Do YOU Trust Benghazi/Bergdahl Liar?


John R. Houk

© April 5, 2017

 

Susan Rice is a typical lying Dem that unmasked Trump campaign staff names that did NOTHING illegal while using an investigation of Russian collusion/voting interference as a MERE excuse to politically impugn Donald Trump during the 2016 election and during the Obama lame duck period leading President Trump’s inauguration!!!!

 

AND even more reprehensible is the Left Stream Media either didn’t report on Ly’n Rice or defended her for doing nothing wrong while simultaneously still stick to the UNPROVEN – ergo lie – accusation the President Trump colluded with the Russians to defeat Crooked Hillary in the 2016 election cycle.

 

Susan Rice Lying to Americans on 5 MSM Networks

 

 

For any American to believe Rice’s words that she “leaked nothing to nobody,” were also duped by her lies about Benghazi and her lies the traitor Bergdahl was an upstanding loyal American: “He served the United States with honor and distinction …”

 

VIDEO: Susan Rice: Bergdahl Served With ‘Honor and Distinction’

 

Posted by PoliticalTurkey1

Published on Jun 2, 2014

 

Hmm … IF SUSAN RICE SAYS SHE DIDN’T UNMASK TRUMP SURVEILLANCE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, I CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY “I DON’T BELIEVE HER!”

 

I have found loads of articles that question the veracity of Susan Rice and Barack Obama. The Left Stream Media will not take up the question of reliability because they are essentially a propaganda of Obama, The Dems and the Left in general.

 

I am cross posting two articles. One from The Federalist posted today and another from Fox News’ Adam Housley post on April third. At the end, I will provide some links (perhaps some excerpts) from other sources that pretty much have the same opinion about Susan Rice but may add some details lacking between each article.

 

JRH 4/5/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

Why Susan Rice’s Role In The Obama Spying Story Is A Big Deal

 

By Mollie Hemingway

April 5, 2017

The Federalist

 

Susan Rice was one Obama official who requested the unmasking of Trump associates’ information that was widely disseminated. Here’s why that’s significant.

 

Since Donald Trump won the election for president in November, U.S. media outlets have received and eagerly published selective, damaging leaks about him from anonymous intelligence officials. The general effort, which appeared highly coordinated, was an effort to delegitimize Trump’s election and paint him as a stooge of Russia or otherwise unfit for office.

 

The media outlets claimed their information came from very highly placed officials in the Obama administration. Even if they hadn’t claimed their anonymous sources were Obama officials, the information they were leaking, such as the name of a U.S. citizen caught up in surveillance by the Obama administration, would have been known only by highly placed intelligence officials.

 

As the publishers of the information that was illegally disclosed, many media outlets weren’t keen to make a story, much less a big story, about the leak campaign by Obama officials. This despite the fact that the same Obama officials who had run the infamous Iran Echo Chamber operation, in which reporters were duped into reporting the Obama administration’s spin on the Iran deal, had bragged that they’d continue a highly developed communications operation in the Trump era.

 

In early March, Donald Trump tweeted out a series of unsubstantiated claims:

 

Trump Tweets on BHO Wiretapping

 

 

Two weeks ago, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes, revealed that he’d seen dozens of reports featuring unmasked information on Trump and his associates and family members. He said these reports arose out of incidental collection during FISA surveillance, had nothing to do with Russia, were disseminated widely throughout the intelligence agencies, and contained little to no foreign intelligence value.

 

It should go without saying that the country’s powerful surveillance capabilities are not to be used against American citizens so that such unmasking should be exceedingly rare, be done for only the strongest reasons, and make pains to avoid the appearance of politicization. Nunes said the incidental collection might be legal but the unmasked dissemination of information about political opponents was disconcerting.

 

Despite the bombshell allegations, many in the media responded by downplaying or denigrating his news, distracting with process complaints, or quickly thrown-together stories from anonymous sources with no evidence claiming more breathless wrongdoing with Russia.

 

On Monday, Eli Lake of Bloomberg Views reported that sources said “Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.” Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the National Security Council’s senior director for intelligence, was conducting a review of unmasking procedures when he “discovered Rice’s multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities.”

 

Susan Rice was Obama’s National Security Advisor for his second term.

 

Again, many in the media are attempting to downplay, denigrate and distract, some are doing so shamelessly. Here are five reasons why this is a story worth covering:

 

1) Susan Rice’s Story Changed Dramatically From Two Weeks Ago

 

Two weeks ago, PBS’ Judy Woodruff asked Rice a very general question about Nunes’ claims:

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: I began by asking about the allegations leveled today by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes that Trump transition officials, including the president, may have been swept up in surveillance of foreigners at the end of the Obama administration.

 

SUSAN RICE, Former U.S. National Security Adviser: I know nothing about this. I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.

 

I know nothing about this, she said.

 

Yesterday, in a damage control interview with prominent Democratic journalist Andrea Mitchell, Rice admitted her unmasking efforts and said they were routine. Mitchell’s 16-minute interview involved no tough questions. Mitchell asked, “Did you seek to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition?” Rice responded in the Clintonian fashion, “Absolutely not for any political purposes.” A natural follow-up would have been if she requested the unmasking for any other purpose. It didn’t occur to Mitchell. Instead she followed-up with the related question, “Did you leak?” to which Rice responded, somewhat confusingly, “I leaked nothing to nobody.”

 

Somehow Rice tried to claim later that her initial statement of having no clue about Nunes’ earlier claim was not at odds with her 16-minute answer about her unmasking efforts.

 

Rice has a reputation for dishonesty, most notably for her claim that a September 11, 2012, attack in Libya that killed four Americans was a spontaneous result of anger at a video critical of Islam. At the time she said this, the State Department knew well that it was a coordinated terrorist attack.

 

Rice also falsely claimed that Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction,” when critics began raising questions about why President Obama traded high-value Taliban detainees and a ransom for the Army deserter. Bergdahl is expected to face a court-martial in August for desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. His desertion was already known at the time Rice made her comments.

 

2) The Unmasking Was Related To Political Information

 

When Nunes first alerted the public about his concerns over the unmasking and dissemination, he noted that the information had nothing to do with Russia and had little to no intelligence value. Lake reported that Rice’s multiple unmasking requests were related to reports on Trump transition activities. She is said to have requested the identities of Americans in reports of monitored conversations between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition and in surveilled contact between the Trump team and monitored foreign officials.

 

“One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration,” according to Lake.

 

When Rice gave her interview to the friendly journalist Mitchell, she gave a hypothetical example of when it would be appropriate to request an unmasking of a U.S. citizen’s name that was caught up in foreign surveillance. She said that if two foreigners were talking about a terrorist attack to be committed with a U.S. citizen, she would seek out that name. That’s a great hypothetical. And no one is making the claim that Susan Rice sought to unmask a Trump family member or transition member’s name because she believed they were about to set off a bomb. They are making the claim that the information in the reports was politically valuable and related to the Trump transition.

 

3) Susan Rice Worked In The White House

 

Rice was known as Obama’s “right-hand woman,” “like a sister,” and was his National Security Advisor throughout his second term.

 

Weeks ago, diplomat Richard Grennell said that if Rice were involved, that would implicate President Obama:

 

‘But within that realm there could have easily been a political calculation to listen in, and then to take those transcripts and the summaries of those transcripts, make sure that those in the NSC and the political people – like Ben Rhodes and Susan Rice – make sure that they have them so they can leak them to reporters.’

 

‘I think that it would be easy to figure out if Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes knew about this,’ he added, ‘because if they did, clearly President Obama knew about it.’

 

Even if Rice wasn’t working with Obama on this effort or informing him of her activities, her role as National Security Advisor means her unmasking request in this instance doesn’t make sense, according to Andrew McCarthy. If the identities of U.S. citizens had intelligence value, it would have been unmasked by agencies that conduct investigations, he wrote:

 

Consequently, if unmasking was relevant to the Russia investigation, it would have been done by those three agencies. And if it had been critical to know the identities of Americans caught up in other foreign intelligence efforts, the agencies that collect the information and conduct investigations would have unmasked it. Because they are the agencies that collect and refine intelligence ‘products’ for the rest of the ‘intelligence community,’ they are responsible for any unmasking; and they do it under ‘minimization’ standards that FBI Director James Comey, in recent congressional testimony, described as ‘obsessive’ in their determination to protect the identities and privacy of Americans.

 

Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies. The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

 

It is unclear what President Obama knew about Rice’s successful request to unmask information on Trump transition members.

 

4) This Substantiates Nunes’ Claim

 

When Nunes told the public that information about the Trump team had been collected, unmasked, and widely disseminated, many media figures questioned the legitimacy of his claim. With the news that no less than Susan Rice requested unmasking of political operatives, it appears that Nunes was onto something.

 

Also of note, Rep. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democratic member on the committee, had been very upset with Nunes for telling the public and the White House about the reports he’d seen before briefing the committee. However, after Schiff saw the information, he more or less went quiet. He didn’t say the reports were a distraction or unimportant, unlike other Democratic operatives.

 

5) Civil Liberties Questions Remain

 

The most frequent defense of the Obama administration’s unmasking efforts is that incidental information collection on U.S. citizens is routine, and that requests to unmask that information about U.S. citizens is also routine. When we learn more about the widespread dissemination of such information, we can anticipate that the media and other Democrats will say that such dissemination is more than routine.

 

When Nunes revealed the collection, unmasking, and dissemination news, he specifically referenced the incidental information collection on members of Congress during the Iran deal. The U.S. spies on foreign leaders, including Benjamin Netanyahu and his advisors. As a result, the Obama administration picked up information on politically valuable information:

 

White House officials believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign. They also recognized that asking for it was politically risky. So, wary of a paper trail stemming from a request, the White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ ‘a senior U.S. official said. ‘We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’ ‘

 

Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.

 

The Bush administration also collected and used information on members of Congress this way.

 

In some ways, this “routine” defense of collecting and disseminating information on political adversaries is the most disconcerting. The federal government’s surveillance powers are intense, from metadata collection to surveillance of communications. Such information is easily weaponized and exceedingly difficult to oversee for accountability purposes.

 

As one journalist who used to be worried about such things wrote a few years ago:

 

Instead, the NSA’s approach of grabbing up every bit of information that it can guarantees that the metadata and sometimes even the content of legislator communications are swept up, and will continue to be available to a secretive class of executive branch employees for years to come. There is obvious potential that this will be exploited with abusive intent–it isn’t like we’ve never had a president try to spy on his political opponents before! But even absent any nefarious motives, incidentally collected data could damage the integrity of our political system.

 

Members of the media should try to cover, rather than cover up, this aspect of the story. The civil liberties of U.S. citizens are of vital importance and the unmasking of information on them should not be routine, not regular, and not a light matter.

