Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

angelburst29 said:
I found this to be an interesting and unexpected statement by Putin? Russia must have some pieces of the puzzle that the general public are unaware of?
Wonder if this "offer" by Russia gives any indication that Comey's life might be in danger?

Russia is ready to grant asylum to former FBI Director James Comey if he is persecuted in the United States, President Vladimir Putin said.

Putin: Russia Ready to Grant Asylum to Comey if He is Persecuted in US
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201706151054659703-putin-comey-asylum-russia-us/

VLADIMIR Putin has accused former FBI chief James Comey of peddling US propaganda as the Russian president hit back at claims of hacking the American election.

Putin mocks Comey over hacking claims and says 'Russia will give you political asylum'
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/817506/Vladimir-Putin-annual-phone-call-James-Comey-hacking

Speaking at his annual phone-in today, Mr Putin also mocked the FBI man by saying Russia would let him have political asylum if charges were brought against him.

Mr Putin said: "(The) ex-FBI director said that he believed Russia meddled into the voting process.

"He didn't provide any evidence once again, but says there was an influence on our minds, on how we should act. While this constant American propaganda... direct allocation of money for this, isn't it an influence on our minds, on how we should act on voting campaigns?"

"He suddenly said that he taped his talk with the president, and then passed this conversation to media via his friend. This sounds strange, when the head of special services records his talks with the commander-in-chief and passes this talk to the media."Then what is the difference between the FBI director and Mr Snowden? He is not the director of the special services then, but a rights defender, which defends a certain position. By the way if, in relation to this, a prosecution would be launched against him (Comey), we are ready to provide him with political asylum in Russia. He has to know this."


The Russian leader went on to blame “political infighting” in the US for the sanctions against his nation.

He said: ”Now a draft law to toughen up the sanctions has emerged in the U.S. Senate. Why? Nothing extraordinary has happened (in Russia). Why they started to talk about these sanctions out of the blue? This is, of course, evidence of ongoing political infighting in the United States."

"If it wasn't for Crimea, other problems, they would have invented something else to deter Russia."

"As far as the endless extension of some restrictions are concerned: if our partners lift sanctions on our economy, we should do the same, otherwise we will face problems within the World Trade Organization."

Construction of a bridge to connect mainland Russia with Crimea is on schedule, he added.

Mr Putin said during an annual question and answer session with Russians, the 19-kilometre (12-mile) road-and-rail bridge across the Kerch Strait is being overseen by Stroygazmontazh, a company controlled by Arkady Rotenberg, Putin's former judo sparring partner.

The road segment is meant to be operational by the end of next year.

Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014.
 
angelburst29,

I think it is a hoot that Putin is being the voice of sanity in the "Theater of the Absurd".

"He suddenly said that he taped his talk with the president, and then passed this conversation to media via his friend. This sounds strange, when the head of special services records his talks with the commander-in-chief and passes this talk to the media."Then what is the difference between the FBI director and Mr Snowden? He is not the director of the special services then, but a rights defender, which defends a certain position. By the way if, in relation to this, a prosecution would be launched against him (Comey), we are ready to provide him with political asylum in Russia. He has to know this."

It is the kind of humor that only sane people can muster to balance the madness I think. FWIW :/ :cool2:
 
I was sent this YouTube video recently put up by a former FBI agent Cesar Paz this morning. In the video, Paz relates his observations regarding ex-FBI Head James Comey. A lot of Paz's info is already out there, but I found his presentation and questions interesting.
 
NormaRegula said:
I was sent this YouTube video recently put up by a former FBI agent Cesar Paz this morning. In the video, Paz relates his observations regarding ex-FBI Head James Comey. A lot of Paz's info is already out there, but I found his presentation and questions interesting.

NormaRegula,

I found two interesting videos by Cesar Paz. I think the first one with all the questions is the one you mentioned.

Mr. Comey, you have been PNG'd

Jeff Danik and Cesar Paz comment about Comey's testimony- Part 1

I thought they were both very interesting.
 
goyacobol said:
NormaRegula said:
I was sent this YouTube video recently put up by a former FBI agent Cesar Paz this morning. In the video, Paz relates his observations regarding ex-FBI Head James Comey. A lot of Paz's info is already out there, but I found his presentation and questions interesting.

