SECURITY PHOTOS: Here Are Some Wall Opponents Who Have Walls Around Their Houses

By

Members of the political and celebrity class are enjoying the lavish walls around their private properties while they fight against President Donald Trump’s plan to build a border wall for the United States to keep out criminal gangs and terrorists. Perhaps these modern-day aristocrats can give John Kerry some tips as he wages a spirited battle to keep migrants off his private beach in France.

Let’s take a look at some of these walls:

Obamas

President Trump approves of the Obama family’s wall in the nation’s capital, which they utilize while Obama engages in shadow diplomacy and other Operation Crossfire Hurricane-related skullduggery to try to damage his successor. It would be nice, however, if Democrats would also give the American people a wall for their protection.

Trending: CONFIRMED: The Government CAN Build The Wall With Brian Kolfage’s GoFundMe Money

Here is a 2017 TMZ photo showing the construction of the Obama Wall:

Paul Ryan

Outgoing House speaker Paul Ryan did not have to worry about his security while he was helping Democrats take the House in the 2018 midterm elections, because his house is appropriately walled off from the mouth-breathers with their populist politics that he so despises. The House eventually did pass Wall funding in Ryan’s last days in office, which no doubt made him grit his teeth after he spent his speakership fighting Trump’s agenda.

The White House’s Julia Hahn caught Ryan in hypocrisy in 2015 when she photographed the seemingly-impenetrable barrier outside of Paul Ryan’s mansion.

Katy Perry

Popular music singer Katy Perry is an advocate for “no barriers,” but she did not seem to mind when one of her immigrant fans got deported for rushing the stage at her concert.

Here are two photographs of the beautiful wall that protects Katy Perry’s property. What magnificent construction on that wall!

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton has a very tastefully-constructed wall around her Chappaqua, New York compound, where she engaged in the email crimes that sank her 2016 bid for the presidency. Hillary’s wall is festooned with cameras and other security measures to protect the former First Lady from anyone who might wish to do her harm.

It’s nice that Hillary is enjoying the benefits of her wall, which less-fortunate Americans do not get to enjoy. Many Americans, especially in our border states, are basically sitting ducks for the criminal cartels who easily traverse our Southern border to pump heroin into the country and spread a cloud of criminality and violence that would not exist in this country if President Trump gets the chance to build his border Wall.

Look at that Clinton wall! Breathtaking!

CFR’s Martin Indyk Slams Trump: Soon He May Be Asking ‘Why Are We Giving Israel So Much Money?’

By Chris Menahan

Capture

Martin Indyk, two-time US Ambassador to Israel and current Distinguished Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, attacked President Trump on Twitter Wednesday for saying Israel will be okay despite the US pulling out of Syria because we give them “billions of dollars.”

“This cavalier attitude is deeply worrying,” Indyk said. “Ignores the role of US as force multiplier for Israeli deterrence. From here it’s a short step to Trump asking: why are we giving Israel so much money?”

Capture

Here’s Trump’s full comments as reported Thursday by the Times of Israel:

Speaking with reporters, Trump was asked about criticism that the move could put Israel in jeopardy by allowing Iran to expand its foothold in Syria.

“Well, I don’t see it. I spoke with Bibi,” he said, referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “I told Bibi. And, you know, we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And they’re doing very well defending themselves, if you take a look.”

“So that’s the way it is,” Trump said, according to a White House transcript.

“We’re going to take good care of Israel. Israel is going to be good. But we give Israel $4.5 billion a year. And we give them, frankly, a lot more money than that, if you look at the books — a lot more money than that. And they’ve been doing a very good job for themselves,” he added.

Here’s some of the top responses to Indyk’s tweet:

Capture

Capture

Indyk has a rather fascinating history according to his Wikipedia page (click through for source links):

In 1982, Indyk began working as a deputy research director for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington.[4][5] From 1985 Indyk served eight years as the founding Executive Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a research institute specializing in analysis of Middle East policy.[6]

[…]He served as special assistant to President Bill Clinton and as senior director of Near East and South Asian Affairs at the United States National Security Council. While at the NSC, he served as principal adviser to the President and the National Security Advisor on Arab–Israeli issues, Iraq, Iran, and South Asia. He was a senior member of Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s Middle East peace team and served as the White House representative on the U.S. Israel Science and Technology Commission.

He served two stints as United States Ambassador to Israel, from April 1995 to September 1997, and from January 2000 to July 2001. He was the first and so far, the only, foreign-born US ambassador to Israel.

