Columnist: ‘Mainstream’ media no longer ‘journalists,’ they’re ‘ACTIVISTS’

(National SentinelMedia Matters: A columnist for the Washington Examiner has taken the so-called ‘mainstream media’ to task for its warped, overtly biased coverage of today’s top political figures, noting that most are no longer “journalists” but really are just “activists.”

“The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today still refuse to employ a single columnist that won’t begin each piece with anything less than, ‘Mr. Trump, you are a liar!’ wrote Eddie Scarry in December.

He noted that in his view, the only major “mainstream” newspaper that provides “anything that even looks sort of like a reasonable perspective on the still-young White House” is The Wall Street Journal opinion page.

Scarry noted further:

CNN this year had to retract one story and significantly modify a second one (both were related to Trump and Russia) after it turned out the former wasn’t supported by any facts (otherwise often referred to as “fiction”) and the latter was inaccurate to the point of libel.

Brian Ross, with his apparent lifetime tenure at ABC News, was suspended in early December after he once again reported catastrophically wrong information about Trump and, of course, Russia.

And as if on cue, The New York Times on Saturday ran a lengthy story praising MSNBC host Joy Reid as a leader of the “resistance.” She has been extremely critical of President Donald J. Trump even to the point of becoming shooing pro-Trump guests off her show.

She, too, has persisted in pushing the “Russian collusion” narrative despite there being no evidence the Trump campaign and Moscow worked in tandem to defeat Hillary Clinton — after nearly two years’ worth of investigating by federal authorities and Congress.

Scarry noted in his column some “truths” about today’s major media:

— “Activism” at most news outlets is now acceptable, especially if it is Left-leaning activism:

CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta, who saved democracy when he challenged the administration’s immigration plan by quoting a cliche poem, said in a radio interview that the media need “a different kind of playbook” when it comes to covering Trump. Like an old lady who feels sassy ordering a Sex on the Beach, Acosta defined his new journalism rules as, “That means at times, you know, I bring a little attitude to what I do on a daily basis.” Acosta may be harmless on his own, but when the sea of media decide to rewrite the standards for covering a presidency, to assume an “attitude,” it’s time to accept that they’re no longer journalists. They’re activists.

— “Everything Trump says is controversial,” even when said ‘controversy’ has to be invented by the media:

In September 2016, then-President Obama acknowledged that now-former NFL Quarterback Colin Kaepernick may be kneeling for the national anthem in earnest, but he said that Kaepernick should “listen to the pain that that may cause somebody who, for example, had a spouse or a child who was killed in combat.” It wasn’t controversial to stand up for the country’s most recognized symbol until Trump did it, at which point it became racist. The Washington Post’s liberal blogger Greg Sargent said Trump’s criticism of NFL players kneeling fit into a pattern of attacking “high-profile African Americans to feed his supporters’ belief that the system is rigged for minorities.” The NFL is not an exclusively black league, and patriotism isn’t racially divisive, but that’s a nuance that doesn’t feed a fake controversy instigated by reporters.

— “Willful ignorance isn’t a bug, it’s a feature,” he wrote, explaining:

It’s possible to actually earn prestige in the national media, a field that formerly required an ongoing thirst for knowledge and understanding, by refusing to learn new things. In November of last year, New York Times columnist Charles Blow bragged that he refused to meet with then-President-elect Trump after the election, though he had come to the Times newsroom for an interview with staff. It’s more important for Blow that he stay ignorantly angry rather than learn anything that might change his mind from a face-to-face meeting. And if there is information readily available that disrupts the media’s enduring suspicion that Trump is a closet klansman, writers find it best to simply ignore it.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Nunes MISSILE: ‘Clear LINK’ between DEMOCRATS and Russia in 2016 election

(National SentinelRevealed: House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., made waves again on Tuesday after he stated the panel’s ongoing ‘Russian collusion’ investigation has established a “clear link” between Moscow and Democrats.

During an appearance on Fox News, Nunes made it clear that the link was part of a conspiracy to undermine and smear President Donald J. Trump with the assistance of Russian government operatives.

“We have a clear link to Russia — you have a campaign who hired a law firm, who hire Fusion GPS, who hired a foreign agent, who then got information from the Russians on the other campaign,” said Nunes.

“It seems like the counterintelligence investigation should have been opened up against the Hillary campaign when they got ahold of the dossier. But that didn’t happen, either.”

