Oct 27, 2016

Western Warplanes Terror-Bomb Syrian School, Russia Irresponsibly Blamed

via SteveLendmanBlog
by Stephen Lendman

Whenever US and/or “coalition” warplanes terror-bomb Syrian schools, hospitals, residential areas, other civilian sites, and vital infrastructure, Moscow and/or Damascus are irresponsibly blamed.

On Wednesday, an Idlib province school was terror-bombed. According to the UK-based/Western funded Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a shamless propaganda service, “warplanes believed to be Russian…targeted schools and its surroundings in the village of Hass…in the countryside…south of Idlib province” - killing at least 35, including 11 children, and injuring dozens of others.

The New York Times, Reuters, AP and other Western media scoundrels jumped on the story, automatically blaming Russia without fact-checking, citing the SOHR report, knowing it regurgitates anti-Syrian propaganda, suppressing cold, hard facts.

Russia categorically denied involvement. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova sharply challenged irresponsible accusers, saying:

“Everyone has accused Russia and Syrian forces of the attack, saying directly that it was a bombardment carried out by Russia and Syria. This is a lie. Russia had nothing to do with this dreadful attack.”

“We demand that all international organizations join the investigation without further delay. We urge the maximum attention to this tragedy. (The) attack is not surprising…(I)t deserves the strongest criticism.”

Zakharova blasted Western media scoundrels for automatically blaming Russia whenever these attacks occur.” They shamelessly proliferate misinformation and Big Lies.

When the Idlib attack occurred, neither Russian or Syrian warplanes were operating in the area. Since terror-bombing by US and “coalition” partners began two years ago, thousands of Syrian civilian men, women and children were massacred.

Oct 25, 2016

What is Going On with Wikileaks? Assange MIA, MacFadyen Dead and the CIA Honeypot Trying to Tank the Clinton Campaign? What Gives?

