juandante + 2016presidentialelection   22

Deconstructing Julian Assange & Wikileaks 350 views
Mr Stosh
Published on Dec 1, 2018

All will be Revealed Episode 1. This was my first episode of All will be revealed. In it, I expose Julian Assange and Wikileaks as controlled opposition. They are put in place for a reason.

In this episode I uncover the origins of Wikileaks and the reason behind the release of Vault 7/Pizzagate
JulianAssange  Wikileaks  Pizzagate  2016PresidentialElection  Psy-ops 
12 weeks ago by juandante
101 Things We Learned from WikiLeaks’ Podesta Emails
US voters have been given a rare, even unprecedented opportunity to look at the machinery inside an electoral campaign and a foundation, as presented by the insiders themselves. Being afforded this privilege motivated one columnist to assert: “Those voting for Hillary Clinton, defending Clinton and supporting Clinton without reading the information reported by WikiLeaks are intellectually no different than those who criticize climate science without ever having read the science” (Denver Post, 2/11/2016). Where access to the “power elites” is typically denied to virtually anyone, thanks to WikiLeaks it is now granted to virtually everyone.

What follows is a list of the 101 stories that caught my attention during the month-long release of the Podesta emails, published by WikiLeaks. Are there only 101 things to be learned? There are likely thousands more—this is by no means a comprehensive account, but more of a personal snapshot. Ideally, one would read each single email, and try to fit them together into larger patterns to form a bigger picture. It would also be very tedious work. I have likely read no more than 20% of the total mass of emails—and even so, look at what we found. My method in producing this overview involved some triangulation: my own reading of the emails, added to key findings posted by WikiLeaks through its Twitter account, plus media coverage by the very few journalists with a dedicated interest. Of course even a complete reading would not reveal everything: not all communications between these insiders was done by email. One can imagine there would have been much more said face-to-face, at lunches, dinners, and board meetings, not to mention what was spoken on the phone.

The information below is loosely organized into broad thematic groups. These include discussion of foreign policy; foreign campaign donors; the Clinton Foundation and suggestions of corruption; media manipulation; the corruption of the political system; Hillary Clinton’s private server scandal; campaign staffers ridiculing Bill Clinton; insider criticisms of Hillary Clinton as a presidential candidate; confusion over Hillary Clinton’s political stances; the corporate oligarchy; free trade; Hillary Clinton as a member of the establishment; the employment of identity politics; religion; and, the white working class. More discussion follows at the end.

Foreign Policy: Russia, the Middle East, Canada

(1) Jose Fernandez, the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs, led the media to believe that he was acting in an independent and neutral manner in signing off on a deal that would sell 20% of the US’ uranium supplies to Russia, when he represented Hillary Clinton’s State Department on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). The Clinton Foundation accepted donations from parties that would profit from the uranium deal with Russia. Fernandez, far from being impartial, was revealed to be active in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and became a board member of the associated Center for American Progress, chaired by John Podesta. [Emails 2053 and 2059]

(2) While Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail has denounced Donald Trump for fictitious links to Vladimir Putin, in more private settings she offered substantial praise for Putin, repeatedly.

(3) Russia, you say? While repeatedly accusing Russia of hacking John Podesta’s email account, it turns out that Podesta was rather careless with his own information security. For example, in one email, he reveals that he lost his phone in a taxi cab. There is an email that acknowledges worries about internal leakers, with an eruption into accusations about “trust issues” within the Clinton campaign itself. Yet another email discusses the problem of leaks from Campaign staff. A tight ship it is not.

(4) “She created this mess and she knows it”—those are Huma Abedin’s words, Hillary Clinton’s closest confidante, on the tangle created by Clinton in obtaining $12 million from the King of Morocco for the Clinton Global Initiative.

(5) On Libya, Hillary Clinton’s leaked corporate speeches paint a picture of a Secretary of State who would take no responsibility for her inaction on security for staff in Benghazi, and who judged the results of the war in Libya in 2011 to be a success.

(6) On ISIS: “Contrary to Qatar and Saudi Arabia’s assurances that they do not support Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), Hillary Clinton apparently believes that they are in fact providing ‘clandestine financial and logistic support to IS and other radical Sunni groups in the region,’ according to an August 17, 2014 email”. Those two states are not only defended by Hillary Clinton as allies, she has received many millions in donations from them to the Clinton Foundation.

(7) Regarding Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a surrogate—he was identified as follows: “Prime Minister Trudeau has been a longtime progressive ally of CAP’s [Center for American Progress, allied to the Democratic Party]…. an active and engaged partner in our Global Progress program”. Another email bore an attachment showing a photo of John Podesta whispering into Trudeau’s ear. The title of the message calls Trudeau “Mr. Canada”.


The Clinton Foundation; Foreign Campaign Donors

(8) Bill Clinton received a $1 million gift from the government of Qatar, via the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation recently confirmed receipt of the gift. However, it was also confirmed that the gift had been received without informing the State Department as required.