 

The media have thousands of questions to force answers on regarding this important story. As Ari Fleischer wrote on Twitter:

 

About Susan Rice: The President’s National Security Advisor has authority to request unmasking of American names from intel agencies.

 

But in this instance, I am stunned by the lack of curiosity most media have shown about the facts and circumstances present here.

 

This is a good example of media giving soft coverage to President Obama while they’re hard on the GOP in general & Trump in particular.

 

Bear in mind, Rice is the official who praised Bowe Bergdahl for his ‘honorable service’ & claimed he was captured ‘on the battlefield.’

 

She also said two weeks ago in a TV interview that she didn’t know anything about the unmasking.

 

I would have thought the media would ask tough questions. There is no reason this should be a FOX News and conservative press issue only.

 

If I were a reporter, I would want to know why Rice sought the unmasking. The FBI is investigating possible Trump collusion, not the WH.

 

How often did she ask? What reasons did she give? (Each request is tracked and catalogued in writing by the NSA. A procedure exists.)

 

The info would have been provided ONLY to her as the requester. It is highly classified. Did she share it? With whom? Why?

 

If she shared it with anyone, why did she do so? What did they do with it? Did they give it to the media or tell media about it?

 

One of the reasons we live in a polarized era is because too many reporters look the other way at issues like this. Bias is real.

 

It’s not too late. The press knows how to dig and get answers. I hope they do so.

 

It’s not just Rice. She wasn’t the only person to request the unmasking of Trump officials regarding politically sensitive operations, and she wasn’t the person who requested that Flynn’s name be unmasked, meaning she requested at least one other Trump associate’s unmasking. We still don’t know who committed the crime of leaking Flynn’s name to the Washington Post. It’s time to start working on covering this story, rather than running interference for anonymous sources.

 

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter at @mzhemingway

 

+++

Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

 

By Adam Housley

April 03, 2017

Fox News

 

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.

 

The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.

 

The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.

 

It was not clear how Rice knew to ask for the names to be unmasked, but the question was being posed by the sources late Monday.

 

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

 

Such amazing reporting on unmasking and the crooked scheme against us by @foxandfriends. “Spied on before nomination.” The real story.

 

5:15 AM – 3 Apr 2017

 

“What I know is this …  If the intelligence community professionals decide that there’s some value, national security, foreign policy or otherwise in unmasking someone, they will grant those requests,” former Obama State Department spokeswoman and Fox News contributor Marie Harf told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum on “The First 100 Days. “And we have seen no evidence … that there was partisan political notice behind this and we can’t say that unless there’s actual evidence to back that up.”

 

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, asked about the revelations at Monday’s briefing, declined to comment specifically on what role Rice may have played or officials’ motives.

 

“I’m not going to comment on this any further until [congressional] committees have come to a conclusion,” he said, while contrasting the media’s alleged “lack” of interest in these revelations with the intense coverage of suspected Trump-Russia links.

 

When names of Americans are incidentally collected, they are supposed to be masked, meaning the name or names are redacted from reports – whether it is international or domestic collection, unless it is an issue of national security, crime or if their security is threatened in any way. There are loopholes and ways to unmask through backchannels, but Americans are supposed to be protected from incidental collection. Sources told Fox News that in this case, they were not.

 

This comes in the wake of Evelyn Farkas’ television interview last month in which the former Obama deputy secretary of defense said in part: “I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill – it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration.”

 

Meanwhile, Fox News also is told that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes knew about unmasking and leaking back in January, well before President Trump’s tweet in March alleging wiretapping.

 

Nunes has faced criticism from Democrats for viewing pertinent documents on White House grounds and announcing their contents to the press. But sources said “the intelligence agencies slow-rolled Nunes. He could have seen the logs at other places besides the White House SCIF [secure facility], but it had already been a few weeks. So he went to the White House because he could protect his sources and he could get to the logs.”

 

As the Obama administration left office, it also approved new rules that gave the NSA much broader powers by relaxing the rules about sharing intercepted personal communications and the ability to share those with 16 other intelligence agencies.

 

Rice is no stranger to controversy. As the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, she appeared on several Sunday news shows to defend the adminstration’s [sic] later debunked claim that the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. consulate in Libya was triggered by an Internet video.

 

Rice also told ABC News in 2014 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl “served the United States with honor and distinction” and that he “wasn’t simply a hostage; he was an American prisoner of war captured on the battlefield.”

 

Bergdahl is currently facing court-martial on charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy for allegedly walking off his post in Afghanistan.

 

Adam Housley joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in 2001 and currently serves as a Los Angeles-based senior correspondent.

 

+++

SOURCES: SUSAN RICE BEHIND UNMASKING OF TRUMP OFFICIALS

White House counsel reportedly ID’d former national security adviser

 

By GARTH KANT

Updated: 04/03/2017 at 11:05 PM

WND

 

WASHINGTON – Multiple reports indicate former National Security Adviser Susan Rice was the Obama administration official who requested the unmasking of incoming Trump administration officials.

 

Mike Cernovich broke the story in an article in Medium on Sunday that said, “The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests.”

 

Unmasking is the revealing of names within the intelligence community of U.S. citizens whose communications were monitored during foreign surveillance.

 

According to Fox News, the unmasked names of people associated with Donald Trump were sent widely to top officials in the Obama administration.

 

That is a potential felony.

 

The unmasked names were reportedly sent to every member of the National Security Council, former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan and some officials at the Defense Department.

 

The NSA is required to remove the names of Americans incidentally collected during foreign surveillance before sharing intelligence with other agencies unless there is an issue of national security, but Rice reportedly requested the unmasking of the identities of Trump associates.

 

Sources said …….

 

+++

BOMBSHELL REPORT: Obama National Security Advisor SUSAN RICE Behind Unmasking Of Trump Transition Team

 

By BEN SHAPIRO

APRIL 3, 2017

Daily Wire

 

In a massive scoop, on Monday morning Eli Lake of Bloomberg reported that Barack Obama’s national security advisor, Susan Rice, repeatedly requested information from the intelligence community on members of the Trump transition team and campaign, unmasking them to an audience beyond the intelligence community in the process. Normally, raw intelligence masks the identity of American citizens caught up in legal surveillance of other targets.

 

Here’s Lake:

 

In February [National Security Council senior director for intelligence] Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice’s multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel’s office, who reviewed more of Rice’s requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy. The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations – primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration. 

 

Rice denied that she knew anything about members of the Trump transition caught up in incidental intelligence gathering last month. As Lake also points out, the revelation that Rice requested the documents would explain House Intelligence Chair Devin Nunes’ trip to the White House two weeks ago – he needed to go there to view Rice’s missives. It would also explain why Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the most ardent Trump critic on wiretapping and leaks, suddenly went silent over the weekend after seeing documents the White House presented to him.

 

This is indeed a huge story for the Trump White House. It doesn’t change the inaccuracy of Trump’s accusations that he was wiretapped by the Obama administration – there is still zero evidence to support that claim. But it demonstrates that the Trump team was not only targeted by members of the Obama intelligence community for unmasking and likely leaking, but that such unmasking went to the very top of the Obama administration.

 

And here’s another inconvenient fact …

 

+++

Benghazi Liar Susan Rice’s Treachery Continues

 

By Daniel John Sobieski

April 4, 2017

American Thinker

 

Call it the tale of two National Security Advisers, Michael Flynn and Susan Rice. As much as Flynn has taken fire as being an architect of unspecified “collusion” with the Russians, Susan Rice has been like the iceberg that sank the Titanic — barely visible above water but dangerous enough to threaten the Trump administration’s ship of state.

 

As reported by Circa News, Rice, while serving as Obama’s National Security Adviser, requested the unmasking of the names of Team Trump officials mentioned in the so-called “incidental” surveillance  of the Trump transition team:

 

Computer logs that former President Obama’s team left behind in the White House indicate his national security adviser Susan Rice accessed numerous intelligence reports during Obama’s last seven months in office that contained National Security Agency intercepts involving Donald Trump and his associates, Circa has learned.

 

Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans’ identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

 

The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition, the sources said. Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.

 

Ordinarily, such references to Americans would be redacted or minimized by the NSA before being shared with outside intelligence sources, but in these cases names were sometimes unmasked at the request of Rice or the intelligence reports were specific enough that the American’s identity was easily ascertained, the sources said.

 

Well, isn’t that special? While Trump’s pick for this sensitive post was under scrutiny, Obama’s adviser was doing opposition research which involved data mining classified intelligence reports. Rice requested the unmasking of names, something only three people, according to Circa, were authorized to do:

 

Dozens of times in 2016, those intelligence reports identified Americans who were directly intercepted talking to foreign sources or were the subject of conversations between two or more monitored foreign figures. Sometimes the Americans’ names were officially unmasked; other times they were so specifically described in the reports that their identities were readily discernible. Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

 

If Susan Rice had worked for Richard Nixon, she could have been one of his Watergate “plumbers”, perhaps retiring as plumber emeritus. We are all familiar with Susan Rice’s tour of the Sunday talk shows after the Benghazi terrorist attack. That was no accident, but a calculated part of the Obama administration’s disinformation campaign to protect President Obama’s reelection chances and …

 

+++

‘Absolutely false’: Top Obama adviser denies she ‘unmasked’ Trump associates for political purposes

 

By Natasha Bertrand

April 4, 2017

Business Insider

 

Former national security adviser Susan Rice told MSNBC on Tuesday that allegations she “unmasked” associates of Donald Trump for political reasons while she served in the Obama administration were “absolutely false.”

 

Bloomberg and Fox on Monday reported that Rice had tried to unmask, or learn the identities of, officials on Trump’s transition team whose conversations with foreign agents — or conversations those agents were having about the transition officials — were incidentally collected during routine intelligence-gathering operations. The Daily Caller then reported that Rice had created a “spreadsheet” with the names she had unmasked.

 

“The allegation is that somehow Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes,” Rice told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. “That’s absolutely false. [Yeah right, & she never lied about Benghazi either]

 

“I was the National Security Adviser.  My job is to protect the American people and the security of our country.  That’s …

 

+++

Rand Paul calls for Susan Rice to testify on unmasking Trump officials

 

By Juliegrace Brufke, DCNF

April 4, 2017 

BizPAC Review

 

GOP Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul said he believes former National Security Advisor Susan Rice should testify before Congress on her request to unmask the names of Trump transition officials collected during routine intelligence-gathering operations.

 

Paul argued the situation should not be downplayed, saying reforms need to be made to prevent individuals from being blackmailed on personal aspects of their lives through unmasking. He noted there was nothing stopping the former administration from looking through Trump officials and national security advisors’ conversations during the transition window.