The Intel chairman also said that the FBI never informed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that the manufactured “Trump dossier” the bureau used to get a surveillance warrant for one-time Trump campaign advisor Carter Page was, in fact, a political opposition research document, not a piece of intelligence.

And he said the bureau also never informed the FISC that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Nunes also lamented the fact that the establishment media is essentially ignoring the revelations contained in his FISA memo and the further allegations being made against the Obama administration and the former president for their alleged roles in the scandal.

“I think the bigger problem, challenge here, is that the mainstream media is totally uninterested in this,” he said.

“Can you imagine if the shoe was on the other foot – and Donald Trump or George Bush or Karl Rove had paid for information and then George W Bush’s FBI had opened an investigation into the Obama campaign because they were talking to Russians – which, by the way, really did happen; the Obama campaign was talking to Russians back in 2008 – and open up a counterintelligence investigation using dirt dug up and paid for by RNC and George W. Bush supporters?” the chairman continued.

“This town would be on fire. Every reporter would be following around Karl Rove and George W. Bush all over town – yet it’s crickets from the media,” he noted.

“It’s embarrassing. It’s absolutely embarrassing, I’m almost flabbergasted. Because I thought at least there would be some ounce of credibility left, but there really is none.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

The Pentagon Papers vs. the FISA Memo: That nostalgic time when the ‘mainstream media’ really GAVE A DAMN about government transparency

analysis
By J. D. Heyes, editor-in-chief

(National SentinelPoliticization: Last month a new movie hit theaters around the country starring, among others, Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep called “The Post.”

The movie is about, according to IMDB.com, “a cover-up that spanned four U.S. Presidents [and] pushed the country’s first female newspaper publisher and a hard-driving editor to join an unprecedented battle between the press and the government.”

The film traces the Washington Post’s reporting on the “Pentagon Papers,” which were officially titled, “United States – Vietnam Relations, 1945–1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense.” The study, which was conducted in secret without informing President Lyndon Johnson, was commissioned in 1967 by then-Defense Secretary Robert McNamara. The papers noted that the Johnson administration had systematically lied to the American people about its involvement in Vietnam.

Initially, the papers were released by Daniel Ellsberg, who had worked on the study; the existence of the papers was first reported in 1971 by The New York Times during the Nixon administration. The Times was threatened with legal action by the government and Ellsberg was charged with conspiracy, espionage, and theft of government property (charges that were later dismissed).

Soon after the Times report, the Post was given a copy of the Pentagon Papers by Ellsberg, who approached reporter Ben Bagdikian. He then brought the information to Post editor Ben Bradlee (played by Hanks in the film “The Post”). He subsequently informed the Post’s publisher, Kay Graham (played by Streep), and in short order, the decision was made to begin publishing a series of articles detailing the papers.

Assistant U.S. Attorney General William Rehnquist — later U.S. Supreme Court chief justice — asked the Post to cease publication, but the paper’s management refused. Rehnquist then asked a federal court to block the paper from publishing any additional materials taken from the papers but the court refused; the government appealed the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 6-3 on June 30, 1971, against the government and for the Post (and a dozen or so other papers that had begun publishing portions of the Pentagon Papers).

At the time the information contained in the Pentagon Papers was truly explosive. The country was still fighting the Vietnam War, tens of thousands of U.S. service personnel had already been killed, and it grew deeply unpopular the longer it went on. Throw into that mix the late 1960s-early 1970s social upheaval on college campuses against the old traditional order, and the discovery that the government had lied the entire time about its involvement in Southeast Asia was devastating to the country.

And yet, journalists back then correctly decided that the American people had the right know they had been duped by their government.

Today, however, some of the same media outlets are siding with Democrats against the release of a report — against transparency — that promises to be equally damaging to the American psyche: The so-called FISA Memo, which purports to show Obama-era abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to manipulate judges with a bogus “Trump dossier” in order to secure a warrant so Hillary Clinton-aligned operatives within FBI and DOJ could spy on the Trump campaign.

Yesterday’s quest for government transparency from the Times, the Post and other legacy media outlets has transformed into partisan attacks and calls for outright secrecy these days because the “wrong” political party is about to be implicated in a massive abuse of government institutions and the people’s trust.

