People have no idea that the government can already track your movement and can determine if you are a protestor or not. A company named Mobilewalla released a report titled, “George Floyd Protester Demographics: Insights Across 4 Major US Cities.” It produced 60 pie charts detailing what percent of protesters in these demonstrations were male or female, young adult (18–34); middle-aged (35-54), or older (55+); and “African-American,” “Caucasian/Others,” “Hispanic,” or “Asian-American.” This data is available now and can provide a questionable practice constitutionally.
You better get a burner phone and leave the smartphone home if you are getting near any protest, for you can be determined to be part of it.
Mit Romney has long been suspected of not being exactly above question. He was the only person in the Republicans to vote to Impeach Trump. The former Republican presidential nominee has isolated himself from Republicans in the Senate, in his home state, and across the country. How his team is going to announce that they no longer support the Republicans and are endorsing Joe Biden. This has been a serious question with respect to Romney that he is not someone who really stands for much of anything other than himself and perhaps like Helmut Kohl which only after his death did we discover he had secreted millions in Swiss accounts that were given to him supposedly for party contributions that were funneled off to personal accounts. The fact that Romney’s people would even support Joe Biden when everyone behind the curtain thinks he is incompetent to be president which is why they are keeping him in the basement most the time, raises serious questions about the integrity of Romney.
Politics is just so disgusting anymore you have to wonder how much more will the people take before they do rise up in a full-blown revolution.
The Democrats have taken control of Virginia and already we see this pervasive move to corrupt the election process in the United States by NOT requiring any photo ID to vote. I have stated before that I had the mandate from Hong Kong to try to negotiate with the Australian government to buy land before the handover back to China. I met with the former Prime Minister Paul Keating. Every proposal I offered was rejected which made no sense. I finally bluntly asked what was the problem, “Is this a racist issue?” He responded, “No,” explaining that they were fleeing communism and as such if he allowed them to enter it would change the demographics and they would vote conservative when he was a Labour government.
This is the same clever tactics behind the Democrats moving to allow anyone to vote by mail and no photo ID required. They do not care how they win and the more illegal aliens they allow in and protect, the more they will vote for them to retain power over real Americans. Socrates has forecast that this is going to be the most corrupt election in American history and with each passing day, there is another step toward making this forecast come to pass.
Beginning October 1st, 2020, every air traveler 18 years of age and older will need a REALID-compliant driver’s license or another acceptable form of ID like a passport to fly within the United States. REALID-compliant cards are generally marked with a star located in the upper portion of the card. This is to ensure that you produced real identification to obtain the ID.
The REAL ID Act is a federal law passed by Congress after 9/11 that establishes new security requirements for state-issued driver’s licenses and identity cards when they are used for certain federal purposes, like entering a federal building or boarding a domestic flight. The law was passed in 2005, but the Department of Homeland Security has given states time to adapt to the new technology by next year. Most states already issue the updated IDs (generally indicated by a gold star).
What is really amazing is that you cannot travel without proving who you are. Many places want your REAL-ID with your credit card to prove it is not stolen. And you cannot even enter some government buildings without a REAL-ID. But the Democrats, desperate to win, say no REAL-ID is necessary to vote.
Some states may ask you to sign a form affirming your identity. Other states will let you cast a provisional ballot. States use provisional ballots when there is a question about a voter’s eligibility. States keep provisional ballots separate until they decide whether they should count. To do so, they will investigate a voter’s eligibility. They may also compel you to show an acceptable form of ID within a few days. If you don’t, your provisional ballot won’t count. But these rules vary greatly between states. There is certainly the possibility that this entire election ends up back in the Supreme Court.
Tucker Carlson used his opening monologue tonight to beg Republicans to stop being Democrats. Most of what Carlson outlines is accurate, especially the “Nikki Haley waiting in the wings” to return to the UniParty rules part.
The end solution is the appropriate course. We The People must take action to force a resounding Trump reelection, and then demand the GOP abandon their leftist alignment.
