CNBC Hires Former Fox Anchor to Bash Trump

By: Cliff Kincaid

CNBC has been a good source for stock market updates and “Shark Tank” programs about new products. Its daytime schedule is best known for the antics of Jim Cramer, a booster of pot stocks who also provides an analysis of financial markets. On Wednesday, however, former Fox News gay anchor Shepard Smith begins hosting his own Trump-bashing program on CNBC. This marks a definite turn to the left for the business channel.

Dozens of ads have been appearing, trying to convince the CNBC audience that he will provide just the “facts,” even the “truth.” CNBC describes the program as the channel’s nightly newscast “providing deep, non-partisan coverage and perspective on the day’s most important stories.”

But the commentator is best known for his disgust for those who reject his liberal opinions masquerading as news.

The one-hour show, “The News with Shepard Smith,” premiers on September 30 at 7:00 pm EST.

One of the major homosexual power players in the media, Smith was a closeted gay early in his career but then began to talk openly about his lifestyle choices and attended a National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association event in 2014 with other Fox News employees. It later became the Association of LGBTQ Journalists.

But he left Fox News in a controversy as the audience rejected his heavy-handed approach and his ratings lagged far behind the conservative news channel anchors. Described as “often” critical of President Donald Trump, he had completely dropped any pretense of objectivity on his show.

When the far-left Huffington Post in 2016 proclaimed Smith as “the future” of Fox News, many conservatives started looking elsewhere for news and information. However, Smith left Fox News in 2019, having achieved notoriety as the only gay anchor at the channel. His poor ratings took their toll.

Later, he emerged from obscurity and donated $500,000 to the Committee to Protect Journalists, in order to protest criticism of the media. “Intimidation and vilification of the press is now a global phenomenon,” Smith said. “We don’t have to look far for evidence of that.”

Hence, Smith apparently believes it is improper for Trump to defend his administration against unfair press criticism by activists posing as journalists.

His decision to join CNBC, a sister network of Trump-hating MSNBC, is regarded as an attempt to inject more bias into a channel the normal CNBC business-oriented audience might not expect or anticipate. It’s comparable to making ESPN, once known for sports, into an arm of Black Lives Matter.

Indeed, the debut of the Shepard Smith show, just weeks before the election, is apparently designed to add one more anti-Trump commentator to the cacophony of anti-Trump voices already in the media, and therefore sway some votes against the president on November 3. The danger for CNBC is that it will lose its edge as a business channel giving objective analysis of the financial markets, driving members of its business audience away.

“Haters are going to hate” is how Shepard Smith, then with Fox News, referred to supporters of Christian clerk Kim Davis when she opposed gay marriage. It was perhaps the most notorious example of his disgust for those rejecting his lifestyle choices.

In fact, Fox News, CNBC, and scores of media organizations have served as sponsors of the Association of LGBTQ Journalists. This is the group that dictates, through an actual “stylebook,” on how to use “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender & queer terminology.” Sponsors of the group’s upcoming convention include AARP, CNN, CBS News, Bloomberg, Fox, the Google News Lab, the Democracy Fund, McClatchy, the Facebook Journalism Project, and NBCUniversal, parent of CNBC.

But in addition to attacking Christians as “haters,” Smith had complained on the air on Fox News that those turning out in support of Christian clerk Kim Davis and her stand against gay marriage were being “divisive.” He said Davis was surrounded by “grandstanders,” such as the “ridiculous” Mike Huckabee, a presidential candidate and former governor of Arkansas who served as a host of a talk show on the Fox News Channel. His daughter later served as Trump’s press secretary.

On his show about Davis, Smith had mocked her for having been married several times and having kids out of wedlock, not mentioning her religious conversion to Christianity that turned her life around and led to her take a stand against signing the gay marriage licenses. Smith said, “Ms. Davis apparently believes in the sanctity of marriage to the degree that she’s been married a total of four times. In fact, she got pregnant with her third husband’s children while married to her first husband. But fear not: her second husband adopted them.”

Davis was the target of this venom because she had objected on religious liberty grounds to putting her name and government title on licenses for homosexual marriages. She spent six days in jail. Later, she met with Pope Francis during his trip to the United States, a visit arranged by his ambassador to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Vigano. Francis removed Vigano, a traditionalist, from his post and Vigano has emerged as a fierce critic of Francis, declaring in letters that a Deep State with secular and demonic spiritual elements and a “Deep Church” are trying to destroy the Donald J. Trump presidency.

He says, “Presidential elections in November represent an epochal challenge, a biblical challenge, the outcome of which will be decisive not only for the United States of America but for the whole world.”

CNBC enters into this conflict with a noted proponent of the gay lifestyle who also wants to take down Trump. CNBC has taken sides. This can only hurt ratings.

*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.


The “Trump Effect” Is the Republicans’ Only Hope

By: Cliff Kincaid

The Wall Street Journal column, “Colorado’s Cory Gardner Struggles to Survive the Trump Effect,” tries to pin the blame on the president for the Republican Senator in Colorado consistently running behind his opponent in his race for reelection. The author, Jillian Kay Melchior, never once mentions that Gardner has been a booster of Colorado’s lethal dope industry and is losing conservative support because of it.

Recognizing that he is losing conservative votes, Gardner has now come out in favor of a quick vote on President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. “He Found His Spine,” proclaimed the conservative website Big League Politics.

Senator Lindsey Graham, often labeled a RINO (Republican in Name Only), is also in jeopardy. He is reportedly leading Democratic challenger Jaime Harrison in the South Carolina Senate race by only one point, 46-45 percent.

The explanation is Graham’s weak conservative credentials. Morning Consult finds that “While Trump has support from 93 percent of Republicans, Graham has support from 84 percent in the same poll —  making him one of the worst-performing GOP incumbents up for re-election this cycle among voters from his own party.”

But the problem is not confined to Gardner and Graham. Other Republicans in Senate contests polling behind Trump are Joni Ernst in Iowa, Steve Daines in Montana, Thom Tillis in North Carolina, and Martha McSally in Arizona.

Contrary to what the Journal’s Melchior says, the “Trump Effect” helps candidates.

In her column on Gardner, published before Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, the Journal’s Melchior wrote that “Mr. Trump, who lost Colorado by five points, has alienated many suburban women and independents,” but Gardner has alienated conservatives opposed to Colorado becoming the headquarters of national marijuana drug trafficking. Gardner has been in the back pocket of the dope business, earning him the label of “pot whore.”

On Facebook, the Melchior column was described as documenting how “Trump’s unpopularity is dragging down his [Gardner’s] re-election effort…” This is nonsense. Gardner is losing not because of Trump but because he, too, is a Republican in Name Only (RINO) taking the “progressive” line on legalization of dope, making him indistinguishable from his Democratic Party opponent, former Governor John Hickenlooper.

Ignoring all of this, she claims that Gardner “is a good candidate and an incumbent with a solid track record” and that “His struggle shows the peril of being a swing-state Republican in the age of Trump.” His problems are of his own making and have nothing to do with Trump. No Republican in good conscience could vote for him. Some might do so, only to say they voted against the Democrat, but Gardner is not a “common-sense conservative,” as he likes to describe himself. Common sense does not drive somebody to be a shill for what is now being called “Big Marijuana.” It is Big Tobacco with the replacement of nicotine by THC’s mind-altering qualities.

Jillian Kay Melchior, an editorial page writer at The Wall Street Journal, was a graduate of Hillsdale College and worked for several conservative publications and organizations. But she ignores the social issues that motivate many voters.

Dozens of new anti-drug groups have emerged in recent years. One of them, Smart Colorado, reports, “Since Colorado voters legalized recreational marijuana with Amendment 64 in 2012, Colorado’s youth have served as guinea pigs in a risky experiment,” and that recent data show that “Colorado now ranks first in the nation for past month marijuana use by those 12-17 years old…”

The group warns, “We never foresaw how aggressive and powerful the financial interests behind this new billion-dollar industry would become.” Yet, Gardner is happy with this outcome.

