DNC Chair Panics as Truth About Farrakhan Relationship Goes National

by Peter Hasson

  • Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison, deputy DNC chair, claimed on Sunday that he hasn’t met with Farrakhan since crossing paths with him at two 2013 meetings
  • Ellison, a former Nation of Islam member, claimed for years that he cut all ties to Farrakhan since running for Congress in 2006
  • Ellison disputed Farrakhan’s account that he and Indiana Rep. Andre Carson visited the hate group leader in his hotel room in 2015
  • Carson has already confirmed his own presence at the 2015 meeting

Under fire over his ties to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, Democratic Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison claimed Sunday that he hasn’t attended any meetings with Farrakhan since 2013 and “never had” a relationship with him.

Farrakhan is a notorious anti-Semite and racist whose organization teaches that white people are inherently inferior to black people. Ellison, the deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), is a former Nation of Islam member who claimed when he first ran for Congress in 2006 that he had left Farrakhan in his past.

New reporting has shown, however, that Ellison attended multiple meetings with Farrakhan while in Congress. That includes a private visit to Farrakhan’s hotel room in 2015 with Democratic Indiana Rep. Andre Carson. Farrakhan referenced the meeting in a December 2016 Facebook video, and Carson has confirmed that he was present. When CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Ellison about that meeting, the congressman did not deny that the meeting took place but instead lashed out at his critics.

Ellison lashed out at his critics again in a blog post on Sunday, claiming that he never had a relationship with Farrakhan and hasn’t met him since 2013, apparently contradicting Farrakhan and Carson’s accounts. Ellison did confirm his presence at two Farrakhan meetings that took place in 2013. Ellison claimed questions about his Farrakhan ties are “a smear by factions on the right who want to pit the Jewish community and the Black community against each other.”

“I do not have and have never had a relationship with Mr. Farrakhan, but I have been in the same room as him,” Ellison wrote. “About a decade ago, he and I had a brief, chance encounter in Washington, D.C. In 2013, I attended a meeting in New York City with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and nearly 50 others where I advocated for the release of an American political prisoner. I didn’t know Mr. Farrakhan would be there and did not speak to him at the event. Contrary to recent reports, I have not been in any meeting with him since then, and he and I have no communication of any kind.”

"But as the attacks on me and my fellow Black representatives in Congress intensify, I want to be clear: this is a smear by factions on the right who want to pit the Jewish community and the Black community against each other, and distract from the hatred and bigotry on display by the president and the white supremacists who stormed Charlottesville this summer with their anti-Semitic chants and Confederate flags. I declined to dignify questions raised about Mr. Farrakhan because I know they are inherently political, and are designed to separate me from people who I work with every day on issues of importance for Americans of all backgrounds,” Ellison continued.

“The critics will not be satisfied. They won’t be satisfied any more than President Obama’s production of his birth documents satisfied his critics, or Hillary Clinton’s eleven-hour testimony before the House Select Committee on Benghazi sated her detractors,” he added.  Ellison’s blog post comes as he is increasingly under fire over his ties to Farrakhan.

The Washington Post awarded Ellison “Four Pinocchios,” their worst possible rating, for claiming that his relationship with Farrakhan ended in 2006. The post cited The Daily Caller’s reporting in the fact-check.

Democratic Illinois Rep. Danny Davis, who has repeatedly praised Farrakhan, compared Ellison’s relationship to Farrakhan to a fallen-away Christian’s relationship to Jesus in an interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation earlier this month.

“I don’t know that Keith knows Farrakhan as well as I do — in fact, I know he doesn’t,” Davis said. “I don’t think that Keith is no person who is super engaged with Farrakhan, he just happens to be a movement. Just like many of the folks who are Christians, they’re not super engaged with Jesus, but they say they Christians,” Davis said. 

Women’s March organization, a prominent left-wing activist group, has come under fire as well after their leaders expressed support for Farrakhan.  The group’s co-president, Tamika Mallory, attended Farrakhan’s annual Saviour’s Day speech last month where he railed against Jews and white people. Mallory defended Farrakhan after suffering backlash by implying that religious leaders are supposed to consider Jews their enemies.  “If your leader does not have the same enemies as Jesus, they may not be THE leader!” Mallory wrote on Twitter. She has repeatedly declined to condemn Farrakhan.

Women’s March has lost supporters over the Farrakhan scandal, and several regional chapters have slammed the national organization for refusing to denounce him. The group’s social media director, Alyssa Klein, resigned over the group’s support for Farrakhan, the New York Post reports.


A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.


FBI Refuses to Release Docs About Secret Comey-Obama Meeting, Says America Doesn’t Need to Know

by Richard Pollock


  • The FBI will not expedite the release of documents about secret meetings between Comey and Obama.
  • Comey held a secret Oval Office meeting with Obama on Jan. 5, 2017.
  • TheDCNF requested records of all meetings between the two.

The FBI states it will not expedite the release of documents about secret meetings between FBI Director James Comey and former President Barack Obama, according to a letter the bureau sent to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Such information is not “a matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exists possible questions about the government’s integrity which affects public confidence,” David Hardy, the section chief for the bureau’s Record/Information Dissemination Section, told TheDCNF in a Feb. 26 letter.

