The Main Stream Media Works for the Left

[vector7]

Fox News Analyst and Clinton Operative, Douglas E. Schoen, Accepted Millions of Dollars to Agitate for War with Russia

September 9, 2016 By Mike Cernovich 59 Comments

In a remarkable conflict-of-interest, Fox News analyst and former Clinton operative Douglas E. Schoen has failed to disclosed to readers that he’s been paid millions of dollars from Ukrainian agents to incite a war between the United States and Russia. Before inciting war with Russia, Schoen worked for Bill Clinton and brokered meeting (for $40,000 a month) between then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and billionaire oligarchs.

This shocking story reveals an entangled web of foreign money, propaganda, and a complete lack of ethics and transparency at Fox News.


Douglas E. Schoen has been paid millions of dollars by Victor Pinchuk, Ukranian oligarch, former member of Ukrainian parliament, and George Soros confederate.
Amy Chozik of the New York Times wrote about Schoen’s connections with Victor Pinchuk. In “Trade Dispute Centers on Ukrainian Executive With Ties to Clintons,” Chozik reveals:

Mr. Schoen had been on a $40,000-per-month retainer as an adviser to Mr. Pinchuk since 2000. In 2011, Mr. Schoen, who had never previously done any lobbying, registered as a lobbyist for him to set up meetings with Washington officials to discuss the political crisis in Ukraine.

Pinchuk was a member of Ukrainian parliament from 1998 to 2006, and thus Schoen was paid $40,000 a month by a foreign government while he himself had close Clinton ties.
Schoen began as an errand boy for Pinchuk, doing run-of-the-mill corruption like using his access to the Clinton family to arrange meetings.

Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton have built a sprawling network of powerful friends around the globe, one that could aid Mrs. Clinton’s chances were she to seek the presidency. But those relationships often come with intersecting interests and political complications; few people illustrate that more vividly than the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk.
A steel magnate and major contributor to the former president’s foundation, Mr. Pinchuk was in frequent contact with Mrs. Clinton’s State Department, at meetings arranged by a Clinton political operative turned lobbyist, Douglas E. Schoen.

Schoen has moved beyond “Clinton Cash” style corruption and into agitating for a war between the United States and Russia.

Americans who lobby for foreign governments are required to register as Foreign Agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The Department of Justice makes these reports, along with financial disclosures, available.
Nevertheless Fox News does not require its analysts to disclose these ties.
Schoen’s bio is for all to see on Fox News (Archive). Notice what is missing. His ties to Pinchuk go unsaid.
Fox News does not require its analysts and guest to disclose their lobbying ties.

According to the report dated Dec. 31, 2011, Schoen began receiving semi-annual payments of $40,000.

These payments of $80,000 a year continued every year according to the FARA reports.
Links to reports:

• https://www.fara.gov/reports/FARA_SAR_12312011.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/SAR_JUNE_2012.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/SAR_DEC_2012.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/SAR_JUNE_2013.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/FARA_DEC_2013.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/FARA_JUN_2014.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/FARA_DEC_2014.pdf
• https://www.fara.gov/reports/FARA_JUN_2015.pdf

Schoen is trying to start a war between Russia and the United States.

Schoen writes about the Ukraine regularly at FoxNews.com. In one such article, “In a world of chaos, the only clear winner is Vladimir Putin,” Schoen writes:

Before Putin illegally annexed Crimea, Clinton went to Yalta and warned the Russians against aggression. The Russians came anyway. Since then, she has scarcely criticized the administration for its refusal to meaningfully aid an increasingly desperate Ukraine.

His article continues:

Putin has a clear strategy that has propelled him to military victory in Crimea, and he holds strong positions in Syria and Ukraine. He is on a mission to advance Russian interests around the world and reestablish Russia as a global superpower. We are doing nothing to stop him, and our politicians have no serious plan for the future.

At the bottom of the article is Schoen’s biography. Nowhere does he mention his handsome yearly stipend nor mention the millions of dollars he received from a member of the Ukrainian parliament.

Douglas E. Schoen has served as a pollster for President Bill Clinton. He has more than 30 years experience as a pollster and political consultant. He is also a Fox News contributor and co-host of “Fox News Insiders” Sundays on Fox News Channel at 7 pm ET. He is the author of 12 books. His latest is “The Nixon Effect: How Richard Nixon’s Presidency Fundamentally Changed American Politics” (Encounter Books, February 2016). Follow Doug on Twitter @DouglasESchoen.

Schoen writes about the Ukraine often at Fox News. In “On foreign policy, Hillary Clinton leans more to the right than Donald Trump,” co-authored with Judith Miller, Schoen states:

On Russia, while Mrs. Clinton has called Putin a “bully” and has described the relationship between Washington and Moscow as “complicated,” Mr. Trump has floated the idea of establishing a new alliance with Russia, whose cooperation he says is needed to help end the six-year war in Syria, fight terrorism, and diffuse tensions. While he says that more should be done to support Ukraine, which has been battling Russia-backed separatists since Russia annexed Crimea, he has not detailed what specifically he would do to help end Russia’s occupation of Crimea and combat Russian meddling in Kiev’s internal affairs.

When you scroll to the bottom of the page, you’ll see that Schoen has neglected to admit his payments from a Ukrainian agent yet again.
A review of Schoen’s articles note a similar pattern. He does not disclose payments he is required to disclose under the Foreign Registered Agents Act.
See, “Putin Is Sponsoring Sectarian Violence in Ukraine” by Schoen, a NewsMax article taking a strong anti-Russia, pro-Ukraine stance:

We can only hope that Obama changes his mind and chooses to defend the global values that the United States and its allies stand for. But if he does not, then he should consider that while America stands idly by, Putin is sponsoring sectarian violence that is claiming the lives of hundreds of Ukrainians and could easily claim the lives of hundreds more.

Schoen has made millions of dollars advocating for war with Russia.
An informal survey of Cernovich readers reveals that undisclosed financial conflicts of interest are indeed newsworthy.

If a Fox News analyst received $80,000 a year from a foreign government, should this payment be disclosed to readers and viewers?
— Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) September 10, 2016

According to Chozik, Schoen was earning $40,000 a month advocating on behalf of Ukraine. Recent reports suggest he may “only” be earning $80,000 a year, although it’s startling that Fox News has not disclosed these connections to readers.

Foreign money controls U.S. media.
Even Fox News is on the take.

Until Fox News and all media outlets require their guests to disclose financial conflicts of interest, you must assume everything you read or hear was bought and paid for.
The mainstream media is dead. There are almost no real journalists left. Even analysts at Fox News are nothing more than paid mouth pieces of oligarchs and billionaires.
Some like myself are crowd-funding the news. You can support honest journalism, which is not funded by foreign governments, by clicking here.

[vector7]

Hillary To Mainstream Media: KILL THE INTERNET POLLS!
September 28, 2016
Max Insider



What you see up there is a combined image of virtually every internet-poll that took place after the first presidential debate. At the top are Time, CNBC, and Fortune. As you can see, Donald Trump handily won all of them. The polls represent millions of users, they are not "controlled" or "adjusted" the same way that "professional polls" (kind of like "professional wrestling") are. You go, you vote, that's it.

If someone tries to game the system and vote twice? Well, sure--but you're up against all the other internet users who could be doing the same thing. In other words, it's a real poll the way real people really understand polling. They were conclusive.

As Bill Mitchell pointed out on Twitter, this is a real measure and it showed a real lead.


RealTrueNews: What can you tell us?

Source in Hillary-World: It's gotten a LOT tighter with security. We don't even mostly even get to see her--but she's ****ing MAD. It's scary. They're losing it and they're doing witch-hunts. It's not going to be long before someone comes after me--proof or not.

RTN: What did you want to tell us about the polling?

SHW: They're shutting them down. All the ones they can. Time, Politico I think, everyone they can beg, buy, or threaten. They want no more of that shit. That's the message. People were dispatch. There were a bunch of calls. No more Internet polling.

They even went after Hannity on Fox. They've got the goods on someone there. They're demanding everyone bend the knee and dump the snap polls. Approved outfits only.

RTN: Who is approved?

SHW: PPP, obviously. I don't know. There's a list. They're working the others. Like I said, they went compartmentalized. They knew they were leaking so everything is like a cell now. I mean, I hear things. People talk. There's gonna be some ship-jumping and folks are scared. So, yeah. They said no more internet polls and they told everyone to spread the word about think-piece-shit.

RTN: Meaning what?

SHW: Everyone has to write an article about how Internet polling is bullshit and push it hard. It's like a homework assignment. They had all these specific bullet points. The deal is Hillary Won. Period. No interference.

RTN: Figures. Can you stay safe?

SHW: I dunno man. I dunno. It's getting dark over here. I mean the mood and shit. I might need to get out and lay low.

RTN: We'll do what we can from here.

SHW: Thanks.

http://www.realtruenews.org/single-p...INTERNET-POLLS

David Brock, head of Media Matters, giving the orders in the below conversation.

Inside Correct the Record: Post-Debate PLOT!

September 27, 2016

Max Insider



Correct the Record is a Hillary-campaign super-pac that is dedicated to "fighting the lies" on the Internet. What it is, is a battalion of paid trolls whose job it is to disrupt, demoralize, and defame any Trump supporters and message boards. They communicate using a secure messaging software called "slack" pictured above.

We were able to get some monitoring software onto a junior analyst's laptop to take a look inside the slack-channel where they were doing work. What we found was startling. In the fall-out from last night's debate, they are beginning a new campaign of targeted harassment (or worse) against the "ring leaders" of the decentralized online Trump movement.

Without a traditional campaign infrastructure to target, it appears they have been reduced to going after the "most influential voices" in the online debate. What exactly this means, we're not sure (the comment at the end of the conversation wasn't good though). Below are the screen shots and the full transcript of today's conversation.

Begin Transcript
ekim [5:52 AM]

ekim [5:52 AM]
set the channel purpose: clean up this mes

brock [5:52 AM]
joined post-debate from an invitation by @ekim

brock [5:53 AM]
go round up the others. i need some coffee.

ekim [5:53 AM]
will do

efink [5:54 AM]
mother****er.

brock [5:54 AM]
good morning to u to fink.

efink [5:55 AM]
the only good thing about it was that whoever that was, she looked pretty good. how tf did they do that?

brock [5:56 AM]
i can't talk. very hush hush. still, we've lost every online poll and we need to get tough here. get this under control.

[5:56]
still, i hope we put the sick thing to bed.

[5:56]
i hope.

efink [5:57 AM]
me 2. do i have time for coffee?

brock [5:57 AM]
we're all gonna need a lot of coffee.

ekim [5:58 AM]
shaw is on his way sir.

[5:59]
i don't see what's so bad. She looked really healthy! I thought she did GREAT!

efink [5:59 AM]
she was scoring 3 on AMTS a couple of weeks ago and 22 on mmse. Yeah, whoever that was was normal.

[6:00]
but the telemetry sucks. look at all the snap onlines: we're losing 100%

[6:00]
romney v obama numbers

ekim [6:01 AM]
but those don't mean anything

efink [6:01 AM]
it means they're enthusiastic. organized. if they can swarm a poll whats to stop them swarming a voting booth?

[6:01]
it also creates a counter-nar. the free press will sniff it. we have to stop the bleeding.

ekim [6:01 AM]
k

efink [6:02 AM]
don't worry. we have something. GET SHAW OUT OF BED.

[6:02]
i'm going for coffee.

cshaw [6:05 AM]
hello!

[6:06]
hi Liz.

[6:06]
I see we're not happy :disappointed:

brock [6:06 AM]
Not at all.

cshaw [6:06 AM]
I read the round-up. It looked good?

brock [6:07 AM]
the round up my burning ass. I'm talking about the real world. Trump made her look like a girl. Today we hit back. We hit back hard.

[6:07]
Fink?

efink [6:07 AM]
one sec.