(9) “Take the money!” wrote Jennifer Palmieri, regarding allowing the Democratic Party’s foreign registered agents to bring in foreign government donations to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign—in violation of the law. Clinton spokesman, Robby Mook, concurred: “I’m ok just taking the money and dealing with any attacks”. Discussion throughout the email chain involves frequent eye-rolling at the idea of an “arbitrary” ban against foreign lobbyists. The consensus seems tilted in favour of allowing such foreign influence.

(10) Indeed, a somewhat cryptic email suggested the money was taken: “Foreign govt donors: all the money is in”.

(11) One story covered foreign donors’ apparent “private jet scam” benefiting the Clintons, as spotted in this email. The Clintons did not declare such non-cash contributions on their tax returns.

(12) Chelsea Clinton also profited personally from the Clinton Foundation. According to her father’s associate, Doug Band, an investigation looked into Chelsea Clinton “getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade…”.

(13) Transparency? Foreign donors? Let’s not go there: Jennifer Palmieri, a senior member of Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff wrote: “We recommend not engaging on specific questions related to 1) donors; 2) implementation of the MOU; or 3) HRC’s knowledge of donors to the Foundation. These are rabbit holes. Press want us to go deeper into these subjects to try to get us to introduce more facts which will lead to more questions and give the story more life”.

(14) In a “governance review” of the Clinton Foundation, there was a concern over conflicts of interest and “an expectation of a quid pro quo benefits in return for gifts”.

(15) In another “audit review” of the Clinton Foundation, it was pointed out that many employees of the Foundation were unaware of conflict of interest policies.


(16) Bill Clinton’s conflicts of interest: an aide to former president Bill Clinton admitted, “I think there WJC may have some real serious conflicts if we start to make too many rules,” adding, “we can not ignore the nexus of WJC’s life”. Doug Band, who scored business for Bill Clinton via Teneo, resented having to sign a conflict of interest policy when, “Oddly, wjc [Bill Clinton] does not have to sign such a document even though he is personally paid by 3 cgi sponsors, gets many expensive gifts from them, some that are at home etc. I could add 500 different examples of things like this…”.

(17) The Clinton Foundation acted “more like a political operation” than a charity, as discussed in detail in this article. See the original memo here.

Rigging the Media

(18) Media collusion: “Washington correspondent John Harwood sends Podesta his private approval of Hillary Clinton appearances, as if he’s on the team. Columnist Nicholas Kristof, in advance of an interview with Bill Clinton, ­emails his questions, which Podesta’s team passes around to staffers to shape Clinton’s answers. A Washington reporter gives Hillary Clinton veto power over quotations he can use from an interview. Another reporter is praised as someone who has ‘never disappointed’ in delivering stories the campaign wants ‘teed up’ for public consumption”.

(19) More media collusion: “Clinton’s campaign coordinated with the New York Times, which gave it approval on quotes for a long profile on the candidate. Times reporter Mark Leibovich ­emailed campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri on July 7, 2015, seeking approval on the Clinton quotes. A Boston Globe editorial writer worked with the Clinton campaign to give her a ‘big presence’ in coverage during the candidate’s swing through the area amid the Democratic primary. Marjorie Pritchard, the Globe’s op-ed editor, emailed campaign chair John Podesta to tell him, ‘It would be good to get it in on Tuesday, when she is in New Hampshire. That would give her a big presence on Tuesday’”.

(20) Even more media collusion: Donna Brazile, Chair of the Democratic National Committee and a CNN contributor, forwarded a debate question in advance to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, in order to cheat in an upcoming debate against Bernie Sanders. Later, another email … [more]
2016PresidentialElection  Pizzagate  JohnPodesta  Wikileaks 
april 2019 by juandante
The Bullshittery of the DNC
If you're going to watch only one video about the 2016 Democratic Party Convention, this one is it.

I enjoyed it so much and watched it several times. It's informative, entertaining, eloquent, succinct, hilarious! An absolute must see!

I wanted to post it as soon as it came out, but sadly, I was blocked from Facebook at the time.



#HillaryClinton #DNC #ElectionFraud #corruption #DemocraticParty #BernieSanders
2016PresidentialElection  DNCorruption  BernieSanders  HillaryClinton 
august 2018 by juandante
The 4 Most Damaging Emails From the DNC WikiLeaks Dump By ALANA ABRAMSON SHUSHANNAH WALSHE Jul 25, 2016, 11:13 AM ET
WikiLeaks leaked nearly 20,000 emails on Friday from top Democratic National Committee officials, exchanged from January 2015 through May 2016. Several emails released show that although the DNC was supposed to remain neutral during the primary contest, officials grew increasingly agitated with Bernie Sanders and his campaign, at some points even floating ideas about ways to undermine his candidacy.

Interested in DNC?