Attorney David Evans, Senior Counsel to Cannabis Industry Victims Educating Litigators (CIVEL), has called Gardner “a pot whore.”

Democrats only need to win four seats to take back the majority in the Senate, and Gardner is a likely goner.

Tragically, Ms. Melchior isn’t alone is being a source of erroneous information.

In his Wall Street Journal column, “GOP Senate Hopefuls Try to Outrun Trump,” GOP “strategist” Karl Rove calls Gardner one of several superior GOP candidates running “energetic, nearly textbook-perfect campaigns.” He, too, ignores Gardner’s debt to the dope lobby.

Gardner gave an interview to a stoner publication, Marijuana Moment, and called  marijuana legalization a “significant success.”

Here’s what their “success” looks like, according to the Rocky Mountain High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (RMHIDTA) program:

  • Since recreational marijuana was legalized, traffic deaths in which drivers tested positive for marijuana increased 109 percent while all Colorado traffic deaths increased 31 percent.
  • The yearly number of emergency department visits related to marijuana increased 54 percent after the legalization of recreational marijuana (2013 compared to 2017).
  • Seizures of Colorado marijuana in the U.S. mail system have increased 1,042 percent from an average of 52 parcels (2009-2012) to an average of 594 parcels (2013-2017) during the time recreational marijuana has been legal.

The argument was that legal dope would replace black market activity. But an investigation by public broadcasting found strong evidence of Colorado marijuana products “being exported to other states,” with law enforcement trying “to keep up with the burgeoning black market.”

If Gardner and the RINOS win, it’s because Trump will pull them across the finish line after they decided to vote for Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. The “Trump Effect” is their only hope.

Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.


“Whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella’s Meetings

By: Col. Lawrence Sellin (Ret.) | CCNS

Eric Ciaramella, the National Security Council Director for Ukraine, is widely assumed to be Rep. Adam Schiff’s so-called whistleblower regarding President Trump’s July 25, 2019 phone call (a call that Ciaramella was not even on) with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. That “whistleblower” complaint began a series of events leading to President Trump’s impeachment and acquittal in late 2019 and early 2020.

It so happens that Ciaramella chaired a series of meetings at the White House and Old Executive Office Building, many with links to the radical leftist billionaire, George Soros, whose fingerprints can be found on everything from the collapse of national currencies to the election of equally radical prosecutors across the U.S. who are allowing our cities to be destroyed right before our eyes, and to the repeated efforts to remove the duly elected President Trump from office.

Criminal or unethical intent of the meeting attendees described below are in no way assumed or implied, but investigating Eric Ciaramella’s perhaps operational activities while a member of the otherwise think tank-like National Security Council is worthwhile.

During the first week of December 2015, Donald Trump began to establish a substantial lead over his Republican primary opponents.

Vice President Joseph Biden traveled to Ukraine to announce, on December 7th, a $190 million program to “fight corruption in law enforcement and reform the justice sector,” but behind the scenes, there was an apparent explicit link between a $1 billion loan guarantee and the firing of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who had been investigating the energy company Burisma, which had as a paid board member Biden’s son Hunter.

At the time, the problem raised about the alleged Latvia-Ukraine-Cyprus money-laundering investigation, which had been ongoing up until December 2015, was that it would potentially involve the Bidens.

It is not unreasonable to assume that a decision was taken to shift the emphasis of the investigation away from the Bidens and in the direction of Paul Manafort and the Trump campaign.

According to White House visitor logs, on January 19, 2016, Eric Ciaramella chaired a meeting of FBI, Department of Justice, and Department of State personnel, which reportedly had two main objectives:

  1. To coerce the Ukrainians to drop the Burisma probe, which involved Vice President Joseph Biden’s son Hunter, and allow the FBI to take over the investigation.
  2. To reopen a closed 2014 FBI investigation that focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm had long been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.

The obvious purpose was to contain the investigation of Biden’s son and ramp up the investigation of Paul Manafort.

Again, according to White House logs, the attendees at the January 19, 2016 meeting in Room 230A of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building were:

Eric Ciaramella – National Security Council Director for Ukraine

Liz Zentos – National Security Council Director for Eastern Europe

David G. Sakvarelidze – Deputy General Prosecutor of Ukraine

Anna E. Iemelianova (Yemelianova) – Legal Specialist, US Embassy Kyiv, and US Department of Justice’s Anti-Corruption Program.

Nazar A. Kholodnitsky, Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor

Catherine L. Newcombe – an attorney in the Criminal Division, Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, with the U.S. Department of Justice

Svitlana V. Pardus – Operations, Department of Justice, U.S. Embassy, Ukraine.

Artem S. Sytnyk  – Director of the National Anti-corruption Bureau of Ukraine

Andriy G. Telizhenko, a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington DC

Jeffrey W. Cole – Resident Legal Advisor at U.S. Embassy Ukraine, presumed to be FBI

Just two weeks after that meeting, on February 2, 2016, according to White House logs, Eric Ciaramella chaired a meeting in Room 374 of the Eisenhower Executive Office, which seems to be a planning session to re-open an investigation of Paul Manafort (Note: one of the crimes of which Manafort was accused was money laundering, an area normally covered by the Department of the Treasury). The attendees were:

Jose Borrayo – Acting Section Chief, Office of Special Measures, U.S. Department of the Treasury, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

Julia Friedlander – Senior Policy Advisor for Europe, Office of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes, U.S. Department of the Treasury.

Michael Lieberman – Deputy Assistant Secretary, Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes, U.S. Department of the Treasury.

Scott Rembrandt – Anti-Money Laundering Task Force, Assistant Director/Director, Office of Strategic Policy, Department of the Treasury.

Justin Rowland – Special Agent (financial crimes), Federal Bureau of Investigation.

It appears that Paul Manafort became a vehicle by which the Obama Deep State operatives could link Trump to nefarious activities involving Russians, which eventually evolved into the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

It is also no secret that George Soros operates through Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) to influence national policies throughout the world.

It may be that Eric Ciaramella was acting as a coordinator of some Soros-linked efforts in Ukraine in parallel with U.S. government activities, in particular through the State Department’s U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

On March 16, 2016, Eric Ciaramella chaired a meeting of the following interconnected individuals and groups in Room 230B of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

  1. Gina Lentine, Program Associate, Europe & Eurasia at Freedom House ( reportedly Soros-funded), where she was responsible for media support and civil society programming in Ukraine. Prior to that, Lentine was Program Coordinator, Eurasia Program for Soros’ Open Society Foundations, where she monitored civil society and NGO development in Ukraine.
  2. Alim Aliiev, a Ukrainian and program director of Crimean House, was a co-founder of the Crimean Tatar Cultural Center in Lviv, which was funded by the Soros-funded International Renaissance Foundation.
  3. Maria Dahle, based in Norway, is Director of Human Rights House, which is Soros affiliated and funded.
  4. Florian Irminger, from Switzerland, was Head of Advocacy at Human Rights House. He was also Treasurer for the Centre for Civil and Political Rights, which had a partnership with Soros’ Open Society Foundation and ran the joint “Conference on Corruption and its Impact on Human Rights in the Post-Soviet World” in Bern, Switzerland, 26-27 November 2014. On October 31, 2019, Irminger received a Soros Open Societies Foundation New Executives Fund grant ($25,000 to $250,000).
  5. Zoryan Kis, a Project Coordinator at Freedom House in Ukraine,  received a $113,000 Soros grant to support LGBT activities.
  6. Tetiana Pechonchyk is chairperson of the ZMINA Human Rights Centre in Ukraine. ZMINA is funded by the Soros-funded International Renaissance Foundation and Freedom House (listed on the ZMINA website). Pechonchyk is connected to the Human Rights House.
  7. Matthew Schaaf is Freedom House’s Project Director Ukraine and writes for the Soros-funded Open Democracy.
  8. Olga Skrypnyk is a member of the Crimean Human Rights Group and ZMINA, the latter which is funded by Soros and Freedom House.