[6:10]
okay. guys, this is 18-2381 stuff. Got it?

cshaw [6:10 AM]
yes

ekim [6:10 AM]
yes sir.

efink [6:11 AM]
alright. we need to move beyond the disruption scripts and down-voting. we need to start hurting people and that's what this is about. This is about winning because we'll never get a chance at this again. everything is justified. David?

brock [6:11 AM]
dramatic.

[6:13]
****--okay. so the Trump team is an emergent order. thirty million little chan and reddit *******s that bump around and then congeal to vote in a poll or push a meme or make a hashtag trend or whatever. This is new. It isn't like fighting a centrally organized campaign.

[6:13]
It's more like fighting a disease.

[6:14]
So what we need to do is break the pattern. The usual means isn't working. Trump's too charismatic. Morale is too high. This is an army of chaos folks.

[6:14]
so we have full clearance. Word of God.

[6:15]
Fink--let's do this. I have a plane to catch.

efink [6:16 AM]
uploaded and commented on an image: foxacid.jpg
1 Comment
FOXACID





ekim [6:16 AM]
Ew.

cshaw [6:16 AM]
i like it! wtf is it??

efink [6:17 AM]
This is manna from heaven, kids.

[6:18]
We have the use of an NSA intrusion package. We are going to find the thought leaders. the meme-generators. the ****-posters. I need a target analysis for reddit, twitter, and the chans by tomorrow 5 PM.

[6:18]
You will monitor, identify, and using the FA software set we have, identify/dox.

cshaw [6:18 AM]
that will dox them??

efink [6:20 AM]
It will man-on-the-side for the anon boards and intercept traffic. We can use that for IP addresses and loading tracking software and magic lantern onto their devices. Once we have them compromised

[6:20]
David? How many do we need?

brock [6:21 AM]
I want 150 from 4chan, whatever you can get from 8. I want 1000 top reddit drivers exposed and I want content analysis for their posts. I want the people who are really driving their narrative.

[6:22]
I need all that in a packet by tomorrow afternoon with lexical analysis, proof of compromise. I want clips of memes. I want to up-vote patterns. All this has to be inside the US too. We can't use externals.

cshaw [6:23 AM]
It won't work outside the US?

efink [6:23 AM]
It works fine outside the us you idiot. That's NSA stuff.

brock [6:24 AM]
WE don't work outside the US. Do you think this is ****ing bean-bag?

[6:24]
We are going to disrupt them before this **** goes any further.

[6:24]
if they don't have leaders, we're going to get their thought leaders.





cshaw [6:24 AM]
like pajama boy!

brock [6:25 AM]
I AM NOT N THE MOOD cshaw

cshaw [6:25 AM]
sorry

efink [6:26 AM]
just get us the target profiles. Hit the numbers. Give us a matrix for each of them. Okay? PII, influence grid, recent activity, Q-rate. Like that.

[6:26]
You know what to do.

cshaw [6:26 AM]
Yes sir.

ekim [6:26 AM]
What are we going to do with that?

brock [6:27 AM]
dof u really want tio ****ing know, kim?

ekim [6:27 AM]
i'm good.

brock [6:28 AM]
u better be. I am going to get a plane. You will be up ALL NIGHT. Keep the lab LOCKED. Fink bring in pizza or whatever to keep the kids going.

[6:28]
I am out.

cshaw [6:28 AM]
does it have to be We the Pizza?

efink [6:29 AM]
Brock LIKES WtP. What do you want?

ekim [6:29 AM]
Sushi. Sushi would be nice.

efink [6:30 AM]
what do you think this is, the Trump campaign. We're getting pizza from We.

[6:30]
Get those files together.

ekim [6:30 AM]
I'm on it. Do you know what brock is going to do with them? I do kind of want to know, sir.

efink [6:31 AM]
google Seth Rich and shut up about it.

cshaw [6:31 AM]
OOg.

[6:32]
well, they are deplorable. idk. I think we should have done this a long time ago.

efink [6:32 AM]
get working kids. I'll check back in a couple. Have something for Brock before he hits the ground. k?

ekim [6:33 AM]
I'm sick of We the Pizza.

cshaw [6:33 AM]
me2.

[6:33]


ekim [6:33 AM]




Rich Seth is the recently deceased (murdered) whistle-blower who gave information to Wikileaks. FOXACID is NSA software designed to compromise enemy systems. We think 'word of god' and 'heaven' are code for Obama and the White House.

If you know anyone who might be a target of this initiative, please let them know to be careful.




http://www.realtruenews.org/single-p...st-Debate-PLOT

I searched "foxacid.jpg" here's what came up...(I've embedded the links on the titles)

NSA FOXACID servers used to drive the hack into target

How the NSA Attacks Tor/Firefox Users With QUANTUM and FOXACID

That "magic lantern" software they refer to is this... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Lantern_(software


----------------------------------------

Doesn't matter because the MSMedia is in the tank for every Leftist Democrat.

CNN Admits to Being "the Biggest Supporters" of Hillary Clinton's Campaign

Published on Aug 4, 2016
CNN's Chris Cuomo and Brooke Baldwin ADMIT on live television that they ARE biased!

Chris Cuomo: "We couldn't help her anymore than we have. You know, she's just got a free ride so far from the media and we're the biggest ones promoting her campaign."

CNN Anchors Hyperventilate After Crowd Chants ‘CNN Sucks’ At Trump Rally

By Kristine Marsh | October 11, 2016 | 11:20 AM EDT

Tuesday morning’s CNN New Day ended the first hour of the show criticizing Donald Trump for attacking the media, which isn’t unusual but then the conversation quickly turned into what some may call an overreaction.



CNN began by playing a clip of a Donald Trump rally yesterday where the crowd began chanting, “CNN sucks” repeatedly. The CNN panel didn’t like that one bit and blamed Trump for not telling the crowd to quit it. Hosts Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota, along with guests Brian Stelter and Bill Carter suggested that Trump was endangering reporters' lives, painting a nightmare scenario of Trump supporters violently attacking reporters. “I’m telling you, something is going to happen.

Something is going to happen,” Cuomo solemnly warned.

After playing the short video clip, Cuomo, Camerota, Carter and Stelter wonder aloud what sinister outcome could arise from this display. Cuomo began by calling it “very high on the list of irresponsible things the guy has done,” blasting Trump for not thinking “about the implications to anybody other than himself.” Cuomo whined, “Have you ever heard of anybody in politics, let alone a presidential nominee, doing anything like this to the fourth estate?”

Stelter agreed this was “much, much worse than what we’ve seen in the past,” while Bill Carter added that there was “a mob mentality now at stake.” “These people are yelling and shouting and threatening reporters in a way I've never seen,” he stated.

Alisyn Camerota remarked that at rallies crowd members would “yell at” reporters and make “vulgar gestures at them.”

“[A]nd Trump encourages it,” Stelter began to say. “He needs to help bring the temperature down. Instead, he keeps raising the temperature by lying to them,” he added.

Cuomo then warned that “something is going to happen” to a reporter at a Trump rally because of the increased criticism of the media.

CUOMO: I dealt with that at the RNC. I get the passion. But a politician has a responsibility. You shape the passion of people. I don't mean to call supporters sheep. I respect people who want to back politicians. Trust me. But he makes them angry. Then instead of saying things to you, they want to do things to you. I'm telling you, something is going to happen. Something is going to happen.

Cuomo added that he used to joke that he would get arrested or attacked at Trump rally but now he fears it may be a reality.

CUOMO: It started as a joke. I used to joke, Trump is going to get me arrested some day. Somebody is going to say something in his stead, and I'm going to wind up getting arrested. Now it's not a joke anymore. I got to walk around with Camerota 24/7. [laughs]

CAMEROTA: Yeah, I protect him.



Funnily enough, at another Trump rally Monday night that’s theme was criticizing CNN’s “pro-Clinton bias,” an anti-Trump protester was actually arrested for spitting in a Trump supporter’s face.

Trump Big Winner Over Three Opponents

By J. Marsolo

October 10, 2016



Trump was smart to trust his instinct to fight and not follow the advice of all the pundits who said he had to grovel and not bring up the Bubba card. Trump brought four of Bill’s victims who were attacked and smeared by Hillary as part of the cover-up of “bimbo eruptions”. Trump also brought the woman who was the 12-year-old rape victim of a 41-year-old man represented by Hillary, who laughed about how she got the rape charge reduced.

The presence of the women victims forced Hillary’s cheerleaders, the MSM, to acknowledge that these were victims of rape and sexual harassment, not “infidelities”, and that these were real people, not abstractions.

It also forced Hillary to hesitate and act defensively. Bill did not look too well. The MSM wanted to talk about the Billy Bush (cousin of Jeb and GWB) tape but Trump took control by bringing Clinton’s victims to the debate, and by going on the attack about Hillary’s record. It was clear that Hillary is not used to being challenged vigorously.

Trump apologized, but then went on the attack about Bill abusing women and Hillary abusing the women victims. This shook Hillary. She turned defensive and repeated her canned lines. Trump got to her when he said he would appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate her emails scandal, and that she would be in jail if he was in charge.

Finally, we saw a Republican nominee who fights to win, and trusted his instincts instead of the advice of those who were never in the ring. We had Romney, who refused to challenge Candy Crowley when she stepped in to help Obama on Benghazi. We had McCain, who refused to use the Reverend Wright issue and even attacked his own supporters for using the name Barack Hussein Obama.

The moderators were the usual MSM types that interrupted and argued with Trump. Trump did not back off, challenging both Raddatz and Cooper about why they interrupted him but not Hillary, and asking them why they did not ask Hillary about the emails.

The bottom line is that Trump took control by bringing Clinton’s victims to the debate so that everyone could see that there are actual victims of Bill and Hillary.

Trump apologized for his crude language, but did not grovel. He set the tone and tempo, and clearly won against his three opponents.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...opponents.html

CNN (Clinton News Network) rigged the Trump/Hillary debate focus group, instructed participants on what to say!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kukUmYqIhIE

Christiane Amanpour Brags About Bias: ‘I Insist on Being Truthful, Not Neutral’

We’ve noticed!

10.13.2016
News
Trey Sanchez

CNN international correspondent Christiane Amanpour isn’t ashamed to brag about her bias as a journalist. The veteran reporter released a video on Thursday declaring herself to be “truthful, not neutral.”

“I learned a long time ago when I was first confronted with outrageous behavior in places like the Balkans when one side was slaughtering another because of its ethnic and religious definition,” Amanpour said. “I learned that as a journalist, I could not be morally equivalent and nor could I present false factual equivalence. I insist on being truthful, not neutral.”

Here’s the video:

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/chri...ul-not-neutral

TruthRevolt has often featured Amanpour’s “not neutral-ness.” During her coverage of Nelson Mandela’s memorial in South Africa in 2013, Amanpour said, “I honestly can’t help but think right now about Israel and the Palestinians.”

“Benjamin Netanyahu is under so much pressure these days and probably feels to a great extent his country is isolated in the same way that apartheid South Africa was isolated,” she added.

That's not neutral, nor truthful, as she failed to mention how all races and faiths in Israel have the same rights and many prime ministers including Netanyahu have called for a Palestinian state, yet, not one Palestinian has ever called for the recognition of the Jewish State.

Amanpour wasn’t “truthful” when reporting on Brexit when she said it was “white identity” and “xenophobia,” not democracy, that was behind Britain’s vote to exit the European Union.

Nor was Amanpour being “truthful” when she and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman figured out that the biggest problem in America is the “large fraction” of racists who support Donald Trump.

Amanpour’s audience was compelled to comment on her admission via Facebook:

“CNN full of propaganda and lies! The coverage of the Balkan conflict was one big fat lie for Nato and there so called new world order interests just like the Arab spring and Ukraine! What a world we live in !!!”

“Really now you are bragging about being biased? They should teach ethics to journalists.”