Add DNC as an interest to stay up to date on the latest DNC news, video, and analysis from ABC News.
DNC Add Interest
The source of the leak has not been revealed, though Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, Robby Mook, said on ABC News' "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" on Sunday that he believes the Russians were instrumental in it.

"Experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, took all these emails and now are leaking them out through these websites," Mook said Sunday. "It's troubling that some experts are now telling us that this was done by the Russians for the purpose of helping Donald Trump."

Regardless of who was behind the leak, the fallout for the DNC has been severe. Just one day before the Democratic convention was set to begin, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation, effective at the end of the week. And as expected, Sanders supporters, hundreds of whom are delegates at the convention, are furious about the content of the emails.

Emails Appear to Show DNC Trying to Aid Hillary Clinton
How Debbie Wasserman Schultz's Dramatic DNC Exit Unfolded
Wasserman Schultz to Step Down as DNC Chairwoman
Here are some of the most damaging finds from the leak:

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz Calls Sanders Campaign Manager Jeff Weaver an "A--" and a "Liar"

In May the Nevada Democratic State Convention became rowdy and got out of hand in a fight over delegate allocation. When Weaver went on CNN and denied any claims violence had happened, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, once she was notified of the exchange, wrote "Damn liar. Particularly scummy that he never acknowledges the violent and threatening behavior that occurred."

In another instance, right before the Nevada Convention, Weaver publicly commented, "I think we should go to the [national] convention." The chairwoman was flagged about this comment and responded in an e-mail, "He is an a--."

Highlighting Sanders' Faith

One email shows that a DNC official contemplated highlighting Sanders' alleged atheism — even though he has said he is not an atheist — during the primaries as a possibility to undermine support among voters.

"It may make no difference but for KY and WA can we get someone to ask his belief," Brad Marshall, CFO of the DNC, wrote in an email on May 5, 2016. "He had skated on having a Jewish heritage. I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist."

Building a Narrative Against Sanders

"Wondering if there's a good Bernie narrative for a story which is that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his campaign was a mess," DNC National Secretary Mark Paustenbach wrote in an email to National Communications Director Luis Miranda on May 21. After detailing ways in which the Sanders camp was disorganized, Paustenbach concludes, "It's not a DNC conspiracy it's because they never had their act together."

The idea was nixed, though. "True," Miranda acknowledged in his response. "But the chair has been advised not to engage. So we'll have to leave it alone."

Lamentations That Sanders Is Not a Democrat

As the primary season wore on, Wasserman Schultz appeared to grow exasperated with Sanders' desire to stay in the race when the delegate math was against him — in one email lamenting the fact that he is an independent in the Senate but was running as a Democrat in the primaries. In an April 24 email she received with an article describing the ways Sanders felt the DNC was undermining his campaign, she wrote back, "Spoken like someone who has never been a member of the Democratic Party and has no understanding of what we do." ...
Wikileaks  JulianAssange  2016PresidentialElection  RussiaGate  BernieSanders 
july 2018 by juandante
Lying Bigot James Clapper Assures World The Russia Narrative He Built Is Legit > ARTICLE JULY 19, 2018 AUTHOR: CAITLIN JOHNSTONE0
4 bookmarking
Caity Johnstonewrites:
"James Clapper, who was almost certainly one of the sources for the New York Times story, was the single most essential architect of the establishment Russia narrative. He personally hand-picked the two dozen intelligence agents who made the report upon which the entire Russian cyber attack narrative has been built, which, as the late, great Robert Parry pointed out last year, is actually hand-picking the findings of the report.
“'Yet, as any intelligence expert will tell you, if you ‘hand-pick’ the analysts, you are really hand-picking the conclusion,” Parry wrote. “For instance, if the analysts were known to be hard-liners on Russia or supporters of Hillary Clinton, they could be expected to deliver the one-sided report that they did.”
"Clapper is also a known liar of the very most egregious sort. In 2013 as National Director of Intelligence he was asked point-blank on the Senate floor about the NSA surveillance practices which would soon be exposed by Edward Snowden, and he lied about it under oath.
“'Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper was asked by Senator Ron Wyden in March of 2013.
“'No, sir,” Clapper brazenly lied. “There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.”
'This known liar, who was absolutely fundamental in constructing the establishment Russia narrative that is now being used to manufacture support for dangerous new cold war escalations including sanctions, arming Ukraine, NATO expansionism, and a Nuclear Posture Review which takes a much more aggressive posture toward Russia, also happens to be a disgusting Russophobic eugenicist pig...."
RussiaGate  JamesClapper  2016PresidentialElection  RussianHackers 
july 2018 by juandante
White House, Clinton Campaign Intervene in Conflict Over Russian Hacking Charges By Andre Damon Global Research, December 13, 2016 World Socialist Web Site 13 December 2016
The conflict within the US government and intelligence apparatus over allegations of Russian intervention in the US election escalated on Monday with the direct intervention by the White House and the Clinton campaign.

