The following is a comment - a take off of a popular child's book with the title, "If You Give A Mouse A Cookie" was posted by an anonymous individual on Roger Stone's web site about the machinations of Muslims in America points out how they've been given the opportunity to implement their long-term plan to dominate and rule America.
= = = = = = = = = = =
Saturday, August 12, 2017
The Truth Is Exonerating Trump
= = = = = = = = =
Comey started a war on Trump!
• COMEY insisted on including a two-page summary of the unverified, fabricated and highly inflammatory anti-Trump dossier in a report to the President and leaders of Congress
• COMEY has testified that he knew that providing confidential information to Congress virtually assured that it would appear in the press. He said he had learned how that works in Washington
• Comey was right. BUZZFEED immediately published the entire dossier and millions read the phony claims
• The FBI knew there were problems with the dossier. In October, 2016,right before the election, the bureau offered $50,000 to Christopher Steele who compiled the dossier. The FBI wanted him to verify the claims in his dossier.
• Steele never verified the dossier and Comey was informed by James Clapper, head of the National Intelligence Agency that the charges in the dossier could not be verified and that there were problems with some of the "sources."
• Despite these warnings about the reliability of the dossier, Comey never alerted the public to the phony material in the dossier
• The fake information in the dossier was easily proven to be false
• The FBI refused to admit or deny that it paid any money to Steele.
• Steele has worked with the FBI in the past
• Steele later told a London Court that much of the material in the dossier was provided to him by "unsolicited sources" and needed to be verified.
After Trump fired Comey, he signed a multi-million dollar book deal.
Maybe he was saving the truth about the dossier for his memoirs.
Directing the FBI turned out to be lucrative.
= = = = = = = = =
Sadly, this seems to be the standard procedure for those seeking fame and fortune in "the swamp".
Friday, August 11, 2017
Propaganda Machine Is Full On
This effort is essentially an effort to nullify our last presidential election in order to retain the establishment's status quo agenda of moving the nation closer to their goal; a nation encumbered with regulations from the EPA, climate change, and UN sanctions against anything resembling the freedoms and liberties which have been under intense and blatant assault during the last administration.
All of this news by the MSM is merely an effort by the "Deep State" to convince the gullible public that there's extreme concern with possibly being nuked by Kim Jung Un's regime. As Rush Limbaugh has been saying, "North Korea can't hit the side of a barn door, let alone send a missile to Hawaii or the west coast." Until and unless it is confirmed that any of their missile launches produce irrefutable proof that they've been able to even splash the launched missile down in any area reasonably close to a U.S. location, there is no actual need to be concerned with claims touted by the regime.
Having lived through the prior "close calls" with Soviet Russia, I ain't buying this line of garbage the media's pumping out now any more than I did that Trump colluded with Russia to fix the election.
Wasserman Schultz's Weak Defense
The more recent news about Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz's statement of defending her reason for keeping Imran Awan on her payroll longer than any other members of Congress as an IT specialist is very revealing about the mindset of a liberal.
Imran is one of five Pakistanis who'd engaged in highly suspicious activities in D.C. for years and it is known that they, collectively, that they sent to Pakistan hundreds of thousands of dollars and Imran had access to Capitol Hill's servers which access was cut off by Capitol Police and his laptop was seized.
Whenever liberals are caught engaging in supporting criminal activities - Awan is now charged with bank fraud, among other crimes - they employ the virtue card they've been trained as liberals to use by claiming it was a difficult thing for her to do by keeping his paychecks flowing when she knew he'd been dropped for good reasons by others in congress who'd cut him off months ago.
It's important to note that they are instructed as public figures to always conduct their interactions with others doing their "dirty work" from a distance of plausible deniability. And, what is interesting to me is the idea that Wasserman Schultz is claiming Awan, a foreigner with a green card, deserved his due process as a reason for keeping him on the payroll. Some have even speculated that there is a more personal connection to this situation than has been publicly revealed up to this point.
Wasserman Schultz, former Chair of the DNC, was fired from the position not long after it was disclosed by published emails from Wikileaks of the DNC's communiques that she had colluded with Hillary Clinton's campaign that Bernie Sanders - Clinton's contender for the Democratic Party's candidacy during the primary election process - would not win the nomination.
Only time will tell whether Wasserman Schultz will be pulled into the vortex of this criminal case of Awan's should his lawyer defending him advises Imran to accept a plea bargain and implicates her in the process. Personally, I doubt it, but, it's possible if the evidence is there to support it.
