Saturday, March 31, 2018

San Bernardino Islamic mass murderer's presence in US was entirely due to US immigration policy that forbids review of social media as part of background checks-NY Times, 12/12/2015

12/12/2015, "U.S. Visa Process Missed San Bernardino Wife’s Zealotry on Social Media," NY Times,

2014, Chicago

She said she supported it. And she said she wanted to be a part of it....Had the authorities found the posts years ago, they might have kept her out of the country.
But immigration officials do not routinely review social media as part of their background checks, and there is a debate inside the Department of Homeland Security over whether it is even appropriate to do so....

In the aftermath of terrorist attacks in San Bernardino and Paris, this screening process has been singled out as a major vulnerability in the nation’s defense against terrorism....

In an era when technology has given intelligence agencies seemingly limitless ability to collect information on people, it may seem surprising that a Facebook or Twitter post could go unnoticed in a background screening. But the screenings are an example of the trade-offs that security officials make as they try to mitigate the threat of terrorism while keeping borders open for business and travel....  

Ms. Malik faced three extensive national security and criminal background screenings. 

First, Homeland Security officials 

checked her name against American law enforcement and national security databases. Then, her visa application went to the  

State Department, which checked 

her fingerprints against other databases. Finally, after coming to the United States and formally marrying Mr. Farook here, she applied for her green card and received another round of criminal and security checks.

Ms. Malik also had two in-person interviews, federal officials said, the first by a consular officer in Pakistan, and the second by an immigration officer in the United States when she applied for her green card.

All those reviews came back clear, and the F.B.I. has said it had no incriminating information about Ms. Malik or Mr. Farook in its databases. The State Department and the Department of Homeland Security have said they followed all policies and procedures. The departments declined to provide any documentation or specifics about the process, saying they cannot discuss the case because of the continuing investigation.

Meanwhile, a debate is underway at United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency that approves visas and green cards, over whether officers conducting interviews should be allowed to routinely use material gathered from social media for interviews where they assess whether foreigners are credible or pose any security risk. With that issue unresolved, the agency has not regularly been using social media references, federal officials said."...

Image caption: "The San Bernardino attackers Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago in 2014. Credit U.S. Customs and Border Protection" 


Reconnect Julian Assange ten hour online vigil draws support across political divides-Disobedient Media, Elizabeth Vos....(President Trump, Mr. Assange provides a service desperately needed by Americans. Please grant him asylum in the US)

"Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA analyst and prominent member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) joined the panel and spoke about his friendship with Julian Assange being initially sparked by Wikileaks’ publication of documents on Afghanistan. McGovern spoke of Assange and Wikileaks providing a pattern by which we can model our journalistic efforts. Ray told us that his five hours on the streamed vigil were the: “… Most pleasant five hours I’ve spent in a long long time, and I admire what you’re doing.”"

3/29/18, "Silencing of Assange Sparks Historic Ten-Hour Online Vigil To #ReconnectJulian," Disobedient Media, Elizabeth Vos

"The Ecuadorian Government’s decision to silence Julian Assange by cutting off his internet access, phone communications and ability to receive visitors represents a saddening turnabout by a country that has long protected the publisher’s human and journalistic rights. The move took place at the behest of Ecuador’s President Lenin Moreno, who took office in May last year. Since that time Moreno has continued to provide Assange with asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and his government conferred citizenship and diplomatic immunity on the arbitrarily confined journalist last December.

When news of the cut in communications emerged yesterday, friends and supporters of Assange immediately lept into action, with Kim Dotcom and Suzie Dawson organizing an online vigil under the banner of #ReconnectJulian. Meanwhile, supporters on the ground in London gathered in front of the embassy, live streaming as they stood in solidarity for hours, meters from the confined Wikileaks Editor-In-Chief.

The event stretched to over ten hours of continual live streaming. We were so honored to be joined by the most incredible guests imaginable all day long, in an awe-inspiring show of solidarity for a political prisoner. Participants included a range of viewpoints from across the political divide and included in no particular order: Kim Dotcom, Suzie Dawson, this writer, Cassandra Fairbanks, Ray McGovern, members of the Pirate Party, Emmy Butlin, John Kiriakou, Ron Placone, HA Goodman, Caitlin Johnstone, Lee Camp, Tim Black and Trevor Fitzgibbons.

This author was utterly overwhelmed at the radiating kindness shown by every single person who contributed whether as a guest or behind the scenes, creating visuals, compiling questions, monitoring the live chat, spreading the word on social media, and more. The way in which Assange and Wikileaks consistently bring out the best in people, participants and viewers alike, speaks to the absolute integrity at the heart of the organization. During the entirety of the stream the strength, mutual respect, and love of truth was palpable.