NormaRegula,

I found two interesting videos by Cesar Paz. I think the first one with all the questions is the one you mentioned.

Mr. Comey, you have been PNG'd

Jeff Danik and Cesar Paz comment about Comey's testimony- Part 1

I thought they were both very interesting.

I viewed the other related video. Thanks for the link!
 
A clear example on how screwed up our U.S. Congress is and how they have Trumps hands tied?

Amendment imposes new sanctions against Moscow and also establishes a process for Congress to review any attempt by Trump to relax or end sanctions.

Senate approves new Russia sanctions as punishment for meddling in election
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/senate-proposes-new-russia-sanctions-meddling-election

The Senate has approved new sanctions against Russia, as punishment after it was found to have meddled in the 2016 presidential election. The legislation also restricts the White House from easing sanctions without congressional approval.

The amendment on Russia, which passed in a 97-2 vote on Wednesday, was attached to a bill to strengthen sanctions on Iran. It codifies existing sanctions against Russia established by Barack Obama’s executive orders and imposes new sanctions against Moscow for its interference in the 2016 elections, aggression in Ukraine and support for the Syrian government.

The agreement establishes a process for Congress to review any attempt by Donald Trump to relax, suspend or terminate the sanctions.


Russia has canceled a planned round of talks with the US in protest at new sanctions imposed this week over Moscow’s military intervention in Ukraine.

Russia cancels talks after US imposes new sanctions over Ukraine conflict
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/21/russia-cancels-us-talks-ukraine-sanctions

The deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, denounced the new sanctions, which expanded the list of individuals and organisations targeted by the US treasury, as the responsibility of “avid Russophobes” in Congress who were determined to derail US-Russian relations.

As a result, Ryabkov said he was cancelling a meeting with his US counterpart, Tom Shannon, in St Petersburg later this week – which was supposed to have been part of a continuing dialogue between Washington and Moscow aimed at reducing “irritants” in bilateral relations.

The sanctions, Ryabkov said, had meant that the circumstances were “not conducive to holding this round of dialogue, particularly as there is no agenda set out for it, as Washington does not to want to make concrete proposals”.

In response, the state department expressed regret and said the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, was “open to future discussions”.

However, in a bluntly worded response to Ryabkov’s statement, the state department spokeswoman, Heather Nauert, insisted the new measures were intended to reinforce existing sanctions and were “designed to counter attempts to circumvent our sanctions”.

“Let’s remember that these sanctions didn’t just come out of nowhere. Our targeted sanctions were imposed in response to Russia’s ongoing violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbor, Ukraine,” Nauert said.

“If the Russians seek an end to these sanctions, they know very well the US position,” she added, saying that Moscow would have to abide fully by the Minsk agreement for resolving the conflict in Ukraine and “end its occupation” of Crimea.

The cancellation of the St Petersburg meeting and the stern exchange of statements are part of a marked dip in US-Russian relations despite Donald Trump’s efforts to improve them. In Congress, House allies of Trump have stalled a Senate bill that would intensify sanctions further and take the power to lift them out of his hands.

On Wednesday, a plane carrying the Russian defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, was approached by a Nato F-16 fighter over the Baltic Sea, prompting a Russian fighter jet to insert itself between the two planes and tilting its wings to show it was armed.

The mid-air incident came a day after another close encounter above the Baltic between US and Russian warplanes.

The Pentagon spokesman, Capt Jeff Davis, said: “Due to the high rate of speed, the poor control that the Russian pilot had of his aircraft during the intercept, the aircraft commander of the [US reconnaissance plane] RC 135 determined it to be unsafe. Such unsafe actions have the potential to cause serious harm and injury to all involved.”

Sweden also reported that a Russian plane had come close to one of its military aircraft over the Baltic on Monday.

The Russian defence minister put out a statement saying that two US “spy planes” had been making “provocative” manoeuvres.

In Syria, meanwhile, Moscow has announced it had suspended a hotline between the US and Russian militaries in Syria and that it would view as targets any coalition planes flying west of the Euphrates river. The Pentagon has played down the threat, saying it continued to operate west of the Euphrates.

“Public statements aside, we have not seen the Russians do any actions that cause us concern. We continue to operate, making some adjustments for prudent measures,” Davis said.

