Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election
- Thread starter Woodsman
- Start date
Pete said:
Well, I know, maybe I am a little drastic but I have thought about all things that could give me "chills up my spine". One of them can be what you say, a 'coup' against Trump, but I think that this hit should be given around the next 4 or 5 days. Of course it could be later too, but I think that the perfect moment would be on dec 19. That's why I was thinking (yes, I know, maybe it is too much) that if the Gang do not achieve turn many Trumps' electors, they could think that a "lonely madman shooter" could be a good (and maybe the only from their point of view) solution to their "problem". This really could give me "chills up my spine"... Just a thoughts.
angelburst29
The Living Force
Update: Forty members (up from 29 earlier) of the Electoral College on Tuesday signed a letter demanding an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the election ahead of their Dec. 19 vote.
As The Hill reports, ten electors originally signed the letter when it was published Monday, and 30 more have since added their names.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-13/soft-coup-builds-more-electors-demand-russian-interference-briefing-they-vote
However, while 40 electors would be enough to turn the election in Hillary Clinton's favor, the so-called "Hamilton Electors" are almost uniformly Democratic voters anyway and so with Ashley-Madison fan Chris Suprun the only Trump turncoat, for now the 'soft coup' remains a long shot.
But, as The Hill adds, Republican electors are coming under intense pressure to change their votes:
At this point, the effort appears to be more about undermining Trump, complicating his ability to govern and following personal convictions — and less about actually winning the Electoral College for another candidate.
On Monday, members of the Electoral College will gather in Washington D.C. and in all 50 state capitols to cast their votes. We know that at least one Republican elector that is supposed to be pledged to Trump will not be voting for him, and that elector claims that there are others that also will not be voting for Trump.
If 37 Republican electors can be persuaded to cast their votes for someone other than Trump, that would throw the election into the House of Representatives, and it is unclear what the House would do in that scenario.
If Trump is not stopped at the Electoral College, there is also the possibility that he could be derailed when a joint session of Congress gathers to count the Electoral votes on January 6th.
As I discussed yesterday, all it takes to force a vote on the validity of Electoral College votes is an objection in writing that is signed by at least one member of the House and one member of the Senate. As the official House.gov website explains, if both the House and the Senate vote to approve the objection, the votes covered by the objection are not counted…
In both the Senate and the House, there are anti-Trump Republicans that would absolutely cherish the opportunity to deny him the presidency.
I don’t know if it will happen, but this Russian interference issue is the kind of thing that could be used to justify taking this kind of action.
Of course if the election was stolen from Donald Trump that would likely throw the entire nation into a state of chaos, but I think that at this point the elite would be willing to risk just about anything to keep Donald Trump out of the White House.
White House, Clinton Tied To PR Firm Behind Electoral College Push
http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/13/clinton-obama-supporters-part-of-faithless-elector-push/
Megaphone Strategies, whose stated mission is to “use PR as a tool to diversify progressive movements,” typically works with progressive causes like Black Lives Matter. The firm is representing the handful of “faithless electors” trying to keep President-elect Donald Trump from winning the Electoral College vote.
The firm was co-founded by Van Jones, the former green jobs czar in the Obama White House who later resigned after it was revealed he signed a statement questioning whether the Bush administration had a role in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Jones now works as a CNN commentator.
Molly Haigh, Megaphone’s co-founder and president, worked for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Haigh blames the Republican party’s “racist, misogynist, xenophobic fear mongering” for Trump’s rise to power.
Megaphone communications manager Diane May worked for Bernie Sanders on his 2016 presidential campaign. Megaphone’s website advertises the fact that May worked on both Obama presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.
Megaphone associate Carlos Vera “previously worked at the White House, European Parliament, House of Representatives, and Latino Victory Project,” according to the firm’s website.
Only two of Megaphone’s listed employees have not worked for Democratic politicians, although they have both worked for liberal causes.
Vien Truong, one of the firm’s four listed board members, headlined a Hillary Clinton fundraiser hosted last September by pro-Clinton environmentalist organization CleanTech Party. Truong also serves as the director of another Van Jones endeavor: Green for All, an environmentalist org that received a $200,000 cash infusion from left-wing financier George Soros through his Open Society Foundations as recently as 2010. Soros recently met with other liberal mega-donors to plot to their opposition to Trump, as first reported by Politico’s Ken Vogel.
The two board members that don’t have direct Obama or Clinton ties, Jodi Jacobsen and Catalina Velasquez, are still solid liberals.
Jacobsen, who is also the editor-in-chief of leftist publication Rewire, wrote in an article last October that “To Trump, women are sex objects. To the GOP, they are valued only insofar as they can reproduce children or serve their husbands. That is a world in which Donald Trump is very comfortable. Their vision is indeed the same.”
Velasquez served on the LGBT policy team for the Sanders campaign and previously worked for liberal organizations like People for the American Way.
Texas Republican elector Chris Suprun, who has said he will not cast his vote for Trump, claimed in an interview with The Daily Caller last week that he decided to switch his vote after watching Vice President-elect Mike Pence defend one of Trump’s tweets on TV.
In his interview with TheDC, Suprun went out of his way to deny any ties to George Soros. “Nobody got to me,” he added later.
DOJ Declines To Comment On Why Agency Won’t Investigate Threats To Electors
http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/01/doj-declines-to-comment-on-why-agency-wont-investigate-threats-to-electors/
“The department will decline to comment,” DOJ deputy press secretary David Jacobs told The Daily Caller in an email Wednesday afternoon.
The Justice Department seemed concerned about protecting voters from being intimidated at the polls on Election Day. It deployed 500 monitors to 67 jurisdictions in 28 states to watch polling stations this past presidential election cycle.
Some have wondered, then, why the Justice Department and the FBI will not investigate the recent claims of threats and harassment of these electors as per violation of Section 11b of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. §10307).
Voters of the Electoral College who are casting their votes for president and vice president are also protected by Section 11b, since the College is a necessary part of the federal voting process.
Anti-Trump Activist Runs Ads in US Newspapers in Attempt to Sway Electors
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612151048600054-trump-election-clinton-newspaper/
Daniel Brezenoff, an activist who is paying for the ads, launched a petition soon after the general election calling for the electors to vote for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton instead of Republican candidate Trump, Politico outlet reported on Wednesday.
The ads reportedly appeared in the Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, Austin American-Statesman and Salt Lake City Tribune Wednesday morning and target the electors in the states where Trump won. The members of the Electoral College are scheduled to meet on December 19 to cast their ballots.
Wikileaks: Hillary Clinton Emails Leaked By Pissed Bernie Backer, Not Russia
http://alexanderhiggins.com/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-emails-leaked-by-pissed-bernie-backer-not-russia/
In the interview Wikileaks envoy Craig Murray and former British ambassador stated the he personally flew to the United States and was handed both the DNC emails and the Podesta emails.
Murray told the Daily Mail the emails came from DNC insider with legal access to the emails who had knowledge of the corruption within the Clinton Foundation leaked the emails because he was frustrated with the DNC rigging the Democratic primaries against Bernie Sanders.
Murray stated regardless of whether Russia hacked any emails or not the Wikileaks emails did not come from Russia.
‘Neither of the leaks came from the Russians,’ Murray said. ‘The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.’
He said the motivation behind the leaks was ‘disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.’
Hillary’s ‘Russian Hack’ Hoax: The Biggest Lie of This Election Season
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/11/01/hillarys-russian-hack-hoax-the-biggest-lie-of-this-election-season/
[...] You can trace the genesis of the Democratic Party’s hardcore anti-Russian strategy back to when President Vladimir Putin made a mild passing remark about Donald Trump’s GOP primary success. From that point on, Trump’s political opponents saw this as an open target. In their words, ‘comparing one dictator to another.’
[...] Backed by the Obama White House, Clinton and the media felt they had a green light to keep pressing ahead with blaming Russia – not only for the controversial DNC leaks, but also for hacking into US election systems in Arizona – a charge devoid of any evidence other than innuendo and speculation.
[...] Behind Clinton’s wild hyperbolic rants about the Kremlin and Wikileaks, you will find the White House…
On October 7th, the Obama Administration formally accused the Russian government of stealing emails from the Democratic National Committee and other high-profile individuals including Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta – giving them to Wikileaks.
[...] Under partisan pressure from senior Democrat Senator Harry Reid, the FBI also initiated another investigation into “people linked to the Trump team with Russia.” Reid was unset about the DNC hacks and the Podesta emails and demanded the FBI do something about the Trump campaign. To date, the FBI haven’t come up with anything.
[...] Clinton spin doctors Josh Schwerin and Michael Fallon would stoop even lower by accusing RT of having possession of the Podesta emails even before Wikileaks did. Their only ‘evidence’ seemed to be Twitter posts by RT News which Clinton held up as ‘proof’ that the Kremlin was front-running Wikileaks email dumps. The Clinton braintrust failed to note that the Podesta emails were posted on Wikileaks own website well before RT News had tweeted about them. At that point it became obvious that the Clinton campaign was panicking and hysterically grabbing for any excuse they could get their hands on. We then watched, as one RT reporter after another dismantled the Clinton campaign’s desperate claims. It was embarrassing.
[...] Their other big problem is that despite all the outrage from Democrats and their mainstream media surrogates, none of the leaked content has been challenged on the basis of its authenticity. The results speak for themselves. The initial DNC leak of 20,000 emails resulted in the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. They revealed the unthinkable: the Democratic National Committee actively worked to undermine the Presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders in favor of the establishment choice in Hillary Clinton. Sanders never had a chance. Honest commentators called this an affront to the democratic process, while party insiders and Clinton supporters pretended to be aloof as if it never happened.