TheDCNF, under the Freedom of Information Act, requested records of all meetings between Comey and Obama and sought an “expedited process” as provided under the act when issues are of great interest to the media and the records address issues pertaining to government integrity. TheDCNF FOIA request was filed Feb. 16, 2018.  The issue prompting the FOIA request was the disclosure Comey held a secret Oval Office meeting with Obama on Jan. 5, 2017. Comey never divulged the meeting to Congress.

Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and former Vice President Joe Biden also attended the meeting.

The National Archives revealed the existence of the meeting and released a declassified version of an email Rice sent to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Rice wrote an email to herself about the secret Jan. 5 meeting with Comey on Inauguration Day Jan. 20, 2017, as President Donald Trump was being sworn into office. The email suggested Comey may have misled Congress and was attempting to cover up the extent of his relationship with Obama.

Christopher Bedford, TheDCNF’s editor in chief, called the FBI denial “shameful.”

“The FBI just told us that Director James Comey potentially lying to Congress should not be of interest to us, that it doesn’t speak to their ‘integrity,’ and that it shouldn’t impact America’s ‘confidence’ in them,” Bedford said. “They said this with a straight face. We disagree, we think the American people disagree, and we think it’s absolutely shameful.”

Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and subcommittee chairman, and Lindsey Graham released the Rice email after they received it from the National Archives.

“President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office,” Rice stated in the email on Jan. 5. 

The president urged Comey to proceed “by the book” on the Russian investigation, according to Rice.  Grassley of Iowa and Graham of South Carolina wrote to Rice in a Feb. 8 letter saying the email seemed “odd” to them.

“It strikes us as odd that, among your activities in the final moments on the final day of the Obama administration, you would feel the need to send yourself such an unusual email purporting to document a conversation involving President Obama,” the two wrote.  “Despite your claim that President Obama repeatedly told Mr. Comey to proceed ‘by the book,’ substantial questions have arisen about whether officials at the FBI, as well as at the Justice Department and the State Department, actually did proceed ‘by the book,’” the two senators continued.

Comey claimed in June 8, 2017, testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence he had only two face-to-face meetings with the president in which they were alone.

“I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) – once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016,” Comey’s opening statement read.  The qualifier that he had meetings with Obama “alone” permitted the former director to suggest he only met with the former president on two occasions.

The DCNF filed its FOIA request before the bureau “seeking records that identify and describe all meetings between former FBI Director James Comey and President Barack Obama. This records request is for all meetings with Obama alone or with meetings with the president in the company of other administration officials.”   The DCNF requested records to include all Comey “logs, director appointment schedules, emails and memos outlining the meetings with the former President along with administration officials,” adding, the records “should list the date of the meeting, location, topic and meeting participants.”  TheDCNF stated it sought an “expedited request” for producing the records. 

“The issue of Director Comey’s meetings with President Obama is a key troubling issue for Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley,” TheDCNF wrote in its application for the expedited processing. TheDCNF attached to Grassly-Graham letter to Rice in the FOIA request for expediting handling.

Hardy said The DCNF failed to meet its standards for expedited processing as provided under 28 CFR 16.5 (e)(1)(iv).

“You have not provided enough information concerning the statutory requirements permitting expedition: therefore your request is denied,” he told TheDCNF.

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.


Hacker Drops Seth Rich Bombshell, Could Blow Case Wide Open

by Martin Walsh

 

New Zealand-based hacker and political activist Kim Dotcom claims the hacking of the Democratic National Committee in 2016 was an inside job. If that’s true, it could blow the case of the mysterious murder of former DNC staffer Seth Rich wide open.

It all began Sunday when President Donald Trump explained on Twitter that he had never denied the possibility of Russia meddling in the 2016 presidential election, saying at one point that “it may be Russia, or China or another country or group, or it may be a 400 pound genius sitting in bed and playing with his computer.” 

In response to that tweet, Dotcom tweeted that the DNC was hacked by “an insider with a memory stick,” adding, “Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied.”  See his response below:

Let me assure you, the DNC hack wasn’t even a hack. It was an insider with a memory stick. I know this because I know who did it and why. Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied. 360 pounds!  https://t.co/AGRO0sFx7s https://t.co/epXtv0t1uN

Dotcom asserts that the DNC files were copied at a speed that wouldn’t be possible by someone on the other side of the planet — like in Russia or China.

Advertisement - story continues below  He also contends that a DNC insider had access to the data and transferred the files to a memory stick at a rate that could only be achieved by someone in close proximity to the DNC office building.

Dotcom’s claim was validated by analysis conducted last year by a researcher named Forensicator, who determined the DNC files were copied at a rate of 22.6 megabits per second.

He claims it wouldn’t be possible for someone on the other side of globe to copy network files that quickly.  As noted by WND, Dotcom’s explosive statement coupled with analysis from Forensicator lends credibility to the theory that Rich was involved, to an extent, in the “hack.”

Rich was shot and killed in July of 2016 while walking home at night in Washington, D.C.  Police ruled it was a failed robbery attempt, but conspiracies have circulated that he was murdered for giving the hacked DNC files to WikiLeaks, which released emails from the DNC during the 2016 presidential election.

Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign chairman John Podesta reported in March 2016 that his email was “hacked,” and his emails were released by WikiLeaks, according to The Washington Post.