He has served on the board of the New Israel Fund.[7] Indyk currently serves on the Adivsory Board for DC based non-profit America Abroad Media.[8]

On July 29, 2013, Indyk was appointed by President Barack Obama as Washington’s special Middle East envoy for the resumption of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.[9] Both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas favored his appointment.[10] He resigned from this position June 27, 2014, returning to the Brookings Institution as its vice president and director for foreign policy.[11][12]

Controversy

In 2000, Indyk was placed under investigation by the FBI after allegations arose that he improperly handled sensitive material by using an unclassified laptop computer on an airplane flight to prepare his memos of meetings with foreign leaders.[13][14][15] There was no indication that any classified material had been compromised, and no indication of espionage.[16]

Indyk was “apparently … the first serving U.S. ambassador to be stripped of government security clearance.”[16] The Los Angeles Times reported that “veteran diplomats complained that Indyk was being made a scapegoat for the kinds of security lapses that are rather common among envoys who take classified work home from the office.”[16] Indyk’s clearance was suspended but was reinstated the next month, “for the duration of the current crisis,” given “the continuing turmoil in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza [Strip] and for compelling national security reasons.”[16]

Criticism
Receiving donations from Qatar

In 2014, Indyk came under scrutiny when a New York Times investigation revealed that wealthy Gulf state of Qatar made a $14.8 million, four-year donation to Brookings Institution, in order to fund two Brookings initiatives,[17] the Brookings Center in Doha and the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World.[18] The Times investigation found that Brookings was one of more than a dozen influential Washington think tanks and research organizations that “have received tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments in recent years while pushing United States government officials to adopt policies that often reflect the donors’ priorities.”[17] A number of scholars interviewed by the Times expressed alarm at the trend, saying that the “donations have led to implicit agreements that the research groups would refrain from criticizing the donor governments.”[17]

The revelation of the think tank’s choice to accept the payment from Qatar was especially controversial because at the time, Indyk was acting as a peace negotiator between Israel and the Palestinians, and because Qatar funds jihadist groups in the Middle East and is the main financial backer of Hamas, “the mortal enemy of both the State of Israel and Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party.”[19] Hamas political chief Khaled Meshaal, who directs Hamas’s operations against Israel, is also harbored by Qatar.[17] Indyk defended the arrangement with Qatar, contending that it did not influence the think tank’s work and that “to be policy-relevant, we need to engage policy makers.”[17] However, the arrangement between Qatar and Brookings caused Israeli government officials to doubt Indyk’s impartiality.[20]

IS THE FEDERAL RESERVE ACTUALLY TRYING TO CAUSE A STOCK MARKET CRASH?

Is The Federal Reserve Actually TRYING To Cause A Stock Market Crash?

It is insanity to raise interest rates when stocks are already crashing, but the Federal Reserve did it anyway

Michael Snyder | Economic Collapse – DECEMBER 20, 2018

The Federal Reserve has decided not to come to the rescue this time. 

All of the economic numbers tell us that the economy is slowing down, and on Wednesday Fed Chair Jerome Powell even admitted that economic conditions are “softening”, but the Federal Reserve raised interest rates anyway.  As one top economist put it, raising rates as we head into an economic downturn is “economic malpractice”.  They know that higher rates will slow down the economy even more, but it isn’t as if the Fed was divided on this move.  In fact, it was a unanimous vote to raise rates.  They clearly have an agenda, and that agenda is definitely not about helping the American people.

Early on Wednesday, Wall Street seemed to believe that the Federal Reserve would do the right thing, and the Dow was up nearly 400 points.  But then the announcement came, and the market began sinking dramatically.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 720 points in just two hours, and the Dow ended the day down a total of 351 points.  This is the lowest that the Dow has been all year, 60 percent of the stocks listed on the S&P 500 are in bear market territory, and at this point approximately four trillion dollars of stock market wealth has been wiped out.

We haven’t seen anything like this since the last financial crisis.  This is officially the worst quarter for the stock market since the fourth quarter of 2008, and it is the worst December that Wall Street has experienced since 1931.

It is insanity to raise interest rates when stocks are already crashing, but the Federal Reserve did it anyway.

They knew what kind of reaction this would cause on Wall Street and in other global markets, but that didn’t stop them.  The financial world is in utter turmoil, and this move by the Fed has definitely added fuel to the fire.

Could it be possible that they actually want a stock market crash?

Some are suggesting that the reason why the vote was unanimous was because they wanted to send a “strong signal” to President Trump.  He has been extremely critical of the Federal Reserve in recent weeks, and this could be a way for the Fed to show Trump who is really in charge.