Just to show you the difference between today’s Democrats and Democrats at the time the Pentagon Papers were making headlines, former U.S. Sen. Mike Gravel, D-Alaska, the lawmaker who introduced the Pentagon Papers to the public by entering them into the official Congressional Record, said Republicans will demonstrate “the height of cowardice” if they refuse to release the FISA memo.

My, how times have changed. If the Times, the Post, and a few other legacy media outlets were all that existed today, as was the case in 1971, Americans would never discover how badly they’ve been lied to — again — by their government. This is another reason to celebrate the independent media.

This story originally appeared at NewsTarget.com.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Carlson and Coulter DESTROY establishment media MYTH that ‘America LOVES Dreamers!’

(National SentinelLegal Immigration: On Tucker Carlson’s Fox News program Friday night, he and conservative author, pundit and lawyer Ann Coulter discussed and debunked statistics widely cited by the ‘mainstream’ media that most Americans support so-called “Dreamers” — illegal immigrants brought into the country by their parents.

Slamming “phony polls” that purport to show that most Americans back liberal immigration policies, Carlson noted that many lawmakers, including a sizable percentage of Republicans, seemingly ignore Americans’ concerns on the issue.

“There’s a deeper question about democracy here,” Tucker said.

“So, if the public has been clear in poll after poll about what it wants and what it doesn’t want on the question of immigration, and it went to the trouble of electing Donald Trump against all odds and all predictions, just to express that view, and it still can’t get what it demonstrably wants in immigration, is it possible for the public to have a say in this?”

“No, it’s amazing. I mean, it is beyond what you just described,” Coulter noted, as reported by The Daily Caller

“I was looking through Nexis transcripts today. The fact that Donald Trump is president–it was utterly implausible. It’s like a Hollywood movie. And this isn’t the first time,” she continued.

“You keep hearing these phony polls being being cited by the media, showing that American love Dreamers! They love them! Just like that one you interviewed, who couldn’t love her? They love them!”

She went onto note that recent polling indicates that a majority of Americans want less immigration — legal and illegal. Recently, the Trump administration “distributed a Harvard-Harris poll that showed Americans generally approve of the president’s immigration plan, believe people should enter legally, and that those who are allowed in should contribute to American life in a positive way,” the Washington Examiner reported.

“…[E]very time they have an actual ballot, every time, for 20 years now, [Americans] will vote against bail for illegals, against government services for illegals, they’ll vote for Donald Trump, they’ll vote for English as the national language,” said Coulter, author of several top-selling books including one on immigration called, “Adios, America.”

“This Harvard poll that just came out that shows more Americans would like zero immigration than our current immigration policy. But the way they pull off these phony polls, is by, I mean, I didn’t need to read Saul Alinsky to know this is not a good way to take a poll–they personalize it,” Coulter continued.

“They say do you want to support Juanita the maid? They make it about a specific person. No, I want questions like ‘Do you want more or less immigration?’ ‘Do you think people who break the law should be able to become citizens and start collecting welfare right away?’ ‘Do you think we should we be dumping millions of low-wage workers on the country?’”

Coulter then noted recent reports indicating that President Donald J. Trump may be supportive of a plan that gives many so-called DACA recipients -a slow but sure path to citizenship.

Rated #1 Consumer Reports

“Which is going to come back–I mean, Trump thinks he’s a genius and in some ways he is,” Coulter said. “He has an uncanny sense for what are popular issues, that’s why he won. He may be able to roll over the never-Trumpers, but if he continues down this line, former-Trumpers may be a much more difficult category for him.”

“We need an immigration time-out so we can assimilate those who are here, like we did throughout much of the 20th century,” editor-in-chief J. D. Heyes said.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

SHOCK PHOTO of Obama with anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan: NOT published by photog to SAVE future prez’s rep

(National SentinelBias: A shocking photo of a smiling then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., with anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan taken in 2005 was purposely not published by the photographer.

The reason, Askia Muhammad told the Trice Edney News Wire, was because he did not want to harm Obama’s political future.

He says that if he had released the photo of Obama and Farrakhan at a Congressional Black Caucus meeting he believed it would have “made a difference” to Obama’s political future.

Instead, he “gave the picture up at the time and basically swore secrecy,” he said.

“But after the nomination was secured and all the way up until the inauguration; then for eight years after he was President, it was kept under cover,” Muhammad said, as noted by Talking Points Memo.

