April 2019 - Truth News Network

Death By Terror

April 30, 2019

I as most Americans will never forget exactly where I was when I was notified about the first plane flying into the World Trade Center in southern Manhattan. That day changed America forever. And that day brought terrorism to the shores of the greatest country on Earth. 3000 unsuspecting Americans in Manhattan, at the Pentagon in D.C., and in a field in Pennsylvania lost their lives at the hands of Muslim terrorists: 19 terrorists in those 9/11 attacks. There were 5 terrorists on each of the planes that flew into the Trade Center, 5 on the one at the Pentagon, and 3 on the flight that crashed in a Pennsylvania field.

Since that horrible day in American history, questions of “Why?, “Who was responsible?,” “Was there a conspiracy?,” and “Can such an attack happen again?” have been asked numerous times by numerous people. And we still are NOT certain of the correct answers to any of those questions and some others.

One thing is certain: terrorism DID exist prior to that day in 2001, but has definitely escalated dramatically since, at least in part because of those September attacks. Whether the increase is a direct or indirect result of 9/11 really does not matter. What matters is that terrorists of all kinds in many nations senselessly take far too many lives of innocent people in the name of some religion or some political group.

Of course, the discussions that spring up every time there is such an attack anywhere in the World are almost always political discussions. And the question that is asked immediately when terrorism occurs is “Who is responsible?” Sadly, most deaths by terrorists in the last 20 years have come at the hands of Muslim terrorists. ISIS takes credit for most. ISIS is simply a group of Muslim extremists who have adopted a tiny sliver of Islam regarding “Death to the Infidels” to the extreme. And they slaughter innocents in the name of their god.

But you know what is most tragic? In the aftermath of most terrorist acts, most of the time the first thing that happens is political finger-pointing and name-blaming. And if it wasn’t so serious, the reporting process regarding such attacks in America would be comical. Leftist news media almost always point fingers away from ISIS and other Muslim groups. And when there is an act of domestic terrorism perpetrated by a white person, those media outlets report the killings almost with glee. Additionally, there are regular battles in the media about terrorists who kill: “Was it a White Supremacist or was it a Muslim?”

Always buried in their stories — at least initially — is the one simple fact that matters: people were slaughtered for the most ridiculous reasons by extremists. That should be enough, but sadly it’s not. The blame game ALWAYS begins in earnest.

Let’s look at a few Media examples and also polling results.

Whodunit?

First, let’s look at the report from statistics compiled by a liberal political organization: New America Foundation.

“Since 9/11, white right-wing terrorists have killed almost twice as many Americans in homegrown attacks than radical Islamists have, according to research by the New America Foundation. In their June study, the foundation decided to examine groups ‘engaged in violent extremist activity’ and found that white extremists were by far the most dangerous. They pointed to the Emanuel AME Church shooting in Charleston, S.C., and the 2012 attack on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, as well as many lesser-known attacks on Jewish institutions and on police. They found that 48 people were killed by white terrorists, while 26 were killed by radical Islamists, since Sept. 11, 2001.

The study also found that the criminal justice system judged jihadists more harshly than their non-Muslim counterparts, indicting them more frequently than non-jihadists and handing down longer sentences.”

(I encourage you all to review statistics on this as compiled in this segment of New America Foundation’s findings on the matter, “Terrorism in America After 9/11“: https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/

The Popular Myth That Right-Wing Extremism Kills More Than Islamic Terrorism in the U.S. Since 9/11

It may have all started with the opinion piece “U.S. right wing extremists more deadly than jihadists,” which was echoed by journalist Sally Kohn. NPR interviewed the authors of the CNN story under the headline “Right-Wing Extremists More Dangerous Than Islamic Terrorists In U.S.”
The New America study was the basis for the reported statistic, which is repeated widely. The study is hosted by the International Security Program, whose backers include George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. Before proceeding any further, it should be mentioned that Politifact examined the New America statistic and stated that it was “half-true.”

So, is the claim true? A professor at Florida State College at Jacksonville recently dissected the terrorism cases and has shredded the finding that right-wing extremists are deadlier than violent jihadists in the United States. Professor Andrew Holt lays out why the coding criteria, and thus, the comparisons are apples-to-oranges:

“The problem with this source, as I see it, is that the count is wrong. In International Security’s listing of the 45 deaths due to Islamic extremism, they attribute them to only nine incidents since 9/11. These include the more well-known attacks, such as San Bernardino (14 dead), Chattanooga (5 dead), Fort Hood (13 dead), the Boston Marathon Bombing (4 dead — with 264 additional casualties, I might add), as well as the Washington and New Jersey killing spree (4 dead), but also the Oklahoma beheading of 2014 (1 dead), the Little Rock Shooting of 2009 (1 dead), the Seattle Jewish Federation Shooting of 2006 (1 dead), and the Los Angeles Airport shooting of 2002 (2 dead).

So this is where they stop, but if we are comparing Islamic extremism to right wing extremism, apples to apples (and, to give credit to International Security, they acknowledge this is subjective on their website) then there are several others incidents that should be included in this total. Professor Holt finds at least six more events that the study did not attribute to violent jihadism.”

The professor discovered that when you add in the numbers from several terrorism cases driven by Islamist intent, the scales tip. Via The College Fix:

In June of 2006, in Denver a man shot four of his co-workers and a swat team member, killing one. He later claimed he did it because it was “Allah’s choice.”

In December of 2009 in Binghamton, a Saudi Arabian graduate student named Abdulsalam S. al-Zahrani killed Richard T. Antoun, a non-Muslim Islamic studies professor who served on al-Zahrani’s dissertation committee, in revenge for “persecuted” Muslims. Prior to the killing, one of al-Zahrani’s roommates tried to warn the university administration that he had been acting “like a terrorist.”

In 2012 in Houston, in two separate incidents in January and in November, two people were shot to death by a Muslim extremist for their roles in his daughter’s conversion to Christianity.

In March of 2013 in Ashtabula (Ohio), a Muslim convert walked into a Christian Church during an Easter service and killed his father, claiming it was “the will of Allah.”

In August of 2014 in Richmond (California) a man killed an Ace Hardware employee by stabbing him seventeen times, claiming he was on a “mission from Allah.”

These six murders are irrelevant, if you take the New America study at face value, yet tilt the balance towards jihadists being deadlier than right-wing terrorists: 50 fatalities to 48, respectively. Why the discrepancy?

The New America study does not count violent jihadist attacks from self-radicalized or “lone wolf” terrorists who swear allegiance to Islam in the same manner as terrorist attacks committed by a card-carrying member of Islamist terror organizations. If a terrorist yells “Allahu Akbar!” before going on a murder spree, you see, that’s not enough.

However, when right-wing terrorist attacks are coded by New America, those are attributed in a loose manner to mere statements made by the perpetrators that fit the left-wing’s shibboleth that racist or anti-government views define someone as a “right-winger.” Thus, the conclusions are not only questionable, they are borderline deceptive. The professor concludes:

“Right wing terrorism is more deadly for Americans only if you add a number of very limiting parameters (e.g. excluding the victims of 9/11, ignoring “lone wolf” attacks without solid connections to groups like al-Qaeda and their affiliates, etc…). But if you lift those limitations, and apply equal standards, then the raw and unfiltered numbers of deaths of Americans due to Islamic extremism in the United States over the last fifteen years dwarf the numbers attributable to right wing extremism by a ratio of over 62 to 1. Even if you leave out 9/11 victims and just focus on the ideological statements and goals of the attackers, then the deaths of Americans due to Islamic extremism still outnumber the deaths attributable to right wingers (which reveals an even greater disparity when compared with population groups). If we move beyond America’s borders, then the disparity becomes far greater, with somewhere around 90% of the world’s terrorism related deaths attributable to Islamic extremism, and only a fraction of 1% attributable to right wing extremism.”

The professor’s findings are consistent with terrorism incidents listed at non-partisan sources like the Global Terrorism Index and the Global Terrorism Database. It is certainly not true that “right wing extremists” kill more Americans than jihadists, or that they are “deadlier.”

Jihadi Terrorists Attacks Outside the U.S.

Such radical Islamist attacks, unfortunately, more common, more prevalent, and more violent than those seen in the U.S. Since we are discussing terrorist attacks in the U.S. compared to white radical attacks, it makes sense to factor in similar situations elsewhere in the World. Islam is MUCH more widespread outside the U.S. than within, so the numbers of jihadist attacks are staggering. Let’s take a look:

Saudi Arabia: November 20, 1979, at The Grand Mosque in Mecca. 244 died and 180 were seriously injured.

Lebanon: October 23, 1983, the deadly bombing of the U.S. barracks. 307 died and 75 were seriously injured.

Lebanon: September 20, 1984, at the United States Embassy. 24 were killed.

Indonesia: January 21, 1985, at The Buddhist Borobudur temple in Java. No one died.

France: December 1985 — September 1986, a series of over a dozen bombings. 13 died and 225 were seriously injured

Israel: July 7, 1989, Tel Aviv Jerusalem bus 405 suicide bomber attack. 16 died and 27 were seriously injured.

We started to give you the numbers of Jihadist terrorist attacks with deaths and serious injuries from 1990 through today. The list is exhaustive. Let it suffice to say, since July 7, 1989, more than 20,000 citizens from more than 20 countries have been executed by Muslim terrorists. Some were mass slaughters; some were single random killings. But all were terrorist acts conducted in the name of the Muslim god.

see the complete list of those acts with details at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

Summary

The purpose of this story is to get away from the “It was Muslims….No, it was White Supremacists” finger-pointing. Let’s just simply face one major factor: terrorism of ANY kind is deplorable, especially when people are killed at the hands of others simply because of their skin color and/or religious beliefs. But what makes these horrors even more egregious is the actions of media zealots to point fingers at some group of individuals to simply place blame and expand division between people of different races, cultures, and religions for one reason and one reason only. And it’s NOT for a news story: it’s to drive wedges between people to foment hatred and bigotry. And we have waaay too much of that already.

The culprit in all of this is Identity Politics. Sadly, American politicians on the Left have perfected the use of specific groups to use for their singular political benefit. And they continually caste those groups without factual knowledge and certainly with no specific proof that would in any way justify the nastiness they spew.

People are humans. And it doesn’t take much to light the fires of hatred between those of different races, religions, sexual preference, nationalities, or political perspective. And today’s Leftists have made doing so an art: and they are pretty successful selling their wares to unsuspecting people.

I am fearful that we are stuck in this cycle of divisiveness. And I fear it will take the lives of many more people. It is unthinkable that when each terrorist act is perpetrated, it seems political leaders — especially those in the United States — ignore the hurt and anguish of the surviving victims and family members of those killed. They immediately rush to the “political narrative of the day” to further their causes. Isn’t it sad that political leaders in America would even consider using these despicable acts of human slaughter for any type of political advantage? But it is happening more and more every time such an attack occurs.

Where does this go? Such attacks seem to have only increased in number and severity. Media reports only fuel the fire of additional headline-seeking mass murderers. It is sad that any religion would teach adherents there are glory and righteousness along with heavenly rewards for donning a suicide vest and killing as many non-Muslims as possible when committing suicide. But it does. And it is horrific.

Unfortunately, I see no end in sight. But what MUST end is the glorification in news coverage of these events. It’s time that today’s media commit to showing the world the horrors of murder. And they need to do so using NO political narrative and reporting with NO editorial comments about details of each event. People’s lives are far more important than a network pushing for ratings to turn into advertising revenue.

As far as God is concerned in all this: “By this will all men know that you are my children — by the love you show for each other.”

