FORMER SHELL OIL PRESIDENT SAYS OBAMA HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH INCREASED FUEL PRODUCTION

Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 3.11.48 PM

By Nick Givas

Former president of Shell Oil Company John Hofmeister said former President Barack Obama had nothing to do with America’s increased oil production and actually frustrated many areas of the energy sector.

Obama claimed he was responsible for America’s recent oil boom during an event hosted by Rice University’s Baker Institute on Tuesday night and Hofmeister challenged his assessment. (RELATED: Obama Touts Climate Change Legacy Then Takes Credit For US Oil Boom)

“American energy production — you wouldn’t always know it, but it went up every year I was president,” Obama said. “That whole, suddenly America’s, like, the biggest oil producer and the biggest gas — that was me, people.”

“The facts are the facts. And, yes, the production did increase throughout his term,” Hofmeister said on “Fox & Friends” Thursday. “But, frankly, he had nothing to do with it.”

“This was production in states like Texas, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado — North Dakota in particular. And these were all state decisions made with industry applications for permits. The federal government had no role.”

Hofmeister said Obama opposed the energy industry at every turn with his actions against offshore drilling and his handling of the Keystone Pipeline.

“If anything, he was trying to frustrate the efforts by taking federal lands off of the availability list — putting them just, no more drilling [sic]. He shut down the Gulf of Mexico for a period of six months,” he said. “[He] changed the regulations from an average of 60 to 80 pages per permit to 600 to 800 pages per permit. He also never approved the Keystone XL pipeline after dangling all the potential customers for eight years. And it was in the eighth year when he said no Keystone Pipeline.”

“I would say that he was not a leader when it comes to energy,” Hofmeister said.

IT WAS A HOAX: Guardian Report Blows Up – Manafort Passport Shows NO UK TRIPS – Never Met with Assange

Screen Shot 2018-11-29 at 11.25.29 AM

by Jim Hoft

On Tuesday The Guardian from the UK posted a shock report that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort met with Julian Assange in March 2016-this was before he became Trump’s campaign chair.

The far left Guardian reported:

Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and visited around the time he joined Trump’s campaign, the Guardian has been told.

Sources have said Manafort went to see Assange in 2013, 2015 and in spring 2016 – during the period when he was made a key figure in Trump’s push for the White House.

Here is what The Gateway Pundit reported as our first reaction to the Guardian report on Tuesday morning…
It should be easy enough to verify the meetings if Manafort actually visited the Ecuadorian Embassy.
Right?

And if Manafort met with Assange don’t you think that would have been reported by now?

Wikileaks pounced on the report —
Wikileaks refuted the report calling it one of the great embarrassments in journalism history.

Then Wikileaks bet The Guardian a million dollars that their report is complete trash.

Assange-Manafort fabricated story is a plot to extradite WikiLeaks founder – Max Blumenthal

Assange-Manafort fabricated story is a plot to extradite WikiLeaks founder – Max Blumenthal

The apparently fabricated report by The Guardian linking Russiagate and Manafort to WikiLeaks is laying the case to arrest and extradite Julian Assange to the US, investigative journalist Max Blumenthal told RT.

WikiLeaks is ready to sue Britain’s Guardian newspaper for a “fabricated Manafort story” that accused Julian Assange of secretly meeting President Donald Trump‘s former election campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Manafort agreed to take part in the Mueller probe over Russia’s alleged meddling into the 2016 US election but he denies co-operating with Russia or ever meeting Assange.

Screen Shot 2018-11-28 at 5.22.47 PM

The author of the report, Luke Harding, based his claim on “sources” and a document “written by Ecuador’s Senain intelligence agency and seen by the Guardian,” which the newspaper didn’t publish.

Investigative journalist Max Blumenthal asks why they didn’t provide actual “evidence from the visitor logs of the Ecuadorian Embassy which are closely watched.”

“Why not show CCTV? London is the most heavily surveilled places on Earth. Why not show that? Why rely on a single Ecuadorian source who appears to be an Ecuadorian intelligence source with the MI6 on the other hand of the line and the US on the other?” he said in a comment to RT.

He believes that it is a fabrication of a story to lay the case for the arrest and extradition of Julian Assange “by tying him to a figure who is hatching out a plea deal with Robert Mueller, by tying him to the Russiagate scandal in the US.”

Blumenthal noted that this story was being met with more skepticism than usual – “even in official circles in Washington” – and that “it might have failed.”

However, he added, “once the allegation is made, the damage is done.”

“Many people might have read this story and seen some commentary about it and news on CNN and judge that Assange did meet with Paul Manafort,” he pointed out.

Screen Shot 2018-11-28 at 5.24.37 PM

‘Guardian has become bulletin board for fabricated national security state propaganda’

Although WikiLeaks is going to sue over this story and both WikiLeaks and Paul Manafort deny the allegations, the article is still on The Guardian’s website.

“It is a sad commentary on what The Guardian has become – basically a bulletin board for fabricated national security state propaganda,” Blumenthal said.