“You ought to be BOTH. Journalism is completely dead as a form of factual information. Stop telling us WHAT to think. That is not your job.”

“You are definitely not truthful or neutral !!!!!!!”

But she has her fans, too:

“Ms. Amanpour, thank you for your dedication to REAL journalism.”

“you are the Best Christiane, always watch you almost every day... good Job.”

Apparently your definition of "REAL journalism" depends on whether or not Amanpour's "neutrality" aligns with your bias.

[vector7]

Sheriff David Clarke: Dear Media, only liberals can call for a political revolution?

It’s incredible that our institutions of gov, WH, Congress, DOJ, and big media are corrupt & all we do is bitch. Pitchforks and torches time pic.twitter.com/8G5G0daGVN
— David A. Clarke, Jr. (@SheriffClarke) October 15, 2016
[/INDENT][/INDENT]Sometimes the media makes my point for me.

On Saturday October 15, I tweeted the above image and said it’s “pitchforks and torches time” over the incredible collusion that our branches of government (plus journalists) have engaged in over the past few years.

Together, they have done unimaginable things to American citizens — the IRS has targeted patriotic citizens for audits, the DOJ under Attorney General Eric Holder thumbed his nose at Congress’ lawful order to turn over papers relative to the botched Fast and Furious gun smuggling investigation that led to one of the guns ending up with Mexican drug lords and being used to kill Border agent Brian Terry and thereby becoming the only Attorney General in United States history to be held in contempt of Congress. His successor Loretta Lynch has decided to let Hillary Clinton get off scot-free, after she cowardly dumps the decision onto FBI Director James Comey who ignores the plethora of evidence to indict and after Lynch meets secretly with Bill Clinton days before the decision. Lynch played ignorant about the meeting for days before finally acknowledging the truth that her meeting the targets husband secretly was improper. She should have been disbarred over that. Her decision allows Mrs. Clinton to lie her way almost to the Oval Office.

And what have journalists done over the past eight years? I use the term “journalist” loosely. Glenn Reynolds from Instapundit says to think of them as “Democratic operatives with bylines” to get closer to the truth. The media has done NOTHING but look the other way. Plus, Wikileaks emails show the collusion between the Clinton campaign as written about in the Observer Politics.com.

“She is going to read me the story later today off the record to further assure me,” Clinton campaign Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri wrote in an email to Podesta and other staff about New York Times‘ Maggie Haberman coordinating directly with the campaign to provide Clinton with favorable coverage.

Now Big Media is trying to once again distract the American people from all of the corruption going on in the Oval Office and in Mrs. Bill Clinton’s campaign by pointing at the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s office. Julian Assange and Wikileaks must be envious. They can’t get Big Media to cover Clinton corruption. Maybe they should have started each leak with the phrase, “Pitchfork and Torches Time in America” and then maybe they could get the media’s attention. (Interestingly, I’ve been using this language since 2015, so it’s more than a coincidence that they are only now bringing it up… after I’ve aligned myself with Donald Trump and have been eviscerating Mrs. Bill Clinton.)

When I tweeted the above image, I meant it. I wasn’t speaking in code. It’s time to run those corrupt politicians out of Washington DC and back to whatever crevices they crawled from. It’s time to put Mrs. Bill Clinton behind bars, where she belongs. And it’s time that the DOJ learns what the “J” stands for in their name.

Of course, that’s not what the “Democratic operatives with bylines” understood when they saw my tweet. They immediately reported that I was trying to “incite violence” — and unbecoming habit for a law enforcement official. They were so desperate to make something of it, they contacted the NRA and probably the Trump campaign to get them to disavow me.)

Here’s what I — and the American people — know… but for the sake of the media, let me spell it out for you.

First of all if you came here expecting me to walk that statement back or ask for a do-over, you are going to be disappointed. I am not your typical conservative. I stand and fight for what I believe in and I play smash-mouth politics. Big Media is not used to that from many conservatives.

When Bernie Sanders called for a revolution almost daily during the Democrat primary, no one in the media blinked an eye. Every sane person knew what he was talking about. (And, by the way, the guy is a socialist — becoming a socialist is like committing “death by government.” The body count from socialism easily exceeds 100 million.) The media yawned when Bernie cried for a “revolution.”

Big Media should go back and read the Declaration of Independence going over the part that reads, “…that mankind are more disposed to suffer while Evils are insufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed,” or as Judge Robert Bork said in his book Slouching Toward Gomorrah: Modern liberalism and America decline, the tendency is for people to complain (bitch) for a while and then ultimately acquiesce and comply.

That speaks to that part of my tweet that says, all we do is bitch. The Founders further stated in the Declaration…it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government and to provide new guards for their future Security. It was pitchfork and torches time in America. If Big Media thinks that the Declaration of Independence is no longer relevant let me remind them that the late, great Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia cited the Declaration of Independence frequently in his opinions.

Yet, here I come — after 38 years of law enforcement and suddenly Big Media gets all weepy. They said I was trying to incite violence, even though my entire career has been geared toward upholding the U.S. Constitution along with law and order.

I don’t buy their false outrage. The Guardian was one of the media outlets that had to pass the smelling salts. So writer Lois Beckett went to a scholar at the UCLA to get his opinion.

Eugene Volokh, a Libertarian second amendment scholar at the University of California Los Angeles school of law, said Clarke’s remarks were clearly intended to be figurative.

“What do you think Sheriff Clarke is trying to get people to do? Is he trying to get them to spear someone with a pitchfork and burn down their house, or is he trying to motivate someone to vote for Trump or support conservative values? It seems to be quite clearly the latter,” he said.

Guess the Guardian didn’t get what they wanted — and instead found someone who had common sense.

When President Obama said at a fundraiser in 2008 (in reference to dealing with Republicans) that if they bring a knife, we’ll bring a gun. I don’t recall Big Media being appalled at that reference and asking if Obama was inciting violence.

Nor did I hear CBS, ABCNews, CNN or the Guardian U.S. feign shock about inciting violence when disgraced Maryland State Attorney Marilyn Mosby repeated the rally cry of rioters, “No Justice, No Peace,” in a national news conference announcing the indictment of 6 Baltimore Police officers.

I’ve done nothing in 38 years of law enforcement to make any person believe that I incite violence, unless you believe that the right of self-defense which I advocate for, is inciting violence which this same media accused me of doing several years ago. Yet here goes the liberal, tolerant media giving liberals a pass while making plastering headlines across America that a black man’s conservative political rhetoric is actually violent.

Please. I’m not buying it, and the American people aren’t buying it.

A significant and growing number of Americans sense that their federal government no longer belongs to the people, nor does it represent them and that our Constitutional Republic has been replaced by an Administrative State.

That is who my tweet was directed at. I encourage them to join me in pushing back against the corruption that has infected our institutions of government. I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, not the pretended legislation of federal bureaucracies that have no law making authority under the Constitution. That Constitution is being shredded with the aid of Big Media as I write. I guess that makes me old school. Fine. I haven’t forgotten that I report to the people, not Big Media.

Yes, like the Founding Fathers knew and had the courage to say, it is pitchfork and torches time in America.

SOURCE: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davidcl...al-revolution/

[vector7]

Katie Couric working with Clinton campaign - John Podesta email dump at Wikileaks.
wikileaks ^ | Katie Couric
Posted on 10/18/2016, 9:08:19 PM by fuzzylogic

...I wanted to write you about some of the metrics that we are getting and let you know through placement on Facebook we can guarantee 1.5 million views in addition to Yahoo engagement which has been close to 1 million for my political interviews. I'd also like to do a separate piece of business through social media along the lines of "10 things you don't know about Hillary Clinton" that would showcase her personality and has a lot of viral potential.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3482174/posts

[vector7]

Twitter Mark Zuckerberg is working directly with Hillary, Saudi Prince (Hillary's Handler) & Merk...
Twitter ^ | Oct 18 2016 | Amy Mek
Posted on 10/18/2016, 8:32:29 PM by grey_whiskers




(Full Source of Wikileaks email):

Re: in case you have time

From:john.podesta@gmail.com
To: sheryl@fb.com
Date: 2015-08-03 21:33
Subject: Re: in case you have time

Sheryl,
Happy to do. My schedule is a little squeezed on this trip probably my best
times are Wednesday evening or late afternoon Thursday, but I'm back often
and could get on his schedule in a more reasonable way. Looking forward to
seeing you.
John
On Monday, August 3, 2015, Sheryl Sandberg wrote:
> John,
>
>
>
> I hope you are well – thinking of all of you often and following every
> move!
>
>
> > I can’t imagine you have any free time at all, but in case you do on this
> trip to the Bay area or another, wondering if you would be willing to spend
> some time with Mark Zuckerberg.
>
>
>
> Mark is meeting with people to learn more about next steps for his
> philanthropy and social action and it’s hard to imagine someone better
> placed or more experienced than you to help him. As you may know, he’s
> young and hungry to learn — always in learning mode — and is early in his
> career when it comes to his philanthropic efforts. He’s begun to think
> about whether/how he might want to shape advocacy efforts to support his
> philanthropic priorities and is particularly interested in meeting people
> who could help him understand how to move the needle on the specific public
> policy issues he cares most about. He wants to meet folks who can inform
> his understanding about effective political operations to advance public
> policy goals on social oriented objectives (like immigration, education or
> basic scientific research).
>
>
>
> In case you have time on any trip, Andrea can schedule. And if it has to
> wait until after the campaign, we will all understand.
>
>
>
> Sheryl

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3482165/posts

[vector7]

Proof It’s Rigged – Clinton Campaign Caught Sequentially Seeding Presser Questions To Compliant Media…

Posted on October 20, 2016 by sundance

How far will the U.S. media go to collude with the Clinton campaign? How corrupt is the U.S. press corp?

This research thread will answer those questions and more.

Following the debate Hillary Clinton held an “impromptu” presser with journalists aboard her campaign plane. However, if you look closely into how it’s coordinated it might just blow you away.

Watch as Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff actually instruct specific reporters on what questions to ask. It took about three different camera angles to fully identify the ruse, but when you see it, it’s rather jaw dropping:

First. Here’s the segment as broadcast on MSNBC. Pay close attention at the very beginning to Andrea Mitchell and the Clinton staffer with the suit/tie:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDA_liuy0-o


--------------------------------------------


CORRUPT FCC DIDN’T TAKE LONG TO REJECT CNN COMPLAINT 10-21-2016

I got the following email from the FCC today, roughly 24 hours after I originally filed my CNN complaint. The FCC claims they have no right to interfere with CNN’s free speech rights. Well, duh my whole point is CNN is suppressing free speech. The FCC apparently feels they can’t censor CNN when my ENTIRE POINT OF THE COMPLAINT IS CNN IS CENSORING FREE SPEECH. At any rate, besides this immediate refusal to deal with CNN censorship, we also have a culture of sexual perversion and degenerate actions within the FCC itself.

The link here tells of the total depravity of the government agency opening supporting CNN censorship. I GUESS THE FCC TYPES WERE TOO BUSY WATCHING PORNOGRAPHY AND ENGAGING IN WILD SEX ON THEIR OFFICE DESKS!
http://www.forbes.com/sites/fredcamp.../#1c4b20681703
And finally, here is the link to the local NBC TV station here in Portland, Oregon where the FCC Public Inspection Files are openly published by them. The FCC is saying they can regulate broadcast TV, but not cable TV. Now that Donald Trump has released his 100 day program, I can hope he goes after the incompetent, sex perverts now infesting the Federal Communications Commission.
http://www.kgw.com/about/fcc-public-inspection-file

FCC
To
Dm1389



Oct 21 at 10:19 AM

##- Please type your reply above this line -##
This ticket (#1276970) has been updated.