I doubt jihadists or white supremacist terrorists score very high in God’s eye — even IF they are promised 72 virgins for those murders.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Liberalism vs. Conservatism

April 28, 2019

Have you ever puzzled over the differences between Liberalism and Conservatism? Make no mistake: there are DRASTIC differences between philosophies and stark differences between Liberals and Conservatives.

I’ve wondered for years myself. Here at TruthNewsNetwork we have written several times about one major difference between Liberals and Conservatives: “When a Conservative disagrees with a political policy of a Liberal, the Conservative doesn’t like the policy. But when a Liberal disagrees with a political policy of a Conservative, the Liberal HATES THE CONSERVATIVE!”

I know that is probably a stretch. But often it seems that way. One thing is certain: Liberals are much more adamant and vocal about their ideas than Conservatives are their own. And Conservatives are more accepting of differences between themselves and Liberals. Those differences are never unseen and certainly are NEVER unheard.

But after diving into research and investigation, we have determined there is a more fundamental reason for these differences. Those differences are layered: some lie deep within one’s soul and intellect while others are closer to the surface and held not so tightly. Some are more visible than others.

What am I talking about?

“In The Beginning”

It is far simpler for people to deal with others if those “others” are part of a group. Certainly, even in a group of people, there are as many differences between those as there are people. But for centuries people have often just grouped people together under one sign. And through the centuries while Man has become more educated, more sophisticated, and more civil regarding social norms, Man has become more committed to put people in groups. Nowhere can this trait be illustrated better than here:

In that incident, a presidential candidate in the 2016 election — Hillary Clinton — created a group in which she put half of the other candidate’s followers: Donald Trump. It is certain that those she put in that group shared at least one thing — support for Mr. Trump. All of those people (and it turned out to be 62 million in total which means “half” by her characterization would be a 31 million member group of ”deplorables”) were simply “one” in Hillary’s mind.

And she wasn’t the first.

Think about it: human nature guides us all to at least perceptually group people who have similar characteristics together: racially, historically, religiously, geographically, spoken language, educational similarity, hobbies, professions, etc. Human nature being what it is leads us to do that. But human nature does NOT automatically grade those in those groups: people do.

Historic “Groups”

In the Bible the groups in similarity were everywhere. Even then people with similarities “hung” together. For the Jewish people, descendants of Ishmael — Abraham’s illegitimate son — became the Arab people. They could not bear Jews and the feeling was reciprocal. In fact, almost without fail, people ALL feel that “their” group is superior to other groups with which they interface.

Remember the Crusades? Almost universally Crusades are remembered as a time when Christians wanted to impose Christianity in the Holy Land. Actually, the “first” Crusades were started by the Muslims in the year 630 A.D. when Muhammad invaded and conquered Mecca. Later on, Muslims invaded Syria, Iraq, Jerusalem, Iran, Egypt, Africa, Spain, Italy, France, etc. all because those ”groups” were different. The Western Crusades started around 1095 to try to stop the Islamic aggressive invasions.

We’re not here to debate who did what, who was right and who was wrong. We are simply pointing to the history of one group, (that was created by “someone”) that was marked by those of another group, (that too was created by “someone”) and then taking actions against that “other” group because that group was better than the other.

It’s happened hundreds if not thousands of times.

American History

There had to be an America established before there could be American History. Why did that happen?

In short, in England groups of upper class people (Royals) looked at groups of low class people (Commoners) and treated them in ways that were literally less than humane. Those Commoners had enough. They wanted to seek somewhere else to live that was free from “group society.” They fled to America.

Then they wanted freedom from the tyranny under which they were forced to live even in a New World. As tyranny does, it followed them to their new land and forced its way into their society from the beginning.

They determined to force that group of Royals to give them total independence. It resulted in the American Revolution from which was birthed an independent and free America that became the United States of America.

The U.S. has been embroiled in numerous “group wars” through its history: President Thomas Jefferson actually declared war on the Barbary Pirates. Why? U.S. ships conducting trade with Northern African countries were being attacked and held by the Barbary Pirates for ransom. (Those Pirates were Muslim slave traders.) The American President refused to pay the ransom to mthat “other” group. War decided it.

There was the French and Indian War and the War of 1812. But the greatest example of American “group war” was the Civil War. What were the groups? Those for slavery and those against.

The war was brutal: 600,000 people died. But slavery was put down in the U.S. But the “grouping” never stopped. Those Africans that had been brought to America and were the subject of the Civil War were freed, but in most respects that freedom was just talk. Legally they were free, but were still part of a “group” that was considered by many to be “less than” others. Though slaves were legally free, their “group” was NOT equal in any way. That racial difference and resulting “group think” has kept the difference fires burning for generations. Citizens of the greatest country on Earth can simply not put that war to death.

There are those from one group who have never accepted the Civil War outcome. There are those from the other group who have never felt like the war ended. They react to the other group in many ways, few of which are positive.

Politics

Politics has been with us for who knows how long. Men created it. Why? To draw lines between groups, of course! Politics has played a very significant role in American history, much of which has not been positive for the country. Nevertheless, the differences between people have dictated its perpetuation for generations. And politics is the chief fuel for creating and growing differences between people.

Politically, Conservatives and Liberals have pretty much dominated U.S. politics. (There you go: groups that Men decide who has to be part of which one) Since World War I, the two major political parties have been Republican and Democrat. Though the policies of differences between those in each group have changed in many ways, fundamentally they each have kept a fairly specific core of principles. The party that has mastered the art of grouping and that dwarfs its counterpart in structure and political ideals is the Democrat Party.

Members of the Democrat Party have always excelled in politically acting in group fashion far more than Republicans. Unification in policies, ideals, who’s in and who’s out, who is credible and who is not, who is worthy and who is not, has pretty much over decades remained the responsibility of party leaders.

Republicans on the other hand have operated more independently regarding party structure. They have shared core values for a long time, but there has never been unity as the Democrat Party has.

(We’re not here to discuss specifics of those differences, just to give us basis for the balance of today’s conversation.)

Groups

What are the modern day groups that Democrats and Republicans have created? To be honest there are far more groups than just those created by politicians. But for this conversation we’ll concentrate on those political creations, and only a few of those.

Religious groups: primarily Christian and non-Christian. Regardless of what some politicians maintain, America was established on well defined Christian principles. For whatever reason, the last few decades many on the Left (the Democrat side) have fought against those principles.

Not only have there been attacks by the Left against Christian principles, there has been massive support of other religions in the World at the expense of Christians and Christianity.

Islam and the Muslim faith has been growing exponentially everywhere on the Globe — even in the U.S. Political support from the Left for the religion and those who embrace it has become dramatically obvious. Democrat leaders have in almost total unity shown massive support for the Muslim faith and Muslim people. Their support has never been so obvious than when horrors are perpetrated by Muslims both in the U.S. and in other nations.

There are multiple examples. But the most recent came from Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar who recently described the 9/11 attacks and that day in this way: “Some people did some thing.” She very obviously did NOT use the term “terrorists” or “terrorism” in her statement about the slaughter of 3000 Americans that day. Further, she did NOT refer to the perpetrators as “Islamists” or “Muslims” or “Terrorists.” She referred to them as “Some People.”

Democrat leaders refused to censure her or even make a unified statement against her characterizations. Why? “Group-Think” and Unity.

To further illustrate how this has become so prevalent, Easter Sunday more than 300 Christians were murdered by a series of suicide bomb attacks against worshippers in 3 churches and several hotels in Sri Lanka. While most Republican leaders when issuing statements about the horrible slaughter of primarily Christians worshipping God in their churches on Easter Sunday — the most holy day of the year for Christians, former President Obama and Hillary Clinton in their statements refused to use the word “Christians” when describing who were murdered.

It is important to note that both aggressively damned Islamophobia when a white Christian from Australia several weeks earlier killed a number of Muslims in New Zealand in a Mosque. Ms. Clinton tweeted her outrage: “We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms. White supremacist terrorists (another “group” created by Democrats) must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.”

She made sure to condemn “Islamophobia,” but she wrote not a word about the far more destructive and widespread hatred of Christians in the Muslim world, seen in Muslims’ virtual elimination of the Christian communities in the Middle East, the regular murder and kidnappings of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and the murder of Christians in Nigeria. She calls on “leaders everywhere” to condemn “white supremacist terrorists,” one of the smallest hate groups on Earth, but never calls on leaders everywhere to condemn Islamist terrorists, the largest hate group on Earth.

Essentially, the Left’s rule is that nothing bad — no matter how true — may be said about Muslims or Islam and nothing good — no matter how true — may be said of Christians or Christianity.

Obama and Clinton refused to use the term ”Christians” when referring to those killed opting to both use the exact same term ”Easter Worshippers” instead. Think there was some Democrat talking-point coordination?

Racial groups: The most obvious time of racial unity in the U.S. came with the attack on Pearl Harbor. It seems that such horrors bring people together rather than divide them. For years Americans dropped (in most cases) all the garbage that came for years from racial groupings and all the resulting tension and uproar between Americans. It has become commonplace for African Americans and Caucasians to be incessantly in conflict with each other. It seems there’s very little effort to find commonalities and concentrate on those rather than concentrating on differences. (That’s not just in racial groups and their differences but between ALL groups)

I would be remiss if I did not point out some dangerous results from this regarding intentional blurring of racial truths. Democrats have always branded Conservatives (Republicans) as the bad guys when it comes to dealing with racial differences. Of course that means Democrats are the good guys. And there are plenty of lies in that regard that have been perpetuated for decades:

Democrats did NOT end slavery as many maintain. Abraham Lincoln led the Civil War to end slavery. He was a Republican;
Democrats did NOT give African Americans the right to vote. In fact, in great majority Democrats voted against the Constitutional Amendment giving them voting rights. Republicans voted it in;
Democrats did NOT pass the Civil Rights Act in the early 1960’s. President Johnson (a Democrat) could not get close to a majority of Congressional Democrats to vote for it. Republicans with a majority of THEIR votes passed the law;
Democrats did NOT get approval for blacks to serve in the U.S. military. Former General and President Dwight Eisenhower (a Republican) led the charge to get Republicans to approve that bill that eventually became law.

Here’s where the Democrats (who are masterful at getting its members in locked-step to back the party’s positions, policies, and actions) have really messed up: getting their adherents to believe in almost anything and most everything their leadership puts out has resulted in millions of Americans to believe untruths. Benign and blind following not only finds Democrat followers walking down the wrong paths, they’re walking hand in hand with other Democrats who because of the group they are in blindly agree to those paths.

Summary

We can go much farther down the road in this conversation, but I’m certain you understand what’s happening around us in this regard. No doubt there are “group-thinkers” in the Republican Party. Why? There are simply many people who prefer to blindly follow than to creatively dig to find facts on their own to believe.

And there is no doubt the Republican Party is full of people who are wrong about many things they believe. That is a product of human nature. Human nature is what powerful politicians have discovered in its weakness, it can be exploited to assist in a political party in achieving Mob Rule, sometimes called “Group-Think.”

I am NOT a Republican nor a Democrat. I am registered in my state as “Other.” But don’t be naive: there are plenty of people in the U.S. and the World who put people like me and those in the “Other” designation with me as a “group.” Some think those in our group are good people while others certainly think those in that group are evil.

What we must learn is that such has always occurred and always will. What we must also learn is responsibility to impact our world by teaching independent thinking and feeding the hunger of the quest for the Truth.

I am convinced that Truth is available for all those who diligently seek it and those who refuse to settle for less. That doesn’t mean everyone must think the same about everything. Such determination must be individual and will always draw from one’s personal circumstances and environment. But Truth is NEVER to be something that is a result of the denigration of anyone else. Your worth is never changed by anything that someone else thinks, says, or does.

