Daily Archives: December 13, 2016

12/13/16

Pity the poor Trump delegates to the Electoral College

By: Nelson Abdullah | Conscience of a Conservative

To be a defenseless victim of any war is a terrible ordeal. To be a victim of psychological warfare is demoralizing at best and downright frightening at least. Let no one misunderstand what is going on here, the 306 elected Trump delegates to the Electoral College have been under assault, verbally and mentally, since the day after the elections on November 8th. And the sole purpose of the assault is to persuade them into switching their votes on December 19th to someone other than Donald J. Trump, the Republican president-elect.

First came the reports that a number of Trump delegates had started to receive threatening emails and phone calls warning them of dire consequences if they cast their sworn votes for Donald Trump. Then came the far left claims the election results in three former Democrat strongholds, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, had been or were suspected of being hacked (with absolutely zero evidence given) and the push began to order a recount of the votes. For obvious reasons the call for a recount was made several weeks after election day so that it could not possibly be completed in time to meet the federal deadline on December 13th.

The only purpose of this maneuver was to try and stall the certification of the final results to prevent the delegates from these states from being able to participate in the Electoral College meeting on December 19th. Finally after two weeks of non-stop media coverage and not a single mention about stalling, state and federal courts ruled Jill Stein had no standing in Pennsylvania, the Michigan recount was halted after hundreds of precincts showed phony Democrat ballot discrepancies and the Wisconsin recount, which was started in advance of court challenges, was completed giving Donald Trump 162 extra votes.

Then, soon after the Democrats began pushing their conspiracy theories about Russia hacking the DNC emails to help Trump’s win, the liberal mainstream news media chimed in to raise the sound level of the wailing losers. And as Donald Trump began to assemble his new government almost every cabinet level and agency head selection was tossed into the liberal conspiracy to turn America into a police state or a sell out to foreign governments.

The latest straw in the desperate Democrat plot to steal the White House is a group of 14 Democrat delegates to the Electoral College, led by the daughter of Democrat Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, plus a single Republican turncoat have demanded that they receive an intel briefing from the CIA on the extent of the Russian hacking of the DNC and the fake news stories planted to solidify Trump’s victory. I cannot even begin to see what legal standing this demand can relate to but that doesn’t seem to bother the Liberal MSM from blaring it from the rooftops.

All of this reminds me of a very simple example of how psychological warfare works. Wherein a very small group of fighters surround the encampment of their much larger enemy at night and begin to bang on pots and pans and use bullhorns to make their numbers seem overwhelmingly large. The much larger enemy becomes confused and demoralized and subsequently throws down their weapons and surrenders.

I’m not sure if the Democrats and their Leftist, Communist, anti-American allies are (maybe I should reword that because Democrats are all Leftists, Communists and anti-American) fully aware of the consequences of what they are doing but should they succeed in disrupting the results of this election and prevent Donald Trump from being inaugurated on January 20th next year, their will be a civil war like nothing that has been recorded in American history. As one wag commented to one of my opinions on Breitbart put it: If Hillary Clinton manages to steal this election she will never again sleep in the same bed twice for the rest of her life.

My name is Nelson Abdullah and I am Oldironsides.

12/13/16

Hillary: Lock Her Up!

By: Lloyd Marcus

Hillary’s post-election speech about fake news was beyond the pale; the height of arrogance and deceit. Her wickedness makes my skin crawl. Blaming fake news for her loss, this deplorable woman had the chutzpah to say, “…it’s now clear that so-called fake news can have real-world consequences. Lives are at risk, lives of ordinary people just trying to go about their days to do their jobs. Its a danger that must be addressed.” http://bit.ly/2h2tmOz

So we are suppose to believe Hillary cares about ordinary people. Remember the leaked emails exposing Hillary’s team’s disdain for Catholics, Southerners, needy Latinos and common folks? http://bit.ly/2dxwkpL

Knowing how the Democrats roll, Hillary saying fake news is “a danger that must be addressed” is yet another attack on free speech, justifying government censorship and regulations. Why are leftists called liberals when they are power obsessed control freaks?