There’s certainly some evidence that lends credibility to the theory that Rich was the individual who leaked the files to WikiLeaks.   If Rich was responsible for “hacking” the DNC, that would also expose the Democrats’ claim that the Russians hacked their servers and cost them the election.

Share this story online with your thoughts on Kim Dotcom claiming Seth Rich copied DNC files and gave them to WikiLeaks.


AGW Believers Replace Scientific Method With Dogma Pt. 2: Suppressing Dissent

by H. Sterling Burnett

 

People caught in the grips of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), the idea that human activities, primarily fossil fuel use, are causing catastrophic change in the world’s climate, seem to live with blinders on, unable to admit evidence to the contrary. 

I don’t begrudge the opinion of scientists who believe their own research shows, or who believe the dominant number of peer-reviewed papers indicates, humans are causing dangerous climate change. But I do disagree with many of the assumptions made by proponents of AGW. So far, evidence shows most of their projections concerning temperatures, ice, hurricanes, species extinction, etc. have failed. As a result, their projections of future climate conditions are not nearly trustworthy enough to make the kind of fundamental, wrenching, and costly changes to our economy and systems of government AGW proponents have proposed to fight climate change. I don’t think climate scientists can foretell the future any better than the average palm reader.

Making matters worse, AGW proponents discount, or ignore entirely, powerful studies that seem to undermine many of their assumptions and refute most of their conclusions.

Admittedly, I start with a position of skepticism, and indeed suspicion, when well-known researchers release a new study purporting to reinforce or provide further evidence AGW is true. This isn’t because I don’t want to hear what those who disagree with my assessment have to say. Rather, it’s based on my understanding of the lengths to which AGW true believers have gone to manipulate temperature data and try to shoehorn or force this and other data to match their dire projections.  It is reasonable, and even expected, for educated people to disagree with one another on this issue. This back-and-forth exchange of points and counterpoints shows the scientific method functioning as it should.

Many AGW believers, however, have seemingly abandoned the scientific method.

Progress is made in science by proposing a hypothesis, and developing a theory, to explain or understand certain phenomena, and then testing the hypothesis against reality. A particular hypothesis is considered superior to others when, through testing, it is shown to have more explanatory power than competing theories or hypotheses and when other scientists running the same testing regime can reproduce the results of the original test. Every theory or hypothesis must be disconfirmable in principle, such that if the theory predicts ‘A’ will occur under certain conditions, but instead sometimes ‘B’ or ‘C’ results, then the theory has problems. The more a hypothesis’ predictions prove inconsistent with results that occur during testing or real-world data, the less likely the hypothesis is to be correct.

AGW theory does not work this way. No matter what the climate phenomenon, if it can in some way be presented as being unusual by AGW proponents, it is argued to be “further evidence of global warming,” even if it contradicts earlier phenomena pointed to by the same people as evidence of global warming. {The same technique evolutionists use to defend their theory. A Theory so inaccurate the courts rule ex cathedra in favor of it - ED}  

What effects AGW will have seem to depend on which scientist one consults and which model they use. In realm of climate change research, different models looking at the same phenomenon applying the same laws of physics with the same inputs produce dramatically varied results.

Another indication AGW advocates have thrown over the scientific method is how they revert to various logical fallacies to manipulate peoples’ emotions in order to have the public dismiss climate realists’ arguments and research. AGW advocates commit the fallacy of ad hominem when they call researchers who disagree with their assessment of the strength of the case for AGW “deniers”—an obvious attempt to link them in the public’s mind with despicable Holocaust deniers. That is not science, it’s rhetoric. I know of no one who denies the fact climate changes, but there are significant uncertainties and legitimate disagreements regarding the extent of humanity’s role in recent climate changes and whether these will be disastrous. Those who refuse to acknowledge highly regarded scientists disagree with AGW are the real “deniers,” and they should suffer the opprobrium rightfully attached to that label.

AGW proponents commit the fallacy of appeal to numbers when they say the case for dangerous human-caused climate change is settled because some high percentage of a subset of scholars agrees humans are causing dangerous climate change. Consensus is a political, not a scientific, term. People once thought Earth was flat. Galileo disagreed, saying he believed it was round—and he was persecuted for saying so. And you know what? Galileo was right, and the consensus of the time was wrong. At one time, people, including the intellectual elite, believed Earth was the center of the universe and the Sun revolved around it. Copernicus said just the opposite. He was right, and everyone else was wrong.

Knowledge acquisition succeeds not through bowing to some purported consensus in thought and opinion, but through questioning previously received wisdom and continuously testing scientific theories against data. “Because the vast majority of us said so,” is not a legitimate scientific response to research raising questions about all or some part of AGW.

AGW researchers commit the fallacy of appeal to motive when they say a particular study or the work of a particular scientist or group of scientists should not be taken seriously because of who funded them. Both sides commit this fallacy, with climate skeptics often arguing AGW research is biased based on the fact it was funded by government, which history shows is predisposed toward finding reasons grow and exert ever more control over people.

Research should be judged based on the validity of its assumptions, whether its premises are true, and whether its conclusions follow from its premises, not on who funded the research. Data, evidence, and logic are the hallmarks of science, not motives.

Beyond the routine data manipulation and logical fallacies, AGW advocates’ own e-mails show they have tried to suppress the publication of research skeptical toward AGW. And they have routinely attempted to interfere with the career advancement of scholars who refuse to completely toe the AGW line, even stooping on occasion to try to get scholars fired for producing research undermining AGW.