March 30, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met David K. Meyer, Foreign Service Officer specializing in relationships with strategic partners including foreign government representatives, domestic and international non-governmental organizations (NGO). The meeting took place in the White House Situation Room suggesting a requirement for secrecy.

April 11, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met with:

  1. Zselyke Csaky, Freedom House, Research Director for Europe and Eurasia and works on Nations in Transit, Freedom House’s annual survey of democracy from Central Europe to Central Asia.
  2. Robert G. Herman, Non-Resident Senior Democracy Fellow at Freedom House specializing in emergency assistance to frontline activists and organizations that have come under threat, and multilateral initiatives.
  3. Nate Schenkkan, Director for Special Research at Freedom House.

April 15, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met Sara E. Silverstein, assistant professor of history and human rights (for migrants) at the University of Connecticut, and Timothy D. Snyder, a historian specializing in the history of Central and Eastern Europe at Yale University.

May 6, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met among others:

  1. Benjamin L. Schmitt, European Energy Security Advisor, U.S. Department of State.
  2. Marguerite B. Rivard, Joint Duty Assignment as EUCOM Branch Chief at US Department of Defense, Office of the Under Secretary for Defense Intelligence (Russian, Ukrainian linguist).
  3. Nathan F. Peeters, Department of Homeland Security

The meeting took place in the White House Situation Room suggesting a requirement for secrecy.

June 1, 2016 – Victoria Nuland has a telephone conversation with George Soros and Yevhen Bystrystky, CEO of the International Renaissance Foundation, a Ukrainian NGO founded by George Soros.

June 2, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met Yevhen Bystrystky, CEO of the Soros-funded International Renaissance Foundation, and Jeffrey L. Goldstein, senior policy analyst for Eurasia at George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

June 9, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met, among others:

  1. Matthew Q. Edwards, Department of Commerce.
  2. Alex J. Grohovsky International Economist, Department of the Treasury conducted political and economic analysis on a portfolio covering Ukraine.
  3. Jonathan Katz, Director for Ukraine, USAID.
  4. Michael A. Lally, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA), Department of Commerce.
  5. Matthew A. Murray, Senior Advisor, Governance and Rule of Law, USAID, who implemented development assistance programs to address risks posed by systemic corruption in critical nations and conflict zones.
  6. Elizabeth I. Urbanas, Director Europe and Eurasia, Department of Energy.
  7. John Vansandt, Senior Policy Advisor and Crisis Coordinator, USAID.

The meeting took place in the White House Situation Room suggesting a requirement for secrecy.

June 17, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella meets Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, and Geoffrey R. Pyatt, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine. The meeting took place in the White House Situation Room suggesting a requirement for secrecy.

July 5, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met Jonathan Katz, Director for Ukraine, USAID.

July 13, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met Jonathan Katz, Director for Ukraine, USAID.

August 16, 2016 – Eric Ciaramella met Jonathan Katz, Director for Ukraine, USAID.

There are several peculiar aspects to a meeting chaired by Eric Ciaramella on September 7, 2016, in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. All seven invitees signed in between 1:14-1:17 PM for a scheduled 1:30 PM start. Based on the attendees’ expertise, the meeting’s topic was likely Ukraine.

  • The meeting appears to have involved at least three employees of the National Security Agency, the intelligence organization responsible for gathering and analyzing electronic surveillance. This meeting occurred over a month before the first FBI-initiated, Trump-Russia collusion hoax FISA warrant was issued.
  • The presence of one attendee, the Executive Director of a Soros-funded entity, raises suspicions as to the intended courses of action arising from the meeting, given Eric Ciaramella’s previous meetings with Soros-connected individuals.
  • It appears that three attendees were signed-in under names other than their own. The names seem to be altered in roughly the same fashion, in such a way suggesting a deliberate intent to deceive. Based on the type of alteration, it gives the impression that the individuals were either instructed to do so or the logs were changed.

According to White House visitor logs, the names of those at Ciaramella’s meeting are listed as: Michael D. Jarvis, Natalia O. Lassowsky, Bailey S. Holladay, Stefanie L. Stagg, Thomas W. Pucci, Donald M. Camp, and Jessica M. Gray.

Based on available public information, the professional roles of the attendees have been analyzed.

Michael D. Jarvis became Executive Director of the Soros-funded Transparency and Accountability Initiative in June 2016. He was previously with the World Bank Group working on corporate responsibility issues, anti-corruption, private sector roles in development, and multi-stakeholder governance. Jarvis is a specialist in the oil, gas, and mining sectors. George Soros is said to have “extensive business interests in Ukraine,” a country with large oil and gas industries.

Natalia O. Lassowsky is believed to be of Ukrainian extraction and was an employee of the National Security Agency, with whom she holds a patent.

Bailey S. Holladay is a U.S. Air Force-trained, likely Russian, linguist, and presumably, an analyst for the National Security Agency, based on her published associates and areas of expertise.

Stafanie L. Stagg is a name that appears in the Washington DC area, but her affiliation is yet undetermined, presumed to have been with the National Security Agency or an intelligence-related organization in some way dealing with Ukraine, based on the nature of Ciaramella’s meeting. A request for verification has not been answered.

“Thomas W. Pucci” appears to be Thomas J. Pucciarella, presumed National Security Agency employee and son of Donna M. Pucciarella, former head of the Office of Personnel Security at the National Security Agency. He now works in the private sector.

“Donald M. Camp” is likely LTG (ret) Donald M. Campbell, former commander of USA EUR during the Ukraine-Russia conflict and the seizure of Crimea. He also has a background in Cyber and is now an independent consultant for Blackwater Agency/Protection, according to his LinkedIn resume.

“Jessica M. Gray” seems to be Jessica K. Graybill, Associate Professor of Geography and Russian and Eurasian Studies; Director, Russian & Eurasian Studies Program, Colgate University.

Ciaramella’s September 7, 2016, Soros-connected meeting follows two of his previous Soros-connected meetings, according to White House visitor logs.

On December 9, 2015, Ciaramella held a meeting in Room 236 of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Ukrainian Anti-Corruption Action Center, which was 59%-funded by Barack Obama’s State Department and the International Renaissance Foundation, a George Soros organization.

Also attending that meeting was Catherine Newcombe, an attorney in the Criminal Division, Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, with the U.S. Department of Justice, where, among other duties, she oversaw the Department’s legal assistance programs to Ukraine. The other meeting took place on March 16, 2016, and described above.

With John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Russia-collusion hoax apparently nearing an end, and the report released this week by Senators Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley into Hunter and Joe Biden’s potential conflicts of interest regarding Ukraine, Russia, and China, these meetings involving Eric Ciaramella take on new meaning in the ongoing Deep State efforts to overturn the last election. If Joe Biden becomes President and the Democrats take control of the Senate, investigations into how these stories overlap and relate to each other will come to an end.

Colonel Sellin is a member of the Citizens Commission on National Security.


A Text Without Context

By: Tabitha Korol

In her book, The Shepherd’s Granddaughter, Anne Laurel Carter drops her young readers into the middle of a land without its history, a situation without context, and a story without perspective, but her message is meant to influence innocent students.  It is a tutorial in subterfuge, a tale woven on an invisible loom, where the circumstances are unseen, the actions undefined, and the slander insidious.  This is my seventh children’s book review and it has left me reeling.