The full ten-hour stream is available below:

Topics of discussion ranged from the reason for Ecuador’s decision to cut off Julian Assange’s communication to the importance of Wikileaks in the field of journalism and in protecting the public from the harmful acts of their governments, and beyond.

To accurately summarize the contributions of such a range of incredibly gifted human beings over ten hours is impossible. Those who had met Julian Assange in person spoke of their impressions of him as incredibly intelligent, in good spirits, and as unbowed in the face of the powers seeking to oppress him. They also spoke of his selflessness in efforts to protect others, whether that be the Catalonian people, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, or thousands of other unknown sources and journalists whose lives have been saved by the efforts of Assange and Wikileaks.

Suzie Dawson emphasized that no journalistic organization has ever gone to the lengths to protect sources than has Wikileaks

Many of the insights gained from Dawson’s recent masterpiece Being Julian Assange, were unexpectedly timely and relevant to the recent events. It provided an invaluable resource that the viewers could use to help others understand the level of attacks that Assange and Wikileaks regularly face. 

John Kiriakou added that the CIA and US intelligence agencies would be extremely happy at the news that Assange had been isolated. He went on to say that they most likely added pressure to Ecuador and Spain to punish Assange, as the United States intelligence community was tired of waiting to prosecute the Wikileaks co-founder.

Kiriakou referenced the likelihood that secret charges await Assange in the United States, specifying that such charges would likely be filed in the Eastern District Court of Virginia, which he said is known as “the Espionage court.” Kiriakou explained that this was because no national security defendant had ever won a case there, and that it is the home of the Central Intelligence Agency. He said: “[Assange] couldn’t possibly get a fair trial in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

Independent journalist Tim Black expressed his support for Assange and Wikileaks, and astutely observed: “This is not a eulogy, and [Assange] will be fighting like hell!” He described the process of slowly finding truth-telling voices amongst corporate narratives, which then naturally translates to becoming a truth teller for others, helping the public see outside legacy media manipulation. His characterization echoed Ray McGovern’s sentiments, when he called Wikileaks and Assange an example by which we should model our journalistic endeavors.

Trevor Fitzgibbons also gave his insight on Assange, his sense of humor and sense of caring for and doing good in the world, praising Assange’s courage as truly contagious. Meanwhile, Ron Placone pointed out the vague nature of Ecuador’s alleged agreement with Assange not to interfere in its relationship with other states, characterizing the current silencing of Assange as punishing a journalist for doing journalistic work. He said that Assange: “Is one of the biggest scapegoats, right now.”

Placone also mentioned the harsh media treatment directed towards Wikileaks supporters like Randy Credico, especially in comparison with the “softball interviews” given to oligarchs and warmongers. This was a topic also discussed by Ray McGovern, who described his experience of being shut out by legacy media and even well-known ‘alternative’ news outlets and pundits, including Democracy Now and Amy Goodman.

One important takeaway from #ReconnectJulian, for all involved, was the invaluable resource Wikileaks is for all independent and anti-establishment journalists. While legacy press largely neglected coverage of the stream, the #ReconnectJulian event nevertheless reached tens of millions of twitter impressions organically over the course of the day. In effect, the event represented the success of independent media in becoming the replacement of legacy press coverage on the censorship of Assange.

Based on the resounding success of #ReconnectJulian, it appears that the public considers pro-Wikileaks, anti-corporate voices as a more reliable source of information than legacy outlets.

This was epitomized early in the progress of #ReconnectJulian, when Kim Dotcom correctly surmised that the reason for Ecuador’s decision to cut Assange’s contact with the outside world likely stemmed from pressure by Spain in the wake of Assange’s consistent advocacy for the right to self determination for Catalonians. Meanwhile, The Guardian published a report that incorrectly framed the events in relation to Russia. Dotcom’s suspicions were soon confirmed as correct by both Wikileaks and the Ecuadorian government, though the two parties disagreed as to any agreement allegedly made by Assange limiting his speech.

It appears that the crux of the issue relates to a Tweet posted by Assange in response to the arrest of Catalan President Carles Puigdemont in Germany at the behest of Spain. He drew a factual comparison between these recent events and the arrest of Lluís Companys, President of Catalonia in the 1940’s, who Assange accurately noted was arrested by the Gestapo – also at the request of Spain. Assange has been a consistent pillar of support for the Catalonian people, with his most recent statements on the matter specifying that he is not for Catalonian independence, but instead supports their right to self determination as a people:

Suze also read a message from Christine Assange, Julian Assange’s mother, who said: “This is Julian Assange’s generation’s struggle. This event and the hashtag has been a roaring success.” Suzie related that Christine was very proud of the vigil and all of the participants.

