against ISIS has now cost American taxpayers
over $11 billion. Iran is bound to Syria by a mutual
defense agreement and has lost significant personnel in the
battle. Iran has also taken full advantage of poor Afghans,
recruiting them to fight in Syria.
Libya was destroyed in 2011 by NATO powers, an
offensive in which the U.S. played the most integral role.
The U.S. was backing jihadists who fought against the
U.S. in Iraq to topple the Libyan regime (these fighters
were later rebranded as ISIS). Even up until his last day in
office, Obama was still bombing Libya (from Missouri,
believe it or not.)
Obama bombed Somalia throughout his presidency. He not
only relentlessly bombed Yemen, but he also supported the
Saudi-led coalition’s brutal assault on Yemen’s civilian
population. It could be argued that Trump is set to
discontinue these practices; but, so far, he is well on his
track to rapidly pursuing them. In his first weekend since
inauguration, his administration conducted a number of
drone strikes in Yemen with no hint at a reversal of
Obama’s policies, though his approval was not required for
those particular strikes.
Further, is the American public even aware that American
troops are stationed in Sudan? American troops can go
there, but refugees fleeing a brutal conflict can’t come to
the United States?
It’s not really clear why Iran is on the list, other than the
fact that Trump opposes the Iranian nuclear deal and has
a love affair with Israel, Iran’s number one nemesis.
Internally, Iran is not embroiled in any significant military
conflict (for the time being), something Trump may look
to change.
Notable omissions from the refugee ban list include Saudi
Arabia, a country that admitted aiding terrorists as a tool of
foreign policy and that has exported its radical Wahhabism
ideology (incidentally, the majority of the 9/11 hijackers
were Saudis); the United Arab Emirates (where the
majority of the funding for 9/11 passed through); Turkey,
which has been shown to aid ISIS fighters as they travel to
and from Syria; Qatar, which has spent an immense
amount of its vast wealth arming fanatical jihadists to fight
in Syria; and Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda was born.
469
In essence, the countries kept off the list are the ones that
arguably create the problem, yet the countries on the list
are the ones that have to deal with the problem. Sound
fair?
It’s one thing to want to keep your country safe from being
infiltrated by terrorists; it’s another thing to stay silent
about the atrocities your military is committing abroad and
to ignore the numerous suspicious countries that have
escaped such a ban. If your military can go somewhere to
wreak havoc, that nation’s civilians should be allowed to
come to you.
Additionally, keep in mind that Trump’s proposal may also
be illegal.
 How To Know When President Trump Is WINNING …
Just Listen For The Heads Exploding On
The Mentally Ill Left
By: Mike Adams
Date: January 28, 2017
I’ve just posted a short commentary video that reveals how
to know when Trump is WINNING.
470
You almost don’t even have to keep track of exactly what
he’s doing. Just listen for all the screaming (or heads
exploding) on the Left, and you’ll know Trump is doing a
great job for America.
That’s because the radical left is not just mentally ill,
they’re all haters of America, haters of liberty and haters of
truth in news. That’s why they push so much fake news
while constantly attacking President Trump with malicious
smears and “fabricated facts.”
Watch my commentary below to learn why the Left is
going so insane over every single accomplishment of
President Trump — the first president in a long time to
actually attempt to do something positive for our country.
No teleprompters. No makeup. No special wardrobe. Just
independent commentary that isn’t scripted… imagine…
REAL news!
 Guess What Group Plans To “Massively” Resist Voter
Fraud Investigation (Video)
By Voice Of Reason
Saturday, January 28th, 2017
How many times have you been talking to someone, and
you know they’re lying, they know they’re lying, and they
know that you know they’re lying, but yet they keep lying
anyway? What the heck is going on with Democrats these
days? It’s been years since they’ve had any sense, but at
least they’ve always known how maneuver politically.
Democrats know darn well voter fraud has been rampant
over the years (because they’ve made an effort to allow it),
the whole country knows it, Democrats know the whole
country knows it, and yet they’re still insisting voter fraud
is a “myth?” Ok, if voter fraud is a “myth,” then
Democrats have nothing to fear from an investigation, and
it will be the quickest investigation in history, right?
Wrong.
.
471
So far, we’ve known since before Election Day (Wikileaks)
that Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta,
was dumb enough to encourage illegal immigrant voting in
writing. We know that two nonpartisan groups
(VoteFraud.org and watchdog.org) have estimated that
Hillary Clinton got between 3-7 million fraudulent votes.
This week, a new study by a political scientist from Old
Dominion University revealed that approximately 800,000
instances of voter fraud occurred during the 2016
presidential election, of which approximately 81% voted
for Hillary Clinton.
Lastly, we also know the Inspector General of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), John Roth, has
opened an official investigation into Obama and Jey
Johnson using DHS systems to hack various state election
systems AFTER everyone had already voted, but
BEFORE the votes had been certified!
It’s not that there is no evidence of voter fraud, as the
mainstream media would like people to believe. There is
plenty of evidence to suggest that voter fraud is a major
problem, but the corrupt and dishonest mainstream media
refuses to cover it. The video below reviews much of what
IS known about voter fraud at this time, and then it makes
the case for how Cornell William Brooks, president and
CEO of the NAACP, isn’t helping the Democrats by
promising to “massively resist” the investigation.
 How The MSM Spun The
False Russian Narrative
By Roger Stone
January 28, 2017
Excerpted from Roger Stones new book: The Making of
the President.
On July 23, 2015, the Guardian in London reported that
Putin’s approval ratings were at record high levels, with 9
out 10 Russians approving of their president in a poll that
highlighted support for Putin’s strategy of invading Crimea
and Ukraine.22 On July 30, 2015, while he was attending
the British Open, Trump said at a press conference that he
would have no problem working with Putin. “I think I
would get along very well with Vladimir Putin. I just think
so. People say, ‘What do you mean?’ I think I would get
along well with him,” Trump, wearing a red “Make
America Great Again” cap, told a reporter. “He [Putin]
hates Obama, Obama hates him. We have unbelievably
bad relationships. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
She was the worst Secretary of State in the history of our
country. The world blew apart during her reign. Now she
wants to be president.”23
Throughout 2015 and 2016, the New York Times fanned
the flames, building Trump’s initial controversial remarks
into a theory Trump and Putin were working behind the
scenes in a secret conspiracy to defeat Hillary Clinton.
In a press conference held a year later, in Doral, Florida,
on July 27, 2016, Trump said he hoped the Russian
intelligence services would release Hillary Clinton’s
emails that the Democrats were claiming the Russians had
hacked from Hillary Clinton’s private email server while
she was Secretary of State. “Russia, if you’re listening, I
hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are
missing,” Mr. Trump said in an apparent reference to Mrs.
Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be
rewarded mightily by our press.” The New York Times
article reporting on the Doral press conference led with the
following paragraph: “Donald J. Trump on Wednesday
said he hoped Russian intelligence services had
successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and
encouraged them to publish whatever they may have
stolen, essentially urging a foreign adversary to conduct
cyber-espionage against a former Secretary of State.”24
This theme developed into a “meme,” or narrative, Hillary
supporters used throughout the campaign to attack Trump
by claiming Trump was working in coordination with
Russia to the detriment of US national security interests.
At the end of the campaign, the Democratic meme
472
morphed into the narrative pushed by far-left supporters of
Hillary Clinton that Trump won because Russia supplied
“fake news” churned by “alt-right” reporters, including
Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report, Alex Jones of
Infowars.com, a staff of reporters at Breitbart.com and
WND.com with campaign coverage led by Jerome Corsi.
Milo Yianoppolous of Breitbart captured the imagination
of millions of millennial voters drawn to his outrageous
assault, confronting the far-left as an unabashed
conservative homosexual who continued to beat the
mainstream media to the punch with big scoops and
provocative content. Trump’s message, each time I
appeared on Alex Jones, reached more people than it ever
did on Fox News prime time because Jones’ online army
turns in a monstrous following.
The 2016 presidential campaign was the first to be fought
and won on the Internet. Donald Trump mastered the art of
dominating the news cycle simply by posting a Tweet that
was so outrageously compelling that it went viral the
moment it was posted. The journalists at Drudge, Alex
Jones, Breitbart and WND plus radio talk-show hosts Rush
Limbaugh and Michael Savage with their enormously
large and loyal national radio audiences, plus Sean Hannity
almost alone on Fox News for his unwavering support of
Trump, were the backbone of the alternative media support
Trump received from the beginning of his campaign.
Trump voters in Middle America in 2016 turned off
MSNBC and CNN—some even turning off Fox News
itself—as most established radio and television news
personalities persisted in questioning Trump, if not
outright ridiculing his candidacy.
While many other conservative websites and reporters
contributed, Drudge led the charge, posting a top center
headline and photograph on June 16, 2015, the day Trump
declared his candidacy, proclaiming “Donald Goes for
White House.” Increasingly as the campaign progressed,
the real action was not in the traditional mainstream media
or in the polls, both of which were badly biased in favor of
Clinton. In the aftermath of Trump’s victory, the widely
read economics blog ZeroHedge.com posted an article
headlined, “How Matt Drudge Won the 2016 Election.”
The article noted that the news aggregation site
Drudge.com spent much of the 18 months leading to the
general election highlighting polls and stories that
predicted a Trump win. “In an election cycle when just
about everyone got it wrong, Matt Drudge ended up
vindicated,” the ZeroHedge.com article noted.
 “The editor of the massive, conservative
news aggregation site spent much of the
last 18 months leading with those rare polls
and stories that predicted a Trump
victory—meanwhile the Huffington Post,
sometimes called Drudge’s liberal mirror,
gave Hillary Clinton a 90-something
percent chance of winning just hours
before the polls started closing.”25
A much more accurate measure of how completely Trump
was resonating with what Richard Nixon called “the Silent
Majority” was the strong support Trump received on social
media websites like Twitter and Facebook. In all of 2016,
Trump dominated the non-scientific immediate online
polls, with thousands scoring him the victor. To counter
this populist support, the Clinton campaign, like the
Obama campaign in 2008 and 2012, hired surrogates,
commonly called “trolls” or “bots,” as in “robots,” to post
disinformation deemed favorable to Hillary to complicate
Internet threads on social media websites trending
favorable to Trump. But even later, when scientifically
conducted polls produced contrary results, showing Trump
had actually lost a particular debate, it didn’t matter. What
mattered was the hundreds of thousands of Trump
supporters self-motivated to go on-line the minute the
debate ended to register their vote that Trump had won.
Hillary, even after her paid trolls got involved, never
received or deserved that type of online voter action.
What Clinton supporters in the mainstream media failed to
understand was that in creating controversy, Trump was
following a basic principle known to professional political
operatives and campaign advisors—namely, dominate the
media, even if what the media is saying about you is
negative. Clearly, Trump’s controversial statements about
Mexico, McCain, and Putin hurt him among the bi-coastal
elite appalled, for example, that Trump dare speak
.
473
negatively about illegal immigrants, aliens among us that
the elite preferred to call “non-documented guest
workers.” Unlike McCain, who lost to Obama in 2008
after reprimanding radio hosts for daring to mention that
Barack Obama’s middle name was Hussein, for fear of