Vicky May(FCC Complaints) Oct 21, 1:19 PM EDT Hi Douglas, Thank you for your submission. The FCC does not license cable TV stations or networks. For information on starting a cable TV channel, the following website may be helpful:http://www.cablemaven.com The FCC cannot interfere with a broadcaster’s selection and presentation of material for the news and/or its commentary. The Communications Act and First Amendment to the Constitution prohibit any action by the FCC that would interfere with free speech in broadcasting. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, except when that material is obscene. As such, no further action is required by the FCC. Your complaint was closed as of today.

Dm1389 Oct 19, 4:57 PM EDT I am increasingly enraged at the blatant bias in the corporate media. CNN has been particularly biased in its news coverage. CNN is granted a license to broadcast on the assumption they are doing some public good besides just making billions of dollars in corporate profit. I want them sanctioned at a minimum. The details are in the attachment, along with the hyperlink to the story. Attachment(s) FCC CNN Complaint 10-19-2016.docx

This email is a service from FCC Complaints. Delivered by Zendesk

[1XMEMQ-Y7KQ]


Doomer Doug, a.k.a. Doug McIntosh now has a blog at www.doomerdoug.wordpress.com
My end of the world e book “Day of the Dogs” will soon be available for sale at smashwords. The url is
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/267340 It is also at the following url
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B007BRLFYU

October 19, 2016
MY FCC COMPLAINT AGAINST CNN 10-19-2016

• ECONOMICS, ELECTION 2016, ESSAYS, GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION, POLITICS, Trump
• POLITICS, USA
• 2 Comments

Of course, I expect nothing will be done about CNN’s blatant, totally biased news coverage of the 2016 election. Still, before the USA collapses into blood, fire and chaos, I will play the game until the shooting starts. Nobody will be able to say to Doomer Doug, once the bodies start to pile up and the blood flows, that he didn’t do everything in his power to prevent Civil War Two. I know we are long past the reform stage, even if Donald Trump is elected. Trump may be able to slow down the rot, but he will not be able to reverse it.
The complaint below refers to the CNN “technical glitch” that happened when a Republican Congressman mentioned the Wikileaks story. Suddenly, he was cut off. In my view this is an act of TREASON and subject to the full sanction of the FCC, and yes I am talking about the Obama Marxist FCC, but I will still play the game.

Hello,
I have become increasingly enraged by the blatant bias in the media. The last time I checked corporate media outfits, like CNN, are legally required to “provide public service,” in return for being granted a broadcast license. I also know the local TV stations are required to keep a detailed log of all their “public service” announcements. Of course, you allow them to make them at 3 am, if they even bother to do them at all. SHAME ON YOU! THE FCC has failed to require corrupt media blobs like CNN to actually provide fair, balanced and honest reporting. You
have betrayed, abandoned the American people to please the media corporations allowed, under the 1997 repeal of the media concentration laws, to become unchecked, totally corrupt and biased media cartels while the FCC did nothing.

At any rate, I am formerly filing this, although the FCC sold out nearly 20 years ago. I want CNN broadcast license pulled for cause. I want them forced to sell their assets to another group that will not be such corrupt turds.

Hell, if Trump manages to avoid having CNN steal the election from him, perhaps we can reinstate the original media anti-cartel laws the uni party gutted back in 1997.

I expect nothing from you, especially after watching the FBI destroy the rule of law with Clinton’s treason. Still, I want the #$%%% at CNN held accountable for their ongoing, blatant and TREASONOUS actions under the color of using airwaves that belong to the people!

CNN "Loses" Satellite Feed Just As Republican Congressman Mentions WikiLeaks

by Tyler Durden
Oct 19, 2016 1:30 PM

In yet another coincidentally-timed "technical glitch" at CNN, Republican Congressman Chris Collins was cut off within seconds of mentioning "WikiLeaks." Per ********, Collins joined a conversation with CNN's Chris Cuomo and immediately went on the attack against Hillary. But as soon as he utters the word "WikiLeaks" his feed is suddenly "lost."

“Two thirds of the public know that Hillary Clinton’s a liar, she can’t be trusted and now the two faces of Hillary are coming out – the fact through Wikileaks she says one thing and….”



Of course, this isn't the first time someone's video feed has been "lost" while criticizing Hillary. Back in July we noted the following example as well:



Finally, we'll leave you with this lovely clip of Larry King assuring Bill Clinton all the way back in 1992 that Ted Turner (founder of CNN) would "serve him"...and what a fantastic service he has been.

"It's crazy - Ted Turner changed the world. He's a big fan of yours. He would serve you...you know what I mean?"

[vector7]

Twitter Mark Zuckerberg is working directly with Hillary, Saudi Prince (Hillary's Handler) & Merk...
Twitter ^ | Oct 18 2016 | Amy Mek
Posted on 10/18/2016, 8:32:29 PM by grey_whiskers

---

CAUGHT: Report Confirms Facebook Wanted to Ban Trump Posts…

Team Crowder Saturday October 22 2016

It’s no secret Facebook is big on censorship (see Former Facebook Employees SPECIFICALLY NAME ‘Steven Crowder’ as Blacklisted News Site). We aren’t the only ones to have problems with their borderline retardation. Apparently a gaggle of Facebook workers tried to make Trump posts disappear because they were “offensive.” Surprise, surprise…

Facebook employees tried to have some posts by US presidential candidate Donald Trump removed from the social network. Posts such as those calling for a ban on Muslim immigration should be branded as hate speech and removed, some workers said.

Zuckerberg’s decision not to delete Trump’s posts led to complaints from employees around the world. …There was about to be a mini-mutiny of staffers who would threaten to quit after being told they could not delete the candidate’s posts.

Threatening to quit your job because someone said mean words? This is what an adult, stinky-diapered tantrum looks like. One expects this sort of fascism from a platform which suppressed conservative content repeatedly in the past. The plot twist here? Mark Zuckerberg voiced a surprisingly rational response when pressured to delete the “offending” posts…




---------------------------------------


Very strange videos at the Greensboro rally.

[vector7]

THE WIKILEAKS LIST: At Least 65 MSM Reporters Were Meeting with and/or Coordinating Offline with Top Hillary Advisors

Jim Hoft Oct 24th, 2016 11:45 am 398 Comments

A few of the “journalists” meeting offline with Hillary advisers

Thanks to Wikileaks we now know that at least 65 mainstream reporters were working closely with the Clinton campaign this election year. They were invited to top elitist dinners with Hillary Campaign Chairman John Podesta or Chief Campaign strategist Joel Benenson.

NO FOX NEWS REPORTERS MADE THE LIST!

These 65 mainstream reporters CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED:

As previously reported— At least 38 top national reporters attended a different dinner at John Podesta’s house in April 2015.

The Clinton campaign sent out invites to New York reporters in April 2015 on their off-the-record meeting on how to sell Hillary Clinton to the public.



These 38 reporters should NEVER BE TRUSTED!

Via The Intercept:




Another group of 25 mainstream reporters were invited to a dinner at Jhn Podesta’s house on April 9.

This was a completely different list of reporters!

Here is the current RSVP list to the Thursday Night (4/9) dinner at Podesta’s.

As a reminder, this is with the 25 reporters more closely following HRC (aka the future bus).

Yes
ABC – Liz Kreutz
Yes
AP – Julie Pace
Yes
AP – Ken Thomas
Yes
AP – Lisa Lerer
AURN – April Ryan
Yes
Bloomberg – Jennifer Epstein
Yes
Buzzfeed – Ruby Cramer
Yes
CBS – Steve Chagaris
Yes
CNBC – John Harwood
Yes
CNN – Dan Merica
Yes
Huffington Post – Amanda Terkel
NO (Panama)
LAT – Mike Memoli
Yes
LAT – Evan Handler
Yes
McClatchy – Anita Kumar
Yes
MSNBC – Alex Seitz-Wald
Yes
National Journal – Emily Schultheis
Yes
NBC – Mark Murray
Yes
NPR – Tamara Keith
NYT – Amy Chozik
Yes
NYT – Maggie Haberman
Yes
Politico – Annie Karni
Politico – Gabe Debenedetti
Yes
Reuters – Amanda Becker
The Hill – Amie Parnes
Yes
Washington Post – Anne Gearan
Yes
WSJ – Laura Meckler
Yes
WSJ – Peter Nicholas
Yes
WSJ – Colleen McCain Nelson

We also know that Politico’s chief political correspondent Glenn Thrush was sending the Hillary campaign articles for their review before publishing.

We know CNBC and New York Times reporter John Harwood was working with the Clinton campaign to help Hillary.

At least 65 mainstream media reporters were chummy with the Hillary campaign from the beginning.

[vector7]

BUSTED! Clinton Campaign Photoshop Rally Attendance



As if things couldn’t get any worse for the Clinton campaign, we learn they photoshop rally attendance.

Taking a page out of Star Wars, the Democrats are ‘cloning’ their supporters at one of their rallies in order to bolster the optics of the size of their events!

As Red State Watcher reports:

Hillary was only able pull in 500 people at an Orlando event. Her VP, Tim Kaine had about 30 people at another Florida rally, and abruptly canceled another.

In yet another embarrassing campaign rally turnout, former President Bill Clinton hosted 50 people at Cleveland State University. The rally could have been held in the hallways of a high school!

by Taboola

Here is a Twitter photo of the actual event:



Then through the miracle of modern technology (PhotoShop), a lackluster 50 person event turns into a ‘full house’!

Here is how the event was depicted on Facebook.



The young man circled in red is the basis. Next to him you can see the same bald man in the dark suit.

Next, you can spot the same two young women in the light blue and dark blue shirts (look for the pony tail). Then there is the same dark haired young man in the burgundy shirt; next to the same man in the dark t-shirt looking up at the ‘OHIO’ sign (in the opposite direction); and the same woman with the long blonde hair.



It’s literally a game of “Where’s Waldo: The Clinton Version“.

And the media wonders why we don’t trust them or the Clintons? When you PhotoShop rally attendance, then downplay the huge rallies of your competitor, one might take pause.

As you might imagine, the crowds will be even smaller for Clinton and her surrogates, given the latest developments in DickiLeaks or WeinerGate, if you prefer. The FBI investigation has already impacted Clinton’s poll numbers, as it should. And you can bet things will get worse for her.

Nevertheless, there is potentially good new for Hillary Clinton, as far as the crowds. Hillary Clinton could get a huge crowd…at her prison sentencing!

I speak for many Americans who will gladly show up to wish Hillary Clinton well, as she’s carted of to prison in shackles.

http://theblacksphere.net/2016/10/bu...ly-attendance/

[vector7]

ABC Still Clueless on Clinton Foundation Investigation, CBS and NBC Dismiss It

By Nicholas Fondacaro | November 3, 2016 | 11:45 PM EDT

A solid 24 hours after Fox News reported the massive bombshell that the FBI was pursuing a criminal investigation into the Clinton Foundation, the liberal “Big Three” networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) were scrambling to defend Clinton Thursday evening. While failing to report the news at all that same morning, CBS and NBC claimed that it was a crazy lie Donald Trump was tell his supporters, while ABC and the Spanish-language networks censored the story entirely.

Instead of reporting on the bombshell news, ABC’s World News Tonight dedicated an over 4 minute long puff piece to touting the efforts of Clinton’s campaign and glorifying her campaign surrogates.

“Today in Jacksonville, falsely alleging Clinton is under criminal investigation for the Clinton Foundation,” declared reporter Katy Tur in regards to a Trump rally, on NBC Nightly News. She tried to downplay the investigation as old news, stating, “A senior law enforcement official tells NBC News after an initial look, the case has not moved an inch in months.”

According to the Fox News report, the shocking news comes with an “avalanche of new information coming every day” to the FBI that could lead to an indictment. But CBS’s Major Garret seem quite irked on CBS Evening News by the way Trump was using the news. “Not quite,” interjected Garrett, “CBS News has confirmed that the FBI has looked into the finances of the Clinton Foundation but so far, no charges have been filed.”

In addition to their initial report Wednesday evening, Fox News’ James Rosen had more to report Thursday evening on Special Report.