“I sort of understood what was going on,” Muhammad told TPM. “I promised and made arrangements to give the picture to Leonard Farrakhan,” the minister’s son-in-law and chief of staff.

“Realizing that I had given it up, I mean, it was sort of like a promise to keep the photograph secret,” Muhammad said.

When he was asked if he believed the photo would have made a difference in whether or not Obama’s political career would have advanced any further he said, “I insist. It absolutely would have made a difference.”

Click here to see the photo, which TPM published with the Muhammad’s permission.

Obama was regularly accused in some circles of being anti-Semitic during his presidency, for what some perceived as overly friendly relations with Islamic nations including Iran, while allowing the U.S. relationship with Israel to deteriorate.

In February Levin, on his daily radio show, blamed Obama for being an anti-Semite and the “biggest funder of terrorism the world has ever seen.”

“So, Obama is the biggest funder of terrorism the world has ever seen – $150 billion to the Islamo-nazis in Tehran. On top of that, another $1.7 billion or so in hard currency, flown into Tehran under cover of dark, for our hostages.”

Levin was responding to criticism in the media of President Donald J. Trump at the time, with some liberals describing him as anti-Semitic.

“Can someone show me anywhere at any time when Trump has demonstrated any level of anti-Semitism? It’s so absurd. It’s so absurd,” he said.

“The Democrat Party is now the party that breeds anti-Semitism. The Democrat Party is now the party that breeds Israel hate. The Democrat Party backed a man, Obama, who used the UN Security Council—They didn’t just vote; they were operating in the shadows behind the scenes. They used the UN Security Council to attack Israel’s security,” he said.

The National Sentinel‘s editor-in-chief, J. D. Heyes, said this is just another example of how the biased ‘mainstream media’ conspired to protect Obama at all costs.

“It’s no wonder the legacy media continues to be mistrusted and discounted by the American people,” he said, “and why news outlets like ours are growing.”

Even the far-Left Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremism, has labeled Farrakhan an anti-Semite. He has claimed that whites are a “race of devils,” declaration that “Hitler was a very great man,” labeling Judaism a “gutter religion,” among other things.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Sarah Huckabee Sanders DESTROYS Chuck Schumer, press, over ‘OUTRAGEOUS’ claims that prez is a ‘racist’

(National SentinelHitting Back: White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was clearly agitated on Tuesday over the establishment media’s continued accusations that President Donald J. Trump is racist.

In addition, Sanders took a swipe at Democrats including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York for making s similar unsubstantiated claim.

During the daily press conference on Tuesday, Fox News reporter John Roberts questioned Sanders saying, “(Schumer) said last night ‘Mr. President show you’re not a racist, cut a deal on DACA.’”

Roberts noted that Schumer is clearly trying to use Trump’s alleged remarks about African countries being “sh–holes” — which the president and others have refuted — as a point of leverage.

“Look, I think that it is an outrageous claim,” Sanders shot back. “Frankly, I think if the critics of the president were who he said he was, why did NBC give him a show for a decade on TV?”

“Why did Chuck Schumer and all his colleagues come and beg Donald Trump for money?” she continued, referencing their successful attempts to convince Trump to financially support their campaigns in the past.

“If they are who they want to try to portray him as, why did they want to be with him for years and years in various activities, whether it was events and fundraisers and other things?” Sanders continued. “I think it’s just an outrageous and ludicrous excuse.”

She noted further, “It’s a sad day for our country. They’re willing to throw away the progress and negotiations and not make big steps that we need to happen, whether it’s funding our military, supporting our government or making a deal on DACA, which they say is a huge priority, something they want to do.”

Trump has blamed Democrats for refusing to work with him and Republicans to come up with a viable immigration bill compromise regarding so-called “Dreamers.”

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

WINNER! U.S. ‘mainstream media’ now considered LESS trustworthy than state-controlled RUSSIAN, VENEZUELAN media

(National SentinelBias: A new survey by the Pew Research Center found that the vast majority of Americans don’t trust the so-called “mainstream media,” which they found to be very biased.

“Publics around the world overwhelmingly agree that the news media should be unbiased in their coverage of political issues, according to a new Pew Research Center survey of 38 countries,” the research center said.

“Yet, when asked how their news media are doing on reporting different political issues fairly, people are far more mixed in their sentiments, with many saying their media do not deliver,” the center continued.

“And, in many countries, there are sharp political differences in views of the media – with the largest gap among Americans.”