In case you might have missed the latest faux-controversy assigned by political operatives to the media narrative engineers, the issue surrounds leaked sketchy intelligence reports, to the New York Times, claiming Russians were willing to pay Taliban members to kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan. The evidence provided by the Times includes:
From this tenuous evidence footnoted with “according to multiple officials familiar with the intelligence”, democrat operatives in media desperately clutch their pearls and stake out another batch of apoplexy claiming President Trump is not doing anything about it.
Setting aside for the moment that nothing claimed by media or the DNC political operatives in/around capitol hill has any substantive intelligence to prove the claim, let’s first look at the underlying premise: ‘Russians are paying the Taliban to kill American soldiers.’
First, obviously these same voices need to ignore that in 2010 Iran was paying insurgent fighters in multiple fields of combat including Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, to kill Americans. Those well-documented examples must be overlooked because despite the overwhelming evidence the Obama administration paid Iran over $170 billion in cash and entered a nuclear deal with them. Once again, in order to retain their left-wing political position the media must pretend not to know things.
Iranian bounties on American soldiers during the 2010 Obama administration were rewarded. Contrast that against unsubstantiated rumors of Russian bounties on American soldiers in Afghanistan in 2020 being the most horrific and alarming situation in history.
It was reported in 2010 that five Iranian companies were winning construction contracts in Afghanistan funded with foreign aid. The money was sent back to Iran via the underground hawala money transfer networks and was used to pay Taliban fighters $200 per month. If they kill a U.S. soldier, they get a $1,000 bonus and a $6,000 bonus for the destruction of a military vehicle. Bounties began being offered as early as February 2005, when a U.S. government document reported that Iran was offering $1,470 for the killing of Afghan soldiers and $3,841 for the death of Afghan officials.
Taliban and similar terrorists are also trained in Iran and are paid for their time. Hundreds go to Zahedan in the winter. The first month is focused on learning how to attack convoys without getting captured. Improvised explosive devices (IED) are the trade taught in the second month. In the last month, attacks on military outposts are simulated. (LINK)
Again, ignoring that Iran also funds Hezbollah, which involves payments for the killing of U.S. and allied western soldiers, the politics of the narrative engineers are so hypocritical they are choking.
Additionally, when Russia invaded Afghanistan, guess who was paying the Mujahideen to kill Russians? Yup, that would be USA. Not only did we pay the Mujahideen (the early Taliban) to kill Russians, we also supplied all the arms and munitions they needed to do it. The U.S. were paying bounty for the killing of Russians. Hypocrisy much.
Decades later, when U.S. President George W Bush invaded Iraq, again we put bounties on the heads of Iraq commanding officers we wanted to kill or capture. Anyone remember the paying cards with the faces and names of the targets?
Oh, and lets not forget the billions that President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta spent on bounties in Libya and Syria where we gave money and weapons to al-Qaeda factions to kill Libyan and Syrian soldiers.
All bounties are not created equal I guess.
The entire argument underpinning the pretext of the claim is ridiculous. However, what’s even more ridiculous is how the media has to set aside all prior information and all pretense of journalism in order to sell a narrative that, even if true, is nothing more than a continuation of proxy war fighting where the U.S has been the largest financial player in history.
Does Russia pay elements, possibly Taliban in Afghanistan, to maintain a forceful position against the U.S.? Hell, I would certainly think the answer is yes. Why should Russia be more magnanimous to our Afghanistan boondoggle than we were to theirs?
Does Russia pay the Taliban directly to kill Americans? There is no direct evidence supporting that claim; and specifically the U.S. intelligence apparatus including the NSA, CIA, NSC and ODNI have said there’s no such direct evidence; but that’s not really the point is it.
Even if there was direct evidence that Russia was offering bounties against U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, how is that different from Iran offering bounties against U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan during the Obama administration?
The entire premise of the outrage is ridiculous; and too make matters worse the number one facilitator of U.S. bounties paid to kill foreign fighters is Senator Lindsey Graham.
FUBAR.