Meanwhile, Hillary and her leftist minions planted, watered and nurtured fake news which continues to reap them a bountiful harvest of racial hate and division. Hillary and Company’s fake news has painted a bright red bulls-eye on the backs of America’s police; our brave men and women in blue. http://bit.ly/2gQiFLW

Hillary’s long list of lies which have devastated lives and even led to the deaths of Americans are well documented. http://bit.ly/2hDfZRH And yet her fake news speech emitted an air of moral superiority. Clearly, Hillary will continue lying and deceiving the American people for as long as she can get away with it – no remorse, no humility and no humanity.

Some have advised President-Elect Trump not to pursue further investigation of what a former FBI agent called the Bill and Hillary Clinton “Crime Family.” http://bit.ly/2eY7wuY I was pretty neutral on the issue. After hearing her nose-up-in-the-air fake news speech, I say, let the law follow its course.

The average jail time for a kid possessing a small amount of drugs is 3 years. Why should Hillary walk with multiple crimes that jeopardized national security? Everyone knows she became filthy rich by selling influence to whomever from banks to foreign governments. http://bit.ly/2a3hwSY

Knowing that the mainstream media has her back, Hillary dared to boldly come to the national microphone and preach to us about fake news. Truly repulsive.

Please do not think I am advocating locking her up without following the legal process; indictment, trial and being found guilty. Some are saying it would be politically wise to give Hillary a pass; not pursuing further investigation. I disagree. The woman is like Jason and Michael Myers in those horror movies. Her fake news speech confirms that unless she is stopped, Hillary will relentlessly keep coming back; finding new ways to attack our freedom and liberty.

Move forward with the investigation Mr President! If all proceeds as the evidence so far leads, lock her evil crooked condescending derriere up!

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman: The Conservative Campaign Committee
http://www.lloydmarcus.com/

12/13/16

Van Jones is Behind this Electoral College Vote Challenge

***NOTE: Megaphone Strategies is connected to George Soros and they are the firm representing the Hamilton Electors seeking to keep Donald Trump from the presidency. They are also the firm that handled Barack Obama’s campaigns and Hillary Clinton’s. They also represent Black Lives Matter.

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

July, 2016:

PHILADELPHIA— Self-described “communist” and “rowdy black nationalist” Van Jones is starting a new “social justice” public relations outfit to be called Megaphone Strategies.

The firm touts itself as a “social justice media strategy firm run for purpose, not profit.” (Good luck with your efforts to circumvent human nature, Comrade Jones.) Molly Haigh, communications director for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee is his partner in this new adventure in antisocial activism.

Jones, who was President Obama’s green jobs czar until it was revealed that he was a 9/11 truther, will chair the organization’s board while Haigh will be president and oversee five staffers in the beginning.

AdWeek’s Fishbowl DC blog reports, quoting Jones:

Everywhere we look, we discover courageous people finding ways to break down barriers and solve tough problems. We need to hear their voices, and we need to elevate their work,” said Van Jones of the reason behind the firm’s creation, which will offer strategy, publicity, media training and event/social justice campaign planning services.

Megaphone’s clients include Vote.org, the ACORN-affiliated Working Families Party, and Demand Progress.

Jones, by the way, said Donald Trump’s speech on the closing day of the Republican National Convention makes him an American Hitler.

Well, actually, the America-hating communist didn’t literally say that but he came fairly close.

Although Trump’s speech was widely applauded in Republican circles, Jones called it a “schizophrenic psychopathic attempt to pull apart the Obama coalition,” like a moment “where there’s some big authoritarian movement, and some leader that’s rising up,” and “a disgrace.”

What do you expect from someone who hates everything America stands for?

What Jones said about Trump’s address probably isn’t anywhere near the worst garbage to have spewed from his mouth on CNN where he is a paid contributor. His commentary throughout the Republican National Convention in Cleveland last week was fairly uniformly malicious, ugly, and unfair.