God made us all individuals. And there’s no one on Earth identical to you!

What About Hillary?

April 26, 2019

We know from being doused with 24/7 news reports that Democrats are going after everything Donald Trump: his personal attorney, company accountant, his tax returns, etc. That’s ALL Democrat members of Congress are about. But now that the Mueller Investigation is history, what’s going on regarding all the exposed wrongdoing of numerous Democrats from the Obama Administration? Think about it: National Security Adviser Susan Rice, UN Ambassador Samantha Power, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, DNI Head James Clapper, Justice Department operatives Peter Strozk, Lisa Page, James Baker, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, (and the list goes on and on) ALL were implicated by hard evidence of wrongdoing revealed during the past 2 years. Are they simply going to go free, escaping penance for all the evil they participated in? Or are they going to be held accountable?

We know that Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz has been investigating wrongdoing in the DOJ for the last year or so. And we are told that Federal Attorney John Huber from Utah since tasked by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in November of 2017 is still investigating apparent wrongdoing by the Clinton Foundation and the Clintons regarding possible criminal actions in the Uranium One transaction with Russia. But we don’t know exactly what the pair are specifically investigating or who. And Americans — MANY Americans — are chomping at the bit to get the details of these 2 investigations.

And what about Hillary?

I won’t list all the details of the illegal acts committed by the Obama Secretary of State and two-time presidential candidate. Everyone knows details of enough of those to know that if an average American was found to have done even 1 or 2 of those things, they’d have been charged, tried, convicted, and would be serving time in federal prison. So far, Hillary has been “bulletproof.” And with all of her exposed garbage, one would expect her to be quiet and certainly away from news reporters and their cameras. But Hillary cannot avoid the press:

I was floored that TIME would question Hillary about the “truth” of impeachment. When you lookup the term “political corruption,” Hillary’s picture is adjacent to the definition. How and why she is given any credit by anyone regarding the validity of any information or explanation she may share regarding anything to do with politics is beyond human comprehension.

We’ll have more to discuss about Mrs. Clinton personally a bit later.

The “Gang” at The Clinton Foundation

Pretty much lost in the exhaustive conversations during the post-2016 election hoopla have been what’s going on with investigations in The Clinton Foundation. The Department of Justice (DOJ) confirmed it received multiple referrals for criminal investigations related to Uranium One and the Foundation in the past two years. One source reported that the referrals sent to the Justice Department have led to ongoing investigations into the controversial deal that allowed 20% of U.S. uranium resources to be placed under the control of Moscow. The investigations also dive into allegations of pay-for-play at the Clinton Foundation.

Multiple sources, including congressional officials, told Circa News that the requests sent to the Department of Justice have led to ongoing investigations, which they say also include investigations into the alleged leaking of classified information to the media and the improper unmasking of Americans.

DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Flores stated, “the department takes seriously all allegations from Congress of criminal conduct in determining whether to open an investigation.” She said, “requests to open an investigation would be referred to the appropriate investigative agency, such as the FBI, for review.”

Flores said, “all allegations are reviewed in light of the principles of federal prosecution. And while some may find it frustrating at times, the Department has a policy against confirming or denying the existence of investigations in order to maintain the integrity of the process until and if charges are filed.

That FBI “Bombshell” Witness

Remember a year ago that it was revealed the FBI uncovered a massive bribery, corruption and racketeering scheme before the Obama Administration approved the Uranium One deal? The last news we heard came shortly after the Trump DOJ cleared a confidential informant for the FBI to testify before Congress on Uranium One. The decision lifted an unprecedented non-disclosure agreement, allowing him to testify about what he witnessed undercover surrounding Russia’s efforts to corner the global uranium market.

“It was expected to also prove damning to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who ran the FBI during what numerous experts say appears to be a scheme to coverup potential crimes resulting from the deal. Then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, who is now the Deputy Attorney General and the man who appointed Mr. Mueller, oversaw the investigation.”

Senator Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for another special counsel to investigate the Obama-Clinton era deal, particularly given Mr. Mueller’s role in the investigation. While his committee launched a probe as well, only the powers granted to a federal prosecutor can get to the bottom of what appears to be a clear cut Clinton quid pro quo. A growing number of lawmakers in both the House and Senate joined Chairman Grassley in that call. (Wonder where that investigation stands — especially in light of the Mueller connection!)

The Uranium One “Scam”

FBI documents show Vadim Mikerin, the director of Rosatom’s Tenex in Moscow, was engaged in illegal activity as early as the fall of 2009.

“As part of the scheme, Mikerin, with the consent of higher level officials at TENEX and Rosatom (both Russian state-owned entities) would offer no-bid contracts to US businesses in exchange for kickbacks in the form of money payments made to some offshore banks accounts,” Agent David Gadren testified. “Mikerin apparently then shared the proceeds with other co-conspirators associated with TENEX in Russia and elsewhere.”

However, the Obama Administration still allowed him to enter the country with a L1 temporary work visa.

At the time, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence against him and the Russian plot to corner the global uranium market. Worth noting, the Uranium One deal did not permit the exporting of the material out of the U.S., but unknown quantities have been exported to unknown nations and parties. And who knows where that uranium went from there? (Anyone think it may be Russia?)

Incidentally: when calls were made to the FBI for updates on the status of the Uranium One-Clinton Foundation investigation, no one will comment.

How/What do we “Know” about Hillary and Bill’s use of her State Department Job?

While Hillary was Obama’s Secretary of State, Bill Clinton’s office proposed 215 speeches around the globe during his wife’s tenure at State. And 215 times the State Department stated that it had “no objection.” There are more than 200 conflict-of-interest reviews by State Department ethics advisers. These “reviews” considered speaking engagements and consulting arrangements proposed by Bill Clinton speaking during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

These documents also show that the State Department approved a consulting arrangement with a company, Teneo Strategy, led by controversial Clinton Foundation adviser Doug Band. The Clintons ended the deal after only eight months, as criticism mounted over Teneo’s ties to the failed investment firm, MF Global.

So we know that the Obama administration’s judgment as to what constitutes a “conflict of interest” is skewed, to put it nicely. Still, Bill was really busy on the Speaking Tour. Let’s take a quick look at where President Clinton took his business and the types of companies that were involved:

appearances in China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Central America, Europe, Turkey, Thailand, Taiwan, India and the Cayman Islands.
Sponsors of the speeches included some of the world’s largest financial institutions—Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, American Express and others—as well as major players in technology, energy, health care and media.
Other speech sponsors included a car dealership, casino groups, hotel operators, retailers, real estate brokers, a Panamanian air cargo company and a sushi restaurant.

And, again, zero objections from the Obama administration.

How the Obama State Department waived hundreds of ethical conflicts that allowed the Clintons and their businesses to accept money from foreign entities and corporations seeking influence boggles the mind. That former President Clinton trotted the globe collecting huge speaking fees while his wife presided over U.S. foreign policy is an outrage. Clinton “earned $48 million while his wife presided over U.S. foreign policy, raising questions about whether the Clintons fulfilled ethics agreements related to the Clinton Foundation during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State.”

That main ethics agreement Hillary signed when accepting her appointment as the Obama Secretary of State? Hillary and Bill both committed that The Clinton Foundation would accept NO funds from any foreign entities while she was in office: foreign countries OR companies. Saudi Arabia gave $10 million to $25 million to the foundation. Other government donors include Norway, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman — no known discussions with any in the Obama White House and no known disclosure by the Clintons as these foreign donations hit the Foundation’s account.

Now the Answer to “What About Hillary?”

Yesterday it was released by Judicial Watch that a slew of those missing Hillary emails — remember those “30,000 deleted emails that dealt with yoga and Chelsea’s wedding plans” — have been discovered! Here’s the report:

Judicial Watch announced today that a senior FBI official admitted, in writing and under oath, that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President. The FBI also admitted nearly 49,000 Clinton server emails were reviewed as result of a search warrant for her material on the laptop of Anthony Weiner.

E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, made the disclosure to Judicial Watch as part of court-ordered discovery into the Clinton email issue. U.S District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, as well as Priestap, to be deposed or answer writer questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

Uh Oh: Hillary just MAY be in some trouble! But the trouble for Hillary got just a bit worse:

“This astonishing confirmation, made under oath by the FBI, shows that the Obama FBI had to go to President Obama’s White House office to find emails that Hillary Clinton tried to destroy or hide from the American people.” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “No wonder Hillary Clinton has thus far skated – Barack Obama is implicated in her email scheme.”

The Finish

Let’s be honest: so far, almost without exception, the Clintons have been bulletproof. They have escaped virtually unscathed in multiple investigations, (Bill even from impeachment) and have avoided any nasty prosecution, even though they have been the subjects of even many more “look-sees” than any of us know about. For 30 years the Clintons have been the darlings of the Left. Bill’s tenure as Arkansas Attorney General, Governor, then U.S. President, and Hillary’s as a big shot lawyer in Arkansas, a First Lady, New York U.S. Senator, 2-time presidential candidate and Secretary of State have ALL been marked with innumerable allegations of wrongdoing, shady dealings with shady characters, infidelity, adultery, misuse of funds, skirting the law, and now probable obstruction of justice. And that list is only a part of what they’ve done!

What’s going to happen to Hillary? I think it would be foolish for anyone to speculate at there being any serious accountability for her wrongs. Why? She’s NEVER been touched for ANY of her wrongdoing. If it happens now, it will be a first.

Let me wrap this up by saying this: the fact that a former president, former U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, a 2-time presidential candidate and the principals in a massive charitable foundation could have through a couple of decades involved themselves in all of the above misdeeds and many more not mentioned, and never paid any type of legal penalty for any of it is virtually impossible! But more than that, it’s a sad tale about how deep, wide, and massive is the U.S. world of political corruption that is centered in Washington D.C. but operates in all 50 states and in numerous countries around the world. And we in the United States when confronted with the tidbits of news about it we hear always seem to turn a deaf ear. That can be the ONLY reason why Hillary has never paid any price for all that she has done.

There are a couple of principles I’ll close by mentioning: “Be sure your sins will find you out.” (Numbers 32:23) Also, Genesis 8:22: “As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease.” What that means is we always get in life the fruit of the exact seed we sow. When we plant watermelon seeds, the only thing that will grow is watermelons. Hillary has planted a bunch of bad seed in the ground. I’m pretty sure we’re close to “harvest time.”

Wonder what Hillary fruit is going to pop up first?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

“Left”

April 25, 2019

Hmmm…I’m sure our title made you ask a few questions about today’s story. We could mean “Left, as in Democrats and those politically left of Democrats.” Or we could mean “Left, as in ‘Left Behind.'” (That’s a Christian movie that depicts how people here respond after the Rapture happens. The Rapture is the Biblical event when Christ reappears to take Christians who are alive to Heaven) But our story today doesn’t reference either. Today we are looking at “Left,” as in “What is remaining.” It may have been more appropriate to title today’s offering as “What is Remaining.”

It is pretty simple for every American to know what has not been left in current American governing: “Investigate.” We have just completed 2+ years of a federal Special Counsel investigation of the President and his 2016 campaign for the purposes of establishing the validity of claims that he or his campaign staff members or both worked with Russia to impact the 2016 presidential election results in his favor. Special Counsel Mueller left NOTHING to question in his 488-page report detailing their findings. Mueller made it abundantly clear that through that intense investigation in which 37 indictments were issued, none of which were for the President or those in his campaign for working with the Russians or even having ties to the Russians regarding his campaign.