[...] Wasserman Schultz’s replacement didn’t fair much better. DNC Vice Chairwoman Donna Brazile was installed to serve as interim chair through the remainder election, but Brazile was soon skewered by subsequent Wikileaks batches – showing how, on more than one occasion, she fed debate questions obtained from corrupt mainstream media operatives – straight to Hillary Clinton.
[...] Perhaps a bigger scandal which the Obama White House and Clinton campaign operatives would like to bury – is the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal confirmed the existence of an internal feud between the FBI and the Justice Department, over whether or not to pursue an investigation into Clinton issue:
So why is Washington going all out to deflect to Russia, and cover-up the Clinton scandals, and the Wikileaks document dumps? One reason is because the Clinton email issue goes all the way to the top – to the President himself.
Obama used a pseudonym [bobama@ameritech.net] when communicating with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by email, and at least one of those emails ended up on Clinton’s private email server.”
[...] What’s clear is that when it comes to all things Russian, there is an established pattern of compulsive lying by this US Administration. The list is too long to chronicle here, although ‘Russian-backed Rebles Shootting Down MH17,’ and ‘Assad Regime Sarin Attack in Damascus in 2013‘ certainly comes to mind.
That said, it’s hard to imagine a lie as egregious and potentially destructive than one which accuses the Russia government, a world nuclear power and member of the UNSC, of ‘Hacking Into the US Electoral Process.’ When you examine history however, what you will find is plenty of evidence documenting exactly how the US government and the CIA have altered and flipped 100 foreign elections throughout history, the attempted assassination of over 50 foreign leaders. Knowing all this, one might find it hard to take seriously Washington’s claims that Putin and Trump are trying manipulate the 2016 Election
Who Cares If Russia Leaks Clinton’s Emails? 5 DNC Officials Resigned For Cheating Bernie Sanders
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/who-cares-if-russia-leaks-clintons-emails-5-dnc-officials_us_57babcb6e4b029a9a466db4d
There’s an Orwellian blame game being used by Clinton’s campaign to overshadow the consequences of a rigged primary. In addition to Debbie Wasserman Shultz and three other DNC officials forced to resign in early August, the DNC’s top fundraiser just recently left because of WikiLeaks. Instead of asking why these DNC officials resigned, media seems focused solely on why Assange would disclose their emails.
As for Russia’s influence in U.S. politics, Hillary Clinton is a walking cybersecurity risk. Russian hackers have apparently infiltrated the DNC, Clinton’s campaign, the Clinton Foundation, and most likely Hillary Clinton’s convenient private server. Thus, not only did cheating Bernie Sanders come with consequences for Debbie Wasserman Shultz and others, but America might elect a person targeted by global hackers.
GOP lobbyist adds $5K to reward for info on murder of former DNC staffer Seth Rich
http://wjla.com/news/local/gop-lobbyist-adds-5k-to-reward-for-info-on-murder-of-former-dnc-staffer-seth-rich
Jack Burkman, a GOP lobbyist, added $5,000 to an existing reward Monday for information on the murder of former Democratic National Committee employee Seth Rich.
Burkman previously offered a $100,000 reward in addition to a $25,000 offer from Metropolitan Police, according to PR Newschannel. In August, WikiLeaks offered it's own $20,000 reward for information on Rich's murder. The extra $5,000 brings the reward total to $150,000, which is the highest reward ever offered for a murder in Washington, D.C.
On Sunday, July 10, 2016 Rich, 27, was shot in the back while walking home in the Bloomingdale neighborhood in Northwest Washington.
The incident happened shortly before Wikileaks released emails which sparked the resignation of several party leaders on the eve of the Democratic Convention.
As The Hill reports, ten electors originally signed the letter when it was published Monday, and 30 more have since added their names.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-13/soft-coup-builds-more-electors-demand-russian-interference-briefing-they-vote
However, while 40 electors would be enough to turn the election in Hillary Clinton's favor, the so-called "Hamilton Electors" are almost uniformly Democratic voters anyway and so with Ashley-Madison fan Chris Suprun the only Trump turncoat, for now the 'soft coup' remains a long shot.
But, as The Hill adds, Republican electors are coming under intense pressure to change their votes:
At this point, the effort appears to be more about undermining Trump, complicating his ability to govern and following personal convictions — and less about actually winning the Electoral College for another candidate.
On Monday, members of the Electoral College will gather in Washington D.C. and in all 50 state capitols to cast their votes. We know that at least one Republican elector that is supposed to be pledged to Trump will not be voting for him, and that elector claims that there are others that also will not be voting for Trump.
If 37 Republican electors can be persuaded to cast their votes for someone other than Trump, that would throw the election into the House of Representatives, and it is unclear what the House would do in that scenario.
If Trump is not stopped at the Electoral College, there is also the possibility that he could be derailed when a joint session of Congress gathers to count the Electoral votes on January 6th.
As I discussed yesterday, all it takes to force a vote on the validity of Electoral College votes is an objection in writing that is signed by at least one member of the House and one member of the Senate. As the official House.gov website explains, if both the House and the Senate vote to approve the objection, the votes covered by the objection are not counted…
In both the Senate and the House, there are anti-Trump Republicans that would absolutely cherish the opportunity to deny him the presidency.
I don’t know if it will happen, but this Russian interference issue is the kind of thing that could be used to justify taking this kind of action.
Of course if the election was stolen from Donald Trump that would likely throw the entire nation into a state of chaos, but I think that at this point the elite would be willing to risk just about anything to keep Donald Trump out of the White House.
White House, Clinton Tied To PR Firm Behind Electoral College Push
http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/13/clinton-obama-supporters-part-of-faithless-elector-push/
Megaphone Strategies, whose stated mission is to “use PR as a tool to diversify progressive movements,” typically works with progressive causes like Black Lives Matter. The firm is representing the handful of “faithless electors” trying to keep President-elect Donald Trump from winning the Electoral College vote.
The firm was co-founded by Van Jones, the former green jobs czar in the Obama White House who later resigned after it was revealed he signed a statement questioning whether the Bush administration had a role in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Jones now works as a CNN commentator.
Molly Haigh, Megaphone’s co-founder and president, worked for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Haigh blames the Republican party’s “racist, misogynist, xenophobic fear mongering” for Trump’s rise to power.
Megaphone communications manager Diane May worked for Bernie Sanders on his 2016 presidential campaign. Megaphone’s website advertises the fact that May worked on both Obama presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012.
Megaphone associate Carlos Vera “previously worked at the White House, European Parliament, House of Representatives, and Latino Victory Project,” according to the firm’s website.
Only two of Megaphone’s listed employees have not worked for Democratic politicians, although they have both worked for liberal causes.
Vien Truong, one of the firm’s four listed board members, headlined a Hillary Clinton fundraiser hosted last September by pro-Clinton environmentalist organization CleanTech Party. Truong also serves as the director of another Van Jones endeavor: Green for All, an environmentalist org that received a $200,000 cash infusion from left-wing financier George Soros through his Open Society Foundations as recently as 2010. Soros recently met with other liberal mega-donors to plot to their opposition to Trump, as first reported by Politico’s Ken Vogel.
The two board members that don’t have direct Obama or Clinton ties, Jodi Jacobsen and Catalina Velasquez, are still solid liberals.
Jacobsen, who is also the editor-in-chief of leftist publication Rewire, wrote in an article last October that “To Trump, women are sex objects. To the GOP, they are valued only insofar as they can reproduce children or serve their husbands. That is a world in which Donald Trump is very comfortable. Their vision is indeed the same.”
Velasquez served on the LGBT policy team for the Sanders campaign and previously worked for liberal organizations like People for the American Way.
Texas Republican elector Chris Suprun, who has said he will not cast his vote for Trump, claimed in an interview with The Daily Caller last week that he decided to switch his vote after watching Vice President-elect Mike Pence defend one of Trump’s tweets on TV.
In his interview with TheDC, Suprun went out of his way to deny any ties to George Soros. “Nobody got to me,” he added later.
DOJ Declines To Comment On Why Agency Won’t Investigate Threats To Electors
http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/01/doj-declines-to-comment-on-why-agency-wont-investigate-threats-to-electors/
“The department will decline to comment,” DOJ deputy press secretary David Jacobs told The Daily Caller in an email Wednesday afternoon.
The Justice Department seemed concerned about protecting voters from being intimidated at the polls on Election Day. It deployed 500 monitors to 67 jurisdictions in 28 states to watch polling stations this past presidential election cycle.
Some have wondered, then, why the Justice Department and the FBI will not investigate the recent claims of threats and harassment of these electors as per violation of Section 11b of the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. §10307).
Voters of the Electoral College who are casting their votes for president and vice president are also protected by Section 11b, since the College is a necessary part of the federal voting process.
Anti-Trump Activist Runs Ads in US Newspapers in Attempt to Sway Electors
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612151048600054-trump-election-clinton-newspaper/
Daniel Brezenoff, an activist who is paying for the ads, launched a petition soon after the general election calling for the electors to vote for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton instead of Republican candidate Trump, Politico outlet reported on Wednesday.
The ads reportedly appeared in the Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, Austin American-Statesman and Salt Lake City Tribune Wednesday morning and target the electors in the states where Trump won. The members of the Electoral College are scheduled to meet on December 19 to cast their ballots.
Wikileaks: Hillary Clinton Emails Leaked By Pissed Bernie Backer, Not Russia
http://alexanderhiggins.com/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-emails-leaked-by-pissed-bernie-backer-not-russia/
In the interview Wikileaks envoy Craig Murray and former British ambassador stated the he personally flew to the United States and was handed both the DNC emails and the Podesta emails.