Ayman Al Zawahiri and Osam Bin Laden
Mohamed Al Zawahiri was on the CTH radar since his release from prison in March 2011 during the Egyptian Islamist uprising. The interim “governing” Egyptian leaders released Mohamed Al Zawahiri after they permitted the Muslim Brotherhood to re-organize following 30 years of banishment. The Brotherhood then opened the jails to release all the Hosni Mubarak captured prisoners.
Mohamed al Zawahiri was the guy who coordinated and called for the protests at the U.S. embassy in Cairo September 11, 2012. He is also the guy who coordinated with the Benghazi rebels in 2011 to assist their uprising against Libyan leader Qaddafi.
President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta paid these guys.
Mohamed planned to coordinate efforts in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Libya, Tunisia and Turkey toward al-Qaeda North Africa (AQIM). Meanwhile his brother, Ayman al Zawahiri, continued the same efforts in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, while aligned with AQAP (al-Qaeda Arabian Peninsular).
In 1999, security forces picked up Mohamed Al Zawahiri in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), where he had settled with his family and was working as an engineer for a construction company.
He claims UAE authorities tortured him for four months — at the behest of the CIA — in an attempt to extract information about his brother. During that time, Zawahiri says, he offered to mediate between his brother and the West, something he believes could have prevented the Sept.11 attacks, but his overtures were rebuffed by UAE officials.
In 1999, he was extradited to Egypt to face terrorism charges related to Sadat’s assassination and conspiracy to topple the regime — charges he denies, but he was jailed by Mubarak in Egypt. He was later acquitted upon appeal, but Mubarak refused to let him leave prison. He remained in jail until March of 2011 when he was released.
Zawahiri spent the following five years in solitary confinement in Egypt’s notorious underground prisons. There, in a 6-by-6-foot cell with no access to sunlight, he says, he was repeatedly waterboarded, electrocuted, and subjected to sleep deprivation.
His family had no idea where he was, or even if he was alive, until it emerged that the United States wanted his DNA to compare it to a skull found in a cave in Afghanistan — one that might belong to his brother Ayman.
Zawahiri thinks that militant Islamist movements pose a big enough threat that the United States will ultimately yield to his demands. “Hundreds or thousands of attempts may fail, but one can succeed and destroy the Western civilization,” he writes in his proposal, citing al Qaeda’s attempts to obtain weapons of mass destruction and the escalation of violence in Iraq. “The next hit or string of attacks cannot be anticipated. No single group or persons can force themselves to control the situation or prevent it.”
Learn about his approach and his intentions in this article.
Judging by what the “West” has put this guy and his family through, it would be pretty darned difficult to think of him burying the hatchet per se’, without his intention to bury it deep in the psyche of the United States.
Apparently, “we” have created this monster, “we” have hardened him, and subsequently he holds MAJOR street cred with all factions of radical Islam. This guy is a Martyr in life, he did not need death. He says “pull the trigger” – everyone shoots.
Given Mohamed’s enormous Islamist pulpit, he will leverage influence over multiple varying factions within all of the aforementioned radicals (al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, Taliban, Salafists, Brotherhood etc).
The level of cultural Marxism within the media reports is even more significant than ever before. U.S. media are trying to protect the domestic terrorists. It is quite unnerving.
In Provo, Utah, a group of armed Black Lives Matter terrorists surrounded a vehicle at an intersection. The driver would not exit the vehicle to be beaten by the mob. One of the BLM activists pulled a gun and demanded the driver come out, when the driver refused the terrorist opened fire shooting the driver. The driver hits the gas and tries to escape, the terrorist fires through the rear window as another armed terrorist joins the fray from the opposite side of the street. WATCH:
.
According to local media, police are determining whether to charge the driver of the vehicle for not complying with the mob’s demand for the beating; thereby putting the other terrorists at risk. “It’s unclear if the driver of the SUV who was shot is facing any possible charge for driving through the protesters after being shot.”
Here’s an enhanced video of the incident:
.
UTAH – “Several protesters began crowding around the vehicle,” said John Geyerman, Provo Police deputy chief. “The male protester ran toward the SUV on the passenger side, pointed a handgun at the driver, and shot one round through the window. The driver who was struck by the bullet accelerated, trying to leave the situation. The same protester ran after the vehicle and fired a second shot that went through the rear passenger window.”