insulting Muslims, Trump shot from the hip. While Obama
had imposed sanctions on Russia in an attempt to get
Russia to pull out of Ukraine, Trump praised Putin’s
ability to direct an aggressive, but successful military
strategy—something President Obama and Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton had failed to do in the Middle East.
The point is that during the summer of 2015, every cable
news station and every nighttime network news program
broadcast by NBC, ABC, and CBS was preoccupied with
stories discussing Trump. It was possible in July 2015 to
flip channels and find every news station on cable or
satellite television discussing Trump at the same time.
Granted, most of the coverage, even on Fox News, was
negative—in the case of Fox News because the network
appeared to have imposed a bias in favor of GOP
establishment candidates, like Jeb Bush, who were
supported by Republican leaders in New York and
Washington. What seemed clear in the summer of 2015
was that the bi-coastal mainstream media heavily favored
Hillary to win, even to the point of suppressing bad news
that might negatively impact Hillary’s candidacy, while
promoting any news that might cause Trump trouble. But
the point, which should have been obvious to all
experienced political operatives, was that Trump had
managed to dominate all news coverage of the 2016
presidential campaign. Whether the audience loved or
hated Trump, the only thing the American public wanted
to talk about during the summer of 2015 was Trump. The
news dominance Trump was commanding was rivaled in
modern times only by the sensation Barack Obama caused
when he first came on the national scene.
 World Reaction To Trump’s Muslim Ban
By Stephen Lendman
1-28-2017
Temporarily banning immigrants, refugees and asylum
seekers from seven predominantly Muslim countries, Syria
targeted indefinitely, drew harsh responses from world
leaders and others.
A statement from Angela Merkel’s spokesman Steffen
Seibert said
“(t)he chancellor regrets the entry ban
imposed by the US government against
refugees and nationals from certain
countries.”
“She is convinced that even in the
necessarily resolute battle against terrorism
it is not justified to place people from a
certain origin or belief under general
suspicion.”
The German government “will now examine the
consequences” of the ban for German citizens with dual
nationality affected by the decision.
She said it’s “not justified to put people
from specific background or faith under
general suspicion” to combat terrorism.
Canada’s Justin Trudeau tweeted
“(t)o those fleeing persecution, terror & war,
Canadians will welcome you, regardless of
your faith. Diversity is our strength
#WelcomeToCanada.”
A UN Refugee Agency and International Organization for
Migration joint statement said
“(t)he needs of refugees and migrants
worldwide have never been greater and the
US resettlement programme is one of the
most important in the world.”
French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said
“(t)he reception of refugees fleeing the war,
fleeing oppression, is part of our duties.”
During a joint Ankara news conference with Turkish
Prime Minister Binali Yildirim and his UK counterpart
Theresa May, he said
.
474
“(r)egional issues cannot be solved by
closing the doors on people.”
She refused to condemn Trump’s order, saying
“(t)he United States is responsible for the
United States’ policy on refugees.”
UK Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron said
“Britain should put President Trump’s visit
on hold until he stops banning people
purely on grounds of their faith.”
A petition was launched to stop him from coming later this
year. UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn expressed “total
opposition” to his travel ban, saying his visit shouldn’t be
invited until the ban is lifted.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said
“(t)oday is the time for peaceful co-
existence, not the time to create distance
among nations.”
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani blasted Trump’s
order, saying
“(m)aking mention of Iran here under the
pretext of concerns about terrorist acts
sounds more like a joke.”
Trump’s measure shows America is “violent” and “racist,”
contemptuous of human rights. Iranian Foreign Minister
Mohammad Javad Zarif called his EO “the greatest gift to
terrorists and their supporters.”
Yemen’s Houthi Ansarullah movement said
“attempts to classify Yemen and its citizens
as a probable source for terrorism and
extremism are illegal and illegitimate.”
Two unnamed Iraqi MPs condemned Trump’s move. Shia
figure Hashd al-Shaabi called on Baghdad to ban US
nationals from entering Iraq.
Expect lots more figures expressing their views ahead,
including extremists supporting Trump’s order.
 Trump's Promises Before
& After The Election
From Patricia Doyle
1-28-2017
Hello Jeff - This is a comprehensive article. It also shows his
Muslim policy and promises before and after election.
As we stated on the program I am withholding my judgement for
90 days and know that every President does let us down a bit as
promises do change and policy does change after a President
takes office. I hope that, in time, Mr. Trump will not let the
American people down.
This is an excellent article. I have only posted half of it for now
and people can read it in its entirety at the URL below.
Patty
President-elect Donald Trump's policy platform continues
to evolve and change dramatically as he prepares to be
sworn into office, making a complete and detailed
understanding of his governing agenda difficult to discern.
In the two months since being elected, Trump has taken 15
new policy stances on nine different issues.
Call it the post-platform era: the president-elect ran and
won a campaign in which he took 141 distinct policy
position on 23 issues over the course of 511 days. Trump
defended this as being "flexible" and unpredictable,
something he argued the country needs more of to better
represent itself on the world stage. His supporters
championed him as a refreshing break from politicians
with carefully-calculated agendas and voting records to
back them up, while his detractors argued this was a sign
of wildly unprepared and unserious candidate.
In order to better understand the president-elect, we'll track
Trump's new policy pronouncements from Election Day
forward, along with any potential changes and
explanations he offers for such change.
MUSLIM BAN
Trump's most explosive campaign proposal — to
temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the U.S. —
changed rapidly throughout the campaign, taking 15
different forms in total. It was softened — U.S. service
members and citizens would be exempt, the campaign
announced quickly — and later in the primary Trump and
his campaign suggested that country of residence would
play a big role in determining who would be barred from
entry. Still, throughout the election, Trump never
475
disavowed his initial promise to ban people based on their
religion.
1. You know my plans.
Speaking with reporters in late December, Trump
inaccurately argued that his plans were clear.
"You know my plans. All along, I've been proven to be
right. 100% correct. What's happening is disgraceful,"
Trump said when asked about the terror attack in Berlin.
2. Taken alone, being Muslim isn't a trigger for the
Muslim ban.
Former campaign manager turned White House counselor
Kellyanne Conway tried to tie the ban to country of
residence.
"That this would be more strictly tied to
countries where we know they have a
history of terrorism and that this is not a
complete ban," she said.
Shortly afterwards she was pressed on CNN, Conway said
that being Muslim "in and of itself" is not a trigger,
Conway said.
Current position: Being Muslim in a vacuum will not get
you banned. Country of residence might.
OBAMACARE
Trump vowed repeatedly to repeal and replace the
president's signature legislation during his White House
bid, complaining that the coverage was poor and the costs
too high and that he could do something better.
"Repeal and replace with something
terrific," he said in one interview, tweeting
up until the final hours of the election that
he'd repeal and replace it with something
"MUCH less expensive" and "MUCH
better."
1. I do want to keep parts of it, we might amend it
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump
indicated that he wanted to keep the protections for
patients with pre-existing conditions, and the measure that
allows parents to keep their children insured until age 26.
"Either Obamacare will be amended, or
repealed and replaced," Trump told the
Wall Street Journal.
He noted however that there would be no gap between the
repeal of Obamacare and the replacement of it with
something else.
2. Begin to repeal on day one.
Vice President-elect Mike Pence told Congressional
Republicans efforts to repeal Obamacare would begin day
one. It's unclear, however, what if any plan there is to
replace the healthcare bill.
3. Be careful -- don't take on the bill's liabilities when
repealing.
Shortly after Pence indicated that repeal efforts were in the
works, Trump warned Republicans to "be careful" about
taking on the bill -- and its liabilities -- arguing that it
would "fall on its own weight."
Current position: Whatever we do, don't take the blame for
Obamacare.
ENTITLEMENT REFORM
Trump promised repeatedly during his White House bid
not to touch entitlements. "I'm not going to cut Social
Security like every other Republican, and I'm not going to
cut Medicare or Medicaid," he told The Daily Signal in
May, in an article the Trump team put on their own
website under the headline "Why Donald Trump Won't
Touch Your Entitlements."
1. Reform Medicaid and Medicare
Trump's transition website has launched and now promises
reforms to the program, including modernizing Medicare
and offering "flexibility" to states' administering Medicaid
for "innovative" solutions. These are vague references at
reform, but hint at the kind of reforms the rest of his party
-- and particularly House Speaker Paul Ryan -- has long
championed. It also directly contradicts his initial promises
not to touch entitlements.
Current position: Reform Medicaid and Medicare in
unspecified ways.
GAY MARRIAGE
During the Republican primary, Trump said he supported
"traditional" marriage and said he opposed the Supreme
Court ruling that effectively legalized gay marriage and
would consider appointing justices to the Supreme Court
who would favor reversing the decision.
476
1. "Fine" with marriage equality.
Trump said in his first televised interview that he's "fine"
with gay marriage now that it's been settled by the
Supreme Court.
His views are
"irrelevant because it was already settled.
It's law. It was settled in the Supreme
Court. I mean it's done," he said. "It's done.
It-- you have-- these cases have gone to
the Supreme Court. They've been settled.
And- I'm-- I'm fine with that."
NATO
Trump expressed his displeasure of NATO, suggesting he
might not honor the treaty if other member nations do not
pay their fare share.
1. Honor NATO
Obama said Trump expressed a desire to honor the NATO
commitment in their meeting at the White House.
"He expressed a great interest in
maintaining our core strategic
relationships," Obama said of his meeting
with the president-elect. "And so, one of the
messages I will be able to deliver is his
commitment to NATO and the Transatlantic
Alliance."
'DRAIN THE SWAMP'
Trump promised ethics and lobbying reform in October,
vowing to institute a five-year ban on executive branch
officials taking lobbying roles after they leave government
service, and encourage Congress to do the same.
"It's time to drain the swamp in
Washington, D.C," Trump said then,
vowing to make government "honest once
again."
1. Hire lobbyists to run my White House transition.
On November 13th in his first televised post-election
interview, Trump defended his decision to include a slew
of lobbyists in his transition team by arguing that
"everyone down there" is a lobbyist and that he'd "phase it
out."
2. Get rid of the lobbyists!
On November 15th, Vice President-elect Mike Pence
ordered a removal of all lobbyists. It's unclear if all the
registered lobbyists, of which there are at least nine, have
left their positions. On Nov. 17, the transition announced
that candidates being vetted for high posts in the
administration must prove that they are no longer a
lobbyist.
3. Deregistered lobbyists are OK.
Individuals who wished to work with the transition team
were permitted to deregister as lobbyists before securing
employment.
4. Don't repeal the independent ethics office
With little warning, House Republicans announced a plan
to put the Office of Congressional Ethics under partisan
.
control -- effectively killing the Congressional watchdog.
Trump tweeted out his disapproval and the plan eventually
died in the House.
Current position: Lobbyists have to deregister to work with
us, and I won't support putting an independent ethics
watchdog under partisan control.
For entire article read below
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/here-are-
new-policy-stances-donald-trump-has-taken-election-
n684946