 

“If it is allowed, we shouldn’t be allowing it, but I don’t think should just discount how big a deal it is that Susan Rice was looking at these,” he told reporters Monday. “And she needs to be asked, ‘Did President Obama ask her to do this? Was this a directive from President Obama?  I think she should testify under oath on this.”

 

Paul said he has long thought there are too many people with the ability to unmask individuals.

 

“The law says you can’t reverse target people, but how would you know that once you get inside the brain and the people that are unmasking people,” Paul continued. “So, what if I decided to unmask and I’m there and I only unmask the conversations of my Democrat opponents — shouldn’t there be more restrictions for unmasking people in the political process?”

 

He said he believes there should be …

++++++++++

VIDEO: Susan Rice Requested Intel to Unmask Names of Trump Transition Officials

 

Posted by Lionel Nation

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

BloombergView’s Eli Lake reports that White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.” Not this time. It was Suzie, kids.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

The Official Lionel READ THE REST

 

+++

FORMER US ATTORNEY JOSEPH DIGENOVA: SUSAN RICE ORDERED SPY AGENCIES TO PRODUCE ‘DETAILED SPREADSHEETS’ INVOLVING TRUMP

 

By ALICIA

APRIL 4, 2017

Patriot Tribune

 

I CAN’T SAY I’M REALLY SURPRISED CONSIDERING THIS IS THE SAME LYING FRAUD WHO GOT HER JOB AS NSA ADVISER AS A POLITICAL FAVOR FROM OBAMA/CLINTON FOR BEING THE FRONT-PERSON IN THE BENGHAZI VIDEO LYING SCHEME.

 

And she did this all on her own, huh? Do you believe that?

 

Daily Caller:

 

Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

 

“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

 

“The overheard conversations involved no illegal activity by anybody of the Trump associates, or anyone they were speaking with,” diGenova said. “In short, the only apparent illegal activity was the unmasking of the people in the calls.”

 

Other official sources with direct knowledge and who requested anonymity confirmed to TheDCNF diGenova’s description of surveillance reports Rice ordered one year before the 2016 presidential election. More

 

VIDEO: Hannity: Susan Rice has a lot of explaining to do

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

Multiple reports reveal the former Obama adviser requested the names of Trump transition team members be unmasked.

 

+++

Former US Attorney: Susan Rice Ordered Spy Agencies To Produce ‘Detailed Spreadsheets’ Involving Trump

 

By Richard Pollock

04/03/2017 10:08 PM 

Daily Caller

 

Update: In response to a question Tuesday from NBC News reporter Andrea Mitchell, former Obama White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice denied that she “prepared” spreadsheets of surveilled telephone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides. The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group, however, reported that Rice “ordered” the spreadsheets to be produced.

 

In addition, former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova, one of TheDCNF’s sources, said Tuesday in response to Rice that her denial “would come as quite a surprise to the government officials who have reviewed dozens of those spreadsheets.” 

 

 

+++

No Proof of Trump-Russia Collusion but Lots of Evidence of Obama Spying

 

By Onan Coca

April 4, 2017

Constitution.com

 

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson ripped the national media to shreds while condemning the Obama era White House for wrongfully spying on American citizens for political purposes.

 

Carlson argued that while media continues to focus in on some phantom collusion between President Trump and the Russian government, something for which they have NO PROOF, they are actively ignoring the real scandal unfolding before their eyes. Susan Rice, one of President Obama’s closest advisors, has been caught wrongfully unmasking members of the Trump campaign and transition teams for what seem to be nakedly political purposes. How do we know she did it for political purposes? Many of the reports now being produced show that the data that Rice was collecting had nothing to do with Russia or other national security issues, meaning that she unmasked the names of members of the Trump team without cause.

 

This fact is what Carlson finds most disturbing because it means that civil libertarians were right all along – there really is NOTHING we can do to stop the government from spying on us.

 

 

VIDEO: Tucker: Susan Rice revelation more disturbing than Russia

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

Carlson then transitioned into a conversation with former Obama advisor David Tafuri, a conversation that grew quite heated when Tafuri argued that the Russia story was the real issue here. Carlson pressed, as he has done time and again with liberals and journalists, for Tafuri to present ANY EVIDENCE that there was collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Or, for that matter, for Tafuri to present any evidence that Russia had any impact on the recent election. Of course, Tafuri could provide none, nor has any liberal politician or liberal member of the media been able to show a tangible connection between Russia and recent events.

 

 

VIDEO: Rice unmasked as Team Trump unmasker: What it really means

 

Posted by Fox News

Published on Apr 3, 2017

 

+++

FAKE-NEWS GIANTS CLAIM SUSAN RICE SPY SCANDAL IS ‘FAKE’

Chorus of legacy media: Nothing to see here

 

By ALICIA POWE

April 4, 2017

WND

 

WASHINGTON – Is it a real story, or is it fake news?

 

That’s the raging debate about the exploding scandal over Susan Rice’s “unmasking” of incoming Trump administration officials when she served as President Barack Obama’s national security adviser.

 

Despite some likening the White House use of classified leaks for political purposes to a scandal bigger than Watergate, media outlets Tuesday were shooting down – or flat-out ignoring – the blockbuster report that verified the Obama administration surveilled the Trump team.

 

 

+++

Susan Rice Responds To Trump Unmasking Allegations: “I Leaked Nothing To Nobody”

 

By Tyler Durden

Apr 4, 2017 9:47 PM

ZeroHedge

 

If anyone expected former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, the same Susan Rice who “stretched the truth” about Benghazi, to admit in her first public appearance after news that she unmasked members of the Trump team to admit she did something wrong, will be disappointed. Instead, moments ago she told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that she categorically denied that the Obama administration inappropriately spied on members of the Trump transition team.

 

[Several MSNBC Tweets of Mitchell/Rice interview]

 

We doubt that anyone’s opinion will change after hearing the above especially considering that, in addition to Benghazi, Rice is the official who praised Bowe Bergdahl for his “honorable service” and claimed he was captured “on the battlefield”, and then just two weeks ago, she told PBS that she didn’t know anything about the unmasking.

 

Unfortunately, Mitchell’s list of questions did not go so far as to ask about her false claim in the PBS interview, in which she said “I know nothing about unmasking Trump officials.”

 

It is thus hardly surprising that now that her memory has been “refreshed” about her role in the unmasking, that Rice clearly remembers doing nothing at all wrong.

 

On Monday night, Rand Paul and other Republicans called for Rice to testify under oath, a request she sidestepped on Tuesday. “Let’s see what comes,” she told Mitchell, when asked if she would testify on …

______________

Do YOU Trust Benghazi/Bergdahl Liar?

John R. Houk

© April 5, 2017

___________

Why Susan Rice’s Role In The Obama Spying Story Is A Big Deal

 

Copyright © 2017 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved

____________

Susan Rice requested to unmask names of Trump transition officials, sources say

 

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2017 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

 

[Blog Editor: FYI, I did not get Fox News permission to cross post. If requested, this cross post will be removed.]

Obama’s Insidious CVE


catastrophic-failure-islamic-terrrism

John R. Houk

© February 9, 2017

 

Americans that have not been brainwashed by eight years of the Obama Administration in collusion with the Leftist MSM, should not be surprised at the Dems and media excoriating President Trump’s protection of American from Islamic terrorism.

 

Obama and the Southern Poverty Law Center (More specifics on the SPLC from the Social Contract Press) were fairly successful in purging Law Enforcement of knowledgeable Counter Terrorism experts. Then proceeded to label Conservative organizations, Traditional Values Christian organizations and Counterjihad organizations as bigoted, hate-inspiring, and Islamophobic American right wing terrorists.

 

Check this out:

 

Unreal… Obama’s DHS Continues to Target Conservatives & Liberty Lovers As Terrorists (Video)

 

It’s an Obama bizarro world
The Obama administration holds peace talks with Taliban killers but treats patriotic Americans as terrorists.
Go figure.

 

The Department of Homeland Security is continuing to target patriotic Americans and conservatives who “believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack” as terrorists.  They even have this listed in their latest report.
This is unbelievable.

 

VIDEO: DHS continues to target conservatives and ignore Islamists


 

[Not part of Gateway Pundit article but important] Posted by usACTIONnews

Published on Jul 9, 2012

“Groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack and is either already lost or that the threat is imminent.” describes potential terrorists? WTH? DHS is using left wing hate groups and even Islamic groups with ties to terrorism as consultants to determine who are threats.

From a Jan, 2011 article “How Dept. of Homeland Security identifies ‘right wing extremists’:

The radical leftist group Southern Poverty Law Center has partnered with the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism to paint conservatives as hate groups and extremists.

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese says it is “despicable” for the Southern Poverty Law Center to classify the Family Research Council and a dozen other top conservative organizations as “hate groups” similar to the Ku Klux Klan.

The SPLC has a history of targeting conservatives and conservative groups as racist, homophobic, or extremist if they disagree with the radical left positions of the SPLC on any number of issues. An article at Discover the Networks.org says “What makes the Southern Poverty Law Center particularly odious is its habit of taking legitimate conservatives and jumbling them with genuine hate groups (the Klan, Aryan Nation, skinheads, etc.), to make it appear that there’s a logical relationship between say opposing affirmative action and lynching, or demands for an end to government services for illegal aliens and attacks on dark-skinned immigrants. The late novelist/philosopher Ayn Rand called this “the broad-brush smear.””

…..
The SPLC has joined the Department of Homeland Security in a ‘Working Group’ called Countering violent Extremism. John Cohen, President and CEO of SPLC is listed as a member and Laurie Wood, Analyst, Southern Poverty Law Center/Instructor, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is listed as an ‘expert in subject matter’. The members of the group also include three from Muslim organizations but we don’t see any conservatives. (see the list at the end of the report)

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which has been determined by the courts to be a terrorist support group proudly points out on their Facebook page that its Michigan members ‘participated a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group meeting with law enforcement officials and community advocates in Dearborn, Mich.'[ibid].

So we have the Southern Poverty Law Center, also known as The Church of Morris Dees, which calls groups and individuals like the Family Research Council, Eagle Forum, the Heritage Foundation, Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Rep. Steve King (R-IA), and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) ‘right wing extremists’ and the Council on American-Islamic Relations which the FBI has proven to be linked to a terrorist organization teaming up with the US Department of Homeland Security to determine what groups in America should be categorized as ‘extremist’ and potentially violent.

Now you can see why the DHS came out with its Rightwing Extremism report in April of 2009 that warned of potential violence by people against illegal immigration and gun control, and returning military veterans. Now that’s change.