According to the journalist, this story brings together the Russiagate scandal in Washington with the plot to extradite Assange.

“We know that there is an indictment of Julian Assange, it may be made public tomorrow,” he said. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with the Ecuadorian foreign minister earlier in the week, which might be a sign that it could be made public, Blumenthal explained.

Recalling that Paul Manafort is working out a plea deal with Robert Mueller, Blumenthal argued that the report may have been “an attempt to put the squeeze on Manafort because he is not providing enough information.”

“This apparently fabricated story was planted through Luke Harding… in order to lay the case for the arrest and extradition of Julian Assange,” he said.

If arrested and extradited, Blumenthal explains, Assange would be the first journalist who published classified information in the US to be tried under the Espionage Act. That, he noted, would basically deprive the WikiLeaks founder of “any real legal defense or an ability to mount a defense and would see him put on trial in a district court in Northern Virginia where the conviction rate on national security prosecutions is close to 100 percent.”

ALSO ON RT.COMAll the Kremlin’s men: Farage, Moscow and six degrees of Kevin Bacon

Former MI5 intelligence officer Annie Machon thinks the US will go to any lengths to fix charges against Assange.

“It has been an open secret for many years that there has been a secret grand jury convened in Virginia trying to find any charge or probably make up a new law just to prosecute Julian Assange as a revenge for the fact that he shone a very bright light on some very murky and dark details of what the American state was doing,” she explained.

According to Machon, it is useful for the American establishment and the Democrats “to conflate everything with one big mess: Paul Manafort, the Mueller probe, Donald Trump, WikiLeaks as all part of big Russiagate-type thing.” She added that when you actually “pick the details, none of that hangs together whatsoever.”

In her opinion, Julian Assange is becoming a pawn in “a very high stakes game within American Washington politics.”

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

‘They’re just bad people’ – NYT columnist on Trump supporters

‘They’re just bad people’ – NYT columnist on Trump supporters

President Trump meets young black Republicans at an event in October © Reuters / Cathal MacNaughton

Why would anyone work for President Donald Trump? Aside from a shared ideological vision, advancing one’s own career, or chasing a sniff of political power, one New York Times columnist has a better explanation: They’re just bad people.

In a failed attempt to understand life outside the morally superior left coast, New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg argues that many Trump supporters are simply “bad people,” of two kinds: “the immoral and the amoral.”

See the source image

Goldberg wasn’t writing about the MAGA-hat wearing middle-Americans who turn out in droves for Trump’s rallies, nor the conservative-leaning average Joe who would have voted for a kick in the head before Hillary Clinton. Instead, she was talking about the revolving cast of aides, officials, and lawmakers who’ve worked for the Trump administration or lent political support to his policies.

They’re the Steve Bannons (a “quasi-fascist with delusions of grandeur”), and the Anthony Scaramuccis ( a “political cipher who likes to be on TV”), the Ivanka Trumps and the Lindsey Grahams. Out of them all, Goldberg finds the apolitical figures, the ones only in it for the paycheck, the worst.

“Trump is unique as a magnet for grifters, climbers and self-promoters,” she wrote. “In part because decent people won’t associate with him.”

Of course, all of this is predicated on the belief that ‘Orange Man Bad,’ a belief that many of the New York Times’ readers likely share with Goldberg. The columnist ponders out loud how these people could work for Trump without feeling “shame or remorse” at his “belligerent nationalism and racist conspiracy theories.” What exactly these conspiracy theories are, however, Goldberg does not explain. Instead, we’re expected to know instinctively that Trump is, for whatever reason, bad.

See the source image

The idea that anyone who works for Trump is “bad” by association is simplistic and no doubt appealing to many in the media and the #Resistance. However, reality is more complicated. Trump aides and officials have their own careers to advance, their own dreams and ambitions, and their own car payments to make. The institutions of Washington, DC will endure long after Trump leaves office, and many of these bureaucrats will still need work.

Take Mary Kissel, named this month as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s new foreign policy adviser. Kissel is a former Wall Street Journal reporter who has been sharply critical of and even openly hostile to Trump’s policies before. Is Kissel’s move to the State Department a surrender of her anti-Trump media credentials, or simply a career upgrade?

What about the officials who served in past administrations? Surely the New York Times fretted over the 29 Google employees who took up jobs in the Obama White House? After all, Obama presided over the largest expansion of mass surveillance in history, and defended the National Security Agency even after it emerged that it gathered vast amounts of call, email and internet data from millions of Americans.

Some moves through the revolving door that existed between Google and the Obama White House were reported, but the morals of the employees themselves were never questioned. Because, while these moves raised questions about the cosy relationship between Washington, DC and the tech industry, they were at an individual level, career moves. Besides, they were working for Obama, who came with a tacit seal of approval from much of the mainstream media.