“The foundation case, as opposed to the e-mail case, is seen by the field agents at the FBI -- my source is well placed source inside the FBI,” Rosen explained, “It is the foundation case that is seen as the stronger of the two, in part because of the way the e-mail case has been conducted.” Rosen also mentioned that his source informed him that the FBI believes multiple entities had breached the meager security measures of Clinton’s personal server.

When it came to reports of a great divide within the FBI Rosen’s source confirmed it:

The field agents are very disappointed that more hasn't been done on both cases. But particularly in the case of the foundation investigation. The field agents believe they have the goods for a case. It's the higher ups, the political appointees and the career prosecutors who tend to be more cautious and are behaving that way in this case.

Transcripts below:

CBS
Evening News
November 3, 2016
6:31:22 PM Eastern [2 Minutes 32 Seconds]

SCOTT PELLEY: The race is down to five days, and Hillary Clinton's lead is down to three points. In a new CBS News/New York Times poll tonight, it's Clinton 45 percent, Donald Trump 42. Two weeks ago Clinton had a nine-point lead. Motivating voters is key, and today, both campaigns seemed to adopt a new motto—“if you can't win them, scare them.” Donald Trump was in Florida with his version of a story in today's Wall Street Journal about the FBI and the Clinton Foundation. Major Garrett was there.

[Cuts to video]

DONALD TRUMP: So, let me ask you this question, I've never done this before. Will justice be done or not? Will justice be done, yes or no?

MAJOR GARRETT: In Jacksonville, Florida today, Donald Trump seized on a new report that the FBI has investigated criminal wrongdoing at the Clinton Foundation.

TRUMP: It was reported that an avalanche of information is coming in. The FBI agents say their investigation is likely to yield an indictment.

GARRETT: Not quite. CBS News has confirmed that the FBI has looked into the finances of the Clinton Foundation but so far, no charges have been filed.

...

NBC
Nightly News
November 3, 2016
7:08:00 PM Eastern

...

TUR: Today in Jacksonville, falsely alleging Clinton is under criminal investigation for the Clinton Foundation.

D. TRUMP: The FBI is investigating how Hillary Clinton put the office of secretary of state up for sale in violation of federal law.

TUR: A senior law enforcement official tells NBC News after an initial look, the case has not moved an inch in months.

[Cuts back to live]

Tonight a worst-case scenario is being discussed in some Republican circles, talk of a special prosecutor or impeachment if Hillary Clinton does get elected. Lester?

LESTER HOLT: Katy Tur in North Carolina tonight, thank you.

...

FNC
Special Report
November 3, 2016
6:04:18 PM Eastern

BRET BAIER: Chief Washington Correspondent James Rosen has been working his sources as well on this story. He joins me now here in the studio. James, good evening, what are you hearing?

JAMES ROSEN: Good evening, Bret. Much of what we have heard but a lot of it is confirming. For example, there are really two parallel cases the FBI has been investigating for over a year. One is the Clinton e-mails case. The other is the Clinton Foundation case. And agents are hard at work on both right now. The foundation case, as opposed to the e-mail case, is seen by the field agents at the FBI -- my source is well placed source inside the FBI. It is the foundation case that is seen as the stronger of the two, in part because of the way the e-mail case has been conducted.

The field agents, for example, cannot believe that Director Comey authorized the provision of immunity to two of Hillary Clinton's lawyers, Heather Samuelson who reviewed the e-mails and Cheryl Mills who was the secretary’s chief of staff, when normal procedure at the FBI would be to immunize one of them and then pressure that individual to flip and deliver the other.

On the e-mails case, this source I asked, “Is there anyone at the FBI who believes Secretary Clinton's server wasn’t hacked?” And the answer was, “No.” And the source says to me, “It’s pretty certain that she was hacked. It doesn't take a computer rocket scientist to figure that out.”

BAIER: They're digging into it?

ROSEN: They’re digging into it. And they believe as many as five to seven individuals or hostile actors might have breached that server.

BAIER: And the split, we just heard about with Catherine and I talked about, real from your source?

ROSEN: Yes. The field agents are very disappointed that more hasn't been done on both cases. But particularly in the case of the foundation investigation. The field agents believe they have the goods for a case. It's the higher ups, the political appointees and the career prosecutors who tend to be more cautious and are behaving that way in this case.

BAIER: James, thank you.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nich...nd-nbc-dismiss


Bozell & Graham Column: Network Blackout Exposes Corrupt Media


By Brent Bozell and Tim Graham | November 3, 2016 | 11:46 PM EDT

While most of America was transfixed by Game 7 of that World Series, the Fox News Channel was doggedly pursuing a new story: The FBI’s probe into pay-for-play schemes at the Clinton Foundation and the State Department has been far more expansive than anyone reported so far and has been going on for more than a year. FBI sources even warned there could be indictments down the road.

Then The Wall Street Journal broke another new story online that “Secret recordings of a suspect talking about the Clinton Foundation fueled an internal battle between FBI agents who wanted to pursue the case and corruption prosecutors who viewed the statements as worthless hearsay.” Senior officials wanted to tell FBI agents to “stand down” from a Clinton Foundation probe.

Two nuclear explosions in one night. Reaction from the news media? Crickets.

The stench of corruption between the Justice Department, the State Department and the Clinton Foundation machine is noxious. Add the leftist ‘news’ media collusion and it becomes overpowering. This is a cover-up.

No one at the networks was breaking into the World Series. No one at ABC, CBS, and NBC could locate the story and offer even the briefest summary the next morning.. MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski offered a serious report early on “Morning Joe,” but she was alone. The other “news” programs preferred the distraction of breathless baseball updates.

The worst moment came on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” where they acted like the story did not exist, period. Pollster Matthew Dowd said a scandal story might still break: “So anything can happen in that regard.” Sounding totally oblivious to the breaking news, co-host George Stephanopoulos replied: “We’ll see if some big news comes out.”

At taxpayer-funded National Public Radio, “Morning Edition” found anything and everything else more interesting and “newsworthy,” including – we’re not kidding – “teen night owls” who need later school starting times and the perils of the illegal human-kidney trade in Pakistan.

The network blackout so far on this FBI probe is beyond the pale. Everyone knows what would be the media reaction were there a report about likely indictments related to the Trump Foundation. There would be an immediate flash mob of reporters camped in front of Trump Tower breaking away from regularly-scheduled programming and offering play-by-play commentary. Anyone denying the double standard is lying.

This is just the latest Clinton-scandal scoop out of hundreds over the last 24 years that the networks have skipped, or downplayed, or just dismissed as toxic waste. This is why an overwhelming majority of Americans tell pollsters it’s obvious the media are undisguised Hillary boosters. Their credibility is shot with the public.

Within 18 hours, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell was bizarrely denying there was any story or any investigation worth noting. “She's not under criminal investigation. In fact, it's not an investigation. It's just a review of the e-mails. She did not lie to the FBI, according to James Comey. There was no grounds to prosecute her. So there are no lies, there’s no criminality.”

This is the kind of spin you expect from defense attorneys, not reporters.

It’s sinking in across America that our “news” media are not First Amendment heroes or watchdogs of government. Many of them are coddling deeply corrupt politicians and denying any evidence that these people have been engaged in what appears to be a criminal conspiracy to enrich themselves using the federal government.

We are looking right down the barrel of the greatest government crisis since the Civil War, with charges – like handing over our uranium mining capacity to the Russians – that could possibly reach the height of treason itself.

And no coverage.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-...-corrupt-media

[vector7]

CNN: FBI Leaks Should Be ‘Firing Offense,’ ‘They’re Unfair to Mrs. Clinton’

By Nicholas Fondacaro | November 3, 2016 | 5:36 PM EDT

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin took up her shift in the liberal media’s campaign to discredit Fox News’ bombshell report detailing the extent of the FBI’s investigation in Hillary Clinton, during Thursday’s CNN Newsroom’s three o’clock hour. “For the Clinton campaign, the headache is not going away here,” Baldwin whined, “Donald Trump wasted no time at a rally this afternoon bringing up the Clinton Foundation woes.” But that’s small potatoes compared to her panelist David Gergen who demanded that agents should be fired leaking to Fox News.

“Evan Perez and our justice correspondent crew in Washington essentially in talking to their sources within Justice saying that there is no talk of indictment, so that's number one,” she rambled, trying to use the Clinton campaign talking point of “there’s no case here.”

The CNN host then leaned on former presidential adviser David Gergen to slam the FBI for talking to Fox News, declaring, “The leaks have been horrendous…” He pleaded for the FBI and the Justice Department do something to put the boot on the neck of their agents:

It ought to be a firing offense if you're caught leaking because the leaks are conflicting, they’re confusing, they’re depressing, and they’re unfair to Mrs. Clinton among other things… But where is the leadership of the Justice Department and FBI to crack down on this? You really have to put people under pressure and say, “You leak, you're gone.”

Baldwin followed up Gergen by bemoaning Donald Trump’s use of the dreaded “"I" word, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment.” “Yes, and there's just no basis for that,” Gergen claimed.

Not long after Gergen smeared the FBI, Baldwin brought on CNN reporter Even Perez and implored him to “Set us all straight. Set, you know, the public straight.” “You know from the reporting we've been doing for a year now on this issue, we're not anywhere near close to that,” Perez obliged, “The FBI has been looking into this well over a year and we're told they haven't gotten much further than what the allegations were in [Clinton Cash].”

Gergen’s fixation with what he claims is “unfair” for Clinton was evidence of his biased in favor of Clinton, which is obvious since he used to work for her husband. But what about what’s unfair for voters going to the polls with incomplete information about who the candidates are?

Transcript below:

CNN Newsroom with Brooke Baldwin
November 3, 2016
3:11:23 PM Eastern [48 seconds]

KRISTEN POWERS: The problem for her is obviously that anything related to, you know, her honesty and which has been rejuvenated, this issue has been rejuvenated with the FBI director coming out and making this announcement right before the election and I think that of all the issues that could come up for her, this is the one that harms her and Trump has hit on something that a lot of people feel, we don't want to go back to the '90s. We don't want to relive the constant investigations. Now, to be fair, the Republicans are partially responsible for that because they do sort of over-investigate the Clintons but the Clintons invite it on themselves as well sometimes, so it is effective in that way, except for the fact that I feel like it goes a little too far. You know, it could possibly turn people off. It’s just a little too in your face.

(....)

3:18:58 p.m. [2 minutes and 28 seconds]

BALDWIN: For the Clinton campaign, the headache is not going away here. Donald Trump wasted no time at a rally this afternoon bringing up the Clinton Foundation woes.

DONALD TRUMP: The investigation is described as a high priority. It's far reaching and has been going on for more than one year. It was reported that an avalanche of information is coming in. The FBI agents say their investigation is likely to yield an indictment. Reports also show the political leadership at the Department of Justice is trying to protect Hillary Clinton and is interfering with the FBI's criminal investigation.

BALDWIN: So, I’ve got my panel back and let me just tell you. This is the reporting. You just heard Donald Trump. Evan Perez and our justice correspondent crew in Washington essentially in talking to their sources within Justice saying that there is no talk of indictment, so that's number one. Number two, though, there is a bit of push/pull between FBI and DOJ, that is an issue as they've been looking into these Clinton Foundation woes. So, that is just — that's the facts, that's what we have from our CNN reporting. I have Gloria, Kirsten, and David back with me and also Manu and so David Gergen, let me just begin with you. This is someone part of the right, on CNN.com somebody had written it like this in reference to the FBI and DOJ and the election: “Another casualty of 2016 has been the mystique of the FBI” The fact that it appears that not everyone is on the same page.

DAVID GERGEN: The leaks have been horrendous coming out of the—

BALDWIN: Leaky.