Since the White House announced Friday that it had commissioned an investigation into allegations that Russia hacked into Democratic Party emails to manipulate the election, the opposed factions in the state have assumed increasingly intransigent positions, which are bound up with conflicts over the foreign policy of the incoming Trump administration.

In a press briefing Monday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest declared that Trump’s campaign was boosted by Russian government intervention into the election. “You didn’t need a security clearance to figure out who benefited from malicious Russian cyberactivity,” he said.

Speaking of Trump, Earnest added, “He called on Russia to hack Secretary Clinton. So he certainly had a pretty good sense of whose side this cyberactivity was coming down on.”

Also on Monday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, declared his support for a request by ten mostly Democratic members of the Electoral College for an intelligence briefing on the CIA’s investigation into claims of Russian intervention in the election.

“We now know that the CIA has determined Russia’s interference in our elections was for the purpose of electing Donald Trump,” Podesta stated. “Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed.”

The frenzied character of the Democratic Party-led campaign, accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of manipulating the US election and portraying Trump as his agent, was summed up by the statement of former acting CIA Director Michael Morell, who called the alleged intervention by Russia “the political equivalent of 9/11.”....
RussiaGate  2016PresidentialElection  CIA  BarackObama 
july 2018 by juandante
Breaking: Clinton Insiders Reveal ‘Blame Russia’ Plan Hatched ‘Within 24 Hours’ of Election Loss By Jack Burns Global Research, May 13, 2017 TheFreeThoughtProject.com 12 May 2017 Region: USA
Wikileaks’ latest tweet has the potential to destroy the Democrat Party’s narrative the election of 2016 was corrupted by Russian election meddling. The news agency detailed the contents of the book “Shattered” — written by Jonathan Allen — and it makes some damning accusations.

The work details former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s presidential loss to billionaire Donald Trump. Allen, who was and is a correspondent for Bloomberg News, has also written extensively about Congress, national politics, and works as a political analyst on national television news programs.

Wikileaks uploaded a picture from a page of Allen’s new book which destroys the Russian hacking narrative immediately. Wikileaks tweeted,

“New book by ‘Shattered’ by Clinton insiders reveals that “blame Russia” plan was hatched “within twenty-four hours” of the election loss.”

The page uploaded by Wikileaks explains how the Clinton spin machine was set in motion in the minutes following her loss to Trump. Allegedly, John Podesta (Clinton’s campaign manager), collaborated with Robby Mook (fellow member of the Clinton campaign) to make the argument the election was rigged by the Russians — an argument which was put forward when it was revealed in early 2016 the Democratic National Committee’s emails had been hacked.

Building on that narrative, the Clinton camp reportedly put out the notion to members of the media the election was anything but fair. The suggestion was apparently made that “Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”

The page uploaded by Wikileaks explains how the Clinton spin machine was set in motion in the minutes following her loss to Trump. Allegedly, John Podesta (Clinton’s campaign manager), collaborated with Robby Mook (fellow member of the Clinton campaign) to make the argument the election was rigged by the Russians — an argument which was put forward when it was revealed in early 2016 the Democratic National Committee’s emails had been hacked.

Building on that narrative, the Clinton camp reportedly put out the notion to members of the media the election was anything but fair. The suggestion was apparently made that “Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”

The motivations for doing so are speculative at best. Was Clinton’s team preparing a comeback in 2020? Was the effort done to cast the shadow of doubt over a Trump presidency? Or was the plan to implicate the Russians a way to rile up voters in an effort to somehow win the presidency when the official electoral votes were cast for the newly elected Trump?

Allen seemed to know, and his sources seemed to indicate the Clinton camp was not at all willing to concede without first doing damage to a Trump presidency. Immediately following the election, riots took place in the streets of several metropolitan areas, including Washington, D.C.

Our very own Claire Bernish took to the streets to document the uprising. With Allen’s revelations and Wikileaks’ charge, those same riots and school walkouts now appear to be a direct result of the Clinton campaign’s spin tactics.

To this date, we’ve still yet to see a single shred of evidence that Russia hacked the US elections. In fact, the US is trying so hard to prove this nonexistent hacking they allegedly bribed a Russian man — offering him cash, citizenship, and an apartment — if he confessed to hacking Clinton’s emails on behalf of Donald Trump. He refused.

The effects of those tactics, as well as the reportedly invented story of Russian meddling, culminated this week with the firing of FBI Director James Comey. His firing took place just as investigations into Russian election meddling were ramping up.

It remains to be seen if Trump’s firing of Comey will quell the wildfire of controversy sparked by what appears to be one candidate’s incessant desire to paint her opponent as nothing more than a pawn of the Russians, and painting herself as a hapless victim.

While there are plenty of reasons to stand against Donald Trump — war, flip-flopping on promises, increasing the police state, etc. — Russian hacking is not one of them.