Officials said the same man who allegedly fired the shots into the SUV also approached another vehicle and broke the window with a handgun.
The driver was taken to Utah Valley Hospital.
Police are looking for the alleged shooter and are asking for anyone with videos or pictures of the incident, or any other information, to contact PPD at 801-852-6210. (link)
Today the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) formally designated Chinese’s Huawei Technologies Co and ZTE Corp as posing as posing national security threats to the United States. This designation and declaration blocks U.S. firms from tapping an $8.3 billion government fund to purchase equipment from either company.
This is an important step toward eliminating Huawei 5G data risks within U.S. telecommunication networks. Additionally, the designation will have the forward impact of restricting U.S. allies from linking networks if they use Huawei/ZTE components.
(Via Reuters) – The U.S. telecommunications regulator voted in November 5-0 to issue the declaration and proposed requiring rural carriers to remove and replace equipment from the two Chinese companies from existing U.S. networks. “We cannot and will not allow the Chinese Communist Party to exploit network vulnerabilities and compromise our critical communications infrastructure,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a statement Tuesday. (more)
This is another policy alignment from the Trump administration toward the ongoing confrontation with China. Beijing will not be happy; and this follows only a day after the Trump administration removed the ‘special trade status’ afforded to Hong Kong.
President Trump and all executive branch offices are strategically targeting China from multiple simultaneous angles. The scale of the strategy is very comprehensive.
This FCC position today aligns with the Commerce Department (Wilbur Ross) setting up new advanced chip manufacturing in the U.S. which will facilitate further decoupling from China. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) announced in May they will build an advanced chip manufacturing facility in Arizona. A manufacturing facility for advanced 5 nanometer chip manufacturing is a steep investment decision costing around $10 billion.
Economic decoupling by a thousand paper cuts.
President Trump has been methodically advancing an economic position for several years that showcases a remarkable duality.
On one hand President Trump demands that China increase purchases from the U.S. to offset the trade imbalance; this approach is Trump using a deliberate panda mask and includes praise each time Beijing responds positively. China expected this approach.
However, on the other hand President Trump has been removing the tentacles of Chinese economic influence both in the U.S. and globally. This approach deconstructs the One Belt – One Road plan of Beijing; this approach is Trump using the dragon strategy. China did not see this part coming.
The duality of the panda mask and the dragon strategy is very unique for Beijing to confront because it is the exact same strategy used by China. By expressing a public panda mask, yet concealing the underlying dragon moves, President Trump’s policy to China is a mirror of their own economic plan.
Historic Chinese geopolitical policy, vis-a-vis their totalitarian control over political sentiment (action) and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.
Each time China takes aggressive action (dragon) China projects a panda face through silence and non-response to opinion of that action;…. and the action continues.
The CCP dragon has a tendency to say one necessary thing publicly, while manipulating another necessary thing privately. The Art of War.
President Trump is the first U.S. President to understand how the CCP dragon hides behind the panda mask. He has now exposed that historic playbook to the world.
First President Trump got their attention with tariffs. Then… On one hand President Trump has engaged in very public and friendly trade negotiations with China (panda approach); yet on the other hand, long before the Wuhan virus, Trump fractured their global supply chains, influenced the movement of industrial goods to alternate nations, and incentivized an exodus of manufacturing (dragon result).
It is specifically because he understands that Panda is a mask that President Trump messages warmth toward the Chinese people, and pours vociferous praise upon Xi Jinping, while simultaneously confronting the geopolitical doctrine of the Xi regime.
In essence Trump is mirroring the behavior of China while confronting their economic duplicity.
There is no doubt in my mind that President Trump has a very well thought out long-term strategy regarding China. President Trump takes strategic messaging toward the people of china very importantly. President Trump has, very publicly, complimented the friendship he feels toward President Xi Jinping; and praises Chairman Xi for his character, strength and purposeful leadership.
To build upon that projected and strategic message – President Trump seeded the background by appointing Ambassador Terry Branstad, a 30-year personal friend of President Xi Jinping.