GERGEN: Very leaky and there ought to be some way to put a stop to it. It ought to be a firing offense if you're caught leaking because the leaks are conflicting, they’re confusing, they’re depressing, and they’re unfair to Mrs. Clinton among other things. But there also have also been some leaks against Mr. Trump so both sides have reason to be angry about this. But where is the leadership of the Justice Department and FBI to crack down on this? You really have to put people under pressure and say, “You leak, you're gone.”

BALDWIN: And it's not just Donald Trump who has been saying the "I" word, impeachment, impeachment, impeachment.

GERGEN: Yes, and there's just no basis for that.

BALDWIN: And there isn’t and that’s what we’ve been doing, the checking because there isn’t that we’ve seen.

(....)

3:22:51 p.m. [1 minute and 10 seconds]

BALDWIN: Let's cut past the politics. Evan Perez, set us all straight. Set, you know, the public straight. You've been doing the reporting on all of this. What's the deal? FBI, DOJ, impeachment, Clinton Foundation. Set it to me straight.

EVAN PEREZ: Well, Brooke, I think one of the first things is you heard from Donald Trump there. He says there's an indictment in the offing in this Clinton investigation, this Clinton Foundation investigation and I’ve got to tell you. You know from the reporting we've been doing for a year now on this issue, we're not anywhere near close to that. We're still, frankly at the starting gates of this investigation. The FBI agents who have been doing it have first started with four different field offices in the FBI in Los Angeles, Little Rock, Washington, and New York wanting to dig into some allegations that came out in this book by a conservative writer Peter Schweizer, Clinton Cash, and the book basically alleged the Clinton Foundation was taking donations from foreign donors and exchanging them for favors while she was at the State Department. The FBI has been looking into this well over a year and we're told they haven't gotten much further than what the allegations were in the book, Brooke.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nich...yre-unfair-mrs

[vector7]

Newsweek Ships Thousands of Clinton Victory ‘Special Edition’ - 'No Trump Versions Made'

Posted on November 6, 2016 by Sean Adl-Tabatabai in News, US

*Thousands of copies of a Newsweek magazine claiming a Hillary Clinton victory have been printed in readiness to ship to newsstands and stores.

Stacks of boxes with the Special Edition ‘Madam President’ cover depicting Hillary Clinton winning the U.S. presidential race next week were secretly photographed by a Newsweek employee who says that there were no Trump versions made.

The find proves that the media, in collusion with the Clinton campaign, have planned for a Hillary victory all along.





*(Fair Use)
http://yournewswire.com/newsweek-cli...ecial-edition/

[vector7]

White House Leaks Private Trump Transition Communication To CBS News…

Posted on November 14, 2016
by sundance

The front of the story is that President Elect Donald Trump’s transition team requested security clearances for Donald Jr., Ivanka, Jerrod and Eric Trump.

The reason for the request is simple: in order to see the executive dossier’s and backgrounds of some governmental officials -who are under consideration for Trump administration positions- you must have a security clearance.

Almost everyone on the transition team needs a security clearance in order to see details of the candidate backgrounds.

It is no big deal, and has nothing to do with anything except the ability to review information, candidate experience, qualifications and provide an opinion.

However, that said – the bigger back story issue as outlined in this tweet from CBS is far more concerning. It would appear the Obama administration is leaking private discussions to CBS news:


https://theconservativetreehouse.com/

[vector7]

After Trump Ditched Media For Dinner With Family CNN Shows Reagan Assassination Attempt Video While Talking About President-Elect Donald Trump



CNN plays the Reagan assassination attempt played on split screen next to the pundits saying Trump would pay for cutting them out of his dinner party.

[vector7]

Facebook Reveals Seven Point Plan To Eradicate "Fake News"

by Tyler Durden
Nov 19, 2016 8:42 PM



Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has a message for his billion-plus users: "you're not capable of deciding for yourself what is 'news' and what is not, so we will do it for you."
Facebook has been widely blamed - by the left-leaning mainstream media - for allowing the spread of online misinformation, amusingly much of it pro-Trump, but Zuckerberg has rejected the notion that Facebook influenced the outcome of the election or that fake news is a major problem on the service.

"Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99 percent of what people see is authentic," he wrote in a blog post on Saturday.

"Only a very small amount is fake news and hoaxes."

Which is why we found it odd that since such "a very small amount" of Facebook is "fake", why the left-leaning CEO would draft up his 7-point plan for eradicating "misinformation" from the social network (via Facebook)...

A lot of you have asked what we're doing about misinformation, so I wanted to give an update.

The bottom line is: we take misinformation seriously. Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information. We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done.

Historically, we have relied on our community to help us understand what is fake and what is not. Anyone on Facebook can report any link as false, and we use signals from those reports along with a number of others -- like people sharing links to myth-busting sites such as Snopes -- to understand which stories we can confidently classify as misinformation. Similar to clickbait, spam and scams, we penalize this content in News Feed so it's much less likely to spread.

The problems here are complex, both technically and philosophically. We believe in giving people a voice, which means erring on the side of letting people share what they want whenever possible. We need to be careful not to discourage sharing of opinions or to mistakenly restrict accurate content. We do not want to be arbiters of truth ourselves, but instead rely on our community and trusted third parties.

While the percentage of misinformation is relatively small, we have much more work ahead on our roadmap. Normally we wouldn't share specifics about our work in progress, but given the importance of these issues and the amount of interest in this topic, I want to outline some of the projects we already have underway:

1. Stronger detection. The most important thing we can do is improve our ability to classify misinformation. This means better technical systems to detect what people will flag as false before they do it themselves.
2. Easy reporting. Making it much easier for people to report stories as fake will help us catch more misinformation faster.
3. Third party verification. There are many respected fact checking organizations and, while we have reached out to some, we plan to learn from many more.
4. Warnings. We are exploring labeling stories that have been flagged as false by third parties or our community, and showing warnings when people read or share them.
5. Related articles quality. We are raising the bar for stories that appear in related articles under links in News Feed.
6. Disrupting fake news economics. A lot of misinformation is driven by financially motivated spam. We're looking into disrupting the economics with ads policies like the one we announced earlier this week, and better ad farm detection.
7. Listening. We will continue to work with journalists and others in the news industry to get their input, in particular, to better understand their fact checking systems and learn from them.

Some of these ideas will work well, and some will not. But I want you to know that we have always taken this seriously, we understand how important the issue is for our community and we are committed to getting this right.

So to clarify, Facebook will make it easier for any Tom, Dick, Or Harriet to complain about a story that will necessarily cut the revenues from that entity and will rely on 'fact-checking' organizations, establishment 3rd parties, and the mainstream media for input.
Well what could go wrong?
As we noted previously, while Facebook (or Google) have every right to tweak their ad policies however they see fit - especially if in the process their own ad revenue decline, as both companies retain a portion of the ad proceeds they pay out to content providers - the move is yet another step on a slippery slope, one which begins with determining just what is considered "fake news" and ends with blanket internet censorship along ideological lines.
Which we find especially ironic considering much of the "pro Clinton" press was terrified that it would be Trump who would be the one to hint at or enforce censorship. It seems the media does not need Trump for that: it can do it quite well on its own.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-1...misinformation

[vector7]

Maybe the thread should be renamed: "The Main Stream Media works for the Democrat Party".

Because they hate Conservatives and the Republican Party.

Brace Yourself for Four Years of Nonstop Freakoutrage

Kurt Schlichter
Posted: Nov 21, 2016 12:01 AM



The left is trying to come to grips with its utter rejection, and its response to Donald Trump will be to fall back on an endless series of freakoutrages – hyperbolic, unhinged, hack media-fueled spasms of faux moral panic every time he dares do anything.

Appoint someone to a job? Freak out – it’s an outrage!

Go to dinner? Freak out – it’s an outrage!

Actually keep promises made to the voters? Freak out – it’s an outrage!

But it isn’t going to work. Not anymore. Not with the form of the Destructor Hillary and the rest of super smart Team Smugfail chose. Freakoutrage fatigue is in effect. You can cry Wolf Blitzer all day long and nobody cares.

It’s important to understand why liberals are so angry and so scared. They are angry because they believe they have a moral right to command us, apparently bestowed by Gaia or #Science or having gone to Yale, and we are irredeemably deplorable for not submitting to their benevolent dictatorship.

They are scared because they fear we will wage the same kind of campaign of petty (and not so petty) oppression, intimidation, and bullying that they intended to wage upon us.
And their fear tastes like sunshine puked up by a unicorn.

I was considering being magnanimous in our total victory, but that lasted until a bunch of loving, tolerant, peaceful anti-Trump demonstrators jumped my friend and hurt his dog. So now, their pain is my sugar, and I say let’s spend the next four years having our coffee Sudden Impact-style.

You want to play the freakoutrage card? Go ahead, make my day.

It’s the only practical tool they have left, secession being hard and scary when you’re on the side that wets itself around guns. So instead they sow cultural chaos with the eager, slobbering cooperation of the dying mainstream media. Hence the nonstop series of post-defeat freakoutrages over each and every action undertaken by President-elect Trump – oh, I’m getting Matthewsian tingles down my leg just thinking of how much it hurts you libs to read those words!

But it’s a loser’s game. Freakoutraging is not a power move – it’s a sign of weakness. It’s weak because to work, it depends entirely on cooperation by us and by President-elect Trump – there’s that tingle again! We have to allow it to work. See, you libs can’t make us do anything because we control everything. The Reid Rule is in effect, players, and we’re going to beat down liberalism like a Nordic-Trak beats down Harry.

Freakoutrage is manipulation, so it depends upon the credibility of the freakoutrager in the eyes of the freakoutragee. Do you see the problem? Because the freakoutragers are liberals amplified by the liberal mainstream media, there’s a bit of a credibility gap in the eyes of us freakoutragees. Similarly yuge gaps include the Grand Canyon and the yawning chasm between Obama’s self-regard and his accomplishments.

To work, the freakoutragee has to take the freakoutrage seriously – “Wow, I can’t imagine that anyone would call the Attorney General appointee a white supremacist Klan lover without a really good reason. I shall be wary of this ruffian!” But when you literally call everyone associated with Donald Trump a bigot, racist, sexist, Islamophobe, transphobe, and miscellaneousphobe – including, by extension, the nearly 50% of Americans who voted for him over Harridan McHarpy – then you lose your credibility. When you redefine “bigotry” to mean “I don’t like you,” you’ve deprived the word of its bite.

Non-political people are watching, and when no one goosesteps over to their houses to throw them into Jesus camp with all the other people whose ancestors didn’t hail from Dusseldorf, they’re going to figure out that your endless freakoutrages are all lies. When everybody’s terrible, nobody is. Especially when the people you say are terrible really aren’t.

Freakoutrage need the cooperation of President-elect Trump (Ohhhh, baby, I’m a-tinglin’ again!), and that’s another reason you’ll fail. Freakoutrage is really a way you and your media fluffers try to train conservative leaders. You try to teach the Republican leader that if he does anything you don’t approve of, you’ll scream and whine and then he’ll have to back down. It’s a means of control, like a shock collar. And this works on a lot of Republicans, or used to: “Oh no, the WaPo is angry! Quick, start #caring!”


But The Donald? Nope. You have no heat because he’s giving absolutely no damns.

Ditching the press to scarf a sirloin? WAAAAAA! Damns given: 0.

Appointing hardcore conservatives? WAAAAA! Damns given: 0.

Building the wall, repealing O-Care, SCOTUS Justice Willet? WAAAAA! Damns given: 0.

You’ll be freaking out and the President will be eating a taco bowl and kicking it old school with his hot immigrant wife like a boss, penning and phoning Obama’s miserable legacy into oblivion.

So libs, carry on with your freakoutrages. Please. Each one makes you weaker and us stronger. Everyone sees the truth behind your freakoutrage scam. Everyone sees the truth behind you. The audience of Hamilton didn't boo Pence. The cast didn’t lecture Pence. The audience booed us. The cast lectured us. You libs hate us. Hate, not merely dislike. Hate. Your dream is a country without us, just like I predicted in my new book.