Lee Camp joined us and expressed his support for #ReconnectJulian, directing praise for Assange and Wikileaks for not only directly influencing media through the publication of documents, but also crediting them with helping to inspire the Arab Spring and Occupy Wallstreet movements. He said: “The ripples of what you have created are immense, and I don’t think anyone’s tried to calculate the impact you’ve had on the world, and that’s why we need you to keep fighting, for transparency, and a world that is not owned by a tiny elite. You are an important part in it.”

Caitlin Johnstone said during the stream: “To be stuck in that embassy anyway and then cut off from the outside world must be devastating… I feel his personal pain, but I think this is really weird. Probably predictable that Ecuador would take issue with things said about the Spanish government, but I hope this goes in reverse for them, that everyone tweets the tweet that they wanted him to take down… that we realize what they are doing to this man. It is just wrong. I thank anyone who is going to bat for Julian because you are on the right side of history… We will make sure that we will remember those who stand up for him.” She also referred to Assange as a “Monk of government transparency,” in light of the degree to which he had given up his life for the cause.

HA Goodman also spoke out in support of Assange and added that he had noticed throughout the day that a number of talking heads with large platforms had stayed silent in the face of Assange being silenced, despite their social media reach. HA expressed his disgust at such cowardice in the face of human suffering.
Emmy Butlin joined the panel, describing the courage and persistence of those who regularly express solidarity with Assange by standing watch on his behalf at the embassy for long hours, every week, for years. She spoke about witnessing policing at the embassy first-hand, as well as the “tremendous support” from the public, whose positivity she characterized as extremely encouraging and something that keeps her going....

That Assange inspires such positive interactions which rise far above political persuasion speaks to his being a truth teller. Often, during the stream the participants commented on the fact that we were bound by prizing truth above and beyond ideology, and that our support for Assange and Wikileaks represented truth acting as our guiding star.

Cassandra Fairbanks informed the panelists that she had visited Assange last Thursday and that at that time he was in good spirits, and as sharp-witted as ever. She characterized his intelligence as intimidating, saying that she was simply in awe to meet him. Both Emmy and Cassandra spoke of Assange “presenting himself as he is,” an incredible statement in contrast with the often two-faced figures that fill the legacy media sphere.

Ray McGovern, a veteran CIA analyst and prominent member of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) joined the panel and spoke about his friendship with Julian Assange being initially sparked by Wikileaks’ publication of documents on Afghanistan. McGovern spoke of Assange and Wikileaks providing a pattern by which we can model our journalistic efforts. Ray told us that his five hours on the streamed vigil were the: “… Most pleasant five hours I’ve spent in a long long time, and I admire what you’re doing.”

As Kim Dotcom and others have noted, Ecuador’s treatment of its own citizen, Julian Assange, at the behest of Lenin Moreno and under pressure from the Spanish government also represents a clear breach of article 16.2 of the Ecuadorian Constitution.

Shortly after ending the live stream, this author received a request to appear on Sky News Australia to speak with Ross Cameron of Outsiders about the success of the #ReconnectJulian live stream, and the current situation Julian Assange is facing. It was an honor to represent the collective effort of so many, and Ross Cameron was a pleasure to speak with. The interview remains the only establishment media coverage of the vigil at the time of writing. 

@DisobedientNews Editor and Chief @ElizabethleaVos: When news came out of Ecuador shutting off @JulianAssange's internet access, a vigil was put together to rise above political difference and to support a truth teller.

It remains to be seen as to how long Ecuador will shut Assange off from the outside world via internet connection, phone calls, and visits. One thing is certain: those who support Wikileaks and Assange will not stop fighting until his human and journalistic right to speech and press is restored, and until he is able to leave the Ecuadorian embassy in safety.

As a final note, Wikileaks encouraged those who wish to support Assange at this time to: “Donate to the Wikileaks’ staff legal fund, AND publicly campaign for his freedom including by politely correcting journalists and editors involved in misreportage.”"