During the investigation, Democrats along with several Establishment Republicans feared that President Trump would somehow either fire Mueller or interfere with his investigation. There were serious discussions on Capitol Hill about passing legislation to prevent the President from doing so. No such legislation was passed. And it certainly came as a surprise to those Democrat and Republican worriers that the President nor anyone in his administration made any attempt to fire Mueller, interfere with the investigation in any way, or even to use a declaration of Executive Privilege to shield from the public any of the Mueller findings that directly impacted the investigation of the President. You probably know this: the President had every legal right to fire Mueller and/or to exert Executive Privilege, both of which he declined to use.

But even with the exhaustive Mueller report, Democrats 2+ years of fawning over “their guy” Mueller and how he was the only person in D.C. with any legal credibility, and that he certainly would find any dirt on the President who they all knew had worked with Putin to change the election results, Democrats en masse refuse to accept Mueller’s results. Instead, they have another plan: “INVESTIGATE!” And it has already turned into a three-ring circus. Who is surprised?

Everyday Americans find themselves staring into a quagmire of government today that they depend on for protection, for governing, and for assurance that everything is O.K. Yet those Americans see their elected officials abandon THOSE necessary and committed to accomplishing tasks. In their abandonment, they are simply today doing one thing and one thing only in their governing responsibilities: INVESTIGATE President Trump.

They are doing so in spite of the fact that their proverbial “Good Guy” — Robert Mueller — found NOTHING to justify taking any action against President Trump. Yet Democrat leaders are totally committed to forcing Trump out of office. In doing so, if they are successful, they will accomplish one thing and one thing only: the subversion of the results of a legal presidential election. In doing so, if successful they will negate the votes of over 60 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump.

To that end, today we are bringing to the forefront a question that few are yet asking and even fewer are concentrating on: What things in D.C. are NOT getting done — “Left” undone — that our lawmakers could and should be doing? We at TruthNewsNetwork have done the “deep-dive” for you, and the results are below. They will certainly shock you. But more than shock, they will anger you — as well they should. Take a ride with us on today’s “Deep-Dive.”

What’s “Left?”

Before we look at what’s “Left” that is undone in Congress, would you like to see just how busy Nancy Pelosi’s House of Representatives is this week? After all, their promise was that if voters gave Democrats back the House, they would push through all the legislation that Republicans failed to implement that are critical to the U.S. and its citizens. They won the House. And, Boy, they are really busy! Here is the full agenda of the House of Representatives for the last 3 days: April 22,23, and 24 of 2019. (This story is being written Wednesday, April 24, 2019, to be published Thursday, April 25)

Monday, 4/22

Mondays are usually really busy when the House is in session. That’s the day that lawmakers file most of the bills to be considered during that week. This past Monday, they loaded up their agenda for legislation for the entire week:

1. H.R.2348 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) To require automatic sealing of certain criminal records, and for other purposes.

2. H.R.2349 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) Climate Change Education Act

3. H.R.2350 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) To award a Congressional Gold Medal to the 23d Headquarters, Special Troops, and the 3133rd Signal Service Company, in recognition of their unique and highly distinguished service as a “Ghost Army” that conducted deception operations in Europe during World War II.

4. H.R.2351 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) Protecting Airport Communities from Particle Emissions Act

5. H.R.2352 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) To improve the ability of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Coast Guard, and coastal States to sustain healthy ocean and coastal ecosystems by maintaining and sustaining their capabilities relating to oil spill preparedness, prevention, and response, and for other purposes.

6. H.Con.Res.35 — 116th Congress (2019-2020) Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States is committed to ensuring a safe and healthy climate for future generations, and to create solutions for restoring the climate.

Whoo-Who! They worked their butts off, didn’t they? Gotta’ seal those criminal records; plan to educate today’s tender youth to the vast truths about climate change; award those mighty men who served as a “Ghost Army” in WWII (definitely a worthy cause); Particle emission police desperately needed for Airport communities; Earth would disappear without NOAA’s exhaustive preparations for that next oil spill; and that resolution to tell the World that Congress is committed to Climate Change!

Wednesday, 4/24

The House had no floor action on Wednesday and had one committee meeting:

Committee on Education and Labor Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Investment and Committee on Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity joint field hearing entitled Protecting Those Who Protect Us: Ensuring the Success of our Student Veterans

But wait: you forgot about Tuesday!

They were so worn out from Monday’s massive workload, they decided to take care of ZERO legislation on Tuesday of this week.

But one thing is certain: there were dozens and dozens of House meetings — many were one-on-one — to discuss the latest plethora of intricate plans to initiate the most important legislation of this century: IMPEACH DONALD TRUMP!

Let’s Get to “What’s Left”

This is not really a hard one. We’ve all known for the 2 years since the 2016 election and even the 2 years before what the most important issues in American’s lives are. But just in case you forgot, we’ll mention them here:

Immigration To Americans, (depending on what’s happening on any one day in the U.S.) fixing the immigration system is the #1 issue, or at least always in the top 3. The promises to totally repair our broken legal immigration system, stop ALL illegal immigration, and to first build a wall on our southern border was the #1 reason Americans voted Donald Trump into office. The President put several bills in front of Democrats in his first 2 years. One of them even included the Holy Grail of immigration for Democrats: a path to citizenship for DACA recipients! Democrats have screamed for that for years. But Democrats obviously turned down that offer and every other immigration reform offer from the President. Why do you think that is? Simple: they refuse to do ANYTHING in legislation that any American will consider something initiated by President Trump. They simply don’t want to give him a win on anything. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of illegals flock to our southern border every week and are — because of judicial political partisanship — crushing our financial, educational, and medical systems by pushing the usages of those processes beyond their capabilities. And let’s not even think about the hundreds of thousands of felonies committed by many of these illegals that not only have filled our prisons but have raped, murdered, robbed, and invaded homes of thousands of Americans while the immigration system looks exactly like Barack Obama left it: broken, wide-open, and dangerous. (No House Immigration legislation being considered this week)
Healthcare is another big reason why Donald Trump was elected President. The American Healthcare System does NOT need to be fixed: it’s in great shape and is one of the best in the World. Healthcare “finance” is broken and needs a drastic change. Don’t confuse the two. ObamaCare was and is a nightmare for Americans. You all know the horrors of its financial structure and the lies told by everyone at the top of the Obama Administration (including Obama himself) to shove it down the throats of a willing American populace. Candidate Trump and almost every GOP member of Congress ran for election and re-election on the promise of “We’ll repeal and replace Obamacare if elected!” They were elected — and, thanks to the late Senator John McCain (R-AZ), could not even bring it to the floor of the Senate to debate alternatives after the House sent over a bill passed to repeal ObamaCare. Healthcare finance’s traumatic condition is about to tear our nation’s healthcare system apart. Democrats promised — if they won the House — to fix healthcare finance. (No House Healthcare Finance legislation being considered this week)
Infrastructure America’s highways, including interstate routes, are in almost universal disrepair. This was the one American political issue most thought could easily get done. Donald Trump while campaigning made a promise for legislation he would get Republicans to offer and pass in a Trump administration. In his first year as president, he sent an infrastructure bill to Congress that was a behemoth. It’s framework including massive spending made possible by federal, state, and private entities working together to underwrite and implement the greatest U.S. infrastructure rebuilding program in history. It did not even get to first base! Democrats, however, promised to (with a win in the House in 2018) make Infrastructure their priority. They won the House, but no Infrastructure bill has shown up. (No House Infrastructure legislation being considered this week)
Middle-Class Tax Cuts Many in America laughed at President Trump’s campaign promises to reduce federal income taxes on the Middle Class if he was elected. And he did just that. 95% of all Americans saw their 2018 personal income taxes reduced. Democrats, however, clung to a lie for the entire year of 2018, telling Americans that those tax cuts benefited only America’s wealthy. When “Tax Time” for 2018 tax filing began, surprise, surprise: the Middle-Class tax cuts were confirmed! Democrats promised that with a win of the House, THEY would give the Middle Class a well-deserved tax cut. (No House Middle-Class legislation being considered this week)
Foreign Policy Democrats have always fashioned their party to be the only group to have legitimacy with citizens and leaders of foreign nations. Americans watched during the 8-year Obama presidency as American credibility overseas dwindled dramatically. Foreign leaders did not feel comfortable that they could trust the U.S. to fulfill its promises and its obligations to their countries. Democrats spent the first 2 years of Trump’s term deriding his attempts to bridge gaps that had become so rampant and obvious between the U.S. and other countries. But, lo and behold, respect for America zoomed back to the world stage with President Trump. Democrats promised with their control of the House they would reclaim the once stellar foreign policy reputation with government counterparts around the world. Speaker Pelosi even made a world tour to Europe during the Christmas/New Years holiday to assure our foreign allies that Democrats would now control foreign policy legislation and that SHE has the same power as the U.S. President. By all accounts, Pelosi was virtually laughed out of Europe! (By the way: No House Foreign Policy legislation being considered this week)

Summary

We could go on and on, but we won’t. Americans on the most part see and recognize that President Trump — even with 95% negative slant of all media stories about him, those in his administration, his policies, his haircut, and even members of his family, this President has accomplished almost all of the things on which he campaigned. And those he has failed on were due to the unwillingness of Congress to pass his proposed legislation. No other President in my lifetime has achieved nearly as much in their first 2 years as Donald Trump.

AND MOST AMERICANS DON’T EVEN KNOW THE MAJORITY OF HIS ACCOMPLISHMENTS. WHY? THE MEDIA DO NOT REPORT THEM!

Do you know what Democrats are doing instead of conducting the business of America, which is supposed to be legislating? They ONLY look ahead to the next election. All of their activities are to assure their existing power in that election while hopefully adding the Senate AND the White House to their “power-stash.”

So what’s their plan? What’s their platform? What are they going to do for Americans if they get that additional significant power?

ANSWER: Whatever they want to do. And certainly with little or NO regard for the desires of the American electorate.

Don’t be shocked; don’t be angry at TruthNewsNetwork for telling you that. You’re all plenty capable to grasp what’s going on. In case you missed it, here in brief bullet point format to close today is exactly what Democrats are doing now and plan to do through the 2020 election.

Now they are doing this:

Investigating Donald Trump

What else are they going to do until the 2020 election?

Investigate Donald Trump

What is the Democrat Party Platform for 2020?

Investigate Donald Trump

” C’est tout!” (French for, “That’s All, Folks!)

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Fear and Loathing

April 24, 2019

FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS ‘72 is a book written by Hunter Thomson. It was a sequel to the original, “FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS.”

The ‘72 book focuses almost exclusively on the Democrat Party’s primaries and the breakdown of the party as it split between the different candidates. Of particular focus was the manic maneuvering of the George McGovern campaign during the Miami convention as they sought to ensure the Democrat nomination despite attempts by the Hubert Humphrey campaign and other candidates to block McGovern.

Thompson began his coverage of the campaign in December 1971, just as the race toward the primaries was beginning, from a rented apartment in Washington, D.C. Over the next 12 months, in great detail, he covered every aspect of the campaign, from the smallest rally to the raucous conventions.

The War

It is uncanny the many parallels between the 1972 election and the upcoming 2020 election as Dems already at 20 in number have begun what is already a vicious battle for the Democrat Party spot to face-off against Donald Trump. Each of the already declared Dem hopefuls certainly dreads that the tactics used against McGovern in 1972 and similarly in 2016 against Bernie Sanders to make certain he would not take the party nomination away from Hillary might reappear in 2020. But stranger things have happened.