Murray told the Daily Mail the emails came from DNC insider with legal access to the emails who had knowledge of the corruption within the Clinton Foundation leaked the emails because he was frustrated with the DNC rigging the Democratic primaries against Bernie Sanders.
Murray stated regardless of whether Russia hacked any emails or not the Wikileaks emails did not come from Russia.
‘Neither of the leaks came from the Russians,’ Murray said. ‘The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.’
He said the motivation behind the leaks was ‘disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.’
Hillary’s ‘Russian Hack’ Hoax: The Biggest Lie of This Election Season
http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/11/01/hillarys-russian-hack-hoax-the-biggest-lie-of-this-election-season/
[...] You can trace the genesis of the Democratic Party’s hardcore anti-Russian strategy back to when President Vladimir Putin made a mild passing remark about Donald Trump’s GOP primary success. From that point on, Trump’s political opponents saw this as an open target. In their words, ‘comparing one dictator to another.’
[...] Backed by the Obama White House, Clinton and the media felt they had a green light to keep pressing ahead with blaming Russia – not only for the controversial DNC leaks, but also for hacking into US election systems in Arizona – a charge devoid of any evidence other than innuendo and speculation.
[...] Behind Clinton’s wild hyperbolic rants about the Kremlin and Wikileaks, you will find the White House…
On October 7th, the Obama Administration formally accused the Russian government of stealing emails from the Democratic National Committee and other high-profile individuals including Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta – giving them to Wikileaks.
[...] Under partisan pressure from senior Democrat Senator Harry Reid, the FBI also initiated another investigation into “people linked to the Trump team with Russia.” Reid was unset about the DNC hacks and the Podesta emails and demanded the FBI do something about the Trump campaign. To date, the FBI haven’t come up with anything.
[...] Clinton spin doctors Josh Schwerin and Michael Fallon would stoop even lower by accusing RT of having possession of the Podesta emails even before Wikileaks did. Their only ‘evidence’ seemed to be Twitter posts by RT News which Clinton held up as ‘proof’ that the Kremlin was front-running Wikileaks email dumps. The Clinton braintrust failed to note that the Podesta emails were posted on Wikileaks own website well before RT News had tweeted about them. At that point it became obvious that the Clinton campaign was panicking and hysterically grabbing for any excuse they could get their hands on. We then watched, as one RT reporter after another dismantled the Clinton campaign’s desperate claims. It was embarrassing.
[...] Their other big problem is that despite all the outrage from Democrats and their mainstream media surrogates, none of the leaked content has been challenged on the basis of its authenticity. The results speak for themselves. The initial DNC leak of 20,000 emails resulted in the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. They revealed the unthinkable: the Democratic National Committee actively worked to undermine the Presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders in favor of the establishment choice in Hillary Clinton. Sanders never had a chance. Honest commentators called this an affront to the democratic process, while party insiders and Clinton supporters pretended to be aloof as if it never happened.
[...] Wasserman Schultz’s replacement didn’t fair much better. DNC Vice Chairwoman Donna Brazile was installed to serve as interim chair through the remainder election, but Brazile was soon skewered by subsequent Wikileaks batches – showing how, on more than one occasion, she fed debate questions obtained from corrupt mainstream media operatives – straight to Hillary Clinton.
[...] Perhaps a bigger scandal which the Obama White House and Clinton campaign operatives would like to bury – is the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal confirmed the existence of an internal feud between the FBI and the Justice Department, over whether or not to pursue an investigation into Clinton issue:
So why is Washington going all out to deflect to Russia, and cover-up the Clinton scandals, and the Wikileaks document dumps? One reason is because the Clinton email issue goes all the way to the top – to the President himself.
Obama used a pseudonym [bobama@ameritech.net] when communicating with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by email, and at least one of those emails ended up on Clinton’s private email server.”
[...] What’s clear is that when it comes to all things Russian, there is an established pattern of compulsive lying by this US Administration. The list is too long to chronicle here, although ‘Russian-backed Rebles Shootting Down MH17,’ and ‘Assad Regime Sarin Attack in Damascus in 2013‘ certainly comes to mind.
That said, it’s hard to imagine a lie as egregious and potentially destructive than one which accuses the Russia government, a world nuclear power and member of the UNSC, of ‘Hacking Into the US Electoral Process.’ When you examine history however, what you will find is plenty of evidence documenting exactly how the US government and the CIA have altered and flipped 100 foreign elections throughout history, the attempted assassination of over 50 foreign leaders. Knowing all this, one might find it hard to take seriously Washington’s claims that Putin and Trump are trying manipulate the 2016 Election
Who Cares If Russia Leaks Clinton’s Emails? 5 DNC Officials Resigned For Cheating Bernie Sanders
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/who-cares-if-russia-leaks-clintons-emails-5-dnc-officials_us_57babcb6e4b029a9a466db4d
There’s an Orwellian blame game being used by Clinton’s campaign to overshadow the consequences of a rigged primary. In addition to Debbie Wasserman Shultz and three other DNC officials forced to resign in early August, the DNC’s top fundraiser just recently left because of WikiLeaks. Instead of asking why these DNC officials resigned, media seems focused solely on why Assange would disclose their emails.
As for Russia’s influence in U.S. politics, Hillary Clinton is a walking cybersecurity risk. Russian hackers have apparently infiltrated the DNC, Clinton’s campaign, the Clinton Foundation, and most likely Hillary Clinton’s convenient private server. Thus, not only did cheating Bernie Sanders come with consequences for Debbie Wasserman Shultz and others, but America might elect a person targeted by global hackers.
GOP lobbyist adds $5K to reward for info on murder of former DNC staffer Seth Rich
http://wjla.com/news/local/gop-lobbyist-adds-5k-to-reward-for-info-on-murder-of-former-dnc-staffer-seth-rich
Jack Burkman, a GOP lobbyist, added $5,000 to an existing reward Monday for information on the murder of former Democratic National Committee employee Seth Rich.
Burkman previously offered a $100,000 reward in addition to a $25,000 offer from Metropolitan Police, according to PR Newschannel. In August, WikiLeaks offered it's own $20,000 reward for information on Rich's murder. The extra $5,000 brings the reward total to $150,000, which is the highest reward ever offered for a murder in Washington, D.C.
On Sunday, July 10, 2016 Rich, 27, was shot in the back while walking home in the Bloomingdale neighborhood in Northwest Washington.
The incident happened shortly before Wikileaks released emails which sparked the resignation of several party leaders on the eve of the Democratic Convention.
angelburst29
The Living Force
Just wondering if DHS was trying to plant fake evidence on these systems - to bolster the "Russia hacked the election" propaganda.
More states confirm suspected cyberattacks sourced to DHS (Video)
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/more-states-confirm-cyber-attacks-sourced-to-dhs/476227320
Thursday Dec 15, 2016 - ATLANTA - Channel 2 Investigative Reporter Aaron Diamant has learned two more states’ election agencies have confirmed cyberattacks linked to the same U.S. Department of Homeland Security IP address as last month’s massive attack in Georgia.
The two states reporting the suspected cyber attack were West Virginia and Kentucky.
In the past week, the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office has confirmed 10 separate cyberattacks on its network were traced back to DHS addresses.
In an exclusive interview, Secretary of State Brian Kemp confirmed the attacks of different levels on his agency’s network over the last 10 months. He said they all traced back to DHS internet provider addresses.
"We're being told something that they think they have it figured out, yet nobody's really showed us how this happened,” Kemp said. "We need to know."
Kemp told Diamant that his office's cybersecurity vendor discovered the additional so-called vulnerability scans to his network's firewall after a massive mid-November cyberattack triggered an internal investigation.
The Secretary of State's Office manages Georgia’s elections, and most concerning for Kemp about the newly discovered scans is the timing.
The first one happened on Feb. 2, the day after Georgia’s voter registration deadline. The next one took place just days before the SEC primary. Another occurred in May, the day before the general primary, and then two more took place in November, the day before and the day of the presidential election.
"It makes you wonder if somebody was trying to prove a point,” Kemp said.
Last week, the DHS confirmed the large Nov. 15 attack traced back to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection internet gateway. But Kemp says the DHS’ story about its source keeps changing.
"First, it was an employee in Corpus Christi, and now, it's a contractor in Georgia,” Kemp said.
Unsatisfied with the response he got from DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson this week, Kemp fired off a letter Wednesday to loop in President-elect Donald Trump.
"We just need to ask the new administration to take a look at this and make sure that we get the truth the people of Georgia are deserving to know that and really demanding it,” Kemp said.
More states confirm suspected cyberattacks sourced to DHS (Video)
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/more-states-confirm-cyber-attacks-sourced-to-dhs/476227320
Thursday Dec 15, 2016 - ATLANTA - Channel 2 Investigative Reporter Aaron Diamant has learned two more states’ election agencies have confirmed cyberattacks linked to the same U.S. Department of Homeland Security IP address as last month’s massive attack in Georgia.
The two states reporting the suspected cyber attack were West Virginia and Kentucky.
In the past week, the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office has confirmed 10 separate cyberattacks on its network were traced back to DHS addresses.
In an exclusive interview, Secretary of State Brian Kemp confirmed the attacks of different levels on his agency’s network over the last 10 months. He said they all traced back to DHS internet provider addresses.
"We're being told something that they think they have it figured out, yet nobody's really showed us how this happened,” Kemp said. "We need to know."
Kemp told Diamant that his office's cybersecurity vendor discovered the additional so-called vulnerability scans to his network's firewall after a massive mid-November cyberattack triggered an internal investigation.
The Secretary of State's Office manages Georgia’s elections, and most concerning for Kemp about the newly discovered scans is the timing.