To enhance and amplify the message – and broadcast cultural respect – President Trump used Mar-a-Lago as the venue for their first visit, not the White House. And President Trump’s beautiful granddaughter, Arabella, sweetly serenaded the Chinese First Familytwice in Mandarin Chinese song showing the utmost respect for the guests and later for the hosts.
All of this activity mirrors the duplicity of China. From the November 2017 tour of Asia to the January 2020 China phase-1 trade deal, President Trump has been positioning, for an economic decoupling and a complete realignment of global trade and manufacturing.
Remarkably, at the same time… inch by inch… President Trump has been able to keep the international financial markets stable while he has moved to completely reset global trade.
For those who follow carefully, you can see President Trump advancing public positions against China at strategic times that keeps the multinational corporations on the U.S. stock exchange from major losses. Forward policy, then pause. Forward policy, then pause. Within this process the financial markets pull back, then regain… pull back, then regain.
This very strategic approach keeps the overall wealth (value) within the U.S. market, while the decoupling is fundamentally taking place. Smart U.S. corporations have made, and/or are making, shifts in their forward business decisions to offset the inevitable end.
It is quite remarkable to stand back and watch how the Trump administration is accomplishing the reversal of decades of exfiltration of wealth, and returning jobs and manufacturing back to the U.S through the America First agenda. No other person could have ever accomplished this.
Unfortunately, this success also explains the opposition. Those who have aligned their personal affluence by selling the wealth of the U.S. are fighting like hell to stop President Trump from Making America Great Again.
Earlier today federal arrest warrants were served to Toledo, Ohio, city council members Larry Sykes, Tyrone Riley, Yvonne Harper, and Gary Johnson. The FBI is actively looking for a fifth person – attorney Keith Mitchell, as the FBI and US Attorney Justin Herdman culminate a two-year investigation into the city council for bribery, extortion and abuse of their public office for financial benefit. [Local Press Report] FBI News Conference:
.
[DOJ Press Release] – Four sitting Toledo City Council members and one local attorney were charged in a criminal complaint today for their participation in a bribery and extortion scheme that encouraged soliciting and/or accepting cash, checks, money orders, or other things of value from local business owners in exchange for their votes on City Council.
Charged today were Tyrone Riley (District 1), Yvonne Harper (District 4), Garrick “Gary” Johnson (At-Large), Larry Sykes (At-Large) and Keith Mitchell all of Toledo. All defendants were charged via a federal criminal complaint filed in the Northern District of Ohio with Receipt of Bribe by Agent of Organization Receiving Federal Funds and Hobbs Act Extortion Under Color of Official Right. Additionally, defendant Harper was charged with Interstate Communications with Intent to Extort.
“As alleged in the Complaint, four Toledo City Council members and a local attorney have been engaged in a pay-to-play scheme involving bribes for Council votes,” said U.S. Attorney Justin Herdman. “Maintaining the public’s trust in its elected officials is one of the Department of Justice’s core responsibilities. The residents of Toledo should know, as should every other resident of the Northern District of Ohio, that where there are allegations of public corruption and kickbacks, we and our federal partners will be there every time.”
[…] According to the criminal complaint, in early 2018, the FBI began to investigate Toledo City Council members for soliciting monetary payments or other things of value from local business owners in exchange for their votes on City Council. In addition, Councilwoman Harper was investigated for an extortion attempt on a local business.
The following is a summary of the events listed in the complaint:(Read Allegations)
The court documents detail each of the council members allegedly accepting thousands of dollars in payments from an FBI source in exchange for support with a business matter that was up for council approval over the course of 2019 and into early 2020.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany is holding a press briefing from the Brady room. Anticipated start time 3:30pm ET.
UPDATE: Video Added
.
[Transcript] – MS. MCENANY: Hello, everyone. The front page of the New York Times is not the venue for discussing classified information. The White House podium is not the venue for discussing classified information. We are here today, having this discussion, because of an irresponsible, anonymous leak to the New York Times. There is no good scenario as a result of this New York Times report.