There already is a war of agreement between the declared Democrat candidates. Their war? It’s against capitalism and all who stand for it — especially Donald Trump. A large part of the Democrat Party actually has been brainwashed to some mystical magic in Socialism. Those people are fearful that capitalism will remain in the U.S. It’s funny: every GOOD thing we have in America is a direct result of capitalism and its opportunities for all. Socialism? There’s no example in World history of Socialism EVER surviving. Why? To quote former U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher: “Socialism always fails because you eventually run out of other people’s money to spend.”

That being said, the skeletal pieces of the Democrat Party platform are so outlandish (at least so far to most Americans) it remains to be seen when the internal attacks among these candidates that are certain to show up during their primaries will begin. But there is plenty of ammunition they can use.

Fear

There certainly was fear in 1972 among Democrats. Half of Democrats feared McGovern winning their nomination and the other half were afraid of Humphrey doing so. The loathing was divided the same way. It had been quite a while that Dems were split and so divided. Remember: they had been through a glorious decade that began with the installation of “Camelot” at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. JFK’s personal magnetism and populist message united Democrats in a way unseen decades. His tragic death left a massive hole that none could plug until Bill Clinton.

Clinton put Democrat fears to rest for a while. Democrats seized the opportunity for power. Clinton led the takeover of the American government while conservatives slept in America. By the time George W. Bush took the oath of office, Democrats had transformed every government agency in D.C. to operate simply as a tool for Democrat leaders. The tool used to seize benign support was the hunger by those politicos to be invited “in” to partake of the freebies of unimaginable magnitude that accompanies unfettered power and control of every part of U.S. government. I’ve often wondered why the Democrats so adore Bill Clinton, especially with the plethora of examples of corruption during his 8 years. He created and implemented the methodology that literally took the U.S. government control away from “we the People” and gave it to the leaders of the Democrat Party. Probably 95% of the middle class that are members of the Democrat Party have no idea how that other 5% use hundreds of processes created by their hero and his minions in the 90s to stealthily take control of our government. It’s so bad today that the only thing left for the American people is the right to vote. And Dems have watered down what our vote means or if it means anything at all. And to regain all the power they lost they desperately fight to eliminate the electoral college which is the only protection from the government the American voters still “own.”

Democrats fear American conservatives and conservatism itself. Why? Those Americans and conservatism are the only 2 things that can “steal” back that power that Democrats have “stolen” from Americans. They fear the truth that they see and hear from Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, FOX News, Breitbart, Bongino, and the few conservative newspapers in the country that are believed by Americans who went to sleep regarding the political process 20 years ago. They fear the Truth! They fear that the sleeping giant of “government, by, of, and for the People” will awaken Americans to the sneaky giant of Big Government who has already wrestled D.C. power away and has initiated an all-out war to hold onto it.

Leftists fear Donald Trump. Why? Not one national politician in recent history has ever won a presidency and given to the American public what they promised during their campaigns: Democrat OR Republican! Donald Trump is the first since Reagan. And they are scared to death of the wins during the young Trump presidency that includes his campaign promises.

How could their missionary appointed to send Trump packing using the fake Steele Dossier as evidence of Trump colluding with Russians in 2016 fail in that one simple task? How could Mueller with an unlimited budget, staff, and access to all things Donald Trump fail to find enough evidence against Trump to jumpstart Impeachment? They are so afraid that their determination was to simply ignore their hero’s findings of “No there-there” and decided to just pick up the mantle of “dumping Trump” themselves, and with their newfound control of the House investigate everything and everybody that has any Trump connections into oblivion!

That’s how fearful they all are.

Loathing

Loathing defined: “extreme disgust: detestation, aversion, disgust, distaste, horror, nausea, repugnance, repulsion, revulsion.”

We’d be here all night if we listed everything and everybody Democrats loathe. Let’s just bullet point a few.

Democrats Loath:

President Donald Trump.
Everyone who works for the President.
Every member of his family.
Attorney General William Barr.
Republican leadership in the House and the Senate.
Every elected Republican or Conservative in Congress.
FOX News and every other honest news reporting entity.
Republican National Committee.
The “Rule of Law.”
Equal Justice Under the Law.
The U.S. Constitution.
The electoral college.
National Borders.
U.S. Immigration in its entirety.
ICE and all those who work within ICE.
Immigration Laws.
Campaign finance laws.
Tax Reductions on corporations and Americans personally

What do Liberals (Democrats) loathe the most? Americans who voted for and support Donald Trump.

Here’s where they are headed. They certainly have very obviously shown their total rejection of the findings of their “darling” Robert Mueller. Their fear and loathing just launched their processes of “going after all things Trump” into a Part 2. Oh, they’re going to impeach this president. We at TruthNewsNetwork have maintained that since the day the Mueller probe was announced. After all, Donald Trump has attacked their gravy train of unadulterated power. And the one tool that Trump has used to bring success in that process is something that horrifies Democrats and liberals who are even farther Left than Dems: Totalitarianists. And remember that those Far-Leftists are pushing the Democrat Party farther left than it has ever been in American history.

How will they get to impeachment if Mueller found no collusion and no obstruction of justice? In closing, rather than us giving you our summary and answer that question, let’s turn to one of the ringleaders of the process of “dumping Trump,” Representative Jerold Nadler (D-NY) who is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. That’s where (if Democrats do launch formal impeachment actions) Articles of Impeachment must be created. Listen closely to what he says in this conversation with ABC’s George Stephanopolous:

Nadler, an attorney who NEVER practiced law after he got his law degree in New York, who has been a politician his whole life, who in this interview in error calls Robert Mueller Special “Prosecutor” rather than “Counsel,” which is what Mueller was, will ultimately drive the impeachment train of Congress to perpetuate this dark chapter in American history, which is the largest and most obvious attempt by one large group of people to overturn the results of a legal and just election of an American president without a shred of evidence supporting their doing so.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Russian Hacking: It’s True Part 2

April 22, 2019

In Part I of this revelation, we proved to our readers/listeners that there actually WAS Russian hacking attempts that in some cases were successful during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. There really is “there-there.” Today as promised we go into “who” and “how” it happened.

This is really important information — stuff Americans need to understand. Read and listen closely! And make certain you look-in to our Summary at the completion of this story.

Leaks and Counterfeit Profiles

Russia has been quite open about playing its hacking card. At a conference in Moscow, a top cyberintelligence adviser to President Vladimir Putin hinted that Russia was about to unleash a devastating information attack on the United States.

“We are living in 1948,” said the adviser, Andrey Krutskikh, referring to the eve of the first Soviet atomic bomb test, in a speech reported by The Washington Post. “I’m warning you: We are at the verge of having something in the information arena that will allow to us to talk to the Americans as equals.”

Mr. Putin’s denials of Russian meddling have been tongue-in-cheek. He allowed that “free-spirited” hackers might have awakened in a good mood one day and spontaneously decided to contribute to “the fight against those who say bad things about Russia.” Speaking to NBC News, he rejected the idea that evidence pointed to Russia — while showing a striking familiarity with how cyberattackers might cover their tracks.

“IP addresses can be simply made up,” Mr. Putin said, referring to Internet protocol addresses, which can identify particular computers. “There are such IT specialists in the world today, and they can arrange anything and then blame it on whomever. This is no proof.”

Mr. Putin had a point. Especially in the social media realm, attributing fake accounts — to Russia or to any other source — is always challenging. The Central Intelligence Security Agency concluded“with high confidence” that Mr. Putin had ordered an influence operation to damage Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and eventually aid Donald J. Trump’s. Facebook published a public report on information operations using fake accounts. It shied away from naming Russia as the culprit until when the company said it had removed 470 “inauthentic” accounts and pages that were “likely operated out of Russia.” Facebook officials fingered a St. Petersburg company with Kremlin ties called the Internet Research Agency.

Russia deliberately hides its role in influence operations, American intelligence officials say. Even skilled investigators often cannot be sure if a particular Facebook post or Twitter bot came from Russian intelligence employees, paid “trolls” in Eastern Europe or hackers from Russia’s vast criminal underground. A Russian site called buyaccs.com(“Buy Bulk Accounts at Best Prices”) offers for sale a huge array of pre-existing social media accounts, including on Facebook and Twitter; like wine, the older accounts cost more, because their history makes hacking harder to spot.

The trail that leads from the Russian operation to the bogus Melvin Redick, however, is fairly clear. United States intelligence concluded that DCLeaks.com was created in June 2016 by the Russian military intelligence agency G.R.U. The site began publishing a collection of hacked emails, notably from George Soros, the financier and Democratic donor, as well as a former NATO commander and some Democratic and Republican staffers. Some of the website’s language — calling Mrs. Clinton “President of the Democratic Party” and referring to her “electional staff” — seemed to contradict its pose as a forum run by American activists.

DCLeaks would soon be followed by a blog called Guccifer 2.0, which would leave even more clues of its Russian origin. Those sites’ posts, however, would then be dwarfed by those from WikiLeaks, which American officials believe got thousands of Democratic emails from Russian intelligence hackers. At each stage, a Large group of Facebook and Twitter accounts — alongside many legitimate ones — would applaud the leaks.

During its first weeks online, DCLeaks saw no media attention. But The Times found that some Facebook users somehow discovered the new site quickly and began promoting it on June 8, 2016. One was the Redick account, which posted about DCLeaks to the Facebook groups “World News Headlines” and “Breaking News — World.”

Melvin Redick’s Facebook Profile

Inconsistencies in the contents of Mr. Redick’s Facebook profile suggest that the identity was fake.

Neither Central High School nor Indiana University of Pennsylvania has any record of Mr. Redick attending.
According to his profile, Mr. Redick was born and raised in Pennsylvania, but one image shows him seated in a restaurant in Brazil, and another shows a Brazilian-style electrical outlet in his daughter’s bedroom.
Mr. Redick’s posts were never of a personal nature. He shared only news articles reflecting a pro-Russian worldview.

The same morning, “Katherine Fulton” also began promoting DCLeaks in the same awkward English Mr. Redick used. “Hey truth seekers!” she wrote. “Who can tell me who are #DCLeaks? Some kind of Wikileaks? You should visit their website, it contains confidential information about our leaders such as Hillary Clinton, and others http://dcleaks.com/.”

So did “Alice Donovan,” who pointed to documents from Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundations that she said showed its pro-American tilt and — in rather formal language for Facebook — “describe eventual means and plans of supporting opposition movements, groups or individuals in various countries.”

Might Mr. Redick, Ms. Fulton, Ms. Donovan and others be real Americans who just happened to notice DCLeaks the same day? No. The Times asked Facebook about these and a half-dozen other accounts that appeared to be Russian creations. The company carried out its standard challenge procedure by asking the users to establish their bona fides. All the suspect accounts failed and were removed from Facebook.

On Twitter, meanwhile, hundreds of accounts were busy posting anti-Clinton messages and promoting the leaked material obtained by Russian hackers. Investigators for FireEye spent months reviewing Twitter accounts associated with certain online personas, posing as activists, that seemed to show the Russian hand: DCLeaks, Guccifer 2.0, Anonymous Poland and several others. FireEye concluded that they were associated with one another and with Russian hacking groups, including APT28 or Fancy Bear, which American intelligence blames for the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails.

Lee Foster, who leads the FireEye team examining information operations, said some of the warlist Twitter accounts had previously been used for illicit marketing, suggesting that they may have been purchased on the black market. Some were genuine accounts that had been hijacked. Rachel Usedom, a young American engineer in California, tweeted mostly about her sorority before losing interest in 2014. In November 2016, her account was taken over, renamed #ClintonCurruption, and used to promote the Russian leaks.