The first one happened on Feb. 2, the day after Georgia’s voter registration deadline. The next one took place just days before the SEC primary. Another occurred in May, the day before the general primary, and then two more took place in November, the day before and the day of the presidential election.
"It makes you wonder if somebody was trying to prove a point,” Kemp said.
Last week, the DHS confirmed the large Nov. 15 attack traced back to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection internet gateway. But Kemp says the DHS’ story about its source keeps changing.
"First, it was an employee in Corpus Christi, and now, it's a contractor in Georgia,” Kemp said.
Unsatisfied with the response he got from DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson this week, Kemp fired off a letter Wednesday to loop in President-elect Donald Trump.
"We just need to ask the new administration to take a look at this and make sure that we get the truth the people of Georgia are deserving to know that and really demanding it,” Kemp said.
Moonbird
Jedi
"They Are Standing Strong By The Will Of Our Voters" - GOP Crushes Democrats' Hopes, Confirms Electors Back Trump
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-15/they-are-standing-strong-will-our-voters-gop-crushes-democrats-hopes-confirms-electo
While a liberal group responsible for fomenting the Electoral College rebellion claims to have at least 20 of the 37 GOP defectors needed to pull an upset and send the election to the House, The Hill reports that, among Republicans on the ground, though, there is no chatter or speculation surrounding that possibility. The liberal opposition has generated a cottage industry of online speculation that an Electoral College revolt is a real possibility. But state party leaders familiar with the thinking of their electors dismiss the speculation as fantasy.
Republican state party chairmen and local officials expect nearly every GOP elector to fulfill their pledges to vote for Donald Trump for president on Monday when delegates gather across the country to cast their Electoral College ballots.
Despite a media frenzy around the scattered groups of liberals suggesting a groundswell of Republican opposition to Trump, there is little evidence to suggest that many GOP voters will go against the popular vote in their home states.
An Associated Press poll of more than 330 electors published Thursday found similarly long odds for any Electoral College revolt, with both Democrats and Republicans convinced Trump will clinch the vote Monday.
The Hill reached state party chairmen or officials for 10 of the 30 states Trump won in November, accounting for 170 of the 270 electoral votes he needs to win.
The officials in those states, most of whom said they are in close contact with their full slate of delegates and are working in tandem with the Republican National Committee’s whip operation, promised to deliver 169 of the 170 electoral votes up for grabs.
(article continues in link above)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-15/they-are-standing-strong-will-our-voters-gop-crushes-democrats-hopes-confirms-electo
While a liberal group responsible for fomenting the Electoral College rebellion claims to have at least 20 of the 37 GOP defectors needed to pull an upset and send the election to the House, The Hill reports that, among Republicans on the ground, though, there is no chatter or speculation surrounding that possibility. The liberal opposition has generated a cottage industry of online speculation that an Electoral College revolt is a real possibility. But state party leaders familiar with the thinking of their electors dismiss the speculation as fantasy.
Republican state party chairmen and local officials expect nearly every GOP elector to fulfill their pledges to vote for Donald Trump for president on Monday when delegates gather across the country to cast their Electoral College ballots.
Despite a media frenzy around the scattered groups of liberals suggesting a groundswell of Republican opposition to Trump, there is little evidence to suggest that many GOP voters will go against the popular vote in their home states.
An Associated Press poll of more than 330 electors published Thursday found similarly long odds for any Electoral College revolt, with both Democrats and Republicans convinced Trump will clinch the vote Monday.
The Hill reached state party chairmen or officials for 10 of the 30 states Trump won in November, accounting for 170 of the 270 electoral votes he needs to win.
The officials in those states, most of whom said they are in close contact with their full slate of delegates and are working in tandem with the Republican National Committee’s whip operation, promised to deliver 169 of the 170 electoral votes up for grabs.
(article continues in link above)
Thanks for the last 2 post angleburst 29 and Moonbird! So there is hope, people aren't being fooled and the depth of the deseption is being revealed..This is something else isn't it, the insanity in Washington. As always such good info here as well as Sott to let us know whats going on. I just wanted to make this personal comment. Once again I found myself being caught up in all thats happening on a emotional level. The big turn around for me supporting Trump then fear it will be taken away with all this...then backing off once again in my view point to remain stable and sane. Without the right perspective one can get caught up in the machinations of psychopaths and that just adds to the energy of entropy all around and isn't good for ones health. If those within our government allow themselves to be taken in by this corruption and lie, I feel we will have truly lost this country, its finished, no integrity left. I may add, although I support Trump, I don't know what he's about yet...that remains to be seen.
This article on Sott was helpful for me today and so I'll be looking into material by the Stoics. I'll copy it here again, if you don't mind. (my emphasis in bold type) https://www.sott.net/article/336754-A-good-dose-of-Stoic-philosophy-is-necessary-for-coping-with-troubling-times
This article on Sott was helpful for me today and so I'll be looking into material by the Stoics. I'll copy it here again, if you don't mind. (my emphasis in bold type) https://www.sott.net/article/336754-A-good-dose-of-Stoic-philosophy-is-necessary-for-coping-with-troubling-times
angelburst29
The Living Force
A surprising development? Maybe more Whistleblowers will come forward with vital information? Then again, maybe it's a trap and they sacrificed one of their own, so they could flush out other Whistleblowers?
A top National Security Administration watchdog, who notoriously declared that whistleblower Edward Snowden should have gone directly to him with his concerns, has been fired for retaliating against another whistleblower.
NSA Watchdog Fired After Retaliating Against Whistleblower
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612161048626043-nsa-watchdog-fired-retaliation/
Former NSA inspector general George Ellard was found by a high-level Intelligence Community panel to have retaliated in May against a whistleblower.
“The closely held but unclassified finding against Ellard is not public. It was reached by following new whistleblower protections set forth by President Obama in an executive order, Presidential Policy Directive 19. (A President Trump could, in theory, eliminate the order.) Following PPD-19 procedures, a first-ever External Review Panel (ERP) composed of three of the most experienced watchdogs in the US government was convened to examine the issue,” the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) reported. “The trio — IG’s of the Justice Department, Treasury, and CIA – overturned an earlier finding of the Department of Defense IG, which investigated Ellard but was unable to substantiate his alleged retaliation.”
The findings against Ellard gave NSA Admiral Director Michael Rogers 90 days to take action by remedying the situation with Ellard’s victim, as well as imposing disciplinary actions against the former NSA inspector.
“The finding against Ellard is extraordinary and unprecedented,” Stephen Aftergood, director of the secrecy program at the Federation of American Scientists, told POGO. “This is the first real test drive for a new process of protecting intelligence whistleblowers. Until now, they’ve been at the mercy of their own agencies, and dependent on the whims of their superiors. This process is supposed to provide them security and a procedural foothold.” “The case, which is still in progress, offers hopeful signs that the new framework may be working,” Aftergood added.
The findings validate Snowden’s claims that he feared retaliation if he went through official channels to report his concerns about NSA overreach,
although it was confirmed that he had expressed his worries about domestic spying programs to his supervisors in a series of emails.
In a 2014 panel discussion at Georgetown University, Ellard declared that “Snowden could have come to me.” “We have surprising success in resolving the complaints that are brought to us,” Ellard said during the panel, adding, “Perhaps it’s the case that we could have shown, we could have explained to Mr. Snowden his misperceptions, his lack of understanding of what we do.”
Top NSA Watchdog Who Insisted Snowden Should Have Come to Him Receives Termination Notice for Retaliating Against a Whistleblower
_http://www.pogo.org/blog/2016/12/intelligence-community-landmark.html
Until just a few months ago, George Ellard occupied a position of trust as top watchdog of the National Security Agency, America’s principal collector of signals intelligence. Ellard was not only NSA’s Inspector General, but an outspoken critic of Edward Snowden, the former contract employee who leaked hundreds of thousands of classified emails to publicly expose the agency’s domestic surveillance program. Snowden claimed, among other things, that his concerns about NSA’s domestic eavesdropping were ignored by the agency, and that he feared retaliation. Ellard publicly argued in 2014 that Snowden could have safely reported the allegations of NSA’s domestic surveillance directly to him.
Then last May, after eight months of inquiry and deliberation, a high-level Intelligence Community panel found that Ellard himself had previously retaliated against an NSA whistleblower, sources tell the Project On Government Oversight. Informed of that finding, NSA’s Director, Admiral Michael Rogers, promptly issued Ellard a notice of proposed termination, although Ellard apparently remains an agency employee while on administrative leave, pending a possible response to his appeal from Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.
The closely held but unclassified finding against Ellard is not public. It was reached by following new whistleblower protections set forth by President Obama in an executive order, Presidential Policy Directive 19. (A President Trump could, in theory, eliminate the order.) Following PPD-19 procedures, a first-ever External Review Panel (ERP) composed of three of the most experienced watchdogs in the US government was convened to examine the issue. The trio -- IG’s of the Justice Department, Treasury, and CIA – overturned an earlier finding of the Department of Defense IG, which investigated Ellard but was unable to substantiate his alleged retaliation.
“The finding against Ellard is extraordinary and unprecedented,” notes Stephen Aftergood, Director of the Secrecy Program at the Federation of American Scientists. “This is the first real test drive for a new process of protecting intelligence whistleblowers. Until now, they’ve been at the mercy of their own agencies, and dependent on the whims of their superiors. This process is supposed to provide them security and a procedural foothold.”
“The case, which is still in progress, offers hopeful signs that the new framework may be working,” Aftergood added.
POGO learned of the decision against Ellard from sources who spoke on condition of anonymity. The information was later confirmed by government officials. POGO has been told that mention of the finding will appear in a semiannual report (SAR) of the Intelligence Community IG (ICIG) that should be released in the near future. It makes brief mention of the case without citing Ellard by name.