[The rest of the Gateway Pundit article is an excerpt of above info] (Unreal… Obama’s DHS Continues to Target Conservatives & Liberty Lovers As Terrorists (Video); By Jim Hoft; Gateway Pundit; 7/11/12 4:45 am)

 

If you want to see the idiotic SPLC list of legitimate Counterjihadists labelled as dangerous right wing hatemongers, you can go to this one of many titles (this one 10/25/16): “A Journalist’s Manual: Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists”.

 

Here is an excerpt pointing to the Obama purge of anything Islamic from training manuals and official reports:

 

 

In another example of the administration’s ability to make key words disappear, a 2013 Judicial Watch report revealed that the FBI scrubbed its law enforcement training material of any language that might be deemed “offensive” to Muslims. Per those guidelines, hundreds of references to “Muslim,” “Islam” or “jihad” were removed from the 2004 9/11 commission report.

 

U.S. Government Terrorism Terminology References

 

The witnesses provided more evidence to corroborate these findings. Mr. Philip Haney, a retired Customs and Border Protection Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, revealed that the CIA has scrubbed more than 800 law enforcement records that were almost all connected to the Muslim brotherhood.

 

The first “great purge,” he said, was in 2009. Yet, in 2012 they didn’t just modify the records, they eliminated them out of the system, which, he noted, bypasses security protocol in Homeland Security. READ ENTIRETY (Cruz Hearing Exposes the Obama Admin’s History of Purging References to Islamic Terror; By Cortney O’Brien; Townhall; 6/29/16 9:15 AM)

 

More details on the Obama purge by Patrick Poole 3/26/14: “A detailed look at ‘the purge’ of U.S. counter-terrorism training by the Obama administration”.

 

So, why the heck am I rehashing Obama’s treacherous history after a majority of States elected Trump over Crooked Hillary? BECAUSE America’s Left is doing everything from lying, Fake News, civil disturbances, and questionable legal procedures to prevent President Trump from following through on his campaign promises.

 

I was alerted by email via Counterjihadist writer Paul Sutliff, that the Donald is going undo Obama’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) agenda which focused on White Supremacists. Please recall from above, that the Obama Administration lumped Conservatives, Christian Values and Counterjihadists with right wing extremists.

 

The new agenda focus will be Islamic terrorism. Paul Sutliff’s email alerts the reader he has been writing about the CVE agenda for some time:

 

Last night I was about to go to sleep and a friend called full of excitement saying did you see what Trump just did? He ended CVE! CVE is Countering Violent Extremism. I have written a few articles exposing their friendliness with the Muslim Brotherhood and the granting of special privileges for members of the Muslim Brotherhood. I wrote Why is Heritage Foundation Promoting Countering Violent Extremism (CVE)? (Part 1 of 3) on May 13, 2016, I wrote My What Strange Bedfellows the Heritage Foundation Has! on May 26, 2016 which further exposed the CVE and on July 5, 2016 I wrote Countering Violent Extremism: A Ghost Buster Solution to a Real World Problem. These articles earned me an interview with Vlad Tepes of TheRebel.media. Maybe Trump is reading my stuff, but I think it is more likely that he has hired good people!

 

SO imagine my excitement with that news! All I can say now is thank you Mr. President. You have earned my prayers and respect.

 

Get informed on Obama’s CVE in Paul’s articles linked above. For your convenience, I am cross posting the Tepes-Sutliff interview from The Rebel linked above.

 

JRH 2/9/17

Please Support NCCR

****************

Paul Sutliff interview (Part II): “Countering Violent Extremism” strategy is anything but

 

Posted by VICTOR LASZLO

REBEL COMMENTATOR

July 16, 2016

The Rebel

 

This is the second part of the interview with Paul Sutliff. Paul explains the US Government’s use of the office of Countering Violent Extremism to assist the Muslim Brotherhood, and of all things, fund mosques.

 

VIDEO: Paul Sutliff interview Part II The CVE


 

Posted by Vlad Tepes

Published on Jul 16, 2016

 

The first part of the interview can be seen here at The Rebel. 

 

His books can be purchased at Amazon.com

Civilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam

and Stealth Jihad two: American Colleges. 

 

Paul’s website is here.

 

At the end of the interview, Paul mentions Stephen Coughlin, the retired Maj. who was in Army intelligence. His website is hereand an interview he did for the Rebel can be seen here.

 

+++

Blog Editor: Here is a cross post from PJ Media by Patrick Poole CVE:

******

Trump Seeks to End Obama’s ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Scam

 

By PATRICK POOLE

FEBRUARY 5, 2017

PJ Media

 

Among the litany of Obama administration disasters, the rapid collapse of his “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) agenda is among the most consequential.

 

But groups in line to receive federal CVE grants announced just days before the end of the Obama era are now whining as the Trump administration seeks to put an end to the CVE scam.

 

Driven directly from the White House, the Obama administration’s CVE agenda was a replacement following a purge of counter-terrorism training across the federal government during 2011-2012 in response to a targeted series of reports by far-Left bloggers and reporters claiming widespread bias and “Islamophobia.”

 

Many of those claims were later debunked, but with the damage done the administration’s purge pressed ahead as it implemented CVE at the demand of Islamic groups, some of whom were directly involved in the formation of the administration’s CVE policies.

 

But as it became apparent that terror recruitment was escalating rapidly at nearly the same time that CVE was being imposed on agencies and departments across the board, the inability of CVE to actually countering any “extremists” was exposed. The same Islamic groups that urged the imposition of CVE then turned against the efforts when they realized that CVE was still primarily directed at the growing threat of Islamic recruitment, and not towards stigmatizing the administration’s perceived domestic political enemies.

 

By January 2015, Politico was already declaring that CVE was a complete flop:

 

POLITICO

@politico

 

No answer for homegrown terrorism? Obama’s plan to combat radicalization is a flop, critics say.

POLITICO Twitter Photo

 

No answer for homegrown terrorism?

Obama’s plan to combat radicalism is a flop critics say.

politico.com

 

The CVE pilot programs in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Boston were already so unsuccessful that the media had to announce they were off to a “slow start” a year ago:

 

WTOP

@WTOP

 

Effort in 3 US cities to combat extremism off to slow start https://t.co/4DMrdthiUn 

 

8:30 AM – 24 Mar 2016

 

The failures of the program were so pronounced that NPR conceded the point, claiming that even if the CVE programs were not effective they still somehow helped the communities.

 

NPR Popular 

@nprpopular

 

Whether It Works Or Not, U.S. Anti-Radicalization Plan Can Benefit Communities https://t.co/Xn34FdLc4N 

 

7:15 AM – 3 Apr 2016

 

As I noted in an assessment of Obama’s CVE policies here at PJ Media last year, and in a separate monographmeasuring Obama’s policies by his own stated White House goals, the CVE program was proven to be a complete failure in the very three areas it was intended to support: community engagement, training, and counter-propaganda.

 

It’s no surprise then that one of the first moves by the Trump administration will be to shut down the failed CVE program, as reported by Reuters:

 

Reuters Top News

@Reuters

 

Exclusive: Trump to focus counter-extremism program solely on Islam – sources https://t.co/9wHw9pKAn6 

 

Trump – CVE

 

7:11 PM – 1 Feb 2017

 

That decision in turn set off a wave of complaints by groups that were hoping to receive federal CVE grants that were rushed out by the Obama administration in its last few days in office:

 

CVE Community 

@CVEcommunity

 

Statement by @DHSgov‘s Jeh Johnson Announcing 1st Round of Countering Violent Extremism Grants

 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/13/statement-secretary-jeh-johnson-announcing-first-round-dhss-countering-violent #CVE #PVE

 

2:58 PM – 13 Jan 2017

 

Those would-be federal grant recipients are now turning to the media to air their complaints:

 

Adam Goldman

@adamgoldmanNYT

 

Pointing to Trump, Groups Reject U.S. Aid to Fight Extremism w/@mattapuzzo https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/us/politics/trump-muslim-groups-aid-extremism.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share 

 

5:09 PM – 2 Feb 2017

 

One of the first groups that took to the media was the Twin Cities-based Ka Joog (which in Somali means “stay away”). Ka Joog had already been one of the groups to receive $300,000 in federal money and another $250,000 appropriated by the state of Minnesota, and was in line to receive another $500,000 federal grant from Homeland Security.

 

Star Tribune 

@StarTribune

 

Citing “unofficial war on Muslim-Americans” launched by Trump, Minneapolis nonprofit rejects $500,000 federal grant https://t.co/lIlfSIw5j5 

 

12:25 AM – 2 Feb 2017

 

AVE 

@ave_org

 

Somali nonprofits get federal grants to counter extremism, Minneapolis #CVE https://t.co/obtvf32BuV 

 

7:30 AM – 19 Jan 2017

 

Ka Joog has been one of the premier programs that CVE defenders have pointed to in calling for additional funding for the CVE program.

 

And yet in one of the group’s most visible failuresthe nephew of the organization’s executive director was recruited by the Islamic State and eventually tried and convicted in federal court.

 

Another Twin Cities groups, Heartland Democracy, was scheduled to receive $165,000.

 

That group had been among the first to participate in a pet “deradicalization” project by the chief federal judge in Minnesota who tried many of the Islamic State recruiting cases.

 

But court documents exposed that Heartland Democracy had no experience in “jihadi rehab,” and its curriculum was described as “more high school civics course than religious deprogramming.”

 

The Daily Beast

@thedailybeast

 

Group With No Jihadi Experience Rehabs ISIS Recruit: http://t.co/8jWwAioziU 

 

8:35 AM – 25 Aug 2015

 

The Daily Beast reported on the regimen established for their first “deradicalization” client:

 

He and a Somali-American mentor began to work through an extensive reading list, which included Richard Wright’s Native Son, a novel about growing up poor and black in the 1930s, and an article by Native American author Sherman Alexie about how poetry freed him from the “reservation” of his mind.

 

McKinley would not say how often Yusuf met his mentor.

 

“We met with him regularly, I don’t know the number of times a week,” she said. When pressed on whether they met weekly, biweekly, or at a different pace, McKinley would not clarify. “We met with him regularly.”

 

Court documents also reference Yusuf meeting with religious leaders, but McKinley wasn’t sure about that.

 

“I don’t know if he’s met with any religious leaders,” she said in response to a question about meeting with imams. “I mean, he’s an adult, he can get any visitor he wants.”

 

That first client was sent back to jail after a search of his room at a halfway house found a box cutter.

 

The Obama administration’s CVE programs have a lengthy history of failure:

 

  • As I reported here at PJ Media just a few days ago, an Associated Press investigation into the Pentagon’s $500 million WebOps program to counter Islamic State propaganda found widespread incompetence and corruption. According to whistleblowers, civilian Arabic specialists with no understanding of Islam tried to defeat complex religious justifications for terrorism, resulting in the program becoming a laughingstock in jihadist circles.