UK "election interference" chart fails to mention that in 2016 it invited foreign interference in its Brexit election by allowing Obama to promote defeat of Brexit, threatening US economic harm to UK if it did otherwise. UK hosted biggest intervention by a US president in a Western democracy in decades. With its "Russia poison" lies UK hopes Daddy US will let it in on the US taxpayer cash bonanza in coming war with Russia

"It is the biggest intervention I can think of by an American president who has turned up in this way and intervened directly in the politics of a Western democracy since the end of the Cold War....It is above and beyond what people do in Western democracies," said a Kings College London professor. "Obama was urging Britain to pool its sovereignty with other nations in a way that the United States would never countenance for itself."
4/22/2016, "Obama exhorts Britain to stay in EU, warns on trade if it leaves," Reuters, Roberta Rampton, Kylie MacLellan, London

"President Barack Obama made a bold intervention into the politics of Washington's closest ally on Friday, exhorting Britons to stay in the EU and warning that if they left they would be at "the back of the queue" for a U.S. trade deal.

4/21/16, Reuters
Obama's plea to British voters ahead of a June referendum on membership of the European Union was welcomed by Prime Minister David Cameron and other supporters of the EU, but denounced by those campaigning to leave as meddling in British affairs."...(UK voters ultimately defied Obama and passed Brexit on June 23, 2016. NY Times failed to compare Obama's interference to 9/11 or bombing of Pearl Harbor though the Brexit outcome toppled a government, causing resignation of UK PM David Cameron: 6/24/16, "David Cameron resigns after UK votes to leave European Union," UK Guardian, Heather Stewart, Rowena Mason, Rajeev Syal). 

3/28/18, "Salisbury Incident Report: Hard Evidence For Soft Minds," Oriental Review

The UK government’s presentation on the Salisbury incident, which was repeatedly cited in recent days as an “ultimate proof” of Russia’s involvement into Skripal’s assassination attempt, was made public earlier today. 

This 6-paged PDF is a powerful evidence of another intellectual low of British propaganda machine. Open it and you can tell that substantially it makes only two assertions on the Skripal case, and both are fals

Have you totally lost your minds, ladies and gentlemen from the Downing Street?"


Friday, March 30, 2018

Paragraph #82 in New Yorker article: Christopher Steele's sources in a July 26, 2016 memo said release of DNC emails was caused by persons "within the Democratic Party structure itself," but the claim hasn't been substantiated-New Yorker, 3/12/18

3/12/18, "Christopher Steele, the Man Behind the Trump Dossier," The New Yorker, Jane Mayer

paragraph #82:

"On July 26, 2016, after WikiLeaks disseminated the D.N.C. e-mails, Steele filed yet another memo, this time claiming that the Kremlin was “behind” the hacking, which was part of a Russian cyber war against Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Many of the details seemed far-fetched: Steele’s sources claimed that the digital attack involved agents “within the Democratic Party structure itself, as well as Russian émigrés in the U.S. and “associated offensive cyber operators." Neither of these claims has been substantiated, and it’s hard to imagine that they will be."...


Comment: Among the entirety of Steele "unsubstantiated memos" used by the US government to obtain FISA Court search warrants against Americans, this one, implicating Democrat party operatives, hasn't been mentioned to date.


Thursday, March 29, 2018

Netflix addition of Susan Rice to its Board of Directors continues collusion among big tech, media, and the dirtiest, deep state swamp creatures-Mark Simone twitter

3/29/18, "Netflix puts Susan Rice on their Board of Directors. The collusion continues between big tech, media and the dirtiest, deep state, swamp creatures." Mark Simone twitter

3/29/18, From Mark Simone twitter


Putin is amazing--he must've hacked Rosanne's huge ratings because "insiders" hadn't predicted them and the highest were in places where Trump did best. As in the election, NY and LA weren't big factors. Putin's final gift to "insiders" was to deliver a huge audience of young people to Rosanne's revival

"Not surprisingly, the top TV markets where Roseanne delivered its highest ratings were in states handily carried by Trump in the election. No. 1 was Tulsa in Oklahoma, which Trump won with 65.3% of the vote. It was followed by Cincinnati, Ohio and Kansas City, Missouri."...
3/28/18, "‘Roseanne’ Revival’s Huge Debut Stuns Hollywood, Prompts Soul-Searching," Deadline,

. But then, few predicted that Trump would become the Republican nominee and would win the presidential election when he first announced his candidacy.

Both Trump and Roseanne were able to tap into the often overlooked and underserved working-class audience. Not surprisingly, the top TV markets where Roseanne delivered its highest ratings were in states handily carried by Trump in the election. No. 1 was Tulsa in Oklahoma, which Trump won with 65.3% of the vote. It was followed by Cincinnati, Ohio and Kansas City, MissouriThe only marquee city from a blue state in the Top 10 was Chicago at No. 5 — the area where the series is set. ABC focused some of its marketing efforts in the region with a preview of the revival at the 54th Chicago International Film Festival.