Imran is one of five Pakistanis who'd engaged in highly suspicious activities in D.C. for years and it is known that they, collectively, that they sent to Pakistan hundreds of thousands of dollars and Imran had access to Capitol Hill's servers which access was cut off by Capitol Police and his laptop was seized.
Whenever liberals are caught engaging in supporting criminal activities - Awan is now charged with bank fraud, among other crimes - they employ the virtue card they've been trained as liberals to use by claiming it was a difficult thing for her to do by keeping his paychecks flowing when she knew he'd been dropped for good reasons by others in congress who'd cut him off months ago.
It's important to note that they are instructed as public figures to always conduct their interactions with others doing their "dirty work" from a distance of plausible deniability. And, what is interesting to me is the idea that Wasserman Schultz is claiming Awan, a foreigner with a green card, deserved his due process as a reason for keeping him on the payroll. Some have even speculated that there is a more personal connection to this situation than has been publicly revealed up to this point.
Wasserman Schultz, former Chair of the DNC, was fired from the position not long after it was disclosed by published emails from Wikileaks of the DNC's communiques that she had colluded with Hillary Clinton's campaign that Bernie Sanders - Clinton's contender for the Democratic Party's candidacy during the primary election process - would not win the nomination.
Only time will tell whether Wasserman Schultz will be pulled into the vortex of this criminal case of Awan's should his lawyer defending him advises Imran to accept a plea bargain and implicates her in the process. Personally, I doubt it, but, it's possible if the evidence is there to support it.
Thursday, August 10, 2017
Today's College Experience; From A Millennial
We've all heard the points made by many "pundits" about the problems with colleges in the U.S. today. But, have we heard about it from millennials who've actually been through it and listened to what their experience was like?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the current social climate on too many college campuses today; far from it! My point in sharing this particular Prager U video in this post is that there actually are some good outcomes for those with the ability exercise whatever level of critical thinking skills they may have developed from that experience. What makes it more interesting, is that some have even benefited from their revelation; like this student who shares her revelations about where too many millennials are stuck today with not much more than paper to show for their loan debt.
The NORK Missile Crisis - Nothing New
For those of us who are old enough to recall the Cuban Missile Crisis, the current situation with North Korea has some aspects which are familiar, while others are different. Let's examine a few of them for the sake of those who weren't around back in the early '60s. (The following is my understanding and recollection of the incident. For more official detailed sources, please use this link, or do your own search.)
The Soviet Union - it was under communist rule then, with Nikita Khrushchev as its leader and the cold war was full on - had secretly made a deal with Castro's Cuba; a satellite of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). In exchange for financial aide from the Soviets, Cuba's Castro agreed to build and place nuclear tipped missiles within Cuba; only 90 miles away from Florida and potentially giving Kruschev the ability to hit any major city in the U.S.
The newly elected President Kennedy(D) - who today, based on his economic policies, would be considered a conservative - learned of the missile launch bases being constructed in Cuba from recon fly-overs of U2 aircraft taking photographs. It was also learned from intelligence that the Soviets were transporting by ships the first batch of missiles to Cuba across the Atlantic Ocean. After unsuccessfully attempting to talk Premier Kruschev out of continuing the transfer of missiles, President Kennedy ordered the military to DEFCON 3 (an acronym for Defense Condition with the scale of danger ranging from 1 to 4, with one being lowest and four being "go to war").
All Air Force B-52 bombers were loaded with nuclear bombs and put on alert; a moments notice to launch from their base and head out over the North Pole, while the entire nation's missile defense system was prepared to launch its dozens of nuclear missiles should the decision be made to back the President's demand to cease and desist the placement of the Soviet missiles on Cuba, maintaining the Monroe Doctrine of Western Hemisphere sovereignty from foreign (Eastern Hemisphere) interference and threat.
Also, a blockade of ships by the U.S. Navy on the eastern side of Cuba was set to intercept the ships loaded with missiles. As the days went by and attempts at negotiating seemed to be failing, tensions mounted across the nation. Citizens watched with growing anxiety that a nuclear war might break out if things couldn't be resolved between the two nations. Kruschev, at the last minute, blinked, and ordered the ships bound for Cuba to turn around. The Cuban Missile Crisis was over and both nations breathed a huge sigh of relief. (Later, revelations disclosed that a deal had been struck between the U.S. & the Soviets that, if the U.S. removed missiles from Turkey that were pointed at the U.S.S.R., then the missiles headed for Cuba would be turned around.)