 

  • In December 2014, the New York Times reported that the then-head of Special Operations Command, Major Gen. Michael Nagata, convened a series of conference calls with outside experts attempting to understand why the message of the Islamic State had grown so dangerous. But after the Obama administration’s counter-terror training purge, Gen. Nagata was forced to admit that “we do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it….We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.

 

  • In September 2011, Obama signed an executive order creating the State Department’s Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications (CSCC).One of their early failures was a graphic video produced called “Welcome to ISIS Land,” targeting would-be Islamic State recruits. The center’s director was quickly replaced. Then a Twitter campaign, “Think Again Turn Away,” was largely panned by terror experts who claimed the effort was largely ineffective and was actually legitimizing the terrorist narrative. A panel of outside experts convened by the State Department agreed, finding that the CSCC was so counterproductive to its mission that they questioned whether the U.S. government should be involved in counter-propaganda at all. The center was promptly closed.

 

  • One of the first CVE guidelines produced by the Department of Homeland Security in 2011 was to instruct federal agencies to avoid using “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim Reformers,'” and yet documents uncovered regarding meetings with DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano show the agency soliciting advice from known extremist groups and controversial Islamic leaders. Some of these extremist leaders even held official positions advising DHS. Last June, when the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Subcommittee released its recommendations urging $100 million in new CVE funding, it urged banning the use of “jihad” or “sharia” in training — two very common terms used by terrorist recruiters. One of the subcommittee members, a Syrian immigrant, had previously said that the 9/11 terror attacks had “changed the world for good.” And in DecemberDHS teamed up with the State Department to bring in the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization that the Justice Department had argued in federal court had supported terrorism, to teach a CVE course for French officials. Even though the State Department programs have been universally panned, it was reported last August that they had tripled the budget.

 

  • In implementing the Obama administration’s CVE agenda, the FBI had conducted a wide-scale purge of its terrorism training curriculum at the request of Islamic groups claiming it was biased. In a move questioned by members of Congress, the FBI classified the identities of the outside experts brought in to censor the material. A subsequent review of the censored terror-training material discovered suspect and inconsistent standards in purging the curriculum. More recently, a FBI website and video game (“Don’t Be a Puppet”) intended to target youth vulnerable to terrorist recruitment was launched, and then suspended after just a day in response to complaints of Islamic groups, terror experts, and even teachers unions that the effort was biased, ineffective, and encouraged students to inform on each other. Some of the criticism came from the FBI’s own Muslim outreach partners that were brought in to advise the bureau on its CVE policies.

 

So it’s no great mystery why the incoming Trump administration began discussions about scaling back and ending Obama’s CVE program.

 

Others contend that the CVE grants were political payoffs to groups to enlist their aid in scuttling counter-terror programs and to silence any possible criticism of the Obama national security and foreign policy agenda.

 

The chairman of one group that was scheduled to receive a $400,000 CVE grant, Life After Hate, has publicly launched attacks on the incoming Trump administration and even called for the violent removal of President Trump one day after his inauguration.

 

Meanwhile in Minneapolis, as Ka Joog declines the $500,000 in announced DHS CVE grants the group has quickly transitioned from attempting to deradicalizing area Somali youth to publicly declaring that President Trump is engaged in “an official war against Islam” — parroting a standard terrorist narrative.

 

But as mentioned previously, the nephew of the executive director who had participated in Ka Joog programs was still recruited to join the Islamic State.

 

In another instance, an Islamic State recruit from Alexandria, Virginia, later captured by Kurdish troops and currently facing federal charges, lived less than 50 yards from one of the Obama administration’s top go-to CVE experts.

 

If these so-called CVE “experts” can’t prevent their closest relatives or neighbors from joining terrorist groups, why should the Trump administration continue to entrust them with our national security?

 

Despite all the media hand-wringing, it seems that questioning the effectiveness of Obama’s CVE program is entirely in order given its constant track record of failure.

 

Yet in light of the current media climate, the new administration should expect that it will come under fire for whatever they eventually replace the failed CVE agenda with. And the Islamic State and other terrorist groups continue to recruit and encourage supporters to conduct attacks inside the homeland.

 

Ending the CVE scam would be a good first step in reversing the corrosive policies established by the Obama administration that have hampered and sometimes punished our law enforcement and national security professionals for doing their job.

___________________

Obama’s Insidious CVE

John R. Houk

© February 9, 2017

_________________

 

Paul Sutliff interview (Part II): “Countering Violent Extremism” strategy is anything but

 

Copyright © TheRebel.media. Some rights reserved.

 

___________________

Trump Seeks to End Obama’s ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Scam

 

Copyright © 2005-2017 PJ Media All Rights Reserved.

 

 

Social Censorship and Racism


John R. Houk

© January 16, 2017

 

I have had my issues of being placed in Facebook and G+ jail under the (FALSE) accusation of posting inappropriate thoughts that violate social community rules. I am guessing many other Conservatives and Counterjihad writers sharing the truth without profanity have also experienced a social ban here and there. Social Ban = Social Jail.

 

The social network via Yahoo Groups (ccpga – Restricted Group) posted a link that exposes this jail phenomenon. Sadly Yahoo Groups are not as active as other social groups; nevertheless, the relatively small members at ccpga are quite active. It is there where I found a link to Constitution.com exposing the idiotic censorship at Facebook.

 

The Facebook poster – Grant Phillips – wrote about the racism involved with teenage Black adults torturing a White disabled mentally challenged young man. Phillips’ thought was pertaining to the MSM not being outraged by “kids” torturing a disabled White man yet contrarily the MSM does not get steamed by the Obama Administration alerting the public to Islamic Terrorism after a terrorist murderer shouts Allahu Akbar. Or calling Black protesters destroying, looting and burning cities are just misunderstood people. Implying Black-Americans need to demonstrate such frustration because of years of oppression. The reality is such actions make Americans displeased and contribute more to racist reactions to show their displeasure.

 

Anyway, read the Constitution.com article which should go viral to protest Facebook censorship and I dare say a cover-up.

 

JRH 1/16/17

Please Support NCCR

*******************

Facebook Bans Yet Another Conservative Viral Post that Only Tells the Truth

 

By Onan Coca 

January 15, 2017

Constitution.com

 

About a week ago a gentleman named Grant Phillips, who in and of himself is not famous or celebrated for any particular reason, posted an important and thoughtful note to Facebook.

 

His argument, written in the wake of the vile Chicago hate crime that saw four African-American adults livestream their kidnapping, abuse, and torture of a special needs white man, was well-written and completely factual. Here’s what Phillips had to say:

 

If you yell “f*ck white people” while torturing a special needs white kid, the city of Chicago won’t call it a hate crime and the superintendent will say it’s “just a bunch of kids.” If you yell “Allahu Akbar” right before blowing yourself up in a public area, POTUS won’t call you an Islamic terrorist. If you burn down cities and destroy property, you’re a misunderstood protester fighting oppression. But if you voted for Trump, you’re a violent racist and white supremacist.

 

Facebook to Phillips – Removed post

facebook-to-phillips-removed-post

 

Mr. Phillips’ post quickly went viral reaching over 100,000 people without much pomp or circumstance, a true miracle considering Mr. Phillips lack of fame. The quick expansion of the message must have bothered someone at Facebook, though, because within a few days Facebook had removed the post for violating “community standards.” Apparently, Facebook’s community standards doesn’t appreciate completely honest, factual, and researchable information.

 

Now, on Facebook, Phillips and his friends, along with many other conservatives, are responding by reposting his message far and wide across the social media network. One of his friends argued, “Facebook is showing an increasing proclivity for punishing Conservative views. Let’s not let them get away with it.”

 

I agree, let’s make sure that Facebook knows we won’t let them get away with their suppression of conservative views.

___________________

Social Censorship and Racism

John R. Houk

© January 16, 2017

_________________

Facebook Bans Yet Another Conservative Viral Post that Only Tells the Truth

 

Onan Coca

 

Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Liberty Alliance media group. He’s also the managing editor at Eaglerising.com, Constitution.com and the managing partner at iPatriot.com. Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.

 

Copyright © 2017 The Constitution. All Rights Reserved.

 

Bannon Called Racist & Antisemite by Hearsay


John R. Houk

© November 18, 2016

steve-bannon-donald-trump

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is a Jewish civil rights organization that might lean a little to militancy in defense of Jews wronged by non-Jews. The ADL posted a huge character assassination on Steve Bannon – Trump’s Chief Strategist at the White House: “BANNON HAS EMBRACED THE ALT RIGHT, A LOOSE NETWORK OF WHITE NATIONALISTS AND ANTI-SEMITES”.

 

Four/fifths of this article is as anti-Bannon as one can be. Here are some excerpts:

 

The alt right is a loose network of individuals and groups that promote white identity and reject mainstream conservatism in favor of politics that embrace implicit or explicit racism, anti-Semitism and white supremacy. Often by leveraging social media and the Internet, alt right adherents express opposition to multiculturalism, immigration and often claim that there is a Jewish conspiracy to advocate for “white genocide.”  Bannon “proudly” told a reporter at the 2016 Republican National Convention “we’re the platform for the alt right.” In the same interview in Mother Jones magazine, he denied that the alt right is inherently racist or anti-Semitic, although a vast majority of people affiliated with that movement hold racist and anti-Semitic views.  In addition, under Bannon, Breitbart News published an article co-authored by Milo Yiannopoulos, a figure who is associated with the alt right, that played down the racism of some of the alt right’s main ideologues.  In The Daily Beast in August 2016, alt right figure Richard Spencer, said:

 

Breitbart has elective affinities with the alt-right and the alt-right has clearly influenced Breitbart. In this way, Breitbart has acted as a ‘gateway’ to alt-right ideas and writers.”

 

Bannon has also been embraced by white supremacists for his views in recent days. Numerous well-known white supremacists weighed in on President-elect Trump’s appointment of Bannon as his chief strategist. David Duke called the selection of Bannon “excellent,” adding that Bannon was “basically creating the ideological aspects of where we’re going.” Peter Brimelow, who runs the racist site VDare, said that the Bannon hire was “amazing.”  Jared Taylor of American Renaissance and Brad Griffin who runs the Occidental Dissent website both said that Bannon would help hold Trump to his campaign rhetoric on immigration and other issues.  Rocky Suhayda of the American Nazi Party voiced the same view.  In addition, Bannon has reportedly reached out to far-right figure and French political activist Marine Le Pen. She tweeted that he had invited her to work together with the new Trump administration.