We meet Amani at age 6, eager to be a shepherd like her grandfather, Seedo.  His two sons (her father and uncle) and his grandson (Amani’s brother) apparently have other interests and Amani loves being with the sheep.  However, there is no resemblance to Johanna Spyri’s joyous tale, Heidi, as this author has a political mission.  We immediately learn that Amani’s people have lived “under the Mediterranean sun” for a thousand years and that this land, by default, should be theirs.  If that were the case, might that same rule also apply to the Jews who have lived in Poland for more than a thousand years? Does mere residency grant consequential ownership?

No, that is not the case. In Ambassador Yoram Ettinger’s “Palestinian claim of continuity,” he quotes British cartographer and Dean of Westminster Abbey, Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, who observed in 1856, “for miles and miles there was no appearance of life or habitation” in Sinai and Palestine.  The labor migration into the British Mandate was notably Egyptian, but also Syrian, Yemenite, Persian, Afghan, Hindu, Bedouin, Bosnian, and more – at least 25 different nationalities. The point being that the majority of residents in Judea, Samaria, and pre-1967 Israel were recent migrants.

Grandfather explains that the mountain wolves were dispossessed by the Israeli “occupation.” It is more likely that the wolves fled due to the din of the systematic shelling into Israel by Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan, and the all-out “Six-Day War,” when Israel made a vital pre-emptive strike that resulted in its re-occupation of the West Bank (Judea, Samaria), Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, Old City of Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.  And since then, the Arabs, now self-proclaimed Palestinians, have never ceased their terrorist raids.

As they navigate the grazing areas, Amani sees terraced olive trees and areas where Israelis destroyed entire groves.  Again, the author allows us to believe that Israelis wantonly cause destruction; the truth is withheld.   Property demolition is a method Israel has used in these territories that came under its control because of winning the Six-day War.  The procedure is considered a form of deterrence or collective punishment, as the terrorist is forced to consider the effects of his actions on his family.  When Amani observes the occupation, checkpoints, security zones, and helmeted soldiers, Seedo justifies, “We’ll never have peace through violence.  They don’t trust us.”  His statement, both prophetic and instructive, remains unexplained but implies that he knows the terrorists who are responsible for the local damage and the Israeli backlash, including the eventual demolition of their property.

During family conversations, they speak of Israelis building new highways and new settlements (neighborhoods) throughout Palestine (Judea, Samaria), and are heading their way. Amani’s uncle Ammo, angry that Palestinians live like refugees, wants only to fight with weapons.  As they watch TV, they learn of battles on city streets, riots, protesters decrying the new highways, people crying, blood-stained sidewalks, a suicide bombing in Israel, 11 young people killed in two explosions.  Israeli soldiers block the old road to disallow passage through the eastern gate.  Ammo wants his people to live in houses on Palestinian land.  The author, Carter, does not explain that this land is disputed territory that falls under the purview of UN Resolution 242, which calls on Israel to withdraw from territories captured if and when its neighbors agree to live in peace, and not as long as the terrorism continues.  Palestinians have refused all proposals of peace, using their UN funding for weaponry, terror tunnels, and payments to mothers of martyrs instead of building infrastructure and establishing a country.

They speak of armed Jewish neighbors chasing Palestinian farmers from their orchards, burning down houses, suggesting that they are the aggressors, attacking without reason.  These are neighbors who are retaliating against the source of terrorist attacks, but until the terrorists are apprehended, it is Israel’s policy to respond with disciplinary action – temporarily shutting down power, imposing a provisional curfew, and positioning tanks to enforce house arrest, which also inflicts a financial hardship for those who cannot go to work.  These activities are not explained to the young readers; neither are they told why  Amani’s father, uncle, and brother are periodically arrested and released.  Amani’s brother Omar gives her a book, Al Naqba (The Catastrophe), referring to the (self-)evacuation of 600,000 Palestinians in 1948.  Carter offers no history, no context, no comment.

As bulldozers approach the north valley, Omar, cries out, “They want our land, our water, they want to drive us out.  A man has the right to defend himself on his own land.”  Their mother, Mama, talks about the past and the “massacre” in her village when the Israel Defense Forces attacked.  Omar claims the right of defense, that Israel wants Palestinian water.  The truth is that Israel supplies Palestinians with water. In fact, Israel has doubled the amount that was stipulated in the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement (9/28/95, signed in Washington) to combat the desert water crisis.  The Palestinian Authority pays Israel $3 million per year for their water, which constitutes less than 10 percent of the water they consume.

Mama’s tale of the massacre is Carter’s revival of the most infamous Massacre that Never Was.  It occurred in Jenin, April 2002, when 16 Palestinian terror bombings killed 102 Israeli civilians.  The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) reported first 3,000, then 520, Palestinians killed, adding unchallenged quotes and false allegations that were repeated in at least half-hourly sensational reports.  When finally Doctors without Borders went in and were met with the undeniable stench, they reported that the body count was unearthed corpses from adjacent cemeteries.  The BBC was fully responsible for all the libelous coverage, falsehoods, accusations of “war crimes against humanity.” Sir Quentin Thomas noted: This was “a straightforward lie unwittingly, but very effectively, served by the BBC, that caused terrible damage and pain.” Carter, knowingly or otherwise, refrains from clarifying that the horrors were never committed.  Knowing only what Mama says, the young readers will conclude that Israel is worthy of loathing. Further, Mama’s village was not “confiscated,” but “recaptured” by the invaded country.

To exacerbate the already damaging narrative, Carter adds two gratuitous Jewish characters to the story.  One is a rabbi who joins the demonstrating Palestinian blockade that chants, “This is our land,” as they seek to stop the Caterpillar equipment from preparing the peak for paving. Certainly, the Jews have their share of collaborators or leftists, but the novelist’s inclusion is psychologically coercive, implying that this individual represents a large percentage of Israelis. 

The second is Jonathan, a teenage boy about Amani’s age, whose “settler” father shot one of Amani’s sheep.  He is sympathetic to Amani and rejects his father’s actions and the conflict.  He says, “My father says a real Jew defends the Holy Land.  I don’t know what a real Jew is anymore  My grandparents saw so many Jews die in the camps. They believed in a homeland where Jews would be safe, but I can’t believe they meant this.  The settlement destroyed your life.”  The author’s message is that the traumatic injustice suffered by the Jewish generation of the Holocaust has goaded them into visiting something similar on a defenseless people.  However, there is no historic precedence to prove that Jews are a vindictive people, but quite the opposite.

The Jews are the indigenous people and legal residents on the land, yet Carter disparages the defensive actions of the Israelis while remaining non-judgmental about the terrorism, which, in essence, is a continuation of the Islamic jihad that has spread throughout the world over 14 centuries.  The novelist has used two Jewish conspiratorial voices to support the Palestinian narrative.

Carter evidently has no concern whatsoever with context, perspective, history, and the consequent dissemination of falsehoods. The danger is that her story will be accepted at face value by the young and undiscerning.  Only those who understand the substory of this tale will realize that Amani’s father, uncle, and brother are terrorists, and it is because of them that Amani and her family have lost everything.

Tabitha Korol



Protest SCOTUS Judge Nominee Plan is Here

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Primer: Amy Coney Barrett went through the confirmation process less than 3 years ago and received bi-partisan votes. You can also be confident that security teams have been deployed to protect Barrett and her family based on what happened during the Kavanaugh hearings.

Okay, read on.

This guide was written and compiled by a coalition of groups including: MoveOn, Frontline/ M4BL Electoral Justice Project, Demand Justice, NARAL Pro-Choice America, CPD Action, Indivisible, and Sunrise Movement.

SCOTUS Rapid Response Action Guide

(c4 non-electoral actions)

September 24, 2020


















This is a guide to support and empower people who are ready to fight back this weekend when President Trump names a SCOTUS nominee and attempts to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat before the inauguration. We will be having a distributed day of action this Sunday, Sept 27 at 2pm local time. This guide will provide a roadmap for taking action, and ensure your actions align with actions across the country so that together, we can be a powerful united force for justice.