In particular, the survey found that three-quarters of respondents — 75 percent — say it is never acceptable “for a news organization to favor one political party over others when reporting the news.”

In the U.S., just 47 percent of respondents believe political issues are fairly reported. Also, only 56 percent believe the news overall is reported accurately.

In Russia, by comparison, 55 percent believe political issues are reported in a fair manner, while 60 percent believe their news reporting is accurate.

A spring 2017 survey found that only 21 percent of Americans believe that major U.S. media supported the governing party, compared to 55 percent who did not think so.

Chart showing that deep political divides exist on whether news media cover political issues fairly

Meanwhile, 65 percent of Russians believe media support the ruling parties, while 62 percent of Venezuelans thought so.

“The U.S. is also one of only a few countries where governing party supporters are less satisfied with their news media than are non-supporters,” the Pew Center said.

“In most countries, people who support the political party currently in power are more satisfied with the performance of their news media than those who do not support the governing party,” it added.

These are among the major findings of a Pew Research Center survey conducted among 41,953 respondents in 38 countries from Feb. 16 to May 8, 2017.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Trump shames WaPo reporter after he tweeted fake photo of prez campaign event — journalists triggered

(National SentinelWar on Fake News: President Donald J. Trump rattled Washington journalists on Saturday after he called out Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel for tweeting a highly misleading photo of a campaign event.

Trump’s response triggered other establishment media figures who claimed that the president’s criticism would lead to a major backlash from the public.

Trump appeared in Pensacola, Fla., Friday night, to a packed venue, but Weigel tweeted a picture showing it with large swaths of empty seats.

The problem was, Weigel’s picture was taken well before the event began. By the time Trump began speaking, it was full.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/939616077356642304

The president called out Weigel and his employer in a tweet with pictures showing a packed arena.

put out a phony photo of an empty arena hours before I arrived @ the venue, w/ thousands of people outside, on their way in. Real photos now shown as I spoke. Packed house, many people unable to get in. Demand apology & retraction from FAKE NEWS WaPo!” he said.

Weigel apologized in response to Trump’s tweet, at which point the president declared victory and called on Weigel to be fired, The Daily Caller reported.

Trump tweeted, “just admitted that his picture was a FAKE (fraud?) showing an almost empty arena last night for my speech in Pensacola when, in fact, he knew the arena was packed (as shown also on T.V.). FAKE NEWS, he should be fired.”

That rattled some in the establishment media. ““By including Dave Weigel’s @ handle, the president’s statement is inviting followers to gang up on a reporter,” CNN’s Brian Stelter wrote.

Other Left-leaning media outlets circled their wagons. For instance, Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffrey defended Weigel, calling him “a great reporter.”

“Trump is trying to gin up ire against Post to give permission structure to those who want to doubt its Moore reporting,” Jeffrey claimed. “A manifestation of the only way Trump is smart.”

“The president calling for a journalist to be fired seems like a public threat to the First Amendment,” wrote MSNBC producer Kyle Griffin.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Limbaugh: ‘The one moment during Trump’s China trip the mainstream media has refused to report’

(National SentinelBlackout: The legacy media has gone out of its way to embarrass President Donald J. Trump during his first trip to Asia, even purposefully misreporting incidents as diplomatic faux pas.

In addition to misreporting, the mainstream media is also ignoring certain events and occurrences in an effort to portray Trump’s visit in a certain, negative light, and talk radio legend Rush Limbaugh pointed out one such incident Thursday.

The host uploaded a picture to his show’s Facebook page of Trump and first lady Melania Trump after they climbed down the steps from Air Force One.

The picture shows the president and his wife being greeted by a number of children who are waving Chinese and American flags.

Limbaugh surmises that the legacy media isn’t showing the photo because it demonstrates that Trump and the first lady visibly happy to have gotten such a warm welcome in China.

“There’s not a single network that televised all of the Chinese children waving American flags to welcome President Trump,” Limbaugh wrote.

The conservative talk giant even jabbed pro football, saying that there were more Chinese kids waving U.S. flags that NFL players.

“They’re happy to see President Trump. There are more ChiCom children waving the American flag than NFL players waving the American flag,” he added.

“Chicom” is Limbaugh’s nickname for “Chinese communists.”

Limbaugh suggested that the legacy media simply did not want to give the appearance of Trump receiving such a warm greeting.