477
 Case for Impeachment:
The Muslim Ban Fiasco
By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
January 28, 2017
Clear cut court decisions prove that Trump's exclusion
order is criminal act knowingly in defiance of the Equal
Protection provisions of the Constitution of the United
States, a violation of his oath in office and are utterly
lacking in legal precedent.
I received a call this morning from Frankfurt,
Germany. I was asked advice by an airline security
officer. This was the situation and it will be easy to see
why a German might be utterly flabbergasted at what
had transpired.
An American Air Force pilot, while stationed at Ramstein
AFB, met and married a German girl. They moved to
California, had a daughter with a physical disability. The
mother, originally born in Iran, was a German citizen,
married to an American military officer, with a disabled
child born in America, an American citizen. The mother
has lived in the US for 5 years as a legal resident and is
going through the naturalization process.
You see, marrying an American only gives her legal
residence, citizenship has to be earned, or that’s how it was
before Trump. He changed all that and though this young
lady is a German citizen, she was born in Iran who also
considers her a citizen there. Thus, she is banned from
reentering the United States and is now stuck in Germany
with her child. She is not being allowed to board a plane
though the airline could allow her disabled child to return
without its mother.
As one might guess, the airline is more than a bit not only
confused but uncomfortable with the whole idea. The term
they used was entgeistert.
478
The airline wanted to know if they should put her in a
hotel and wait for the courts to handle the emergency cases
that their legal counsel told them would overturn the
presidential order or to suggest the child fly home alone
and have the father pick it up at the airport. When the
airline called the father, now with the Air National Guard
as a Lt.Col., he expressed concern that me might not be
able to get back into the United States himself, if he were
to fly to Germany to escort the child home.
Is he wrong? Is he overreacting? Is America that crazy?
As of this writing, nearly 200 Americans are in
detention, all of whom are legal residents of the US.
Most are expecting to be released in hours based on
court orders from Saturday night.
Around the world, however, business travelers, university
lecturers, mothers with children or worse still, parents
whose children wait them back in the United States are
stuck around the world. Many are British and Canadian
passport holders who retain, and this is typical, citizenship
in Iraq or Syria or one of the other nations on the current
terrorism list.
As of this writing, 5000 American military and
thousands of contractors currently serving inside Iraq
are now “persona non grata” and await expulsion by
the Iraqi government. Some are serving as frontline
combat advisors in the city of Mosul, involved in street
to street fighting there. You see, Iraq, now on the
“Trump Terror List” is an American ally in the War
on Terror and though Iraq is now deemed a terror
state, American military are serving their in support of
Iraq’s terror government.
The Department of Defense and the State Department have
sent out “red list” notices that Americans in Iraq may be
attacked at any time and could well be detained. Detaining
5000 American troops was last attempted at Khe Sanh in
the Republic of Vietnam, I think the year was 1968.
Johnson was still president then. It took B52 raids, day
and night, to get us out of that one.
The typical “terror suspect” being blocked by Trump is a
medical student attending an American university. Not all
have green cards, which give, under normal circumstances,
the same rights citizens have. Until yesterday, this was the
law in the United States, based on court decisions that
interpret constitutional protections:
“Rights and Responsibilities of a Green Card Holder
(Permanent Resident)
Your Rights as a Permanent Resident
As a permanent resident (green card holder), you have the
right to:
 Live permanently in the United States provided you
do not commit any actions that would make you
removable under immigration law
 Work in the United States at any legal work of your
qualification and choosing. (Please note that some
jobs will be limited to U.S. citizens for security
reasons)
 Be protected by all laws of the United States, your
state of residence and local jurisdictions
Your Responsibilities as a Permanent Resident
As a permanent resident, you are:
 Required to obey all laws of the United States the
states, and localities
 Required to file your income tax returns and report
your income to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service
and state taxing authorities
 Expected to support the democratic form of
government and not to change the government
through illegal means
 Required, if you are a male age 18 through 25, to
register with the Selective Service”
The text above, taken from the USCIS.gov website
expresses constitutional rights, which preclude being kept
out of the country by Donald Trump. That act, done
without approval of congress and in direct violation of
constitutional protections as expressed above is a criminal
violation of US statutes, almost too many to count.
All are impeachable offenses. Wasn’t there something
about being required to “protect and defend the
Constitution of the United States?”
This is a dictatorial abuse of power that a president simply
doesn’t have that denies guaranteed rights and violates due
process. Current court interpretation that has extended
legal personhood to even corporations that now enjoy
constitutional guarantees, has always extended to legal
479
resident aliens as well. We are talking about denial of life,
liberty and property here.
Moreover, as I will demonstrate, even attempts to block
legal residents who travel outside the US from returning,
when those residents were accused of crimes, was
overturned by the court repeatedly:
The courts, including the Supreme Court, when addressing
the case of a noncitizen who fails to fit neatly into the
established legal categories, such as when a lawful
permanent resident who has lived in the United States for
many years — and thus has significant community ties –
travels outside the country and seeks to return. Given the
ties that these lawful permanent residents generally have
to the community, courts frequently have been reluctant to
impose on them the stricter rules applicable to initial
entrants.
In Rosenberg v. Fleuti (1963) a lawful permanent resident
from Switzerland visited Mexico for a few hours and, upon
his return, was charged with being excludable because he
had committed a “crime involving moral turpitude” before
he left the country; the U.S. government later claimed that
he was also excludable because he was homosexual. To
avoid a harsh result, as well as to avoid deciding difficult
constitutional questions, the Supreme Court interpreted the
immigration statute to mean that Fleuti’s “innocent,
casual, and brief” departure from the United States was
not “meaningfully interruptive” of his lawful permanent
residence and thus he was not seeking “entry” (and thus
admission) into the country. Under the Court’s reasoning,
Fleuti therefore could not be denied admission on the
exclusion grounds applicable to initial entrants.
The Case of Panagis Vartelas
In 1979, Panagis Vartelas, a native of Greece, came to the
United States on a student visa to attend Queens College.
After marrying a U.S. citizen in 1985, he became a lawful
permanent resident in 1989. Vartelas and his wife, who
later divorced, had two U.S. citizen children. He owned
an auto body shop in Queens, New York. After his arrest
on charges that he had assisted his business partner in
preparing counterfeit traveler’s checks – conduct for
which he did not receive any economic benefit, he pleaded
guilty in 1994 to conspiring to make or possess a
counterfeit security in violation of federal law and was
sentenced to imprisonment for four months.
In 1996, Congress added Section 101(a)(13)(C)(v) to the
INA. That statute provides that a lawful permanent
resident who returns from a trip out of the United States
“shall not be regarded as seeking an admission” unless he
“has committed an offense identified in” Section 212(a)(2)
of the INA, which includes crimes involving moral
turpitude. The change in the law helped lawful permanent
residents without criminal convictions who traveled
abroad because it did not treat them as seeking admission
(and thus like initial entrants subject to the inadmissibility
grounds). The amendment was no help to Vartelas,
however. Because counterfeiting is a crime of moral
turpitude, a ground for inadmissibility, Vartelas was
inadmissible under Section 101(a)(13)(C)(v) of the INA.
On January 29, 2003, Vartelas returned to the United
States from a week-long trip to Greece, where he had gone
to assist his parents with their business. An immigration
inspector questioned him about his 1994 criminal
conviction. Vartelas later was served with a notice to
appear for removal proceedings on the ground that he was
inadmissible as an alien who sought entry into the United
States after being convicted of a crime of moral turpitude.
Under the applicable law, he would not have been subject
to deportation if he had remained in the United States and
had not left the country to visit his parents in Greece.
The immigration court ordered Vartelas removed from the
United States. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
agreed. The Second Circuit denied the petition for review
of the BIA ruling. The court of appeals agreed with the
Board that the 1996 amendments had abrogated the
Court’s holding in Rosenberg v. Fleuti. The Second
Circuit further concluded that application of Section
101(a)(13)(C) (v) to Vartelas’s 2003 trip to Greece was
not impermissibly retroactive. In so doing, the court of
appeals recognized that its holding was contrary to that of
the Fourth and Ninth Circuits.
Cert. petition
Identifying the split in the circuits on the question,
Vartelas filed a pro se petition for writ of certiorari in the
Supreme Court. The U.S. government opposed the
petition: in addition to defending the Second Circuit’s
application of the statute, it argued that “the issue is of
limited significance, as it involves the applicability of a
statutory repeal and amendment that occurred more than
15 years ago and has precipitated only a handful of
cases.” The Court granted certiorari.
Merits briefs
In his brief on the merits, Vartelas argues that the
application of the 1996 amendment to his case is
unconstitutionally retroactive under the Court’s 1996
decision in Landsgraf v. USI Film Products . Assuming
that the 1996 amendments abrogate the Court’s holding in
480
Rosenberg v. Fleuti, he challenges the Second Circuit’s
retroactive application of Section 101(a)(13)(C)(v). If the
Court concludes that the section does not apply, Vartelas
can then argue under Rosenberg v. Fleuti that his trip to
Greece was not “meaningfully interruptive” of his
presence in the United States, such that he would not be
subject to the inadmissibility grounds.
Petitioner contends that, under the test articulated by the
Court in Landsgraf, Section 101(a)(13)(C)(v) should not
be applied retroactively to lawful permanent residents, like
him, who committed offenses before 1996. First,
Congress did not clearly state that the statutory provision
applies retroactively. Second, if applied to lawful
permanent residents who committed offenses before its
enactment, Section 101(a)(13)(C)(v) would impose a
substantial new penalty upon them for their pre-1996
offenses that would be contrary to their reasonable
reliance on the state of the law when they pleaded guilty.
Relying on the language of Section 101(A)(13)(C)(v), the
U.S. government contends that it means that a lawful
permanent resident who has left the country and returns is
an applicant for “admission” if he or she has “committed
an offense” that would constitute grounds for
inadmissibility. Vartelas’s criminal conviction thus falls
within the statute, and he can be denied admission. The
Second Circuit correctly held, the government argues, that
the 1996 amendment applies to all returning aliens,
including those convicted of crimes before 1996.
Moreover, it contends, the Landsgraf test does not apply.
First, the statute applies only to non-citizens who engage
in conduct – travel outside the United States – after the
passage of the new law. The government further
emphasizes that non-citizens have no vested right to enter
or reenter the United States, and “Congress possesses
plenary power to regulate immigration by preventing
aliens from entering the United States.” The government
bolsters it argument by contending that non-citizens could
not have reasonably relied on pre-1996 law in deciding to
commit crimes.
Violating oath of office, endangering American’s
overseas, not a crime but idiocy, but systematically
denying constitutional rights to resident aliens which
according to court decisions endangers them, doing so
knowingly in a usurpation and abuse of power is an
impeachable offense and an act against the United
States.
 Media Talking Heads Continue
To Call For President Trump’s Murder
Calls To Assassinate President Trump Continue
Throughout Corporate Media
By Alex Thomas -
01.29.2017 @10:43 PM EST