Register your event here: http://bit.ly/RegisterSCOTUSAction  (list of events is forthcoming and will be available here).

COVID REMINDER: If you choose to participate in an in-person event, follow key precautions to reduce the safety risks you may face while protesting during the COVID-19 pandemic, including staying home if you are not well or have reason to think you have COVID-19; wearing a mask or face covering over your nose and mouth; and maintaining at least 6 feet of physical distance from other protestors to the extent possible.


Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on Friday, September 18, 2020. Many of us are grieving her death and remembering her legacy as a fearless champion for women’s rights and social justice.

With voting already underway, it should be left up to the American people to decide who gets to nominate the next Supreme Court justice. No nomination should advance or be voted on before the 2021 Inauguration.

Senate Leadership needs to prioritize economic relief for the millions of people who are suffering after having lost their jobs and are struggling to pay rent and feed their families, not play politics with a rushed Supreme Court nomination process.

In this moment of overlapping crises–a global pandemic, mass unemployment, systemic racism, and climate change–the stakes of nominating and confirming a new Supreme Court Justice could not be higher. Supreme Court justices are appointed for life and as the highest court in the US, their rulings shape all of our lives—everything from abortion to segregation, transgender rights to climate change, big money in politics to healthcare. It is unjust and unacceptable to try to rush through a nomination less than 40 days from the election.

With our futures on the line, we must rise up to demand that US Senators stand on the right side of history and let the people decide on the next Supreme Court Justice of this country. We must demand no nomination before inauguration.  It’s our future and we should get to choose our justice.



Slogans are a simplified version of your message. Having unified slogans helps us make our demands clear. Slogans are the words that we use on our action art. These slogans should be used in ALL CAPS on action art. For more information on how to make art for your action see the action visuals section below, or check out the action art toolkit.

  • I DON’T WANT YOUR NOMINEE. I WANT _____________ [fill in the blank to personalize]


Social media is a powerful organizing tool. You should post on social media leading up to your action, to recruit people to attend, as well as post during the action and directly after. See the call to action section for more info about posting on social media after the action.

Here is sample language to use on social media:

Protect our democracy and our communities. No confirmation before inauguration.

We’re less than 30 days out from the election. Honor democracy and RBG. Let the people decide who will be the nominee.

It’s time for the Senate to pass economic relief, not ram through a Supreme Court nominee.

#RuthBaderGinsburg leaves a legacy on the Supreme Court that is etched into the fabric of our democracy. We must fight to protect it by ensuring that there’s no confirmation before the inauguration .

Health care for people with preexisting conditions is on the line. Right now there is a case at the Supreme Court that may end the entire Affordable Care Act, which would kick millions off their insurance in the middle of a pandemic. If he is able to pick another justice that could put health care at risk for all of us.

One more conservative justice on the Supreme Court would lock in a conservative supermajority for decades to come. Everything — including abortion rights, gun violence prevention, LGBTQ+ rights, economic justice, and voting rights — would be at risk. Progressives are ready to rally and fight back to protect our rights and our democracy.

Senate leadership should be focused on addressing the COVID-19 crisis, not fast-tracking a Supreme Court nominee. No confirmation until inauguration — period. #LetThePeopleDecide

If Trump confirms a replacement for #RBG, there’s no telling what damage they could do to reproductive freedom or healthcare access. To protect our rights, we need to make sure there’s no confirmation until after the inauguration.

Our most fundamental freedoms are at stake. Another conservative justice threatens access to reproductive freedom, healthcare, and equality. The people should pick the next president, and the next president should choose the nominee.

What’s at stake if senate leadership replaces #RBG with a radical new justice who could serve on the Supreme Court for decades? EVERYTHING. We have to fight this nomination with all that we’ve got, because we’re fighting for our freedom.

Primary Hashtag (use this on all your social media posts): #LetThePeopleDecide

Additional Hashtags: #OurCourts #OurFutureOurJustice #ProtectTheCourts #PeopleOverPolitics

Sample graphics:


These are for the speakers at your action to use to craft their speeches, and for writing a press release or sharing more info to your base to encourage people to come support your action.

  • With voting already underway, it should be left up to the American people to decide who gets to nominate the next Supreme Court justice.
  •  No nomination should advance or be voted on before the 2021 Inauguration.
  • Senate leadership needs to prioritize economic relief for the millions of people who are suffering after having lost their jobs and are struggling to pay rent and feed their families, not play politics with a rushed Supreme Court nomination process.
  • The Supreme Court makes rulings that shape all of our lives—everything from abortion to segregation, transgender rights to climate change, big money in politics to healthcare. It is unacceptable and unjust to try to rush through a nomination less than 40 days from the election.
  • We must rise up to demand that US Senators stand on the right side of history and let the people decide on the next Supreme Court Justice of this country. We must demand no nomination before inauguration.  It’s our future and we should get to choose our justice.
  • DO lead with values
  • DO name the violation of those values and/or culprits
  • DO focus on an irresistable vision of the future
  • DO name your audience/s and think about what moves them, this is another great way to localize your rally
  • DON’T use/repeat the opposition’s language or frames.
  • DON’T lead with data. You can include it, but numbers shouldn’t be the lead


Holding an action at your local courthouse will help move your community into action and bring this narrative into the public. Below are the key steps in planning your action. Check out this action planning resource from Sunrise Movement for more details on how to plan an action.

If you’re planning to host an in-person action, please register it on social media and fill out this quick form to spread the word! http://bit.ly/RegisterSCOTUSAction.

If you aren’t able or don’t feel comfortable holding an in person action, you can still take action online – see the bottom of this section for more information on digital actions.

COVID Note: To address COVID concerns, it is best to strongly discourage anyone who feels unwell or is exhibiting symptoms from attending. There will be a digital event to participate in at the national level (see below for digital action). In the recruitment materials, make it clear and explicit that social distance and mask wearing rules will be in effect. Make sure there is someone at your action thinking about COVID safety. Those who are high-risk should understand the potential risks of attending, and organizers should take precautions to keep attendees safe.


Below are all of the key roles for an action, if you have a small group, it’s ok if the same person holds multiple roles. There is more information about how to do each role in other sections of the guide.

  • Action coordinator
  • Coordinates the team and manages the overall event
  • Recruitment Lead
  • Recruits people to the action, supports action coordinator with outreach
  • Police Liaison & Safety Coordinator
  • Is prepared to speak with the police if any are at your action
  • Identify yourself at the action as the person for everyone to point the police to if they arrive and want to speak to someone
  • Ensures COVID safety during the event
  • Has first aid materials or coordinates with volunteer medic to bring first aid materials
  • Speaker(s)
  • Makes a short (2-4 minute) speech during the action, and uplifts the action’s purpose, mixing with their personal narrative of why this is so important to them and their community. Speakers should refer to the messaging guidance (above).
  • Media coordinator
  • Creates a press advisory and/or press release about your action
  • Contact reporters and media outlets before and after the event
  • Connects speakers and spokespeople with reporters during event
  • Social media coordinator
  • Assigns someone to take photos of the action
  • Assigns someone to livestream the action
  • Shares photos, posts or livestream of the event on facebook, twitter, and instagram
  • Use this Photo & Livestream toolkit to capture powerful content that communicates the message of our action
  • Uses the hashtags with all posts from the event
  • Action Art Coordinator
  • Coordinate the creation of the action art
  • Oversee the art (banners and signs) and action staging the day of the action



We are asking people to take action at their local courthouse. Google where your local courthouse is if you don’t know, if there are multiple courthouses, think of which is best for the action – which one is in the neighborhood of the community you want to come to the action? Which one is most accessible to get to?