Do you feel something is wrong with our society? Then read this book. Click here!


Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Poll: Majority believe America is at its lowest point ever

(National SentinelSurvey Says: A clear majority of Americans in all age groups believe that their country is at its historical low point, according to a recently-released poll by the American Psychological Association.

The organization’s “Stress in America” poll, which asks what is stressing out Americans and how they are dealiing with it, found that 59 percent of adults believe the present day  to be “the lowest point in our nation’s history that they can remember.”

The poll, first reported by Axios after its release Monday, further noted that this includes adults who have lived through World War II, the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the 9/11 attacks.

Much of the stress is attributable to the 2016 presidential election result, proving to be a “somewhat or very significant” reason for mounting stress among 52 percent of Americans.

At the same time, money and work are also high stressors for Americans (62 percent and 61 percent, respectively), the survey noted.

“While an overall majority of adults from both parties are stressed about America’s future, the APA poll found that the number is higher for Democrats — with 73 percent of Democrats stressed, compared to 59 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of independents,” Breitbart News reported.

Regarding public policy issues, those surveyed put health care (43 percent) and the economy (35 percent) as top stressors.

Via the poll:

Additional issues causing stress for about three in 10 Americans include trust in government (32 percent), crime and hate crimes (31 percent), and terrorist attacks in the United States (30 percent). Around one-quarter of adults (28 percent) cited high taxes as a source of stress, while one in five Americans cited unemployment and low wages (22 percent) and climate change and environmental issues (21 percent) as causes of stress when thinking about the nation.

The APA noted that women saw an increase in stress from 2016 to 2017, while men on average saw their stress fall.

Most blamed the media for their added stress (56 percent), while nearly three-quarters of respondents accused the media of blowing events “out of proportion.”

What are your thoughts?

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

Russian dossier investigators suspect reporters were paid to spread fake collusion narrative

(National SentinelFake News: The role the media played in the spread of a thus-far unsubstantiated narrative that collusion existed between the Trump campaign and Russia is coming under further scrutiny by investigators looking into the infamous Russia dossier.

As noted by The Washington Times, Fusion GPS, which financed the dossier via funds provided by the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign, is fighting a House committee chairman in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as he attempts to find out whether journalists were paid.

Also, the Times reported, a self-described dossier victim wants a federal judge in Florida to order the news web site Buzzfeed, which published the full 35-page dossier, to say who provided it.

The Times:

 

The cases underscore how a Moscow-sourced memorandum created as opposition research against Donald Trump in the presidential campaign last year often dictates the debate about politics and reporters’ rights in Washington.

Rep. Devin Nunes, California Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, signed a subpoena to force a bank to turn over Fusion’s financial records. He wants to know who paid for the dossier, which was written in a series of 18 memos by former British spy Christopher Steele. He relied almost exclusively on unidentified Kremlin sources.

Steele also reportedly paid those Kremlin sources, further raising suspicions about the information they provided, the most damning of which remains unsubstantiated.

Fusion went to court in a bid to block Nunes, “but the law firm Perkins Coie LLP, whose partner Marc E. Elias is the Clinton’s campaign’s general counsel, intervened,” the Times reported, providing information that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for the dossier.

Fusion and Nunes worked out an agreement for the opposition research firm to supply him with additional financial information.

However, now the firm has gone back to court to block Nunes’ subpoena because he is seeking even more data.

Fusion briefed a number of Washington journalists on the contents of the dossier, but executives with the firm said they did not provide Buzzfeed with an actual copy.

The site is being sued by Russian tech firms accused of wrongdoing in the dossier.

In addition, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was known to have possessed a hard copy of the dossier through a set of complex arrangements with Steele. But he has said he also was not the source of providing a copy of it to Buzzfeed, the Times reported.

“I gave it to no one except for the director of the FBI. I don’t know why you’re digging this up now,” McCain told The Daily Caller last month.

What are your thoughts?

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

Mueller to announce first indictment Monday in Trump ‘collusion’ probe

(National SentinelTeam Trump: Special counsel Robert Mueller is set to announce the first indictment in his probe of alleged “collusion” between members of the Trump campaign and Russia during last year’s election on Monday, two sources leaked to NBC News.

The sources did not disclose who was set to be indicted or the nature of the charges but did confirm that the announcement would be made tomorrow.