Maxim Suchkov, a political analyst and editor of al-Monitor’s Russian coverage, said Moscow’s decision to cancel the St Petersburg talks “is explained by that given the recent events in Syria and Ukraine, Russia wants to raise the stakes and attempts to take its own ‘position of strength’ vis-a-vis Washington.”

“I’d say it’s a risky move on the Russian side, since in Washington the message to suspend the talks may be read differently from what Moscow intended it to sound,” Suchkov said.


Shortly after Russia's deputy foreign minister Ryabkov snubbed the US, cancelling a meeting with the Under Secretary of State Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., in retaliation to the Trump administration's announcement on Tuesday that it has imposed sanctions on 38 Russian individuals while a parallel bill of Russian sanctions is making its way through Congress, the US State Department issued a statement on US-Russian relations.

State Department Issues Statement On US-Russia Relations
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-21/state-department-issues-statement-us-russia-relations

Shortly after the Russian snub, the US State Department responded that it regrets "that Russia has decided to turn away from an opportunity to discuss bilateral obstacles" and then adds: "Let's remember that these sanctions didn't just come out of nowhere. Our targeted sanctions were imposed in response to Russia's ongoing violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbor, Ukraine. If the Russians seek an end to these sanctions, they know very well the U.S. position."

Finally, for any reporters who are still confused how Russia could possibly slam the door of diplomacy in the US' face after an American F-18 shot down a Syrian fighter jet flying over Syria, and proceeded with two separate sanctions, the State Department has some advice: "we would refer you to the Russian government to explain their decision to cancel this meeting. "

Full statement below:

Statement from the State Department on U.S.-Russia relations

We regret that Russia has decided to turn away from an opportunity to discuss bilateral obstacles that hinder U.S.-Russia relations.

During the Secretary's April visit to Moscow, he and Foreign Minister Lavrov agreed to establish a senior-level working group to discuss bilateral issues of concern. Undersecretary Shannon had planned to travel to St. Petersburg this week to continue discussions which began in May when he met Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov in New York.

The maintenance package of sanctions issued yesterday by the Treasury Department, which only reinforced existing sanctions, was designed to counter attempts to circumvent our sanctions and to maintain alignment of U.S. measures with those of our international partners. We have regularly updated these sanctions twice a year since they were first imposed.

Let's remember that these sanctions didn't just come out of nowhere. Our targeted sanctions were imposed in response to Russia's ongoing violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbor, Ukraine. If the Russians seek an end to these sanctions, they know very well the U.S. position: Our sanctions on Russia related Russia's ongoing aggression against Ukraine will remain in place until Russia fully honors its obligations under the Minsk Agreements. Our sanctions related to Crimea will not be lifted until Russia ends its occupation of the peninsula.

We would refer you to the Russian government to explain their decision to cancel this meeting. From our perspective, and as Secretary Tillerson has made clear, there are many issues to be discussed. We remain open to future discussions.


A US senator has warned against the United States' measures in Syria, which is pushing Washington "closer and closer" to a military conflict with Iran and Russia, describing the move as “another mistake on the scope of the Iraq War."

US Moves Towards Military Conflict with Iran, Russia: Senator Says
_https://www.albawaba.com/news/us-moves-towards-military-conflict-iran-russia-senator-says-988970

Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Murphy made the comments in an interview with CNN on Tuesday.

I think we're getting closer and closer to open conflict with Iran and Russia, and the American public needs to know that we're moving very fast toward what could be another war inside the Middle East," Murphy said. "Something by the way that Donald Trump promised he wouldn't do when he ran for office."

The remarks came two days after a US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet shot down a Syrian Sukhoi SU-22 aircraft, which was conducting an operation against Daesh extremists on the outskirts of Syria’s northern city of Raqqah.

The Sunday downing of the Syrian warplane prompted Russia to issue a threat against American airborne assets over Syrian airspace and track all coalition flights west of the Euphrates River.

The Democratic Senator also said that the US president had no authority to act on his own to engage in a war in Syria and that he must gain permission from Congress. "There's no authorization for military force that Congress has passed that gives the president the ability to take military action against the Syrian regime," Murphy said.

"And we have to understand what we're getting involved in, right. You are not just fighting Bashar al-Assad," he noted. "If you're going to ramp up military activity against Assad, you are also going in against Iran and Russia."