***

Megaphone Strategies lists a majority of its clients as environmental and “social justice” organizations such as 350.org, Green For All, Democracy Fund, and Demand Progress. More here.

Going back to 2009, Van Jones called the Republicans ‘assholes’ before his audience at a time when he worked for the Obama White House.

12/13/16

Aleppo: Tell Our Story After We Are Gone

By: Denise Simon | Founders Code

Update as of 2:24 EST, December 13, 2016, a truce and a cease fire announced.

The Syrian government has established control over eastern Aleppo, Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s Ambassador to the United Nations, told the UN Security Council on Tuesday. More from CNN.

It was October of 2016, that I interviewed Abdulkafi Al-Hamdo that is mentioned weeks later, today, in this article. He told me the same then, don’t cry for us, tell our story. You could hear the reckoning in his voice, his time on earth was short. (Segment 2) Barack Obama and John Kerry own this genocide and hence should be the mantle of their policy legacy.

 

Last Rebels in Aleppo Say Assad Forces Are Burning People Alive

As the Syrian dictator’s coalition captures the last rebel-held neighborhoods, residents are bidding the world farewell and opposition media says mass atrocities have already begun.

DailyBeast: Amid celebratory gunfire and cheers from Assad loyalists, foreign militias under Iranian command and troops loyal to the regime on Monday captured about 90 percent of the opposition-held areas of eastern Aleppo.

The last hope of the besieged rebels, most of whom seem to have withdrawn in the face of certain defeat, had been to receive reinforcements or resupplies from their counterparts in the southern and western suburbs. That option has now been foreclosed upon as these routes are completely interdicted by the regime.

The triumphal takeover of the citadel of the Syrian revolution followed a day of intense bombing of houses and apartment buildings, destroying so many that it was impossible to determine the death toll. The neighborhoods of Bustan al-Qasr, al-Kallasa, al-Farod and al-Salhin in the Old City, as well as Sheikh Saed, in the southern district, are all now under regime control.

The Syrian Civil Defense, or White Helmets, an internationally renowned team of first responders, said more than 90 bodies of people presumed to be still alive are under debris and that its volunteer staff reported they could hear the voices of children trapped in the rubble of their houses.

A member of the group in Aleppo told al-Arabiya TV on Monday night that men, women, and children were huddling and crying in the streets and at the gates of empty buildings in the few neighborhoods that remained in the hands of the opposition. He described the situation as hopeless, because precision munitions and indiscriminate barrel bombs had destroyed the city’s medical facilities, ambulances, and fuel supply.

Unconfirmed reports, circulated by opposition media, suggest that mass atrocities have already begun, such as the summary executions of 17 in al-Kalaseh neighborhood, 22 in Bostan al-Kasrand, and the immolation of four women and nine children on al-Firdous Street. The Daily Beast could not independently confirm these figures.

The official Syrian news agency SANA claimed that eight people were killed and 47 were injured in regime-held Aleppo after opposition fighters bombed the city. Most of the victims were women and children, according to the agency.

Activists and residents of the ever-dwindling opposition pocket, an urban islet of about five square kilometers and home to as many as 100,000 people, spent the day signing off from social media, asking journalists to tell their story, and warning of their impending demise.

The Daily Beast was able to get in touch with Abdulkafi Al-Hamdo, a university teacher in the besieged city. The brief conversation was as follows:

TDB: “I hope you’re safe.”

AA: “I don’t think I will be tomorrow.”

TDB: “Do you expect all the remaining besieged neighborhoods will fall by tomorrow?”

AA: “No. Except over the body of every civilian. I won’t surrender my body, and my wife, and my daughter to the Assad regime without defending them… I hope that you’ll tell everyone what I’m saying.”

On a publicly visible WhatsApp feed belonging to the Aleppo Siege Media Center, al-Hamdo was more fatalistic. “Doomsday is held in Aleppo,” he said. “People are running don’t know where. People are under the rubble alive and no one can save them. Some people are injured in the streets and no one can go to help them [because] the bombs are [falling on] the same place.”