The top market of the country, New York, was not in the Top 20; No. 2 Los Angeles was not in the Top 30. And yet, Roseanne delivered the highest demo rating for any comedy telecast in 3 1/2 years, since the fall 2014 season premiere of TV’s biggest comedy series of the past five years, The Big Bang Theory.

There no doubt was an element of nostalgia and curiosity about how the characters from the original series have changed and about the new generation of the Conners. But Roseanne went beyond that. Its youngest 18-49 viewers when the series originally aired on ABC from 1988-97 are now at the very top or outside of that ad-friendly demographic range, in which last night’s premiere posted a staggering 5.2 Live+same day rating with no lead-in. It came largely from new viewers who were children or not even born during Roseanne‘s initial run.

Somehow Roseanne transcended age, recruiting droves of young viewers for a show whose two leads, Roseanne Barr and John Goodman, are both 65, well outside of the 18-49 demo. It tapped into the zeitgeist of Middle America, tackling its economic problems — and political leanings — head-on. There was curiosity how Roseanne would address Trump, which the show did in the first episode. In an encouraging sign, the novelty did not wear off, with the second episode rating even higher than the opener. 

ABC did a major marketing campaign for Roseanne, including a three-day stunt during SXSW in Austin that drew huge crowds, and a tie-in with NASCAR, which is hugely popular in the flyover states.


And then there was Barr. Always a firebrand, she did not shy away from controversy, flipping off Jimmy Kimmel and talking candidly about her political views while promoting the show, generating a slew of provocative headlines in the process.

That could’ve gone either way, possibly alienating viewers. But it worked, leaving many TV insiders shellshocked today by the magnitude of the revival’s ratings success that revealed the untapped potential of comedies that provide realistic portrayal of blue-collar America. What’s more, Roseanne did that while also making a social commentary, something rarely seen since All in the Family, Norman Lear’s 1970s classic that has long been rumored to get a reboot.

The TV business always has been reactionary, so when something works, others immediately look for ways to replicate it. ABC, NBC and CBS all have classic sitcom revivals featuring the original casts on deck with Roseanne, Will & Grace and CBS’ upcoming Murphy Brown....

Meanwhile, if Roseanne continues to be a ratings juggernaut, ABC, which is close to renewing the revival for a second season, should look into bringing back its other big blue-collar sitcom hit of the 1990s, Home Improvement, which starred another open Trump sympathizer, Tim Allen.

ABC was strongly criticized by the right in May when it canceled Allen’s long-running sitcom Last Man Standing despite its strong viewership. It was a rare broadcast comedy with a central character who is a political conservative and devout Christian adhering to traditional American values that appeals to viewers in the Heartland.

With The Middle going away, there is a vacuum in representing middle-class families on broadcast TV, and the success of Roseanne no doubt will help get more blue-color sitcoms on the air. We might see that happening as soon as next month when the broadcast networks pick their new series for next season out of the dozens of pilots currently in production."


Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Industrial strength double standard: Washington Post loved Obama for getting the most voter data-Mark Simone twitter


3/27/18, "Industrial strength double standard," Mark Simone twitter


CNN gobsmacked, can't get women Trump supporters to agree with its Stormy Daniels 60 Minutes narrative which supporters say is just a media narrative to sink their president and will make them work even harder for Trump: "We the people are ready to define the narrative"-Rush Limbaugh

3/28/18, "CNN Gobsmacked! Stormy on 60 Minutes Has No Impact on Female Trump Voters," Rush Limbaugh

"RUSH: Now to the audio sound bites. CNN is desperate to find female Trump voters after the Make America Horny Again Tour on Sunday night, and they bombed out. The very first time Stormy Daniels’ name was mentioned on this program, I told people it wouldn’t matter to Trump voters....

Monday night, CNN...This is a portion of Randi Kaye…She’s the correspondent. She went out and did a report, a focus group of Trump supporters reacting to the 60 Minutes Make America Horny Again Tour interview.

(CNN) KAYE: What was your first impression of Stormy Daniels? 

WOMAN #1:  I felt sorry for her.

WOMAN #2:  My heart hurts for her.
WOMAN #3:  This is a porn star! (chuckling)  Why are we giving it any credibility?

WOMAN#4: Exactly.

WOMAN #2: I agree.

WOMAN #3: And the fact that she now wants to come out with a story because she’s afraid of (sic) her children?

WOMEN: (laughing)

WOMAN #3: My goodness!  What did you tell the kiddos about your full-time job?

(CNN) KAYE: (dramatic read) These women all voted for Donald Trump — and despite Stormy Daniels’ claims, they still don’t buy her story. Most in this group believe God ordained Donald Trump to be president and stand by him despite his imperfections. 