So your freakoutraging did do us one solid – you helped remind us who our real enemy is. It’s you. And we know it because you dorky, safety-pinned, not moving-to-Canada-like-you-promised freakoutragers keep telling us so.

http://townhall.com/columnists/kurts...trage-n2248518

[vector7]

Donald Trump’s media summit was a ‘f—ing firing squad’

By Emily Smith and Daniel Halper



November 21, 2016 | 5:12pm | Updated

President-elect Donald Trump exploded at media bigs in an off-the-record Trump Tower powow on Monday, sources told The Post.

“It was like a f—ing firing squad,” said one source.

“Trump started with Jeff Zucker and said I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed….

“The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added.

A second source confirmed the encounter.

“The meeting took place in a big board room and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks…,” the source said.

“Trump kept saying, ‘We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong. He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was network of liars.

“Trump didn’t say Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room.

“Gayle did not stand up, but asked some question, ‘How do you propose we the media work with you?’ Chuck Todd asked some pretty pointed questions. David Muir asked how are you going to cope living in DC while your family is in NYC? It was a horrible meeting”

The meeting was off the record, meaning the participants agreed not to talk about the substance of the conversations.

The hour-long powwow included top execs from network and cable news channels. Among the attendees were NBC’s Deborah Turness, Lester Holt and Chuck Todd, ABC’s James Goldston, George Stephanopoulos, David Muir and Martha Raddatz, CBS’ Norah O’Donnell John Dickerson, Charlie Rose, Christopher Isham and Gayle King, Fox News’ Bill Shine, Jack Abernethy, Jay Wallace, Suzanne Scott, MSNBC’s Phil Griffin and CNN’s Jeff Zucker and Erin Burnett.

Additional reporting by Claire Atkinson

[vector7]

Time mag brands Trump a 'huckster,' calls Clinton 'an American Moses'

Time mag brands Trump a 'huckster,' calls Clinton 'an American Moses'



Published December 07, 2016 FoxNews.com

President-elect Donald Trump was named Time magazine's Person of the Year on Wednesday – and the honor basically ended there.

While describing Trump as the real change-maker of 2016, the magazine also ragged on the Republican president-elect as a “huckster” and “demagogue” while reserving its most glowing praise for runner-up Hillary Clinton -- whom the edition breathlessly described as “an American Moses.”

In describing Trump, Time's article almost exclusively used backhanded compliments. For instance, while the piece said he “did what no American politician had attempted in a generation,” it added that he “magnified the divisions of the present, inspiring new levels of anger and fear within his country.”

“Now it’s difficult to count all the ways Trump remade the game: the huckster came off more real than the scripted political pros. The cable-news addict made pollsters look like chumps. The fabulist out-shouted journalists fighting to separate fact from falsehood. The demagogue won more Latino and black votes than the 2012 Republican nominee,” Time's Michael Scherer said in one particularly bruising paragraph.

Among the descriptions of what it called “Trump’s America,” Time described a land “where a hijab-wearing college student in New York reports being attacked and jeered at in the next President’s name, where American-born children ask their citizen parents if Trump will deport them, where white supremacists throw out Nazi salutes in Washington meeting halls for their President-elect.” [It is worth noting that President Obama is still in charge until January.]

The article on Hillary Clinton is much different. Subtitled “The winner of the popular vote leaves a complicated legacy,” the tone is worlds away from the fulminating darkness that permeates the Trump piece.

The opening paragraph reads more like the prologue of St. John’s Gospel than an essay on a presidential runner-up, saying of Clinton: “she became a symbol in a fight that was about much more than symbolism."

"She’s the woman who was almost President, she is what might have been and what will yet be."

Even when writer Charlotte Alter offered criticism of the former secretary of state, she implied Clinton’s mistakes stemmed from her fundamental strengths, or were the fault of her critics.

“Long before she ever ran for office, Clinton built up a sturdy shield. Decades of attacks on her looks, her judgment, her marriage and her motivations left Clinton reflexively contained and guarded. But armor both insulates and obscures, and those self-protective traits may have led to some of her most damning mistakes, like the creation of a private email server and her fumbling rationale for it,” Alter wrote.

After discussing what Clinton’s failed candidacy means for future female candidates, Time likened Clinton to “an American Moses.”

“Like an American Moses, she was an imperfect prophet, leading women to the edge of the Promised Land. Now it’s up to another woman to enter it.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...can-moses.html

Time Urges 65 Million Americans Who Voted For Hillary Not To Pay Taxes

by Tyler Durden
Dec 6, 2016 12:46 PM

Under the twisted premise of losing the popular vote and "no taxation without representation", TIME's Mark Weston proclaims that the approximately 65 million Democrats who voted for Hillary Clinton should pledge "we won’t pay taxes to the federal government... until democracy is restored."
Because, It's just not fair?

Twice in the past 16 years, a Republican candidate who finished second in the popular vote has won the presidency. This year, Donald Trump won the electoral vote with about 46% of the popular vote, while Hillary Clinton received about 48%. If the parties stay this evenly divided, another electoral mishap is more likely than not in the next 20 years.

Most Republicans are quite content with this system. Appeals to fairness have not persuaded them of the need to amend the Constitution to establish direct presidential elections, preferably with a runoff if no one wins 50% of the vote. Nor does the real chance that a Democrat could win the presidency with fewer votes than a Republican alarm them. Even the taunt, “Are you afraid of a direct election? Can’t you win a straight-up vote?” doesn’t faze them. Democrats must, therefore, pester Republicans where it hurts: the pocketbook.

Is signing a pledge to not pay taxes legal? Yes, if no overt act of conspiracy is involved, and the pledge itself is hypothetical. No one knows when or if it would be carried out.

A national movement not to pay federal taxes in the future would put Republicans on notice: they do not have the right to impose a hard-right, second-place presidency on a moderate nation every dozen or so years. If the Republicans won’t help amend the Constitution so that America can resume being a democracy, then Democrats, lacking the representation that supporters of a future popular vote-winner ought to have in the executive branch, should not submit to paying taxes to the federal government.

How would the pledge work?

First, an online group such as MoveOn.org, Change.org or both, should circulate a petition. The pledge is not just a powerful protest; it is also effortless, requiring no legal or financial sacrifice at all for years, possibly decades.

Second, the pledge should only apply to federal taxes. We would still pay state, local, sales and property taxes. This is a protest against our 229-year-old system of electoral votes, not against taxation in general.

Third, if a Republican wins the election without winning the popular vote again, we should still pay what we owe in federal taxes—just not to the IRS. Instead, people would compute their federal taxes, file a Form 1040 and write a check to a national escrow account, preferably in a well-established Canadian or British bank that is beyond the reach of the U.S. Justice Department, because whoever opens this account probably will be in violation of U.S. law. In the check’s memo line, people should write, “Funds to be transferred to the IRS as soon as America resumes being a democracy.”

If the U.S. government wanted control over the trillions of dollars in this escrow account, it would have to replace our antiquated electoral system with a fairer way of electing presidents. Then, when 38 state legislatures have ratified an acceptable Constitutional amendment, the escrow officer could cheerfully transfer the account’s trillions of dollars to the IRS.

The beauty of a no-taxation pledge is that it almost certainly won’t have to be carried out. The mere threat could be enough to propel a Constitutional amendment. If millions sign now, Republicans will know that a third modern Republican runner-up presidency is impossible; Democrats will not be cooperative again.

The cry, “No Taxation Without Representation,” inspired America to declare its independence in 1776. It can also lead to a rebirth of democracy in our own time.

Sadly, it appears, Mr. Weston missed out on what America's constitutional democracy means. As we noted previously, despite what the disaffected left now says about the "outdated" electoral college system, there was and still is solid reasoning behind it's existence. The power of the individual states weighed very heavily on the founding fathers who created the electoral college system specifically to avoid the mass centralization of power in high population density areas. And, while we certainly understand why the left would look to now discredit such a system, the fact is that there would be no United States of America without it as smaller states simply never would have opted in to the union.


Per the map above, absent the electoral college system, presidential elections would be almost entirely determined by a handful of cities including New York City, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco. And while the left would prefer to ignore the opinions of those in the "fly-over" states, we would suggest that their representation in the electoral college is a vital underpinning of American democracy...without such representation we're not sure why the fly-over states would choose to remain a part of a union where they had no say.
* * *
Finally, we look forward to President-Elect Trump's tweet response to this seemingly treasonous sore-losership.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-1...-not-pay-taxes

[vector7]

Sheriff David Clarke Destroys The Mainstream Media As Orwellian 'Operation Censorship' Kicks Into Overdrive December 8, 2016

- 'The Purge' We've Long Been Warned About Has Begun!


By Stefan Stanford - All News Pipeline - Live Free Or Die
According to Milwaukee, Wisconsin Sheriff David Clarke, 'fake news' was born in August of 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri when MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times and Washington Post all began pushing the 'hands up, don't shoot' lie that has since been demolished though it started a movement. Ripping the MSM in a Tweet favorited over 10,000 times, Clarke implored to 'fix the ghettos' and 'stop trying to fix the POLICE!' while claiming that the DEMOCRATS created the 'black lies matter' MONSTER.

Just the latest public figure to slam the 'real fake news' that came to us straight from the MSM in their drive to push Hillary Clinton into the White House while defaming Donald Trump every chance they had, we hear in the final video below from Dave and the X22Report that 'Operation Censorship' has kicked into full gear as the desperate globalists seek to silence all opposition to their madness.

And despite one 'conspiracy theory' after another having gone viral over the past several decades dating back to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, for some very strange reason, we've never seen the MSM and globalists going into full meltdown mode like they have over the recent 'pizza gate conspiracy theory'. Why are the globalists in full meltdown mode over 'pizza gate', with social media banning conversation of the topic already, when 9/11 or Sandy Hook or the Boston Marathon bombing 'conspiracy theories' were allowed to continue on and flourish w/o as much as a peep from them?

While we have no proof nor are we accusing anybody, it has long been warned, where there is smoke, there is fire.



With Facebook already blocking links to 'fake news' websites according to this new story from ********, DESPITE the Washington Post recently issued a 'sort of' retraction on their recent 'fake news' Russian propaganda story as seen in the screenshot below soon after the Naked Capitalism Blog threatened legal action against them, we see that the real 'war' against the 1st Amendment is just being kicked into gear. As we learn in this new story from Mac Slavo over at SHTFPlan, 'this is the purge we all knew was coming' as social media seeks to stifle 'extremist content'.

And we'd be wise to remember that according to official US government documents under Barack Obama, Christians, those who support the US Constitution, 2nd Amendment supporters, preppers and in all, 72 'types of Americans' are labeled as extremists and potential terrorists according to this August of 2013 story from Michael Snyder. Will we soon see massive, widespread censorship of those things near and dear to us such as our religion or...'the truth'?



As we're told in the SHTFPlan story, they already have the ability to make us 'invisible' and as we hear directly from former Huffington Post journalist David Seaman in the 1st video below, YouTube is already actively engaging in censorship over the highly controversial 'pizza gate', joining Twitter, Reddit and other social media outlets in censoring the topic that has gone viral nationwide despite the globalists best efforts to shut it down.

Many current incidents are being used to push the idea that a new online policing – and a pulling of the weeds – is now necessary.

The “fake news” purging campaign has reached across the blogosphere and alternative media and punished websites that have dared to report on such taboo topics as Pizzagate, Wikileaks email dumps, any controversial aspects of the Syrian war and many other serious topics which these agenda-driven companies have opted to suppress.

While these platforms offer the opportunity to reach a wide audience, the centrality of ubiquitous platforms like Facebook, Google and Twitter is, obviously, that they have the power to delete accounts and drive down audience response by tweaking the algorithm.

They can make you invisible.

That is the state of free speech in 2016. It can be eradicated at a moment’s notice, and perhaps for reasons you aren’t even aware of.



As the son of Donald Trump's incoming National Security Advisor Mike Flynn recently Tweeted, 'Pizza Gate' is not going away and until it is PROVEN false, it'll remain a story whether the globalists want it to or not. And seeing the globalists reactions to 'pizza gate' compared to other 'conspiracy theories' tells us something may be there afterall.

Knowing as an absolute fact that the 'gunman' who recently visited one of the 'pizza stores' IS an 'actor' gives us just a small taste of what we need to know. Of course, 'investigating' a 'conspiracy theory' with a gun while making threats against others is plain stupid and anybody doing so deserves what's coming to them. Was THAT a 'false flag' to shut down alternative media as some have argued?

And that still doesn't answer the million dollar question: Why have the globalists gone into total meltdown mode over 'pizza gate' when, in all of the other 'conspiracy theories' that have flourished over the years, not a word from them nor any attempt to shut down the freedom of speech or eliminate the 1st Amendment?



It's time that Americans seeking the truth 'shut down' and boycott websites such as Twitter, Reddit and others that are attempting to censor it. If you're looking for documentation of the REAL fake news websites in order to avoid using them, you can see all of them in this recent story from ******** and we're not surprised that the REAL fake news outlets are those who've long been lying to the American people...the fake news outlets that Sheriff David Clarke pointed out himself.

For those who have yet to see the emergency message from ******** and their petition, we urge you to visit here now and sign up in a request to ask Donald Trump to fight back against 'fake news' attacks with their claim that the government wants to shut down websites such as ******** and ANP. We at ANP have also signed this petition.

In the 2nd video below from ******** we hear about the latest moves being made by authoritarian liberals in their desperate attempt to ban the free press here in America while in the 3rd video, we hear about the 'real fake news' list that has been released. In the 4th video below our videographer breaks down for us 'the purge we've long been warned about' while the 5th and 6th videos take a look at the Washington Post's 'black list' story.

Will the desperate globalists succeed at silencing the truth by shutting down the alternative media? Every attempt that they make to shut down the 1st Amendment further labels them as enemies of freedom and the American people.



Having said that, there is never any reason for American citizens to take the law into their own hands like the actions taken recently in Washington DC by a fool allegedly 'investigating' a pizza outlet with a gun while making threats.

In America, we have laws and law enforcement and courts of law and, while some may have forgotten, Americans are still innocent until proven guilty. And while some people may believe that 'the guilty' will forever get away with their crimes and that LEO's across America are all 'bought and paid for', Sheriff David Clarke proves that theory wrong and as we all know, he's not alone.

As Milo Yiannopoulos recently told a crowd at Miami University of Ohio in a talk he was supposed to give on 'pizza gate', he recently received phone calls from Washington DC area codes from people telling him 'not yet'.

As even Trump's new National Security Advisor Michael Flynn tweeted prior to the election as seen above, something really nasty is going on with Washington DC. Thankfully, it appears to us by reading his Tweet that the professionals are still doing their jobs. Busting open something this huge will obviously take time.

And while the MSM shouts 'fake news' and the globalists attempt to extinguish the 1st Amendment just to extinguish 'pizza gate', we get proof by their actions alone of their absolute desperation to silence the truth, whatever that truth might be.

So, why didn't the globalists take the same moves to silence all of the other 'conspiracy theories' over the years?

"The lie tastes sweet at the beginning, but bitter at the end."

[vector7]

I changed the title to the thread as with the previous Administration the information here shows the outright hypocrisy with regard to the MSM views toward conservatives.

Busted?: Brit Hume Allegedly Exposes Deceptive Inauguration Photo, ‘Shot Was Taken Early’

January 22, 2017
MediaMSMTrump43 Comments1 min read

After a photo was released showing the attendance difference between Obama and Trump’s inaugurations, details of Trump’s inauguration attendance has been highly questioned. Fox News’ Brit Hume sent out a tweet last night to give his opinion.

The picture in question was originally released on the New York Times’ Twitter account. Many felt that it was another way for the media to continue their apparent mission to delegitimize President Trump.



After a photo was released showing the attendance difference between Obama and Trump’s inaugurations, details of Trump’s inauguration attendance has been highly questioned. Fox News’ Brit Hume sent out a tweet last night to give his opinion.

The picture in question was originally released on the New York Times’ Twitter account. Many felt that it was another way for the media to continue their apparent mission to delegitimize President Trump.
The story dominated news coverage the following day and even led White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer to dedicate a large majority of his first press conference to address the media’s take on the crowd size.

Photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way in one particular tweet, to minimize the enormous support that had gathered on the National Mall. This is the first time in our nation’s history that floor coverings have been used to protect the grass on the mall. That had the effect of highlighting any areas where people were not standing, while in years past, the grass eliminated this visual.

While those on the left for happy about the photo, others pointed out key factors that change the context of the picture. Among those factors included added fencing around the perimeter and the floor coverings, as previously mentioned by Press Secretary Spicer.

The time that the photo was taken has also been questioned. Particularly by Fox News’ Brit Hume, who recalled what he saw in a tweet.

Those that attended the inauguration also tweeted out photos that tell a much different story.

While few have claimed that President Trump’s inauguration crowd was larger than Obama’s, the originally tweeted photo seemed to be posted solely for decisive purposes.
Source:

Independent Journal Review

CNN Quietly Releases Updated Pic Showing Trump’s Inaugural Crowd Size Greater than Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Crowd

Jim Hoft Jan 25th, 2017 7:51 am



As we pointed out throughout the months leading up to the election, crowd size matters. President Trump was crushing Hillary Clinton in number of rallies and number of participants at his rallies when compared to Clinton.



These numbers, in part, led to us projecting a Trump win and probable landslide and we were correct. Trump did win in an electoral landslide. Nevertheless, the numbers at the rallies were significantly different between the two candidates and the one with the larger number of participants won the election. (Note Deroy Murdock reported on our rally observations last week).

The media remained silent on the crowd size numbers when it was clear that Trump was crushing Hillary in this area. But late last week the media finally reported that crowd size does matter. CNN (Fake News) reported that President Trump’s crowd size was much smaller than President Obama’s crowd size in 2009, and CNN provided two pictures to show the difference.

However, the pictures in the article show the crowd size for Obama when he was speaking during his 2009 inauguration with the crowd from Trump’s inauguration approximately 3 hours before Trump spoke.



CNN’s report was another of their ‘Fake News’ lies. The photos used in their post were not comparing apples to apples and President Trump’s Press Secretary pointed this out on Saturday in a special press conference. Trump’s crowd was huge and every bit as big as Obama’s crowd in 2009. Also, in CNN’s article they say that Obama had 1.8 million people in 2009. This is now refuted and is more likely closer to 800,000.

Later CNN’s report was proven false by their own reporting. CNN released a gigapixel of President Trump’s Inauguration and the areas they show as empty in their article from their January 21st report were filled to the brim in their more recent picture which was taken at the time of Trump’s speech during the Inauguration ceremony.




CNN Quietly Releases Updated Pic Showing Trump’s Inaugural Crowd Size Greater than Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Crowd

Jim Hoft Jan 25th, 2017 7:51 am 260 Comments

Guest post by Joe Hoft

As we pointed out throughout the months leading up to the election, crowd size matters. President Trump was crushing Hillary Clinton in number of rallies and number of participants at his rallies when compared to Clinton.

These numbers, in part, led to us projecting a Trump win and probable landslide and we were correct. Trump did win in an electoral landslide. Nevertheless, the numbers at the rallies were significantly different between the two candidates and the one with the larger number of participants won the election. (Note Deroy Murdock reported on our rally observations last week).

The media remained silent on the crowd size numbers when it was clear that Trump was crushing Hillary in this area. But late last week the media finally reported that crowd size does matter. CNN (Fake News) reported that President Trump’s crowd size was much smaller than President Obama’s crowd size in 2009, and CNN provided two pictures to show the difference.

However, the pictures in the article show the crowd size for Obama when he was speaking during his 2009 inauguration with the crowd from Trump’s inauguration approximately 3 hours before Trump spoke.

CNN’s report was another of their ‘Fake News’ lies. The photos used in their post were not comparing apples to apples and President Trump’s Press Secretary pointed this out on Saturday in a special press conference. Trump’s crowd was huge and every bit as big as Obama’s crowd in 2009. Also, in CNN’s article they say that Obama had 1.8 million people in 2009. This is now refuted and is more likely closer to 800,000.

Later CNN’s report was proven false by their own reporting. CNN released a gigapixel of President Trump’s Inauguration and the areas they show as empty in their article from their January 21st report were filled to the brim in their more recent picture which was taken at the time of Trump’s speech during the Inauguration ceremony.

If you review the gigapixel closely you will also see Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama looking on with disgust.

You will also see Democrats looking on in angst and Judge Sotomayer apparently playing with her iPhone.

It is now clear that Trump had at least as many participants at his inauguration as Obama did in 2009, and probably more. The Left and MSM are terrible with numbers and only report them when they can distort and use them to support the Left’s agenda. Trump crushed Hillary in rally attendance and now as CNN’s pictures show, Trump crushed Obama in Inaugural attendance as well.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...t-it-was-huge/

Barbara Boxer: We Have To Make The Middle Class Understand That Trump Is Not Their Friend


Posted By Ian Schwartz
On Date January 25, 2017



In a roundtable interview with MSNBC's Chris Jansing that included Hollywood actors and other political leaders, former Sen. Barbara Boxer said "we" have to "make" the middle class understand that Trump is not their friend. The panel included Jamie Lee Curtis, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla (D), a Black Lives Matter activist, and Tony Goldwyn, star of ABC's Scandal and grandson of MGM studio mogul Samuel Goldwyn.

"I want to jump in with something specific that he did on the very first day that didn't get that much coverage," Boxer said. "There was an order that was signed that made it more expensive now for middle income home buyers to buy homes, and as a result, tens of thousands fewer Americans will do it. We have to make sure that the middle class understands he's not their friend."

"In our case as celebrities or actors, we can -- we're useful in convening people. Like people come show up sometimes just because they want a selfie," Goldwyn said of their importance.

"Honestly that's true in many cases," Goldwyn acknowledged. "I really just talked about what activism means to me and how trying to encourage people to engage in communities at the local level for their families... Because I think as soon as people engage they feel how powerful that is."

"The risk of losing something has awakened people," Curtis said.

Curtis also explained how she become "woke."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ir_friend.html

ABC Apologizes After Being Caught Deceptively Editing Quote About Sean Spicer

By Debra Heine January 25, 2017
chat 150 comments

White House press secretary Sean Spicer calls on a reporter during the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2017. Spicer answered questions about the Dakota Pipeline, infrastructure, jobs and other topics. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

ABC News apologized late Tuesday after being caught deceptively editing a quote from former George W. Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer during the Monday night edition of Nightline. ABC edited Fleischer's words to make it look like he was being more critical of White House press secretary Sean Spicer in the taped interview than he actually was.

Nightline quoted Fleischer as saying, “[Spicer’s] briefing made me uncomfortable. It was too truculent, too tough. It looks as if the ball was dropped on Saturday.” But that is not what Fleischer meant to convey at all. The point he was trying to make was actually complimentary of Spicer.

He posted a series of tweets complaining about ABC's duplicity Tuesday morning, prompting the network's apology.

ABC issued the following apology Tuesday evening:

Nightline aired a segment Monday night about the first three days of the new administration including Sean Spicer’s statement to the press on Saturday. As part of the report, we interviewed former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. In editing the piece for air, his quote was shortened and as a result his opinions mischaracterized. We are fixing the piece online to include his full quote and context. We apologize and regret the error.

Has anyone at ABC been reprimanded? Because that wasn't an innocent error. It was a calculated attempt to put the Trump White House in the worst possible light -- which we keep seeing the mainstream media do over and over again. If they don't like being called the #FakeNews media, maybe they should stop engaging in #FakeNews tactics? Just a thought.