Things are different in 2018, however. Trump (who Goldberg actually called “the orange emperor” in her previous column) is bad, and anyone who works for him is bad and should feel bad. Life sure is black and white on the pages of the Gray Lady.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Illinois Democrat says she wanted to pump a ‘broth of Legionella’ bacteria into Republican colleague’s water supply

Screen Shot 2018-11-28 at 10.38.16 AM

Democratic Rep. Stephanie Kifowit, shown earlier this year during a committee hearing about deadly Legionnaires’ outbreaks at a state-run veterans home, criticized a Republican colleage Nov. 27, 2018, over his stance on a bill aimed at helping the victims’ families. (Zbigniew Bzdak/Chicago Tribune)

By Mike Riopell and Rick Pearson

A Democratic state lawmaker said she wanted to pump a lethal “broth of Legionella” bacteria into the water system of a Republican colleague’s family, during heated remarks on the Illinois House floor over a bill aimed at helping families of more than a dozen residents at the Downstate Quincy veterans home who died of Legionnaires’.

The bill would raise limits on damages in some state Court of Claims cases from $100,000 to $2 million, which could affect the victims’ families, who allege the state was negligent in the deaths that resulted from outbreaks at the veterans home over the past three years. Gov. Bruce Rauner rewrote the proposal over the summer to reduce such caps on damage awards to $300,000, but lawmakers voted Tuesday to override him.

See the source image

During the House floor debate over the proposal, Republican state Rep. Peter Breen of Lombard questioned some of the plan’s details, contending the state doesn’t know how much it will cost. Breen, the outgoing House GOP floor leader, noted that multiple tort claims could be paid out for the same incident.

“And, yes, we know the personal injury lawyers are going to make out like bandits, which they tend to do anytime they come to the General Assembly,” Breen said.

AG Lisa Madigan investigating Gov. Bruce Rauner’s administration’s response to deaths at veterans home »

Minutes later, Democratic state Rep. Stephanie Kifowit of Oswego, a co-sponsor of the legislation, stood up to attack Breen.

“I would like to make him a broth of Legionella and pump it into the water system of his loved one, so that they can be infected, they can be mistreated, they can sit and suffer by getting aspirin instead of being properly treated and ultimately die. And we are talking about our nation’s heroes,” said Kifowit, a Marine veteran.

Kifowit recounted questions over the Rauner administration’s handling of repeated outbreaks at the home, which are the subject of a grand jury investigation by Attorney General Lisa Madigan, and, in closing, said, “I respectfully ask for you to support this bill.”

Lawmakers voted 71-36 to raise the cap on lawsuit damages, the bare minimum number of votes they needed to override Rauner. The bill passed in May with 79 House votes. The Senate voted two weeks ago to override Rauner.

See the source image

Breen yelled off microphone after Kifowit’s speech and Republican state Rep. Keith Wheeler of Oswego urged the chamber to reflect on the scale of the rhetoric.

“We lost our way today. I cannot fathom the idea that any one of us would ever publicly make a statement that is effectively a wish for a family member of one of our colleagues to die. That is what was said today. I think that’s despicable,” Wheeler said. “We shouldn’t stand for that.”

Gov. Bruce Rauner vetoes larger damages for veterans who died from Legionnaire’s at Quincy veterans home »

Later, after the vote, Kifowit said her words were misheard, misrepresented, misinterpreted and mischaracterized.

“Quite clearly what I said was ‘imagine if it was your family,’ ” she said, though she didn’t use those words. “So if it was misheard, I’ll apologize for the misheard, but my words were clearly, ‘Imagine if it was your family.’ ” Kifowitz acknowledged that her remarks “are all transcribed, and my words will be clear.”

On Twitter, she later said, “My words were twisted and misrepresented.” She added in another tweet, “I never stated anything to wish his family death.”

The deaths at the Quincy veterans home dogged Rauner’s re-election campaign. The post-Civil War-era facility is where 14 people have died and nearly 70 others have been sickened by Legionnaires’ disease outbreaks since 2015. At least a dozen lawsuits have been filed since the initial outbreak, claiming negligence by the state.

In its legal filings, the state has denied any negligence and Rauner has said the state has followed all recommendations of federal experts at the Quincy home. In April, Rauner’s veterans affairs director resigned.

Rauner’s veterans affairs director resigns in wake of 13 Legionnaires’ deaths at Quincy home »

In his amendatory veto, Rauner wrote that raising the $100,000 cap on damages to $2 million through the state Court of Claims was “effectively ignoring the impact of vastly expanded future litigation on the fiscal position of the state and its taxpayers.”

“I recognize that the current law is outdated and in need of adjustment,” he wrote. “However, this adjustment should reflect regional and national averages in order to properly compensate those who, once properly adjudicated, were found harmed by the state of Illinois.”

The $100,000 cap was established in 1972.

The vote to override Rauner’s veto on Tuesday came as lawmakers returned to Springfield for what could be their last clash with him, as they consider overriding dozens of the governor’s vetoes less than two months before he leaves office.

Rauner hasn’t made many appearances since losing his re-election bid to Democratic Gov.-elect J.B. Pritzker and hasn’t been publicly defending his vetoes. That’s in contrast to his high-profile four years fighting Democrats who control the General Assembly.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