Who’s going to want to cooperate with the United States intelligence community, who’s going to want to be a source or an asset, if they know that their identity could be disclosed? Which allies will want to share information with us if they know that some rogue intelligence officer can go splash that information on the front page of a major U.S. newspaper?
Specifically, there are two bad scenarios that emerge from this report: Number one, this report makes it more difficult to come to a consensus on this matter, to verify intelligence. And number two, this level of controversy and discord plays directly into the hands of Russia and, unfortunately, serves their interests.
Since before President Trump assumed office, damaging and oftentimes erroneous leaks seeking to undermine or delegitimize the duly elected president have been published. According to the DOJ, classified leaks surged in this administration. There were, under President Obama, just 39, on average, criminal leak referrals. In this administration, we’ve seen 100 criminal leak referrals to the DOJ in 2017, 88 in 2018, and 104 on average per year.
We have seen targeted leaks of classified information against this President, and it is irresponsible: phone calls with foreign leaders, meetings with government officials, and now reports of alleged intelligence. Make no mistake: This damages our ability, as a nation, to collect intelligence.
As the National Security Council noted just yesterday, “To those government officials who betray the trust of the people of the United States by leaking classified information, your actions endanger our national security.”
The ODNI said, “The selective leaking of any classified information disrupts the vital interagency work to collect, assess, and mitigate threats, and places our forces at risk. It is also, simply put, a crime.”
And finally, the CIA said this: that “Leaks compromise and disrupt the critical interagency work to collect, assess, and ascribe culpability.”
To the anonymous sources who leak classified information, you should know this: You may seek to undermine our President, but in fact, you undermine our country’s safety and our country’s security.
And with that, I’ll take questions.
Kristin.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. When did White House officials first learn that this intelligence about Russian bounties existed?
MS. MCENANY: I will say this: The President was never briefed on this, this intelligence still has not been verified, and there is no consensus among the intelligence community.
Q Does the President wish that he had been briefed sooner? I mean, today, Joe Biden called it a “dereliction of duty.”
MS. MCENANY: This is a piece of intelligence information that had no consensus, has not been verified. Still, to this day, has not been verified. And there are several intelligence agencies on the record noting that. You have the Department of Defense saying that there has — they have no corroborating evidence to validate [sic] — validate the recent allegations. The NSC: “…Allegations in recent press articles have not been verified or substantiated by the intelligence community…” And the ODNI: “We are still investigating the alleged intelligence referenced in recent media reportings.”
But that didn’t stop the New York Times from putting it on the very first page of their newspaper and stopping us from getting to an ultimate conclusion and an ultimate place of having a consensus on the alleged intelligence.
Darlene.
Q You said that —
Q Just one more question. If this intelligence does turn out to be true, is the President prepared to take some serious action against Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin?
MS. MCENANY: The President has always taken tough, unadulterated action against Russia. We saw that there’s no diplomatic presence on the West Coast of our country, of Russia, because the President closed the consulates. We saw he expelled 60 Russian intelligence officers; sanctioned hundreds of targets; withdrew from the INF Treaty, the Open Skies Treaty; tried to halt Nord Stream — still trying to do that; impose visa sanctions, and many other actions.
So make no mistake: This President is prepared to act and will always act in protecting our American troops. We saw in Syria, in the strikes in 2018, that dozens of Russian mercenaries were killed. He will always act, prot- — to protect American troops. That is indeed his track record.
Darlene.
Q There’s a briefing — an intel briefing on the President’s schedule today. Will this matter be part of his briefing this afternoon?
MS. MCENANY: The President has been briefed on what is unfortunately in the public domain because of the New York Times and the irresponsible leak. Yes, he has been briefed, but that does not change the fact that there is no consensus on this intelligence that still has yet to be verified.
Q I have one more question.
MS. MCENANY: Yeah. Darlene?
Q On another subject: Republican allies of the President, like Kevin McCarthy and Lamar Alexander, have said that it would be great if the President would wear a mask in public, sometimes, to set an example. How much weight do words from McCarthy and Lamar Alexander carry with the President?