(INTELLIHUB) — Despite the fact that Donald Trump is
now the sitting president of the United States, multiple
corporate media talking heads have continued to openly
call for his actual assassination.
The latest stunning example comes in the form of a Tweet
put out by author and Sunday Times columnist India
Knight in which she publicly whines about the fact that the
assassination of the American president is apparently
taking too long for her liking.
The assassination is taking such a long
time.
— India Knight (@indiaknight) January 28,
2017
Additionally, before the inauguration, many in the
alternative media wondered if the CIA itself was going to
assassinate the incoming president, especially after new
Senate minority leader Charles Schumer literally warned
Trump that the Central Intelligence Agency was coming
after him.
“It isn’t just that Donald Trump routinely
thumbs his nose at the establishment,
insults media figures he sees as unfair and
bucks conventional wisdom,” wrote Mac
Slavo.

As Breitbart reported,

“During a days-long invective against the

newly inaugurated President, on Twitter in
which Knight called Mr Trump a “moron”,
“mad”, “needy”, and an “arse”, among other
things, before telling him to “shut up”, she
mused “the assassination is taking such a
long time.”
“It is that President-elect Trump is defying
the will of the deep state, military industrial
Knight also seems to be proud of her message promoting
complex base of ultimate power in the
murder as she hasn’t taken it down nor has she apologized
United States. That is why he is treading
despite multiple Twitter users calling her out.
dangerous waters, and risks the fate of
JFK.”
Unfortunately, this is not even the first public corporate
media call for Trump’s assassination this week as the
Slavo went on to detail the fact that Trump seems to
editor and publisher of the German newspaper Die Zeit,
actually be conducting the business of the presidency as if
Josef Joffe, also recently floated the idea of murder as a
he were the man in charge, rather than looking to the
means to stop Trump’s anti-globalist agenda.
establishment and their deep state bosses for guidance on
key issues as every president since Kennedy has.
During a segment which features callers, Joffe interrupted
another guest who was responding to a question about
“It is one thing to play captain, but another
impeaching Trump by saying, “Mord im Weißen Haus
to imagine that you steer the ship. They are
zum Beispiel,” or “murder in the White House for
happy for Trump to take all the prestige
example.”
and privileges of the office; but not for him
to cut into the big business of foreign
conflict, the undercurrent of all American
481
 affairs, the dealings in death, drugs, oil and One can imagine that these public calls for Trump’s death
weapons, and the control of people through by people within the corporate media are yet more signals
a manipulation of these affairs,” Slavo to the deep state that it is time to take him out. It is up to
continued. the American people to not only expose these disgusting
calls for murder, but also hold those that make them
“If President Trump takes his rogue
accountable by boycotting the publications who pay them.
populism too far, he will suffer the wrath of
the same people who took out Kennedy…
there are some things that are not tolerated
by those who are really in charge.”
.

482
 Senate Democrats Bash Trump's Immigration Ban;
Emotional Schumer Vows Fierce Hill Opposition
Foxnews.Com
Published January 29, 2017
Senate Democrats on Sunday attacked President Trump’s
recently imposed ban on immigration from several mostly-
Muslim countries -- calling the order unconstitutional and
seizing on some refugees and green card holders being
detained this weekend at U.S. airports to fuel their political
outrage.
“He has established a target of refugees,”
Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the Senate’s
second-ranking Democrat, told “Fox News
Sunday.”
Trump on Friday issued an executive order that includes a
120-day suspension of the U.S. refugee program and a 90-
day ban on travel to the United States by citizens of Iraq,
Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
Durbin spoke after a hectic Saturday at New York’s John.
F. Kennedy International Airport and other airports across
the country -- where dozens of refugees or people with
green cards were detained or stopped for additional
vetting.
“They just sprung this on us,” Durbin said
about the executive order. “Refugees are
the most carefully vetted visitors who come
into this country.”
Durbin also thanked a Brooklyn judge (the first of several
federal judges across the country) who late Saturday issued
emergency orders to temporarily bar the administration
from deporting people from the seven countries.
Top White House officials late Saturday and early Sunday
rushed to defend the program and pointed out that
483
President Obama identified the seven countries from which
immigration has been banned.
“These are countries that have a history of
training, harboring, exporting terrorists,”
Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the
president, said twice on “Fox News
Sunday.”
White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said on NBC’s
“Meet the Press” that 75 to 80 percent of Americans agree
with the policy change, amid terror attacks in the United
States and elsewhere around the world in which the
perpetrators have been linked to such countries.
“We don't want people that are traveling
back and forth to one of these seven
countries that harbor terrorists to be
traveling freely back and forth between the
United States and those countries,” Priebus
said.
Hours after Durbin spoke, Senate Majority Leader Chuck
Schumer, at a press conference, vowed to fight the
executive order “with every fiber of my being.”
The New York lawmaker also argued that Trump’s order
was “unconstitutional” and vowed Senate Democrats
would try, in the GOP-controlled Congress, to reverse the
order.
“Mr. President, I’m here to tell you that I will
fight this,” said Schumer, who sniffled back
tears as he stood alongside several
children and adult immigrants impacted by
the ban.
Trump also faces public opposition from at least a handful
of congressional Republicans including Sens. Jeff Flake, of
Arizona; Ben Sasse, of Nebraska, and Rob Portman, of
Ohio.
"This was an extreme vetting program that
wasn't properly vetted," Portman said
Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."
 Team Trump Defends 'Extreme Vetting' At Airports As
Priebus And Spicer Say Just 0.0033 Per Cent Of
International Arrivals Were Stopped – And
Conway Reminds Americans That 9/11
Victims' Kids Will Never See
Their Parents Again!
 Administration Officials Argue That Just 109 Of The 325,000 International Arrivals On
Saturday Were Detained – A Rate Of 1/30 Of 1 Per Cent
 Kellyanne Conway Revealed That That Number Grew Only To 0.1 Per Cent If Those Who
Were Prevented From Boarding Aircraft In Other Countries Are Included
 Only 'A Couple Dozen' Were Held For Further Questioning In The U.S., White House Chief
Of Staff Reince Priebus Said
 Conway Scoffed At Protesters' Complaints About Temporarily Splitting Up Families At
Airports, Saying Children Of 9/11 Victims Will Never See Their Parents Again
 Press Secretary Sean Spicer Said There Are 46 Muslim-Majority Countries Not Targeted By
Trump's Executive Order, And The Seven Included Nations Were All Chosen By The
Obama Administration
By David Martosko, Us Political Editor For Dailymail.Com
Published: 12:07 EST, 29 January 2017 | Updated: 16:07 EST, 29 January 2017

The Trump administration put on a full-court press
Sunday morning to defend Friday's executive order that
temporarily closed the U.S. borders to people from seven
terror-prone countries.
came into the United States' on Saturday,
Priebus said on the CBS 'Face the Nation'
program.
'About 109 of those people were detained
for further questioning because they came
from the identified seven countries that the
Obama administration and both houses of
Congress have identified as being
countries that harbor and train terrorists.
They were asked questions,' he said.

White House chief of staff Reince Priebus, press secretary

Sean Spicer and chief counselor Kellyanne Conway all
emphasized on political talk shows the tiny sliver of
arriving passengers who were caught in the
administration's first 'extreme vetting' dragnet.
'Yesterday, what people need to
understand is that 325,000 foreign travelers
White House chief of staff Reince Priebus revealed
Sunday that only 1/30 of 1 per cent of international arrivals
to the U.S. the day before were detained for questioning in
the wake of President Donald Trump's 'extreme vetting'
executive order

484
 the American public from would-be
terrorists.
'It's a screening process that they'll go
through,' Conway protested. 'If they're not
dangerous, if they are not a threat, then ...
their situations will be handled on a case-
by-case basis.'
'You know, I was stopped many times –
weren't you? – after 9/11. I didn't resemble,
or share a name with, or be part of any kind
of terrorist conspiracy, but this is what we
Senior counselor Kellyanne Conway compared the plight do to keep the nation safe.'
of children whose parents were caught in Saturday's
dragnet to those whose mothers and fathers were killed on
9/11

'The vast majority of all those people were

released. About a couple dozen people
remained for further questioning. And my
suspicion is those people will move on as
long as they're not dangerous. And
perhaps a couple of them will be further
detained because it's determined that
they're dangerous for this country.'
'This Week' host Martha Raddatz declared
Protests broke out at major U.S. international airports on that the 109 people who were detained
Saturday after a few incoming refugees were detained. were 'probably Muslims'
Federal judges ruled quickly that those who had already
been cleared to enter the U.S. before Trump signed his
executive order could be allowed to stay.

Trump defended his program Sunday morning on Twitter,

writing that

'[o]ur country needs strong borders and

extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is
happening all over Europe and, indeed, the
world - a horrible mess!'

Press secretary Sean Spicer said there are 46 Muslim-

majority countries that Trump's order didn't address,
responding to Raddatz

Many protesters on Saturday told reporters that families

were being split apart as incoming travelers were detained
by Customs and Border Protection officers.
Kellyanne Conway told 'Fox News Sunday' that the overall
number of people affected – including those who were 'This whole idea that they're being
prevented from boarding airplanes bound for the U.S., still separated and ripped from their families,
doesn't reach 1/10 of 1 per cent of the total. it's temporary,' Conway protested.

'You're talking about 300 and some who
have been detained or are prevented from
gaining access to an aircraft in their home
countries and must stay for now,' she said,
calling it 'a small price to pay' for protecting
She contrasted their situations with
'the over 3,000 children who will be forever
more separated from the parents who
perished on 9/11.'

485
Spicer, too, insisted that
'there's 325,000 people from foreign
countries that traveled into the united
states yesterday. There were 109 people
that this actually addressed.'
go there and do anything that would cause
our nation harm,' Spicer explained.
A pained Raddatz retorted:
'109 people, probably Muslims.'

He appeared with ABC anchor Martha Raddatz on 'This
Week.'
'This really comes down to 109 people who
are all being processed through the system
to make sure that when they've gone out of
the country – gone somewhere that is one
of those seven countries – and coming
back, that they've done so and not tried to
But Spicer responded that
'there are 46 other countries with muslim
populations that are not part of this. And I
think that's an important thing to note.'
Looking at his notes, Spicer rattled off Algeria, Jordan,
Kuwait, Oman and the United Arab Emirates as examples.

486
 Conway Defends Trump Immigration Ban,
Ripped Press 'A New One' Over Bias
By Joseph Weber
Published January 29, 2017

She said Trump is privy to intelligence reports that critics

and others have not seen and suggested the list could
change.

“They can’t have it both ways on Trump,”

she said. “The president and Congress will
always have information we do not."

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Sunday

defended President Trump’s order to temporarily ban
immigration from seven mostly-Muslim nations -- and
deflected criticism over countries like Saudi Arabia and
Pakistan not being included in the ban.