On Friday, CNN was the first to report the Mueller’s office was set to announce its first indictment in the probe in what appeared to be a targeted leak to a friendly news outlet. CNN has been reliably ant-Trump administration throughout President Donald J. Trump’s short tenure.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, slammed the leaks, saying that it was obvious someone “violated their oath” of secrecy.

“In the only conversation I’ve had with Robert Mueller, I stressed to him the importance of cutting out the leaks,” Gowdy told “Fox News Sunday.” “It’s kind of ironic that the people charged with investigating the law and the violations of the law would violate the law.”

Gowdy, himself a former federal prosecutor, added: “Make no mistake, disclosing grand jury material is a violation of the law. Somebody violated their oath of secrecy.”

The charges come as calls came last week for Mueller, a former FBI director, to resign. Mueller was head of the bureau when it discovered evidence that Russian operatives were violating laws against racketeering via money laundering and bribery as they worked to get the sale of a Canadian firm company with uranium holdings in the U.S. approved. The company, Uranium One, was eventually sold to Russian state-owned nuclear company Rosatom, which gained control over 20 percent of all strategic U.S. uranium in the deal.

The sale was approved by the Obama administration, which went ahead despite the FBI’s discovery of law-breaking. Reports noted that Mueller failed to notify Congress of the bureau’s findings.

Fox News also reported that Mueller’s investigatory tactics have also been called into question. During a raid by the FBI in July of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s Virginia home,  a source close to the investigation told Fox News at the time the scope of the search was “heavy-handed, designed to intimidate.”

red-alert-FO-160x600In addition, the prosecutor Mueller tapped to help lead the investigation has also come in for some scrutiny. Sydney Powell, a former federal prosecutor, recently wrote about Weissmann in a piece titled, “Judging by Mueller’s staffing choices he may not be very interested in justice.”

Andrew Weissmann, the prosecutor tapped by Mueller to help lead the investigation, has also received criticism. Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor recently wrote about Weissman in a piece titled, “Judging by Mueller’s staffing choices, he may not be very interested in justice.”

He accused Weissmann — who once directed the Enron task force — of “prosecutorial overreach” and said that members of Trump’s campaign team could be subject to similar judicial abuse.

“What was supposed to have been a search for Russia’s cyberspace intrusions into our electoral politics has morphed into a malevolent mission targeting friends, family and colleagues of the president,” Powell wrote in The Hill. “The Mueller investigation has become an all-out assault to find crimes to pin on them — and it won’t matter if there are no crimes to be found. This team can make some.”

Powell went on to cite a number of cases where Weissmann won convictions that were later overturned.

There has been speculation that former Trump campaign chairman Manafort and former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn as likely targets.

What are your thoughts?

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

Dossier proves there WAS Russian collusion in last year’s election — by Clinton

(National SentinelHouse of Cards: The creation of the now-infamous “Trump dossier” containing information fed to a former British spy by Russian operatives and the fact that Hillary Clinton’s campaign helped pay for it means that indeed there was “Russian collusion” in last year’s election.

But it didn’t involve the campaign of GOP nominee Donald J. Trump, as Americans have been told now for more than a year, the Washington Times noted Friday.

The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee hired opposition research firm Fusion GPS to create the dossier. The firm then contracted with former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who assembled the dossier.

“The irony: Virtually all of Mr. Steele’s sources are Russian, meaning Democrats have been indirectly colluding with Moscow disinformation to bash the Trump team for purportedly doing the same thing,” the Times noted.

The dossier began making its rounds in Washington, D.C., and NYC political and media circles in June 2016, but none of its core collusion charges against Trump have been proven. What’s more, there hasn’t been any confirmation by public pronouncement or congressional leak from either of Congress’ two intelligence committees or from special counsel Robert Mueller validating those charges.

“That did not stop the Clinton campaign from attacking Mr. Trump,” the Times wrote. “Neither has it stopped congressional Democrats, especially members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, from reading the dossier’s sensational charges into the Congressional Record and on the network news. Based on the dossier, they publicly accused people of felonies while knowing the document remained unverified.”

“It also did not matter that the Democrats’ targets — Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen and the president, to name a few — all called the dossier fiction,” the Times reported.

Or that veteran Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward called the document “garbage” or that former CIA acting Director Michael Morell said that the gossip contained in the dossier came from paid Kremlin figures who would say anything for a dollar.

Or that three people accused of crimes in the dossier have filed libel lawsuits.