A good location is:
1) High profile/high traffic so the action is more likely to be seen and raise awareness of our demands 2) Is the most symbolic location that represents the messaging of your action


Sunday, September 27th at 2pm (local time) is set as a national day of action for SCOTUS rapid response courthouse actions. Doing your event at this time will help you get traction on the event because it will be at the same time as events across the country. If you need to adjust the timing of your event, aim to have it as close to 2pm on Sunday as possible.

If you’re planning to host an event, please register it on social media and fill out this quick form to spread the word! http://bit.ly/RegisterSCOTUSAction.


Visual Strategy is everything communicated through the visuals of your action. This includes your action art (banners, signs, t-shirts), your staging (the way people stand and hold their signs), and lots of details like people’s body language. The more thoughtful and aligned with your overall strategy your visuals are, the more powerful your action will be. The visuals for your event are crucial for telling a powerful story. Across the country, we’re coordinating our slogans to clearly communicate our demands with a unified voice.

Staging is making a plan for how your participants and action art will be positioned during your action to be as powerful as possible and to be able to capture photos and video that tell a clear story of the action. You can make a plan for staging by drawing what you want the action to look like.

On the day of your action, plan to have someone overseeing staging, and someone overseeing the action art, and at least one person taking photos. All of the people in these roles should coordinate about what the action will look like and what photos of the action you need.

For more guidance and resources for how to make powerful action art for your action, check out the SCOTUS Action Art and Staging toolkit.


Work with the rest of your action team to make a plan for the action day. Think about what the action will look like (consult the staging guide), what equipment you will need, like a bullhorn or amplification system, and recruit your speakers. You can use the action planning toolkit to make a tik-tok for the day, so you have a plan for how the day will run.


An important part of your action planning is preparing the people who will be speaking publicly. Speakers should write and rehearse their speech ahead of time, and spokespeople, the people who are designated to talk to the press, should also review talking points ahead of time to make sure that your topline messaging, demands, and objectives are highlighted in short sound bites and so that you’re ready to answer questions during the action. Help people keep their speeches to 3-5 minutes, and focus on what inspires you – speak from your heart!


There is a level of risk inherent in any action we take, and each of us experiences that risk in different ways. Participating in an action may be a much higher sacrifice for some of us, depending on our race, gender identity, our ability, our immigration status or other factors. When we take action together, we need to take into account how different people will experience interactions with the public, press, and police. Check out this Know Your Rights Guide from the ACLU to make sure you are prepared. Consult Sunrise Movement’s Taking Action Guide for more information about risk.


For many actions, and always for actions that include the possibility of arrest, you should hold a training. We recommend holding the action training the evening before your action, for everyone holding a key role, so all the information is fresh in people’s minds.

Set a time and date to get your group together for a run-through of the action plan and invite everyone who you want to attend the action. You can make an event for this action prep meeting to collect RSVPs so you know how many people to expect and can remind people to show up! Spread the word for this meeting by texting everyone in your hub, sending an email, calling people who you want to make sure show up, and posting the event link on social media.

In this meeting, make sure everyone knows their legal rights. Your action lead and police liaison should talk at the training about rights, risk and de-escalation. You should make plans for who will step in if a situation arises that needs to be deescalated.

Practice your deployment (how you approach the area where you are taking action) and practice your staging (who’s holding what sign, where everyone is standing). If you can’t meet in person, meeting virtually is a good secondary option. Share your Action Plan with all participants who are confirmed as participants in the action, which includes the details of your training, the march plan, what to bring, tick-tock (day-of schedule), and other important details. For privacy purposes, at this meeting you should set up a secure group message for everyone holding roles to communicate centrally via an app like Signal.


Recruitment is an extremely important part of your action: the more people that show up to the action, the better! Below are several ways that you can recruit people to show up to and participate in your event:

  • Make a Facebook event and invite all your friends – remind attendees to wear a mask and practice social distancing
  • Register your event here: http://bit.ly/RegisterSCOTUSAction  (list of events is forthcoming and will be available here).
  • Promote on social media platforms with graphics or videos hyping up the action, send an email to your networks
  • Call or text people from your network who would be interested in the action. This could be your friends or people who signed up from events you’ve held in the past
  • Outreach through other groups in your community and in student networks
  • Create an online form (like a google form) to sign people up to attend the action
  • Recruit people to help volunteer with certain roles, logistics, social media, etc. (it makes it more likely to come out if they have a role to help with)

Remind people the day before or the morning of the event so they don’t forget and so you can encourage them to join!


Your follow-up call to action is super important to helping keep the momentum going after your in person action. If you aren’t able to hold and in person action you can still do these digital actions and encourage others to do them with you!

Below are the key digital actions to take after your in person action, make sure to share these with people in person, and send out information about them to attendees after the action so everyone can participate and amplify the calls to action.

Social media is a powerful tool to use for actions. It allows you to tell the story of your action in your own words and gives you the possibility to show your action off to thousands of people who may not have been there while you did it.

We’ve seen a lot of powerful actions that are well documented but the photos aren’t well utilized on social media.  Social media is a key way to build power. Often we only post one image from our action after the action is over, but you can use your social media to share images and the livestream during the action, post images and interviews with attendees after the action is over, and share the call to action.

When sharing photos and short video clips after the action on your social media, use the caption of the post to write a short sentence about why this fight is important to you, and include a link to the call to action. Calls to action are often more effective when shared with photos from the event!


Share these two calls to action in the captions of your social media posts:


MoveOn: Do not fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Supreme Court seat until after the 2021 inauguration

Planned Parenthood Action Fund: Protect RBG’s Legacy

  1. Call Your Senators:

Planned Parenthood Action Fund:  NO VOTE on ANY Nominee Before Inauguration Day


Debriefing is often forgotten in the urgency of moving onto the next urgent thing, but it’s a really important part of your action. Your team members have just gone through a powerful experience and were asked to take on responsibilities they may not have done before. Here is a link to a template agenda for a team debriefing: Sample Action Debrief Agenda

Debriefing should be held shortly after the action is done, ideally immediately. You want folks to have the experience fresh in their minds to be able to have them share learning and reflections.


MI, PA, WI JUDICIAL VOTE FRAUD UPDATE: Are Democrat House and Senate Candidates Trapped in a No-Win Situation?

From: Doug Ross @ Journal

As if Democrats weren’t already fomenting enough chaos with their brownshirts — Antifa, BLM, and the like — the Supreme Courts of several battleground states have decided to pile on. In PennsylvaniaMichiganMinnesota, and Wisconsin, Democrat activists dressed in black robes have fundamentally rewritten state election laws. Among their various revisions to these crucial laws:

  • Mail-in ballots can be received up to seven (7) days after the election and still be counted
  • These ballots can be missing postmarks and still be counted
  • The signature on the ballot doesn’t even have to match with that of the registered voter
  • And, as a bonus, they have banned the Green Party from the ballot to prevent erosion of the Biden vote

All of these illegal proclamations directly contravene state law and are simply naked, partisan attempts to swing the election.

More importantly, they are in clear violation of the Constitution.

Article I, Section 4

…The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof…

The Judicial branch — at any level of government — has no role in deciding the times, places, and protocols for Congressional elections.

Democrat Activists on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Who Are Trying to Launch a Coup Against the President in 2020: Christine Donohue, Democrat. David Wecht, Democrat. Kevin M. Dougherty, Democrat. Debra Todd, Democrat. Max Baer, Democrat. May their names live in infamy for all times.

Which means that even if the illegal vote harvesting scam promoted by certain state Supreme Courts at the presidential level goes unchallenged, the clear text of the Constitution prevents any other federal office-holder from being counted if it is in violation of state law.

As for the presidential election, the Constitution is equally clear, as Mark Levin has repeatedly pointed out.