WOMAN #5:  I know that when I voted for him, I wasn’t voting for a choir boy.

WOMAN #6:  He hasn’t changed as a person in order to become a president.

RUSH: This is not what they had in mind, obviously, at CNN--and I think they were sort of gobsmacked by it. Remember the world they construct for themselves: Everybody hates Trump.  Responsible, reasonable women, they hate Trump — and so they couldn’t find any here. And don’t think they didn’t look hard.  I’m just surprised they didn’t hire an actor or make up one of their infobabe reporters to look frumpy and stuff and to pretend to be somebody.

Here’s the next portion of the interview…

(CNN) KAYE: (dramatic voice) This group suggests the women coming forward with tales of having had an affair with Trump are being targeted. 

WOMAN #1: Someone is looking and shopping for these people to come out of the woodwork because it is demeaning to our president.

(CNN) KAYE: And as some strongly suggested, all part of a media plot to bring down Donald Trump.

WOMAN #2: You can throw all of that stuff up in our face as many times as you want, but that means that we will work harder for Trump. Is that not so, ladies?

WOMAN #3: That’s correct!

RUSH:  Wow. So they tell the infobabe is the CNN (whose name is Randi Kaye), “The more you try this, the more this garbage that you dredge up, the more we’re gonna work for Trump and the harder we’re gonna work for Trump.” This did not go down well with Randi Kaye. You can hear her exasperation here.

WOMAN #1: This is the media defining the narrative. The people--we, the people--are ready to define the narrative, and it’s not about tawdry sexual peccadillos.
WOMAN #2:  In order for somebody to come forward, you can be pushed by somebody else, right?

WOMAN #3: Correct.

WOMAN #5: Who knows?

WOMAN #2: And so I think the thing is, you’re — you’re looking for a way to impeach my president that I worked very hard for.

KAYE: (exasperated) I’m asking about a Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes! Period! That’s it!

WOMAN #4: Worst-case scenario, if he slept with her, whatever.  That’s between him, the Lord, and his family.

WOMAN #2: Exactly.

WOMAN #4: That is not about the job he’s doing and running our country, which he’s doing an amazing job.

RUSH:  Ms. Kaye, if you don’t like any of this you better take it up with Bill and Hillary Clinton, because they paved this road.  (chuckling)  Trump didn’t build this. (laughing) The Clintons built this! And you and the media? You built the road and you built the escape hatch!  Why, these women are saying exactly what you said about Clinton. I think these women are so sophisticated....Here you have average Americans talking about “the media narrative.” You know, that used to be a secret?

That used to be a secret aspect of the news. Doing the narrative, establishing a narrative –creating it, maintaining it — that was what journalists learned in J-school, that every story is a “narrative.” It’s not based on events. It’s the “narrative” that you have, and that narrative depends or determines, you know, what you talk about and what you don’t. You know, what you consider news and what isn’t. Now these so-called bumpkin women from the middle of America are talking to the media about their narrative and how it ain’t gonna fly.

And I guarantee you, that doesn’t sit well. You can hear the exasperation of Randi Kaye’s voice. “I am asking you about a Stormy Daniels interview on 60 Minutes! Period! That’s it!” She was near the end of her tolerance for these women. These women had the gall to properly define what Randi Kaye here was doing. “You’re trying to get rid of my president.” “I’m asking you about Stormy Daniels! Period! That’s it!” They didn’t get what they wanted, and Wolf Blitzer was not happy when he saw Trump’s approval numbers." image above from

Rush Limbaugh "Related links"


Whether or not George Will, Richard Haass or others agree with it, President Trump has done his best to enact the program voters approved when they elected him-Conrad Black, Special to the NY Sun

Trump's "chief offense has been breaking ranks with the bipartisan coalition that produced the only period of absolute and relative decline in American history....If Mr. Trump succeeds, the abrasions he sometimes causes will be worth enduring. I commend to my hand-wringing friends the wisdom of dual citizen (Australian and American) Nicole Kidman, who advised her Hollywood peers to have some respect for the elected president and some understanding that if he does well, the country does well."... (last parag.)

3/27/18, "The Kidman Doctrine Trumps George Will As John Bolton Rises," NY Sun op-ed, by , Special to the Sun 

"It is distressing to see my friend of nearly 40 years, George Will, writing such words of frenzied despair about the president and his national-security adviser-designate, John Bolton. It is also worrisome to see my cordial acquaintance of 20 years, Richard Haass, writing as mournfully as he did last week of the end of the Liberal World Order.