They are calling this “the Trump economy”, but that is simply not true.  And when Barack Obama was in the White House, it wasn’t “the Obama economy” either.  Ultimately, it is the Federal Reserve that is running the economy, and they fiercely guard their independence and their authority.

President Trump knows that the only way that he is going to win in 2020 is if the economy is doing well, and he also understands that higher interest rates will slow the economy down.

So essentially the Federal Reserve has a tremendous amount of political power in their hands.

During the Obama era, the Fed pushed interest rates all the way to the floor and kept them there for many years.

But now the Federal Reserve has raised interest rates seven times since Donald Trump took office, and four of those rate hikes have been under current Fed Chair Jerome Powell.

Needless to say, it certainly doesn’t take a lot of imagination to figure out how Donald Trump is feeling about Powell at this moment.

Capture

Meanwhile, we continue to get more indications that the U.S. economy is heading for difficult times.  Just consider the following news about FedEx

FedEx shares are plunging after what Morgan Stanley called a “jarring” cut to its annual forecasts, suggesting global growth is slowing far more than most expect – in fact, the bank hinted at the possibility of a “severe recession” unfolding – and prompting expectations of an “uber-dovish hike” by the Fed.

The global logistics bellwether slashed its outlook just three months after raising the view, reflecting an unexpected and abrupt change in the company’s view of the global economy amid rising trade tensions between the U.S. and China. Not only were the cuts were deeper than the Street expected according to Morgan Stanley analyst Ravi Shanker, but everyone is pointing to the following comment from the press release: “Global trade has slowed in recent months and leading indicators point to ongoing deceleration in global trade near-term.”

To see the term “severe recession” used in such a context is more than just a little bit alarming.

The last time the U.S. economy went through a recession, millions of Americans lost their jobs and we saw a wave of mortgage defaults unlike anything we had ever seen before in modern American history.

Are we about to go through something similar?

Earlier today, a CNN article also used the term “recession”, and it discussed the fact that investors now want big corporations to focus on paying down their debts instead of buying back shares of stock…

Fears of an economic slowdown — or even recession — have turned a spotlight on the debt that businesses piled up during the past decade, when borrowing costs were historically low.

For the first time since the Great Recession, investors want companies to prioritize paying down debt rather than investing in the future or share buybacks and dividends, according to a Bank of America Merrill Lynch survey of global fund managers.

But stock buybacks are one of the only things that has been propping up the stock market.  The only way for the bubble to continue is for corporations to go into dizzying amounts of debt in order to fund massive stock buybacks, because the Federal Reserve clearly does not intend to support the markets right now.

At least for the short-term, the Federal Reserve could have calmed the markets and encouraged economic activity by leaving interest rates alone.

In the end, they decided not to do that, and that makes one wonder what they are really trying to achieve.

MSNBC’s Russia ‘expert’: Moscow terrorizing US with meme-filled ‘cruise missiles’ (VIDEO)

MSNBC’s Russia 'expert': Moscow terrorizing US with meme-filled ‘cruise missiles’ (VIDEO)

Malcolm Nance

Millions of impressionable American minds are being corrupted by Russian-linked memes, “the cruise missiles of fake news”, according to MSNBC’s self-anointed Russia expert. Everyone agrees that this is a reasonable observation.

Malcolm Nance, a former Navy cryptologist who studied Arabic and served in the Middle East, makes regular appearances on MSNBC, where he is given generous amounts of airtime to share his thoughts on all things Russia related. In his latest appearance on the network, Nance described how the destructive power of Russian-linked internet memes have apparently devastated America.

 

“The Internet Research agency built all these memes and tropes which became the cruise missiles of fake news and disinformation,” Nance said. He claimed that these nefarious meme-bombs have ravaged the mental faculties of “one third of the United States population,” leaving them unable to “believe what they see before their very eyes.” And of course, these JPEG-rockets “may have elected a president in the process.”

Photographs of these ghastly cruise missiles have been floating around on the internet in recent days, with many noting their astonishing level of sophistication.

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.02.11 AM

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.03.26 AM

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 11.05.19 AM

This is not the first time that Nance has deployed terrifying images of Russian meme missiles to warn Americans about the new Moscow menace: In a July interview he declared that, “As an information war, the payloads in the information cruise missiles that Russia launched at this country were propaganda products which had their origins in 1917, in the Bolshevik revolution.”

Months before that outburst, in March, Nance was quoted by the Washington Post as thoughtfully asking: “What happens if 100s of millions of progressives worldwide abandon Facebook because they think it’s a tool of Trump, Russia authoritarians and neo-Nazis? Facebook needs to own up and do damage control to ensure they are not 2018’s information cruise missile of choice.”