MS. MCENANY: The President has said he has no problem with masks; that he encourages people to make whatever decision is best for their safety and to follow what their local jurisdictions say. CDC guidelines are still recommended, but not required. And the President is the most tested man in America. It’s his decision whether to wear a mask.
Justin.
Q But to set an example?
MS. MCENANY: Justin.
Q I wanted to look back on you saying that the President had never been briefed. There’s, I think, some dispute over whether, in February, his PDB included this intelligence information. And so I’m wondering if you can say whether or not, you know, he may not have read the briefing book that he was presented with, but was he at some point at least given access to this information.
MS. MCENANY: So the PDB is a top-secret document that is widely disseminated among government. I will never sit here and confirm or deny what is in a top-secret document. So I’ll leave it at that.
One thing I will say that is routine is when there is intelligence — and I was speaking with some folks over at NSC about this earlier and some other folks around the White House — when we get intelligence — verified or unverified, deemed credible or not credible, deemed consensus or no consensus — if that information in any way impinges upon the safety of our troops, that information goes to our troops on the ground and to our allies so they can take the appropriate measures.
What is briefed up to the President — and in this case, it was not the case; was never briefed to the President of the United States because there was no consensus — what is briefed to the President is when there’s a strategic decision to be made. So in this case, if there was a strategic decision to be made vis-à-vis Russia, those are the kind of things that are briefed to the President when they’re deemed credible. But in this case, it was not briefed to the President, there is no consensus, it was not credible.
But make no mistake: This President will always protect American troops.
Q I mean — sorry, just — just to follow on that. I think there’s two points. One, I would say that press secretaries in the past have disclosed, in certain instances, what was in the PDB.
But secondly, I mean, this is a relevant issue because — and I think critics have seized on this and said, “Well, if the President isn’t reading his PDB, he might not know that there are these policy decisions to be made,” right? If a President was presented with this information, it’s unverified, he could be alarmed; change his posture towards Russia; conceivably ask intelligence officials to work harder to determine whether or not this was true; make, you know, a series of judgments.
And so, I guess more broadly, you know, I would re-ask the question of whether it was in his material, but asking maybe to defend why the President isn’t necessarily reading his PDB when there are these types of issues that could arise.
MS. MCENANY: The President does read, and he also consumes intelligence —
Q So, then it wasn’t in his PDB?
MS. MCENANY: — verbally. This President, I’ll tell you, is the most informed person on planet Earth when it comes to the threats that we face. You have Ambassador O’Brien, who sees him in person twice a day, who sometimes takes the upwards of half a dozen calls with this President. He’s constantly being informed and briefed on intelligence matters.
But I’m not going to allow the New York Times to dictate when we give top-secret information and don’t give top-secret information. That’s —
Q But let me just square the —
MS. MCENANY: — an untenable proposition.
Q Just to square the circle there, then —
MS. MCENANY: Yes, Emerald.
Q Thanks, Kayleigh. Does the White House have any comment on Bruce Ohr testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Hill today?
MS. MCENANY: So, no comment on that specifically. But what I would say more generally is that what Bruce Ohr and others in the Obama-era government have to answer for is quite substantial: When you had a dossier full of lies weaponizing against this President — Bruce Ohr’s wife, of course, being involved in the creation of that dossier, which was funded by the Democrat National Committee and in coordination with the Hillary Clinton campaign, and was used to spy on the Trump campaign, to be the basis for two FISA warrants, to launch a three-year investigation into Russia collusion that ultimately ended in an exoneration of this President and an immense waste of taxpayer dollars — Mr. Ohr and many others have a whole lot of questions to answer for.
Q So why wasn’t it — why was it behind closed doors? Why wasn’t it televised, given the public interest in these players in the Russia investigation?
MS. MCENANY: That would be a question for Congress, but I think the public deserves to know Mr. Ohr’s answers on those matters.
Q And then one more, if I may. You opened about leakers. Democrat lawmakers are calling for a briefing from intelligence officials. They aren’t satisfied with the White House personnel today. Is there a concern to brief Democrat lawmakers, especially Adam Schiff, given the leaks out of his committee?