One expects, a year into an administration that went to war in the [winning] election campaign against the entire political class in both parties and among the national press (such as George Will) and the foreign policy establishment (and Richard Haass is one of the best of them), that there will be panic below decks. One hears it every day from Joe Scarborough and Wolf Blitzer and their legions of screeching sound-alikes....

George Will is one of the country’s outstanding polemical writers, but he should not be squandering that talent on mind-reading and misrepresenting the president. John Bolton absolutely does not think and will not be “suggesting that the United States should seriously consider embarking on war crimes.” George has no standing to say that “Trump has no convictions.”

Whether or not George or others agree with it, the president has done his best to enact the program the voters approved when they elected him. He has appointed judges who believe they should carry out the law and not the current political reinterpretation of what that great paragon of modern liberal jurisprudence Eliot Spitzer described as “a flexible constitution.”

Mr. Trump has drastically reduced illegal immigration, reformed and reduced taxes, deregulated, stimulated economic growth, succeeded in gaining China’s serious cooperation in dissuading North Korea from gaining a nuclear first-strike capacity, and armed the Ukrainians with anti-tank weapons and committed to providing Eastern Europe with anti-missile defenses.

The president is working to reduce the U.S. trade deficit, has assisted importantly in raising oil production by 5 million barrels a day, and emancipated the American people from President Obama’s mad promise (in the Paris climate agreement) to reduce American carbon use by 26% in the next twelve years, while the world’s leading polluters, China and India, pollute more, and Western Europe does nothing, though with great unctuousness.

With a more suave individual enacting the same policies, George Will would, on past form, be an appreciative supporter; it is dismaying that such a substantive person and eminent commentator and old friend is unable to distinguish often annoying (though usually rather entertaining and even refreshing) Trump flimflam and posturing from the substance accomplished by an administration that has, despite the continuing war with most of the political class, had the most successful first year of any newly elected administration since Eisenhower’s, if not Franklin D. Roosevelt’s.

It is also worrisome, given his stature, that George Will is not setting a more thoughtful example, and has gone back to snide name-calling, as in his still-remembered reference to George H. W. Bush as emitting “the tinny ‘arf’ . . . of a lapdog.” Donald Trump as a public personality is an acquired taste, or not, but, like all holders of high public offices, he has the right to be judged on his record. 

George Will presupposes that “this scatterbrain’s Swiss-cheese-style tariffs are too sloppy to reflect forethought.” Mr. Will is not a trade wonk and the whole point is to shrink the trade deficit. Steel and aluminum were as good a place to start as any. Of course China will compromise; the trade specialists will work out something so complicated that no one can figure it out, but the result will be a sharp reduction in the present imbalance in China’s favor, and some repatriation of jobs to the U.S. At the least, George Will should give the president some credit for opposing Chinese theft of American technology.

The takeaway from the initiative to reduce the trade gap with China is that the administration is confident that the North Korea arrangement is already practically in place. President Trump said to the New York Times at the time of his visit to China several months ago that he had indeed deferred taking action with China on the trade front because of the need for China’s entire cooperation to deter Pyongyang from nuclear military deployment by a method short of precise American attack on its military targets.

Mr.Trump’s assertion to the Chinese and North Koreans that if North Korea did not desist, the United States would eliminate the North Korean nuclear program militarily, should promote an agreement a little like that over missiles in Cuba in 1962: no nuclear weapons in either Korea, a divided peninsula, and no attempt at regime change. Both sides would get what they originally wanted.

The Iran agreement was insane: It gave Iran ten years to become a nuclear power, if it chooses to honor the porous and ineffectual monitoring program the treaty provides. But the agreement covers only fissile material, not the Iranian missile program or Iran’s development of a nuclear warhead compact enough to be delivered by a missile, and both of these activities are proceeding apace.

To combat this, the method is essentially the same formula that has been employed with North Korea, though without a Chinese analogue: draconian sanctions and explicit threats that, if a reasonable agreement that no such nuclear military capability will be sought is not concluded, there will be U.S. military interdiction of it. Once the Iranians realize the administration is serious, they will act rationally. The portrayal of this policy as the aspiration to commit “war crimes” is shameful and outrageous.

Neither Messrs. Will nor Haass shows the least recognition of the fact that Donald Trump is the only possible savior of the nuclear non-proliferation system. It must be said for the Iranians that at least they correctly identified the hypocrisy of the existing non-proliferation regime: a club that others could join if they didn’t seem likely to be irresponsible, although all were piously urged to abstain and leave a monopoly of ultimate military power in the hands of the incumbent cartel-members, who haven’t really done anything to fulfill their promise to disarm (nor should they, as the whole concept is insane).

The five founders of the United Nations achieved nuclear military status; then India had to do so as China had, Pakistan because of India, and Israel was a special case. South Africa renounced its status when the apartheid system was dismantled. Ukraine renounced the nuclear capability it inherited from the Soviet Union and all major powers guaranteed its borders, a promise Putin’s Russia has flagrantly violated, and President Trump is the only head of a guarantor country who has done anything about it."...

[Ed. note: 9/2/2014, The US has been active in Ukraine, achieved long sought "regime change" there in 2014, forcing elected pro-Putin personnel to flee: "Official Washington draws the Ukraine crisis in black-and-white colors with Russian President Putin the bad guy and US backed leaders in Kiev the good guys." Key US interventionist Gershman called Ukraine "the prize": "Regime change" in Ukraine was achieved at a cost of billions of US taxpayer dollars. But by Dec. 5, 2017 it was clear: "The West Backed the Wrong Man in Ukraine," Bloomberg View, by Leonid Bershidsky: "It's become increasingly clear that Obama-era US politicians backed the wrong people in Ukraine. President Petro Poroshenko's moves to consolidate his power now include sidelining the anti-corruption institutions he was forced to set up by Ukraine's Western allies....Poroshenko, however, would have gotten nowhere -- and wouldn't be defending Ukraine's opaque, corrupt, backward political system today -- without Western supportNo amount of friendly pressure is going to change him."]

(continuing): "If I did not have such high regard for Richard Haass, I would fear that he had taken leave of his senses in writing, as he did last week, that the Trump administration had taken the “decision ... to abandon the role [the U.S.] has played for more than seven decades in the world. It is difficult to imagine what possessed him to utter such nonsense.

The whiplash between George W. Bush’s almost mindless promotion of democracy (even to setting up a prefabricated failed state in Iraq and supporting anti-democratic parties in democratic elections, as in Gaza, Lebanon, and Egypt) and the feckless pacifism and appeasement of the Obama administration certainly shook the confidence of the world — whether friend or foe — in the United States.

Richard Haass purports to believe that declining to ratify the Paris climate accord and to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and seeking to renegotiate the $70 billion trade deficit with Mexico and drastically amend the Iran nuclear arrangements, are evidence of Mr. Trump’s scuttling of America’s preeminent and indispensable role in the promotion of democracy and the free market, which goes back to Roosevelt’s Quarantine speech in Chicago in 1937.

This is bunk; Mr. Trump is returning to that policy. Richard also decries that “the U.S. is experiencing unprecedented attacks from its own president on the country’s media, courts, and law-enforcement institutions,” and relates this to the rise of “authoritarianism” in such places as Turkey, Russia, and China, and to Britain’s Brexit vote.

Mr. Trump isn’t the problem, but among the symptoms of the problem are that the director and deputy director of the FBI have been fired for cause as the Bureau virtually became the dirty-tricks arm of the Democratic National Committee, and that, as the Center for Media Studies and Pew Research have both recorded, 90% of national-press comment on Mr. Trump is hostile. Mr. Trump may have aggravated some of the current nastiness, but his chief offense has been breaking ranks with the bipartisan coalition that produced the only period of absolute and relative decline in American history.
If Mr. Trump succeeds, the abrasions he sometimes causes will be worth enduring. I commend to my hand-wringing friends the wisdom of dual citizen (Australian and American) Nicole Kidman, who advised her Hollywood peers to have some respect for the elected president and some understanding that if he does well, the country does well. These are almost the only sensible words that have been heard from Hollywood since Ronald Reagan left there for Washington in 1980 (to have dinner at George Will’s house)."

" From the National Review."


Added: More on US taxpayer funded "regime change" in Ukraine:

7/13/2015: "The U.S. had invested $5 billion in their [Ukraine's] “European aspirations"...The Ukraine crisis is spinning out of control, making the State Department’s preferred narrative of the conflict that it’s all Russian President Vladimir Putin’s fault harder and harder to sell....Neocons at The Washington Post and elsewhere still rant about the need for the Obama administration to sink more billions upon billions of [taxpayer] dollars into post-coup Ukraine because it “shares our values.” But that argument, too, is collapsing."..."In other words, the neocons have struck again, dreaming up a “regime change” scheme that ignored practical realities, such as ethnic and religious fissures. Then, as the blood flowed and the suffering worsened, the neocons just sought out someone else to blame."...(2nd parag. from end)

7/13/2015, "The Mess that [Victoria] Nuland Made," Robert Parry, Consortium News