Nance really has a knack for inventive Russia commentary. He previously demonstrated his vast knowledge about the country by falsely claiming that Russian President Vladimir Putin was a “former director of the KGB.”

The “intelligence analyst” is also a savvy media observer, describing journalist Glenn Greenwald as “an agent of Trump & Moscow” after the Intercept editor attended a conference in Moscow.

When it comes to comparing GIFs to airstrikes, the MSNBC talking head keeps good company: Guardian writer Carole Cadwalladr once famously suggested that the UK was now at “war” with Russia. The reason? Russia’s Foreign Ministry changed its Twitter profile picture to a photograph of Maria Butina.

BREAKING: Transcript of James Comey Testimony to Joint House Committee Round #2 – (Full transcript pdf)…

Screen Shot 2018-12-18 at 4.54.04 PM

Former FBI Director James Comey appeared December 17th, 2018, for a second round of questions by a joint House committee oversight probe into the DOJ and FBI conduct during the 2016 presidential election and incoming Trump administration.

The Joint House Committee just released the transcript (full pdf below):

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/395972408/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-VowRINMl7U6kF9efRfAx

This was just released.  Analysis to follow.

 

Trump-Russia dossier was created so Clinton could challenge 2016 election results – Steele

See the source image

The British ex-spy who authored the infamous dossier alleging collusion between President Donald Trump and the Kremlin said one of his goals was to give Hillary Clinton legal basis to challenge the 2016 election results.

Christopher Steele’s salacious 17-page report was commissioned by Fusion GPS, a firm connected to Clinton’s campaign.

“Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election,” Steele wrote in recently unsealed declaration that was published by the Washington Times.

ALSO ON RT.COMComey admits FBI failed to verify Steele Dossier it used to obtain a spy warrant on Trump’s aide

See the source image

His statement is part of a series of answers which Steele provided in a defamation suit brought by three Russians who head Alfa Bank, who were named in the dossier as part of the alleged collusion conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin.

The court challenge never came. Instead, the unsubstantiated dossier was leaked to news outlets such as BuzzFeed, fuelling Russiagate hysteria and serving as the backbone of a two-year probe that has yet to corroborate any of the document’s core claims. The document was also used by the FBI to obtain a warrant to spy on former Trump aide Carter Page, who was accused by Steele of meeting secretly with Kremlin insiders in Moscow. Incredibly, former FBI Director James Comey admitted that his agency had not verified the dossier’s contents before using it to justify the warrant.
The dossier itself has apparently fallen out of favor with many of its early champions: One of the first journalists to report on Steele’s research has stated that many of Steele’s central claims have yet to be substantiated and are “likely false.”

ALSO ON RT.COMSteele dossier’s main claims ‘likely false,’ admits journalist who helped launch RussiagateThe defamation case against Steele was dismissed by a DC Superior Court judge, but lawyers representing the Russian bankers have launched an appeal in US District court, attaching Steele’s revelatory statements as part of their filing. Steele claimed that internet traffic data had been observed between Alfa Bank and a computer served linked to the Trump Organization. The allegation has yet to be proven, with some reports suggesting that the flagged data actually originated from an internet spam farm based outside Philadelphia.

Steele faces similar legal trouble in London, where he is being sued for defamation by Russian entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev. In one of his memos, Steele accused Gubarev of personally hacking DNC computers. Gubarev has also sued BuzzFeed for publishing the unverified claim as part of its uncritical coverage of the dossier.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Russia! The gift that keeps giving for the BBC, even on the streets of France

Russia! The gift that keeps giving for the BBC, even on the streets of France

Luxembourg’s artist Deborah de Rebortis (C) and a group of women dressed as “Marianne”, December 15, 2018 © AFP / Valery Hache

By Robert Bridge

Given the rash of conspiracy theories leveled against Russia of late, it is no surprise that the BBC is deep-sea fishing for a Kremlin angle to explain the protests against the government of French President Emmanuel Macron.

Dear failing leaders of France, are basement-level ratings getting you down? Are violent riots spooking the tourists? Are running street protests at the height of the holiday season placing a drag on consumer spending? Have no fear because the BBC is here with a one-size fits all bogeyman to explain virtually everything. Please have a seat because the name alone will send shock waves of bone-chilling fear surging through your entire body.

This new and improved beast of burden to explain every uprising, lost election, accident and wart, popularly known as ‘Russia’ – a strategy rebuked by none other than President Putin as “the new anti-Semitism” – provides craven political leaders with a ready-made alibi when the proverbial poo hits the fan. Yes! It can even rescue Emmanuel Macron, who just experienced his fifth consecutive weekend of protests in the French capital and beyond.