by Scott CreightonOctober 23, 2016
UPDATE: Please see UPDATE at end of article which details Cass Sunstein’s involvement in the creation of Wikileaks. Then read about Sunstein and his work on the cognitive infiltration of the alternative dissident movements.
I’ve been asked on several occasions about what I think is going on with Wikileaks and all these document dumps they are releasing trying to derail the Hillary train, at least in terms of appearances, when in fact we all know that Wikileaks is a CIA honeypot designed to:
  1. aid various regime change propaganda as needed by influencing the more left-wing of the alternative media outlets
  2. serve as a black hole for real leaks from real whistle-blowers when they make the mistake of trusting Wikileaks and sending something to them
Wikileaks was established in 2006 at a time when real whistle-blowers like William BinneyRuss Tice, Mark Klein (Room 641A ) and a few others were starting to make things really difficult for our glorious leaders who had a totally different world in mind for us to live in. You may also recall in 2004 the story of Abu Ghraib broke complete with leaked photos depicting horrific torture being conducted by our troops who were running the detention center.
So in 2006 something needed to be done in order to keep real whistle-blowers from getting their stories on the front pages of every news paper and website in the country and thus, Wikileaks was born. The idea of a honeypot was hatched.
They got Julian Assange to act as it’s front-man. A sleazy character, who, like most other assets they procure for such operations, had a long history of criminal behavior and a strange history of being forgiven for it.
“As a teenager in Melbourne, he (Assange) belonged to a hacker collective called the International Subversives. He eventually pled guilty to 24 counts of breaking into Australian government and commercial websites to test their security gaps, but was released on bond for good behavior. His official bio describes him as “Australia’s most famous ethical hacker.” In the years that followed, Assange helped write a book about his exploits in the online underground and says he went on to become an investigative journalist for Australian and British newspapers.” Mother Jones, 2010
In 1987, part of the folklore of Julian Assange has him hacking the Pentagon at the tender age of 16. Four years later in 1991, he was caught hacking an Australian multinational telecom company and arrested. He was charge with 31 major hacking crimes and later, in 1996, he pled guilty to 25 of those. 25 felony charges. He was released for “good behavior”
What was that “good behavior” you ask?
In 1993 Assange gave technical advice to the Victoria Police Child Exploitation Unit and assisted with prosecutions.[37] In the same year he was involved in starting one of the first public Internet service providers in Australia, Suburbia Public Access Network
That’s right. He got his mind right and helped the system bust other criminals.
It should also be noted that when Wikileaks first started up, they openly admitted they were run by a bunch of Chinese dissident “hackers”. These are the same types of “hacktivists” who work for groups like USAID and the Soros’ Open Society Foundation who work to promote regime change in various countries on behalf of the CIA and the masters of the universe. Julian Assange describes his ideology as being in support of market libertarianism. Yeah, free market neoliberalism.
I am certainly not the only one out here who sees Wikileaks and Assange for what they really are.
“Steven Aftergood, who writes the Federation of American Scientists’ Secrecy News blog and has published thousands of leaked or classified documents, says he wasn’t impressed with WikiLeaks’ “conveyor-belt approach” to publishing anything it came across. “To me, transparency is a means to an end, and that end is an invigorated political life, accountable institutions, opportunities for public engagement. For them, transparency and exposure seem to be ends in themselves,” says Aftergood”…
“John Young, founder of the pioneering whistleblower site,, is skeptical. Assange reverently describes Cryptome as WikiLeaks’ “spiritual godfather.” But Young claims he was conned into registering the WikiLeaks domain when Assange’s team first launched (the site is no longer under his name). He fought back by leaking his correspondence with WikiLeaks. “WikiLeaks is a fraud,” he wrote to Assange’s list, hinting that the new site was a CIA data mining operation. “Fuck your cute hustle and disinformation campaign against legitimate dissent. Same old shit, working for the enemy.” Mother Jones, 2010
A “disinformation campaign against legitimate dissent” and “working for the enemy”. A pretty straight forward assessment of Wikileaks and Assange from a real whistle-blower website.
When they first came online, Wikileaks made a name for themselves with the “Collateral Murder” video which was designed to give them all sorts of whistle-blower street-cred but the video itself was carefully chosen in that it could easily be chalked up to the “fog of war” since two of the party members did have AKs on them and the film crews’ tripod did look like some sort of weapon from a distance. The van that was shot up was harder to justify but it was still an active combat area with troops on the ground a couple blocks away and thus they could end up saying they were taking precautions to make sure those troops weren’t ambushed.
I wrote about all of this years ago.
I also kept up with the Julian Assange controlled opposition psyop as it developed over the years:
As if we needed any more proof of what Wikileaks really is, read this from WIRED back in May of 2011;
“WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange now makes his associates sign a draconian nondisclosure agreement that, among other things, asserts that the organization’s huge trove of leaked material is “solely the property of WikiLeaks,” according to a report Wednesday.
“You accept and agree that the information disclosed, or to be disclosed to you pursuant to this agreement is, by its nature, valuable proprietary commercial information,” the agreement reads, “the misuse or unauthorized disclosure of which would be likely to cause us considerable damage.”
The confidentiality agreement (.pdf), revealed by the New Statesman, imposes a penalty of 12 million British pounds– nearly $20 million — on anyone responsible for a significant leak of the organization’s unpublished material. The figure is based on a “typical open-market valuation” of WikiLeaks’ collection, the agreement claims.” WIRED
The CIA honeypot would make leakers sign a contract with them expressly forbidding them from leaking their stuff after they hand it over to Wikileaks under penalty of being ruined financially for the rest of their lives. That way they could ensure once they had control of the information given to them in good faith by a whistle-blower, they could bury it forever if they chose to do so, without fear that the whistle-blower would get impatient waiting for the release and give it to someone else.
That’s not the work of a whistle-blower site. That’s the signature of a honeypot. No… question… about… it.
Started in Dec. of 2006, Wikileaks was being promoted in the MSM very early on. In fact, it was promoted as a whistle-blower site by the mainstream press even before it leaked a single document.
“By March, more than one million leaked documents from governments and corporations in Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Bloc will be available online in a bold new collective experiment in whistle-blowing. That is, of course, as long as you don’t accept any of the conspiracy theories brewing that could be a front for the CIA or some other intelligence agency.” TIME Jan. 2007
From the start and even before the start, the Mockingbirds at TIME and the Washington Post were telling us about Wikileaks and more importantly, telling us what to think about them … and what NOT to think about them. Specifically the Mockingbirds were telling us it was a “conspiracy theory” to think Wikileaks was a CIA honeypot. Kind of an odd position for an establishment rag to take regarding a website that was supposed to help bring down the establishment don’t you think?
All of this should make it perfectly clear to anyone not named Glenn Greenwald that Wikileaks is, was and always shall be a CIA honeypot designed to sucker in unwise whistle-blowers and vacuum up their potentially damaging leaks before they can be shown the light of day. They also serve the purpose of an irregular warfare operation in support of military campaigns across the world via various degrees of “hearts and minds” operations attempting to build popular support for those military objectives.
That said…
What’s going on with these leaks that look to undermine Hillary Clinton’s chances at winning the White House, Julian Assange’s disappearing act and the death of Gavin MacFadyen?
Let’s take these one at a time.