Raising concerns over what he called "a dangerous escalation," the Connecticut senator said it was not in the US interest to get involved in the Syrian war. "That would be another mistake on the scope of the Iraq War.”

Meanwhile, US General Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a day earlier that Washington was working to restore a “deconfliction” line with Moscow intended to avoid mid-air collisions over Syria.
 
At least a couple of congressmen seem to know the score...

‘US should mind its own business; it shouldn’t be in Syria’ – Ron Paul

The US has no right to fly into Syrian airspace where it shouldn’t be and set boundaries but should mind its own business. Otherwise, it is an act of aggression, says former US Congressman Ron Paul.
The US fighter jet downed an armed drone belonging to pro-Syrian government forces in southern Syria, near a base in the al-Tanf region, on June, 20 as the drone was advancing on US-backed forces, according to a coalition statement.

This is happening at a time of escalating tension between Moscow and Washington. Also on Tuesday, Australia said it is temporarily suspending air operations in Syria.

RT discussed the latest developments in Syria with former US Congressman Ron Paul.

RT: Australia halted its cooperation. How significant is this development? Why did they do it?

Ron Paul: I think that is good. Maybe wise enough, I wish we could do the same thing – just come home. It just makes no sense; there’s a mess over there. So many people are involved, the neighborhood ought to take care of it, and we have gone too far away from our home. It has been going on for too long, and it all started when Obama in 2011 said: “Assad has to go.” And now as the conditions deteriorate …it looks like Assad and his allies are winning, and the US don’t want them to take Raqqa. This just goes on and on. I think it is really still the same thing that Obama set up – “Get rid of Assad” and there is a lot of frustration because Assad is still around and now it is getting very dangerous, it is dangerous on both sides. One thing that I am concerned about - because I’ve seen it happen so often over the years are false flags. Some accidents happen. Even if it is an honest accident or it is deliberate by one side or the other to blame somebody. And before they stop and think about it, then there is more escalation. When our planes are flying over there and into airspace where we shouldn’t be, and we are setting up boundaries and say “don’t cross these lines or you will be crossing our territory.” We have no right to do this. We should mind our own business; we shouldn’t be over there, when we go over there and decide that we are going to take over, it is an act of aggression, and I am positively opposed to that. And I think most Americans are too if they get all the information they need.

RT: Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said earlier that he wanted to ask his American counterpart why the US-led coalition isn’t targeting Al-Nusra in Syria. What sort of answer do you think he’ll get?

RP: I think it will be wishy-washy. He’ll probably think it is in their interests not to do anything to damage the radicals, the extremists, the rebels because I think that our government thinks that they could be helpful in undermining Assad. I don’t think they are going to say “Yeah, they are our buddies now, we consult with them all the time.” It won’t be that. They’ll argue “We have to help the Kurds out” or something along those lines and make excuses. I think that there’s a net benefit to the radicals for us to get involved there and it is not helpful in the long run for our position which ought to try to bring about peace.

The propaganda the American people hear is such that they get them pretty excited about it, but I am very confident that if the American people had more information…because when I talk to them, they side with my arguments. It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to be doing what we are doing, and that’s why I persist in trying to get to the facts but trying to eliminate the danger, try to obey international law, try to do the things that are in our best interest. And if we are talking about America’s interest – it isn’t helped by our policy in the Middle East for the last 15-20 years, I think it has all been negative.

Richard Black, Republican member of Virginia State Senate, told RT that "the US and the coalition are in Syria without any permission, without any lawful authority to be present".

"Some members of the coalition may say “We are in clear violation of international law, maybe this is not right.” Others bought into this coalition to be part of a group fighting ISIS, and now they are saying “Wait a minute. We didn’t go into Syria to fight the legitimate duly elected government of Syria; we went there to fight this terrorist organization.”…The coalition is certainly not there to help the Syrian people; it is there to help Saudi Arabia with its Wahhabi radical Islamic domination of the entire world beginning with the countries close to it".
 
Another congressman asking interesting questions is Trey Gowdy.


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/06/21/gowdy-maybe-dnc-not-cooperate-dhs-something-else-server/ said:
Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “The Story,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) said it was concerning that while testifying before the House Intelligence Committee earlier in the day at a hearing on the alleged Russian hacking of the 2016 presidential election, former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said his department’s offer to help the Democratic National Committee was denied.