Neither Ellard, his lawyer, nor the NSA provided any comment, despite POGO’s numerous attempts to offer them the opportunity.
POGO also reached out to the NSA employee and victim of Ellard’s retaliation, posing a detailed series of questions about what happened through an official intermediary. POGO has been told that the whistleblower composed answers to at least some of those queries, and was seeking NSA approval before releasing them. So far, there is no sign that such approval has been granted.
The DODIG told POGO it would have no immediate comment.
THE RETALIATOR
Ellard, a Yale-trained lawyer and former prosecutor with a doctorate in philosophy, was for nine years the top oversight official keeping tabs on NSA, an agency fraught with controversy over its handling of Edward Snowden and other prominent whistleblowers. Ellard in particular chose to enter that debate along with other critics who faulted Snowden for his alleged unwillingness to report his concerns about NSA domestic surveillance through channels inside the agency set up for that purpose.
IG Ellard’s criticism of Snowden first stirred controversy during a 2014 panel discussion at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington. “Snowden could have come to me,” Ellard declared, arguing that the leaker, now a fugitive in Russia, would have received the same protections as other NSA employees, who file some one thousand reports annually to the agency’s hotline. “We have surprising success in resolving the complaints that are brought to us,” Ellard said, adding, “Perhaps it’s the case that we could have shown, we could have explained to Mr. Snowden his misperceptions, his lack of understanding of what we do.”
Snowden himself has explicitly contended that he feared retaliation and that he had no other option but to go public if he wished to expose NSA domestic eavesdropping. Among the cases of retaliation that Snowden has pointed to is that of former senior NSA employee Thomas Drake, who after reporting alleged wrongdoing through authorized channels, was arrested at dawn by the FBI, stripped of his security clearance, charged with crimes under the Espionage Act, all of which were later dropped, leaving him to find work in an Apple store. Snowden’s related contention is that in his own case, he did, in fact, report his concerns in emails to NSA superiors at the time, a contention which NBC has said it verified.
Now, given the official finding that Ellard retaliated against an NSA whistleblower, the credibility of Ellard’s argument that Snowden could have come to him is gravely undermined. More generally, there are few if any incentives for intelligence whistleblowers to report problems through designated authorities when the IG of NSA is found to have retaliated against such an individual.
PPD-19 IS WORKING
Meanwhile, the ICIG’s handling of what began as a whistleblower complaint against Ellard sends an encouraging signal to those who may report wrongdoing at 17 US intelligence agencies and all executive-branch federal offices where employees hold security clearances, according to the ICIG, which oversees the directive.
Obama proposed the PPD-19 process in 2012, though implementation did not begin until in mid-2013. Some 18 appeals for review of a retaliation charge, or the convening of an ERP , have made their way to the office of Intelligence Community IG Charles McCullough, III, who oversees the directive.
Dan Meyer, the ICIG’s Executive Director for Intelligence Community Whistleblower & Source Protection told POGO, “The purpose of PPD-19 is to offer intelligence and national security whistleblowers an effective and safe means to report problems without being forced to confront the fear of reprisal.”
As such, the Ellard case is groundbreaking not only because it represents the most extensive use of PPD-19 procedures to date, but also because of Ellard’s high-ranking position in a national security environment where few, if any top officials are known to have been held accountable. A variety of reprisal accusations have been made against senior officials over the years. Rightly or wrongly, very few have been ever been substantiated.
Under the PPD-19 procedures used in Ellard’s case, the allegations were first reviewed by the DoD IG, but that office was unable to substantiate retaliation. The victim who had made the allegations then appealed to ICIG McCullough. He, in turn, decided to convene a first-ever high-ranking, three-person ERP to further examine the matter.
McCullough would normally have chaired the group, but opted to recuse himself, mindful of a conflict of interest. Indeed, McCullough previously worked at the NSA IG himself as its chief of investigations. Ellard was his boss.
Filling in for McCullough as chairman of the panel was DOJ IG Michael Horowitz, who selected the CIA and Treasury watchdogs to serve with him.
According to ERP procedures, the panel had the option to approve the earlier DoD IG findings, which did not substantiate retaliation; to ask the DoD IG to redo all or part of its probe; or to redo the investigation itself, using the record of the previous probe as a baseline.
The ERP opted to conduct its own inquiry, including witness interviews and the evaluation of evidence.
Once the panel found that Ellard had retaliated against a whistleblower, the finding went to Admiral Michael Rogers who, as NSA director, had 90 days to take action on two fronts: what remedy to offer the victim of retaliation, and what discipline to impose on Ellard, the retaliator.
POGO has been unable to determine exactly what remedy Rogers prescribed, if any, for the victim, but he promptly moved against Ellard. The highly unusual outcome marks the first time a PPD-19 review panel has ever been convened and the first time that a prior investigation was reversed under the process set forth in the directive.
A top National Security Administration watchdog, who notoriously declared that whistleblower Edward Snowden should have gone directly to him with his concerns, has been fired for retaliating against another whistleblower.
NSA Watchdog Fired After Retaliating Against Whistleblower
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612161048626043-nsa-watchdog-fired-retaliation/
Former NSA inspector general George Ellard was found by a high-level Intelligence Community panel to have retaliated in May against a whistleblower.
“The closely held but unclassified finding against Ellard is not public. It was reached by following new whistleblower protections set forth by President Obama in an executive order, Presidential Policy Directive 19. (A President Trump could, in theory, eliminate the order.) Following PPD-19 procedures, a first-ever External Review Panel (ERP) composed of three of the most experienced watchdogs in the US government was convened to examine the issue,” the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) reported. “The trio — IG’s of the Justice Department, Treasury, and CIA – overturned an earlier finding of the Department of Defense IG, which investigated Ellard but was unable to substantiate his alleged retaliation.”
The findings against Ellard gave NSA Admiral Director Michael Rogers 90 days to take action by remedying the situation with Ellard’s victim, as well as imposing disciplinary actions against the former NSA inspector.
“The finding against Ellard is extraordinary and unprecedented,” Stephen Aftergood, director of the secrecy program at the Federation of American Scientists, told POGO. “This is the first real test drive for a new process of protecting intelligence whistleblowers. Until now, they’ve been at the mercy of their own agencies, and dependent on the whims of their superiors. This process is supposed to provide them security and a procedural foothold.” “The case, which is still in progress, offers hopeful signs that the new framework may be working,” Aftergood added.
The findings validate Snowden’s claims that he feared retaliation if he went through official channels to report his concerns about NSA overreach,
although it was confirmed that he had expressed his worries about domestic spying programs to his supervisors in a series of emails.
In a 2014 panel discussion at Georgetown University, Ellard declared that “Snowden could have come to me.” “We have surprising success in resolving the complaints that are brought to us,” Ellard said during the panel, adding, “Perhaps it’s the case that we could have shown, we could have explained to Mr. Snowden his misperceptions, his lack of understanding of what we do.”
Top NSA Watchdog Who Insisted Snowden Should Have Come to Him Receives Termination Notice for Retaliating Against a Whistleblower
_http://www.pogo.org/blog/2016/12/intelligence-community-landmark.html
Until just a few months ago, George Ellard occupied a position of trust as top watchdog of the National Security Agency, America’s principal collector of signals intelligence. Ellard was not only NSA’s Inspector General, but an outspoken critic of Edward Snowden, the former contract employee who leaked hundreds of thousands of classified emails to publicly expose the agency’s domestic surveillance program. Snowden claimed, among other things, that his concerns about NSA’s domestic eavesdropping were ignored by the agency, and that he feared retaliation. Ellard publicly argued in 2014 that Snowden could have safely reported the allegations of NSA’s domestic surveillance directly to him.
Then last May, after eight months of inquiry and deliberation, a high-level Intelligence Community panel found that Ellard himself had previously retaliated against an NSA whistleblower, sources tell the Project On Government Oversight. Informed of that finding, NSA’s Director, Admiral Michael Rogers, promptly issued Ellard a notice of proposed termination, although Ellard apparently remains an agency employee while on administrative leave, pending a possible response to his appeal from Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.
The closely held but unclassified finding against Ellard is not public. It was reached by following new whistleblower protections set forth by President Obama in an executive order, Presidential Policy Directive 19. (A President Trump could, in theory, eliminate the order.) Following PPD-19 procedures, a first-ever External Review Panel (ERP) composed of three of the most experienced watchdogs in the US government was convened to examine the issue. The trio -- IG’s of the Justice Department, Treasury, and CIA – overturned an earlier finding of the Department of Defense IG, which investigated Ellard but was unable to substantiate his alleged retaliation.
“The finding against Ellard is extraordinary and unprecedented,” notes Stephen Aftergood, Director of the Secrecy Program at the Federation of American Scientists. “This is the first real test drive for a new process of protecting intelligence whistleblowers. Until now, they’ve been at the mercy of their own agencies, and dependent on the whims of their superiors. This process is supposed to provide them security and a procedural foothold.”
“The case, which is still in progress, offers hopeful signs that the new framework may be working,” Aftergood added.
POGO learned of the decision against Ellard from sources who spoke on condition of anonymity. The information was later confirmed by government officials. POGO has been told that mention of the finding will appear in a semiannual report (SAR) of the Intelligence Community IG (ICIG) that should be released in the near future. It makes brief mention of the case without citing Ellard by name.
Neither Ellard, his lawyer, nor the NSA provided any comment, despite POGO’s numerous attempts to offer them the opportunity.
POGO also reached out to the NSA employee and victim of Ellard’s retaliation, posing a detailed series of questions about what happened through an official intermediary. POGO has been told that the whistleblower composed answers to at least some of those queries, and was seeking NSA approval before releasing them. So far, there is no sign that such approval has been granted.