Award-winning blogger and activist Marcell Shehwaro, a native of Aleppo, shared on Facebook a message from one of her most “peaceful” and least-sectarian friends. “No Marcell, don’t worry,” it read. “I will kill myself, I won’t let them arrest me.”

Lina al-Shamy, a 26-year-old woman, posted a video of herself to Twitter. Speaking in fluent English, al-Shamy said: “To everyone who can hear me. We are here exposed to a genocide in the besieged city of Aleppo. This may be my last video. More than 50,000 civilians who rebelled against the dictator, al-Assad, are threatened with field executions or dying under bombing. According to activists, more than 180 people have been field executed in the areas the regime has recently retook control of by Assad’s gangs and the militias that support them. The civilians are stuck in a very small area that doesn’t exceed two square kilometers. With no safe zones, no life, every bomb is a new massacre. Save Aleppo, save humanity.”

Jouad al-Khateb had a similar message—one hesitates to call it valedictory— for the world. In Arabic, he told the camera: “Behind me is the Bustan al-Qasr neighborhood. Since last night up to the present moment, it is being bombed with every kind of weapon; vacuum rockets, missiles. The rockets have not stopped since last night. The people coming out of Bustan al-Qasr are telling me it’s become a city of ghosts. More than 20 families remain under the rubble across various districts.” The White Helmets were unable to reach any of the victims, al-Khateb added.

“My message to those watching: Just stop the waterfall of blood for us. We don’t want to leave the besieged areas. Just stop the waterfall of blood. It’s as if this has become very normal for the international community, you know, a rocket falls, 20 or 30 people are killed, under the rubble, they can’t pull them out—that’s a totally normal thing. In any case, there’s no space for graves to bury them in. Let them be buried under the buildings. I think this will be my last video, because we’ve gotten bored of talking, bored of speeches.”

Al-Khateb was interrupted by a loud groaning sound.

“That’s a barrel bomb,” he said, referring to one of the regime’s most notorious improvised munitions, a metal canister filled with high explosives and shrapnel, which are dropped indiscriminately from helicopters.

Another trapped resident, Ameen al-Halabi, boasted on Facebook, “I’m waiting for death or imprisonment by the Assad forces. I would rather die on the soil of my land than be arrested by their faithless militias.” Al-Halabi asked his friends to forgive him if this was the last message he wrote.

On several rebel chat forums on the popular messaging application Telegram, there were calls for the youth of Syria to wage “jihad” against the conquerors of Aleppo, if only to defend the honor of women who had allegedly been raped in the course of the Assadist blitzkrieg.

Whether or not that particular war crime has yet occurred in Aleppo—though human-rights monitors have documented mass rape in Syrian regime prisons since the start of the conflict—the call for holy war against the regime may yet take hold. For this reason, the CIA and Joints Chiefs of Staff earlier advised the Obama administration that the fall of eastern Aleppo, apart from being a humanitarian catastrophe, would also constitute a counterterrorism threat to the United States. The radicalization of survivors is all but a foregone conclusion.

As for those already radicalized, they’ve had a remarkably auspicious week. While the regime was focused on reclaiming Aleppo, ISIS, or the self-proclaimed Islamic State, was able to completely retake another ancient Syrian city, Palmyra, which it had lost, to much international fanfare, last March.

Despite the gravity of the day’s events, and the many breaches of international law that led to the collapse of the rebel-held area, U.S. political leaders were slow to comment. President Obama has watched in silence as Russia and the Assad regime have committed what Secretary of State John Kerry called crimes against humanity, and Donald Trump has not once publicly mentioned the word “Aleppo” on his favorite social-media platform, Twitter, since being elected president of the United States a month ago. Kerry even meekly invited the Kremlin over the weekend to show “a little grace” in how it recaptured eastern Aleppo.

“The Holy Quran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as—it is as if he has killed all mankind. And the Holy Quran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.”