It should be pointed out that, because of the "Red Scare" of the decade of the '50s after Sen. Joe McCarthy went after Soviet spies in the U.S., fallout shelters had been built with the purpose of being able to sequester hundreds, if not thousands of citizens into underground bunkers that were supposedly capable of surviving a nuclear holocaust. While there certainly weren't enough for everyone, it did provide the public with a sense of comfort to know that their government did intend to provide some measure of protection for those fortunate enough to survive to carry on some semblance of life afterwards.
However, those fallout shelters no longer exist. They've been turned into other uses or destroyed in some locations. This is due in part to two major factors; one, the yield of newer nuclear warheads increased to the point which would make it very unlikely that anyone would survive, and two, detente had reached a point at which a nuclear war was no longer a likelihood for either nation to carry out.
Over several decades, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, the cold war between the two nations also ended. But, the nuclear arsenals of both countries didn't just disappear. Fast forward to the more recent administrations and it is now obvious that the Clinton administration's weak, if not deliberate policies of appeasement during the '90s, has allowed the development of one of the last "hold-outs" of hardcore communist regimes to acquire nuclear missile technology to the point at which we find ourselves today.
Sadly, today's media - backing the ideological policy of appeasement - is having kanipshun fits over the current President's verbal remarks and is considering them more dangerous than the threats made by the "potbelly" dictator, Kim Jong Un. I guess they're not very concerned that other countries are threatening to wipe our country out. Given their attitude towards other threats - like ISIS cells within out country, or immigrants infiltrating our cities and sucking our tax dollars to support them - it's understandable.
Some will speculate that, because they believe Trump is crazy, or mentally unstable, this situation will lead to Armageddon. On the other side of that "coin", there are those who view this stance by Trump to be what is necessary to call the "potbelly dictator's" bluff, and eventually the situation will resolve itself; much like the Cuban Missile Crisis eventually did.
The Soviet Union - it was under communist rule then, with Nikita Khrushchev as its leader and the cold war was full on - had secretly made a deal with Castro's Cuba; a satellite of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR). In exchange for financial aide from the Soviets, Cuba's Castro agreed to build and place nuclear tipped missiles within Cuba; only 90 miles away from Florida and potentially giving Kruschev the ability to hit any major city in the U.S.
The newly elected President Kennedy(D) - who today, based on his economic policies, would be considered a conservative - learned of the missile launch bases being constructed in Cuba from recon fly-overs of U2 aircraft taking photographs. It was also learned from intelligence that the Soviets were transporting by ships the first batch of missiles to Cuba across the Atlantic Ocean. After unsuccessfully attempting to talk Premier Kruschev out of continuing the transfer of missiles, President Kennedy ordered the military to DEFCON 3 (an acronym for Defense Condition with the scale of danger ranging from 1 to 4, with one being lowest and four being "go to war").
All Air Force B-52 bombers were loaded with nuclear bombs and put on alert; a moments notice to launch from their base and head out over the North Pole, while the entire nation's missile defense system was prepared to launch its dozens of nuclear missiles should the decision be made to back the President's demand to cease and desist the placement of the Soviet missiles on Cuba, maintaining the Monroe Doctrine of Western Hemisphere sovereignty from foreign (Eastern Hemisphere) interference and threat.
Also, a blockade of ships by the U.S. Navy on the eastern side of Cuba was set to intercept the ships loaded with missiles. As the days went by and attempts at negotiating seemed to be failing, tensions mounted across the nation. Citizens watched with growing anxiety that a nuclear war might break out if things couldn't be resolved between the two nations. Kruschev, at the last minute, blinked, and ordered the ships bound for Cuba to turn around. The Cuban Missile Crisis was over and both nations breathed a huge sigh of relief. (Later, revelations disclosed that a deal had been struck between the U.S. & the Soviets that, if the U.S. removed missiles from Turkey that were pointed at the U.S.S.R., then the missiles headed for Cuba would be turned around.)