As late as the first week in May, Clinton was still blaming the Russians among other things. According to the Associated Press, Clinton blamed misogyny (hatred of women), James Comey and the FBI, Russian meddling in the election, and even herself for her loss. Now, it seems, there’s one less group to blame; The Russians.

If Allen is to be believed, it was all an apparent invention from her campaign team in an effort to control the narrative, and in some ways, control the man who beat her. The real question is who is behind these Deep State movements?

RussiaGate  HillaryClinton  DonaldTrump  2016PresidentialElection 
july 2018 by juandante
No, The Russians Did Not Meddle in Our Election by Publius Tacitus
I am writing this in response to a request from a longtime friend, a former CIA Operations Officer, who has watched the propaganda meme unfold, which declares that Russia stuck its runny red nose into our election and helped Trump win. My friend, a woman who had extensive field experience and worked on the Iraq weapons of mass destruction mess, has a personal experience witnessing the so-called "Intelligence Community" ignore real intel and seize on bullshit in order to justify a war that political masters were keen on launching. The actual intelligence was ignored (but that is a another story for another day).
She has a problem. She is a person of integrity and, despite her own politics, is unwilling to slant intelligence to serve a political agenda. She suffered terminal damage to her career because she refused to play the political game. God bless her. She exemplifies what a genuine intelligence officer is supposed to be.
She asked me the other day what I made of the repeated meme that the Russians--Vladimir Putin in particular--intervened in our election and put their (his) thumb on the political scale in order to help Trump. Here is my answer:
Let's begin with the continued refusal of the DNC to allow DHS or FBI to examine the computer/computers of the DNC where the alleged hack supposed took place. Instead of insisting that the FBI examine their computers, the DNC turned to a private organization--CrowdStrike.

It was CrowdStrike that uncovered the “Russian hacking” of the DNC, and when the DNC refused to allow the FBI access to their servers to see the evidence for themselves, it was CrowdStrike that told the FBI that it was the Russians.
Here’s the problem with this: CrowdStrike’s reputation is currently unraveling. Why? It seems that CrowdStrike is as politically motivated as everyone else in Washington, D.C. The company is itself an opponent of Vladimir Putin and Russia and was recently caught fabricating a report that attempted to blame Russian hacking for problems with Urkainian military technology.
Yes, you read that correctly. CrowdStrike was forced to retract portions of a report that blamed Russian hacking for problems that didn’t actually exist. This realization completely undermines any reason we have to trust their analysis of the DNC servers. Since the DNC refused to allow the FBI access, we only have CrowdStrike’s word that the Russians hacked the DNC. Now that we know CrowdStrike has been caught lying about Russian hacking in another instance, we simply cannot give them the benefit of the doubt on the DNC email leak.
One of the owners/founders of Crowd Strike is a Mr. Dmitri Alperovitch. Dmitri was born in Russia but does not like Russia. He is not an objective outsider. CounterPunch called out Crowd Strike and Alperovitch on their deficient objectivity:
The cyber security firm outsourced by the Democratic National Committee, CrowdStrike, reportedly misread data, falsely attributing a hacking in Ukraine to the Russians in December 2016. Voice of America, a US Government funded media outlet, reported, “the CrowdStrike report, released in December, asserted that Russians hacked into a Ukrainian artillery app, resulting in heavy losses of howitzers in Ukraine’s war with Russian-backed separatists. But the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) told VOA that CrowdStrike erroneously used IISS data as proof of the intrusion. IISS disavowed any connection to the CrowdStrike report....
RussiaGate  RussianHackers  Crowdstrike  2016PresidentialElection  DNC  Ukraine  CIA  Israel 
july 2017 by juandante
The Triumph of James Comey He’s the most powerful man in America by Justin Raimondo, May 05, 2017
Since FBI Director James Comey has become a kind of arbiter of the political discourse – to say his pronouncements have been decisive would not, I think, be an overstatement – his appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee was much anticipated. As Hillary Clinton and her supporters continue to re-litigate the presidential election, blaming him for her defeat, how he would defend his decision to reveal that the FBI was investigating her private email server, and the possible unauthorized release of classified information, was the focus of much interest. And yet the really interesting aspects of his testimony had to do with two questions that, in a free society, would not normally be the domain of law enforcement: 1) What should be the nature of our relations with a foreign country, i.e. Russia? And 2) what is a legitimate journalistic enterprise?...
That our interpretation of the First Amendment is now dependent on the olfactory sensibilities of the FBI Director highlights the fact that the real danger to our republic isn’t in Moscow, but right here in the good old United States of America. If the WikiLeaks revelations – that our government is systematically engaged in spying on us, and is involved in any number of foreign operations that violate our alleged values and even cross the line into illegality – is “intelligence porn,” then so were the Pentagon Papers. According to Comey’s logic, Daniel Ellsberg should’ve been prosecuted and convicted for revealing the truth about the Vietnam war to the American people.