“As reasonable, intelligent people have understood for some time, the ‘Dodgy Dossier’ was nothing more than a political stunt designed to undermine the Trump campaign and damage the ‘deplorable’ members of the Trump movement who supported it,” Mr. Page, who has filed a lawsuit, told The Washington Times.

The news site Buzzfeed, without substantiating anything in the dossier, published it in full. That site is also now being sued.

“If voters knew the truth in early November 2016, which they began to more fully understand this week regarding the actual interference in last year’s election, President Trump’s victory would have unquestionably exceeded 400 [votes] in the Electoral College,” said Mr. Page.

Nevertheless, Democrats and many in “the Left-wing press” continue to vouch for the dossier, “some to this day,” the Times noted.

What are your thoughts?

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

 

Limbaugh: ‘Obvious’ Trump is succeeding

(National SentinelPolitical Agendas: Talk show giant Rush Limbaugh took some time to just absorb the opposition — Democrats, RINOs, the media — surrounding President Donald J. Trump’s administration thus far and came up with a singular conclusion: Trump is winning, and it’s patently obviously that he is winning when you look at all the evidence.

“The Democrats are having to circle the wagons in ways in which they have been hoping and praying Trump would have to,” Limbaugh observed Thursday.

“When you take a day off and you look at all of this — and all I did was absorb it without having any outlet to comment on it — it is obvious who’s coming unglued here,” he said. “And it’s obvious who’s losing their cookies. And it’s obvious who’s becoming unhinged.”

Despite the fact that every day is a battle for Trump, he is the one who keeps coming out on top.

“They’ve fired every weapon they’ve got with every bit of ammo they’ve got, and nothing is getting rid of Trump,” Limbaugh noted. “Nothing is really derailing the Trump agenda other than some recalcitrant Republicans.”

Despite it all, the Trump agenda is moving ahead. Also, Limbaugh noted, Trump’s detractors have yet to impact his base.

“After almost a year now of lies from the deep state and leaks that were treated as gospel by the drive-by media, they’ve got nothing,” he said, referring to the various investigations into hoaxes like ‘Russian collusion.’

“They can’t find any Russians that anybody can find who colluded with anybody, other than the ambassador who had lunch every day with everybody,” he continued.

And because they’ve yet to ‘indict’ Trump on anything substantial, the Alt-Left and the perpetually angry Democrats are now attempting to portray him as ‘unfit’ for office.

“So they have moved directions to ‘Trump is nuts, Trump is unhinged, Trump is insane.’ It shows up now in every commentary,” he said. “It’s all day, just like the Russia stuff was. It’s all day on PMSNBC and it’s all day on CNN.”

“He doesn’t appear to be disturbed, bothered, upset. He doesn’t appear to be deranged,” Limbaugh said. “He exhibits none of the characteristics that the drive-by media says with their associates.”

“Millions of people do not think Trump is nuts … or anything of the sort,” he said.

But those same people do think his detractors are.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

 

 

 

Establishment media coverage of Trump nearly ALL negative

(National SentinelPolitical Media: No, the so-called “mainstream media” is not fair, is not unbiased, and has a serious credibility problem when it comes to coverage of President Donald J. Trump and his administration.

Those are the only possible conclusions any reasonable person can make based on the results of a Pew Research Center of Journalism and Media study that has just been released: A content analysis of his first days as president found that 62 percent of media coverage was negative, while just 5 percent was positive.

Contrast that with the early coverage of Obama: 42 percent was positive while just 20 percent was negative

NBC News reported:

Among recent presidents, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush had higher negative than positive coverage early in their administrations, but not nearly to Trump’s degree. Clinton had 28 percent negative coverage and 27 percent positive in 1993, while Bush had 28 percent negative and 22 percent positive in 2001.

Coverage of Trump was primarily focused on “character and leadership” versus policy, according to the Pew Center, a nonprofit based in Washington. The study also showed that only 2 percent of stories from outlets with a right-leaning audience refuted statements made by Trump or his administration, while 15 percent of stories carried by left-leaning outlets questioned the administration.

“It certainly shows that where people turn for news has implications for what they’re hearing about President Trump,” said Amy Mitchell, Pew’s director of journalism research.

Trump has frequently said that most media coverage of him has been negative. Once again, the president is right and his detractors — many of them in the media — are wrong.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here