Partial transcript as follows:

MACCALLUM: What struck you most about your conversation with Jeh Johnson today?

GOWDY: He is in a unique position to answer those questions. He is looking at what Russia was doing. What was the government’s response in 2016? He was the secretary of DHS at all relevant times. I was interested in what the Obama administration knew and when and what efforts they took to thwart the Russians, or to notify potential victims. You just played a clip where we had a victim, the DNC. Not only did they not cooperate with Jeh Johnson, they didn’t turn the server over to the FBI, I think it is a little ironic to now criticize, some Democrats are, Jeh Johnson and Jim Comey and others for not giving enough in 2016, when you had a really good piece of evidence you didn’t bother to turn over.

MACCALLUM: It’s really a head scratcher. When you take a look at it from that perspective—when you put yourself there, during the election, and you remember the emails that were leaked, very embarrassing for John Podesta, Neera Tanden. That was the main thing that Democrats pegged their election loss on. They said because these emails were released, they call it the Russian hacking, which is apapently where it came from. If you remember the content, it was embarrassing. At the same time, they were asked by the FBI and the DHS to give the servers up, let’s figure out who is getting into them and how. Why would they say no? Why would they not want to cooperate?

GOWDY: Let me hazard a wild guess. There may be something else on that server they didn’t want law enforcement to see? That is where you start. I don’t like speculating, but I have dealt in the past with victims that would not cooperate with investigations. Typically, the reason is, there is something else you don’t want law enforcement to see. There is no reason to not allow DHS to patch or fix a vulnerability in the DNC system. Heaven knows there is no reason to not give the world’s premier law enforcement agency, which is the FBI, the evidence they may need to stop another attack from hurting someone else.


House Intelligence Committee member speaks out on 'The Story with Martha MacCallum'.

 
AIPAC's current onslaught against Trump. And other useful idiots.

One on One with Alan Dershowitz - June 22, 2017
ILTV ISRAEL DAILY
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilmOu_IWzg8

Billionaire Haim Saban, major Democratic donor, backs bill slashing funds to Palestinian Authority
6-22-17
_http://mondoweiss.net/2017/06/democrats-palestinian-authority/
 
angelburst29 said:
A clear example on how screwed up our U.S. Congress is and how they have Trumps hands tied?

Amendment imposes new sanctions against Moscow and also establishes a process for Congress to review any attempt by Trump to relax or end sanctions.

Senate approves new Russia sanctions as punishment for meddling in election
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/senate-proposes-new-russia-sanctions-meddling-election

The Senate has approved new sanctions against Russia, as punishment after it was found to have meddled in the 2016 presidential election. The legislation also restricts the White House from easing sanctions without congressional approval.

The amendment on Russia, which passed in a 97-2 vote on Wednesday, was attached to a bill to strengthen sanctions on Iran. It codifies existing sanctions against Russia established by Barack Obama’s executive orders and imposes new sanctions against Moscow for its interference in the 2016 elections, aggression in Ukraine and support for the Syrian government.

The agreement establishes a process for Congress to review any attempt by Donald Trump to relax, suspend or terminate the sanctions.

Russia has canceled a planned round of talks with the US in protest at new sanctions imposed this week over Moscow’s military intervention in Ukraine.


As mentioned by angelburst29 above, on the 14th of June the US Senate voted in favour of sanctions . Despite the fact that Trump's administration is restricted by the Congress when it comes to any attempts to ease the sanctions (as mentioned in the quote above) the Trump administration are pushing for more flexibility:

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201706171054730449-white-house-lobbying-weaker-sanctions/

The White House is hoping to convince House Republicans to take some of the sting out of the bill passed by the Senate last week to enact new sanctions on Russia and Iran and to curtail the president's power to alter or end them.

Citing a senior administration official, Politico reports that though US President Donald Trump's administration supports sanctioning Russia, they are worried that the new bill will tie their hands as they are trying to rebuild relations with Moscow.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told a House Foreign Affairs hearing as the bill went to vote that "I would urge Congress to ensure any legislation allows the president to have the flexibility to adjust sanctions."