MS. MCENANY: Look, I mean, I think that Democrats should come forward in good faith. And if anyone has politicized intelligence — we’ve had the New York Times acting entirely irresponsibly, and you have the Democrat Party politicizing this information, which I think is absolutely disgraceful.
Alayna.
Q Hi. Yes. Thank you, Kayleigh. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell should, quote, “absolutely not,” unquote, be allowed back into the G7. Does President Trump agree with Mitch McConnell?
MS. MCENANY: Look, I haven’t spoken to him on that matter. The President believes that we have to have diplomatic relationship — relations with the top economies of the world. But there’s been no one that’s been tougher on Russia than this President. I went through several of those actions.
And also, I would note that when it comes to acting on viable, actionable, credible intelligence, there has been no one who has acted more forcefully than this President. He has a track record of that. He has made protecting our American troops overseas his highest and strongest priority.
As you know, Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of 600 Americans and thousands maimed from, quote, “explosively formed penetrators, other improvised explosive devices, improvised rocket-assisted munitions, rockets, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, small-arms, snipers, and other attacks in Iraq.” This is what Soleimani did to our American troops.
You had President Bush, who declined to strike Soleimani, who was, quote “in the crosshairs,” according to the New York Times. You had Obama-Biden who, quote, “never made an effort to strike Soleimani.”
But you had this President who, when he had actionable intelligence to protect American troops, he did it. He took that option. He was criticized by Democrats. “Democrats condemn Trump’s strike on Soleimani,” as your publication, Axios, had in a headline. NBC said, “Democrats demand answers on Soleimani killing.” Politico, “Top Democrats blast Trump’s ‘false’ justification for Soleimani killing.” And the Atlantic asked, “Why Kill Soleimani Now?”
We removed Soleimani from the battlefield — President Trump did — to protect our American troops, based on credible intelligence. He did the same with al-Baghdadi, who was responsible for 300 public beheadings, who killed thousands of captured prisoners of war. When this President had actionable intelligence, he took action, criticized by Democrats for it, but that’s what this President does: He acts in defense of our American troops.
David.
Q You said it was “targeted leaking” in the New York Times. Who’s doing the targeting and why are they doing it?
MS. MCENANY: It’s a — it’s a great question. But these are rogue intelligence officers who are imperiling our troops’ lives. We will not be able to get — very likely not be able to get a consensus on this intelligence because of what was leaked to the New York Times. And you have both the NSC, ODNI, and CIA all noting what damage this leaks does, not just to the safety of our troops, which is paramount, but to the ability of the United States to aggregate information from our allies and have assets and have — get this valuable information. So who’s doing it? It’s —
Q Are you saying members of the IC are going after Trump? Is that what you’re saying?
MS. MCENANY: It very possibly could be. And if that’s the case, it is absolutely despicable.
Q Kayleigh —
MS. MCENANY: Yes.
Q On that note, is the Trump administration doing anything or taking any action, like an audit of the IC? Or what steps are you planning on taking to try to find the source of the leaks?
MS. MCENANY: Well, make no mistake: The DOJ has done several criminal leak referrals — 120 in 2017, 88 in 2018, 104 on average, per year, under President Trump. So we do take those steps.
And we do have a President who, ultimately, when it comes down to the safety of our troops, he doesn’t take impulsive action, he takes deliberate action. And we saw that in the killing of Soleimani and the killing of al-Baghdadi and the protecting of our troops. And at the same time, when you had Iran, who shot down a drone, he chose not to strike back in that instance. He chose to protect civilians, protect our troops. It was the measured response; it was a proportionate response.
And ultimately, the ultimate way to protect American troops is to not get into needless foreign wars. This President is on record for decades and decades and decades opposing — opposing foreign wars. And Iraq is a great example, a 20 — nearly two-decade war. You have this President who, when Washington was unanimous in saying, “We’re going into Iraq,” this President said, “No, that’s not the right decision.”
He’s wound down our troop presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. And he’s ultimately protected American troops and kept this country safe. And this President has a very strong foreign policy record to be incredibly proud of.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 