“These are countries that have a history of

training, harboring, exporting terrorists,”
Conway, counselor to the president, told
“Fox News Sunday.” “We can’t keep
pretending and looking the other way.”
Conway said the Obama administration and Congress
essentially came up with the list of seven, citing the
Terrorist Prevention Act of 2015.
A federal judge on Saturday evening issued an emergency
order temporarily barring the administration from
deporting people from those countries.
Conway argued Sunday that the Brooklyn judge who
issued the order is a President Obama appointee and that
the judge’s order doesn't impact the thrust of Trump’s
executive order -- preventing dangerous people from
coming into the country, not detaining them.
“The upside (is) greater protection of our
borders, our people. That’s a small price to
pay,” said Conway, arguing the ban
impacts just roughly 1 percent of such
travelers.
In the wide-ranging interview 10 days into the Trump
administration, Conway also attempted to explain why
such countries as Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia were not included in the ban.
487
Conway again on Sunday criticized the media for what she
suggested is unfair coverage of the administration. And she
questioned why news organizations haven’t fired the
pundits, columnists, pollsters and others who failed to
foresee Trump’s victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.
"It’s a colossal failure that nobody wants to
talk about,” she said.
On her back-and-forth with reporters over
such issues, Conway said, “I ripped them a
new one.”
Conway said Trump’s controversial plan to build a wall
along the U.S.-Mexico border will not spark a destructive
trade war between nations.
She declined to say whether Trump’s nominee to fill a
vacant Supreme Court seat will attempt to overturn Roe v.
Wade, the high court’s landmark case on abortion.
“That will come up in a person’s
[confirmation] hearings,” said Conway,
acknowledging that Trump is a pro-life
president. “They will be asked about Roe v.
Wade obsessively.”
 What Trump's Executive Order
On Immigration Does—And Doesn't Do
The Order Has Caused Chaos; White House Statements
Haven’t Clarified What’s Going On.
Krishnadev Calamur
Jan 29, 2017
Updated on Sunday, January 29, at 6:53 p.m.
President Trump signed on Friday an executive order that
severely restricts immigration from seven Muslim
countries, suspends all refugee admission for 120 days,
and bars all Syrian refugees indefinitely. The order has
been widely criticized and praised—but it led to massive
protests at several airports across the country where people
with valid documentation were detained. Legal challenges
against those detentions were successful. The
administration’s response Sunday only made the situation
more unclear.
Here’s what the executive order does and doesn’t do, the
challenges to it, and how the Trump administration
responded.
Who is not affected?
The executive order applies only to non-U.S. citizens, so
anyone with U.S. citizenship—whether that person in
natural-born or naturalized—is not affected. But on
Sunday, Reince Preibus, the White House chief of staff,
said on NBC’s Meet the Press that Customs and Border
Patrol (CBP) agents would have the “discretionary
authority” to question U.S. citizens coming from the seven
countries. CBP agents have had that authority even before
Friday’s executive order.
488
“I would suspect that if you’re an American
citizen traveling back and forth to Libya,
you’re likely to be subjected to further
questioning when you come into an
airport,” he said.
Who is affected?
For 120 days, the order bars the entry of any refugee who
is awaiting resettlement in the U.S. It also prohibits all
Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. until further notice.
Additionally, it bans the citizens of seven majority-Muslim
countries—Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, and
Yemen—from entering the U.S. on any visa category.*
On Saturday this included individuals who are permanent
residents of the U.S. (green-card holders) who were
traveling overseas to visit family or for work—though a
senior administration official said their applications would
be considered on a case-by-case basis. The official also
said green-card holders from those countries who are in the
U.S. will have to meet with a consular officer before
leaving the U.S.
News reports suggested the White House overruled the
Department of Homeland Security’s recommendations on
excluding green-card holders from the executive orders.
Preibus, on Meet the Press, denied that, then appeared to
suggest that the order won’t affect permanent residents
going forward, but when pressed appeared to contradict
himself.
“We didn’t overrule the Department of
Homeland Security, as far as green-card
holders moving forward, it doesn’t affect
them,” he said. But when pressed by
Chuck Todd, the show’s host, on whether
the order affected green-card holders, he
replied: “Well, of course it does. If you’re
traveling back and forth, you’re going to be
subjected to further screening.”
On Sunday evening, John Kelly, secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security, offered more definitive
guidance.
“In applying the provisions of the
president’s executive order, I hereby deem
the entry of lawful permanent residents to
be in the national interest,” he said in a
statement. “Accordingly, absent the receipt
of significant derogatory information
indicating a serious threat to public safety
and welfare, lawful permanent resident
status will be a dispositive factor in our
case-by-case determinations.”
The order also targets individuals of those countries who
hold dual citizenship with another country. For instance,
an individual who holds both Iraqi and Canadian
citizenships—though the U.K. foreign secretary said the
U.S. had assured him it didn’t apply to U.K. nationals.
It does not apply to individuals who hold U.S. citizenship
along with citizenship of another country—though a CBP
agent can presumably question such a person based on his
or her discretion.
Why were those seven countries chosen?
Trump had made national security a centerpiece of his
election campaign—at one point calling for a “total and
complete” ban on all Muslims coming to the U.S.
Although the executive order does not do that, Sean
Spicer, the White House spokesman, said on ABC’s This
Week that the president “hit the ground running, had a
flurry of activity, to do exactly what he said he was going
to do.”
Spicer noted that the seven counties put on the list were
chosen by the Obama administration. Indeed, it has its
roots in the visa-waiver program. The U.S. allows the
citizens of more than 30 countries to visit for short stays
without a visa under this program. But that visa waiver
does not apply if a citizen of an eligible country has
visited—with some exceptions—Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen on or after March 1,
2011—under measures put in place by the Obama
administration. Those individuals must apply for a visa at a
U.S. consulate. These seven countries are listed under
section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12) of the
U.S. code, and it is this code that Trump’s executive order
cited while banning citizens of those nations.
What is the impact?
The number of permanent residents from these countries is
relatively small. For instance, 1,016,518 green cards were
issued in 2014. Of these, 19,153 went to Iraqis and 11,615
to Iranians, according to the Department of Homeland
489
Security’s data. These two countries make up the
overwhelming majority of U.S. permanent residents from
among the seven nations, which together have 500,000
permanent resident in the U.S., according to ProPublica.
But the seven nations, as I reported this week, also account
for 40 percent of U.S. refugee intake.
Numbers, however, seldom tell the whole story. There
have been multiple reports since the executive order was
signed of people being prevented from boarding flights;
refugees, who had gone through the years-long process
before being approved to come to the U.S., stranded in
third countries; of Iraqis who had worked for years with
the U.S. military being denied entry; of Iranian students
stuck overseas; of U.S. tech companies recalling its foreign
workers because of the possible impact. And there have
been protests against the order at airports across the
country, including at New York’s JFK International
Airport and Dulles Airport outside Washington, D.C. , and
the Los Angeles International Airport where lawyers,
demonstrators, and the media descended to witness the
order’s impact.
Is this a Muslim ban?
Technically, no. The ban includes seven majority Muslim
countries, but by no means are these states the most
populous Muslim countries, nor are they among the top
sources of Muslim immigration to the U.S., nor have they
produced terrorists in the same numbers as other Muslim
countries not on the list. Indeed, Muslims from Saudi
Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and other countries can still visit
the U.S.
Still, advocacy groups challenging the order say a Muslim
ban is precisely what it amounts to. Indeed, they cited
former the words New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s
comments Saturday on Fox News. Giuliani said that
Trump had asked for a “Muslim ban,” but one that was
done legally. He said he and a panel of experts “focused
on, instead of religion, danger.”
“The areas of the world that create danger
for us, which is a factual basis, not a
religious basis,” he said. “Perfectly legal,
perfectly sensible.”
He went onto say the ban was "not
based on religion.”
“It’s based on places where there are
substantial evidence that people are
sending terrorists into our country,” he said.
“What we’ve seen here is stunning,” David
Leopold, a Cleveland-based immigration
lawyer who is a past president of the
American Immigration Lawyers
Association, said on a conference call
Saturday with reporters. “No president ever
 ever has used the authority and statute of
the law to ban people based on their
religion, ban people based on their
nationality.”
He said President Carter’s ban on Iranians in 1980 after the
Islamic revolution
“barred certain classifications, not the
whole country.”
Is there legal action?
Yes. Judges in four cities—Alexandria, Virginia; Boston;
New York; and Seattle—ruled against the detention of
individuals at airports—in cases filed by the ACLU and
others. The rulings appear to be limited to those people
already at U.S. airports or in transit. They do not appear to
say anything about the legality of the president’s actions.
DHS said it would comply with the orders—and some,but
not all, of the people being detained at airports were
allowed to leave.
.
490
The rulings were in response to legal challenges filed
Saturday by the ACLU on behalf of two Iraqis who were
detained at JFK Airport. The group also filed what’s
known as a motion for class certification, which would
allow it to represent others who say they were detained at
airports and other ports of entry to the U.S. But there may
be challenges ahead.
Indeed, Trump has broad discretion under the law to bar a
class of person deemed detrimental to the U.S. from
entering the country. Leopold, the immigration lawyer,
said the issue will have to be resolved by the courts.
“The problem we’ve got there,” Leopold
said, “ is that this is unprecedented.”
* This article originally states that the ban did not extend
to non-Muslims from the seven countries; the ban extends
to all citizens of those countries. We regret the error.
Trump Says Top Priority Is To 'Protect And Serve' America
Amid Backlash Over Extreme Vetting
By Joseph Weber
Published January 29, 2017
President Trump’s order to suspend the country’s refugee
program and temporarily ban immigration from seven
mostly-Muslim nations erupted Sunday into a full-scale
political battle -- with Trump and top aides defending the
move amid nationwide protests and congressional
Democrats vowing a relentless Capitol Hill fight to undo
the order.
“America is a proud nation of immigrants,
and we will continue to show compassion
to those fleeing oppression. But we will do
so while protecting our own citizens and
border,” Trump said Sunday afternoon.
“This is not a Muslim ban, as the media is
falsely reporting. … My first priority will
always be to protect and serve our country,
but as president I will find ways to help all
those who are suffering.”
Trump issued the statement as hundreds of protesters
marched in Washington and in other cities across the
country to protest the president's self-described “extreme
vetting” -- which resulted this weekend in dozens of
foreign visitors and some legal permanent U.S. residents
being detained at domestic airports.
Earlier in the day, Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer, D-N.Y., staged a press conference with some
immigrant children and adults impacted by the bans and
vowed to fight them on Capitol Hill “with every fiber of
my being.”
Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she would
introduce two bills Monday. One of the bills would rescind
Trump's order, while the other would give Congress
greater oversight of the president's immigration authority.
491
And California Democratic Rep. Lou Correa said the
executive orders on illegal immigration “directly challenge
the right to due process under the Constitution” and that
he’ll introduce legislation to fund legal aid to those who
are “targeted.”
Congressional Democrats led by Schumer, who said he’s
already appealed to Homeland Security Secretary John
Kelly, will have a difficult task getting any kind of
measure through the Republican-control Congress that
would reverse the executive order.
“I doubt many Arkansans or Americans
more broadly object to taking a harder look
at foreigners coming into our country from
war-torn nations with known terror
networks. I think they’re wondering why we
don’t do that already,” said Arkansas GOP
Sen. Tom Cotton, who as an Army officer
served combat tours in Afghanistan and
Iraq.
However, Trump is facing opposition for some
congressional Republicans, including Reps. Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen, of Florida, and Barbara Comstock, of Virginia,
along with Sens. Ben Sasse, of Nebraska, Lindsey
Graham, of South Carolina, and John McCain, of Arizona.
"It is clear from the confusion at our airports
across the nation that President Trump's
executive order was not properly vetted,”
Graham and McCain said in a joint
statement. "Ultimately, we fear this
executive order will become a self-inflicted
wound in the fight against terrorism.”
Trump, a Republican, tweeted in response that the
statement was “wrong” and that the senators were “sadly
weak on immigration.”
The executive order Trump issued Friday imposes a 120-
day suspension of the U.S. refugee program and a 90-day
ban on travel to the United States by citizens of Iraq, Syria,
Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
On Saturday afternoon -- as reports surfaced about foreign
visitors being detained at New York’s Kennedy airport and
elsewhere -- Trump said his plan to prevent Islamic
terrorists and others for attacking the United States was
“working out very nicely.”
But by Saturday evening, a federal judge in Brooklyn
issued a temporary halt on the part of the executive order
that allows the Trump administration to deport people
from the largely-Muslim countries.
“Our country needs strong borders and
extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is
happening all over Europe and, indeed, the
world - a horrible mess!,” Trump tweeted
Sunday morning.
Meanwhile, Kellyanne Conway, counselor to the president,
told “Fox News Sunday”:
“These are countries that have a history of
training, harboring, exporting terrorists.”
And White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus argued
that as many as 80 percent of Americans agree with the
policy change, while dismissing media reports about
chaotic scenes Saturday at U.S. airports.
“I do not think there was any chaos,” he
told NBC’s “Meet the Press,” while
predicting more people will be detained and
offering “no apologies.”
.
492
Priebus also seemed to suggest that foreign arrivals who
have so-called “green cards” that allows them to
permanently live and work in the United States will not be
subject to the additional screenings.
“As far as green-card holders going
forward, it doesn’t affect them,” he told
NBC.
Kelly said later that allowed green card holders into the
country was "in the national interest” of the country.
And Tennessee GOP Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., chairman
of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also said
Trump's order had been "poorly implemented, especially
with respect to green card holders."
Trump, Conway and Priebus argued Sunday that the seven
countries were in fact identified by President Obama in
2015 and pointed out that roughly 40 other such nations
included Afghanistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia were not
part of the travel ban.
Trump is also facing opposition from attorneys general in
15 states and the District of Columbia, who issued a
statement Sunday condemning his order as
“unconstitutional, un-American and
unlawful.”
 Trump Idea-Man Steve Bannon
X-Rays NY Times’ Skull: Empty
By Jon Rappoport
January 29, 2017
A few days ago, the NY Times interviewed Trump’s
special counselor, Steve Bannon. Bannon wasted no time:
“The media should be embarrassed and
humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just
listen for awhile.”
“The media here is the opposition party.
They don’t understand this country. They
still do not understand why Donald Trump
is the president of the United States.”
“The elite media got it [their election
prediction] dead wrong, 100 percent dead
wrong…a humiliating defeat that they will
never wash away, that will always be
there.”
“The mainstream media has not fired or
terminated anyone associated with
following our [Trump] campaign. Look at
the Twitter feeds of those people
[reporters]: they were outright activists of
the Clinton campaign.”
“That’s why you [the NY Times and other
press outlets] have no power. You were
humiliated.”
The Times asked Bannon if he thought Sean Spicer,
Trump’s new press secretary, had
“lost credibility with the media.”
Bannon said:
“Are you kidding me? We think that’s a
badge of honor… The media has zero
integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard
work. You’re the opposition party. Not the
Democratic Party. You’re the opposition
party. The media’s the opposition party.”
The Times thought they were being clever by getting
Bannon’s quotes “on the record.” They knew he would
attack the press, and they knew their loyal readers would
tsk-tsk and shake their heads as they sipped their morning
coffees. O dear, o my, who is this wild man Bannon
lashing out at our beloved newspaper?
493
Bannon knows the game. He understands the Times and
the Washington Post, and the rest of the media echo-
chamber that bounces agreed-upon stories among
themselves. That’s what they did during the presidential
campaign, and despite their best efforts, Globalist queen,
Hillary Clinton, hit the skids and ended up back in
Chappaqua, the Oval Office forever out of her reach. Cry
for her, America.
Bannon is right. The media is the
opposition party. They oppose the people’s
right to know, on hundreds of major stories,
and whether you love or hate Donald
Trump, the media are criminal rogues in a
long-running stage play.
The media believe an election campaign is an event they
own. It’s their property. They can twist it any which way.
If something can be printed on page one and put on the
nightly news, the media claim ownership. This is why ABC
is asserting that their recent interview with Trump cannot
be aired by ANYONE after February 1. ABC owns history.
They can erase it. (See here and here. Oh, and for good
measure, see here.)
Sound familiar? It’s straight out of Orwell’s 1984.
And hold on: since Trump’s election, Orwell’s novel has
jumped to number one on Amazon’s list of best sellers.
Number one. Its publisher, Penguin, has ordered a new
print run of 75,000 to keep up with the demand. 47,000
copies have been sold since Trump won the election.
My God, the basket of deplorables can read.
Something’s happening, Mr. NY Times, and you don’t
know what it is.
You’re clueless. You’re outflanked. You’re throwing
power-puff punches in the dark.
What’s your next move? An interview with Beelzebub,
who says he voted for Trump?
My guess is you’ve got a team down in Mexico right now,
talking to your principal investor, billionaire Carlos Slim,
begging him for more money to refinance the refinance of
your debt, so you can keep paddling along in your vast sea
of red ink.
Meanwhile, more and more people will be reading
Orwell’s 1984 and identifying you as the Ministry of
Truth.
494
Even readers from Hillary’s camp, taken in by your claim
that fake news brought her down, will discover, when they
read 1984, that the prime number one faker is the State
media apparatus, not 50,000 independent outlets.
You, the NY Times, have been THE State
media apparatus for a long, long time.
 Anti-Trump Protesters At JFK Chant, ‘F*Ck Your Wall!
We’ll Tear It Down!’; Threaten Reporter
Kristinn Taylor
Jan 29th, 2017 1:50 Am