The day before, he'd told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "We would like the flexibility to turn the heat up on Russia," he said. "We have some channels where we're starting to talk, but what I wouldn't want to do is close the channels off."

The bill passed, however, on Wednesday in a 97-2 show of bipartisanship. It would enshrine existing sanctions into law; slap new penalties on Russia's defense, military intelligence, energy and transport sectors; restrict debt dealings with Russian banks and energy companies; and allow Congress to block the president from altering sanctions with a two-thirds majority vote. The bill was a response to allegations of Russian interference into the US presidential election last year, allegations Russia has consistently denied.

White House Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders the following day criticized the sanctions package. "We believe the existing executive branch sanctions regime is the best tool for compelling Russia to fulfill its commitments," Sanders told reporters, adding that the bill had yet to move through the house.

Politico reports that the ramifications of a veto are not under discussion, according to their administration source. Instead, the administration intends to reach out to House members who have doubts about limiting the power of the executive branch to control sanctions, according to Politico. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert on Thursday also pointed out again the White House's desire to cooperate with Russia on global problems. "We continue to look for areas in which both parties can work together," Nauert told reporters. "We've talked about how we believe the United States and Russia can work together to fight ISIS."

The new sanctions "will of course complicate the Russian-American relationship," Russian President Vladimir Putin said in an interview reported Saturday by the TASS news agency. Immediately following the bill's passage in the Senate, Russian lawmakers promised a response.

Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown, a sponsor of the Senate bill, said as early as Wednesday that the White House was already working to undermine the measure.
 
Quite interesting today's tweets by Donald Trump:

Fake News CNN is looking at big management changes now that they got caught falsely pushing their phony Russian stories. Ratings way down!

So they caught Fake News CNN cold, but what about NBC, CBS & ABC? What about the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost? They are all Fake News!

Wow, CNN had to retract big story on "Russia," with 3 employees forced to resign. What about all the other phony stories they do? FAKE NEWS!
 
I've said in the past that I find Trump going over the heads of the MSM via tweets amusing. The outraged reactions from the journalist snowflakes cracks me up.

According to Brietbart and other non-MSM outlets, Project Veritas has caught another CNN Producer on video admitting that the Russian scandal is b.s., but good for ratings. Even more interesting admissions on the tape and the transcript.

From the Brietbart article:

The video also shows Bonifield admitting that he has not seen evidence that Trump has committed any crimes.

“I haven’t seen any good evidence to show the president committed a crime,” Bonifield says in the video.

And even if Russia did try to influence the U.S. election, Bonifield is heard saying in the video, that is not really much of a scandal. He is seen arguing that Russian efforts to influence the election would be normal, and that the U.S. government does the same thing around the world all the time.

“Even if Russia was trying to swing an election, we try to swing their elections, our CIA is doing shit all the time, we’re out there trying to manipulate governments,” Bonifield says.

Bonifield is a supervising producer for CNN Health. According to his biography on CNN’s website, Bonifield works with the CNN Medical Unit and “primarily with CNN Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen.”

These startling admissions from a CNN producer on hidden camera video come amid many other comments the video shows him making that are particularly problematic for a network in crisis. The Project Veritas video was released on Tuesday amid the worst scandal in CNN history. Zucker, the network president, is currently leading an internal investigation into a very fake news hit piece that CNN published Thursday night then retracted late Friday after a Breitbart News investigation. He is joined, per reports from BuzzFeed News, by the head of HR inside CNN at the top of the investigation. Three of CNN’s senior-most editorial staffers have resigned as a result of the growing scandal.

This story may be a blip on the radar as the Deep State/PTB have a false flag Syrian gas attack in the making to take over the airwaves soon. And the Zionist-connected Brietbart News will probably be at the forefront reporting on the horror of it all. :(
 
Siberia said:
Quite interesting today's tweets by Donald Trump:

Fake News CNN is looking at big management changes now that they got caught falsely pushing their phony Russian stories. Ratings way down!

So they caught Fake News CNN cold, but what about NBC, CBS & ABC? What about the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost? They are all Fake News!

Wow, CNN had to retract big story on "Russia," with 3 employees forced to resign. What about all the other phony stories they do? FAKE NEWS!
It is quite remarkable, in EU land they are quite along the lines of the medias.
 
Back
Top Bottom