Here is the real beauty of this new media product, which may just outsell Chanel No.5 this holiday season. Reporting on ‘Russia’ does not require any modicum of journalistic ethics, standards or even proof to peddle it like snake oil to an unsuspecting public.

Simply uttering the name ‘Russia’ is usually all it takes for the fairytale to grow wings, spreading its whimsical lies around the world. ‘Russia’ is truly the gift that keeps on giving!

Allow me to demonstrate how easy it is to apply. Just this weekend, BBC journalist Olga Ivshina was engaged in correspondence with a stringer in France. In an effort to explain what has sparked the French protests, Ivshina gratuitously tossed out some live ‘blame Russia’ bait.

“And maybe some Russian business is making big bucks on it,” the BBC journalist solicited in an effort to conjure up fake news out of thin air. “Maybe they are eating cutlets out there en masse, for example. Or maybe the far-right are the main troublemakers?”

ALSO ON RT.COMBBC endorses reporter’s actions seeking to find Russian influence in Yellow Vest protestsWhen the question only managed to elicit an uncomfortable laugh from the stringer, the nonplussed BBC journalist exposed more trade secrets than was probably advisable. In fact, what followed seems to have been the only nugget of truth to emerge from the discussion.

Ivshina confided that she was looking for various angles” since the broadcaster, like a modern day Dracula flick, was “out for blood.

When RT reached out to BBC for some explanation, the British broadcaster reasoned that since the French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian had “spoken publicly about media reports of a possible Russian influence in the protests, it was perfectly reasonable for our correspondent to raise the subject.”

It also said the finished report did not mention a “possible connection with Russia at all.”

At this point, it is only natural to ask if such a knee-jerk anti-Russia bias in other news events – for example, the Skripal affair – demands that the BBC mindlessly toe the government line instead of, oh, I don’t know, pursuing the truth. A naïve question, of course, but please humor me.

Suffice it to recall that before any evidence was presented to the public in the poisoning of ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury, British Prime Minister Theresa May declared it was “highly likely” that Russia was to blame.

That reckless comment was then launched around Planet Google by the Western leaders and their laptop media without further ado, not to mention a little thing called evidence. At the very least, you would expect the British people to demand much more for their tax pounds which fund the BBC.

Do you see how easy and effective this type of journalism is? The basis for the claims of ‘Russian interference’ by the French foreign minister should sound very familiar. Echoing claims of ‘Russian meddling’ in the 2016 US presidential elections through the use of social media, the minister pulled the very same rabbit out of his hat to suggest why hundreds of thousands of French citizens were suddenly out on the street, protesting against the unpopular policies of a former investment banker turned president.

As Bloomberg reported: “France opened a probe into possible Russian interference in the Yellow Vest protests, after… about 600 Twitter accounts known to promote Kremlin views began focusing on France, boosting their use of the hashtag #giletsjaunes.”

Keep in mind that the purchase of a few hundred Facebook ads is how the US Democratic Party – itself the focus of a number of potentially-criminal activities, as revealed by WikiLeaks – has attempted to explain the failure of Hillary Clinton to beat the Republican maverick Donald Trump in the race to the White House, as well as conceal its many wrongdoings.

Never mind that a Facebook executive admitted that Russia-linked posts had negligible impact on that part of the US brain that is responsible for pulling levers and making independent choices on election day.

Meanwhile, the recent and very explosive comment by Google CEO, Sundar Pichai, further confirms that the claim of Russian interference in the US political system was a well-done nothing burger.

“We undertook a very thorough investigation, and… we now know that there were two main ad accounts linked to Russia which advertised on Google for about $4,700 in advertising,” Pichai told a stone-faced US congressional probe last week.

Screen Shot 2018-12-17 at 4.56.02 PM

Back to the French streets, with some unavoidable sarcasm.

Of course, the French would never think of protesting against Emmanuel Macron’s aggressive neo-liberal policies, which have subjected the French people to painful austerity measures at the same time that the French government has embraced an open door immigration policy.

The only explanation that makes any sense – at least for those whose careers depend upon it, that is – is that the Russians monkeyed with the French mentality, causing Macron’s popularity rating to plunge, while at the same time inducing the French to take to the streets en masse.

The problem with that media narrative, first tossed out by a French minister without any evidence and then regurgitated by an obedient media, is that so many people are willing to accept it at face value. Or perhaps I underestimate the intelligence of the average news consumer and such a comment actually helped spur the French protesters into action for being taken as fools. We can always dream.

@Robert_Bridge

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