Rachel Usedom’s Twitter account was taken over and used to post political leaks.

Ms. Usedom had no idea that her account had been commandeered by anti-Clinton people who used her account to spread propaganda . “I was shocked and slightly confused when I found out,” she said.

Notably, the warlist tweets often included the Twitter handles of users whose attention the senders wanted to catch — news organizations, journalists, government agencies and politicians, including @realDonaldTrump. By targeting such opinion-shapers, Mr. Foster said, the creators of the warlists clearly wanted to stir up conversation about the leaked material.

J. M. Berger, a researcher in Cambridge, Mass., helped build a public web “dashboard” for the Washington-based Alliance for Securing Democracy to track hundreds of Twitter accounts that were suspected of links to Russia or that spread Russian propaganda. During the campaign, he said, he often saw the accounts post replies to Mr. Trump’s tweets.

Mr. Trump “received more direct replies than anyone else,” Mr. Berger said. “Clearly this was an effort to influence Donald Trump. They know he reads tweets.”

Only a small fraction of all the suspect social media accounts active during the election have been studied by investigators. But there is ample reason to suspect that the Russian meddling may have been far more widespread.

Several activists who ran Facebook pages for Bernie Sanders, for instance, noticed a suspicious flood of hostile comments about Mrs. Clinton after Mr. Sanders had already ended his campaign and endorsed her.

John Mattes, who ran the “San Diego for Bernie Sanders” page, said he saw a shift from familiar local commenters to newcomers, some with Eastern European names — including four different accounts using the name “Oliver Mitov.”

“Those who voted for Bernie, will not vote for corrupt Hillary!” one of the Mitovs wrote on Oct. 7. “The Revolution must continue! #NeverHillary”

While he was concerned about being seen as a “crazy cold warrior,” Mr. Mattes said he came to believe that Russia was the likely source of the anti-Clinton comments. “The magnitude and viciousness of it — I would suggest that their fingerprints were on it and no one else had that agenda,” he said.

Both on the left and the pro-Trump right, though, some skeptics complain that Moscow has become the automatic boogeyman, accused of misdeeds with little proof. Even those who track Russian online activity admit that in the election it was not always easy to sort out who was who.

“Yes, the Russians were involved. Yes, there was a lot of organic support for Trump,” said Andrew Weisburd, an Illinois online researcher who has written frequently about Russian influence on social media. “Trying to disaggregate the two was difficult, to put it mildly.”

Mr. Weisburd said he had labeled some Twitter accounts “Kremlin trolls” based simply on their pro-Russia tweets and with no proof of Russian government ties. The Times contacted several such users, who insisted that they had come by their anti-American, pro-Russian views honestly, without payment or instructions from Moscow.

“Hillary’s a warmonger,” said Marilyn Justice, 66, who lives in Nova Scotia and tweets as @mkj1951. Of Mr. Putin, she said in an interview, “I think he’s very patient in the face of provocations.”

Another of the so-called Kremlin trolls, Marcel Sardo, 48, a web producer in Zurich, describes himself bluntly on his Twitter bio as a “Pro-Russia Media-Sniper.” He said he shared notes daily via Skype and Twitter with online acquaintances, including Ms. Justice, on disputes between Russia and the West over who shot down the Malaysian airliner hit by a missile over Ukraine and who used sarin gas in Syria.

“It’s a battle of information, and I and my peers have decided to take sides,” said Mr. Sardo, who constantly cites Russian sources and bashed Mrs. Clinton daily during the campaign. But he denied he had any links to the Russian government.

But if Russian officials are happy at their success, in 2016’s election and beyond, they rarely let the mask slip. In an interview with Bloomberg before the election, Mr. Putin suggested that reporters were worrying too much about who exactly stole the material.

“Listen, does it even matter who hacked this data?” he said, in a point that Mr. Trump has sometimes echoed. “The important thing is the content that was given to the public.”

Summary

In the wake of the nonstop claims from absolutely everyone on the Left about Russian meddling in 2016 and even some Republicans, it’s good to finally have verification that it really happened. Even though the world knew the Russians were proficient and committed to diligently working to thwart the wills of voters not only in the U.S. but in other countries, it has been extremely puzzling to locate, identify, and confirm factual occurrences of their election tampering attempts. It’s even more difficult in the case of the 2016 U.S. election to find factual confirmation of any of their efforts having any substantial impact yet alone that they changed or affected actual vote counts.

But what it most certainly has done is alert Americans — ALL Americans — to the fact that several countries have been and are trying to interfere with our elections. I’m certain part of their hopes in doing so is to distract Americans and the government from foreign policies that impact their countries directly. Let’s be honest: the U.S. has consistently and diligently worked hard to do the same things in the elections of our foreign foes.

Intelligence spying capabilities throughout the world have far exceeded the capabilities that in the 1970s were seen and heard only in James Bond movies that we all thought were impossible and would never be achieved. Yes, in part we conduct such activities to keep Americans safe and our country free from outside interference from other countries. But let’s be clear about this: we are at a tipping point in how we not only listen-in and watch through spying and electronic surveillance the activities of our foreign enemies, we found out daily just how much our government is using these tactics in the name of the Law to monitor every aspect of AMERICANS’ lives. No matter what the leaders of the “Spook” agencies tell us, that capability with very little accountability to Americans is deadly. The scary stories contained in Orwells 1984 are actually reality today and have been for much longer than we even thought was possible.

What about Russia? No doubt they’re our #1 enemy. Even with our weakened economy for 8 years from Obama Administration financial starvation, we still have the #1 military on Earth. With the rebuilding of the military and our intelligence infrastructure being cleaned of those who have perpetrated these frauds on our public, we’re well on our way to putting significant space between us and Russia. But we better be smart. Unearthing their attempts to tamper with our elections is a big victory for us, but only if we take demonstrative actions.

Let their secrecy from those in the Obama Administration going unseen by our CIA, NSA, and FBI during the 2016 election cycle a warning. Unless we take care of our own country using every opening available to ferret out their foreign intelligence ploys, they will be here in great force very soon. Vladimir’s greatest desire is to instigate processes through KGB leftover ideas that dismantle the intelligence structure of the U.S., thereby forcing us to our knees. Say what you will about Donald Trump, but he promised to rebuild and re-establish the American military might and he’s started that process with a vengeance.

We close with this: did Russia change by their actions any votes from Hillary to Trump in 2016? We probably will never know. But what we DO know is they could have and almost certainly will going forward unless we take demonstrative steps to prevent those.

I know secrecy is critical regarding many elements of these efforts by our intelligence community. But certainly there are ways of communication they can use to make Americans feel comfortable that these agencies are really working for us. And instead of Congress chasing cameras all day every day to talk about Russia collusion, obstruction of justice, and impeachment, how about they instead pass meaningful legislation to make and keep America safe?

And they might start with stopping the aliens from storming our southern border. Those aliens are actually breaking the law!

Russian Hacking: It’s Real, Part I

April 21, 2019

I as well as millions of other Americans tired long ago about the reports we saw and heard over and over that “experts” continued to harass us with claiming “We know factually that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election in coordinated efforts to denigrate Hillary Clinton and to assist Donald Trump’s win of the White House.”

”Factually” is the word that perked me up: at TruthNewsNetwork we research, always digging for facts. I’m sure you will understand that when we are told by “experts” that something politically is “factual,” our stomachs turn and our heads ache because the belief that what political “experts” tell us today are “facts,” we are pretty certain they are NOT facts.

But in our patience and continued research, we have unearthed some facts about 2016 that support those Russian interference claims in 2016 with apparent attempts to discredit Clinton. We had significant help from other news sources in putting this together. (See credits at the end of this report) But saying this has been a difficult task and that there has been little cooperation from our normal sources is a gross understatement.

This report will be our ONLY such report going forward, so it is lengthy and detailed. We will present it in two parts to make it easier to digest. And we’ll hold our Summary until the end of Part II that you’ll see tomorrow.

Read carefully! There’s much “meat” in this. And it explains much and answers many questions you may have. But it will also initiate new questions for you. Let’s go!

The Fake Americans Russia Created to Influence the Election

I knew that the Russians had attempted on numerous occasions to impact the elections of foreign countries. So do the Chinese, and, for that matter, so does the United States! We’ve reported on those in previous reports here at TruthNewsNetwork. That being said, my assumption has always been that the NSA and the CIA as the two foremost U.S. intelligence agencies on the frontlines of defense of the nation’s IT infrastructure stopped every threat. Surely their protections extended into our election system. Because of the cloak of secrecy that covers both agencies, I assumed it was for that secrecy that none of their methods were known to the public.

I was shocked to learn that those “experts” probably were right. What was a bigger surprise was the way the Russians had sneaked into our IT infrastructure.

It’s not surprising the Russians use spies. They always do. We do, China does, and every other country on Earth does too. But apparently, the Russians in 2016 didn’t (at least on the most part) use actual Russian spies. They created “fake” Americans to be their spies.

Russian Spies in America

Melvin Redick of Harrisburg, PA, a friendly-looking American with a backward baseball cap and a young daughter, posted on Facebook a link to a brand-new website.

“These guys show hidden truth about Hillary Clinton, George Soros and other leaders of the US,” he wrote on June 8, 2016. “Visit #DCLeaks website. It’s really interesting!”

Mr. Redick turned out to be a remarkably elusive character. No Melvin Redick appears in Pennsylvania records, and his photos seem to be borrowed from an unsuspecting Brazilian. But this fictional concoction has earned a small spot in history: The Redick posts that morning were among the first public signs of an unprecedented foreign intervention in American democracy.

The DCLeaks site had gone live a few days earlier, posting the first samples of material, stolen from prominent Americans by Russian hackers, that would reverberate through the presidential election campaign and into the Trump presidency. The site’s phony promoters were in a cyber army of counterfeit Facebook and Twitter accounts, a legion of Russian-controlled impostors whose operations are still being unraveled.

The Russian information attack on the election did not stop with the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails or the onslaught of stories, true, false and in between, that battered Mrs. Clinton on Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik. Far more difficult to trace was Russia’s experimentation on Facebook and Twitter, the American companies that essentially invented the tools of social media and, in this case, did not stop them from being turned into the sources of deception and propaganda.

An investigation by The New York Times and new research from the cybersecurity firm FireEye reveals some of the mechanisms by which suspected Russian operators used Twitter and Facebook to spread anti-Clinton messages and promote the hacked material they had leaked. Recently, Facebook officials disclosed that they had shut down several hundred accounts that they believe were created by a Russian company linked to the Kremlin and used to buy $100,000 in ads pushing divisive issues during and after the American election campaign.

On Twitter, as on Facebook, Russian fingerprints are on hundreds or thousands of fake accounts that regularly posted anti-Clinton messages. Many were automated Twitter accounts, called bots, that sometimes fired off identical messages seconds apart — and in the exact alphabetical order of their made-up names, according to the FireEye researchers. On Election Day, for instance, they found that one group of Twitter bots sent out the hashtag #WarAgainstDemocrats more than 1,700 times.

The Russian efforts were sometimes crude, with a trial-and-error feel, and many of the suspect posts were not widely shared. The fakery may have added only modestly to the din of genuine American voices in the pre-election melee, but it helped fuel a fire of anger and suspicion in a polarized country.

A Times investigation reveals missed signals, slow responses and a continuing underestimation of the seriousness of a campaign to disrupt the 2016 presidential election.

