Dem Rep. Brown: ‘We’re Not Going to Move’ on Wall Unless It’s Part of Comprehensive Reform

By Ian Hanchett

On Tuesday’s broadcast of “CNN Right Now,” Representative Anthony Brown (D-MD) said the border wall funding issue should be moved to February, and declared that there will not be movement on a border wall “unless it’s part of a comprehensive immigration reform.”

Brown stated, “[W]hat we’re suggesting is, we have a controversial issue around the president’s border wall, which we reject. Let’s isolate that issue. Let’s move it to February 8, give us some breathing room, so we can open up the rest of government.”

He later added, “Well, we’re not going to move on [a] border wall unless it’s part of a comprehensive immigration reform.”

 

Viewers Slam NBC NYE Coverage – No ‘Ball Drop’ – But Trump-Hater Chrissy Teigen Discusses ‘Vaginal Steaming’ (VIDEO)

 

Capture

Viewers slammed NBC’s New Years Eve coverage as a train-wreck and embarrassment for America.

NBC’s New Years Eve show didn’t have a countdown clock nor did they show the ball drop — a tradition many Americans enjoy watching.

Rather, Chrissy Teigen, who was one of the three hosts for NBC’s NYE coverage discussed ‘vaginal steaming,’ — and NBC even showed a picture of it!

GROSS!

Viewers were disgusted and disappointed — especially because children were watching.

Capture

Chrissy Teigen’s co-host Leslie Jones then hit her in the eye with her umbrella at midnight. 

What a train-wreck!

VIDEO:

CNN wasn’t too far behind NBC.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper was taking hourly shots of tequila with his co-host Andy Cohen.

Capture

New Years Eve TV broadcast show ratings took a double-digit free fall this year. Imagine our shock.

Irony alert: Firm that warned Americans of Russian bots…was running an army of fake Russian bots

See the source image

By Danielle Ryan

The co-founders of cybersecurity firm New Knowledge warned Americans in November to “remain vigilant” in the face of “Russian efforts” to meddle in US elections. This month, they have been exposed for doing just that themselves.

Ryan Fox and Jonathan Morgan, who run the New Knowledge cybersecurity company which claims to “monitor disinformation” online, penned a foreboding op-ed in the New York Times on November 6, about “the Russians” and their nefarious efforts to influence American elections.

At the time, it struck me that Fox and Morgan’s reasoning seemed a little far-fetched. For example, one of the pieces of evidence presented to prove that Russia had targeted American elections was that lots of people had posted links to RT’s content online. Hardly a smoking gun worthy of a Times oped.

ALSO ON RT.COMThe only ‘Russian bots’ to meddle in US elections belonged to Democrat-linked ‘experts’Morgan and Fox, intrepid cyber sleuths that they are, claimed in the article they had detected more “overall activity” from ongoing Russian influence campaigns than social media companies like Facebook and Twitter had yet revealed — or that other researchers had been able to identify.

See the source image

The New Knowledge guys even authored a Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russia’s alleged efforts to mess with American democracy. They called it a “propaganda war against American citizens.” Impressive stuff. They must be really good at their job, right?

This week, however, we learned that New Knowledge was running its own disinformation campaign (or “propaganda war against Americans,”you could say), complete with fake Russian bots designed to discredit Republican candidate Roy Moore as a Russia-preferred candidate when he was running for the US senate in Alabama in 2017.

The scheme was exposed by the New York Times — the paper that just over a month earlier published that aforementioned oped, in which Fox and Morgan pontificated about Russian interference online.

New Knowledge created a mini-army of fake Russian bots and fake Facebook groups. The accounts, which had Russian names, were made to follow Moore. An internal company memo boasted that New Knowledge had “orchestrated an elaborate ‘false flag’ operation that planted the idea that the Moore campaign was amplified on social media by a Russian botnet.”

Moore lost the race by 1.5 percent. To be fair, accusations published by the Washington Post that he pursued underage girls back in the 1980s may have had something to do with it as well, but that’s a different story.

Of course, New Knowledge and even the New York Times, which blew the lid of the operation, are trying to spin this as some kind of “small experiment” during which they “imitated Russian tactics” online to see how they worked. Just for research, of course. They have also both claimed that the scheme, dubbed ‘Project Birmingham’ had almost no effect on the outcome of the race.

The money for the so-called research project came from Reid Hoffman, the billionaire co-founder of LinkedIn, who contributed $750,000 to American Engagement Technologies (AET), which then spent $100,000 on the New Knowledge experiment. After the scheme was exposed, Hoffman offered a public apology, saying he didn’t know exactly how the money had been used and admitting that the tactics were “highly disturbing.”

ALSO ON RT.COMLinkedIn billionaire ‘sorry’ for funding ‘Russian bot’ disinformation campaign against Roy MooreIf people like Fox and Morgan actually cared about so-called Russian meddling or the integrity of American elections, they would not have run the deceptive campaign against Moore, no matter how undesirable he was as a candidate. Their sneaky and deceitful methods are in total contrast to the public profile they have cultivated for themselves as a firm fighting the good fight for the public good. But is it really that much of a surprise?

You would think that a newspaper like the New York Times would have cottoned on to the fact that guys like Fox and Morgan, with their histories in the US military and intelligence agencies, have clear agendas and are not exactly squeaky clean or the most credible sources of information when it comes to anything to do with Russia. But that kind of insight or circumspection might be too much to ask for in the age of Russiagate.

Facebook removed Morgan’s account on Saturday for “engaging in coordinated inauthentic behavior” around the Alabama election. Three days after publishing its initial article on the scandal (the one in which it played down the effects of New Knowledge’s disinfo campaign), the New York Times published a follow-up piece about the Facebook removal, in which it admitted that the controversy would be a “stinging embarrassment” for the social media researcher, noting that he had been a “leading voice” against supposed Russian disinformation campaigns.

In Fox and Morgan’s original NYT oped, they warned of the ubiquitous “Russia-linked social media accounts” and estimated that “at least hundreds of thousands, and perhaps even millions” of US citizens had engaged with them online. One must now wonder, were they including their own fake Russian bots in that count, or were they leaving those ones out?

It’s nearly two years into the Trump presidency and still we have no solid evidence that the Russian “collusion” theory is anything more than a fantasy concocted by Democrats desperate to provide a more palatable reason for Hillary Clinton’s loss than the fact that she simply ran a bad campaign.

In fact, at this point, we actually have more solid and irrefutable evidence of election meddling from the likes of dodgy American and British companies like Cambridge Analytica and New Knowledge than we do of any meddling orchestrated by Russia.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Democrats’ plan to end shutdown? Force Trump to give up on border wall, apparently

See the source image

Once Democrats take over the House on January 3, they are planning to pass a government funding bill without any money for the border wall. President Donald Trump shows no sign of caving as shutdown continues, however.

As the impasse between Trump and the Democrats shut down parts of the federal government and forced some 800,000 workers to stay home or work without pay, the incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-California) vowed the president would never get his wall.

Once Pelosi returns from her vacation in Hawaii and gets sworn in, she intends to have the House approve a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security until February and not include a penny for the border wall, the New York Times reported citing congressional staff.

Capture

Even if the Republican-majority Senate agrees to this – which the leadership has shown no sign of wanting to do – the question will come up again in just a few weeks. Democrats mean to use this to push for broader immigration reform and demonstrate they are the responsible party, according to the Times.

“We’ve got to really learn how to play jujitsu with the president and figure out how to take the wall issue and show the American people that we are the modern party who will actually secure the border and also be for a compassionate immigration system that recognizes the benefits of immigration and diversity,” Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), said in an interview Monday.

Unwilling or unable to pick one objection to Trump’s border wall proposal, they have panned it as “immoral, ineffective and expensive” as well as “fifth-century technology.”

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Israel’s wall works 99.9%’: Trump says shutdown only about Democrats not letting him win

Trump, who campaigned on building a “big, beautiful wall” on the border with Mexico, showed no sign of backing down, however. While Democrats went on vacation, he stayed at the White House and tweeted up a storm, only taking a break for a surprise trip to Iraq and Germany to visit US troops overseas.

In one of the tweets on Monday, Trump reminded Democrats they have voted in favor of a border barrier twice before.

“You voted yes in 2006 and 2013. One more yes, but with me in office,” he wrote. “I’ll get it built, and Fast!”

Capture

He also mocked the Democrats’ claim that walls are old technology, quipping “but so is the wheel.”

Capture

Trump and the Democrats have clashed over border funding before, resulting in a brief government shutdown in January 2018. At the time, Trump proposed a sweeping amnesty for children brought into the US illegally and their relatives in return for wall funding and immigration reforms. Democrats rejected it, however, and eventually prevailed in getting an omnibus spending bill that ignored immigration altogether, setting the stage for the December 2018 showdown.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Sick Bastards Are Going after the Kids! Michael Moore Wants “As Many” Trump Family Members “In Orange Jumpsuits as Possible” in 2019

 

Capture

President Trump with granddaughter Chloe Trump

The liberal attacks on President Trump, his young children and grandchildren are increasing.

The American lefts want rape and jail for the Trump children.

Actor Peter Fonda threatened Barron Trump in June.
(Of course, Peter still has his Twitter account!)

Capture

Hollywood writer Pat Dussault one-upped Fonda and threatened President Trump’s little granddaughter Chloe!

Capture

This is the modern day left.
They want to destroy the Republican President, his family, his grandchildren, his wealth, his business, his reputation and everything he holds dear.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Now this…

Michael Moore wants the ENTIRE FAMILY behind bars… NOT for any criminal actions — just because of who they are!

The Washington Examiner reported:

Liberal documentary filmmaker Michael Moore has high hopes for the new year.

When asked during an Friday interview on MSNBC what he was “most looking forward to in 2019,” Moore said it was for “as many members of the Trump family in orange jumpsuits as possible.”

“It’s really the wrong way to end such a festive time of the year, with such animosity toward those who would do wrong to this country, but yes,” the fervent Trump critic said…

…But Moore on Friday suggested Jared Kushner, a White House senior adviser and Ivanka Trump’s husband, was also legally exposed for allegedly trying to establish back channels with foreign governments during the transition period between the Obama and Trump administrations.

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]

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