AGW fanatics also try to suppress the teaching of a balanced, accurate understanding of the current state of climate science, with all its uncertainties, in the nation’s schools. This is the tool of the propagandist, not the scientist seeking the truth.

All these reflections came to a head in recent years, as AGW true believers have fought in court to prevent the release of the data underpinning their own research, attempted to suppress free speech by accusing those with whom they disagree of committing libel, and even on occasion called for the prosecution and incarceration of climate skeptics for daring to question AGW orthodoxy. Some AGW proponents have openly admired various authoritarian regimes for their ability to “get things done” without the interference of democratic institutions. Real scientists know truths do not bloom under authoritarianism.

When a theory does not comport with the facts, data, and evidence, it is the theory that should be questioned, not the data or the motives of those bringing such evidence to the world’s attention. Consider this my plea for AGW true believers to embrace, once again, the scientific method, to follow the evidence in the field of climate research where it leads even if it proves inconvenient or inconsistent with their earlier beliefs. To the extent I myself have failed to live up to this ideal, I will try and do the same, approaching AGW arguments with an open mind.


The Vaccine Hoax is Over. Documents from UK reveal 30 Years of Coverup

by Jeffrey Phillips


Andrew Baker ( FFN),- Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have:

1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies

Those are the same vaccines that are mandated to children in the US

800px-Smallpox_vaccine : Educated parents can either get their children out of harm’s way or continue living inside one of the largest most evil lies in history, that vaccines – full of heavy metals, viral diseases, mycoplasma, fecal material, DNA fragments from other species, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (a sterilizing agent) – are a miracle of modern medicine.

Freedom of Information Act filed in the US with the CDC by a doctor with an autistic son, seeking information on what the CDC knows about the dangers of vaccines, had by law to be responded to in 20 days. Nearly 7 years later, the doctor went to court and the CDC argued it does not have to turn over documents. A judge ordered the CDC to turn over the documents on September 30th, 2011.

On October 26, 2011, a Denver Post editorial expressed shock that the Obama administration, after promising to be especially transparent, was proposing changes to the Freedom of Information Act that would allow it to go beyond declaring some documents secret and to actually allow government agencies (such as the CDC) to declare some document “non-existent.”

Simultaneous to this on-going massive CDC cover up involving its primary “health” not recommendation but MANDATE for American children, the CDC is in deep trouble over its decades of covering up the damaging effects of fluoride and affecting the lives of all Americans, especially children and the immune compromised. Lawsuits are being prepared. Children are ingesting 3-4 times more fluoride by body weight as adults and “[t]he sheer number of potentially harmed citizens — persons with dental fluorosis, kidney patients tipped into needing dialysis, diabetics, thyroid patients, etc — numbers in the millions.”

The CDC is obviously acting against the health of the American people. But the threat to the lives of the American people posed by the CDC’s behavior does not stop there. It participated in designed pandemic laws that are on the books in every state in the US, which arrange for the government to use military to force unknown, untested vaccines, drugs, chemicals, and “medical” treatments on the entire country if it declares a pandemic emergency.

The CDC’s credibility in declaring such a pandemic emergency is non-existent, again based on Freedom of Information Act. For in 2009, after the CDC had declared the H1N1 “pandemic,” the CDC refused to respond to Freedom of Information Act filed by CBS News and the CDC also attempted to block their investigation. What the CDC was hiding was its part in one of the largest medical scandals in history, putting out wildly exaggerated data on what it claimed were H1N1 cases, and by doing so, created the false impression of a “pandemic” in the US.

The CDC was also covering up a financial scandal to rival the bailout since the vaccines for the false pandemic cost the US billions. And worse, the CDC put pregnant women first in line for an untested vaccine with a sterilizing agent, polysorbate 80, in it. Thanks to the CDC, “the number of vaccine-related “fetal demise” reports increased by 2,440 percent in 2009 compared to previous years, which is even more shocking than the miscarriage statistic [700% increase].

The exposure of the vaccine hoax is running neck and neck with the much older hoax of a deadly 1918-19 flu. It was aspirin that killed people in 1918-19, not a pandemic flu. It was the greatest industrial catastrophe in human history with 20-50 million people dying but it was blamed on a flu. The beginning of the drug industry began with that success (and Monsanto was part of it). The flu myth was used by George Bush to threaten the world with “another pandemic flu that could kill millions” – a terror tactic to get pandemic laws on the books in every state and worldwide. Then the CDC used hoax of the pandemic hoax to create terror over H1N1 and to push deadly vaccines on the public, killing thousands of unborn children and others. (CDC will not release the data and continues to push the same vaccine.)

The hoax of the vaccine schedule is over, exposed by FOIAs in the UK.  The hoax of the CDC’s interest in children’s lives has been exposed by its refusal to respond to a doctor’s FOIAs around its knowledge of vaccine dangers.

The 1918-19 pandemic hoax has been exposed by Dr. Karen Starko’s work on aspirin’s role in killing people.

And despite refusing to respond to FOIAS, the CDC’s scandalous hoax of a 2009 flu pandemic and its part in creating it, was exposed by CBS NEWS.  And the Obama administration, in attempting to salvage the last vestige of secrecy around what is really happening with vaccines, by declaring agency documents non-existent, has made its claim of transparency, non-existent.