Given the powerful role of social media in political contests, understanding the Russian efforts will be crucial in preventing similar, or more sophisticated, attacks in the 2020 congressional races and the presidential election. Multiple government agencies have investigated the Russian attack, though it remains unclear whether any agency is focused specifically on tracking foreign intervention in social media. Both Facebook and Twitter say they are studying the 2016 experience and how to defend against such meddling.

“We know we have to stay vigilant to keep ahead of people who try to misuse our platform,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s chief security officer, wrote in a post about the Russia-linked fake accounts and ads. “We believe in protecting the integrity of civic discourse.”

Critics say that because shareholders judge the companies partly based on a crucial data point — “monthly active users” — they are reluctant to police their sites too aggressively for fear of reducing that number. Remember: Facebook and Twitter are free to users. Advertising pays the bills AND investors their stock dividends. The more accounts, the more ads get sold and at higher prices.

The companies use technical tools and teams of analysts to detect bogus accounts, but the scale of the sites — 328 million users on Twitter, nearly two billion on Facebook — means they often remove impostors only in response to complaints.

Though both companies have been slow to grapple with the problem of manipulation, they have stepped up efforts to purge fake accounts. Facebook says it takes down a million accounts a day — including some that were related to the most recent French election and upcoming German voting — but struggles to keep up with the illicit activity. Still, the company says the abuse affects only a small fraction of the social network; Facebook officials estimated that of all the “civic content” posted on the site in connection with the United States election, less than one-tenth of one percent resulted from “information operations” like the Russian campaign.

Twitter, unlike Facebook, does not require the use of a real name and does not prohibit automated accounts, arguing that it seeks to be a forum for open debate. But it constantly updates a “trends” list of most-discussed topics or hashtags, and it says it tries to foil attempts to use bots to create fake trends. However, FireEye found that the suspected Russian bots sometimes managed to do just that, in one case causing the hashtag #HillaryDown to be listed as a trend.

Clinton Watts, a former F.B.I. agent who has closely tracked Russian activity online said that Facebook and Twitter suffered from a “bot cancer eroding trust on their platforms.” But he added that while Facebook “has begun cutting out the tumors by deleting false accounts and fighting fake news,” Twitter has done little and as a result, “bots have only spread since the election.”

Asked to comment, Twitter referred to a blog post in June in which it said it was “doubling down” on efforts to prevent manipulation but could not reveal details for fear of tipping off those trying to evade the company’s measures. But it declared that Twitter’s “open and real-time nature is a powerful antidote” to falsehoods.

“This is important because we cannot distinguish whether every single Tweet from every person is truthful or not,” the statement said. “We, as a company, should not be the arbiter of truth.”

Part I Wrapup

During an interview with the Daily Show’s Trevor Noah, Barack Obama denounced the conspiracy theory that Russians tampered with the American voting process. “We were frankly more concerned in the run-up to the election to the possibilities of vote tampering, which we did not see evidence of,” he admitted. “And we’re confident that we can guard against.”

Then Breitbart.com reported that: Obama downplayed the hack of a private email account of Clinton campaign chief John Podesta, defending his administration for revealing in October that the Russian government was connected.

“None of this should be a big surprise,” Obama said, “Russia trying to influence our elections dates back to the Soviet Union.” Obama dismissed the hack and the leaked emails as “not very interesting” and lacking “explosive” revelations. He puzzled as to why it was an “obsession” by the news media despite the knowledge that the Russians were responsible.

He also criticized President-elect Donald Trump for calling on the Russian government to hack Hillary’s emails to reveal the contents of the deleted emails from her private server, and reminded the audience that Trump had campaign officials connected to Russia.

“What’s happened to our political system where some emails that were hacked and released ended up being the overwhelming story, and the constant source of coverage – breathless coverage – that was depicted as somehow damning in all sorts of ways when the truth of the matter was it was fairly routine stuff?” he said.

Watch (and Listen) closely to exactly what Obama said to Trevor Noah about Russian hacking in 2016:

What I find interesting is how the former President of the United States, who had just completed 8 years in office, downplayed in this interview just after the election of Donald Trump the seriousness of the role the Russians played in the 2016 election and apparently in previous elections — perhaps even his own in 2008 and 2012! The book is still out on that.

In Part 2, we will look further into what actually happened with the Russians in 2016 and how it happened. We discuss the impact it made on vote totals and what has happened regarding Russian election hacking in our elections since 2016. You don’t want to miss it! Catch it first thing tomorrow at www.TruthNewsNet.org!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Mueller Time!

April 19, 2019

Attorney General Barr appeared with Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to give his “final” report about the presentment of the Mueller Report to Congress and the American people. The report in full (with minimal redactions for legal purposes) was released 2 hours later to Congress and the public.

We are NOT going to go through the details of the report. This story today is simply to point out some facts about the process and how those facts and the process itself play into the future of the U.S. To that end, let me say this: the Mueller Report and Mueller’s entire process of putting his team of attorneys together, the methods they used for interrogations, grand juries, and even making arrests have never been seen in American history in past Special Counsel or Special Prosecutor cases.

We did predict here the release of his findings would certainly NOT end the noise about Donald Trump and his alleged collusion with Russia and also alleged obstruction of justice. In fact, Mueller’s findings and the structure of his report left the door open for all those on the Left to simply ratchet-up their investigation threats, subpoenas, and more allegations. In our Summary, we’ll detail exactly where we are. Let’s put all this in bullet points to make it easy to follow (and keep it brief):

♦Collusion

“The Special Counsel’s investigation established that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election principally through two operations.

“First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.”

The report said there was no collusion found between Donald Trump or any member of his campaign and the Russians regarding manipulation of the 2016 election.

♦Conspiracy

The report said there were numerous contacts between members of Trump’s circle and Russia and that the campaign “expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.”

But it said the efforts did not amount to criminal conspiracy.

“While the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges.

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

♦Obstruction of Justice

The report said the special counsel investigated numerous actions by Trump “that raised questions about whether he had obstructed justice.”

These included “public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation.”

“The president’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the president declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests.

“Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the president’s conduct.

“At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.

“Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.

“Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

♦Efforts to Remove Special Counsel

The report detailed an effort by Trump to have the special counsel removed.

“On June 17, 2017, the president called (White House counsel Don) McGahn at home and directed him to call the acting attorney general and say that the special counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed.

“McGahn did not carry out the direction, however, deciding that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday Night Massacre.”

The determination by the Special Counsel was that President Trump could not be legally implicated in any action to remove Special Counsel Mueller.

♦The “Rest of the Story”

I know, the above is really brief. And what it does is summarize all of the “meat” — if one can call it meat — in the report. But, believe me, there’s plenty more “stuff” in the Mueller Report.

Again, we will not detail it all — there’s a bunch of stuff that basically seems to be included to in some way justify the $25 million + of taxpayer dollars spent and the 2 years of constant daily political uproar regarding the president and nothing more.

The report highlights most of the areas of question American have had and still have, even with the release of the report. Questions regarding the possible influence many felt the President tried to use to “influence” Michael Cohen in his multiple testimonies to Mueller’s team were included in the report with “no finding of wrongdoing.

Conventional wisdom states that in spite of the bottomless budget of taxpayer dollars used in this investigation, in spite of millions of pages of documents, numerous subpoenas, and testimony, 37 indictments (none of which implicated Mr. Trump or his campaign for Russian collusion), Donald Trump is walking away with no “baggage.” But is he?

Mueller may be done, but Congress is not. Members of Congress — all Democrats — who hold very critical jobs heading committees are still beating the drum of “Collusion and Conspiracy.”

♦“Russia, Russia, Russia!“

Who’s guilty of still carrying the “Russia” torch?

Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA)

March 27, 2017: The ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said on MSNBC there is evidence that is “not circumstantial” of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

August 5, 2018: Rep. Schiff said there is “plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight” regarding the Trump campaign and Russia.

March 25, 2019: “There’s a difference between compelling evidence of collusion and whether the special counsel concludes that he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the criminal charge of conspiracy,” Schiff told host George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week.”

Congressman Jerold Nadler (D-NY)

March 24, 2019: “Obviously, we know there was some collusion,” he said during an appearance on CNN. “We know the president’s son and campaign manager were involved in a meeting with the Russians to receive what they thought was information stolen by the Russians from the Democratic National Committee, as part of the Russian government’s attempt to help Trump in the election.” (It was later shown in sworn testimony that the meeting was called to make available “Opposition Research” materials to the Trump team which was perfectly legal and used by every campaign in the 2016 election)

(One note here since we’re speaking of Congressman Nadler: in the Clinton Impeachment Starr Report that Starr released without redactions to the public. Nadler and 13 other Congressman currently still in the House all fought AGAINST its release at the time. But Nadler’s committee is demanding continuously for the Mueller Report to be released without any redactions)

Calling the comparison “apples and oranges,” Nadler said his remarks on the Starr report concerned the release of grand jury information to the public rather than to Congress.

Nadler did not take a position on whether the full Mueller report could contain grounds for impeachment, saying “there could be grounds for impeachment, there could be grounds for other actions, there could be things the American people ought to know.”

Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA)

March 25, 2019: Swalwell, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, is quoted from a March 2018 interview on CNN saying, “In our investigation, we saw strong evidence of collusion.” He was referring to his panel’s Russia investigation. That inquiry took place when the House Intelligence Committee was in GOP control and concluded there was no collusion.

March 26, 2019: Swalwell told Chris Matthews on MSNBC’s Hardball, that all the evidence points to the president being a “Russian agent” and that he has not seen “a single piece of evidence that he’s not” a Russian agent. He stood by those claims on Fox News’ The Story with Martha MacCallum.

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA)

March 4, 2019: Senator Mark Warner said there are “enormous amounts of evidence” linking the Trump campaign to Russia — the same day House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said there’s “direct evidence” of collusion between the two.

Senator Chris Coons (D-DE)

March 6, 2017: Liberal Delaware Senator Chris Coons caused a stir when he indicated during a televised interview that yet-undisclosed transcripts of recorded phone conversations conclusively prove that elements of the Trump campaign explicitly colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA)

March 24, 2019: “Here you have a president who I can tell you and guarantee you is in collusion with the Russians to undermine our democracy,” Waters said.

Waters predicted in December 2017 that Mueller’s report is “going to lead right to, not only collusion, obstruction of justice, money laundering.”

♦Summary

As we warned, Democrats are just getting started. And their attack dogs — the Leftist Media — moments after the completion of Barr’s presentation summary of the now released report showed America what Democrats are totally about for 2020: NOTHING NEW. Sadly for their base, they have nothing to offer the nation other than “Get Donald Trump.” STILL!

We close today with the most troubling revelation in the Mueller report. There is stark proof that the President’s terminology of the Mueller investigation as a “Witch Hunt” was and is warranted. It’s contained in the following statement from the report:

“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards however, we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we obtained about the president’s actions and intent present difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred.”

By making this statement as THE basis — not for their findings but for their NO-findings — Mueller and his staff of “13 angry Democrats” (as termed by Sean Hannity) have categorically reversed a fundamental guarantee given in the U.S. Constitution. According to Mueller, the inability of such a mass of investigators with such a mountain of evidence never before seen in any other federal investigation could not find evidence to justify charging President Trump with a crime. Yet they end the report by saying they could not conclusively determine that no criminal conduct occurred!

It either DID occur or it DIDN’T occur. If it happened, a crime was committed. If it didn’t happen, NO crime was committed.

The Mueller gang just stomped all over the fundamental that millions of people charged throughout American judicial history in civil and criminal trials alike have relied on for fundamental fairness in their prosecution: The Presumption of Innocence. That presumption clearly states that those charged are “Innocent Until PROVEN Guilty.”