The DODIG told POGO it would have no immediate comment.
THE RETALIATOR
Ellard, a Yale-trained lawyer and former prosecutor with a doctorate in philosophy, was for nine years the top oversight official keeping tabs on NSA, an agency fraught with controversy over its handling of Edward Snowden and other prominent whistleblowers. Ellard in particular chose to enter that debate along with other critics who faulted Snowden for his alleged unwillingness to report his concerns about NSA domestic surveillance through channels inside the agency set up for that purpose.
IG Ellard’s criticism of Snowden first stirred controversy during a 2014 panel discussion at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington. “Snowden could have come to me,” Ellard declared, arguing that the leaker, now a fugitive in Russia, would have received the same protections as other NSA employees, who file some one thousand reports annually to the agency’s hotline. “We have surprising success in resolving the complaints that are brought to us,” Ellard said, adding, “Perhaps it’s the case that we could have shown, we could have explained to Mr. Snowden his misperceptions, his lack of understanding of what we do.”
Snowden himself has explicitly contended that he feared retaliation and that he had no other option but to go public if he wished to expose NSA domestic eavesdropping. Among the cases of retaliation that Snowden has pointed to is that of former senior NSA employee Thomas Drake, who after reporting alleged wrongdoing through authorized channels, was arrested at dawn by the FBI, stripped of his security clearance, charged with crimes under the Espionage Act, all of which were later dropped, leaving him to find work in an Apple store. Snowden’s related contention is that in his own case, he did, in fact, report his concerns in emails to NSA superiors at the time, a contention which NBC has said it verified.
Now, given the official finding that Ellard retaliated against an NSA whistleblower, the credibility of Ellard’s argument that Snowden could have come to him is gravely undermined. More generally, there are few if any incentives for intelligence whistleblowers to report problems through designated authorities when the IG of NSA is found to have retaliated against such an individual.
PPD-19 IS WORKING
Meanwhile, the ICIG’s handling of what began as a whistleblower complaint against Ellard sends an encouraging signal to those who may report wrongdoing at 17 US intelligence agencies and all executive-branch federal offices where employees hold security clearances, according to the ICIG, which oversees the directive.
Obama proposed the PPD-19 process in 2012, though implementation did not begin until in mid-2013. Some 18 appeals for review of a retaliation charge, or the convening of an ERP , have made their way to the office of Intelligence Community IG Charles McCullough, III, who oversees the directive.
Dan Meyer, the ICIG’s Executive Director for Intelligence Community Whistleblower & Source Protection told POGO, “The purpose of PPD-19 is to offer intelligence and national security whistleblowers an effective and safe means to report problems without being forced to confront the fear of reprisal.”
As such, the Ellard case is groundbreaking not only because it represents the most extensive use of PPD-19 procedures to date, but also because of Ellard’s high-ranking position in a national security environment where few, if any top officials are known to have been held accountable. A variety of reprisal accusations have been made against senior officials over the years. Rightly or wrongly, very few have been ever been substantiated.
Under the PPD-19 procedures used in Ellard’s case, the allegations were first reviewed by the DoD IG, but that office was unable to substantiate retaliation. The victim who had made the allegations then appealed to ICIG McCullough. He, in turn, decided to convene a first-ever high-ranking, three-person ERP to further examine the matter.
McCullough would normally have chaired the group, but opted to recuse himself, mindful of a conflict of interest. Indeed, McCullough previously worked at the NSA IG himself as its chief of investigations. Ellard was his boss.
Filling in for McCullough as chairman of the panel was DOJ IG Michael Horowitz, who selected the CIA and Treasury watchdogs to serve with him.
According to ERP procedures, the panel had the option to approve the earlier DoD IG findings, which did not substantiate retaliation; to ask the DoD IG to redo all or part of its probe; or to redo the investigation itself, using the record of the previous probe as a baseline.
The ERP opted to conduct its own inquiry, including witness interviews and the evaluation of evidence.
Once the panel found that Ellard had retaliated against a whistleblower, the finding went to Admiral Michael Rogers who, as NSA director, had 90 days to take action on two fronts: what remedy to offer the victim of retaliation, and what discipline to impose on Ellard, the retaliator.
POGO has been unable to determine exactly what remedy Rogers prescribed, if any, for the victim, but he promptly moved against Ellard. The highly unusual outcome marks the first time a PPD-19 review panel has ever been convened and the first time that a prior investigation was reversed under the process set forth in the directive.
angelburst29
The Living Force
Putin has had enough of the relentless barrage of US accusations that he, personally, "hacked the US presidential election."
Putin Lashes Out At Obama: "Show Some Proof Or Shut Up"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-16/putin-lashes-out-obama-show-some-proof-or-shut
The Russian president's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said on Friday that the US must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it. Peskov said it was "indecent" of the United States to "groundlessly" accuse Russia of intervention in its elections.
“You need to either stop talking about it, or finally show some kind of proof. Otherwise it just looks very indecent”, Peskov told Reporters in Tokyo where Putin is meeting with Japan PM Abe, responding to the latest accusations that Russia was responsible for hacker attacks.
Peskov also warned that Obama's threat to "retaliate" to the alleged Russian hack is "against both American and international law", hinting at open-ended escalation should Obama take the podium today at 2:15pm to officially launch cyberwar against Russia.
Previously, on Thursday, Peskov told the AP the report was "laughable nonsense", while Russian foreign ministry spox Maria Zakharova accused "Western media" of being a "shill" and a "mouthpiece of various power groups", and added that "it's not the general public who's being manipulated," Zakharova said. "the general public nowadays can distinguish the truth. It's the mass media that is manipulating themselves."
Meanwhile, on Friday Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister told state television network, Russia 24, he was "dumbstruck" by the NBC report which alleges that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved in an election hack.
The report cited U.S. intelligence officials that now believe with a "high level of confidence" that Putin became personally involved in a secret campaign to influence the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. "I think this is just silly, and the futility of the attempt to convince somebody of this is absolutely obvious," Lavrov added, according to the news outlet.
As a reminder, last night Obama vowed retaliatory action against Russia for its meddling in the US presidential election last month. "I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing," Obama told National Public Radio.
US intelligence agencies in October pinned blame on Russia for election-related hacking. At the time, the White House vowed a "proportional response" to the cyberactivity, though declined to preview what that response might entail. Meanwhile, both President-elect Donald Trump, the FBI, and the ODNI have dismissed the CIA's intelligence community's assessment, for the the same reason Putin finally lashed out at Obama: there is no proof.
That, however, has never stopped the US from escalating a geopolitical conflict to the point of war, or beyond, so pay close attention to what Obama says this afternoon.
According to an NBC report, a team of analysts at Eurasia Group said in a note on Friday that they believe the outgoing administration is likely to take action which could result in a significant barrier for Trump's team once he takes office in January.
"It is unlikely that U.S. intelligence reports will change Trump's intention to initiate a rapprochement with Moscow, but the congressional response following its own investigations could obstruct the new administration's effort," Eurasia Group analysts added.
At the same time, Wikileaks offered its "validation" services, tweeting that "Obama should submit any Putin documents to WikiLeaks to be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible."
Putin Lashes Out At Obama: "Show Some Proof Or Shut Up"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-16/putin-lashes-out-obama-show-some-proof-or-shut
The Russian president's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said on Friday that the US must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it. Peskov said it was "indecent" of the United States to "groundlessly" accuse Russia of intervention in its elections.
“You need to either stop talking about it, or finally show some kind of proof. Otherwise it just looks very indecent”, Peskov told Reporters in Tokyo where Putin is meeting with Japan PM Abe, responding to the latest accusations that Russia was responsible for hacker attacks.
Peskov also warned that Obama's threat to "retaliate" to the alleged Russian hack is "against both American and international law", hinting at open-ended escalation should Obama take the podium today at 2:15pm to officially launch cyberwar against Russia.
Previously, on Thursday, Peskov told the AP the report was "laughable nonsense", while Russian foreign ministry spox Maria Zakharova accused "Western media" of being a "shill" and a "mouthpiece of various power groups", and added that "it's not the general public who's being manipulated," Zakharova said. "the general public nowadays can distinguish the truth. It's the mass media that is manipulating themselves."
Meanwhile, on Friday Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister told state television network, Russia 24, he was "dumbstruck" by the NBC report which alleges that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved in an election hack.
The report cited U.S. intelligence officials that now believe with a "high level of confidence" that Putin became personally involved in a secret campaign to influence the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. "I think this is just silly, and the futility of the attempt to convince somebody of this is absolutely obvious," Lavrov added, according to the news outlet.
As a reminder, last night Obama vowed retaliatory action against Russia for its meddling in the US presidential election last month. "I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing," Obama told National Public Radio.
US intelligence agencies in October pinned blame on Russia for election-related hacking. At the time, the White House vowed a "proportional response" to the cyberactivity, though declined to preview what that response might entail. Meanwhile, both President-elect Donald Trump, the FBI, and the ODNI have dismissed the CIA's intelligence community's assessment, for the the same reason Putin finally lashed out at Obama: there is no proof.
That, however, has never stopped the US from escalating a geopolitical conflict to the point of war, or beyond, so pay close attention to what Obama says this afternoon.
According to an NBC report, a team of analysts at Eurasia Group said in a note on Friday that they believe the outgoing administration is likely to take action which could result in a significant barrier for Trump's team once he takes office in January.
"It is unlikely that U.S. intelligence reports will change Trump's intention to initiate a rapprochement with Moscow, but the congressional response following its own investigations could obstruct the new administration's effort," Eurasia Group analysts added.
At the same time, Wikileaks offered its "validation" services, tweeting that "Obama should submit any Putin documents to WikiLeaks to be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible."
angelburst29
The Living Force
Jeff Bezos - Washington Post owner receives $600 million contract from the CIA
http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives-600-million-cia/
Editor’s note: The Washington Post was the first to run the story of the CIA’s claim that Russia hacked the US election, of which there is absolutely no evidence.
It’s been a rough couple days for The Washington Post. Word emerged that hackers invaded its internal system—for a few days, no less—all of its staffers had to change their passwords as the company tried to figure out how much data had been compromised.
Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.
Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction.
In a statement released by the Institute for Public Accuracy, media writer/author Robert McChesney observes:
When the main shareholder in one of the very largest corporations in the world benefits from a massive contract with the CIA on the one hand, and that same billionaire owns the Washington Post on the other hand, there are serious problems. The Post is unquestionably the political paper of record in the United States, and how it covers governance sets the agenda for the balance of the news media. Citizens need to know about this conflict of interest in the columns of the Post itself.
If some official enemy of the United States had a comparable situation—say the owner of the dominant newspaper in Caracas was getting $600 million in secretive contracts from the Maduro government—the Post itself would lead the howling chorus impaling that newspaper and that government for making a mockery of a free press. It is time for the Post to take a dose of its own medicine.”
See article by Norman Solomon for a fuller accounting. He notes:
Bezos personally and publicly touts Amazon Web Services, and it’s evident that Amazon will be seeking more CIA contracts. Last month, Amazon issued a statement saying, “We look forward to a successful relationship with the CIA.”
SOURCE - https://www.thenation.com/article/amazon-washington-post-and-600-million-cia-contract/
http://www.hangthebankers.com/washington-post-owner-receives-600-million-cia/
Editor’s note: The Washington Post was the first to run the story of the CIA’s claim that Russia hacked the US election, of which there is absolutely no evidence.
It’s been a rough couple days for The Washington Post. Word emerged that hackers invaded its internal system—for a few days, no less—all of its staffers had to change their passwords as the company tried to figure out how much data had been compromised.
Meanwhile, a petition campaign was launched related to news that Amazon, under the Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, recently secured a $600 million contract from the CIA. That’s at least twice what Bezos paid for the Post this year. Bezos recently disclosed that the company’s Web-services business is building a “private cloud” for the CIA to use for its data needs.
Critics charge that, at a minimum, the Post needs to disclose its CIA link whenever it reports on the agency. Over 15,000 have signed the petition this week hosted by RootsAction.
In a statement released by the Institute for Public Accuracy, media writer/author Robert McChesney observes:
When the main shareholder in one of the very largest corporations in the world benefits from a massive contract with the CIA on the one hand, and that same billionaire owns the Washington Post on the other hand, there are serious problems. The Post is unquestionably the political paper of record in the United States, and how it covers governance sets the agenda for the balance of the news media. Citizens need to know about this conflict of interest in the columns of the Post itself.
If some official enemy of the United States had a comparable situation—say the owner of the dominant newspaper in Caracas was getting $600 million in secretive contracts from the Maduro government—the Post itself would lead the howling chorus impaling that newspaper and that government for making a mockery of a free press. It is time for the Post to take a dose of its own medicine.”
See article by Norman Solomon for a fuller accounting. He notes:
Bezos personally and publicly touts Amazon Web Services, and it’s evident that Amazon will be seeking more CIA contracts. Last month, Amazon issued a statement saying, “We look forward to a successful relationship with the CIA.”
SOURCE - https://www.thenation.com/article/amazon-washington-post-and-600-million-cia-contract/
angelburst29
The Living Force
Beau said:
Yes, you are correct. In hindsight, I should have put the "SOURCE" link and it's date - (as back-dated December 19, 2013) after the introduction of the Editor’s note: which stated: The Washington Post was the first to run the story of the CIA’s claim that Russia hacked the US election, of which there is absolutely no evidence. clarifying a repost of the 2013 article - instead of inserting the source and the link at the end of the article. The introduction, itself (Editor’s note), from the hangthebankers link was published December 16, 2016.
My purpose in Posting the article - was to show a connection between the Washington Post, it's owner Jeff Bezos and prior contract with the CIA - which "might explain" why the Washington Post published an article that "the CIA claimed that Russia hacked the US election"?
Looking further, on Wednesday, 21 August 2013, Amazon Received $600 Million CIA Computer Cloud Contract
http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18151-amazon-received-600-million-cia-computer-cloud-contract-surveillance-shopping
Let's see, recently Bezos paid $250 million for the Washington Post (and some other of its affiliated properties); Amazon earlier this year (beating out IBM, who is still contesting the awarding of the CIA contract to Amazon) received a $600 million contract from the CIA (and holds other government IT contracts including possibly one with the NSA).
-...- -...-
WikiLeaks calls on Obama to submit proof of Russian hacking for verification
https://www.rt.com/usa/370567-wikileaks-obama-russian-hacking-docs/
Published time: 16 Dec, 2016 - Following Barack Obama’s vow to take action against Russia for its alleged hacking of the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair John Podesta’s emails, WikiLeaks has suggested the president upload any documents to its whistleblowing site for verification.
In a tweet on Friday from the WikiLeaks Twitter account, the whistleblowing website encouraged Obama to “submit any Putin documents” to them so they can “be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible.”
The tweet comes only a day Obama told NPR, “there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action.”
The president has ordered a full review into the hacking and expects it will give “a comprehensive and best guess as to those motivations,” behind the leaks.
The Washington Post published an article last week featuring claims by anonymous CIA officials that Russia had “intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump.” It quickly came under public scrutiny, as people were wary of trusting anonymous claims without evidence, given the intelligence agencies’ history of lying to the public.
The Washington Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos’s, also has contracts with the CIA worth $600 million, more than double what he paid for the Post.
There have been calls for the intelligence agencies to produce evidence of Russian government hacking the DNC.
Speaking to Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Thursday, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange clearly stated, “Our source was not the Russian government.”
Addressing claims that WikiLeaks chose not to release similarly damning information about Republicans during the election, Assange also said that the site had received about three pages on the RNC, but that the information had already been published.
The WikiLeaks editor went on to say they were unhappy to even have to say that the documents did not come from a state party, as their usual policy is not to say anything about the source of leaks. In this case, they were forced to do so to prevent further distraction from the content of the documents.
Former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan and WikiLeaks insider Craig Murray said he knows for a fact that the DNC leak came from an insider and not a foreign hacker.
“Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak,” he said. “The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access.”
“The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks,” he explained, adding that he was part of the handover of the data.
When asked about Murray’s comments, Assange said he did not want to be drawn into discussing it, as they had to protect their sources.
angelburst29
The Living Force
At least 2,500 people are expected to protest Donald Trump’s presidency at a rally in Washington, DC on Saturday, event organizer John McGrane told Sputnik.
Over 2,500 Expected Saturday at Civil-Rights Rally in Washington Against Trump
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612171048675914-trump-rally-washington-expected/
At least 2,500 people are expected to protest Donald Trump’s presidency at a rally in Washington, DC on Saturday, two days before the Electoral College votes in the last act of the 2016 US election, marketing company executive John McGrane, who is organizing the event, told Sputnik.
"We think a Trump presidency presents a very real and immediate threat to the things we hold sacred," McGrane said Friday. "The march will be held two days prior to the states casting their electoral votes on December 19, and we want to ‘turn out’ two days early and let our unified voice be heard."
Under the social media hashtag #TurnOut, the protest is being sponsored by NOQ Creative, a San Francisco, California marketing company McGrane founded with his sister, Kelly, in 2015. NOQ, according to the company website, "partners with companies and individuals…around the globe" to help accomplish marketing objectives.
The goal of Saturday’s demonstration is to defend and protect liberties that some Americans fear will be threatened under Trump's presidency, such as the rights of women and minorities, environmental protection and affordable health care, McGrane explained. The fact Republicans control both chambers of the US Congress exacerbate these concerns, he added. The event is to take place at an amphitheater near the Washington Monument and feature Christopher Suprun, a Republican elector from Texas who has said he will defy the popular-vote result in his state and oppose Trump when the Electoral College convenes Monday. The Electoral College, whose 538 votes equal the number of legislators in Congress, consists of state-level electors like Suprun who formally choose the president and vice president based on popular-vote results. Trump surpassed the threshold of 270 electoral votes needed to become president, reaching 306 to Democrat Hillary Clinton’s 232. Clinton, however, won the November 8 nationwide popular vote by a margin of more than 2.8 million over Trump.
Hillary Clinton hosted a holiday party for her millionaire donors in New York (Photos)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4039350/Hillary-Clinton-arrives-holiday-party-New-York-s-famed-Plaza-Hotel.html
15 December 2016 - A downcast Clinton arrived at New York's famed Plaza Hotel on Thursday night and was pictured sitting in the back of a black car as it was directed into the hotel's loading dock garage.
Vogue editor Anna Wintour hid her face behind a male friend as she walked through the hotel and made her way into the party.
It is in stark contrast to the beaming attitudes they had during the recent election campaign before Clinton was beaten by Republican Donald Trump.
Clinton gave a speech at one point during the evening, where she was joined on the stage by her husband Bill, daughter Clinton and son-in-law Marc Mezvinsky, running mate Tim Kaine and John Podesta. It is unclear if Huma Abedin attended the event.
Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump continued his 'thank you' tour on Thursday night in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
He went after White House press secretary Josh Earnest – who has been pounding on Trump from the White House podium over Russian interference in the U.S. elections.
'This foolish guy, Josh Earnest, I don't know,' Trump said, calling out President Obama's chief spokesman by name.
Ex-House Speaker Slams Podesta for Blaming Election Loss on Others
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612161048671127-clinton-loss-election/
Gingrich, a Trump campaign ally who has been excluded from consideration for jobs in the incoming administration, was responding to an opinion article Podesta wrote in Friday’s Washington Post arguing that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) severely hurt Clinton’s electoral chances.
"Podesta is desperately trying to find somebody else to say, ‘It wasn't my fault,’ that ‘I was a stupid campaign manager, somebody else did it to us. It's beyond my control.’ Well, nice try," told Fox News Channel.
The FBI is "deeply broken,” Podesta asserted in the article, and he accused the bureau’s director, James Comey, of ignoring alleged Russian interference in the election and focusing instead on an "overblown" scandal involving Clinton’s email practices as US secretary of state. Podesta himself was at the center of the email scandal, when his correspondence with other Democratic Party officials was hacked, purportedly by people in Russia, US intelligence officials have claimed. The hacked emails were then passed on to whistleblower website WikiLeaks, which released them in daily batches in the weeks leading to the November 8 election.
Clinton Donor Soros, Fake News Disseminator WashPo Among Facebook Fact Checkers
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612171048677477-clinton-donor-fake-news-facebook/
17.12.2016 - On Thursday Facebook detailed a plan to fight ‘fake news,’ asking users to flag suspicious articles, in hopes of limiting bogus stories from winding up in the Facebook news feed. George Soros, a major Clinton supporter, is among the list of donors for International Fact Checking Network’s (IFCN) code of principles. The Mountain View, California, company will partner with mainstream outlets including ABC News, FactCheck and Snopes. Later that list was updated to include The Washington Post. The code of principles states that the group is nonpartisan in approaching facts, but conservatives are clearly baffled and even outraged at Facebook’s reliance on mainstream media outlets.
Ironically, The Washington Post’s most famous ‘fake news’ expose was later acknowledged by the news outlet to itself be fake. The Post had listed over 200 websites from across the political and economic spectrum, from an anonymous, recently-started website called PropOrNot. The site accused popular sites such as The Drudge Report, Zero Hedge, TruthOut, WikiLeaks, and Sputnik News of promoting false narratives and so-called Russian propaganda. After a host of groups, including some outlets not listed by site, questioned PropOrNot’s findings, the Washington Post added an editor’s note saying, "The Post…does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet."
Adrian Chen of the New Yorker, writes, “the prospect of legitimate dissenting voices being labelled fake news or Russian propaganda by mysterious groups of ex-government employees, with the help of a national newspaper, is even scarier,” than the prospect of bogus stories touted as true that favored Trump.
After the election, the social network was criticized for displaying news in a biased format. This prompted CEO Mark Zuckerberg to meet with so-called conservative ‘thought leaders’ where he promised that the site would give equal weight to different points of view.
Also here:
Clinton mega donor George Soros leads line-up of liberal billionaires who are funding Facebook's fake news fact checker
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4041910/Clinton-mega-donor-George-Soros-leads-line-liberal-billionaires-funding-Facebook-s-fake-news-fact-checker.html
Over 2,500 Expected Saturday at Civil-Rights Rally in Washington Against Trump
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612171048675914-trump-rally-washington-expected/
At least 2,500 people are expected to protest Donald Trump’s presidency at a rally in Washington, DC on Saturday, two days before the Electoral College votes in the last act of the 2016 US election, marketing company executive John McGrane, who is organizing the event, told Sputnik.
"We think a Trump presidency presents a very real and immediate threat to the things we hold sacred," McGrane said Friday. "The march will be held two days prior to the states casting their electoral votes on December 19, and we want to ‘turn out’ two days early and let our unified voice be heard."
Under the social media hashtag #TurnOut, the protest is being sponsored by NOQ Creative, a San Francisco, California marketing company McGrane founded with his sister, Kelly, in 2015. NOQ, according to the company website, "partners with companies and individuals…around the globe" to help accomplish marketing objectives.
The goal of Saturday’s demonstration is to defend and protect liberties that some Americans fear will be threatened under Trump's presidency, such as the rights of women and minorities, environmental protection and affordable health care, McGrane explained. The fact Republicans control both chambers of the US Congress exacerbate these concerns, he added. The event is to take place at an amphitheater near the Washington Monument and feature Christopher Suprun, a Republican elector from Texas who has said he will defy the popular-vote result in his state and oppose Trump when the Electoral College convenes Monday. The Electoral College, whose 538 votes equal the number of legislators in Congress, consists of state-level electors like Suprun who formally choose the president and vice president based on popular-vote results. Trump surpassed the threshold of 270 electoral votes needed to become president, reaching 306 to Democrat Hillary Clinton’s 232. Clinton, however, won the November 8 nationwide popular vote by a margin of more than 2.8 million over Trump.
Hillary Clinton hosted a holiday party for her millionaire donors in New York (Photos)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4039350/Hillary-Clinton-arrives-holiday-party-New-York-s-famed-Plaza-Hotel.html
15 December 2016 - A downcast Clinton arrived at New York's famed Plaza Hotel on Thursday night and was pictured sitting in the back of a black car as it was directed into the hotel's loading dock garage.
Vogue editor Anna Wintour hid her face behind a male friend as she walked through the hotel and made her way into the party.
It is in stark contrast to the beaming attitudes they had during the recent election campaign before Clinton was beaten by Republican Donald Trump.
Clinton gave a speech at one point during the evening, where she was joined on the stage by her husband Bill, daughter Clinton and son-in-law Marc Mezvinsky, running mate Tim Kaine and John Podesta. It is unclear if Huma Abedin attended the event.
Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump continued his 'thank you' tour on Thursday night in Hershey, Pennsylvania.
He went after White House press secretary Josh Earnest – who has been pounding on Trump from the White House podium over Russian interference in the U.S. elections.
'This foolish guy, Josh Earnest, I don't know,' Trump said, calling out President Obama's chief spokesman by name.
Ex-House Speaker Slams Podesta for Blaming Election Loss on Others
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612161048671127-clinton-loss-election/
Gingrich, a Trump campaign ally who has been excluded from consideration for jobs in the incoming administration, was responding to an opinion article Podesta wrote in Friday’s Washington Post arguing that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) severely hurt Clinton’s electoral chances.
"Podesta is desperately trying to find somebody else to say, ‘It wasn't my fault,’ that ‘I was a stupid campaign manager, somebody else did it to us. It's beyond my control.’ Well, nice try," told Fox News Channel.
The FBI is "deeply broken,” Podesta asserted in the article, and he accused the bureau’s director, James Comey, of ignoring alleged Russian interference in the election and focusing instead on an "overblown" scandal involving Clinton’s email practices as US secretary of state. Podesta himself was at the center of the email scandal, when his correspondence with other Democratic Party officials was hacked, purportedly by people in Russia, US intelligence officials have claimed. The hacked emails were then passed on to whistleblower website WikiLeaks, which released them in daily batches in the weeks leading to the November 8 election.
Clinton Donor Soros, Fake News Disseminator WashPo Among Facebook Fact Checkers
https://sputniknews.com/us/201612171048677477-clinton-donor-fake-news-facebook/
17.12.2016 - On Thursday Facebook detailed a plan to fight ‘fake news,’ asking users to flag suspicious articles, in hopes of limiting bogus stories from winding up in the Facebook news feed. George Soros, a major Clinton supporter, is among the list of donors for International Fact Checking Network’s (IFCN) code of principles. The Mountain View, California, company will partner with mainstream outlets including ABC News, FactCheck and Snopes. Later that list was updated to include The Washington Post. The code of principles states that the group is nonpartisan in approaching facts, but conservatives are clearly baffled and even outraged at Facebook’s reliance on mainstream media outlets.
Ironically, The Washington Post’s most famous ‘fake news’ expose was later acknowledged by the news outlet to itself be fake. The Post had listed over 200 websites from across the political and economic spectrum, from an anonymous, recently-started website called PropOrNot. The site accused popular sites such as The Drudge Report, Zero Hedge, TruthOut, WikiLeaks, and Sputnik News of promoting false narratives and so-called Russian propaganda. After a host of groups, including some outlets not listed by site, questioned PropOrNot’s findings, the Washington Post added an editor’s note saying, "The Post…does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet."
Adrian Chen of the New Yorker, writes, “the prospect of legitimate dissenting voices being labelled fake news or Russian propaganda by mysterious groups of ex-government employees, with the help of a national newspaper, is even scarier,” than the prospect of bogus stories touted as true that favored Trump.
After the election, the social network was criticized for displaying news in a biased format. This prompted CEO Mark Zuckerberg to meet with so-called conservative ‘thought leaders’ where he promised that the site would give equal weight to different points of view.
Also here:
Clinton mega donor George Soros leads line-up of liberal billionaires who are funding Facebook's fake news fact checker
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4041910/Clinton-mega-donor-George-Soros-leads-line-liberal-billionaires-funding-Facebook-s-fake-news-fact-checker.html
Also here:
Clinton mega donor George Soros leads line-up of liberal billionaires who are funding Facebook's fake news fact checker
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4041910/Clinton-mega-donor-George-Soros-leads-line-liberal-billionaires-funding-Facebook-s-fake-news-fact-checker.html
Reminds me what Laura once made mention to, something along the lines of, we have to raise the bizarre bar almost every day.
Clinton mega donor George Soros leads line-up of liberal billionaires who are funding Facebook's fake news fact checker
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4041910/Clinton-mega-donor-George-Soros-leads-line-liberal-billionaires-funding-Facebook-s-fake-news-fact-checker.html
Reminds me what Laura once made mention to, something along the lines of, we have to raise the bizarre bar almost every day.