So did Obama tell a receptive audience in Cairo, in 2009, in a much-scrutinized maiden speech of his administration. (The second line in this sacred allusion, as it happens, is also the mantra of the now-helpless White Helmets.)

The president who came to office promising to repair the breach between the United States and the Islamic world, putatively caused by the war on terror and the invasion and occupation of Iraq, is now set to leave office having done little to stop to the slaughter or displacement of millions in Syria or the wholesale destruction of one of Islam’s most venerated cities.

12/13/16

Does the Constitution Need to be INTERPRETED?

By: Gary Alder

Ever since the US Constitution was ratified the question asked over and over is: who has the prerogative and responsibility to interpret the Constitution? Early on, the Supreme Court assumed the right to exercise this function but nowhere in the words of the Constitution (the document itself) is this practice authorized.

Before jumping to the conclusion that the Constitution requires interpreting and accepting anyone’s interpretation, I would ask what I consider a much more pertinent question and its corollary: Does the Constitution need to be interpreted, and if so why?

I can think of only three possible reasons why our Constitution would need interpreting which I will list and examine in the increasing level of likelihood and incidence of interpretation.

  •   The way a clause is worded doesn’t make sense.
  •   The way a clause is worded is ambiguous or imprecise.
  •   Part of the Constitution doesn’t say what we want it to say.

As I will demonstrate, interpret generally is used as a euphemism for disregard or make the Constitution say what its actual words don’t.

Case 1 – The way a clause is worded doesn’t make sense.

I can’t think of an example of such gross incompetence in the original Constitution, but the Twelfth Amendment states that a presidential Elector can’t vote for a presidential and vice-presidential candidate both from his own state.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves;

If you assume that the Electors were designed to cast a final vote, (which I don’t), that means that if the Electors are given a list of candidates and one presidential and one vice-presidential candidate are from Delaware, all of the Electors except those from Delaware could vote for both. What sense does that make? Someone needs to interpret some sense into that one.

Case 2 – The way a clause is worded is ambiguous or imprecise.

Probably the most glaring example of this concerns the issue of slavery, the worst blight in our history as a nation. This ambiguity allowed a practice to continue beyond the 20 year period that barred the federal government from interfering, while giving time for the states to get rid of that abhorrent practice. (see Article I Section 9, also Article V)

The migration, or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

Even though they couldn’t bring themselves to write the words slave or slavery in the Constitution, by dancing around the issue with euphemisms, a conversion time was allotted. The only part of the system that ended up being addressed was the foreign slave trade which to the credit of congress was abolished in January of 1808. It took a horrible war which devastated the nation and claimed the lives of 620,000 Americans to finally resolve the issue.

Case 3 – Part of the Constitution doesn’t say what we want it to say.

Now we come to the part of the issue that seems both most pervasive and most perversive. This is the problem with most interpretations and interpreters. Rather than studying the Constitution and trying to figure out what it is saying, we usually try to find a way to make it say what we want it to say. By our “cut and paste” methodology—taking a piece here, ignoring a piece there, and interpreting a piece somewhere else, we arrive at a system of government that is a modified democracy rather than the modified federation that the original Constitution defined.

To illustrate this point, we can look at the First Amendment and the way that it has been interpreted.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This amendment contains a list of things that congress may not do. Rather than follow the Constitution, our government has declared a wall of separation between church and state and made themselves the arbiter of that separation. Freedom of speech is now interpreted to include disruption of the daily activities of others and even destruction of property, and not only are we free to petition government but the First Amendment supposedly allows rowdy gathering and protesting of any entity or organization that seems to be doing or not doing things the particular mob assembled wants them to do or quit doing. How does that become peaceably assembling? What freedom of speech and freedom of religion do not include are things like prayer in schools and expressions like “Merry Christmas” or “God Bless You”. If Congress can make no law concerning these things, where did all this nonsense come from?