 

… (Steven Bannon: Five Things to Know; Anti-Defamation League)

 

After linking Bannon to everything that can be White National Supremacist racism, the ADL in the article’s last point – kind-of – exonerates Steve Bannon of Antisemitism:

 

WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY ANTI-SEMITIC STATEMENTS FROM BANNON.

 

While there is a long fact pattern of evidence that Breitbart served as a platform for a wide range of bigotry and there is some controversy related to statements from Mr. Bannon’s divorce proceedings in 2007, we are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by Bannon himself.  In fact, Jewish employees of Breitbart have challenged the characterization of him and defended him from charges of anti-Semitism. Some have pointed out that Breitbart Jerusalem was launched during his tenure.

 

Nevertheless, Bannon essentially has established himself as the chief curator for the alt right. Under his stewardship, Breitbart has emerged as the leading source for the extreme views of a vocal minority who peddle bigotry and promote hate. (Ibid.)

 

The American Spectator demonstrates the hypocrisy of the Left labelling Steve Bannon an Antisemitic White Identity racist:

 

The things you hear when the left stops trending.

 

Steve Bannon is a white nationalist. Anderson Cooper touched me in the gym one time. Wolf Blitzer is an actual wolf, it’s true, I heard it from an ex-staffer’s best friend’s brother’s uncle who used to work next door to the building that is next door to CNN. Martha Raddatz was an extra in the movie They Live, Megyn Kelly has talent, CNN is fair and balanced, liberals are open-minded. Every Republican that gets into power is a descendant of Hitler, and of course none of these are true, but it is fun and I can keep going. That’s where we are as a media and a public that just says whatever it wants to, with not an ounce of factual or concrete evidence to back it up. But, hey, it’s trending, so it must be true. Here are few little things that we do know to be stone cold facts that you never ever hear reported by those I was touched by.

 

The behind-the-scenes financial leader of the Democrat party, George Soros, was an actual Nazi collaborator. You want to throw the word Nazi around? Well, so will this Jew. Yes, he was 14 years old during the war, and God I can’t imagine what he saw. But like 50 is the new 30 now, back then 14 was the old 44. He has said he feels no remorse or guilt, so I feel no remorse or guilt about saying it, and saying it, and saying it. He has given millions to anti-Israel/anti-Zionist organizations, not to mention that he was convicted of insider trading by the French Courts. He has also broken economies, and to paraphrase Paul Krugman, done so with glee. You want to call people Nazis and Hitler, or white nationalist, your de facto party leader was an actual, well I don’t want to be sued, so I’ll leave the rest to your imagination.

 

You want to accuse Mr. Bannon of being anti-Semitic and a white nationalist? Let’s talk about Time magazine, who made Hitler their Man of the Year in 1938. Let’s talk about the New York Times, who will never pass up the chance to portray Israel as being in the wrong — and, yes, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. Let’s talk about MSNBC, and Al Sharpton calling Jews interlopers and diamond merchants. He also led marches in which people chanted “death to Jews.” But if you really want to talk about white power, look no further than the gratefully deceased Robert Byrd, who was an actual white nationalist, pillow case and all. But maybe I’m actually being a little too factual for people on the left.

 

What exactly is the basis of the left’s arguments against Mr. Bannon? Is it that his wife, in a divorce, accused him of spewing anti-Semitic comments? Yeah, no one in a divorce has ever accused their spouses with false claims. It also never happens in the real world, with people making false claims like: Brian Williams, the Duke rape accuser, the Benghazi attack was caused by a video, John Kerry’s life, Hillary Clinton dodging sniper fire in Bosnia, and celebrities threatening to leave the country. This really does piss me off, and I don’t know Mr. Bannon, but I do know Breitbart. Like The American Spectator, and the Drudge Report, there are no better friends of Israel, and by proxy, the Jews, than these sites. But if the ADL really wants to go after people for being anti-Semites, let them go after the DNC. It was they who debated bringing up Bernie’s Judaism. It was they who debated whether or not bringing up Israel was a good or bad idea, like it’s 1935 all over again, and should we or should we not mention the horrible Jews. It was Obama officials who called Bibi a chickens**t, not Mr. Bannon. It’s Mr. Obama who attended Rev. Wright’s church and gladly welcomed Al Sharpton to the White House. These are facts, not divorce proceedings conjecture.

 

Yes, I am an avid reader of Breitbart, and maybe I missed the white nationalist section. Maybe there is a secret code that Jews weren’t given for that section. I guess it comes after Big HollywoodBreitbart Texas, and Breitbart Israel, where Aaron Klein, an Orthodox Jew, is bureau chief. I guess he wasn’t given access to the White Power section either. Do you really think Ivanka and Jared Kushner, being Orthodox Jews, would be okay with a white nationalist anti-Semite helping run their father and father-in-law’s presidency? I guess they don’t have the codes for the secret Breitbart section either.

 

READ THE REST (A Better Perspective: Steve Bannon Is a What? By JUDAH FRIEDMAN; American Spectator; 11/15/16 1:07 am)

 

I’ll be honest that I was a bit uninformed about Steve Bannon until the Left went ballistic about Trump’s staffing decision in the White House. ONCE AGAIN there is the appearance that Dems, the Left Stream Media and Leftists in general are using half-truths and downright lies to smear an opponent of the American Left agenda.

 

John Zmirak writes of the Leftist tactics to smear their opponents to eliminate them:

 

 

The Guilt-By-Association Method

 

These attempts to destroy Bannon follow a time-tested formula used against skeptics of globalism:

 

  1. Call Mr. X a racist or anti-Semite.

 

  1. When pressed for evidence, if there isn’t any, cite some old friend or one-time associate of Mr. X, who can be plausibly framed as prejudiced — in little munchable sound bites, shorn of context. Demand to know why Mr. X hasn’t already denouncedhis former associate. Muse publicly about how very suspicious that is.

 

  1. If some pundit defends Mr. X, publicly charge that he is enablingracism and anti-Semitism.

 

  1. Denounce that pundit, and demand that his friends and associates denounce him, too. Try to get him fired.

 

  1. When anyone else sticks his neck out for Mr. X, rinse and repeat.

 

 

Steve Bannon, Breitbart, and the Alt-Right

 

Now Bannon is being targeted because the website which he inherited and helped to build into a behemoth, Breitbart, has been called a venue for white supremacists and anti-Semites. And so, because he ran the place, Bannon is also at best a cynical opportunist, and at worse a hater himself. The evidence for these charges is …  somewhere between thin and none.

 

No one has cited an article that appeared at Breitbart whose contents can be plausibly construed as racist or anti-Semitic. No one has found a writer who published at Breitbart whose other writings, elsewhere, are racist or anti-Semitic. No one has produced any evidence of personal or political racism or anti-Semitism that Bannon himself engaged in. A number of conservatives who happen to be Jewish, such as David Horowitz, have come forward to deny that Bannon has ever shown any sign of prejudice. No one has offered any tangible evidence of racism, either.

 

So what does the charge come down to? Two things:

 

1) That Bannon once said that Breitbart was a platform for the “Alt-Right.” and

 

2) That some of the attention-grabbing headlines which Bannon approved could be considered “dog-whistles” intended to get racists and anti-Semites to read them and forward them around, increasing traffic on the site.

 

Let’s Look at the Evidence

 

The best analysis of these headlines was done by London-based writer Melanie Phillips, a brave and embattled defender of Israel and the rights of Jews in an increasingly hostile, sharia-friendly country. As she wrote on Facebook: “False allegations are made against Donald Trump and his new head of strategy Stephen Bannon, smearing them as antisemites, fascists and racists. Whether through laziness or ideological malice, these smears are recycled uncritically throughout both mainstream and social media.” Phillips addresses the controversial headlines as follows:

 

Exhibit A: an article entitled “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew.”

That headline is said to be antisemitic. The author of the article, David Horowitz, has written however:

“In fact, neither Breitbart nor Bannon is responsible for that statement. A Jew is. I wrote the article, which was neither requested nor commissioned by Breitbart. And I wrote the headline: “Bill Kristol, Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew.

“I wrote the article when Kristol set out to lead the Never Trump movement, after Trump had secured the Republican nomination. I would write it again in a heartbeat. I would write it the same way and with the same headline. Bill Kristol and his friends betrayed the Republican Party, betrayed the American people, and betrayed the Jews when he set out to undermine Trump and elect the criminal Hillary Clinton. Obama and Hillary are supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that launched the Arab drive to destroy Israel and push its Jews into the sea (that was their slogan).”

Exhibit B: an article which said of journalist Anne Applebaum [a Yale classmate of mine, and a fine Cold War scholar—J.Z.] that “hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned.” That phrase is said to be antisemitic.

The article attacked Applebaum for what it claimed was her “disinformation offensive against the anti-globalist right.” Central to its argument was a description of Applebaum’s circumstances and political world-view as the wife of the former Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski. It said: “Sikorski desperately wanted to replace Baroness Catherine Ashton as EU foreign affairs spokesman. This bid died with the exposure of the Civic Platform corruption. This turn of events ended Applebaum’s dream of being Poland’s first Jewish-American first lady. And hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned”.

There was nothing gratuitous or innately offensive about this Jewish reference any more than the references to her being Polish or American. It was simply another biographical detail in a highly personal piece. The claim that this was “antisemitic” is absurd.

  • The charge of racism.

After the murder in 2015 of nine black worshippers in a Charleston church by a man who posed with a Confederate flag, an article attacking the left for cynically exploiting this tragedy to attack conservatism, tradition and the south.

The author said the left had rewritten history. “The epitome of everything they detest and fear is the Confederate Flag, so that is now the target of a hate campaign so fanatical and irrational as to seem barely sane.”

The insanity has gone one stage further; the left has extended this hate campaign to the website’s chief executive, smearing him as a racist for running this article merely criticising the left for its hatred and lies.

  • The charge of Islamophobia

Breitbart has run numerous pieces exposing Islamist aggression and sexual violence. For this it has been falsely accused of anti-Muslim prejudice by those who wish to censor facts which it is overwhelmingly in the public interest to report.

  • The charge that it has promoted the “alt-right.”

This term is being used as a smear in itself. It makes no distinction between the legitimate populist movement for western cultural identity to which millions who voted for both Trump and Brexit subscribe, and neo-Nazis and white supremacists who have leeched onto that populist movement — whether to legitimise themselves or to make trouble for the populists through “guilt by association” isn’t clear.

An article about the “alt-right” on Breitbart itself noted that those who use these Nazi types to tarnish the alt-right movement should, to be consistent, use Islamist killers to tarnish all Muslims or Black Lives Matter to tarnish all black people. Of course they would think that preposterous, but they use this tactic against their political enemies. The authors went on:

“The politics of identity, when it comes from women, LGBT people, blacks and other non-white, non-straight, non-male demographics is seen as acceptable — even when it descends into outright hatred. Any discussion of white identity, or white interests, is seen as a heretical offense. … Even for us — a gay man of Jewish descent and a mixed-ethnic half-Pakistani — the dangers of writing on this topic loom large. Though we do not identify with the alt-right, even writing an article about them is akin to prancing through a minefield.”