Article II, Section 1

…Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector…

Once again, the legislature is wholly responsible for directing the manner of presidential elections.

Rogue Democrat partisans disguised as judges have no role in dictating the times, places, and manner of elections for any federal officeholder.

But Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution clearly dictates that any down-ticket federal elections must conform explicitly to the legislative body’s instructions. Perhaps Democrat activists disguised as judges have helped entrap their own party’s Congressional candidates in a web of deception.

Hat tip: BadBlue Uncensored News.


Chinese Embassy in NY is a Spy Hub, so is the UN

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code


January of 2020, a reported United Nations hack revealed the infiltration of spies.

U.S. Boots Cuban Diplomats for Running Spy Ops on American ...

A New York City police officer charged with acting as an agent for China has been denied bail by a US federal judge in New York. And in January of 2020 prosecutors pointed to Baimadajie Angwang’s financial records showing “unusually large” wire transfers to and from China and the possibility that the 33-year-old defendant – a naturalized US citizen who is accused of spying on fellow ethnic Tibetans – might flee to China’s consulate in New York.

NYPD Officer Allegedly Acted as Agent for Chinese ...

Magistrate Judge Roanne Mann of the US Justice Department’s Eastern District of New York granted the request for continued detention on Monday because “no credible sureties” were offered to assure that Angwang would appear for court proceedings. Angwang is a community affairs police officer in the borough of Queens as well as a US Army reservist stationed at Fort Dix in New Jersey. The indictment against Angwang highlighted his familial and financial ties to China, noting that his brother was a reservist in the People’s Liberation Army. Wire transfers from China to accounts with Angwang’s name in the US in 2014 and 2016 amounted to nearly US$120,000, including one US$49,985 transfer from his brother, prosecutors said. He faces up to 55 years in prison if convicted.

NR: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that the Chinese consulate in New York City is a center for espionage, in comments to the New York Post on Thursday.

Pompeo’s remarks came after the Justice Department charged an NYPD officer on Monday with spying for China. The officer, Baimadajie Angwang, is accused of arranging invitations for Chinese officials to NYPD events, in order to gain access to senior ranks of the NYPD.  Angwang is an ethnic Tibetan who also gathered information for China on Tibetans in the city.

The Justice Department alleged that Angwang was in contact with at least two consulate officials. Pompeo said there would likely be additional arrests of agents connected with the consulate.

Officials in the consulate are “engaged in activities where they’re crossing the line from normal diplomacy to the kinds of things that would be more akin to what spies are doing,” Pompeo told the Post.

In addition to the New York consulate, Pompeo warned that China’s spying efforts may extend to its United Nations personnel.

“Remember, not only do we have Chinese consulates here, but there’s a UN facility, too,” Pompeo said. “So if we’re talking about New York, we not only have the Chinese Consulate in New York — that is the bilateral consulate — they also have a large contingent of Chinese diplomats here for United Nations work.”

China has attempted to influence state and local politics in the U.S. through its consular missions, across various locations. National Review has reported that the wife of the Chinese Consulate-General in Chicago sent emails to Wisconsin’s State Senate President Roger Roth in February, asking Roth to “consider adopting a resolution expressing solidarity with the Chinese people in fighting the coronavirus.”

The U.S. ordered the closure of China’s consulate in Houston on July 22, citing unspecified “massive illegal spying and influence operations” emanating in part from the consulate. Nearby residents called the fire department after consulate workers began burning piles of documents in the courtyard of the complex.


The Anti-Trump FBI’ers Bought Liability Insurance, no REALLY

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Hoorah for Sidney Powell. Text messages sure tell interesting facts.

Professional liability insurance? Really?

The Federalist: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ), states that the latest document production included handwritten notes and texts from Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, and FBI analysts who worked on the FBI’s investigation of Flynn.

Agents also said they were worried about how a new attorney general might view the actions taken against Trump during the investigation. Shortly after then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) was confirmed to be Trump’s new attorney general, congressional Democrats, media, and Obama holdovers within DOJ immediately moved to force Sessions to recuse himself from overseeing the department’s investigations against Trump.

“[T]he new AG might have some questions….then yada yada yada…we all get screwed,” one agent wrote.

The FBI agents also discussed how the investigation’s leadership was consumed with conspiracy theories rather than evidence.

“I’m tellying [sic] man, if this thing ever gets FOIA’d, there are going to be some tough questions asked,” one agent wrote. “[A]nd a great deal of those will be related to Brian having a scope way outside the boundaries of logic[.]”

“[REDACTED] is one of the worst offenders of the rabbit holes and conspiracy theories,” an agent texted. “This guy traveled with that guy, who put down 3rd guy as his visa sponsor. 3rd guy lives near a navy base, therefore…[.]”

Several texts show that the order to close the criminal investigation against Flynn came as early as Nov. 8, 2016, the same day as the 2016 presidential election. It was later re-opened in early January of 2017.

“We have some loose ends to tie up, and we all need to meet to discuss what to do with each case (he said shut down Razor),” one agent texted, referring to Crossfire Razor, the FBI’s internal code name for the investigation of Flynn.

“[S]o glad they’re closing Razor,” an agent responded.

The new disclosures made by DOJ also show that the FBI used so-called national security letters (NSLs) to spy on Flynn’s finances. Unlike traditional subpoenas, which require judicial review and approval before authorities can seize an innocent person’s property and information, NSLs are never independently reviewed by courts. One of the agents noted in a text message that the NSLs were just being used as a pretext by FBI leadership to buy time to find dirt on Flynn after the first investigation of him yielded no derogatory information.

“[T]he decision to NSL finances for Razor bought him time,” one agent said nearly two weeks after the initial order to shut down the anti-Flynn case. It is not known to whom the agent was referring in that text.

“What do we expect to get from an NSL[?]” an agent texted on Dec. 5, 2016. “We put out traces, tripwires to community and nothing.”

“[B]ingo,” another FBI agent responded. “[S]o what’s an NSL going to do – no content.”

“Hahah this is a nightmare,” an agent said.

“If we’re working to close down the cases, I’m not sure what NSL results would do to help,” one agent wrote.

“[E]xactly that makes no sense,” an agent wrote back.

The explosive new text messages also show agents believed the investigation was being run by FBI officials who were in the tank for Hillary Clinton.

“[D]oing all this election research – I think some of these guys want a [C]linton presidency,” one agent wrote on Aug. 11, shortly after the FBI opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation against Trump.

In one series of texts sent the same day as the infamous Jan. 5 Oval Office meeting between Obama, Biden, Comey, Sally Yates, and Susan Rice, one agent admits that “Trump was right” when he tweeted that the FBI was delaying his briefings as incoming president so they could cook up evidence against him. As The Federalist first reported last May, that Jan. 5 meeting was the key to understanding the entire anti-Trump operation run out of Obama’s FBI.

“The ‘Intelligence’ briefing on so-called ‘Russian hacking’ was delayed until Friday, perhaps more time needed to build a case,” Trump tweeted on January 3. “Very strange!”

“So razor is going to stay open???” an agent wrote on Jan. 5.

“[Y]ep,” another FBI agent responded. “[C]rimes report being drafted.”

“F,” the first agent wrote back.

“[W]hat’s the word on how [Obama’s] briefing went?” one agent asked, referring to the Jan. 5 meeting.

“Dont know but people here are scrambling for info to support certain things and its a mad house,” an FBI agent responded.

“[J]esus,” an agent wrote back. “[T]rump was right. [S]till not put together….why do we do this to ourselves. [W]hat is wrong with people[?]?

A week later, the FBI agents also wrote that they suspected that the illegal leak of top secret information about Flynn’s phone calls with Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak to the news media came directly from the White House.

“FYI – someone leaked the Flynn calls with Kislyak to the WSJ,” the agent wrote.

“I’m sorry to hear that,” another FBI agent responded sarcastically. “I’ll resume my duties as Chief Morale Officer and rectify that.”

“Published this morning by Ignatius,” an agent said, referencing the Jan. 12 column from Washington Post writer David Ignatius that included leaked top-secret information about Flynn’s calls with Kislyak.

“It’s got to be someone on staff,” an agent wrote. “[Presidential Daily Briefing] staff. Or WH seniors.”

To date, not a single person has been charged with illegally leaking that information to the Washington Post as a way of damaging Flynn and the incoming Trump administration.

Following a review of the federal government’s investigation by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, which was ordered by Attorney General William Barr, the government moved to dismiss all charges against Flynn that had been previously brought by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Documents unearthed during Jensen’s review showed that before the FBI was tasked by the Obama White House in early 2017 with re-targeting Flynn, the agency closed a previous investigation against him because there was no proof of any criminal wrongdoing. Jensen’s review also uncovered evidence that the FBI’s interview of Flynn, which later led to charges that he lied to FBI investigators, had no legal basis and that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he had lied.

Contrary to claims by Mueller’s office that Flynn had lied about discussing financial sanctions against Russia during post-election phone calls with Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak, declassified transcripts of those conversations confirmed that Flynn spoke to Kislyak only about expulsions of Russian diplomats and that the two men never discussed financial sanctions against Russia that had previously been levied by the Obama administration. Jensen’s review of Flynn’s case file also revealed handwritten notes from the FBI’s top counterintelligence official that admitted a primary goal of the FBI’s anti-Flynn operation was “to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired.”

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Flynn did not lie to agents, the FBI had no legal basis to interview him, that the FBI later hid exculpatory documents from Flynn’s defense team, Flynn did not discuss financial sanctions during his phone calls with Kislyak, and the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he lied, federal trial Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has refused to dismiss the case against Flynn.

Instead, Sullivan personally appointed a left-wing shadow prosecutor, whose partners represent former DOJ official Yates, to smear Flynn and attempt to continue the baseless criminal case against him. At one point last April, Sullivan even tried to order the DOJ to stop producing and publicly filing exculpatory evidence for Flynn or evidence of FBI misbehavior during its investigation of Flynn.

Sullivan, who called Flynn a traitor during court proceedings and suggested that Flynn — a decorated Army combat veteran — be charged with treason, has refused to recuse himself from the case despite his obvious personal animosity toward Flynn.


Should the Nation Mourn Ginsburg?

By: Cliff Kincaid

The New York Times headline, “As Nation Mourns Ginsburg, Trump Vows Nomination,” has two distortions. First, while many people are sorry to see her passing, the expression of deep sorrow is not something pro-life people would feel about someone whose rulings denied the humanity of the unborn. Second, the Times’ contrast of the “mourning” for Ginsburg with Trump’s vow to nominate a successor is designed to convey the notion that Trump is hard-hearted. But one could argue that “women’s rights,” as taken to an extreme by Ginsburg and other feminists, have been used to sanction the deliberate and savage murder of a human being.

Trump issued a “Proclamation on the Death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg” and visited the Supreme Court to pay respects. But Senator Jesse Helms called her “callous” toward the unborn when she was up for a confirmation vote in 1993. His warning wasn’t taken seriously by most fellow Senators. Indeed, he was one of only three to vote against her confirmation. Since then, 30 million abortions have taken place, making a total of more than 60 million since the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973.

Ginsburg, known as RBG, is being promoted by the Times as a cult figure, as a result of fighting sexist bias when she was on her career path. She did achieve her dream. The problem is that she denied the American dream to millions of Americans. Many cannot excuse or forgive her.

In her book, The Supremacists, Phyllis Schlafly noted that Ginsburg even endorsed funding of abortions as a constitutional right. That was too extreme for the Supreme Court, which rejected that idea in the 1980 decision, Harris v. McRae.

A major tragedy in the career of Ginsburg is her failure to understand the religious principles that she claimed to be following.

Liberal Fox News commentator Leslie Marshall said that Ginsburg, who was Jewish, “died on one of the holiest days in Judaism, Rosh Hashana, the Jewish New Year. One of the themes of the holiday suggests that very righteous people would die at the end of the year because they were needed until the very end.”

But Thomas Jacobson of the Global Life Campaign notes that while Ginsburg quoted the Torah on the duty to do justice, she contradicted the Torah by supporting “the innocent bloodshed of babies in the womb, violating the justice requirements of the Law of God and the U.S. Constitution.” He added, “In God’s eyes, our greatest national sin may be the innocent bloodshed of more than 61.3 million babies. Can you imagine standing before the Creator, Lawgiver, and Judge of the world and being held to account in part for that? It is our prayer that she did repent before her death, and received mercy and forgiveness from Jesus Christ.”

Randy Engel, the traditionalist Catholic writer and founder and director of the U.S. Coalition for Life, said, “One can always pray for her immortal soul and wish her the same merciful judgment that we all desire from God at our own death. However, I believe that judgment will likely be tempered by the ritual lack of mercy she showed to the millions of unborn children who met their untimely death under Roe v. Wade which Ginsburg faithfully worshipped.”

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, of course, won’t be commenting directly on the Roe v. Wade decision which led to their deaths. The ruling will be treated as a “precedent” of the Court that a judge must address objectively. Yet, a recorded conversation with possible Trump nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett about raising a family and adopting children makes the pro-life case. “What greater thing can you do than raise children?” she says. “That’s where you have your greatest impact in the world.”

A campaign has already been started to portray Barrett as a religious zealot with too many children and too devoted to “Catholic values.” As if that wasn’t enough, the media have “discovered” she belongs to a Christian group, and this has now become a “scandal.”

While commentators praise Ginsburg for her Jewish faith, Christian judges like Barrett,  a Notre Dame Law School alumna and member of the Law School’s faculty since 2002, are being opposed for having pro-life tendencies and favoring adoption over abortion.

Francis Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois, goes further, asking, “Has Barrett taken any kind of pledge that’s relevant to her being on the Court? She is being positioned for the Supreme Court to do a job and overturning Roe v. Wade will be part of it.”

He says that when he interviewed with Notre Dame Law School, which describes itself as the nation’s oldest Roman Catholic law school, he was told by the dean that law professors took a required pledge that they had to conduct themselves consistent with Catholic values, “which I took to mean I would not teach, write or advocate in favor of abortion rights.”

But even belonging to a pro-life group is grounds for suspicion. In 2018, Senator Kamala Harris, now the Democratic Party vice-presidential nominee, questioned whether Brian C. Buescher should be seated as a federal district judge because he was a member of the pro-life Catholic group the Knights of Columbus. (He was confirmed 51-40).

“Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion,” the Catholic Catechism declares. “This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.”

Harris’ running mate, Joseph Biden, claims to be Catholic but was denied communion at a Catholic church in South Carolina over his pro-abortion stance. The 2020 Democratic Party platform declares they believe in “safe and legal abortion” and full federal funding for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. It was founded by Margaret Sanger, a revolutionary socialist and anti-Christian activist who favored government programs to eliminate what she called “human weeds.”

Father James Altman, pastor of St. James the Less Catholic Church in La Crosse, Wisconsin, comments, “You cannot be Catholic and be a Democrat. Period. Their party platform absolutely is against everything the Catholic Church teaches. So just stop pretending that you’re Catholic and vote Democrat.  Repent of your support of that party and its platform or face the fires of hell.”

The Altman video, in which he seems to suggest that Catholics who vote Democrat will go to hell, has gone viral.

His popularity with traditional Catholics suggests that attacks on Barrett’s Catholic faith if she is the nominee, may backfire and drive more Catholics who take their faith seriously into the arms of President Trump.

*Cliff Kincaid is president of America’s Survival, Inc. www.usasurvival.org.