Probably the most common interpretation given to the Constitution by educated people who should know better, is the notion that it defines a two-party (or any party) system of government. Unfortunately the “two-party system” is the system that supplanted “Constitutional Federalism” when America turned its collective back on the original Constitution. It happened so early in our history that Americans almost without exception assume that party politics is constitutional. It led to replacing the recommendations of the best presidential candidates by independent Electors to the confirmation of the least-worst options as determined by a party-controlled popular vote between self-nominated and self-interested demagogues who bribe the people with legislative promises which they have no constitutional authority to fulfill if they do get elected.

Most of the time the popular vote for President coincides with the party manipulated electoral votes, but the election of 2016 was an exception. Now there are many who are trying to manipulate the vote of the Electors in different directions. It will be interesting to see how this works out. There is some hope that this confusion will lead to a study of the actual words of the Constitution and the concepts that those words convey. Time will tell.

Article VI of the Constitution reads:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution;…

which invites this rhetorical question: when the officers take the oath to support this Constitution, are they bound by the words of the Constitution or by some interpretation; and if so which one?

Having analyzed the reasons why the Constitution could need some interpretation, I conclude that what is needed most is careful study of the actual words of the Constitution by both the elected officials and all Americans. This study must include a look at the whole picture not just a few select pieces. If the incumbents do not follow the Constitution, they must be replaced. If after careful study, changes seem appropriate, let them be made by amendment not by interpretation.

As George Washington said in his farewell address:

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

Gary Alder 801-597-4182  [email protected]    www.freedomformula.us
P.O. box 306 Cokeville, Wyoming 83114

Gary and Carolyn Alder Authors of:

The Evolution and Destruction of the Original Electoral College

12/13/16

The CIA’s War on Trump

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

You couldn’t fault Donald J. Trump for concluding that the CIA is out to get him even before he starts his presidency. Former CIA officials Michael Morell, Michael Hayden and Philip Mudd have all denounced him. Plus, former CIA operations officer Evan McMullin ran against him as an independent presidential candidate.

Obama’s director of the CIA is John Brennan, who recently disclosed that he voted for the Communist Party (CPUSA) ticket when he was in college. He was hired by the CIA anyway and quickly rose through the ranks, even though the CPUSA was funded by Moscow and known to provide cover for Soviet espionage activities.

The liberal media haven’t made Brennan’s disclosure into a scandal and didn’t call for any investigations of Obama’s CIA.

Clearly, having an “intelligence” connection doesn’t mean you are intelligent or have good judgment. Making “America First” is not a requirement for serving in the CIA and other intelligence agencies. You can have numerous skeletons in your closet and even be a transgender. If you have any doubts, consider reading the CIA’s “Diversity and Inclusion Strategy (2016-2019).” It is Brennan’s masterpiece.

The line-up of former CIA personnel opposing Trump sounds impressive, except when you consider the fact that the CIA has a habit of getting things wrong. Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a former vice-chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, once declared that “for a quarter century, the CIA has been repeatedly wrong about the major political and economic questions entrusted to its analysis.” Moynihan had introduced a bill to abolish the CIA. The late Lt. Gen. William Odom, then-director of the National Security Agency (NSA), said the CIA should be disbanded.

Trump critic Michael Hayden, who served as director of both the NSA and CIA, was on a list of “former national security officials” from Republican administrations who announced they wouldn’t vote for Trump. He was once photographed at a gala with former CIA and NSA analyst Edward Snowden, who stole and released classified information and is now living in Russia. Hayden can’t be faulted personally for that betrayal. But Snowden and other spy cases have to be considered when judging the reliability of products from the intelligence community, especially when they are transmitted anonymously through the press.

Under the headline, “CIA Judgment On Russia Built On Swell Of Evidence,” The New York Times reports that “many believe” there is “overwhelming circumstantial evidence” that the Russians tried to help Trump. The paper said “the conclusion that Moscow ran an operation to help install the next president is one of the most consequential analyses by American spy agencies in years.”

Such analyses can mean nothing and can, in fact, divert the attention of elected officials from the truth. Trump calls the verdict on alleged Russian involvement in the election “ridiculous.” It would not be the first ridiculous work product from the intelligence community. The CIA failed to predict the Soviet “collapse,” and then mistakenly assumed the collapse was real and not a strategic deception.