It should be pointed out that, because of the "Red Scare" of the decade of the '50s after Sen. Joe McCarthy went after Soviet spies in the U.S., fallout shelters had been built with the purpose of being able to sequester hundreds, if not thousands of citizens into underground bunkers that were supposedly capable of surviving a nuclear holocaust. While there certainly weren't enough for everyone, it did provide the public with a sense of comfort to know that their government did intend to provide some measure of protection for those fortunate enough to survive to carry on some semblance of life afterwards.
However, those fallout shelters no longer exist. They've been turned into other uses or destroyed in some locations. This is due in part to two major factors; one, the yield of newer nuclear warheads increased to the point which would make it very unlikely that anyone would survive, and two, detente had reached a point at which a nuclear war was no longer a likelihood for either nation to carry out.
Over several decades, and with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, the cold war between the two nations also ended. But, the nuclear arsenals of both countries didn't just disappear. Fast forward to the more recent administrations and it is now obvious that the Clinton administration's weak, if not deliberate policies of appeasement during the '90s, has allowed the development of one of the last "hold-outs" of hardcore communist regimes to acquire nuclear missile technology to the point at which we find ourselves today.
Sadly, today's media - backing the ideological policy of appeasement - is having kanipshun fits over the current President's verbal remarks and is considering them more dangerous than the threats made by the "potbelly" dictator, Kim Jong Un. I guess they're not very concerned that other countries are threatening to wipe our country out. Given their attitude towards other threats - like ISIS cells within out country, or immigrants infiltrating our cities and sucking our tax dollars to support them - it's understandable.
Some will speculate that, because they believe Trump is crazy, or mentally unstable, this situation will lead to Armageddon. On the other side of that "coin", there are those who view this stance by Trump to be what is necessary to call the "potbelly dictator's" bluff, and eventually the situation will resolve itself; much like the Cuban Missile Crisis eventually did.
Monday, August 7, 2017
And Just What IS This Country All About, Mr. Brennan?
When, in an interview on CNN, former CIA Director John Brennan states that "... it is the obligation of the officials in the executive branch to refuse
to carry out his orders, because they are “inconsistent with what this
country is all about.”, just what is Mr. Brennan thinking our country is all about?
Let's realize that it's now widely accepted that the "deep state" is considered part of the opposition to Trump's administration and its efforts to "drain the swamp". The CIA is certainly part of that "deep state" along with many of the other national security organizations meant to protect the United State's national interests. However, it seems, based on such concepts as Mr. Brennan is expressing here, that the "deep state" is more interested in their own survival and ability to continue operating behind the curtain of any scrutiny, than preserving the Constitutional Republic we now have kicked to the curb.
So, obviously Mr. Brennan's concept of what our country is all about isn't what most conservative voters and constitutional scholars understand the country is all about. Is this country all about letting in migrants from other countries with no limits? Is it about supporting them with social services which drain the coffers they never contributed to and leave nothing for those who paid into it over their careers? Is it about keeping the current bureaucracies which make it extremely difficult to get ahead financially in this current circumstance of taxes and regulations?
A friend at church told me last winter shortly after the election that things had become so bad that it could most likely result in some outbreaks of civil war in parts of the country, if not totally. I now understand why he said this. If the establishment in "the swamp" is going to completely ignore the people's election choice and oust Pres. Trump with the "fishing expedition" that's now going on under Mueller, then it's not hard to imagine how they will react.
Let's realize that it's now widely accepted that the "deep state" is considered part of the opposition to Trump's administration and its efforts to "drain the swamp". The CIA is certainly part of that "deep state" along with many of the other national security organizations meant to protect the United State's national interests. However, it seems, based on such concepts as Mr. Brennan is expressing here, that the "deep state" is more interested in their own survival and ability to continue operating behind the curtain of any scrutiny, than preserving the Constitutional Republic we now have kicked to the curb.
So, obviously Mr. Brennan's concept of what our country is all about isn't what most conservative voters and constitutional scholars understand the country is all about. Is this country all about letting in migrants from other countries with no limits? Is it about supporting them with social services which drain the coffers they never contributed to and leave nothing for those who paid into it over their careers? Is it about keeping the current bureaucracies which make it extremely difficult to get ahead financially in this current circumstance of taxes and regulations?
A friend at church told me last winter shortly after the election that things had become so bad that it could most likely result in some outbreaks of civil war in parts of the country, if not totally. I now understand why he said this. If the establishment in "the swamp" is going to completely ignore the people's election choice and oust Pres. Trump with the "fishing expedition" that's now going on under Mueller, then it's not hard to imagine how they will react.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)