It’s sad that a sitting president who in the 2016 presidential election demolished a career-political opponent who was a shew-in for the White House was NOT given the Presumption of Innocence.

Maybe that is the “new” way for the Judiciary in America to operate now. Maybe it’s so just in politics.

Or maybe — just maybe — this was Robert Mueller’s parting shot at President Trump for NOT offering him the FBI Director’s job in that Oval Office meeting with Rod Rosenstein which was purportedly a job interview for Mueller.

Is that what Due Process in America has come to?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

“The Polls! The Polls! The Polls!”

April 17, 2019

It’s hard to fathom that we have already begun campaigning for 2020. It seems like November of 2016 was yesterday! But it wasn’t. The presidential campaign cycle begins earlier and earlier every 4 years. And maybe that’s a good thing. After all, being that lengthy usually means more and more candidates jump into the race just to see if America likes them enough to give them a shot at the White House. Then, just as quickly as they jump in, they begin to jump out of the race one at a time. The race for 2020 already has about 20 in the race with several heavy hitters undeclared.

In that race for candidates to start swimming the “election river” are all the polling entities. Nowadays it seems that everyone has a poll. And it seems they will take a poll on ANYTHING! It’s really comical to watch. And as you’d bet, the polls have already begin in earnest to tell Americans who every other American likes, who is the best presidential candidate in the race, who has the best shot of winning the most vote and who has the best shot to win the electoral college, and the list of poll types goes on and on.

And you can bet the polls themselves will go on and on, too!

Polling History: Not So Good

90% of the polling entities that were active during the 2016 election period were wrong in their predictions: 90%. In fact, there was only one poll that accurately predicted Donald Trump would take the oath of office. You would think polling companies would simply throw in the towel because of their dismal results and how wrong they were. But, no: “They’re BAACK!”

I’ve seen already about 50 polls regarding 2020. And they change from day-to-day and during each day during day-parts. We’re not going to dig into what and how polls are done and what impacts their results. Let it suffice to say this: polling methodology can be tweaked in about 50 ways to sway the results of each poll for the benefit or detriment of any candidate however the polling entity wishes to do. Facts do NOT matter when it comes to polling. Because of that, pollsters have become very important, very expensive, and an absolute necessity.

The recent polls to no one’s surprise have been all over the place, too. I saw one yesterday that showed Bernie Sanders “if the presidential election was held today” would beat Donald Trump with a double-digit margin of victory! When I saw it, I just shrugged it off, because I know “it’s a long time before we’ll know who’s going home to the White House in January 2021.

Yet there are people who simply live and die by the presidential polls they see. To that end, and to illustrate to all just how unreliable and off the mark pollsters are almost all the time, TruthNewsNetwork today is cutting our story short and giving you an in-depth synopsis of how and what the pollsters did — along with political pundits with their predictions — regarding who the 2016 presidential race winner would be. This video is in detail, it covers a broad spectrum of pundits, news broadcasters, talk show hosts, U.S. Senators and members of the House, former presidential candidates, and even President Obama. Watch it in detail and relish every minute:

We hope you enjoyed it!

In spite of what polls say today, tomorrow, next year, and even the morning of November 3, 2020 — election day — NO POLL, NO POLLSTER, NO NEWS PERSON, POLITICAL CANDIDATE, FORMER PRESIDENT, AND NOT EVEN ANY AMERICAN VOTERS WILL KNOW WHO’S GOING TO WIN!

What’s fun will be that even with the video you just watched above that exposes their misses, vitriol, crazy ideas and predictions, the same people on the same shows and networks, the same writers and talk show hosts will take “the poll of the day” and make the same stupid mistakes again!

By the way, the “elephant” in the room will be the same guy that lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue right now. Elephants are pretty hard to move unless and until they want to. It’s going to be tough to get this elephant to move until 2025!

Attorney General Barr: “SpyGate Crucifixion”

April 16, 2019

The Department of Justice released news that the redacted version of the Mueller Report will be made available to Congress and the American public Thursday morning, April 18, 2019. That will be a memorable day in American history that most on both sides of the political spectrum have been salivating over while waiting. And based on the “summary” sent to Congress shortly after Mueller announced he had finished and sent his final report to the DOJ, both sides will probably find red meat in the full version. We need to discuss that. But before we do, “if” you read Attorney General Barr’s summary letter, you’ve probably forgotten most of it. We’ll talk about specifics he included. But before we do, here’s a link to his summary. Please read it again.

Attorney General Summary of Mueller Report

Our Thoughts

While reading Attorney General Barr’s letter, several things became obvious to us:

The AG included Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in the process of digesting Mueller’s near 400-page report, dissecting its parts, and determining the reasoning for Mueller’s findings, and the included evidence in the report that supports his not taking any further actions via indictments;
The investigation was exhaustive. Mueller employed 19 attorneys who had help from 40 FBI agents, “intelligence analysts, forensic accountants….”
Mueller issued more than 2800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, more than 230 “orders for communication records,” 50 more orders authorizing the use of “pen registers,” 13 requests of foreign governments for evidence, and 500 witnesses were interviewed; (A pen register, or dialed number recorder (DNR), is an electronic device that records all numbers called from a particular telephone line)
While Mueller referred several other matters to various legal offices for further investigation, Mueller did not recommend any further indictments;
Also, Mueller did not obtain any sealed indictments of which details are still unknown and if existing, might lead to further legal actions.

Regarding the two areas that the Special Counsel and his team investigated in this matter — collusion by members of the Trump Campaign or the President with Russia and possible obstruction of justice by the President — Mueller concluded there was NO collusion with Russia committed. Secondly, there was not sufficient evidence of obstruction of justice to prove that “beyond a reasonable doubt” any such obstruction occurred. (IMPORTANT: we will go into detail on “Alleged Obstruction” below)

The Investigation DID conclude that the Russians DID attempt to impact the 2016 presidential election. “The first involved attempts by a Russian organization to conduct disinformation and social media operation in the U.S. designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election.”

The second element involved the Russian government’s “efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks.”

According to this summary, there is NO doubt that the Russians were definitely working hard to influence our election. But it is important to remember that they have been doing that for years, and not just to the U.S. For that matter, the United States has on numerous occasions attempted in numerous ways to impact the national elections of other foreign countries! In fact, TruthNewsNetwork has detailed the specifics of several of those. To be honest, the Chinese, the French, British, and even modern-day Germany is known for doing so.

The U.S. also attempted to sway Russian elections! In 1996, with the presidency of Boris Yeltsin and the Russian economy flailing, President Clinton endorsed a $10.2-billion loan from the International Monetary Fund linked to privatization, trade liberalization and other measures that would move Russia toward a capitalist economy. Yeltsin used the loan to bolster his popular support, telling voters that only he had the reformist credentials to secure such loans, according to media reports at the time. He used the money, in part, for social spending before the election, including payment of back wages and pensions. (See our story with complete details published here February 18th of 2018)

Special Counsel Mueller’s Methodology is Suspicious

Do you like me wonder why Mueller would with so many investigative resources at his disposal — subpoenas, grand juries, witness questioning, and testimony, cutting deals with people — using 19 of the most well-known investigative attorneys in U.S. history, spending a reported $25 million over 2 years would NOT give a conclusion in his report regarding both Russia collusion AND Obstruction of Justice? Conventional wisdom says “where there’s smoke there’s fire,” which means to most “if there is proof/evidence of any obstruction of justice indictments should be made.”

Why did Mueller — if there was an obstruction on the part of the President — not take the evidence to a grand jury to get an indictment? And if there was NO evidence of obstruction, why did he NOT say so in his report? (No, the report is not out yet, but Barr’s summary plainly states that Mueller instigated no indictments of the President) There are two reasons or excuses:

Those on the Left immediately upon reading Barr’s letter stated the reason Mueller did not indict Trump for obstruction was because most believe a sitting president CANNOT be indicted for obstruction of justice, and that Mueller was afraid that a huge federal court battle would be initiated if he had pushed for an indictment of the President that would keep the furor going for another two years or so to the chagrin of Americans.
Our conclusion is the second: that Mueller’s team could not (at least by a majority of those 19 attorneys with Mueller added) unite on an obstruction decision. It appears that one or several of those Mueller attorneys — almost all of which are Democrats and are not fond of President Trump — thought that not recommending indicting this president would initiate even more investigations by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and even by the federal Southern District of New York. In that scenario, the rage, anger, and vitriol from the Left would continue and certainly even heighten in intensity while those additional investigations go on. And their feeling is certain that all of the unknowns and continuous allegations and questions without answers would guarantee the President’s credibility and integrity would be attacked by the attack dog media all the way through the 2020 elections.

The Mueller Investigation is the first one in U.S. history that occurred at the federal level in which NO conclusion was reached! THAT’S why the Mueller report left the question unanswered, “Did Donald Trump commit Obstruction of Justice?”

Summary

I would love to say that Mueller’s report will bring to an end to what the President has continually called “A Witch Hunt.” But it will not. Think about it: Democrats are desperate. Yes, they won the House of Representatives in the midterm elections. Yes, the Democrats have a choke-hold on the media who breathlessly and continuously perpetrate whatever the Democrat talking point “of the day” is each and every day.

But there are more “matters” that few are talking about. As of last week, there are more than 82,000 sealed federal indictments, some issued by federal courts in each one of the federal courts in all 50 states, all issued and sealed since November of 2017. Some expected some of those would be “Mueller indictments.” But according to his report, he obtained no indictments that were or are sealed. And no one is certain for whom those name, how many, or who initiated them. But it’s a serious matter. In U.S. history, no more than 3000 have been issued in a 12-month period. Something is up there.

And there’s one more thing: Attorney General Barr lit the media world up when he responded to a Senator’s questions in the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee Hearing when he testifed before that committee. Listen/watch closely to his responses:

Attorney General Barr made it clear that the DOJ is looking into spying during the 2016 campaign against the Trump Campaign. Immediately after the hearing, the media went into a frenzy about his statements. Several stated “He has no evidence. If he had proof he would have given it during the hearing,” and “AG Barr showed he’s nothing more than a mouthpiece and conspiracy theorist for President Trump.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

If you listen to his responses in the video and audio given above, you hear him respond to the Senator’s question about any evidence NOT by saying he has no evidence, but by saying this, “I am not going to discuss the evidence NOW. I’m going to wait for details to be finalized and I’ll come back with my report.”

There’s a BIG difference between what he said and that he HAS NO EVIDENCE.

So what can we expect when the report is released? More chaos, more vitriol, more media and political attacks against Attorney General Barr and, of course, President Trump. And what good can possibly come from it all? The Democrats will get exactly what they want and need: more negativity about President Trump and his Administration. They’ll scream louder and blame more, and in doing so, keep the anti-Trump rhetoric alive with absolutely no proof of any of the allegations!

Remember this: The Democrat Party has NO unity right now, NO real leadership, NO party platform for 2020. The only thing they have to use against the President is THE MUELLER REPORT! And since there’s “no there-there,” they MUST manufacture their own brand of truth.

But don’t think the other side will sit idly by. You can bet the President will amp up his twitter account, his campaign rally derision of Democrats and each 2020 candidate.

It’s not going to be fun very long. I promise Americans will (if they haven’t already) get tired of the constant back and forth between camps. I just hope Americans can stand solid for facts, not get distracted by more allegations without truth, and certainly do not lose sight of the massive swing to all things Left by every one of the Democrat 2020 presidential candidates.

Socialism has never and is not now working for ANY country in the World.

If that’s the only reason to re-elect Donald Trump that can be found, it certainly will be good enough!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download