But pandemic laws arranging for unknown vaccines to be forced on the entire country are still in place with HHS creating a vaccine mixture that should never be used on anyone and all liability for vaccines having been removed. Meanwhile, a Canadian study has just proven that the flu vaccine containing the H1N1 vaccine which kills babies in utero, actually increases the risk of serious pandemic flu.

Americans who have been duped into submitting their children to the CDC’s deadly vaccines, have a means to respond now. People from every walk of life and every organization, must 


1. take the information from the UK FOIAs exposing 30 years of vaccine lies, the refusal of the CDC to provide any information on what it knows about those lies, and the Obama Administration’s efforts to hide the CDC’s awareness of those lies, and go to their state legislatures, demand the immediate nullification of the CDC vaccine schedule and the pandemic laws.

2. inform every vet. active duty military persons, law enforcement people, DHS agents and medical personnel they know, of the vaccine hoax, for their families are deeply threatened, too, but they may not be aware of it or that they have been folded into agency structures by the pharmaceutical industry (indistinguishable from the bankers and oil companies) that would make them agents of death for their country with the declaration of a “pandemic” emergency or “bio-terrorist” attack. It is completely clear now that the terrorism/bioterrorism structures are scams so that any actions taken to “protect” this country using those laws would in fact be what threatens the existence of Americans.

It was aspirin that killed millions in 1918-19. Now it is mandated and unknown, untested vaccines with banned adjuvants in them that threaten the country with millions of deaths. At the same time, the CDC is holding 500,000 mega-coffins, built to be incinerated, on its property outside Atlanta. Not to put to fine a point on this, but it’s clear now that the CDC should not be involved in any way with public health. 

Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), we know that vaccines are not a miracle of modern medicine. Any medical or government authority which insists vaccines prevent diseases is either ignorant of government documents (and endless studies) revealing the exact opposite or of the CDC’s attempts to hide the truth about vaccines from the public, or means harm to the public.


The health danger to American children and adults are vaccines.



Bombshell FBI Files Show Mueller Approved Lies, Cover-ups During 9/11 Investigation [Report]

by V Saxena


FBI documents reviewed this month by the watchdog organization Florida Bulldog suggest that during special counsel Robert Mueller’s tenure as the director of the FBI from 2001 to 2013, he actively sought to cover up the disturbing links between a Saudi family in Florida and the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

According to a report filed by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune last year, when the terrorists who carried out the devastating attack that left 2,977 Americans dead first arrived in America, they relied on a network of associates across the country to “get apartments, open bank accounts and connect with local mosques.”  They essentially used family and friends to get settled in and begin making preparations for their planned attack. This brings us to a mysterious Saudi Arabian family “who were living in Sarasota County (Florida) shortly before the 9/11 attacks” but disappeared shortly thereafter.

“Alerted by neighbors’ suspicions about a lack of activity and three vehicles apparently abandoned in the driveway and garage, FBI agents converged on 4224 Escondito Circle within weeks of the 9/11 attacks” and found “mail on the table, dirty diapers in the bedroom, made beds, a refrigerator full of food, and closets with entire wardrobes intact,” according to the Herald-Tribune.

“Alerted by neighbors’ suspicions about a lack of activity and three vehicles apparently abandoned in the driveway and garage, FBI agents converged on 4224 Escondito Circle within weeks of the 9/11 attacks” and found “mail on the table, dirty diapers in the bedroom, made beds, a refrigerator full of food, and closets with entire wardrobes intact,” according to the Herald-Tribune.

It was as if they had chosen to leave at a moment’s notice. As a result, many suspected the family had held ties of some sort to the Sept. 11 attacks.  Now fast-forward to 2011, when Florida Bulldog first unveiled these extraordinary facts in an exclusive report that quickly went viral across the nation, attracting attention from the Miami Herald and other notable papers.  In response, FBI officials “immediately repudiated the story, asserting that it had thoroughly investigated the Sarasota family and could find no links with the hijackers,” according to the Herald-Tribune.

Now fast forward another year to 2012, when the Florida Bulldog watchdog organization filed a Freedom of Information Act suit against the FBI, demanding it release its records on the Saudi family.  When the watchdog group finally obtained the records a year later, it noticed a bombshell sentence within them: “Further investigation of the (name deleted) family revealed many connections between the (name deleted) and individuals associated with the terror attacks on 9/11/2001.” 

What wasn’t redacted was the address, 4224 Escondito Circle, i.e., the same one as the aforementioned Saudi family. This stunning piece of evidence proved that the FBI had known from day one that the Saudi family did in fact have verified links to the Sept. 11 attacks and had therefore lied in 2011.  Moreover, according to additional FBI records reviewed this month by Florida Bulldog, it appears it was Mueller who ordered the agency to lie.

“Mueller … is referenced in a document index created in late November by the FBI at the direction of U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch of Fort Lauderdale,” the watchdog group reported. “The index reference to former FBI Director Mueller is contained in an item about a FBI white paper that was written one week after the Bulldog and the Miami Herald simultaneously published the Bulldog’s story about the abrupt departure of Saudis Abdulaziz and Anoud al-Hijji from their Sarasota area home about two weeks before 9/11.”