Sasse didn’t bring up the Ellsberg case, however he did try to get Comey to distinguish between what we consider legitimate journalism and, in effect, what the FBI Director considers to be espionage:
So let’s parse this. According to Comey, the distinction between WikiLeaks, and, say, the Washington Post – which has been publishing leaked information from its friends in the intelligence agencies in order to smear the President as a tool of the Kremlin – is that the latter “will almost always call us before they publish.” What this means is that Comey and company can leak whatever they want – but anything not approved by them in advance amounts to espionage. The leaking of the fact that former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was in contact with the Russian ambassador prior to the election, and the releasing of the contents of a transcript of those calls to the media – that’s just fine and dandy. But Julian Assange publishing a video of a US military helicopter mowing down a van full of journalists, or revealing the fact that the Democratic National Committee actively sabotaged the Bernie Sanders campaign, is a “crime.”
RussiaGate  AntiWar.Com  JustinRaimondo  RussianHackers  Russiaphobia  FBI  JamesComey  CIA  WashingtonPost  Wikileaks  JulianAssange  HillaryClinton  2016PresidentialElection 
may 2017 by juandante
Snopes Conveniently Silent on WaPost’s Dangerous Fake Story About Russia Hacking US Power Grid Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/snopes-wapost-fake-news-russia-hacking/#yv5G7YU3DMYwzXzR.99
Snopes, one of the new arbiters of Fake News for Facebook, has been utterly remiss in its fact-checking duties by failing to report the false allegation The Russians hacked into Vermont’s power grid — perhaps because the original claim appeared in the Washington Post.
But for whatever reason, Snopes — whose CEO David Mikkelson stands accused by ex-wife Barbara Mikkelson of embezzling company money to hire prostitutes — simply didn’t bother to report on the Post’s dangerous assertion Russian state actors had tampered with critical infrastructure.
Now emblazoned with an editor’s note essentially stating its original article amounted to Fake News, the Post declared on New Year’s Eve, “Russian operation hacked a Vermont utility, showing risk to U.S. electrical grid security, officials say” — but, as harrowing as that seems, the Department of Homeland Security begs to differ.
In fact, it simply isn’t true.
Snopes  FakeNews  RussianHackersNarrative  2016PresidentialElection  2016ElectionFraud 
february 2017 by juandante
BUSTED: Journalism Professor Nails Washington Post Cheating by Spreading Fake Ne...
On Monday, True Pundit produced actual CIA sources who loudly debunked the Washington PostΓÇÖs claims as an ΓÇ£outright lieΓÇ¥ and likewise hammered the New York Times who blindly piggybacked the PostΓÇÖs baseless claims. Today, the Washington Post doubled down on spreading more fake news with a newly minted front-page story that again, contained no information from CIA or intelligence sources. As a substitute for actual sources, the Post installed rambling paragraphs loaded with more national security innuendo and CIA-based fiction constructed to help dig the embattled newspaper out of the hole it has dug for itself in the last week by spreading multiple fake news stories. ThatΓÇÖs nothing new for the Washington Post, according to a veteran beltway journalist, author and award-winning professor. He said very little has changed at the Washington Post since he worked as a Beltway journalist covering politics in Prince GeorgeΓÇÖs, Maryland. ΓÇ£They just make news up, fabricate whatever news was required at the time, especially when they were scooped or embarrassed by other publications,ΓÇ¥ said Gregg Morris. ΓÇ£Sometimes they did it because they believed they were entitled. Nothing has changed.ΓÇ¥
2016ElectionFraud  2016PresidentialElection  RussianHackersFalseNarrative  CIA  WashingtonPost  GregMorris  Delicious 
december 2016 by juandante
NOVEMBER 9, 2016 The Working Class Won the Election by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS ~ Coun...
A happy lasting result of the election is the complete discrediting of the US media. The media predicted an easy Hillary victory and even Democratic Party control of the US Senate. Even more important to the mediaΓÇÖs loss of influence and credibility, despite the vicious media attack on Trump throughout the presidential primaries and presidential campaign, the media had no effect outside the Northeast and West coasts, the stomping grounds of the One Percent. The rest of the country ignored the media.
2016PresidentialElection  PaulCraigRoberts  MSMPropagandaMachine  MSM  Media  Delicious 
november 2016 by juandante
NOVEMBER 4, 2016 The Secrets of the US Election: Julian Assange Talks to John Pi...