 

Racism and Globalism: Equal and Opposite Heresies

 

Of course, there are some people out there who really are racists, anti-Semites, or some other variety of anti-Christian extremist. Some white nationalists today have gone as far as calling to keep abortion legal to lower the non-white birth rate — you know, as eugenicist Margaret Sanger tried to do when she founded Planned Parenthood. Such twisted, hate-goaded people ought to be shunned. One of the READ ENTIRETY (Steve Bannon: Bigot, Cynic or Brave Contrarian? By JOHN ZMIRAK; The Stream; 11/16/16)

 

Much like the character assassination in the past by Leftists against Sarah Palin and Donald Trump before the election, Steve Bannon is a part of that Leftist tactic.

 

The inspiration for these thoughts comes from Americans for Limited Government (AGL) noting that the ADL has retracted its Antisemite charge against Steve Bannon.

 

See Also: Why the Big Lie About Steve Bannon?

 

JRH 11/18/16

 Please Support NCCR

***************

ADL backs off Bannon smear: ‘Not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by Bannon’

 

By press

November 17, 2016

Americans for Limited Government

 

Stephen Bannon and Breitbart News owed apology.

 

Nov. 17, 2016, Fairfax, Va.–Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement condemning the Anti-Defamation League for finally revealing that “we are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by [Stephen] Bannon” four days after smearing Bannon as “a man who presided over the premier website of the Alt Right, a loose-knit group of white nationalists and unabashed anti-Semites and racists”:

 

“The Anti-Defamation League has engaged in the most partisan libelous smear campaign imaginable against Stephen Bannon based on their own political prejudices and bias. One would expect ADL to actually look at the record prior to defaming someone who has proven to not only not be an anti-Semite, but to be a true friend of Israel. After four days of obscene character assassination of Bannon and Breitbart News, ADL has been forced to admit that there is no evidence that Bannon has ever made any anti-Semitic comments. This should provide a cautionary tale for the media that all too often engages in ready, fire, aim narratives unsupported by facts when talking about people they disagree with.

 

“Everyone in the media who reported this without first checking and ADL in particular owe Stephen Bannon and Breitbart News a front-page apology for their reckless political smear job.

 

“It is absolutely fair to have a public policy discussion based upon real statements and positions taken by public figures. But this discourse is destroyed by the left’s continued insistence that anyone who disagrees with them is by definition a racist, bigot, anti-Semitic, white supremacist. At a time when the entire media needs to engage in thorough self-examination to determine how they got so far off course, these false attacks on Bannon serve as the prosecution’s Exhibit A in exposing that the left is composed of nothing more than hacks undeserving of the moniker news.”

 

Interview Availability: Please contact Americans for Limited Government at 703-383-0880 ext. 106 or at media@limitgov.org to arrange an interview with ALG experts including ALG President Rick Manning.

______________

Bannon Called Racist & Antisemite by Hearsay

John R. Houk

© November 18, 2016

______________

ADL backs off Bannon smear: ‘Not aware of any anti-Semitic statements made by Bannon’

 

©2016 Americans for Limited Government. All rights reserved.

 

About  ALG

 

Our Name Defines Us – Americans for Limited Government.

We are leaders in identifying, exposing and working with Congress and state legislatures to prevent the continued expansion of government. Never shying away from the big issues, ALG is perpetually ahead of the issue curve taking on issues like the $100 billion International Monetary Fund line of credit while others are still trying to spell IMF.

 

This aggressive, non-partisan approach to the threats posed by an ever expanding government to our basic freedoms gives us the ability to honestly present the limited government perspective both inside the beltway and most importantly around the country.

 

Don’t take it from us.

 

“Americans for Limited Government can be an incredibly effective force in advancing the cause of freedom.” -Ed Crane, Founder/President, Cato Institute

 

“Americans for Limited Government stands up… to defend the most important principles in politics today.” -Former Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)

 

Paula Jones goes off! I don’t recall Bill or Hillary apologizing…


The Leftist Mainstream Media, Establishment Republicans and NeverTrump Conservatives have accomplished an unholy alliance to trash Donald Trump over his hot-mike video from eleven years ago. If that video is so damaging how does Crooked Hillary get a pass in covering up and attacking President Bill Clinton’s legacy of victimizing Sexual Assault and Adultery?

hillary-trashes-bills-victims

Paula Jones, one of Slick Willie’s victims makes this similar point!

 

JRH 10/11/16

Please Support NCCR

*****************

Paula Jones goes off! I don’t recall Bill or Hillary apologizing while Bill got ‘his wee wee . . . under the Oval Office desk’

By Carmine Sabia

October 8, 2016

BizPac Review

 

First we heard from Juanita Broaddrick, the alleged rape victim of former President Bill Clinton, and now Paula Jones has lashed out at those on the left who have attacked Donald trump for lewd comments he made about women 11 years ago.

paula-jones-facebookCredit Paul Jones Facebook.

 

paula-jones-sean-hannity-facebook

Credit Paul Jones Facebook.

 

The former Arkansas state employee who Clinton settled a sexual harassment lawsuit with to the tune of $850,000, teed off on the Clintons and the left-wing attack dogs in a Facebook post on Saturday.

 

“So Donald Trump had to apologize about the woman comments, ” she wrote. “I don’t recall that Bill or Hillary has apologized to me and Juanita Broaddrick or Kathleen Willey yet Bill was getting his wee wee sucked under the Oval Office desk and still won a second term, UNBELIEVABLE! No liberal ever questioned his ability to run our country then, why NOW with Trump..???? Two faced hypercritical liberals!”

______________

Copyright © 2016. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

 

About BizPac Review

 

Conservative News You Can Trust

 

Based in Palm Beach County, BizPac Review is a privately held, for-profit news and opinion website covering news that matters to conservatives throughout Florida and the United States.

 

Our articles and posts are fact-checked and edited, and BizPac Review content is accepted by and listed with Google News.

 

BizPac Review is a major new conservative media outlet that provides an alternative to legacy media in Palm Beach County, Florida and the nation.

 

To inquire about READ THE REST

Bad News, Good News, and a Common Blind Spot


Let me ask a question: When you think of a person who is a Nazi do you also think that person is a follower of the ideology of Nazism? Both person and ideology are thought of as evil, right?

Hmm… So why is a Muslim divided into moderate-good and radical-evil Islamic ideology when both the moderate and the radical both believe the Quran is the uncreated word of Allah? Or why do present day multiculturalists brainwash students and listeners that Islamic history during Muhammad’s life and the next thousand years or so are taught that this time period is the golden age of Islam? Keep in mind I ask about this golden age fallacy because one can account for about “270 million killed by jihad”.

Elsa Schieder addresses the hypocritical paradox about personhood and ideology.

JRH 2/3/16

Please Support NCCR

******************

Bad News, Good News, and a Common Blind Spot

By Elsa Schieder

January 30, 2016 2:37 PM

Sent by WorldTruthSummit.com

Today, bad news, good news, and a way that most people – even those very aware of the threat of Islam – are asleep.

Bad news. In Israel, the stabbings of Jews by Islamics continue. A mother was murdered in front of her children. In Canada, a man named Mohammed entered a Calgary nightclub with a gun and started firing. There was only one injury – bouncers tackled the man, subdued him. In Paris, a man with 2 guns, ammo and a Quran was caught in Disney Land. A 22-year-old Swedish woman, daughter of Christian refugees from Lebanon, was murdered by an Islamic so-called refugee at a refugee center for unaccompanied minors. (The supposed minor was over 6′ tall.) Another story from Sweden: a 15-year-old Lithuanian student was murdered by an Islamic student after the Lithuanian student protected a non-Islamic female student from sexual harassment. In Berlin, a German-born Iranian Muslim man murdered a 20-year-old German woman by pushing her into the path of an oncoming subway train. I could go on and on.

I hear so many stories, and grieve for the lives lost.

Good news. There’s a new Fortress Europe coalition. It’s planning to hold mass demonstrations across Europe on February 6. And in the United Stated, a presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has declared that, if elected, he will stop all Islamic immigration until the jihad threat has been eliminated.

Will enough people wake up in time to save the West? My inner answer: yes. At what cost? We will see. I remember a film that gripped me when I was a child: High Noon. It feels like high noon, right now.

And now I want to pay attention to a way that most people are asleep.

It should be obvious: Christians are to Christianity, what Muslims are to Islam, what Nazis are to Nazism. But just try and see – maybe even on yourself – and you’ll almost certainly experience very different responses to the 3 things. I can certainly feel this in myself. My intrained [sic] kneejerk response re Muslims and Islam: of course one can’t generalize about Muslims, Muslims are people, Islam is an ideology. My kneejerk response re Nazis is utterly different: within myself, I tar them all with the same brush – bad, evil, Jew-killers. As for Christians, it’s also automatic: I don’t feel any need to say, of course not all Christians are like this or that.

I did a mini-experiment with a few people when they spouted the usual line (“We must be careful not to negatively stereotype Muslims”). I agreed vehemently, that it’s important to distinguish between Muslims (people) and Islam (ideology) – just as we need to make a distinction between Nazis (people) and Nazism (ideology). The people were stunned. Spluttering. Silence. What??

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, I have heard. Instead I could feel a powerful double standard, which these people – and most Western people, I suspect – hold, without awareness.

The biggest thing: Muslims are radically disconnected from any of the nasty ideology found in the supposedly perfect Quran. On the other hand, Nazis are 100% connected to The Final Solution (the plan to murder all Jews) – though The Final Solution is NOT in Hitler’s Mein Kampf, in fact was not developed until 1942, the middle of World War II. Yet in World War II, there were no cell phones, no instant videos instantly uploaded, no selfies of SS guards herding Jews into the gas chambers. There was no Twitter, no Facebook, no internet. There was even no mention in the news – for the most part, outside as well as inside Germany – of the concentration camps. Not a single train track leading to the concentration camps was ever bombed.

Now there is a wealth of information on Islamic ideology, plus there are scores of graphic videos of Islamics quoting the Quran while committing atrocities. No one can say that Muslims have no access to knowledge of Islamic ideology that includes Jew hatred, belief in Islamic superiority, and worldwide Sharia, and an Islamic caliphate. In fact, there is massive evidence that millions of Muslims adhere to this ideology. About three-quarters of a billion Muslims (about 50%), according to some recent statistics, want worldwide Sharia.