Anti-Trump protesters who gathered at New York City’s

JFK Airport to protest President Donald Trump’s
executive order on immigration and travel from seven
Muslim nations threatened a reporter several times and
chanted,
“F*** your wall! We’ll tear it down!”
THIS IS SO BEAUTIFUL!!!
@NYCLightBrigade arrives to join
thousands at #JFK airport protesting
Trump's #muslimban #nobannowall #resist
pic.twitter.com/Xqgj3MzPA5
— Lucky Tran (@luckytran) January 28,
2017
Video posted to Twitter by ABC7NY reporter CeFaan Kim
shows a sea of protesters at JFK with a message projected
high above them in blue letters that read, “F*** YOUR
WALL”. The protesters were chanting over and over,
“F*** your wall! We’ll tear it down!”, in protest of
Trump’s commitment to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico
border.
#JFK pic.twitter.com/N9RTyQFkUl
— CeFaan Kim (@CeFaanKim) January
29, 2017
Kim also posted video of the protesters chanting,
“No hate. No fear. Muslims are welcome
here!” to protest the detention of several
travelers from the newly banned Muslim
countries.
They are marching now at #JFK terminal 4
pic.twitter.com/C9J58JdEPr
— CeFaan Kim (@CeFaanKim) January
29, 2017
.
Independent reporter Tim Pool posted to Twitter that he
was threatened several times by protesters at JFK who
demanded of him, “agree with us or leave.”
So while I have been at the JFK protest I
have been threatened with violence three
times and told "agree with us or leave."
— Tim Pool (@Timcast) January 29, 2017
“So while I have been at the JFK protest I have been
threatened with violence three times and told “agree with
us or leave.”
@migaldaco Who said I was filming? I
wasn't, I was minding my own business
and had my hands in my pockets.
— Tim Pool (@Timcast) January 29, 2017
“@migaldaco Who said I was filming? I
wasn’t, I was minding my own business
and had my hands in my pockets.”
Pool noted the difference in his treatment between Trump
supporters and Trump protesters.
Why is it that Trump supporters say "we
don't agree and that's OK" and the Trump
protesters say "I'm going to break your
phone"
— Tim Pool (@Timcast) January 29, 2017
“Why is it that Trump supporters say “we
don’t agree and that’s OK” and the Trump
protesters say “I’m going to break your
phone”