Here’s the kicker: The white paper “was created to brief the FBI Director concerning the FBI’s investigation of 4224 Escondito Circle,” as quoted directly from the index.  Florida Bulldog further notes that the white paper was created on the exact same day that the FBI issued its lies to the media denying the existence of evidence proving the family had ties to the Sept. 11 attacks. 

What does all this mean? Well, assuming the picture painted by the clear-cut evidence is accurate, the man currently investigating President Donald Trump for collusion/obstruction/whatever is a bald-faced liar, point blank, period.


Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about these astonishing revelations about Robert Mueller.



After 5 years US government to release info on verification of SSNs in Obamacare

by Orly Taitz


On Saturday 01.20.2018 Attorney Orly Taitz, President of Defend Our Freedoms Foundation,  suddenly received a consent for production of information, which was requested 5 years ago. FOIA response re social security numbers  For the past 10 years attorney Orly Taitz fought for transparency in the government and end to corruption.

In relation to Obamacare, Taitz provided the government with a 200 page file showing how individuals without a Social Security number or ones using a stolen Social Security number can get Obamacare health insurance, which is paid by the US taxpayers. This leads to increase in premiums and deductibles.  Taitz was seeking documentary evidence showing how Social Security numbers of recipients are being verified in ACA Obamacare. Current release of documents, which will start within days, will help to clean up Obamacare fraud and will save the taxpayers billions of dollars.

Additionally, with the start of Obamacare, it was reported that Mr. Obama applied for Obamacare on line and his application was rejected. Subsequently, he dispatched his aide, who hand delivered the application to the Washington DC ACA exchange, where the rejection was manually overridden and Obamacare policy was issued for Barack Obama.

Originally, the media claimed that this happened because the Social Security number of Barack Obama was sealed. Taitz submitted an FOIA request to the Washington DC ACA,  requesting documentation which would show that the Social Security number of Barack Obama was sealed. Taitz got a response from Washington DC ACA, stating that Barack Obama’s Social Security number was not sealed. FOIA Response Washington DC Exchange.

Taitz provided several government agencies with a 150 page file showing why the original application was rejected. The evidence included the unredacted  tax returns, which Mr. Obama originally posted on White House.gov. (subsequently those tax returns were redacted). Those tax returns showed Barack Obama using a Connecticut Social Security number xxx-xx-4425. Since Obama was never a resident of Connecticut, there is no legitimate reason for him to have a CT SSN. Later, this number was traced to records of Harrison J. Bounel, who resided originally in Bronx, NY and later believed to have resided in nearby Connecticut.  Mr. Obama was repeatedly requested to explain to the public, why he is using a CT Social Security number, why doesn’t he have a valid Social Security number from the state of Hawaii, where he grew up?

Mr. Obama never responded and never provided any explanation. This matter is still under investigation by a number of government agencies. As Obama appointees are being gradually replaced by Trump appointees, more information, more documentation to FOIA requests, more answers are expected.

Taitz will start releasing information to the media and to the public at large in batches, as the information will start arriving from the CMS HHS.


FOIA response re social security numbers


Report: Lawyer Caught Offering Woman $200,000 to Accuse Trump of Sex Assault

by V Saxena


Two months ago former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly revealed the existence of a tape that he claims shows what he described as “an anti-Trump attorney” offering a woman $200,000 during the presidential election last year to issue false sexual harassment claims against then-GOP nominee Donald Trump.

“It exists,” he said to Newsmax at the time. “We have urged the person who has the tape to hand it over to the U.S. attorney, because my investigative team believes there are three separate crimes on the audio tape.”

On Friday, O’Reilly doubled down on that claim during an interview with conservative talk show host Glenn Beck, though he declined to offer a deadline for when the tape might finally be released.

“There is an audiotape of an anti-Trump person offering $200,000 to a woman to accuse Donald Trump of untoward behavior,” he said.  When Beck asked whether this tape will ever be released, O’Reilly replied by maintaining that he “may have to go to the U.S. attorney” himself.  “I don’t want to have to do that and inject myself into the story … but I had my lawyer listen to the tape,” O’Reilly said. “There are at least three crimes on the tape. So as a citizen, I may have to do this.”  He cautioned, though, that the tape isn’t in his possession but rather with “someone who knows the seriousness of this situation.”

Then, Beck asked, why won’t this mysterious someone simply release the tape to the public?

“I can’t really get into that at this point, but I can tell you, Donald Trump knows about the tape,” O’Reilly said. “And I, for the life of me, am sitting here going, ‘Why on Earth are you allowing a movement to try to smear you when you have such a powerful piece of evidence that shows this is an industry — that there are false charges and money changing hands?'”

But Trump doesn’t “have such a powerful piece of evidence” at his disposal; the actual owner of the tape does, and until he or she chooses to release the tape, there might not be much the president can do about it.  Keep in mind that the former Fox News host first mentioned this tape two months earlier, and yet it still remains unpublished. 

My honest recommendation to O’Reilly would be to try his hardest to obtain a copy of the tape and then simply distribute the copy to conservative media.

The fact is that talk is cheap, and allegations come easy. It’s only surefire, indisputable evidence that’ll make any difference against the left’s ongoing war on our president.