This interview was filmed in the Embassy of Ecuador in London ΓÇô where Julian Assange is a political refugee ΓÇô and broadcast on November 5, 2016. John Pilger: WhatΓÇÖs the significance of the FBIΓÇÖs intervention in these last days of the U.S. election campaign, in the case against Hillary Clinton? Julian Assange: If you look at the history of the FBI, it has become effectively AmericaΓÇÖs political police. The FBI demonstrated this by taking down the former head of the CIA [General David Petraeus] over classified information given to his mistress. Almost no-one is untouchable. The FBI is always trying to demonstrate that no-one can resist us. But Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBIΓÇÖs investigation, so thereΓÇÖs anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak.
JulianAssange  Wikileaks  JohnPilger  2016PresidentialElection  HillaryClinton  HillaryClintonEmailScandal  FBI  Delicious 
november 2016 by juandante
Fakery: major media preparing to steal election-night outcome? Oct 17 by Jon Rap...
ΓÇ£The National Election Pool (NEP) is a consortium of American news organizations formed in 2003 to provide ΓÇÿinformation on Election Night about the vote count, election analysis and election projections.ΓÇÖ Member companies consist of ABC News, the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, Fox News and NBC News. The organization relies on the Associated Press to perform vote tabulations and contracted with Edison Research and Mitofsky International to ΓÇÿmake projections and provide exit poll analysis.ΓÇÖ Edison Research has provided this data since 2004. ΓÇ£The precursor was Voter News Service, which was disbanded in 2003, after controversies over the 2000 and 2002 election results. The NEP plan is largely the suggestion of CNN, which used Edison/Mitofsky as consultants in the past. Mitofsky headed the original pool that preceded VNS.
2016PresidentialElection  2016ElectionFraud  2004ElectionFraud  NationalElectionPool  JonRappoport  Delicious 
october 2016 by juandante
The Stench of Bernie Sanders and the ΓÇ£Unsafe State StrategyΓÇ¥ by JOSHUA FRANK ~ J...
but another whiff and I knew it was something far more noxious. It was the smell of defeat; Bernie Sanders had formally endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. But was it really a defeat, or was that staged rally with Hillary and Bernie the deal all along? Had Bernie simply been the DNCΓÇÖs dupe and wrangled up AmericaΓÇÖs disgruntled youth into the stinky feedlot of the Democratic Party, so that Hillary wouldnΓÇÖt have to do the dirty work herself? Is that why Bernie was so damn afraid to go after her email scandal in those debates? Was that why he refused to ΓÇ£go negativeΓÇ¥ even though the Clinton camp never held back their contempt for Bernie? Is that why Sanders refused to take on her egregious foreign policies (or was that because he supported most of them)? It really shouldnΓÇÖt have come as much of a surprise regardless, at the outset Bernie said he planned to back Hillary in the general election if his primary bid burned out ΓÇö and Bern out it did.
BernieSanders  2016PresidentialElection  Delicious 
july 2016 by juandante
Democratic Primary True Vote Model: Sanders has 52% 19 JUN Democratic Primaries...
This model estimates SandersΓÇÖ True Vote. The base case estimate is that Sanders had 52% of the total vote in primaries and caucuses. It is important to note that SandersΓÇÖ exit poll share exceeded his
1) recorded share in 24 of the 26 primaries. The probability is 1 in 190,000.
2) recorded share by greater than the margin of error in 11 primaries. The probability is 1 in 77 billion. Is the exit poll shift to Clinton just pure luck? Or is something else going on? TRUE VOTE MODEL BASE CASE ASSUMPTIONS 1.Sanders won the caucuses with 63.9%
2. 10% of voters were disenfranchised (voter rolls, provisional ballots, etc.) .
3. Sanders won 70% of uncounted votes
4. 15% of SandersΓÇÖ votes flipped to Clinton.
2016PresidentialElectionFraud  2016PresidentialElection  ElectionFraud  RichardCharnin  Delicious 
july 2016 by juandante
NY Times Reporter Says ThereΓÇÖs NO WAY To Tell Whether Election Is Legit
Published on Jun 30, 2016
A NY Times writer has decided to tear apart election fraud ΓÇ£conspiracy theorists.ΓÇ¥ Unfortunately in the process he manages to instead put forward the idea that thereΓÇÖs no way AT ALL to tell whether US elections are legit. If the exit polls mean nothing, which is what he wants us to believe, then there is literally no way to detect fraud. Watch Lee Camp show how wrong the NY Times is on this topic. Join the ΓÇÿRedactivistΓÇÖ movement online...
Subscribe to the Redacted Tonight YouTube channel for more comedy news with saber tooth tiger teeth: http://youtube.com/user/RedactedTonight Find Redacted Tonight on Facebook for source material about our stories and daily updates:
http://facebook.com/RedactedTonight Follow us on Twitter for funny, informative info and to participate in our weekly ΓÇÿRedactivistΓÇÖ hashtag:
http://twitter.com/RedactedTonight Visit Lee CampΓÇÖs official site to listen to the ΓÇÿMoment of Clarity: The Backstage of Redacted TonightΓÇÖ podcast w/ Lee and John F.OΓÇÖDonnell:
LeeCamp  2016PresidentialElection  2016PresidentialElectionFraud  ElectionFraud  ElectronicElectionFraud  NewYorkTimes  Delicious 
july 2016 by juandante
Exit Polls versus Reported Vote Counts. 2016 Presidential Primaries Posted on Ju...