495
 Investigation Launched Into
Obama’s DHS Hacking State Election Systems
By Voice Of Reason
Sunday, January 29th, 2017
How many times have Americans heard Donald Trump
say that the mainstream media is grossly dishonest?
Furthermore, thanks to Wikileaks, how many separate
instances did Americans learn about where the mainstream
media and the Democrats were colluding throughout the
2016 presidential election? We also learned that two
groups have been colluding at the highest levels for many
.
496
years. From the moment President Trump was sworn in on
January 20th, members of both the Democrat party, and
most of the party’s propaganda arm (aka the mainstream
media), have been relentless with their attacks on Donald
Trump. Neither group seems to grasp the fact that each
time they provoke the most powerful man on earth, most
of those provocations being baseless or unwarranted in
nature, they do so at great risk to themselves.
Rather than talking about issues of actual substance, the
mainstream media and the talking heads in the Democrat
party keep choosing to focus on every syllable of every
single word President Trump says or tweets. Instead of
letting it go when Donald Trump said he believes he won
the popular vote as well as the electoral vote (if the
fraudulent votes weren’t counted), both groups chose to
make a huge deal about the comments, and now it’s
coming back to bite them in a major way.
 Trump Puts Mexican President In A Political Vise
By Rafael Bernal
01/29/17 06:00 AM EST
Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto is facing
tremendous pressure to take a firm stand against President
Donald Trump, just a week after the new U.S. leader took
office.
Trump is highly unpopular in Mexico, perceived as
someone who has repeatedly insulted the country. He has
done little to change that sentiment, taking a hard stance on
U.S.-Mexico relations.
That's bad news for Peña Nieto, whose political fate is in
the balance.
At the center of the controversy is one of Trump's
signature campaign pledges, to build a border wall paid for
by Mexico.
Payment for the wall has also become a central issue in
Mexico, where Trump's demand is seen as an affront to
national pride and an irrational demand that the
government cannot afford to comply with.
"There are things that go beyond
negotiation, and this is something that we
will not do, we will never do, because this is
about our dignity and our pride," said
Secretary of Foreign Relations Luis
Videgaray Thursday.
Peña Nieto's team has little space to maneuver on the issue,
with record low approval ratings and a political system at
home gearing up for the 2018 presidential election.
On Thursday, Peña Nieto canceled a scheduled meeting
with Trump in Washington after Trump tweeted,
"If Mexico is unwilling to pay for the badly
needed wall, then it would be better to
cancel the upcoming meeting."
When they first caught wind of Trump's tweet, Videgaray
and secretary of the economy Ildefonso Guajardo were in
the White House, meeting a team led by White House
chief of staff Reince Priebus.
"As that happened I asked for a pause and
immediately called President Peña Nieto,"
said Videgaray. "I received his instruction
497
to convey the message to the White House
that if the condition to have the meeting
was for Mexico to pay for the wall, then it
was absolutely impossible for us to do."
Peña Nieto had already taken a hit at home when he
backed away from canceling the meeting one day earlier.
On Wednesday, Trump signed an executive order
mandating construction of the wall while Videgaray and
Guajardo held their first meetings at the White House.
Opposition Sen. Armando Rios Piter of the center-left
Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD)
reacted, warning that Peña Nieto's "presence in the United
States would be a very bad sign."
Margarita Zavala, a leading presidential contender for
2018 and wife of former President Felipe
Calderón, called Trump's tweet a "humiliation" and blasted
Peña Nieto for not canceling the trip sooner.
Despite the beating he took at home, Peña Nieto found
allies in the Democratic Party and the international media.
"Less than one week after taking office,
President Trump is already causing serious
damage to one of our most important
relationships in the world. U.S. national
security depends directly on cooperation
with our neighbors. From addressing
border security and drug trafficking to
migration and economic issues, the United
States is safer and stronger when we
collaborate with Mexico," said Sen. Ben
Cardin (D-Md.)
The Washington Post's editorial board slammed Trump,
saying he "seems determined" to change a strong bilateral
relationship that has benefited both countries.
The New York Times called the debate
over the wall payment a "tantrum" and
warned that "allowing this view to drive
trade and foreign policy toward Mexico
could have disastrous consequences for
workers and consumers in both countries."
Spanish newspaper El Pais published an editorial called
"In Defense of Mexico." In it, the paper's editorial board
warned that Trump's policies are part of a "racist and
xenophobic agenda of which Mexico is the first victim."
For Mexico, the feud with Trump is threatening a trade
relationship that was worth $531.1 billion in 2015.
The United States is by far Mexico's largest trading
partner, accounting for more than 70 percent of the
country's exports.
Mexico is also an important partner to the United States —
it bought $236 billion of goods from the United States in
2015, making it the second-largest buyer of American
goods after Canada. But that year, the United States also
ran a $58 billion trade deficit with Mexico, according to
the United States Trade Representative.
Trump latched on to that deficit, along with illegal
immigration and an ongoing 10-year drug war in the
country, during his presidential campaign.
In August, Peña Nieto invited then-GOP nominee Trump
for a meeting and joint press conference in Mexico City,
hoping to reassure Mexicans and investors that his
government could successfully deal with a Trump
administration.
Before that meeting, Peña Nieto had an already-dismal 23
percent approval rating. By Trump's inauguration, that
number had dipped to 12 percent.
The meeting also cost Videgaray his job as finance
secretary, because he reportedly put together the meeting
through a mutual friend of his and Jared Kushner, Trump's
son-in-law and now White House advisor.
498
Videgaray came back to Peña Nieto's cabinet as secretary
of Foreign Relations, tasked with maintaining a good
relationship with the Trump administration.
Videgaray and Guajardo rushed to Washington after the
inauguration to set the stage for talks.
After the tit-for-tat exchange that culminated in Peña
Nieto's cancellation, the two leaders held an hourlong
call Friday.
The White House and Peña Nieto's office sent out nearly
identical releases after the call, but the Mexican version
included a sentence saying the two leaders had agreed to
no longer discuss the matter of the wall payment publicly.
Trump’s press secretary, Sean Spicer, later confirmed the
two leaders did indeed agree to keep quiet about the wall.
"They agreed not to discuss how it will be
paid for publicly, that they will continue to
have those discussions privately," he said.
Republican strategist Ford O'Connell said Trump is
unlikely to quietly let the issue go.
"The audience for this showdown is not
necessarily Mexico and the U.S.," said
O'Connell.
"If you listen to Trump carefully, he wants
to go after countries with high trade
surpluses," he added. "The people
watching this are places like China."
 'Unprecedented': Trump Adds Bannon To National
Security Council, Kicks Out Intelligence Officials
'To Reiterate, The Joint Chiefs Of Staff Have Been Removed From The
National Security Council And Replaced With A
White Nationalist. Worry.'
By Nadia Prupis, Staff Writer
Sunday, January 29, 2017
The memorandum gives Bannon, former executive chair of the
rightwing website Breitbart News, a regular seat at some of the most
sensitive meetings at the highest levels of government, along with
other NSC meetings. (Photo: Reuters)
President Donald Trump signed memorandums on
Saturday that kicked the nation's top military and
intelligence advisers off the National Security Council's
(NSC) Principals Committee and elevated his chief
strategist, Steve Bannon, in their place.
The memorandum gives Bannon, former executive chair of
the rightwing website Breitbart News, a regular seat at
some of the most sensitive meetings at the highest levels of
government, along with other NSC meetings.
The Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—who need to be
confirmed by the Senate—will now only attend the
meetings when discussions pertain to their "responsibilities
and expertise," the memo states.
"This is unusual," writes John Bellinger at
Lawfare Blog. "[T]he NSC function usually
does not include participants from the
political side of the White House."
Under former President George W. Bush, for example,
Karl Rove did not attend NSC meetings, Bellinger noted.
"According to former Chief of Staff Josh
Bolten, President Bush did not want to
appear, especially to the military, to insert
499
domestic politics into national security
decisionmaking."
Additionally, while Bannon has been granted this
privileged access, CIA director Mike Pompeo has not—
another break with tradition, Bellinger wrote.
Both Bush and former President Barack Obama gave the
DNI and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regular
seats on their councils.
Bellinger notes other irregularities:
The NSC executive secretary (General Keith Kellogg)
"shall" attend all Principals Committee and Deputies
Committee meetings. This is also unusual. The executive
secretary in the Bush administration was generally too
busy and did not attend NSC or PC meetings.
[....] The Deputies Committee will have at
least 14 regularly invited participants and
potentially 19 or more. This will be
unwieldy.
CNN national security correspondent Jim Sciutto called
Bannon's placement on the committee "unprecedented."
"You're putting in someone who is not
Senate confirmed and taking out the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National
Intelligence, who need to be Senate
confirmed," Sciutto told CNN's Jake
Tapper. "It raises questions about whose
voices will be most prominent about key
national-security decisions in the country."
Former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates likewise told ABC
on Sunday that excluding the DNI and the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff was "a big mistake."
"Under law, there are only two statutory
advisers to the National Security Council—
 the DNI, and the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff," Gates said. "Pushing them
out [is] a big mistake. They both bring
perspective, judgment, and experience to
bear that every president—whether they
like it or not—finds useful."
MSNBC's Joy Reid summed it up thus:
"To reiterate, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have
been removed from the National Security
Council and replaced with a white
nationalist. Worry."
500
The memo was issued amid a second series of executive
orders in Trump's first full week in office, including
ordering the Pentagon to devise a plan in 30 days to defeat
the Islamic State (ISIS). The president also held several
calls with foreign leaders, including Russian President
Vladimir Putin, French President François Hollande,
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, German Chancellor
Angela Merkel, and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm
Turnbull.
Bannon joined Trump for all of those calls.
The move also affirms Bannon's rise just after Trump
echoed the strategist's recent comments that the media is
"the opposition party."
 Defiant Trump Team Digs In:
"We Wont Apologize For Keeping America Safe"
By Tyler Durden
Jan 29, 2017 4:47 PM
Under assault from foreign governments, domestic CEOs,
and thousands of protesters across the nation, members of
the Trump administration were stern in their refusal to
budge, and were unified in their support of the president's
sweeping executive order that bars refugees and people
from seven nations from entering the U.S.
Repeating a phrase first uttered by Trump, top aides to the
president denied that the immigration order amounted to a
Muslim ban and pointed to the Obama administration for
identifying the seven countries included in the order. The
Trump team also defended the executive order's at times
botched implementation amid backlash from some
lawmakers and Federal Judges blocking the partial
immgiration order.
Among the more vocal defenders of Trump were top aide
Kellyanne Conway, who on Sunday emphasized the
importance of having safe borders, suggesting that the
small number of people who were inconvenienced by the
order was worth it to keep the country safe. She said
325,000 people
"from overseas came into this country just
yesterday through our airports."
"You're talking about 300 and some who
have been detained or are prevented from
gaining access to an aircraft in their home
countries," Conway said on "Fox News
Sunday." "Thats 1 percent. And I think in
terms of the upside being greater
protection of our borders, of our people, it's
a small price to pay."
She also echoed Trump and insisted the immigration order
was not a Muslim ban, even as some Democratic
lawmakers have argued the opposite.
"These seven countries, what about the 46
majority-Muslim countries that are not
included? Right there, it totally undercuts
this nonsense that this is a Muslim ban,"
Conway said. "This is a ban on
prospective travel from countries, trying to
prevent terrorists in this country, from
countries that have a recent history of
training and exporting and harboring
terrorists."
501
Returning the attack, Conway said the list of seven
countries included in the order actually came from
former President Obama's administration, which it did
as per a DHS announcement from February 2016. In
February 2016, the Obama administration added Libya,
Yemen and Somalia to a list of "countries of concern" with
respect to its visa waiver program. Iran, Syria, Iraq and
Sudan were already on the list, according to a release from
the Department of Homeland Security.
"These are countries that have a history of
training, harboring, exporting terrorists,"
Conway said. She added that the president
will "certainly keep identifying threats and
risks."
***
White House spokesman Sean Spicer also highlight the
Obama administration's role for initially flagging the seven
"countries of particular concern."
"The Obama administration put these first
and foremost," he said on ABC's "This
Week."
He similarly noted there are 46 other Muslim-majority
countries not included in the seven listed and defended the
president for following through on the promises he made
during his campaign.
"This is nothing new," Spicer said.
"President Trump talked about this
throughout the campaign and throughout
the transition. The president is just
implementing the policies he
campaigned on" he added noting that
protecting the nation and its people is the
No. 1 priority of the Trump administration.
***
In a testy exchange with Chuck Todd, White House Chief
of Staff Reince Priebus was the third to reiterate that the
seven countries included in the order were identified by the
Obama administration as
 "the seven most dangerous countries in the traveling back and forth to these seven countries receive
world in regard to harboring terrorists and extra questioning. Priebus then added that other countries
affirmed by Congress multiple times." may need to be added to the executive order in the future.

Priebus also defended the order's implementation, saying "But in order to do this in a way that was
there shouldn't have been a "grace period" put on the order. expeditious, in a way that would pass
muster quickly," he said, "we used the 7
"Then, people that want to do bad things to countries that have already been codified
Americans would just move up their travel and identified." He said the order was
date two days in order to get into the "done for the protection of Americans, and
country before the grace period's over," he waiting another three days, waiting another
said on NBC's "Meet the Press." three weeks is something that we don't
want to get wrong."
"I think it's one of these things that, and if
you ask a lot of people at the Customs and
Priebus' bottom line: Trump won't apologize for keeping
Border patrol, would just tell you you got to
Americans safe:
rip off the band-aid and you have to move
forward."
"President Trump is not willing to get
As noted earlier, Priebus also clarified the order, saying it this wrong," Priebus said, "which is why
doesn't affect green card holders. he wants to move forward quickly and
protect Americans.... So we apologize
for nothing here."
"We didn't overrule the Department of
Homeland Security, as far as green card
holders moving forward, it doesn't affect
them," Priebus said on NBC's "Meet The
Press." But Priebus noted if a person is
traveling back and forth to one of the seven
countries included in that order, that person
is likely to be "subjected temporarily with
more questioning until a better program is
put in place."
"We don't want people that are traveling
back and forth to one of these seven
countries that harbor terrorists to be
traveling freely back and forth between the Meanwhile the symbolic pressure from tens of thousands
United States and those countries," he of protesters, 16 Democratic attorneys general who are
said. seeking to overturn the Trump executive order, at least 11
Republican members of Congress, and countless civil
rights groups and CEOs continues to mount with some
He clarified that it is up to the "discretionary authority" of
confident that the matter will end up before the Supreme
a Customs and Border Patrol agent whether people
Court, and lead to even greater social polarization.
.

502
 Border Guards Say Trump's Orders Have IMPROVED
Morale And Insist The Immigration Ban Will Save Lives
 National Border Patrol Council Is A Union Which Represents 16,500 Border Patrol Agents
 NBPC Released Statement On Its Website Sunday Saying That Trump's 'Extreme Vetting'
Order Will Save Lives And Money
 Union Said Trump's Policies 'Exponentially' Boosted Morale Among Rank-And-File Border
Patrol Agents
By Ariel Zilber For Dailymail.com
Published: 18:22 EST, 29 January 2017 | Updated: 22:28 EST, 29 January 2017

President Donald Trump's executive orders on refugees
was wholeheartedly endorsed Sunday by the unions
representing border patrol officers and immigration and
customs officials.
The National Border Patrol Council released a statement
on its website Sunday praising the president's policies as
from entering the US and suspended refugee admissions
for 120 days.
The order also singled out citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, who are barred from
entering the US for a period of 90 days, according to The
New York Times.

'swift and decisive action' that 'will make

America safer and more prosperous.'

The statement, which was written on behalf of union

members employed with the Border Patrol and the
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, says that morale
among officers and agents has lifted since Trump's three
executive orders were signed in his first eight days in
office.

'Morale amongst our agents and officers

has increased exponentially since the
signing of the orders,' the statement read.
'The men and women of ICE and Border
Patrol will work tirelessly to keep criminals,
terrorists, and public safety threats out of
this country, which remains the number
one target in the world – and President
Trump's actions now empower us to fulfill
this life saving mission, and it will indeed
save thousands of lives and billions of
dollars.'
Trump on Wednesday signed two executive orders that
were aimed at beginning the process of constructing a wall
along the border with Mexico and denying federal funding
to so-called 'sanctuary cities' that declined to help the
government prosecute undocumented aliens, according to
ABC News.
Thousands of protesters (above) converged on Los Angeles
International Airport on Sunday to condemn President Trump's
travel restrictions as attorneys filed court papers on behalf of those
who were detained at the airport
But the order appears to trigger widespread confusion
among government agencies who began detaining green
card holders and permanent residents from these countries
even though they have been living here for years.
The detentions and deportations of a number of
immigrants ignited anger and protests at airports and cities
across the country over the weekend.
The traditionally apolitical NBPC took the unprecedented
step of endorsing Trump for president during the
campaign, according to The Washington Times.

The most controversial executive order signed by the That decision, however, was made by the union's
president on Friday indefinitely barred Syrian refugees leadership board that is comprised of 11 members. The

503
union as a whole represents 16,500 agents, according to
The Los Angeles Times.
'Morale amongst our agents and officers has increased exponentially
since the signing of the orders,' the statement from the National
Border Patrol Council read on Sunday. Above an agent patrols the
border fence that divides the US and Mexico in the town of Nogales,
Arizona
504
Trump issued his most substantial defense of his 'extreme
vetting' executive order on Sunday afternoon, saying in a
statement from the White House that he's not banning
Muslims from entering the US – and laying much of the
grief at former president Barack Obama's feet.
'My policy is similar to what President
Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas
for refugees from Iraq for six months,'
Trump said of his own order, which is
slated to expire in 90 days.
And he said that the seven nations targeted by his
executive order
 Time For US Media To ‘Clean House,’ Conway Says
Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:51PM
Kellyanne Conway, a senior aide to US President Donald Trump,
speaks at a rally on January 27, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by
AFP)
Kellyanne Conway, the senior counselor
to US President Donald Trump, is
calling on networks to fire the reporters
that “talk smack” about him.
In an interview on Fox News Sunday, she asked:
"Who is cleaning house? Which one is
going to be the first network to get rid of
these people, the people who think things
were just not true?"
The key figure in the administration recently drew
attention by bringing up her "alternative facts," whose
media coverage she criticized in the Sunday interview.
"I went on three network shows and spoke
for 35 minutes on three network Sunday
shows. You know what got picked? The
Photo combo via The New York Times
505
fact that I said 'alternative facts,' not the
fact that I ripped a new one to some of
those hosts that they never cover the facts
that matter," said Conway (pictured below
along with Trump).
"Not one network person has been let go.
Not one silly political analyst and pundit
who talked smack all day long about
Donald Trump has been let go," she added.
"I'm too polite to mention their names, but
they know who they are, and they are all
wondering who will be the first to go. The
election was three months ago. None of
them have been let go."
'Alternative facts'
Describing anti-Trump news and analyses “fake” has been
on top of the Trump team’s agenda since the real estate
mogul and reality TV star started campaigning for the
2016 presidential election.
During an NBC’s “Meet the Press” interview, Conway
defended a false statement about the size of the crowd at
Trump’s inauguration ceremony announced by White
House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, noting that the new
administration has its own “alternative facts.”
The term “alternative facts” has naturally started to mean
falsehood in a mocking way and now has its own
dedicated Wikipedia entry, with credits to Conway, where
it is associated with terms such as Big Lie, Deception, Dog
Whistling, Doublespeak, Factoid, and Fallacy.

“You're saying it's a falsehood, and ... our

press secretary, Sean Spicer, gave
alternative facts to that," she said.
.

506
 Oops! CNN Accidentally Airs Press Conference With
Detained Iraqi Traveler Who Likes Trump –
ABC News Edits Out
By Zeropointnow
Jan 29, 2017 4:07 AM

Scores of irate liberals organized in part by

CAIR (considered a terrorist organization in the UAE),
descended upon airports around the country on Saturday to
protest Donald Trump's 120 day ban on refugees from 6
"nations of concern" and a permanent ban on Syrians until
further notice. Of note, the countries on the list were
originally identified under Obama by the Department of
Homeland Security in the "Terrorist Travel Prevention
Act of 2015."

As a result of the Executive Order, several travelers from

the newly restricted nations found themselves in limbo at
airports across the United States, as many were kept off
One of the stranded travelers was Iraqi interpreter Hameed
flights or stranded. In response, Democrat congressional
Khalid Darweesh, released from detention after 18
representatives Nydia Velazquez and Jerry Nadler showed
hours. Reps. Velazquez and Nadler were quick to cozy up
up to JFK airport with the press to earn a few votes for the
to Darweesh, hoping to milk the “human element” of this
next election.
tragic story of injustice.

The Puerto Rican born Velazquez (who’s been in US About an hour later, Darweesh was wheeled in front of
Politics over 35 years and hasn’t bothered to master network cameras where he was asked what he thought of
English), took to the cameras to decry the Executive Order Donald Trump:
for not offering guidelines. Oh, and it’s unjust.

507
 Refugee released from JFK said he likes
@POTUS @realDonaldTrump - look at
@NydiaVelazquez face. ????????????
pic.twitter.com/p09odD5Vyq
— dil (@fsxrekal) January 29, 2017

THAT FACE

Unfortunately for Rep. Velazquez, Hameed Khalid

Darweesh didn't fit the bleeding heart narrative.
Fortunately for the rest of the stranded travelers, and
putting an end to this orchestrated CAIRport protest, a NY
Federal judge granted a temporary repreive following an
ACLU request for a temporary stay allowing detained
travelers to stay in the United States.

Unsurprisingly, ABC News cut that part out…

508
 Understanding This Chart Can Flat Out
Save America From Civil War
Bernie Suarez
January 29, 2017
It can no longer be denied. America appears to be
increasingly descending into civil unrest as the Liberal
Left continues to be manipulated by the Leftist mainstream
media and Left wing organizations funded by people like
George Soros who has been funding revolutions around
the world for decades through organizations like The Open
Society. This time it’s America’s turn; and now that the
ruling elite’s candidate of choice was defeated in the US
presidential election we’re seeing well organized protests
and “revolutions” throughout America at times becoming
violent and destructive to local properties.
What we’re seeing is the follow-up to Occupy Wall Street
which (as it is now) was filled with well-meaning
participants fighting for generic unspecified causes (e.g.
“corruption”) without singling out specific guilty parties or
specific crimes that can be leveraged against these specific
criminals. I firmly believe this strategy of “generic”
enemies and generic causes is very much intentional as it
causes the chaos and unrest at the street level without
actually singling out who the enemy is. Of course, in this
case many of the brainwashed Hillary supporters single out
President Donald Trump as the enemy for being a “hater,”
“racist” and “woman hater.” As most readers know all of
these accusations were based on a massive corporate
509
mainstream media propaganda campaign waged against
Trump as well as propaganda spread by Soros-funded
groups like Moveon.org, puppet Hollywood celebrities and
the politicians themselves like Hillary Clinton and others.
We are now seeing the progression of what many of us
have been calling an engineered civil unrest designed to
overthrow the government of the United States now that
Obama the sorcerer is not in office.
So in the interest of explaining the current massive divide
and civil unrest we are seeing in America, I put together a
chart that fundamentally explains everything we are
seeing. The video below breaks everything down leaving
no rock unturned and will allow truth seekers to easily
predict future events as well as understand events as they
happen in real-time.
Ultimately the goal is to spread the understanding of this
information far and wide so that the tactics of the ruling
elite will fail. Below is a chart which is fully explained in
the video and it explains all the different paradigms in
place right now in the United States. Understanding this
information could be the difference between civil war and
peace and order here in America.
For the sake of clarity the 4 columns represent 4 major
political ideologies. Actually it’s 3 ideologies plus one
more; T= truth seekers who are represented in green all the
way on the right. The rest of the ideologies are the
following:
D = Democrats, Liberals, Progressives, Communist and
those that believe in big government, the collective
ideology and global government.
R = Republicans, Conservatives, Tea Party, Libertarian
and those that generally believe in small government, the
strength of the nation state and conservative values.
510
A= Anarchists who are those who fundamentally do not
believe in any form of government. This group is very
important to understand in light of the big picture and
current day events as I explain in my video.
As you can see I inserted one other group at the bottom,
group X which represents everyone else who doesn’t care
about truth, anarchism or political systems. Understanding
this group is another key to understanding the engineered
chaos of today. This group consists of druggies, gangsters,
thugs, many prisoners, medicated zombies, partiers who
don’t care about anything but themselves and others. In the
video below I also explain their role in the current
engineered chaos and how all of these ideologies are
playing into the current evolving situation.
Reader Notes:

511