So what is going, that now, with all this information readily available, Muslims are “anti-demonized”, disconnected from Islamic ideology?

Just ask yourself:

– Why it isn’t even suggested that we need to distinguish between Nazis (people) and Nazism (Nazi ideology as laid out in Mein Kampf)?

– Much more important, why is it drilled into us (correctly) that we need to distinguish between Muslims (people) and Islam (Islamic ideology as laid out in the Quran)?

 – But why it isn’t drilled into us that we must educate ourselves as well as Muslims – or that Muslims are responsible for educating themselves – on Islamic ideology, so we all know the ideology Muslims are associating themselves with?

To me, it doesn’t make any logical sense to demonize all adherents of one of these ideologies (Nazism), while treating adherents of the other (Islam) with kid gloves – “one must not generalize about Muslims.”

We know the answers to these questions, actually. Islam is powerful. So are the politically correct. Nazis are not. It’s easy to demonize those out of power.

Now for something else, something that shocked me, and made me do a lot more thinking about Nazis and Nazism.

It’s something I came across accidentally online. I had to look twice to believe what I was seeing. I was so shocked I didn’t even mention it to anyone for a week. I was looking for Silent Night, in the original German. I found a lovely sing-along version by Nana Mouskouri. Then, in one of those automatic changes, right after Nana Mouskouri finished, on came a German version of White Christmas. Nothing strange about that – except that it included photos of Hitler. (183,942 views. 522 likes. 87 dislikes. January 30, 2016.)

Sweetly ring the bells Christmas

As I said, I had to look twice to believe what I was seeing. Hitler at Christmas.

Then I clicked off the video.

You can see it here: https://youtu.be/jE2vyGSbUVM

VIDEO: Weiße Weihnacht (White Christmas) German – Sing Along

Posted by Valhalla Videos Network

Uploaded on Dec 20, 2007

This is White Christmas in German Sung by the boy choir Toelzer Knabenchor.
This music video is a continuation to last year’s Christmas video of Stille Nacht (Silent Night) which I did. I’ve included subtitles if you want to sing along also with a few pics and video clips from Germany during Christmas between the late 1930’s till the early 1940’s. Enjoy!

A week later I went looking for the video. It was easy to find. Once again, it came on automatically after Nana and her sweet sing-along. This time I made myself watch closely, quietly.

I could understand the images of German housewives, little German children, German soldiers.

image006

image007

And there is only one wish

May there be peace on earth forever. Wonderful words.

All that existed – people, not some strange monsters, celebrating Christmas.

I could feel the humanity of the young soldiers who went to war – like my 2 oldest uncles, 18, 19, both killed on the Russian front when my father was a boy.

Gone are worry and pain

The celebration of love is now here.

But, as I’ve said, I was stopped cold at the photos of Hitler.

And I was stunned that this video played automatically. What was going on here?

One good thing. Most of us – including myself – are at pains to make the distinction between Muslims and Islam. Muslims are people – lots of different attitudes and viewpoints – while Islam is an ideology.

The video got me to recognize, on a gut level, how differently I have been trained to respond to Nazis and Nazism, than to Muslims and Islam.

So, one thing positive, for me, about the images of German citizens celebrating Christmas during World War II is that the people were not demonized.

Sweetly ring the bells Christmas

One thing horrific is that Hitler was in there.

That crossed my inner line so much that I did what I tend to do when something is too much. I pushed the video out of my mind for a few days. I “numbed out.” But now I’ve done what I generally do next: I’ve thought about it more, and I’m writing to you about it.

I wonder: how many people, like me, react with shock when they see the video? How many don’t think about it at all? And how many are glad of the positive images of Hitler?

By the way, I had another experience of the way that Islam is let off the hook when I recently attended a presentation on the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. The presenter had many statistics – including that 91% of Muslims surveyed in (I think) Morocco were anti-Semitic. However, even when repeatedly pressed, he refused to make any link between the rise of anti-Semitism, the growing Islamic presence in Europe, and the anti-Semitism inherent in the Quran. Instead there were dismissive comments: basically, the Quran was deemed irrelevant. It was as if I were faced with someone truly closed to considering that there could be a connection between lung cancer and smoking.

And now, to all of us who care and dare, to life and to love,

Elsa

PS. American volunteers wanted to Stop the Stealth Jihad in America: The Truth in Textbooks Project. TNT (Truth in Textbooks) is joining ACT for America Education to form the most extensive teams to review social studies textbooks in the country. Training classes start in April, July and Oct 2016. The goal is to have a total of 300-500 volunteers fully trained by the end of this year. More information here: http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2016/01/seeking-volunteers-to-stop-stealth.html

You can also get more information at: tnt@actforamerica.org

PPS. And this is if you are a British citizen or UK resident – a petition to ban Sharia in the UK. Please sign, support, send on: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/107864

PPS. Strange what shocks us. I don’t watch videos of beheadings. But I’ve heard of them so often that I’m not shocked that they exist and that millions have watched. On the other hand, Nazis not demonized!! That shocks me!!

PPPS. The next update will likely only come in 2 weeks.

PPPPS. More images from the video.

May there be peace on earth forever

 

Merry Christmas

PS. For lots more, come to: http://ElsasEmporium.com

___________________

John R. Houk Editor

© Elsa Schieder

ELSA, TRUTH SLEUTH:
MY JOURNEY INTO ISLAM

It could be about, how I came to find the wonder of Islam.

The words that come into my mind: The Heart of Darkness, the title of a novel by Joseph Conrad.

What I mean is that I found so many things I did not expect, so many things I could not admire. I would have loved to find a religion of peace. I did not. I feel as if I slowly stepped into a cave, slowly found lights, and had to recoil from what I found.

In one corner, the corpses of 600-900 dead Jews, murdered by Mohammed. The story isn’t one I found in early versions of his story that I came across. But it’s right there, hinted at in the Qu’ran, and spelled out in detail in the Sira and Hadiths (very revered Islamic religious texts). The story is right there.

But I didn’t find the story until late in my exploration, when I already had a good idea of what kinds of things I’d be coming across.

The early explorations were much more tentative.

After all, I was told Islam was a religion of peace. But something did not make sense.

It was a bit like being a detective – Nancy Drew, say – young and innocent and very Western. Why was there this feeling of danger when I was tiptoeing into finding out about a religion of peace? The cave felt damp, and at the same time dusty. It felt that much lurked, that did not want me tiptoeing around, just wanting to look and see. But why should this be, if this was truly a religion of peace? After all, all I READ THE REST

The Big Yellow Stripe of Hypocrisy


John R. Houk

© January 15, 2011

 

I am going to look at this video as the Left being exposed for its hypocrisy of blaming the Tea Party and Sarah Palin for inspiring nut case Jared Loughner to massacre people in Tucson including the attempted assassination of Rep. Giffords. If any other intent was the goal then this video is ghoulish. Someone has put together a series of video captures of Tweets in which Leftists either wish death or the actual shooting of Sarah Palin.

Palin Targeted by Left 

The video is the clearest evidence of the difference between Conservative euphemism and actual threats of bodily harm and of death with Leftists. Violence has always been the modus operandi to achieve goals inspired by Karl Marx and placed into practice with the leadership of Vladimir Lenin and perfected by Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot. If the charisma of an individual that symbolizes Original Constitutionalism, limited government and Judeo-Christian values threatens the transformative concepts of a Left Wing Secular Humanist society; then Leftists demand the death of that person.

 

In light of these Tweets the Left Wing bloggers, MSM pundits and Democratic Party haters of free speech and gun rights should be exposed for their shameful vitriol to tarnish Sarah Palin and the Tea Party Movement.

 

Check out some of posts:

 

A four-minute video montage of “hate tweets” on YouTube directed at Sarah Palin and calling for her death is creating outrage on the Internet. The video was posted on Tuesday, before President Barack Obama’s Wednesday address calling for unity in the wake of the Tucson shooting rampage, which killed six and injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 12 others.

The montage is set to Alice Cooper’s song “School’s Out.” (SlantRight Editor: The YouTube video I found was to the Beatles tune “Imagine.”)

Among the tweets:

 

·       “Why couldn’t Sarah Palin get shot instead?”

 

·       “I hope Sarah Palin dies an ugly death and takes her moronic hate with her.”

 

·       “Can somebody please shoot Sarah Palin?”

 

·       “I hope Sarah Palin gets cancer and dies in the next two years.”

 

·       “Sarah Palin should be shot for her encouragement of fanaticism against Democrats.”

 

·       “Join us in praying to God that Sarah Palin contracts cancer and dies.”

 

·       “Sarah Palin is the single most dangerous threat to the future of the human race. Somebody bloody shoot her.” (Newsmax)

 

Here is an excerpt from FOX News:

 

Attempts to reach some of the Twitter users who posted the messages were unsuccessful, but one claimed she is a “Reagan conservative” whose intent was taken out of context.

 

“Anybody who knows me, has read my blog, has read my Tweets, has breathed the same internet air I breathe knows I’m a Reagan-conservative-moving-swiftly-to-libertarian Mormon with a side of objectivism to spice things up,” author Moriah Jovan posted on her blog. “Thus, it didn’t occur to me that my tweet, made in conversation with someone else, in response to my utter disgust with the immediate blaming of Sarah Palin for Saturday’s shooting of a Congresswoman would be taken as a literal threat against Palin and/or a wish for her death.”

 

Jovan’s blog continues, “It smacked me in the head last night when I was tweeted that I was ‘scum’ who had threatened her, with a link to a YouTube slideshow of a collection of tweets that actually DID wish her dead.”

 

The video montage, set to the tune of The Beatles’ “Imagine,” had nearly 400 views of as Thursday afternoon.

 

Excerpt from US for Palin:

 

… As documented many times, the gun-hating leftists seem to have a sudden love of guns when they want to eliminate – quite literally – a political opponent.

 

YouTube audio excerpt of Mark Levin talking of the vilification of Sarah Palin.

 

Rush Limbaugh delineated how Glenn Reynolds, a law Professor the University used the term “blood libel” in a Wall Street Journal op-ed written on January 10, pre-dating Gov. Palin’s “America’s Enduring Strength” video and Facebook Note by two days. Not one word was written or uttered regarding Reynolds’ usage of the term in describing the left’s moronic attempts to implicate Gov. Palin in the Arizona shooting rampage. Once, Gov. Palin used the term, “all Hell broke loose,” Limbaugh said.

 

YouTube video of Rush Limbaugh calling out Leftists on their hypocrisy toward Sarah Palin.

 

The Leftists have demonstrated their big yellow stripe of hypocrisy in making Loughner’s assassination attempt and massacre a political hacking job against Sarah Palin.

 

JRH 1/15/11 HH