It is significant that The Washington Post, owned by Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos, broke the story about the CIA allegedly concluding that the Russians had somehow meddled in the U.S. elections by hacking into Democratic Party computers. The CIA has a $600 million contractwith Amazon Web Services.

Former Post publisher Katharine Graham reportedly gave a speech in 1988 at the CIA headquarters, where she said, “We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things that the general public does not need to know and shouldn’t. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows.”

If this was the case under Graham, the previous owner of the Post, how likely is it that such a relationship continues under an owner of a company that does business with the CIA?

Interestingly, Amazon CEO Bezos plans to attend President-elect Donald Trump’s meeting of tech-industry executives this Wednesday in New York. Perhaps Trump will ask Bezos whether the Post is being manipulated by political partisans in the Intelligence Community.

Trump has tweeted, “Can you imagine if the election results were the opposite and WE tried to play the Russia/CIA card. It would be called conspiracy theory!” Or “fake news.”

In response to the CIA’s reported findings, the Trump transition office raised the matter of another mistake: “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.”

The discredited analysis concluding that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is most closely associated with former CIA director George Tenet. A Clinton holdover, Tenet had told President George W. Bush that finding WMD was a “slam dunk.” He was photographedgiving an award to then-DIA intelligence analyst Ana Montes, who turned out to be a Castro spy. Again, Tenet is not personally responsible for this betrayal. But it is one of many spy cases that have corrupted the Intelligence Community.

President Bush’s problem was that he failed to clean house in the Intelligence Community before the war.

After he takes office, Trump should immediately clean house in the CIA and other intelligence agencies. But it may be the case that the charges being directed against him at the present time are designed to prevent just that. If Trump cleans house, he will be accused in the press of trying to purge intelligence officials with evidence of a Russian plot to elect Trump!

The American people have been saddled with an Intelligence Community that is full of what are called “insider spies.” The situation is so bad that a special paper has been published about a novel new way to deal with traitors. The idea is to provide a “safe refuge” and a secret process of “reconciliation” for them without threatening long prison terms or the death penalty. In this manner, the American people would hear nothing about spies being arrested and the damage they have done.

We know that the media picked sides in the presidential contest. Now we are seeing more evidence of how the CIA picked sides, to the point of engaging in what is an obvious effort to bring down the Trump presidency even before it begins.

Cliff Kincaid

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.

12/13/16

Elizabeth Warren speaks out against president-elect Donald Trump at terror-linked Boston mosque

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

Senator Elizabeth Warren addressing Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center December 11, 2016 via Facebook

“I must say I am really discouraged by the people he’s bringing into his administration.  He starts with someone like Steve Bannon, who celebrates white supremacy.” -Senator Elizabeth Warren, Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, December 11, 2016

Imagine if a prominent mayor and senator spoke at an organization founded by white supremacists convicted of plotting to murder [name religious or ethnic group here]. Imagine that the organization also happened to have prior members who murdered innocent people in the name of white supremacy and yet additional members who were serving prison sentences for their roles in various plots to hurt [name religious or ethnic group here].

Would there be questions?

But there is precious little discussion in the mainstream media about the attendance of Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh at the terror-linked Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center on Sunday night at an event sponsored by the Greater Boston Interfaith Organization.

Massachusetts U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh “joined a crowd of more than 2,000 people at Boston’s largest mosque on Sunday night for a rousing conversation about diversity and solidarity as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take over the White House.” Photo via JIM DAVIS/GLOBE STAFF

The event was evidently organized to publicly distort the intentions of President-Elect Donald Trump. “For those feeling disenfranchised by the election last month of President-elect Donald Trump,” reported CBS Boston, “the goal was to come together and heal.”

Speakers such as Senator Elizabeth Warren parroted the blatant lies about 1.) an uptick of “hate crimes” since Donald Trump’s election and 2.) the #FakeNews about Trump proposing a so-called “National Muslim Registry.”