Oct 22, 2016


[10/22/16]  A year after the dictator-dominated United Nations declared war on “ideologies” such as “anti-Muslim bigotry” and opposition to mass immigration, the White House cooked up a fresh version of the Obama administration’s national plot to supposedly prevent people from adopting unapproved ideologies. The controversial scheme aims to deploy “community-based” teams of “mental health” workers, teachers, law enforcers, social service employees, “faith leaders,” and others to supposedly stop the spread of ideologies that Obama claims can be dangerous or violent.
Analysts and critics of the White House plan, though, warned that Obama’s supposed attack on “violent ideologies” was in reality a thinly veiled assault on conservatives and political opponents of his agenda to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Indeed, almost from the start of his term, the Obama administration was remarkably candid in targeting conservatives, libertarians, patriots, veterans, pro-life activists, nationalists, and others as “extremists” and even potential terrorists. Various Obama bureaucracies disgorged a steady stream of propaganda painting hundreds of millions of mainstream Americans as the enemy merely for their religious or political views.
News about the new 18-page plan was first reported by Reuters on October 19. It represents the first time the administration’s “policy for preventing violent extremism” has been updated, the establishment-controlled media organ reported. “The policy aims to prevent conversions to all violent ideologies,” Reuters reporter Julia Edwards added, citing the document, which still does not appear to have been released publicly. It was not immediately clear what constitutional or statutory authority the White House imagines it possesses to police people’s ideologies, or to hijack local governments to interfere in people’s personal beliefs.
According to Reuters, the White House “strategy” will be to unleash so-called “intervention teams” led by “mental health professionals,” faith-based groups, educators, and others “as a resource for people who find themselves in such circumstances.” These draconian “intervention teams” will then work to “divert a person” away from supposedly violent ideologies before they actually commit any violent acts or even any crimes. It is sort of like “pre-crime,” just more Orwellian and totalitarian.
If targets of Obama’s “community-based intervention teams” do not abandon the prohibited ideology through “mental health” and other interventions, “law enforcement” will be brought in to use more coercive measures. And if a person is believed to “pose a threat” or be “capable of committing a crime,” law-enforcement action will be taken, the policy states. In other words, “law-enforcement” action begins before a crime has even been committed — even before a target plots or conspires to commit a crime, which is of course already a crime in and of itself. Literally everyone is “capable” of committing a crime. The implications of the developments should be triggering alarm bells nationwide.
The increasingly politicized and lawless Justice Department and “Homeland Security” Department also have a big role to play in the new plan, according to media reports. Among other schemes, they will be super-charging their ideological propaganda campaigns, using taxpayer funding to illegally promote Obama’s ideology under the guise of countering ideologies Obama and the establishment disagree with and paint as violent.
The two bureaucracies will “enhance their social media campaigns to counter people being drawn to violence,” Reuters claimed matter-of-factly, without adding any details on how federal propaganda efforts — prohibited under federal law — would prevent anyone from being drawn to unapproved ideologies. The scheme may be related to a new “behavioral science” program Obama unleashed that aims to “nudge” and manipulate Americans to support everything from the man-made global-warming ideology and vaccines to Big Government and globalism.
As The New American reported last year, in the interest of defeating allegedly extreme ideologies with “better ideas,” Obama touted some of his administration’s policies at a UN summit announcing a global jihad against ideologies such as what the UN described as “anti-Muslim bigotry” in a press release. Among other schemes, he pointed to “efforts to discredit ISIL’s propaganda, especially online,” an apparent reference to his recently unveiled “Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications,” a federal propaganda machine led by Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamist Rashad Hussain.
Under the new policy, federal prosecutors working for the increasingly radical DOJ will also put together “after-school programs” to shape children’s ideologies. Other recently unveiled Obama “extremism” plans also call for conscripting school teachers to seek out students with unapproved ideologies and report them to Big Brother for further scrutiny. The warning signs the FBI told teachers to look for included non-approval of homosexuality, Islam, and more. The leaked FBI document also decried what it referred to as “violent propaganda,” suggesting an increasingly unhinged federal government now literally equates speech with violence.
In other words, it appears that the federal government is now officially and openly waging all-out war on the God-given freedoms protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These include free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and more — some of the most fundamental liberties; indeed, freedoms that the government was actually created to protect.
Unsurprisingly, Reuters and the administration both implied that the latest scheme was aimed at groups like the Islamic State, or ISIS. Yet, in reality, official Pentagon documents confirm that Obama knew al-Qaeda was leading the revolution in Syria, supported it with weapons and money anyway, and outlined as a deliberate policy goal the establishment of an Islamist “principality” in eastern Syria — an Islamic State today known better as ISIS or Daesh. Meanwhile, the administration has been importing Muslims into the United States as fast as politically possible, and both ISIS and the U.S. government acknowledge that ISIS terrorists are among them.
Thrown in among the myriad reported Islamic terror attacks purporting to justify the new White House scheme — San Bernardino, California; Orlando, Florida; and New York and New Jersey in 2015 and 2016 — was the brutal terrorist attack on Christians in South Carolina. In that case, a drug-abusing National Socialist (Nazi) named Dylan Roof reportedly massacred church-goers in Charleston. Incredibly, the Obama administration and the radical left have tried to paint the anti-Christian socialist-minded collectivist druggie as a conservative right-wing activist.

Oct 19, 2016

We are living in a false reality of constructed events

By Jim Fetzer
The Pulse Nightclub in Orlando
Although most Americans are unaware, their world changed dramatically--and not for the better-- with the passage of the National Defense Appropriations Act of 2013 (NDAA 2013), which nullified the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 by permitting the dissemination of information within the United States that had previously only been allowed to be distributed in foreign countries. The purported grounds for the change was the claim that al Qaeda was infiltrating the Internet and that its propaganda needed to be countered by propaganda "made in the USA". Today we hear the same about ISIS.

What most Americans also do not know is that ISIS itself was "made in the USA", where documents that record the decision to create it were pried from the Defense Intelligence Agency by means of FOIA requests by Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that believes the Constitution of the United States is supposed to have meaning and that agencies of the government should not be acting contrary to its provisions. Those documents originated in 2012, when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and Barack Obama was President. I published about it, "How we know ISIS was 'Made in the USA'", but the media has not been eager to inform the public. You won't be hearing about it on NBC.

Indeed, these were crucial times in American history, where the news we receive from the national press, including both in newspapers and on television, began to report a series of staged events as though they were real, including the Sandy Hook child shooting massacre of 14 December 2012, the Boston Marathon bombing of 15 April 2013, and the San Bernardino events of 2 December 2015. None of these was real. We have the FEMA manual for a two-day drill at Sandy Hook, tweets from The Boston Globe that a demonstration bomb will be set off during the marathon and a Craigslist ad soliciting actors for San Bernardino with good pay, transportation and food and some speaking roles.

I don't make these observations casually or without cause. After a 35-year career as a professional scholar and offering courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning, I do my homework. I either author articles about these things or edit books about them, such as the one you are holding in your hands. I bring together the best experts on these events and document what really happened so future generations of Americans--if we survive as country long enough for there to be one--will know the truth about their own history, which the people are not going to learn from the mainstream media.

ISIS is a perfect case in point. Once Judicial Watch had succeeded in exposing its origins, you would have thought that the press would run with it and announce from every rooftop that ISIS was "Made in the USA". It turns out that the Iraqi Army shot down two UK cargo planes delivering supplies to ISIS; that the Iraqi Popular Forces did the same to a US helicopter not long thereafter; that we have photos of ISIS members sporting "US Army" tattoos; that files hacked from an aide to John McCain included footage of fake beheading videos being taped on a sound state in Hollywood or in Tel Aviv.

If you go on-line, you can do a search for "John McCain with al Baghdadi" or "John McCain with the leader of ISIS" and discover dozens of photographs of them together. In Washington, D.C., ISIS is even known as "John McCain's Army". And today we are being told that ISIS has been infiltrating the Internet and that DHS has to take control, which means that Americans be further constrained from discovering the truth about the world around us. Indeed, as Hillary's prospects have waned, we are told that Russia is trying to affect our elections and therefore DHS should take complete control.
David Wheeler playing both a SWAT team member and a grieving father

Just how dumb are we supposed to be? DHS was amalgamated from some 35 independent agencies that had been functioning perfectly well prior to 9/11, which was used as the pseudo-justification for engaging in endless wars in the Middle East to remove the modern Arab states that were serving as a counter-balance to Israel's domination of the entire region and to pass the misnamed PATRIOT Act, which consolidated those agencies into the mammoth "Department of Homeland Security", which was modeled after the East German Stasi, the most efficient secret police agency in human history.

What you will learn here is that the beat goes on. Orlando was a complete and total fraud, where the license to run the club had expired in 2013; its legal occupancy was only 150; there were a total of 11 parking spaces (none handicapped), where, had 50 persons been killed and 53 more wounded, there would have been abandoned cars all over the place (because their drivers were either dead or in the hospital), but they just weren't there. A correspondent who resides in Orlando wrote to tell me that it wasn't even a gay club. Now the hospital has said it isn't going to bill anyone for services rendered.

When is the last time you heard of a hospital not charging for a bandaid? They aren't going to charge because they didn't render any services, only served as a prop for another elaborate production, just like the elementary school in Sandy Hook, which had been closed since 2008 because it was loaded with asbestos and other bio-hazards, served as the stage for a fabricated shooting in which no one was injured, much less killed--unless someone stubbed their toe performing their role. One of them, David Wheeler, performed both as a SWAT team member and as a grieving parent. Barack Obama flew him and his wife to the White House to address the nation about gun control, which was point of the plan.

We have 50 photos of the Connecticut State Police refurbishing the school, including one where you can see the SWAT vehicle already on the scene, which we know was before "the shooting" had taken place because the windows of Classroom 10 are still intact. Wayne Carver, the Medical Examiner, is leaning against a wall with his arms crossed awaiting the arrival of his portable mortuary tent. And its the evening before the massacre officially took place.  Infowars published a story about the banning the book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook (2015), but it was only up for 38 minutes, no doubt because it included the photo caption credit, "CONNECTICUT STATE POLICE", which was too much truth.

About 38 minutes later, after it had already received 138 comments, it was taken down. Now it has been scrubbed from the archives of the Internet. Fortunately, some of us had already made screen captures or we would not be able to reproduce it here (at least, in part). That has become another of the current administration's practices: revise history to make it conform to your preferred version. In the Soviet Union, revising history--not to advance the truth, but for political purposes--was refined to an art, where leaders who were no longer in favor would be expunged from photographs and simply disappear. The digital era has made that technique all the more effective, but not always with success.

Oct 17, 2016

Updated Summary of Biggest Leaks So Far…

by Timo 
Clinton dreams of a world with “open trade and open borders”: Every American should understand that Democrats, and plenty of Republicans, are fighting an all-out war against national sovereignty. Sure, Democrats want new voters, and Republican interests want cheap labor, but they also share a mutual desire to increase the distance between the Ruling Class and voters. In the globalist future, political and business titans will stand atop the world, without having to worry about fulfilling annoying duties to grubby little voters with nostalgic memories of the days when American politicians served America’s interests. Globalism means you’ll never be able to vote against anything.
Clinton courted business elites to support liberal agenda to beat back populism: Clinton’s speeches include numerous examples of something that’s hardly new, or unique to her, but a very important harbinger of things to come if she gets into the White House. Democrats serve their voters a steady stream of anti-business, anti-wealth rhetoric, but they’re keenly interested in using Big Business to promote the agenda of Big Government. Some of the examples in the leaked speeches, such as Clinton urging business interests to beat back the Tea Party and support open-borders immigration, are points of common interest with the GOP Establishment.
Clinton campaign coordinated with Super PAC: No one familiar with the WikiLeaks disclosures should be able to restrain their laughter when Hillary Clinton talks about getting “big money” and “dark money” out of politics. Then again, she should have been laughed off the stage for such tirades long before WikiLeaks started releasing her campaign’s emails.
Clinton admitted she has different “public and private positions” on Wall Street reform: Again, this shouldn’t surprise anyone, but it’s always useful to catch a politician actually admitting she isn’t honest with the public on issues – especially an issue of keen interest to the Democrats who opposed her in the primary. In the same issue, she admitted she’s out of touch with ordinary Americans and “far removed” from middle-class life, which is a refreshing bit of (unintended) candor from such a sanctimonious candidate and Party. Lastly, she said it was an “oversimplification” to blame banks for the 2008 financial meltdown, which is true – and greatly understating the truth of Democrat politicians’ culpability, at that – but not at all what Democrat hyper-partisans want to hear from their leaders.
Clinton campaign asked about using White House executive privilege to hide emails from Congress: “Think we should hold emails to and from POTUS? That’s the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that,” John Podesta – current Clinton campaign chair, and former White House counsel – wrote to Hillary’s aide Cheryl Mills, even as the House Benghazi Committee was writing a subpoena for Clinton’s long-hidden correspondence. It’s absolutely shocking that Team Clinton would think Barack Obama was willing to abuse executive privilege to hide vital information from Congress. Wherever did they get that outrageous idea?
Clinton campaign looked for political support from “needy Latinos”: This is the perfect example of an email chain that would set the media on fire, if it came from a Republican political campaign. They seem to have been talking about Latino politicians who were needy, rather than herds of Latino voters, but they were colorfully insulting to some of those politicians.
Collusion with State Department on managing Clinton’s email scandal: It’s pretty clear from these emails that Clinton’s team knew she broke the law, but they were (justifiably) confident they could trump the rule of law with politics… and plenty of help from their good friends in the Obama Administration. Other emails illustrate the Clinton team’s conviction that all Democrat scandals can be overcome with distractions and delaying tactics, counting on that 90% Democrat media to be easily distracted, and to stay quiet while stonewalls are constructed. You will see more collusion and stonewalling in future Democrat Administrations, building on the precedents Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton established. The next Republican Administration that tries it will get a swift and brutal lesson in why scandal management only works when the administrative state and media support the party in power.
“Journalists” secretly working as enthusiastic volunteers for Clinton/Kaine 2016: Another one to file under “no big surprise, but still nice to see it on paper.” The American public needs to understand there is no real division between the government and media when a Democrat is in the White House, especially with this particular Democrat. The press loved Barack Obama and was childishly easy for him to spin at will, even during the queasy Fifty Shades of Grey stages of their romantic relationship, but the press is Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They’re her donors, Clinton Foundation contributors, and often her former (and future!) employees. If you didn’t think the media could be less interested in holding a president accountable than Obama, you’re in for a shock if Clinton wins.
Planting the “seeds of revolution” in the “Middle Ages dictatorship” of the Catholic Church: Democrats view Christians in almost exactly the terms they adamantly refuse to apply to Islamic supremacists. They’re also very determined to infiltrate institutions that resist liberalism, subverting them from within, and destroying them if they refuse to be subverted. Check out the latest news about the National Football League for another example.
Clinton Cash panicked the campaign: They knew how bad this stuff was, and they wasted no time devising strategies to spin it away. They didn’t have much trouble convincing the press to stop bugging Clinton about the galaxy of Clinton Foundation scandals, did they? With Republicans, the media works hard to set up denials that look uncomfortable, or which they think can be demolished by later revelations. With Democrats, not so much.
Flip-flopping on TPP: It’s amazing than a single Sanders voter ever believed Clinton was honest about opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but evidently most of them did, or else they never really cared about the issue as much as they claimed to. Leaked emails reveal how Clinton was not “comfortable” with attacking the trade deal she once gushed over as the “gold standard” for such agreements, but she knew she had to pretend to oppose it to placate union bosses and woo the Sanderistas. Clinton campaign staff talked about her “integrity” as though it were a stack of poker chips, deeming it reasonable to sacrifice a little integrity to keep the Sanders insurrection under control.
Gun control: cherry-picked data and executive orders: Democrats are going to lose patience with voter opposition to their gun control agenda and begin imposing it, as soon as they no longer have to worry about losing a tough election in the near future. They often worry about the potential backlash from Democrat voters in key states who support gun rights, but they’ll stop worrying about that soon, especially if Clinton does extremely well in those states. A packed Supreme Court will make her even bolder about chipping away at the Second Amendment. No one should be surprised that Democrats like to pick and choose which crimes the public should focus upon, in order to sell the gun control agenda.
Special favors for “Friends of Bill” in Haiti: The Clintons’ use of Haiti as a cash machine was disgusting. The hypocrisy of liberals willing to ignore this carnival of corruption, at the expense of an impoverished black nation, to slip the Clintons back into the White House is unbearable. The corruption of the State Department into a wholly owned subsidiary of Clinton, Inc. should be completely unacceptable.
Iran nuclear deal was “greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler”: This email chain quotes Republican Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois saying Obama’s nuclear deal “condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf,” and Clinton campaign chief John Podesta responding, “Yup.” While the Democrats figure out how to spin that away, the rest of us can reflect that Clinton, Podesta, and other old hands in her inner circle probably have significant differences of opinion with Barack Obama and his teenage-punk approach to foreign policy. Obama and his weird little gang of young advisers thought it would be a great idea to do the opposite of everything his predecessors did, Republican and Democrat alike. The Clinton group worked in one of those preceding Administrations. However, Mrs. Clinton and all of her loyal retainers were willing to stifle their objections to Obama’s foreign policy in the name of party loyalty… even when those objections hinted at a future nuclear war.
Clinton wanted to run against Donald Trump in 2016: The three Republican candidates Clinton’s campaign thought they had the best chance of beating were Trump, Ben Carson, and Senator Ted Cruz. “We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously,” said a memo sent to the Democratic National Committee. They were quite confident of their ability to tell the press which Republican candidates it should take seriously.
Clinton knew Libya was a disaster: Her hindsight about the bloody, world-destabilizing fallout from the overthrow of Qaddafi, and the inability of the new Libyan government to provide security for Americans, was 20/20… but what good does that do anyone, especially the Americans who died in Benghazi? It’s laughable to hear Clinton and her supporters brag about her great resume. Her resume is the world outside your window, and what she says about it to her big donors is very different from what she says to the general public.
“Foreign govt donors: all the money is in”: The Clinton team is much more relaxed about discussing big bucks from overseas among themselves. They don’t want the public thinking about how much support Clinton gets from foreign interests, or dwelling on how unsavory some of those interests are. They were reluctant to disclose all of those foreign donors to the Obama Administration as they promised. But the leaked emails show they’re very well aware of how important that imported cash is. This particular email seems to concern locking down foreign financial support for the Clinton Foundation, in case Mrs. and Mr. Clinton find themselves back in the White House next year.
Clinton Foundation audit reveals it may have misled the IRS: One of the perks of Clintonhood is that you can file taxes incorrectly, suffer no penalties whatsoever, and refile the paperwork years later. A 2011 audit of the Clinton Foundation requested by Chelsea Clinton discovered that, despite sworn statements to the IRS, the Foundation didn’t write or enforce the required conflict-of-interest policy… and, wouldn’t you know it, some conflicts of interest do seem to have cropped up! Two years later, long after Hillary Clinton resigned as Secretary of State, gift acceptance policies were still a work in progress.
HRC’s organization actively conspiring with wealthy Israel supporters to “delegitimize” BDS.
Citigroup chose Obama’s 2008 cabinet
Democrats prepared fake Trump “grope under the meeting table”
Hillary Clintons Brother Was Hustling Gold Mine Deals in Haiti
“Obama says he learned of Clinton using private email through news reports” … WikiLeaks has now confirmed this to be a lie.
Talk of E.T. Disclosure through Clinton’?s Campaign Chair
Hillary campaign pushing Muslim Obama narrative
EMAILID 2170 Attachment How to make $8 Million campaign debt disappear for Hillary? For example by “renting voter and donor information lists” from the Hillary 2008 campaign. Renting them with other organizations that they control, thus funneling money back into the campaign to cancel the debt. This was outlined in a memo, but they actually did it. With HillPAC for example (investigated by a journalist at The Intercept).
EMAILID 2783 Hillary took foreign money. The implication through Huma is she knew about it and solicited it. FARA stands for the Foreign Actors Registration Act Huma said…”we had decided to accept it wanted to know who the individuals are and (Hillary) wants to weigh in”
EMAILID 3990 “Beyond this Hillary should stop attacking Bernie, especially when she says things that are untrue, which candidly she often does. I am one of the people with credibility to suggest Bernie people support her in November, and she and Benenson and others have no idea of the damage she does to herself with these attacks, which she does not gain by making.”
EMAILID 2953 Too afraid to ask for Bernie’s medical records. Knowing Hillary’s medical records are much worse.
EMAILID 2485 Names of some big money Democrat donors.
EMAILID 2301 A famous but unnamed journalist is warning about how “Clinton’s sex life” could cause problems because “sources close to the Clintons” are telling him exactly that. Attempts are made to shut up these sources internally, because Bill Clinton sex “allegations are hurting both Clintons” LOL
EMAILID 3782 HRC Campaign thanking Univision’s owner Haim Saban for its moderators handling of Hillary against Sanders. Things were a bit rigged against Bernie?
EMAILID 1786 Preparing for huge attacks on Bernie Sanders : “Sanders once wrote that men fantasize about women being on their knees and women fantasize about being raped by three men simultaneously.”
EMAILID 2535 Hillary Camp prepares for hard-hitting interview with MSNBC “journalist”, they prepare sections of text for her. They call the whole thing “tax hit”, meaning the thing is supposed to be some hit piece against Bernie (possibly). This is early 2016, so during the fighting against Bernie. HRC then proceeds to read sections almost verbatim from these prepared remarks : compare this video to the text .
EMAILID 3154 Discussion about the emails. Should Hillary make a joke about the emails? She shouldn’t because “We don’t know what’s in the emails, so we are nervous about this. Might get a big laugh tonight and regret it when content of emails is disclosed. “- Mandy Grunwald . Better not to joke about the “emails” (turns out the email case was really about how she exposed classified TOP SECRET/SAP information through the “emails” to the following people: Combetta, Pagliano, all of her lawyers, all of Platte River Network maybe a few janitors. )
EMAILID 2631 Hillary’s stance on the Defense of Marriage Act revealed, 2015 October “I’m not saying double down or ever say it again. I’m just saying that she’s not going to want to say she was wrong about that, given she and her husband believe it and have repeated it many times. Better to reiterate evolution, opposition to DOMA when court considered it, and forward looking stance.”
EMAILID 2372 Hillary campaign scared shitless, about the NYT. Maybe they will report meetings with a PAC “So afraid that NYT is going with this story on Priorities whether we like or not. They have sources about the meetings. Honestly, it sounds like Priorities staff was yapping.” Did the NYT go with it? (They didn’t, they are in the tank). Language suggests meetings took place, there was coordination with Priorities PAC.
EMAILID 2676 Probably the moment when they figured out how to destroy all of the emails: “When I worked for the leadership we had a records retention policy to actively destroy all emails after 3 or 6 months . Each office made up its own policy. ” So if you just change your policy to something “made up”, you get to destory all the evidence after the fact. BLEACHBIT TIME
EMAILID 4178 “DOJ folks inform me…” Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon keeping in touch directly with the DOJ folks regarding the email case.
This one is questionable by many. I am leaving it since it’s still a relevant email, but the words can be taken out of context
EMAILID 4433 John Podesta about Crooked Hillary: ” I know she has begun to hate everyday Americans, but I think we should use it once the first time she says I’m running for president because you and everyday Americans need a champion.” EMAILID 4836 Katie Couric sucking up to the Hillary campaign, offering her services: “I’d also like to do a separate piece of business through social media along the lines of “10 things you don’t know about Hillary Clinton” that would showcase her personality and has a lot of viral potential.” EMAILID 5213 Clinton Foundation problems ( WJC=Bill Clinton CVC = Chelsea Clinton in previous emails: ) “I just received a call from a close friend of wjcs who said that cvc told one of the bush 43 kids that she is conducting an internal investigation of money within the foundation from cgi to the foundation The bush kid then told someone else who then told an operative within the republican party I have heard more and more chatter of cvc and bari talking about lots of what is going on internally to people Not smart”

When “elites” think “good ideas” that the people must live with

From ZerohedgeOct 16, 2016 (excerpt):
What if “elites” or whatever term you want to use for people who think they know what is best for the rest of society, rather, than leaving that up to society itself, and have concluded no matter who wins the election, this whole charade of market stability is about ready to collapse upon itself like a house of cards at any time?
And any time is weeks, or months, not years. What would one do? Wait, and try to deal with the fallout in real-time? Or, bring it down of your own volition and have it fall in some type of controlled demolition experiment of one’s choosing?
I think when it comes to “elites” they believe they can control anything if they are the one’s that initiate it. So, I would go with the latter. And if so, what does that look like? Well, consider this….
Let’s say the candidate of choice for the “elites” wins. How could you employ the triggers with near immediacy that would devastate, or wreak the most havoc on an adversary lest dropping real ordinance? Hint: A release via the monetary equivalent by raising interest rates causing a market meltdown, but in-particular, causing a capital outflow of inordinate proportions out of your adversary, seeking refuge in not only the $dollar, but $dollar denominated securities, and more.
That is – while the $dollar is, still remains/considered “safe haven” status. It doesn’t sound all that crazy when put in those terms does it?
During the most assuredly ensuing period of absolute financial turmoil you (once again e.g. Paulson and Bernanke-esque) convince both the congress, as well as the business community that “Radical action is needed now! Or we all go down in flames.” All the while the current president (much like Bush) steps off to the sidelines where the new (much like Obama did) “president-elect” calls for much of the same, echoing the most assuredly chants of fire and brimstone if “Decisive action is implemented immediately!” No matter how radical or unnerving it may be to commonsense at the time.
You could have a scenario where the wind (as little as there would be except for the bloviating of politicians) of capital flight would be in the desired direction of your choosing, along with the ability to once again push through laws, or just allow for further take over, or more intervention by the Fed. or others in ways never dreamed possible before in a capitalistic society.
All the ground work has already been plowed. Both in some precedents, as well as open rhetoric of the possibilities of going where no modern society has gone before with its capital markets. (Think current Fed. communications)
As for your adversaries? You’d be doing this before they had real-time to test newly formed alliances of monetary trading or swaps in crisis mode. And during a crisis? Money seeks known safety first – not speculative. And the U.S. $dollar, along with its equity markets, as perverted as they are, are still the cleanest shirt in a dirty laundry.
The absolute havoc, devastation, financial destruction, and a whole lot more is almost near unconscionable to even contemplate. Yet, what you have to always remember is this: Elites, or those controlling the power, never think about the destruction happening to them. They always think in terms of “It won’t be us who has to live with our decisions. That’s for others to deal with.”
And if there is any doubt you may have to that last thought. Let me remind you of another story you may not have heard about, and the resulting aftermath when “elites” think “good ideas” that the people must live with and beside – not them.
Welcome to Paris “Scenes From The Apocalypse” circa this month.
A lot of people there once thought “They would never allow that to happen!” Maybe they would like to re-think that again, no?
No tinfoil required.