Hillary Clinton Cannot win the 2020 Presidential Race

by Wayne Flaherty


There is no way Hillary can win the presidency when 66 % of the people believe she is not trustworthy and 58 % also believe that she is corrupt. She cannot run on her record since that will only bring more proof of her corruption. If she falls back on her tried and true technique of lying her way out of a situation, what lie can she tell that would facilitate her escape? How do you lie your way out of 25 years of corruption?

She cannot win a debate with Donald Trump. He will not only defeat her, he will annihilate her. He will ask her the questions she has so desperately tried to avoid. As of today, it has been 221 days since she has held a press conference. She will not hold a press conference because she has no answers for the questions that are sure to be asked. She depends totally on her 3 media outlets (ABC, CBS, & NBC) to whitewash her image. No other media outlet will give her the free pass that she gets from these 3 co-conspirators. The silence of her media trio cannot hide the millions of dollars she has accepted from foreign nations hostile to America. What she promised them in exchange for her 30 pieces of silver is unknown but you can be sure it won't be good for America.

She must find a squeaky-clean Vice Presidential running mate - a person who is her exact opposite in temperament, honesty, and corruption. What sane person would use their hard earned reputation in an attempt to prop up a candidate that the people distrust to the degree the public distrusts her? Maybe there is someone who wants to be the captain of the Titanic but I seriously doubt it. Not only will squeaky-clean fail to pull her up in the polls, she will pull them down so far that she will essentially end their political career. Already, one person discussed for her VP has been eliminated because he is just as corrupt as Hillary. She will never win by attempting to run on her VP's record. She will still be 'Crooked Hillary'.

Bill Clinton sealed Hillary's fate in the email scandal when he met with Attorney General Lynch. If the FBI recommends Hillary be indicted, the AG would be forced to proceed with the criminal charges. If the AG finds her not guilty, everyone will know the fix is in. If, as many people say, AG Lynch is an honorable person, she will have only one way to salvage her already damaged career - find Hillary guilty. If the FBI does not recommend a future indictment, then everyone will know the fix is in and Bill Clinton was just giving the AG her marching orders.

Hillary's time in Washington stands as stark evidence of 25 years of lies and corruption. Time after time, the Clintons, and Hillary in particular, demonstrate contempt for the law, and assure us common folk that the law does not apply to them. One area of proof is the number of books written about the Clinton corruption that increases almost weekly.

Like a caged animal, Hillary huffs and puffs, feigns indignation, and declares "It's time to move on!" Unfortunately, fate has decreed otherwise, and the people are choosing not to move on. They are demanding accountability and they will get it - at the polls if necessary.


Chelsea’s ‘Best Friend’ Wins $11 Mil In Defense Contracts With No Clearance

by Richard Pollock


A company whose president is “best friends” with Chelsea Clinton received more than $11 million in contracts over the last decade from a highly secretive Department of Defense think tank, but to date, the group lacks official federal approval to handle classified materials, according to sensitive documents TheDCNF was allowed to review.

Jacqueline Newmyer, the president of a company called the Long Term Strategy Group, has over the last 10 years received numerous Defense Department contracts from a secretive think tank called Office of Net Assessment.

The Office of Net Assessment is so sensitive, the specialized think tank is housed in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and reports directly to the secretary. To date, the Long Term Strategy Group has received $11.2 million in contracts, according to USAspending,gov, a government database of federal contracts. But after winning a decade of contracts from the Office of Net Assessment, the federal agency is only now in the process of granting clearance to the company. Long Term Strategy Group never operated a secure room on their premises to handle classified materials, according to the Defense Security Service, a federal agency that approves secure rooms inside private sector firms. Long Term Strategy Group operates offices in Washington, D.C., and Cambridge, Mass. 

“The Long Term Strategy Group is currently in process for a facility clearance with the Defense Security Service,” the agency informed The DCNF in an email. 

Newmyer declined to address her company’s lack of facilities to handle classified material. “With regard to your questions about the status of our facilities, those are best directed to the US government, which has authority over such matters,” she wrote in an email to The DCNF.  She also declined to say whether her company is footing the bill for the new secure facility, or if the taxpayers are footing the bill through the Office of Net Assessment.

Adam Lovinger, a whistleblower and 12-year Office of Net Assessment (ONA) veteran, has repeatedly warned ONA’s leadership they faced risks by relying on outside contractors as well as the problem of cronyism and a growing “revolving door” policy, where ONA employees would leave the defense think tank and join private contractors to do the same work.

Others outside ONA have drawn similar conclusions about the office’s reliance on outside contractors. USA Today complained in August 2013 that the same set of contractors never seem to leave ONA: “While Democratic and Republican administrations come and go, ONA and its team of outside advisers remains the same. Contract records show the office relies on studies from outside contractors.” 

Clinton and Newmyer first met each other while attending Sidwell Friends School, an exclusive private Quaker school in the nation’s capital. They were in each other’s weddings, and in 2011 Chelsea referred to Newmyer as her “best friend.”  In numerous emails, Chelsea’s mom, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, actively promoted Newmyer and attempted to assist her in securing Defense Department contracts.

Secretary Clinton put Newmyer in contact with Michèle Flournoy, then-President Barack Obama’s undersecretary of defense, according to the emails from Clinton’s private email server released by the Department of State under a lawsuit filed by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.  Hillary followed up in a July 19, 2009 email, asking Newmyer, “By the way, did the DOD contract work out?”