Both of these allegations are verifiably false.

And there is the minor detail that the Islamic Society of Boston has ties to numerous Islamic terrorists.

As reported at the NY Post by Paul Sperry in September, 2014, the most famous members of the Islamic Society were Boston Bombers Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his brother Dzhokhar.

Other worshipers at the Islamic Society of Boston have included:

  •  Abdurahman Alamoudi, the mosque’s founder and first president, who in 2004 was sentenced to 23 years in prison for plotting terrorism. In 2005, the Treasury Department issued a statement saying Alamoudi raised money for al Qaeda in the US.
  •  Aafia Siddiqui, an MIT scientist-turned-al Qaeda agent, who in 2010 was sentenced to 86 years in prison for planning a New York chemical attack. Known as “Lady al Qaeda,” she is related to 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. ISIS has tried to trade her release for journalist hostages.
  •  Tarek Mehanna, who in 2012 got 17 years in prison for conspiring to use automatic weapons to murder shoppers in a suburban Boston mall.
  • Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a mosque trustee and Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader banned from the US after issuing a fatwa that called for the killing of US soldiers.
  • Jamal Badawi, another former trustee who in 2007 was named an unindicted co-conspirator in a plan to funnel more than $12 million to Palestinian suicide bombers.
  • Ahmad Abousamra, …a “top propagandist for ISIS” whose father “sat on the board of directors of the Muslim organization that runs the mosque.”

Image via Facebook

Sperry points out that “investigators found a mosque prayer card for [ Tarek] Mehanna tucked in a Russian dictionary in Tsarnaev’s Cambridge apartment.”

Patrick Poole of PJ Media wrote that the mosque’s founder and first president Abdurahman Alamoudi “was tasked with founding and developing the Defense Department’s first-ever Muslim chaplain program. Alamoudi himself handpicked the Pentagon’s Muslim chaplain corps.”

Abdurahman Alamoudi with Al Gore, Bill Clinton

One of the trainers of the chaplains was Anwar Al-Awlaki, (aka Anwar al-Aulaqi) who influenced the Fort Hood terrorist Nidal Malik Hasan, the “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, San Bernadino terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, Tennessee Navy terrorist Mohammod Youssuf Abdulazeez, the Tsarnaev brothers and Ahmad Khan Rahami, the radical terrorist “accused of planting a bomb that injured two dozen people in New York’s Chelsea neighborhood….”

Abdurahman Alamoudi with George Bush

Al-Awlaki “was also said to inspire would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad” and preached at the mosques attended by 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Hani Hanjour. As reported at Fox News, the three hijackers “were all onboard Flight 77 that slammed into the Pentagon.”

But these minor details are not mentioned in news coverage of the event, described at the local WBUR news outlet as “a rousing conversation about diversity and solidarity as President-Elect Donald Trump prepares to take over the White House.” The article continues with the #FakeNews that President-Elect Donald Trump supports “the idea of a national Muslim registry.”

During her speech, Elizabeth Warren warned against “bigotry:”

“We’re here to stand against bigotry in all of it’s forms. Yes. These are challenging times and many people are afraid. Since the election, hate crimes have been on the rise. Attacks on religious and racial groups have sky-rocketed. And now is a time when we must be willing to say, loud and clear, ‘there is no room for bigotry anywhere in the United States of America.’ None. Let us be clear, let us say it as many times as we need to. An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. And we will fight back against discrimination whenever and wherever it occurs. We will fight back calmly, we will fight back deliberately, and we will fight back with absolute resolution.”

These words would be inspirational if they were not based on an entirely false premise, and that is that the election of Donald Trump has empowered racist white Americans to commit hate crimes. It is a lie reminiscent of that which fuels the “Black Lives Matter” movement, similarly based on the entirely false premise that white police officers are indiscriminately murdering black Americans.

It should be noted that several prominent citizens published an open letter to Senator Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Martin Walsh expressing concerns about their appearance at a terror-linked mosque. But it went ignored.

Watch the entire event here: