SPRING'S 1-24-2018 = COMMUNIST PARTY OF USA (CPUSA) , DSA (DEM SOCIALIST OF AMERICA) & 3500 FBI PHONES-GLITCH? &

#1

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2018/01/24/google-facebook-twitter-and-communist-china-are-assigning-a-threat-matrix-score-to-all-internet-users/

Google, Facebook, Twitter and Communist China Are Assigning a Threat Matrix Score to All Internet Users

Two top Democratic Senators, both in the House and Senate, are demanding Facebook and Twitter investigate another Russian-Collusion-Delusion connection to President Trump.
Feinstein and Schiff want these social media giants to investigate whether or not Russian bots and trolls are conspiring in a social media plot to get Americans to call for the release of the memo detailing what republicans are saying is the Democratic abuse of power with regard to the FISA warrants issued to spy on candidate Trump, his family and his staff. Americans are increasingly demanding the release of these FISA documentes in campaign calling for the release of a memo detailing criminal behavior by Obama and key members of the Democratic Party.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the top Democrat, and according to Trevor Louden’s Enemies Within, have ties to front groups for the American Communist Party and the Muslim Brotherhood, are calling for the concealment of the documents and they are also demanding the social media censor any social media posts on the topic. Schiff serves on the House Intelligence Committee, and he and Feinstein have sent letters to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey asking them to look into whether accounts tied to Russia were involved in the #ReleaseTheMemo social media campaign. THE COMMON SENSE SHOW IS CALLING FOR EVERYONE WITH A FACEBOOK, YOUTUBE AND TWITTER ACCOUNT TO SEND OUT A #RELEASETHEMEMO social media message.
Schiff, who has gonge completely insane stated the following:

Quote :

“These Russian efforts are intended to influence congressional action and undermine Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, which has already resulted in the indictments of two Trump campaign officials and guilty pleas from two others, who are both now cooperating with prosecutors…”“It is critically important that the Special Counsel’s investigation be allowed to proceed without interference from inside or outside the United States.”

Here we go again America, anytime the Democrats are caught committing felonies for which they should go to jail, they blame the Russians.
The #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag spread on social media after Republican lawmakers calls for the release of a four-page memo they said showed FISA abuses.
The House Intelligence Committee voted along party lines to allow all House members to read the memo, but some Republicans wanted the document released to the public.
Feinstein and Schiff have asked Twitter and Facebook to determine the Russian connection of postings on #ReleaseTheMemo and their russian connections. The two lawmakers have also called for social media censorship over accounts that would chamption #ReleaseTheMemo. In other words, Feinstein and Schiff are calling for more censorship of the truth. Feinstein and Schiff are clearly attempting to conceal very serious criminal activity. Why are the American people putting up with this obstruction of justice?
It is clear that Twitter, Facebook and Google are aiding and abetting a criminal conspiracy with regard to the FISA surveillance issue. However, this social media criminal behavior goes much further than the concealment of multiple felonies by key members of the Democratic Party.  The following video I produced on Youtube was demonitized, by title, before it was even uploaded. The video dealt with topic of assigning a threat matrix score to all Internet users. This is clearly a naughty list that could be used to send people to FEMA camps in the event of a coup.
https://youtu.be/oLxDSQAeRoY

Professor Margaret Hu from the Washington and Lee University  School of Law states that “The implementation of a universal digitalized biometric ID system risks normalizing and integrating mass cybersurveillance into the daily lives of ordinary citizens”.
Professor Hu explains that the FBI’s Next Generation Identification project will institute the following:

Quote :

“A comprehensive, centralized, and technologically interoperable biometric database that spans across military and national security agencies, as well as all other state and federal government agencies. Once complete, NGI will strive to centralize whatever biometric data is available on all citizens and noncitizens in the United States and abroad, including information on fingerprints, DNA, iris scans, voice recognition, and facial recognition data captured through digitalized photos, such as U.S. passport photos and REAL ID driver’s licenses. The NGI Interstate Photo System, for instance, aims to aggregate digital photos from not only federal, state, and local law enforcement, but also digital photos from private businesses, social networking sites, government agencies, and foreign and international entities, as well as acquaintances, friends, and family members”. Biometric ID cybersurveillance might be used to assign risk assessment scores and to take action based on those scores“.

The healthy side of your paranoia is about to emerge as we consider the fact that Professor Hu describes a DHS program known as FAST, which is a DHS tested program and has been described as a “precrime” program. FAST will gather upon complex statistical algorithms that will compile data from multiple databases and will subsequently “predict” future criminal or terrorist acts.
The “precrime”  data will be gathered” through cybersurveillance and stealth data monitoring of ordinary citizens. The FAST program purports to assess whether an individual might pose a “precrime” threat through the capture of a range of data, including biometric data. In other words, FAST accuses non-convicted individuals as being a security threat risk of becoming future criminals and terrorists through data analysis. No charges, no police interviews, the system is designed to become “judge, jury and executioner“.
Under the Future Attribute Screening Technology (FAST), criminal cues are captured through the following types of biometric data including body and eye movements, eye blink rate and pupil variation, body heat changes, and breathing patterns. Various linguistic cues include the analysis of voice pitch changes, alterations in voce rhythm patterns, and changes in intonations of speech. Hu notes that in documents released by DHS clearly show that individuals could be arrested and face serious consequences based upon statistical algorithms and predictive analytical assessments.
Professor Hu issued the following warning:

Quote :

“The prognostications of FAST can range from none to being temporarily detained to deportation, prison, or death“.

These developments, plus the increased participation of social media in this type of tyranny is making the Internet experience a dangerous endeavor.
DHS has funded a multi-billion dollar spy tool and it is called FirstNet. This is a citizen information gathering device like no other. A company called New World Systems (do they really mean New World Order Systems?) is in charge of implementing this system.
The Radio Access Network (RAN) part of this elaborate network consists of the radio base station infrastructure that connects to user devices including cell towers and mobile hotspots embedded in vehicles which connects to the satellite network or other types of wireless infrastructure. This is a “search and destroy system” as FirstNet is designed to hunt you down in remote areas. Take a look at the map below along with the embedded graphics from the FirstNet website. They have developed the technology to track you and find you should you be a fugitive from their own special brand of justice. RAN has the ability to track you anywhere on the planet. Soon, there will be nowhere for people with high threat matrix scores to run and hide without being found by this system. And now, Facebook, Twitter and Google are a major part of this tyranny and they are partnering with Communist China.
A company called PredPol claims that it possesses proprietary software which can actually predict times and places for likely future crimes. Intrado has the capability to data mine all social media and create your personal profile based on your Internet chatter. Subsequently, if you are pulled over for a speeding violation, you could find yourself face down on the pavement because you have written something negative about the police who murdered Eric Garner. Or, you might just end up like Eric Garner.
Does anyone else have a problem with this police state surveillance grid? Some might intimate, it is time for a revolution. For those who are so inclined, the authorities, the minions for the banksters, have that possibility covered as well and that will be the topic of a future article. Meanwhile, take a pill, your paranoia is about to get worse because your friendly communists in China and your social media are partnering to label you for the dangerous dissident that you are.

3 1/2  LOL.  THANK YOU SPRING FOR LETTING ME SNEAK IN. [I DON'T WANT TO START A THREAD FOR A COUPLE ITEMS, ]

IF YOU PICK UP PM'S, PRIVATE MESSAGES, I COULD SEND U THE LINKS AND YOU COULD ADD EM IN.
LET ME KNOW IF THAT WORKS FOR U.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cecile-richards-to-step-down-as-planned-parenthood-president-report/article/2646946

https://truepundit.com/us-kills-150-isis-fighters-syria-airstrike-government-shutdown-pentagon-says/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-international-partnership-impunity-use-chemical-weapons/

CAN WE SAY BARSHAR AL-ASSAD

#3
https://www.blacklistednews.com/NSA_DELETES_“HONESTY”_AND_“OPENNESS”_FROM_CORE_VALUES/63168/0/38/38/Y/M.html

[size=30]NSA DELETES “HONESTY” AND “OPENNESS” FROM CORE VALUES[/size]

Published: January 24, 2018

SOURCE: THE INTERCEPTSOURCE: THE INTERCEPT

THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY maintains a page on its website that outlines its mission statement. But earlier this month the agency made a discreet change: It removed “honesty” as its top priority.
Since at least May 2016, the surveillance agency had featured honesty as the first of four “core values” listed on NSA.gov, alongside “respect for the law,” “integrity,” and “transparency.” The agency vowed on the site to “be truthful with each other.”
On January 12, however, the NSA removed the mission statement page – which can still be viewed through the Internet Archive – and replaced it with a new version. Now, the parts about honesty and the pledge to be truthful have been deleted. The agency’s new top value is “commitment to service,” which it says means “excellence in the pursuit of our critical mission.”
Those are not the only striking alterations. In its old core values, the NSA explained that it would strive to be deserving of the “great trust” placed in it by national leaders and American citizens. It said that it would “honor the public’s need for openness.” But those phrases are now gone; all references to “trust,” “honor,” and “openness” have disappeared.
The agency previously stated on its website that it embraced transparency and claimed that all of its activities were aimed at “ensuring the safety, security, and liberty of our fellow citizens.” That is another sentence that has been discarded. The agency still says it is committed to transparency on the updated website, but the transparency is now described as being for the benefit of “those who authorize and oversee NSA’s work on behalf of the American people.” The definition of “integrity” has been edited, too. The agency formerly said its commitment to integrity meant it would “behave honorably and apply good judgment.” The phrase “behave honorably” has now been dropped in favor of “communicating honestly and directly, acting ethically and fairly and carrying out our mission efficiently and effectively.”
The new list of values includes the additions “respect for people” and “accountability.” But the section on respecting people is a reference to diversity within the NSA workforce, not a general commitment made to members of the public. Accountability is defined as taking “responsibility for our decisions.” The one core value that remains essentially unchanged is “respect for the law,” which the agency says means it is “grounded in our adherence to the U.S. Constitution and compliance with the U.S. laws, regulations and policies that govern our activities.”
In response to questions from The Intercept on Tuesday, the NSA played down the alterations. Thomas Groves, a spokesperson for the agency, said: “It’s nothing more than a website update, that’s all it is.”

#5
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/19997-top-u-s-communist-boasts-that-party-utilizes-democrats
Wednesday, 28 January 2015

Top U.S. Communist Boasts That Party “Utilizes” Democrats

Written by  Alex Newman




Communist Party USA boss John Bachtell boasted in a recent column that his Marxist-Leninist organization, a tentacle of the Soviet regime in America for decades, “utilizes” the increasingly radical Democratic Party to advance its totalitarian objectives in the United States. Writing in the Communist Party propaganda mouthpiece People’s World, Bachtell suggested that, eventually, a “radical third party” would become a viable option to advance communism in America. However, for now, he argued, fending off what he calls the “ultra-right” — essentially anyone to the right of Obama, whom American communists openly backed in both elections — requires the CPUSA to continue utilizing the Democrat Party as a “vehicle.”       
In his column, Bachtell, who was selected last year to serve as the national chair of the Communist Party USA, offers a wide array of arguments for why communists must continue to work through the Democrat Party. For instance, at least in the collectivist communist mind, the Democratic Party is “home” to “African Americans, Latinos, other communities of color, women, most union members, young people,” as well as various “social and democratic movements.” In reality, of course, there are plenty of blacks, Hispanics, women, and young people who boldly reject statism and the extremist Democrats promoting it.

Still, as many Democrats do, Bachtell lumps unique individuals into “constituencies” based on arbitrary characteristics such as melanin content, and declares that the Democratic Party is their “home.” He contrasts that with the GOP and “extreme right-wing elements” such as pro-lifers, climate realists, “right-wing” Christians, the Tea Party, social conservatives, and others, broadly categorized as “ultra-right.” By working with and through the Democrat Party, Bachtell purports to be building the “broadest anti-ultra right alliance possible,” even openly welcoming a “section” of what he describes as “monopoly” capital on Wall Street into the Communist Party war on liberty.
“This necessarily means working with the Democratic Party,” Bachtell explained, adding that some on the Left “underestimate the danger” from the Right and “overestimate” the willingness of “key class and social forces” to leave the Democratic Party right now. “Second, our objective is not to build the Democratic Party. At this stage we are about building the broad people's movement led by labor that utilizes the vehicle of the Democratic Party to advance its agenda. We are about building the movements around the issues roiling wide sections of people that can help shape election contours and debates.”
Finally, the Communist Party USA participates in what Bachtell referred to as “coalition campaigns” that challenge the “Wall Street wing” of the Democrat Party and “galvanize forces around a progressive agenda, mainly in Democratic primary elections.” Among other examples, he cited “labor activists, progressives, socialists and communists who emerge from movements and run as candidates, backed by broad coalitions.” Having self-declared socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont run within the Democrat presidential primary, for instance, “would help do just this,” he added. Sen. Sanders has said publicly he would decide by March whether to run for the White House in 2016 as a Democrat.
“If the CPUSA is to be a mass political party it must be a mass electoral party, immersed in every aspect of electoral politics and the process toward political independence,” Bachtell continued, explaining to communist lackeys why they must continue to support and infiltrate the Democrat Party to advance more draconian tyranny later on. “Municipal elections are a key arena of battle in 2015.... Clearly, there is an immense amount of electoral activism and movement building that is laying the foundation for the eventual emergence of a mass radical third party.” For now, though, the Democrat Party will be “utilized” as the “vehicle” to advance Communist Party totalitarianism — at least until the “Right” is totally crushed.
Commenting on the explosive but hardly surprising admissions, anti-communist analyst Trevor Loudon, author of The Enemies Within exposing subversion at the highest levels of power in the United States, noted that much could be learned from communist strategy. “The Communist Party often upsets less mature Marxist groups because of their refusal to abandon the Democratic Party, despite not always getting every item on their agenda immediately,” Loudon explained. “As an experienced Communist, John Bachtell understands that in spite of difficulties and disappointments, the Communist Party agenda is far better served by infiltrating the Democrats than by marching in the streets yelling revolutionary slogans.”
As Loudon points out, “the Communist Party and their only marginally less radical Democratic Socialists of America allies can point to real achievements under their ‘friend’ Barack Obama.” From ObamaCare and amnesty for illegal immigrants to the ongoing attacks on the military and restored relations with the mass-murdering communist dictatorship in Havana, numerous CPUSA goals have been advanced through the Democrat Party just in recent years. Of course, the glaring similarities between the positions and policies of the Communist Party USA, the Democrat Party, and the Obama administration have now become fully obvious, at least to anyone who cares to look.
In 2004, for example, the CPUSA platform included, among other elements, demands for “free” healthcare, unrestricted abortion, government-funded education from pre-kindergarten to college, more federal “job” programs for “minorities,” more farm subsidies, a higher minimum wage, a ban on “discrimination” against homosexuals, international treaties to stop “global warming,” and much more. When compared with the Obama agenda that was unleashed upon America beginning in 2008 and that continues to be foisted on an outraged America today via lawless executive decrees — and funding from the GOP Congress — the parallels are impossible to deny.
In fact, comparing U.S. policy today to the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto — government education, progressive income taxes, central bank with monopoly on credit, and much more — key points of the communist agenda have been on the march in the United States for generations. And unsurprisingly, the Communist Party’s affinity for advancing its nightmarish vision of total state control via the Democrat Party goes back decades, too, as summarized and extensively documented in KeyWiki. In 1972, for instance, then CPUSA boss Gus Hall outlined the party’s policy to do precisely that.
“Our electoral policy has for 25 years been expressed in the phrase, 'the three legs of a stool.'... The stool was constructed at a time when the Party was under sharp attack ... a reflection of the Party's response to the difficulties,” he wrote. “The flexibility was contained in the idea that no one leg of the stool was the main leg. Depending on the political pressures, one could choose a particular leg or legs. In fact the concept was built on the idea that when the other two legs, namely, the Communist Party and the forces of political independence, got strong enough, then and only then would the stool sit on three legs. But until that day comes the one operating leg would be the liberal wing of the Democratic Party.”
More recently, a 2010 report for the Communist Party’s National Convention was prepared by members of the Young Communist League USA. “Currently, the conditions rarely if ever allow us to run open Communists for office,” the report stated. “When members do run for office, it is within the auspices of the Democratic Party. Otherwise, we find ourselves supporting progressive (and in some instances not-so-progressive) Democratic candidates. Despite how much many of us would love to run comrades for office as Communists, we all agree that this is how we currently have to function in this political climate.”
In late 2012, meanwhile, a report delivered at the 14th International Meeting of Communist and Workers Parties in Beirut, Lebanon, praised Obama and the advances he had made for the cause. “The Communist Party USA not only welcomes the reelection of President Barack Obama, but actively engaged in the electoral campaign for his reelection and for the election of many Democratic Party congressional candidates,” explained the report, prepared by CPUSA International Department operative Erwin Marquit. “We regarded the 2012 election as the most important in the United States since 1932, an election held in the midst of the Great Depression.”
The CPUSA’s “present strategy,” the report continued, was to “build alliances both inside and outside the Democratic Party.” After Obama’s re-election in 2012, the so-called “progressive caucus” in Congress — masterfully exposed in Loudon’s work — will “be playing an important role in contributing to the mobilization of mass activity on critical issues to bring pressure on the Congress and administration to act on them.” The report also openly proclaimed that “the victory of Obama is a welcome aid for us in our domestic struggles.” Obama’s political career, of course, began in the home of Communist terrorist Bill Ayers, whose Weather Underground terror movement in the United States was backed by Communist mass-murderer Fidel Castro.
In his comments on Bachtell’s most recent admission, Loudon said Americans have a lot to learn. In the same manner that the CPUSA has “utilized” the Democrat Party, constitutionalists who hope to preserve liberty and the Republic bequeathed to Americans by the Founding Fathers ought to work within the GOP, Loudon argued. “Bachtell understands that prematurely breaking with the Democrats, on some quixotic adventure of forming a new leftist third party, would almost certainly hand the next few elections to the GOP,” Loudon wrote. “He fears that a revitalized GOP, led by Ted Cruz, or some similar figure, would roll back most, or all of the Communist Party’s hard fought gains.”
“If U.S. Constitutionalist conservatives and Tea Party activists can show similar political discipline and maturity, they will abandon plans for a suicidal third party agenda — for now,” Loudon wrote. “Instead they will work through the GOP, as the Communists have through the Democrats. Learn from the opposition. Utilize the GOP machinery and voting base to build a big Constitutionalist base inside the GOP. Build your strength, do as the Communists have done, primary any vulnerable GOP candidates who will not support your Constitutionalist agenda.”
Loudon argued that today, less than 1,000 hardcore Communist Party operatives and their few thousand allies in the Democratic Socialists of America “effectively dictate Democratic Party policy.” If the far larger constitutionalist and Tea Party movement could learn from the opposition’s tactics, “they can have a real shot at restoring the Republic.” In the end, Loudon argued, the battle for America is not between Democrats and the GOP. Instead, it is between constitutionalists and communists. If constitutionalists want a chance to win that battle and preserve liberty, he concluded, understanding and learning from the opposition is crucial.
The process of communists using other parties and movements to enslave populations is hardly new — it works the same from Brazil to South Africa and everywhere in between. Communism and communist regimes, of course, murdered well over 100 million people in the last century alone, making the "movement" by far the most murderous and bloodthirsty in the history of humanity. However, as The New American has documented extensively, there have always been even more sinister forces operating behind the communists and their legions of useful idiots. If liberty is to survive, exposing and countering them remains essential.
 
Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at: anewman@thenewamerican.com
 
Related articles:
Is America Embracing the 10 Tenets of the Communist Manifesto?
America: Land of the Free?
Communists Happy With Obama Reelection
Obama’s Political Career Began With Castro-backed Terrorist
Communists Cheer On Obama’s Gun Grab
Obama's Communist Connections Revisited
Radical Green Jobs ‘Czar’ Resigns Amid Furor
“Moderate” President of Brazil Rallies Communist Party Allies
After Brazil Election, Obama Vows Closer Ties With Radical Ruler
South African Communist Party Admits Mandela’s Leadership Role

#6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Socialist_Party_of_America

List of members of the Socialist Party of America
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


[ltr]See also: List of elected socialist mayors in the United States
This is a selectively annotated list of the most prominent or important members of the Socialist Party of America (1901–1972).

Summary list[edit]

Key:
* Went on to join the Communist Party, Communist Labor Party of America or Workers Party of America^[size=11]ISS A founder or key member of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society, 1905, later League for Industrial Democracy^IWW A founder of the Industrial Workers of the World, 1905.^SDL Left to found the Social Democratic League of America, 1917.^SDF Left to found the Social Democratic Federation, 1936.^IPN Left to found the Independent Party of Norwalk, 1951^SDUSA Continued into Social Democrats, USA, 1973^SPUSA Went on to join the Socialist Party USA, 1973^DSOC Went on to join the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, 1973, later Democratic Socialists of America
[/ltr][/size]

Martin Abern * Devere Allen Elmer Allison * Harry Ault J. Mahlon Barnes David P. Berenberg Victor L. Berger Barney Berlyn Allan L. Benson Ella Reeve Bloor * Nikolai Bukharin Roy E. Burt Frank Bohn IWW Earl Browder* Jack Carney * James P. Cannon * John C. Chase Travers Clement Joseph Coldwell James Connolly Eugene V. Debs IWW Nicholas Dozenberg * David Dubinsky Max Eastman * J. Louis Engdahl Elizabeth Gurley Flynn * William Z. Foster * Louis Fraina * Joseph Freeman *

Irving Freese IPN Samuel Friedman SPUSA Julius Gerber Adolph Germer Arturo Giovannitti Benjamin Gitlow * Carl Haessler * Emanuel Haldeman-Julius SDL Job Harriman Michael Harrington DSOC Hubert Harrison Max S. Hayes Bill Haywood IWW Emil Herman George D. Herron Morris Hillquit ISS Daniel Hoan Darlington Hoopes SPUSA Jessie Wallace Hughan ISS Haim Kantorovitch David Karsner Helen Keller Charles H. Kerr George R. Kirkpatrick Alexandra Kollontai Antoinette Konikow * Frederick Krafft Maynard C. Krueger William F. Kruse *

Leo Krzycki Harry W. Laidler ISS Algernon Lee ISS, SDF Lena Morrow Lewis SDF Walter Lippman Jack London ISS George Lunn Theresa S. Malkiel Mary Marcy James H. Maurer SDF Jasper McLevy SDF David McReynolds SPUSA Walter Thomas Mills Tom Mooney Thomas J. Morgan Gustavus Myers Scott Nearing Reinhold Niebuhr Santeri Nuorteva Kate Richards O'Hare James Oneal SDF Mary White Ovington Joseph Arthur Padway Jacob Panken Patrick L. Quinlan A. Philip Randolph SDF, SDUSA John Reed * Victor Reuther DSOC Walter Reuther

Charles Edward Russell Bayard Rustin SDUSA Carl Sandburg Margaret Sanger Roland D. Sawyer Clarence Senior Max Shachtman Abraham Shiplacoff Upton Sinclair ISS John W. Slayton John Spargo SDL Seymour Stedman Charles P. Steinmetz A.M. Stirton J.G. Phelps Stokes ISS, SDL Rose Pastor Stokes * Maurice Sugar Norman Thomas Henry M. Tichenor Hermon F. Titus Gus Tyler Ernest Untermann Charles H. Vail Baruch Charney Vladeck Alfred Wagenknecht * Louis Waldman SDF Julius Wayland George W. Woodbey John M. Work Frank P. Zeidler SPUSA

#7
http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/communists-in-congress-just-count-em/

COMMUNISTS IN CONGRESS? JUST COUNT 'EM

Book names names, details strategies to 'transform' U.S.

Published: 08/18/2013 at 7:20 PM


image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/01/Jerome-R.-Corsi_avatar-96x96.jpg
 JEROME R. CORSI About | Email | Archive


image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png
 Subscribe to feed


[size=20]16.2K

Share on Facebook
 
Share on Twitter
 
Email
 16.2K

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif
 Print
 

 

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/08/chinese-communist-congress-340x161.jpg

NEW YORK – New Zealander Trevor Loudon has just published an encyclopedic new 689-page volume, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,” to accompany his 668-page 2011 book, “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within.”
In both volumes, Loudon has proved himself to be among the foremost experts in the world investigating and reporting the penetration of communists, socialists and the current group of “progressives” affiliated with Democratic Party politics who portray themselves as liberals.
In his 2011 book, Loudon presented documented evidence that Barack Obama’s rise in politics was not an accident, but a conscious, decade-long effort by the radical left to promote a candidate with African roots. Obama, he said, was packaged as an engaging and seemingly harmless Trojan Horse radical, sent to Chicago to refine his skills running for office as a Democratic Party politician.
It is impossible to read “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within” without being convinced that Obama’s education in communist ideology stretches from the extracurricular education he received from Communist Party mentor Frank Marshall Davis in Honolulu to his recruitment as a New Party candidate in Chicago, with strong ties to the Democratic Socialists of America.
Loudon continues naming names in his current volume, “The Enemies Within,” which documents how extensively communists, socialists and progressives have penetrated the U.S. Congress, running on the Democratic Party ticket.
The goal of these radicals in Congress, Loudon demonstrates, is the same goal Obama announced when running for president in 2008, to transform the United States from the constitutional republic established by its Founding Fathers into a radical socialist state. The aim is to be achieved through passing extensive social welfare legislation designed to bankrupt a government adhering to concepts of private property and private enterprise.
In an insightful essay on the Democratic Socialists of America, Loudon emphasizes the impact on U.S. radicals of the late Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci, whose writings from prison declared that the “working class revolution” is a dead end, arguing instead that communism can best be achieved “by infiltrating civil society – political parties, churches, labor unions, universities, the media, community groups, etc., to turn them into revolutionary vehicles.”
Similarly, Loudon documents how the Communist Party of the USA itself has adopted a stealth plan to achieve revolutionary goals by decisions made in the 1970s to infiltrate and manipulate the Democratic Party. The plan is to form alliances with the radical elements in organized labor in conjunction with radicals in the African-American community and the feminist movement to establish a progressive coalition on the left that could dominate the national political agenda for decades to come.
His essay on the Institute for Policy Studies provides extensive evidence that the IPS, operating today with the distinction of being oldest – founded in 1963 – and most influential of the far left “think tanks” in Washington, D.C., “works closely with several U.S. Marxist groups, but is particularly close to the Democratic Socialists of America.”

The congressional profiles of current members of Congress provides extensive evidence of radical leftist ties in the backgrounds of top Democratic Party legislators, including Democratic Party Sens. Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin, Tom Harkin, Barbara Mikulski, Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Debbie Stabenow, Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Patty Murray and Tammy Baldwin.
In the House of Representatives, Loudon profiles the radical left background of Democratic Party Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Louis Gutierrez, John Conyers, Charles Rangel, Marcy Kaptur, Peter DeFazio, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jim McDermott and dozens more.
Loudon’s profiles of the radical lawmakers is extensively footnoted, complete with photos, news clips, website screen captures and quotations from published sources that leave no doubt as to the authenticity and accuracy of his allegations.
In documenting the success with which the radical left has captured the politically correct core of Democratic Party politics since the 1970s and the end of the Vietnam War, Loudon joins bestselling author Paul Kengor, who published in 2010 “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Conservatives for a Century,” followed in 2012 by “The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor.”
What authors Loudon and Kengor show is that communism in America did not die with the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is alive and well, with ties that run deep today with Barack Obama in the White House and the radical leftist Democrats serving in the halls of Congress.
Loudon will be in Washington, D.C., at the National Press Club Aug. 20 to participate in the all day conference “The Crisis in American Journalism and the Conservative Response,” hosted by the public policy group America’s Survival Inc.
Joining Loudon, who is listed on the program to speak about his book “The Enemies Within,” will be Kengor, presenting his new book, “All the Dupes Fit to Print: Journalists Who Have Served as Tools of Communist Propaganda.”[/size]


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/communists-in-congress-just-count-em/#tPB95mWxOhuXtZMi.99COMMUNISTS IN CONGRESS? JUST COUNT 'EM

Book names names, details strategies to 'transform' U.S.
Published: 08/18/2013 at 7:20 PM
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/01/Jerome-R.-Corsi_avatar-96x96.jpg




author-image JEROME R. CORSI About | Email | Archive
image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/themes/worldnet-theme/_/images//feed.png




rss feed Subscribe to feed
16.2K
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email 16.2K
image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif




Print Print  
 
image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/08/chinese-communist-congress-340x161.jpg




chinese-communist-congress
NEW YORK – New Zealander Trevor Loudon has just published an encyclopedic new 689-page volume, “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress,” to accompany his 668-page 2011 book, “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within.”




In both volumes, Loudon has proved himself to be among the foremost experts in the world investigating and reporting the penetration of communists, socialists and the current group of “progressives” affiliated with Democratic Party politics who portray themselves as liberals.




In his 2011 book, Loudon presented documented evidence that Barack Obama’s rise in politics was not an accident, but a conscious, decade-long effort by the radical left to promote a candidate with African roots. Obama, he said, was packaged as an engaging and seemingly harmless Trojan Horse radical, sent to Chicago to refine his skills running for office as a Democratic Party politician.




It is impossible to read “Barack Obama and the Enemies Within” without being convinced that Obama’s education in communist ideology stretches from the extracurricular education he received from Communist Party mentor Frank Marshall Davis in Honolulu to his recruitment as a New Party candidate in Chicago, with strong ties to the Democratic Socialists of America.




Loudon continues naming names in his current volume, “The Enemies Within,” which documents how extensively communists, socialists and progressives have penetrated the U.S. Congress, running on the Democratic Party ticket.




The goal of these radicals in Congress, Loudon demonstrates, is the same goal Obama announced when running for president in 2008, to transform the United States from the constitutional republic established by its Founding Fathers into a radical socialist state. The aim is to be achieved through passing extensive social welfare legislation designed to bankrupt a government adhering to concepts of private property and private enterprise.




In an insightful essay on the Democratic Socialists of America, Loudon emphasizes the impact on U.S. radicals of the late Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci, whose writings from prison declared that the “working class revolution” is a dead end, arguing instead that communism can best be achieved “by infiltrating civil society – political parties, churches, labor unions, universities, the media, community groups, etc., to turn them into revolutionary vehicles.”




Similarly, Loudon documents how the Communist Party of the USA itself has adopted a stealth plan to achieve revolutionary goals by decisions made in the 1970s to infiltrate and manipulate the Democratic Party. The plan is to form alliances with the radical elements in organized labor in conjunction with radicals in the African-American community and the feminist movement to establish a progressive coalition on the left that could dominate the national political agenda for decades to come.




His essay on the Institute for Policy Studies provides extensive evidence that the IPS, operating today with the distinction of being oldest – founded in 1963 – and most influential of the far left “think tanks” in Washington, D.C., “works closely with several U.S. Marxist groups, but is particularly close to the Democratic Socialists of America.”




The congressional profiles of current members of Congress provides extensive evidence of radical leftist ties in the backgrounds of top Democratic Party legislators, including Democratic Party Sens. Barbara Boxer, Dick Durbin, Tom Harkin, Barbara Mikulski, Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Debbie Stabenow, Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Patty Murray and Tammy Baldwin.




In the House of Representatives, Loudon profiles the radical left background of Democratic Party Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Louis Gutierrez, John Conyers, Charles Rangel, Marcy Kaptur, Peter DeFazio, Sheila Jackson Lee, Jim McDermott and dozens more.




Loudon’s profiles of the radical lawmakers is extensively footnoted, complete with photos, news clips, website screen captures and quotations from published sources that leave no doubt as to the authenticity and accuracy of his allegations.




In documenting the success with which the radical left has captured the politically correct core of Democratic Party politics since the 1970s and the end of the Vietnam War, Loudon joins bestselling author Paul Kengor, who published in 2010 “Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Conservatives for a Century,” followed in 2012 by “The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor.”




What authors Loudon and Kengor show is that communism in America did not die with the fall of the Berlin Wall. It is alive and well, with ties that run deep today with Barack Obama in the White House and the radical leftist Democrats serving in the halls of Congress.




Loudon will be in Washington, D.C., at the National Press Club Aug. 20 to participate in the all day conference “The Crisis in American Journalism and the Conservative Response,” hosted by the public policy group America’s Survival Inc.




Joining Loudon, who is listed on the program to speak about his book “The Enemies Within,” will be Kengor, presenting his new book, “All the Dupes Fit to Print: Journalists Who Have Served as Tools of Communist Propaganda.”








Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/communists-in-congress-just-count-em/#tPB95mWxOhuXtZMi.99

#8
http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/191605/
SEE
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=191609

WORLDNETDAILY

70 AVOWED SOCIALISTS IN U.S. CONGRESS

DSA lists members of the 111th session

Published: 08/15/2010 at 4:31 PMIn October 2009, the Democratic Socialists of America released in its newsletter a list of 70 members of the U.S. Congress who are members of the organization:
Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)
Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)


House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
Related story:
How many socialists sit in Congress today?

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/191605/#kMg0ifMOvjD29FiL.99

#9
http://www.wnd.com/2008/10/78945/

WORLDNETDAILY

NEWSPAPER SHOWS OBAMA BELONGED TO SOCIALIST PARTY

Democrat's campaign denied allegations, but new evidence indicates membership

Published: 10/24/2008 at 12:50 AM

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/09/Aaron-Klein_avatar.jpg
 AARON KLEIN About | Email | Archive

849

Share on Facebook
 
Share on Twitter
 
Email
 849

image: http://www.wnd.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-print/images/printer_famfamfam.gif
 Print
 

image: http://www.wnd.com/images/1023newparty.JPG Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)

JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.
Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the controversial party.
The New Party, formed by members of the Democratic Socialists for America and leaders of an offshoot of the Community Party USA, was an electoral alliance that worked alongside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. The New Party’s aim was to help elect politicians to office who espouse its policies.
Among New Party members was linguist and radical activist Noam Chomsky.
Obama’s campaign has responded to the allegations, denying the presidential candidate was ever a member of the New Party.
But the New Zeal blog dug up print copies of the New Party News, the party’s official newspaper, which show Obama posing with New Party leaders, list him as a New Party member and include quotes from him.

The party’s Spring 1996 newspaper boasted: “New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary).
The paper quoted Obama saying “these victories prove that small ‘d’ democracy can work.”
The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.

image: http://www.wnd.com/images/1023newparty2.JPG Barack Obama pictured in New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)

New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago’s Democratic Socialists for America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group’s support and “encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on Voter Education and Voter Registration.”
Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party’s political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a “visible and active relationship” with the party.
The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral “fusion,” which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party went defunct in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.
Following the initial reports of Obama’s purported membership in the New Party, Obama associate and former Chicago New Party activist Carl Davidson posted a statement on several blogs claiming his former party was not socialist, but he admitted it worked with ACORN.
“[The New Party] was a pragmatic party of ‘small d democracy’ mainly promoting economic reforms like the living wage and testing the fusion tactic, common in many countries but only operational in New York in the U.S. The main trend within it was ACORN, an Alinskyist outfit, which is hardly Marxist,” wrote Davidson.

But the socialist goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.
Among the New Party’s stated objectives were “full employment, a shorter work week, and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal ‘social wage’ to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time, and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth and like programs to ensure gender equity.”
The New Party stated it also sought “the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets, community-controlled alternative financial institutions.”
Many of the New Party’s founding members were Democratic Socialists for America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Obama attended several DSA events and meetings, including a DSA-sponsored town hall meeting Feb. 25, 1996, entitled “Employment and Survival in Urban America.” He sought and received an endorsement from the DSA.
According to DSA documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, has been a point of controversy for Obama over the presidential candidate’s ties to the group.
In 1995, the DSA’s New Ground newsletter stated, “In Chicago, the New Party’s biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.
“Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag. On one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it’s easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2008/10/78945/#7geCzQHx4xcq1lb1.99

#11
https://shortlittlerebel.com/2012/07/26/what-is-a-modern-progressive-an-excellent-description-by-james-walsh/



[size=41]What is a Modern Progressive? An Excellent Description by James Walsh[/size]
SUSAN SHANNON JULY 26, 2012  12 COMMENTS

George Soros: Open Society and Open Borders

Quote :

by James H. Walsh Tuesday, July 25, 2006

.


George Soros uses a vast network of special interest groups and non-governmental organizations, in the United States and abroad, to support his global objective — a one-world government.

Open borders are a stepping stone in his efforts to put into action his open-society philosophy. What form will a one-world government take? Not surprisingly it will be a billionaire oligarchy. What sort of billionaire? To begin with, try one George Soros.

Soros provided the following definition of an open society in his article, “The Capitalist Threat,” in the February 1997 “Atlantic Monthly”: “Societies derive their cohesion from shared values . . . religion, history, and tradition. When a society does not have boundaries where are the shared values to be found? . . . the concept of the open society itself.”

In the intervening years, his more-than-generous financial support of a society without boundaries has contributed to the current open-borders immigration crisis being experienced by the United States, his adopted homeland.

The Open Society Institute is the cornerstone for the Soros Foundations Network, a group of Soros-funded organizations in more than 50 countries, which promote open-society concepts by influencing governmental policies.

The various branches and paid instrumentalities of the network include Democracy Alliance, MoveOn.org, America Coming Together, America Votes, The Center for American Progress, and other leftist front organizations, which advocate open borders for the United States — not for other nations but for the United States. These Soros-funded groups finance his camp followers, among them the Democratic Party, the National Organization of Women, abortion advocacy groups, various environmental groups, and last but not least, the increasingly powerful immigration special interest groups.

Soros to Soar

Born in Hungary in 1930 as Gyorgy Schwartz, he provides most of his own biographical data, which is thus open to verification. The family changed its name in 1936 to Soros, which in Hungarian means “successor” and in Esperanto means “to soar.” His father was a devotee of Esperanto, a concocted one-world language introduced in 1887 by Ludwik Zamenhof, a Polish doctor. The Esperanto movement, based on Indo-European languages, continues to have followers today. The Soros name change was an effort to protect the Jewish family from the rise of fascist rulers. Young George Soros, a second-generation Esperanto, survived the fascists and then the communists and in 1946 defected to the West, while attending an Esperanto youth congress abroad.

He emigrated to England, where he enrolled in the London School of Economics. There, he came under the tutelage of Austrian-English philosopher of science, Karl Popper. After graduating in 1952, George Soros came to the United States in 1956 and went to work on Wall Street. Today his fortune is estimated at $7-11 billion. One of his companies, Quantum Fund, is based outside the United States, beyond U.S. government supervision, as apparently is most of the Soros fortune — off-shore for tax purposes.

Soros still quotes his mentor Karl Popper, who set forth a framework for governments in his book, “The Open Society and Its Enemies.” Soros acknowledges that Popper’s concept owes much to French philosopher Henri Louis Bergson (1859-1941). Popper, expanding on Bergson, developed “fallibilism,” a theory that no entity possesses the ultimate truth, and to claim otherwise leads to repression or a closed society.

Human knowledge, Popper wrote, may be mistaken. While Popper claimed that “we may be wrong,” his pupil Soros claims that “we are bound to be wrong.” Both agreed that “right” and “wrong” or “good” and “bad” are rational concepts and evoke claims of certitude. In his later years, Popper became more of a libertarian, fearful of the abuses of power by socialists.

Today George Soros opines that the United States is the world’s best example of an open society, despite the failings of the founding fathers and founding documents.

He holds that the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, based as they are on Enlightenment thinking, do not allow for modern skepticism and the limitations of the human mind. Soros holds that there is no certainty in life and no ultimate truth.

In his 1997 Atlantic Monthly article, he wrote, “The Declaration of Independence may be taken as a pretty good approximation of the principles of an open society, but instead of claiming those principles are self-evident, we ought to say that they are consistent with our fallibility.”

He adds that the open society concept is highly sophisticated, and much more difficult to work with than the more primitive beliefs, such as, “my country (or my company or my family), right or wrong.”

The Enlightenment refers to an 18th century European philosophy based on rationality together with belief and piety as a means to a system of aesthetics, ethics, and logic. The Age of Enlightenment, preceded by the Age of Reason, is credited with leading Europe and the world out of the Dark Ages by developing nation-states, sciences, social reforms, and political reformations. The Enlightenment was the basis for the American and French revolutions and ultimately for modern-day humanistic secularism. Open-society believers, while rejecting the rationalism of the Enlightenment, opt for its secularism to guide the restructuring of nation-states through social and political engineering.

Open-society advocates would reinterpret the U.S. Constitution to better suit the “age of fallibility,” which no longer recognizes unalienable rights or divine providence. The Soros open-society concept requires that the United States be removed as a superpower and that the American people be subjected to the will and wants of all the world’s people.

To support his belief that the human mind cannot fathom ultimate truth and reality, Soros apparently advocates the deconstruction of nations by educating the masses in open-society jargon.

His open society comes off as a bastardization of socialism and libertarianism. This mixed brew includes more taxes (but not on the Soros fortune), increased government spending, open borders, immigration entitlements for legal and illegal aliens, devaluing citizenship but promoting feminism, free abortions, affirmative action, and sex and gender rights. Incongruously he would lessen government intrusion while eliminating “excessive individualism.” Essential to an open society is destruction of the nation-state authority, family structure, and religious beliefs, thus rendering national culture, heritage, and ethos meaningless.

Popper concluded that since science has no certain truths or secure foundations, a state should have no fixed virtues or heritage. While Soros molds Popper’s concepts to his thinking, he notably refrains from directing any revisionism toward Muslim countries or organizations.

Open Society, Open Borders

Open-society, open-borders advocates seek to vilify the United States as a war-mongering, empire-building, brutish abuser of the world’s impoverished nations. The United States thus is worthy of internal and external contempt and global defeats as part of the nation’s deconstruction.

Soros’ latest book, The Age of Fallibility (Public Affairs 2006), is a pamphlet-like espousal of his beliefs, political, economic, philosophical, and nihilistic. In the book’s prologue, he writes that the United States is the main obstacle to a stable and just world. Open-society billionaires like Soros are modern-day robber-barons who seek world domination –for themselves– by supporting all comers who attack the United States. The Democracy Alliance is a shadow group of billionaires led by Soros that acts as a financial clearinghouse to support radical left-wing groups. Under the guise of honest debate and political criticism, Soros and his followers seek a change in U.S. policies. In the United States, the Democrats are their party of choice, and the Democratic Party and its minions are receptive.

A current tool of deconstruction is the immigration chaos caused by 20 million illegal aliens residing in the United States. Add to this the proposed U.S. Senate immigration legislation supported by Soros-funded special interest groups. Open-society advocates realize that open borders can only mean a devaluation of citizenship, of voting, of patriotism, and love of country. Open borders mean equal opportunity for dismantling the United States.

Soros equates the Bush administration and conservatives to communists and Nazis. From Popper’s theory that communism and fascism were philosophically linked, Soros goes a step further and declares that America is an open society that does not understand the concept of an open society and does not abide by its principles. According to him, U.S. democracy does not recognize that the ultimate truth is beyond our reach. In recent years, Soros has moved radically to the left both in his philosophy and politics.

In The Age of Fallibility, Soros gives immigration short shrift, saying that Europe, with an aging population, needs immigrants as an economic necessity. Soros brags that while he is a U.S. citizen, he is also a European. For open-society advocates, citizenship has little meaning.

President Theodore Roosevelt did not believe in hyphenated-Americans, let alone “Americans” who claim they owe allegiance to another country. In 2006, the Open Society Institute contributed to the U.S. Justice Fund, which, in turn, awarded a grant to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, San Francisco office, to defend non-citizens in criminal and immigration matters and to combat the federal government’s “inappropriate” use of local jails for detention of non-citizens.

Another grant went to an author to write articles on alleged immigration enforcement excesses for magazines and newspapers, thus attempting to sway public opinion in favor of illegal aliens and open borders.

Organizations that receive Soros funding, directly or indirectly, include Human Rights Watch, the Center for American Progress, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and the New Democrat Network (NDN). As an example of what these organizations do, the NDN operates the Hispanic Strategy Center to assist immigrants, legal and illegal. The goal is to extend the vote to all non-citizens and to assure that they vote the Democratic ticket.

The old bromides–environmental degradation, abortion, anti-war, poverty, human rights, justice for all, health care for all, and peace at any price are being doled out to a new generation in the hope that enough naïve, poorly educated U.S. citizens will support the open-society agenda.

Rebuttal

Despite well-financed promotions of the open-society philosophy, the United States remains a republic based on inalienable rights of the individual and guidance by divine providence.

Enlightened self interest keeps the nation strong. Culture, ethos, heritage, and language are the foundation of a nation’s sovereignty, of its very existence. The United States of America is blessed with one constitution, one flag, one language, and one people owing allegiance to one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

The history of the United States is one of assimilation, with immigrants embracing U.S. values. These values still stand in opposition to nouveau open-society dogmatists led today by seekers of a one-world government, perhaps speaking Esperanto.

James H. Walsh is a former federal prosecutor.

#11
https://politichicks.com/2017/06/communist-party-usa-now-fully-aligned-democrats/
[size=30][size=30]The Communist Party USA Has Now Fully Aligned with Democrats[/size][/size]
By Tom Stark
 |  [size=15]June 26, 2017[/size]
For those who are not familiar with the name, John Bachtell is the reigning chairman of the Communist Party USA. On June 6, 2017, he published an article on the party website. It demands a response.
The article entitled “Capitalism is destructive and unsustainable – It needs to be replaced” is a rather extensive and predictable screed describing just what he thinks is wrong with America and why Communism is the answer to everything that ails this republic.
Unfortunately, Bachtell gets many of his facts mixed up with talking points that sound, not surprisingly, akin to those spouted by the Democrat Party of late. He claims that America is experiencing multiple crises of “contemporary capitalism” and goes on to name several including “social inequality, job loss and dislocation from automation, and the existential threat posed by the ecological crisis [apparently the latest euphemism for man-caused climate change].”
In every category he describes, Bachtell blames all of it on the greed of capitalists and failures on the part of government to reign them in. The ability to obtain cheap energy is ironically called the causal factor in the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer at their expense
Despite the shift from coal to natural gas being highly beneficial to the amount of emissions generated, Bachtell can’t help but twist it around and call it the opposite – an opportunity being used by the “oligarchy” to suck more profits from the system at the expense of “the 99%”.
While many of the statistics quoted (with sources) in his article are generally accurate, his interpretation would likely be enough to make the sources cringe at how badly those numbers were crushed – not crunched. In fact, capitalism has been so over-regulated by the federal government that it can no longer be called free or market-based which is the only way it can work as intended.
Once his laundry list of capitalism’s failures is laid out for all to contemplate, he begins to describe what a good communist (or Democrat) would do about it. It can be succinctly summed up by the familiar words of former President Obama – wealth redistribution.
Granted, wages have stagnated following eight years of leftist excess that has screwed up the banking system, frightened investors, and caused many of the world’s banks to hoard capital while the fed dilutes our money by printing more and more of it. Whether it was Dodd-Frank, the Community Reinvestment Act, Federal Reserve policy, or the introduction of hundreds of business-stifling regulations under Obama, Bachtell continues to bark up the wrong tree.
Automation – another boogie-man blamed on capitalism – certainly has reduced the demand for manual labor for repetitive jobs in factories and service businesses, but it has, in many cases, been the only answer – again – to government’s continual upward pressure on wages at times when our economy cannot possibly sustain itself against the rising costs of doing business.
Communism and leftists more generally, are quick to bash profit as a “dirty word”. To the contrary, profit is not much different than what every person who has a bank account expects…a reasonable return on the money deposited/invested in the bank/business. When anyone starts a business, all their money is usually at risk if the business fails. As the business becomes established – by providing a useful product or service – the price charged for that service or each product includes a relatively small amount that represents the owner’s return on that initial investment. In the case of those big, nasty corporations, that profit is typically reinvested to expand (more jobs) or returned to individual stockholders in the form of dividends. At last count, about 50% of Americans own stock in one form another. Bachtell is simply doing what leftists do – using common terms in a dishonest way that makes his straw-man argument sound conclusive and convincing to the uninformed.
The argument proffered by Mr. Bachtell that the workforce has been decimated by temporary contract workers and forced part-time work fails to hold water as a fault of capitalism. Until the advent of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) the problem of forced part-time work was not a common practice outside of Wal-mart. The ACA created the incentive for employers to limit employee hours to avoid having to comply with its insane provisions. Temporary workers have become popular for similar reasons and simply because much of the administration of personnel is taken off the back of the business and handled by people who specialize in that field while ensuring that workers are compensated and have their benefits administered efficiently. Forced unionization didn’t help in this area either.
Virtually every solution presented in his article has been made by a Democrat office-holder at some point in the past 100 years. Whether it is more infrastructure spending, green industries, taking money from the military and spending it on civilian needs, a guaranteed “living wage” (whatever that means), or every other Democrat wish-list item, it becomes apparent that two facts cannot be denied:

• The goals and methods of the Democrat Party are indistinguishable from those being promoted by the Communist Party USA, and
  
  
• While there are problems with our economy at present, rather than capitalism being to blame, the source of most of the problems cited by Bachtell are actually – in large part – due to the same misguided leftist policies that he so passionately endorses as solutions.
  
  

[size]
The capitalist system is the only one in the history of the world that has consistently lifted people out of poverty and expanded the size of the pie. It is only through the interference of overreaching central government policies like those espoused by Bachtell that the gifts of capitalism fail to reach their intended beneficiaries.
With the likes of Bernie Sanders and John Bachtell still wandering the streets of America, we should all be prepared to answer their truly devious arguments with facts based on sound economic and political principles.
Think about it.[/size]

#13
http://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate



Link to how they LEAN in Voting Currently

http://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate

#14
Their Link : http://www.cpusa.org

Take a peek

#15
https://www.blacklistednews.com/Mueller_Probe_Accidentally_Exposes_FBI_Cover-Up_of_Saudi_Role_in_911/63173/0/38/38/Y/M.html



MUELLER PROBE ACCIDENTALLY EXPOSES FBI COVER-UP OF SAUDI ROLE IN 9/11
Published: January 24, 2018

SOURCE: MATT AGORIST @ FREE THOUGHT PROJECT
Further deteriorating the propaganda surrounding the government’s probe into alleged interference by Russia in the 2016 election, recently discovered court documents have just revealed that the person leading the investigation, Special Counsel Robert Muller, was complicit in covering up Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11. Not only did Mueller cover for the Florida Saudi family but, according to the documents, he released intentionally deceptive statements to muddy the official investigation.

The new report, released by Florida Bulldog is nothing short of bombshell.

According to the CIA’s database, 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and when they first arrived in the United States, nine of them arrived in Florida.

As TFTP previously reported, Florida Bulldog, a team of investigative journalists that has spent years probing the connections between the 9/11 hijackers and Saudi Arabia, sued the FBI in 2012 for details on the ties between the hijackers and a rich Saudi family that mysteriously left all of their belongings and abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota, Florida, just two weeks before the attacks. The lawsuit led to the release of materials from a 2002 FBI report, which found “many connections” between the Saudi family and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

The idea that a federal judge would go from supporting a group of investigative journalists and pushing for transparency, to supporting the FBI and insisting that protecting the location of a security camera was worth covering up the funding of the 9/11 attacks, may seem bizarre—but it is a common practice under all administrations.

As Judicial Watch reports,

Under Mueller’s leadership, the FBI tried to discredit the story, publicly countering that agents found no connection between the Sarasota Saudi family and the 2001 terrorist plot. The reality is that the FBI’s own files contained several reports that said the opposite, according to the Ft. Lauderdale-based news group’s ongoing investigation. Files obtained by reporters in the course of their lengthy probe reveal that federal agents found “many connections” between the family and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.” The FBI was forced to release the once-secret reports because the news group sued in federal court when the information wasn’t provided under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The disingenuous statements were issued by FBI officials in Miami and Tampa in a desperate effort to disparage a 2011 story exposing the agency’s covert investigation of the Sarasota Saudis as well as reporting that it had been concealed from Congress. Mueller is referenced in a document index that was ordered by a federal judge to be created in late November 2017. The south Florida judge, William J. Zloch, a Ronald Reagan appointee, asked the FBI to explain where it had discovered dozens of pages of documents in the public-records case filed six years ago. The index reference to then-FBI Director Mueller appears in an item involving an agency white paper written a week after the publication of a news story about the abrupt departure of Saudis Abdulaziz and Anoud al-Hijji from their Sarasota area home about two weeks before 9/11. The couple left behind their cars, clothes, furniture, jewelry and other personal items. “It was created to brief the FBI Director concerning the FBI’s investigation of 4224 Escondito Circle,” the al-Hijjis’ address, the index says.

Though the recently filed court documents reveal Mueller received a briefing about the Sarasota Saudi investigation, the FBI continued to publicly deny it existed and it appears that the lies were approved by Mueller. Not surprisingly, he didn’t respond to questions about this new discovery emailed to his office by the news organization that uncovered it. Though the mainstream media has neglected to report this relevant development, it’s difficult to ignore that it chips away at Mueller’s credibility as special counsel to investigate if Russia influenced the 2016 presidential election. Even before the Saudi coverup documents were exposed by nonprofit journalists, Mueller’s credentials were questionable to head any probe. Back in May Judicial Watch reminded of Mueller’s misguided handiwork and collaboration with radical Islamist organizations as FBI director.

What’s more, under Mueller’s leadership, the FBI purged all anti-terrorism material deemed “offensive” to Muslims in an attempt to grovel and give in to multiple radical Islamist groups.

As The Free Thought Project has reported, Trump is also complicit in covering for the Saudis, as he went from calling for holding Saudi Arabia accountable for its involvement in 9/11, to ignoring the idea that the country could have had any involvement at all.

After months on the campaign trail, in which he pledged that if he was elected, Americans would “find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center,” Trump made Saudi Arabia the first foreign nation he visited as president of the U.S.

Trump’s visit with Saudi King Salman occurred on May 20—just four days after Judge Altonaga ruled that the FBI should face a Freedom of Information trial in an attempt to pursue transparency surrounding the funding of the 9/11 attacks.

During the visit, Trump announced plans for a $110 BILLION weapons deal with Saudi Arabia, which adds a new level of context that should be considered when looking at why Altonaga then reversed her decision on June 29.

Now, Americans are told we must believe the outcome of these “investigations” into Russian interference as the man behind them has been exposed as complicit in covering for the people responsible for the deadliest terror attack ever carried out on American soil.

#16
IS THIS ALL ABOUT GETTING A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION TO ENABLE ?????####


HOW MANY SOCIALISTS ARE IN STATES OFFICES RIGHT NOW?????


[list=web_regular_results]
[*]

[size=18]Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_a...Proxy  Highlight
A Convention to propose amendments to the United States Constitution, alsocalled an Article V Convention, or Amendments Convention, called for by two- thirds (currently 34) of the state legislatures, is one of two processes authorized by Article Five of the United States Constitution whereby the Constitution, the nation's ...[/size]
[*]

[size=18]Convention of States

https://conventionofstates.com/Proxy  Highlight
Article V offers the only constitutional solution as big as the problem. Together,we can end federal overreach.[/size]
[*]

[size=18]America might see a new constitutional convention in a few years ...

https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21729735-if-i...Proxy  Highlight
Sep 30, 2017 ... If he does, then a convention would be on the cards. If his effortsfalter, a bigger push is waiting in the wings. Called the Convention of States (CoS), it promises amendments on three topics: a balanced budget, limiting the federal government's power and establishing term limits for members of Congress.[/size]
[*]

Wisconsin Senate OKs Constitutional Convention Call | Wisconsin ...

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/wisconsin/art...Proxy  Highlight
Nov 7, 2017 ... MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The state Senate is set to finalizeWisconsin's call for a convention of states to add a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
[*]

How a 'convention of states' could tweak the Constitution | TheHill

www.thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/state-local-politi...Proxy  Highlight
Aug 15, 2017 ... OPINION | A "convention of states" meeting in Pheonix nextmonth will start work on a proposed constitutional amendment.


[*]

[size=18]**  Hillary Clinton aims at Convention of States Project — and misses ...

www.thehill.com/opinion/white-house/351919-hillary-cl...Proxy  Highlight
Sep 22, 2017 ... During the interview, Clinton alleges that throughgerrymandering, Republicans plan to elect Republican governors, and call a constitutional convention. Clinton suggests that supporters of the Convention of State Project advocates for limits on the First Amendment, no limits on the Second Amendment, ...[/size]
[*]

[size=18]Consideration of a Convention to Propose Amendments Under ...

https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/report/cons...Proxy  Highlight
Many Americans worry about the ever-increasing size, scope, and reach of thefederal government. They point out that it spends beyond its means and for the most part operates outside of the strictures of the Constitution. They also point to various rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States that have effectively ...[/size]
[*]

[size=18]Push for Convention of the States to rein in government gains steam ...

www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/15/push-for-conventi...Proxy  Highlight
May 15, 2017 ... In 1804, Vice President Aaron Burr and former TreasurySecretary Alexander Hamilton settled their bitter political feud with a pistol duel that took Hamilton's life , but Article Five of the Constitution offers a more civilized resolution – a Convention of the States.[/size]
[*]

[size=18]ALEC Push for Constitutional Convention Faces Legal Questions

www.billmoyers.com/story/alec-constitutional-convention/Proxy  Highlight
Aug 3, 2017 ... With Republicans in control of 32 state legislatures, the AmericanLegislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has been actively pushing the idea of a second Constitutional Convention to rewrite the US Constitution. The nation's first and only Constitutional Convention took place in Philadelphia in 1787 with ...[/size]
[*]

[size=18]The March Toward a Constitutional Convention Slows to a Crawl

www.prospect.org/article/march-toward-constitutional-...Proxy  Highlight
The March Toward a Constitutional Convention Slows to a Crawl. Miles Rapoport. April 12, 2017. While some conservative legislatures may still vote for it, liberal legislatures are rescinding their state's decades-old support.[/size]
[/list]

#17
https://www.blacklistednews.com/Things_Are_Getting_Worse%2C_Not_Better%3A_Round_Ups%2C_Checkpoints_and_National_ID_Cards/63189/0/38/38/Y/M.html


THINGS ARE GETTING WORSE, NOT BETTER: ROUND UPS, CHECKPOINTS AND NATIONAL ID CARDS
Published: January 24, 2018


BY JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Here in Amerika, things are getting worse—not better—as the nation inches ever closer towards totalitarianism, that goose-stepping form of tyranny in which the government has all of the power and “we the people” have none.

Take what happened recently in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

On Friday, Jan. 19, 2018, immigration agents boarded a Greyhound bus heading to downtown Miami from Orlando and demanded that all passengers provide proof of residence or citizenship. One grandmother, traveling by bus to meet her granddaughter for the first time, was arrested and taken off the bus when she couldn’t provide proof of residency.

This isn’t is a new occurrence.

A year ago, passengers arriving in New York’s JFK Airport on a domestic flight from San Francisco were ordered to show their “documents” to border patrol agents in order to get off the plane.

With the government empowered to carry out transportation checks to question people about their immigration status within a 100-mile border zone that wraps around the country, you’re going to see a rise in these “show your papers” incidents.

That’s a problem, and I’ll tell you why.

We are not supposed to be living in a “show me your papers” society.

Despite this, the U.S. government has recently introduced measures allowing police and other law enforcement officials to stop individuals (citizens and noncitizens alike), demand they identify themselves, and subject them to patdowns, warrantless searches, and interrogations.

These actions fly in the face of longstanding constitutional safeguards forbidding such police state tactics.

Set aside the debate over illegal immigration for a moment and think long and hard about what it means when government agents start demanding that people show their papers on penalty of arrest.

The problem with allowing government agents to demand identification from anyone they suspect might be an illegal immigrant—the current scheme being employed by the Trump administration to ferret out and cleanse the country of illegal immigrants—is that it lays the groundwork for a society in which you are required to identify yourself to anygovernment worker who demands it.

Such tactics quickly lead one down a slippery slope that ends with government agents empowered to subject anyone—citizen and noncitizen alike—to increasingly intrusive demands that they prove not only that they are legally in the country, but also that they are in compliance with every statute and regulation on the books.

This flies in the face of the provisions of the Fourth Amendment, which protects the American people from undue government interference with their movement and from baseless interrogation about their identities or activities. The Rutherford Institute has issued a Constitutional Q&A on “The Legality of Stop and ID Procedures” that provides some guidance on one’s rights if stopped and asked by police to show identification.

Unfortunately, even with legal protections on the books, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for the average American to avoid falling in line with a national identification system.

We’re almost at that point already.

Passed by Congress in 2005 and scheduled to take effect nationwide by October 2020, the Real ID Act, which imposes federal standards on identity documents such as state drivers’ licenses, is the prelude to this national identification system.

Fast forward to the Trump administration’s war on illegal immigration, and you have the perfect storm necessary for the adoption of a national ID card, the ultimate human tracking device, which would make the police state’s task of monitoring, tracking and singling out individual suspects—citizen and noncitizen alike—far simpler.

Americans have always resisted adopting a national ID card for good reason: it gives the government and its agents the ultimate power to target, track and terrorize the populace according to the government’s own nefarious purposes.

You see, it’s a short hop, skip and a jump from allowing government agents to stop and demand identification from someone suspected of being an illegal immigrant to empowering government agents to subject anyone—citizen and noncitizen alike—to increasingly intrusive demands that they prove not only that they are legally in the country, but that they are also lawful, in compliance with every statute and regulation on the books, and not suspected of having committed some crime or other.

It’s no longer a matter of if, but when.

You may be innocent of wrongdoing now, but when the standard for innocence is set by the government, no one is safe. Everyone is a suspect. And anyone can be a criminal when it’s the government determining what is a crime.

Remember, the police state does not discriminate.

At some point, it will not matter whether your skin is black or yellow or brown or white. It will not matter whether you’re an immigrant or a citizen. It will not matter whether you’re rich or poor. It won’t even matter whether you’re driving, flying or walking.

Eventually, when the police state has turned that final screw and slammed that final door, all that will matter is whether some government agent—poorly trained, utterly ignorant of the Constitution, way too hyped up on the power of their badges, and authorized to detain, search, interrogate, threaten and generally harass anyone they see fit—chooses to single you out for special treatment.

We’ve been having this same debate about the perils of government overreach for the past 50-plus years, and still we don’t seem to learn, or if we learn, we learn too late.

All of the excessive, abusive tactics employed by the government today—warrantless surveillance, stop and frisk searches, SWAT team raids, roadside strip searches, asset forfeiture schemes, private prisons, indefinite detention, militarized police, etc.—started out as a seemingly well-meaning plan to address some problem in society that needed a little extra help.

In the case of a national identification system, it might start off as a means of curtailing illegal immigration, but it will end up as a means of controlling the American people.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, whatever dangerous practices you allow the government to carry out now—whether it’s in the name of national security or protecting America’s borders or making America great again—rest assured, these same practices can and will be used against you when the government decides to set its sights on you.

#19
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-24/counter-memo-drafted-desperate-dems-refute-bombshell-fisa-report
Democrats Draft "Counter-Memo" To Refute Bombshell FISA Report




by Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/24/2018 - 21:05





Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have drafted their own "counter-memo" to respond to the four-page memo created by GOP staffers and made available for House members to review. 
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA)
The GOP memo - which Republican lawmakers are pushing to make public, has been described as containing bombshell revelations of extensive abuse of the FISA surveillance court in a conspiracy involving the Obama administration, the DOJ, the FBI and the Clinton campaign. 
In an effort to counter the GOP memo's imminent release, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) announced that Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee would release their own memorandum "setting out the relevant facts and exposing the misleading character of the Republicans' document so that members of the House are not left with an erroneous impression of the decidated professionals at the FBI and DOJ." 
Schiff will move to make the "counter-memo" available to the full house. 

[ltr]
View image on Twitter


[/ltr]

Quote :

Byron York

✔@ByronYork

[ltr].@RepAdamSchiff announces House Intel Dems have written their own counter-memo; will seek to make public, too.[/ltr]
12:28 PM - Jan 24, 2018

• 
  
   1,1821,182 Replies
   
  
• 
  
   717717 Retweets
   
  
• 
  
   797797 likes
  

[size][ltr]
Twitter Ads info and privacy

[/ltr][/size]

At the end of the day, however, if the GOP memo reveals that the FBI applied for a FISA surveillance warrant or otherwise used an unverified "Trump-Russia dossier" created by opposition research firm Fusion GPS, or that the extent of the Obama administration's "unmasking" of Trump officials was much more invasive than previously understood, it's hard to imagine how Schiff's "counter-memo" is going to be able to explain all of it away. 
This latest act of desperation as the noose tightens comes on the heels of an absurd letter written by Adam Schiff and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to Facebook and Twitter executives, calling for the Social Media giants to combat "Russian bots" which were promoting the hashtag #ReleaseTheMemo.

[ltr]



[/ltr]

Quote :

ABC News

✔@ABC

[ltr]NEW: Sen. Feinstein, Rep. Schiff urge Facebook and Twitter to investigate involvement of Russian bots in pushing "Release the Memo" campaign: "If these reports are accurate, we are witnessing an ongoing attack by the Russian government through Kremlin-linked social media actors."[/ltr]
7:52 AM - Jan 23, 2018

• 
  
   9,8679,867 Replies
   
  
• 
  
   11,93211,932 Retweets
   
  
• 
  
   17,69117,691 likes
  

[size][ltr]
Twitter Ads info and privacy

[/ltr][/size]

Unfortunately for Schiff and Feinstein's straw-grabbing, the Daily Beast reported that internal Twitter sources confirm that the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag has been pushed by actual Americans. 

Quote :

a knowledgeable source says that Twitter’s internal analysis has thus far found that authentic American accounts, and not Russian imposters or automated bots, are driving #ReleaseTheMemo. There are no preliminary indications that the Twitter activity either driving the hashtag or engaging with it is either predominantly Russian.
In short, according to this source, who would not speak to The Daily Beast for attribution, the retweets are coming from inside the country.

The source pointed to influential American users on the right, including Donald Trump Jr., with his 2.49 million followers, pushing the hashtag forward. It’s become a favorite of far-right Republican congressmen, including Steve King, who claimed the still-secret memo shows the FBI was behaving “worse than Watergate” in one viral tweet. Mark Meadows called it an “absolutely shocking” display of “FISA abuses,” referring to a counterintelligence process.

Schiff and the Democrats are apparently so riled up by the GOP memo that now they're telling people that the American public shouldn't be allowed to see the document because we're too stupid to understand its contents. In an interview with CNN, Schiff said the following: 

Quote :

CABRERA: “Why not allow peel to look at it and let Americans make the decision for themselves about whether it’s useful information or not?”
SCHIFF: “Well, because the American people unfortunately don’t have the underlying materials and therefore they can’t see how distorted and misleading this document is. The Republicans are not saying make the underlying materials available to the public. They just want to make this spin available to the public. I think that spin, which is a attack on the FBI, is just designed to attack the FBI and Bob Mueller to circle the wagons for the White House. And that’s a terrible disservice to the people, hard working people at the bureau, but more than that, it’s a disservice to the country.”

https://youtu.be/P34zKSW1l68S




So - Congressional Democrats have crafted a "counter-memo" to combat the GOP memo, Russian bots are pushing for the GOP memo's release (along with over 60 Congressional Republicans), and the American public is too stupid to understand it. 
We are undoubtedly witnessing the Schiff hitting the fan. 

#20
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-01-24/son-bitch-got-fired-joe-biden-brags-he-forced-ukraine-fire-key-official-exchange
"Son Of A Bitch Got Fired!": Joe Biden Brags He Forced Ukraine To Fire Key Official In Exchange For Money




[size=10]by Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/24/2018 - 21:45[/size]





Former Vice President Joe Biden just casually dropped a bombshell admission that he personally and directly intervened in Ukraine's governance, boasting on stage during an event hosted by the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) that he got a high Kiev government official removed essentially at the snap of his fingers.
"I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’" Biden said at the CFR talk on Tuesday, in what was a follow-up to prior admissions revealing that the United States actively asserted behind the scenes control of Ukraine's post-Maidan government, to the point that US officials even dictated who would occupy high offices in the war-torn country.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and then Vice President Joe Biden in Kiev, Ukraine, January 16, 2017. Image source: Reuters via The Indian Express.
Biden confirmed what was only previously hinted at through an anonymous senior official who spoke to The New Yorker in 2016. It was revealed then that Ukraine's Prosecutor General, which the equivalent office to the US Attorney General, was removed only after the Obama administration threatened to withhold 1$ billion in loan guarantees.
The prosecutor general at the time, Viktor Shokin, was previously supported by the US and much of the EU, but as The New Yorker described, "after initially supporting Shokin, U.S. and E.U. officials soured on him." Washington suddenly viewed Shokin, who had served two decades within the Prosecutor General's office as corrupt and unwilling to initiate crackdown in major financial scandal cases involving high profile figures.
Ukraine's chief prosecutor serves a term of six years and can only be appointed and dismissed by the president with parliamentary consent; however in the case of Shokin, Joe Biden boasted before the CFR audience that he told Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and former Ukrainian prime minister Arseny Yatsenyuk sometime in late March 2016, "I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars," unless they immediately sacked Shokin. To the glee of his CFR listeners who laughed audibly, Biden added, "Well, son of a bitch. He got fired!"
Indeed the threat of withholding what had been the third installment of a massive loan package desperately needed to help prop up the new pro-EU/US Kiev government resulted in Viktor Shokin being hastily removed from his post by Ukrainian parliament on March 29, 2016 - within the very month Biden made the ultimatum (Shokin had initially promised he would willingly resign in a February letter, but resumed his work through March). Poroshenko then officially and formally dismissed Shokin on April 3, 2016.
But it appears that it was somewhat of an open secret as Shokin became widely referred to among Ukrainians as "the billion-dollar man". It was also a time in which Biden and other US officials were constantly in direct communication with President Poroshenko, talking foreign aid and loan packages, and presumably according to Biden's latest admission, how he should run his government.
Biden had previously disclosed in his personal memoirs that he “had been on the phone with either Poroshenko or… Yatsenyuk, or both, almost every week” for months attempting to guide nearly every major decision of the Poroshenko administration after the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych in the 2014 coup d'état which inaugurated the Ukraine crisis.
As a reminder, in 2014 - not long after Ukraine's US-endorsed and facilitated presidential coup - Joe's son Hunter joined the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest private gas producers in Ukraine, incorporated in Cyprus, a European tax haven.
Elsewhere in Tuesday's talk, Biden revealed that the Obama White House "spent so much time on the phone making sure that everyone from… [former French president Francois] Hollande to [former Italian prime minister Matteo] Renzi wouldn’t walk away" from anti-Russian sanctions.
We certainly hope that Biden continues to open his infamously big mouth as he will only further confirm (primarily through his penchant for boasting and self-congratulating) that the US version of events whether in Ukraine, Syria, or other parts of the world (spontaneous "democratic revolutions" championed by political figures who happen to take their dictates from Washington, etc...) is nowhere close to the reality.
* * *
Below is the full segment containing former VP Biden's Ukraine confessions during Tuesday's CFR speech:

Quote :

Joe Biden: "Do I think they’re—I think the Donbas has potential to be able to be solved, but it takes two things. One of those things is missing now. And that is I’m desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Kiev in terms of corruption. They made—I mean, I’ll give you one concrete example. I was—not I, but it just happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine. And I remember going over, convincing our team, our leaders to—convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t."
"So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him."(Laughter.)
"I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."
"Well, there’s still—so they made some genuine substantial changes institutionally and with people. But one of the three institutions, there’s now some backsliding."

And a video of the full event:

"Son Of A Bitch Got Fired!": Joe Biden Brags He Forced Ukraine To Fire Key Official In Exchange For Money
Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/24/2018 - 21:45
58
SHARES
TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrint
Former Vice President Joe Biden just casually dropped a bombshell admission that he personally and directly intervened in Ukraine's governance, boasting on stage during an event hosted by the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) that he got a high Kiev government official removed essentially at the snap of his fingers.

"I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’" Biden said at the CFR talk on Tuesday, in what was a follow-up to prior admissions revealing that the United States actively asserted behind the scenes control of Ukraine's post-Maidan government, to the point that US officials even dictated who would occupy high offices in the war-torn country.


Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and then Vice President Joe Biden in Kiev, Ukraine, January 16, 2017. Image source: Reuters via The Indian Express.

Biden confirmed what was only previously hinted at through an anonymous senior official who spoke to The New Yorker in 2016. It was revealed then that Ukraine's Prosecutor General, which the equivalent office to the US Attorney General, was removed only after the Obama administration threatened to withhold 1$ billion in loan guarantees.

The prosecutor general at the time, Viktor Shokin, was previously supported by the US and much of the EU, but as The New Yorker described, "after initially supporting Shokin, U.S. and E.U. officials soured on him." Washington suddenly viewed Shokin, who had served two decades within the Prosecutor General's office as corrupt and unwilling to initiate crackdown in major financial scandal cases involving high profile figures.

Ukraine's chief prosecutor serves a term of six years and can only be appointed and dismissed by the president with parliamentary consent; however in the case of Shokin, Joe Biden boasted before the CFR audience that he told Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and former Ukrainian prime minister Arseny Yatsenyuk sometime in late March 2016, "I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars," unless they immediately sacked Shokin. To the glee of his CFR listeners who laughed audibly, Biden added, "Well, son of a bitch. He got fired!"

Indeed the threat of withholding what had been the third installment of a massive loan package desperately needed to help prop up the new pro-EU/US Kiev government resulted in Viktor Shokin being hastily removed from his post by Ukrainian parliament on March 29, 2016 - within the very month Biden made the ultimatum (Shokin had initially promised he would willingly resign in a February letter, but resumed his work through March). Poroshenko then officially and formally dismissed Shokin on April 3, 2016.

But it appears that it was somewhat of an open secret as Shokin became widely referred to among Ukrainians as "the billion-dollar man". It was also a time in which Biden and other US officials were constantly in direct communication with President Poroshenko, talking foreign aid and loan packages, and presumably according to Biden's latest admission, how he should run his government.

Biden had previously disclosed in his personal memoirs that he “had been on the phone with either Poroshenko or… Yatsenyuk, or both, almost every week” for months attempting to guide nearly every major decision of the Poroshenko administration after the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych in the 2014 coup d'état which inaugurated the Ukraine crisis.

As a reminder, in 2014 - not long after Ukraine's US-endorsed and facilitated presidential coup - Joe's son Hunter joined the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest private gas producers in Ukraine, incorporated in Cyprus, a European tax haven.

Elsewhere in Tuesday's talk, Biden revealed that the Obama White House "spent so much time on the phone making sure that everyone from… [former French president Francois] Hollande to [former Italian prime minister Matteo] Renzi wouldn’t walk away" from anti-Russian sanctions.

We certainly hope that Biden continues to open his infamously big mouth as he will only further confirm (primarily through his penchant for boasting and self-congratulating) that the US version of events whether in Ukraine, Syria, or other parts of the world (spontaneous "democratic revolutions" championed by political figures who happen to take their dictates from Washington, etc...) is nowhere close to the reality.

* * *

Below is the full segment containing former VP Biden's Ukraine confessions during Tuesday's CFR speech:

Joe Biden: "Do I think they’re—I think the Donbas has potential to be able to be solved, but it takes two things. One of those things is missing now. And that is I’m desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Kiev in terms of corruption. They made—I mean, I’ll give you one concrete example. I was—not I, but it just "Son Of A Bitch Got Fired!": Joe Biden Brags He Forced Ukraine To Fire Key Official In Exchange For Money
Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
by Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/24/2018 - 21:45
58
SHARES
TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrint
Former Vice President Joe Biden just casually dropped a bombshell admission that he personally and directly intervened in Ukraine's governance, boasting on stage during an event hosted by the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) that he got a high Kiev government official removed essentially at the snap of his fingers.

"I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’" Biden said at the CFR talk on Tuesday, in what was a follow-up to prior admissions revealing that the United States actively asserted behind the scenes control of Ukraine's post-Maidan government, to the point that US officials even dictated who would occupy high offices in the war-torn country.


Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and then Vice President Joe Biden in Kiev, Ukraine, January 16, 2017. Image source: Reuters via The Indian Express.

Biden confirmed what was only previously hinted at through an anonymous senior official who spoke to The New Yorker in 2016. It was revealed then that Ukraine's Prosecutor General, which the equivalent office to the US Attorney General, was removed only after the Obama administration threatened to withhold 1$ billion in loan guarantees.

The prosecutor general at the time, Viktor Shokin, was previously supported by the US and much of the EU, but as The New Yorker described, "after initially supporting Shokin, U.S. and E.U. officials soured on him." Washington suddenly viewed Shokin, who had served two decades within the Prosecutor General's office as corrupt and unwilling to initiate crackdown in major financial scandal cases involving high profile figures.

Ukraine's chief prosecutor serves a term of six years and can only be appointed and dismissed by the president with parliamentary consent; however in the case of Shokin, Joe Biden boasted before the CFR audience that he told Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and former Ukrainian prime minister Arseny Yatsenyuk sometime in late March 2016, "I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars," unless they immediately sacked Shokin. To the glee of his CFR listeners who laughed audibly, Biden added, "Well, son of a bitch. He got fired!"

Indeed the threat of withholding what had been the third installment of a massive loan package desperately needed to help prop up the new pro-EU/US Kiev government resulted in Viktor Shokin being hastily removed from his post by Ukrainian parliament on March 29, 2016 - within the very month Biden made the ultimatum (Shokin had initially promised he would willingly resign in a February letter, but resumed his work through March). Poroshenko then officially and formally dismissed Shokin on April 3, 2016.

But it appears that it was somewhat of an open secret as Shokin became widely referred to among Ukrainians as "the billion-dollar man". It was also a time in which Biden and other US officials were constantly in direct communication with President Poroshenko, talking foreign aid and loan packages, and presumably according to Biden's latest admission, how he should run his government.

Biden had previously disclosed in his personal memoirs that he “had been on the phone with either Poroshenko or… Yatsenyuk, or both, almost every week” for months attempting to guide nearly every major decision of the Poroshenko administration after the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych in the 2014 coup d'état which inaugurated the Ukraine crisis.

As a reminder, in 2014 - not long after Ukraine's US-endorsed and facilitated presidential coup - Joe's son Hunter joined the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, the largest private gas producers in Ukraine, incorporated in Cyprus, a European tax haven.

Elsewhere in Tuesday's talk, Biden revealed that the Obama White House "spent so much time on the phone making sure that everyone from… [former French president Francois] Hollande to [former Italian prime minister Matteo] Renzi wouldn’t walk away" from anti-Russian sanctions.

We certainly hope that Biden continues to open his infamously big mouth as he will only further confirm (primarily through his penchant for boasting and self-congratulating) that the US version of events whether in Ukraine, Syria, or other parts of the world (spontaneous "democratic revolutions" championed by political figures who happen to take their dictates from Washington, etc...) is nowhere close to the reality.

* * *

Below is the full segment containing former VP Biden's Ukraine confessions during Tuesday's CFR speech:

Joe Biden: "Do I think they’re—I think the Donbas has potential to be able to be solved, but it takes two things. One of those things is missing now. And that is I’m desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Kiev in terms of corruption. They made—I mean, I’ll give you one concrete example. I was—not I, but it just happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine. And I remember going over, convincing our team, our leaders to—convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t."

"So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him." (Laughter.)

"I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."

"Well, there’s still—so they made some genuine substantial changes institutionally and with people. But one of the three institutions, there’s now some backsliding."

And a video of the full event:

happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine. And I remember going over, convincing our team, our leaders to—convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t."

"So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said—I said, call him." (Laughter.)

"I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time."

"Well, there’s still—so they made some genuine substantial changes institutionally and with people. But one of the three institutions, there’s now some backsliding."

And a video of the full event: https://youtu.be/Q0_AqpdwqK4

#21
http://www.wnd.com/2018/01/cops-settle-case-after-injuring-man-who-refused-warrantless-search/

WND EXCLUSIVE

COPS SETTLE CASE AFTER INJURING MAN WHO REFUSED WARRANTLESS SEARCH

Officers refused to believe homeowner who said suspect wasn't in house

Published: 1 hour agoCOPS SETTLE CASE AFTER INJURING MAN WHO REFUSED WARRANTLESS SEARCH

image: http://www.wnd.com/files/2011/10/runruh.jpg
 BOB UNRUH 


Deputies in a Texas county have settled a lawsuit brought against them for injuring a man who refused them permission for a warrantless search of his home after he told the officers the person they sought wasn’t there.
The deputies didn’t believe the homeowner, Huntly Dantzler, but it turned out he was right.
Before they discovered Dantzler was telling the truth, however, they handcuffed him, threw him to the ground and arrested for him refusing to give consent. The officers then coerced his wife, Susan Dantzler, to allow one of them to conduct the warrantless search.
After a judge ruled that at least some of the couple’s claims were valid and would require a trial, the deputies agreed to a settlement, the terms of which were not disclosed.
“Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare Is Becoming Our Reality” chronicles how America has arrived at the point of being a de facto police state and what led to an out-of-control government that increasingly ignores the Constitution. Order today!
Earlier, a ruling from U.S. District Judge David Ezra left charges standing against the officers.
The case developed in Gillespie County, when Deputy Sgt. Joe Hindman and Deputy Hunter Westbrook pounded on the couple’s door at 6:35 one morning.
They wanted to see the Dantzler’s son, who wasn’t there.
After the officers handcuffed and threw Huntly Dantzler to the ground, his wife, “alarmed by the treatment of her husband and the inherent coercion,” granted permission for one officer to enter, stating it was against her will.
The officers were looking for a woman who, according to an anonymous source, might be with the Dantzlers’ son and might be in danger.

The son wasn’t in the home, nor was the woman, and the Dantzlers told the officers that.
The search was prompted by an anonymous caller who claimed to have seen the Dantzlers’ son, Huntly Dantzler Jr., drinking with a woman in a Fredericksburg, Texas, bar.
The unknown person claimed the son put pills into the woman’s drink and she was highly intoxicated.
However, there was no evidence of that, nor was the caller identified.
The court threw out some of the couple’s allegations but left a significant number standing, ruling the “officers’ actions … were based on inaccurate information from an anonymous source and violated the Dentzlers’ clearly established constitutional rights.”
Constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, which handled the case, said there are those “who insist that if you’ve done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide, you should submit to police demands to search your person and your home, whether or not those orders are lawful.”
“What makes this case so striking is the contrast between American citizens who not only know their rights but are exercising them and government officials – in this case, the police – who are either completely ignorant of what the law requires (namely, a search warrant and probable cause) or who don’t believe the laws of the land, namely the Fourth Amendment, apply to them,” he said.
The judge found that the officers detained Huntly Dantzler Sr. without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and the deputies are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2018/01/cops-settle-case-after-injuring-man-who-refused-warrantless-search/#HKCicGwP4j9ifQux.99