ONA was supposed to work on complicated future warfare scenarios when it was originally set up in the 1970s.  The think tank’s first director, Andrew Marshall, was adored by a coterie of ONA staff. He was called “Yoda,” after the “Star Wars” series, adding to his mystique. Marshall lasted in the DOD post for 42 years and retired at the age of 93 in 2015.


In 2016, Lovinger sent a series of memos to James H. Baker, ONA’s new director, raising many problems Baker “inherited” from Marshall, including the use of contractors. ONA has a reputation for issuing “‘sweet-heart contracts’ to a privileged few,” Lovinger told Baker in a Sept. 30, 2016 email chain.


ONA’s leadership, led by Baker, did not take kindly to Lovinger’s warnings and allegedly retaliated against the staffer, according to Sean Bigley, a federal security clearance attorney who also represents him.  Baker suspended Lovinger’s security clearance in May for “security infractions,” and launched numerous investigations.  The suspension came after Lovinger had been detailed to the National Security Council. He was removed from the National Security Council after losing his security clearance, and now languishes inside a Defense Department satellite office doing busy work.

In a Sept. 13, 2017 letter to DOD officials, Bigley charged: “A review of the ‘case file’ in this matter illuminates a picture of intentional whistleblower retaliation against Mr. Lovinger; personal and political vendettas against Lovinger by Baker …”  Although Lovinger has since been exonerated of all the accusations, he still faces the possibility of a revocation of his clearance. His case is currently pending before Defense Department officials.

In a recent move, Baker decided to “reclassify” Lovinger’s ONA position to one that now requires new skills he doesn’t possess.  Bigley complained about this new act of alleged retaliation in a Sept. 21 letter to the DOD acting general counsel:  “The practical effect of Baker’s plan, if executed, is that Mr. Lovinger will become a surplus employee and will be terminated; he does not possess the skill set applicable to the proposed reclassification.” Lovinger is the only staff member Baker has “reclassified,” according to Bigley.

One of Lovinger’s main complaints about ONA was that many of the reports contractors wrote imparted very little new information to the think tank. “Over the years ONA’s analytic staff has expressed how they learn very little from many (if not most) of our often very thin and superficial contractor reports,” he wrote in the Sept. 30, 2016 email. 

Some of Long Term Strategy Group’s reports bear out Lovinger’s critique. A September 2010 Long Term Strategy Group report, titled “Trends in Elite American Attitudes Toward War,” came to the astounding conclusion that, “American intellectuals have for the last century held considerably more cosmopolitan views than their non-intellectual counterparts.”  Another Long Term Strategy Group report was “On the Nature of Americans as a Warlike People.”

Lovinger also suggested in a March 3, 2017 memo to the record that contractor studies should be peer-reviewed: “There has never been an external review of these contractors’ research products,” he said, adding, “It is now clear that over several decades the office transferred millions of dollars to inexperienced and unqualified contractors.” 

Others outside of ONA have been even more critical of the think tank. Book critic Carlos Lozada criticized the think tank as “an opaque bureaucratic outfit,” in a Washington Post review of a book about Marshall, ONA’s founder.  University of Notre Dame Political Science Chairman Michael C. Desch said “a systematic scrutiny of [ONA’s] work is long overdue” in the December 2014 issue of  The National Interest. He recommended that ONA, “like so many now-superfluous parochial schools, should close its doors.”

On the liberal front, Middlebury Institute’s director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program, Jeffrey Lewis, wrote a scathing attack on ONA in the Oct. 24, 2014 edition of Foreign Policy Magazine. “Marshall funded a fair number of crackpots,” he charged.  Lewis cited two studies on Iraq “written by a crackpot who thinks Saddam planned the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and 9/11, and a study on ‘Islamic Warfare’ by the guy who fabricated both a Ph.D. and an interview with Barack Obama.”

Lovinger has also been critical of the revolving door at ONA, where previous government staffers went to work for ONA contractors.  Phillip Pournelle, who was ONA’s military adviser from November 2011 to December 2016, now works at Long Term Strategy Group as its “director for gaming and analysis,” according to his LinkedIn page.

Steve Rosen, also a long-time ONA consultant, was originally Newmyer’s professor at Harvard. But Newmyer and Rosen hit it off, and they “co-taught” a Harvard class together in 2006.  Newmyer and Rosen are top officers in a nonprofit they created together called the American Academy for Strategic Education, which is dedicated to educating a rising generation of strategic thinkers,” according to its website.  The organization has raised $894,000 since it began operations in 2013, according to their IRS 990 filing. The academy paid Newmyer and Rosen $45,000 each in 2015.

Since serving as president of Long Term Strategy Group, Newmyer has participated in many prestigious bodies on national security, and she was enrolled in a Ph.D. program at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.  But her Ph.D. had little to do with today’s international conflicts or in contemporary military strategy. Her dissertation was on “a comparison of seminal works on strategy and statecraft from ancient China, the medieval Middle East, and early modern Europe,” according to a Harvard profile of her.

Adam Lovinger did not consent to an interview for this article. The Office of Net Assessment did not reply to a DCNF inquiry.

 

 


Delivered by The Daily Sheeple We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details). Contributed by Richard Pollock of The Daily Caller News Foundation.