In the United States, computerized election vote counts are essentially unverified [1]. Computer counts are non-transparent and non-observable by ordinary citizens. For these reasons, and in order to prevent hard-to-detect computer vote fraud, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (their version of the US Supreme Court) in 2009, effectively banned the use of computers to count GermanyΓÇÖs ballots [2]. In order to be able to verify the results of their elections, Germany reverted to the hand counting of all ballots in front of citizen observers [3]. Other technologically advanced countries such as Canada, France, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Finland and 53 other countries protect the integrity of their elections with hand-counted paper ballots [4].
ElectionFraud  DemocraticPrimaryFraud2016  2016PresidentialElection  TheodoredeMacedoSoares.  Delicious 
june 2016 by juandante
Racketeering Lawsuit Exposing Nationwide Vote Rigging in DNC Primaries Could Der...
Richard Charnin, a mathematician and statistician and author of the book, Matrix of Deceit, has been reporting on the apparent shifting of electronic vote totals and the non-release of raw data from Edison since 2004. Richard Charnin, well-known for what he calls the ΓÇ£Red ShiftΓÇ¥ which has been a shift between exit polls and electronic vote total differences of about 4-5% each year. This constitutes a shift to the political right. Although he is unable to analyze the raw data, he has been able to get screen shots of what the exit polls showed minutes before all of the electronic votes have been totaled since 2004.
In 2004, when Edison Research initially got exit poll data that said that Kerry was winning and Bush was losing at 9pm on election night and that the reverse was true shortly after midnight, Edison Research made a choice to ΓÇ£adjustΓÇ¥ the raw data after that time so that it would match the electronic voting machine totals. Edison Research definitely wanted to keep being hired by the Media Consortium which proposes to tell viewers the true election results but which also chooses to trust electronic voting machine data. That was the last time that the American public has been able to see raw exit poll data. Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/election-fraud-rico-lawsuit-alleging-widespread-e-vote-rigging-dnc-primaries-derail-clinton-nomination/#TBDzdBsiZZZsYLoT.99
2016PresidentialElection  ElectronicElectionFraud  RichardCharnin  BernieSanders  HillarytClinton  Delicious 
june 2016 by juandante
Bernie Sanders Wins California Landslide BUT 2/3 of his Votes ArenΓÇÖt Counted (VI...
June 7, 2016. California. The Justice Gazette reporters and others are conducting an investigation into voting irregularities and the theft of Bernie Sanders's apparent California landslide victory by those supporting Hillary Clinton. According to popular actress Frances Fisher, a lawsuit is being prepared to require the counting of all the provisional ballots. If this lawsuit is successful, the actual vote count is expected to become known and Sanders will likely have a landslide victory in California. The theft of California hasn't deterred Sanders from his course. He has promised to fight on while noting it is a steep uphill climb. Given all the states where vote fraud in favor of Hillary Clinton has been allowed to swing primaries from Sanders to Clinton, it is in fact a steep uphill climb to restore democracy and force the now undemocratic Democratic Party to nominate the man the vast majority of American voters have voted for or tried to vote for.
BernieSanders  2016ElectionFraud  2016PresidentialElection  Delicious 
june 2016 by juandante
Tangled Up in Trump Chris Floyd Published: 05 June 2016 Hits: 355
One trope says weΓÇÖve been here before, with the political triumph of a gleefully ignorant, blustering, bigoted faux populist made famous by show biz: Ronald Reagan. Although he was more closely handled, ReaganΓÇÖs off-hand idiocies and nasty nativism were very much in the Trumpian vein. Then thereΓÇÖs Dubya Bush, a certified chowderhead riding to power spouting gooberish nonsense and simplistic slogans while, like Reagan, acting as cover for a rapacious agenda of corporatism and militarism. In this view, Trump is just one more in an inglorious line of dimbulb hucksters whose success confirms, yet again, H.L. MenckenΓÇÖs bleak view of the knuckle-dragging American electorate, whose intelligence can never be underestimated. (Or even misunderestimated.) Another view sees Trump as a welcome ΓÇö if inadvertent ΓÇö heightener of contradictions, exposing the unsustainable hypocrisies of the system and bringing the rancid impostume of our militarized hyper-capitalism to the bursting point. The poisons that ooze from this opened carbuncle ΓÇö the racism, aggression, nativism, hatred and vulgarity that pour from TrumpΓÇÖs mouth in a gangrenous stream ΓÇö will provoke a movement that will ΓÇö eventually, after much struggle and suffering ΓÇö cleanse the body politic at last. (ΓÇ£The worse, the betterΓÇ¥ is a stance with a long history in political warfare; Lenin was an adept of the principle, as are the Senate Republicans.)
DonaldTrump  ChrisFloyd  2016PresidentialElection  Delicious 
june 2016 by juandante

Copy this bookmark: