US troops rushed to Poland before Trump’s inauguration


Obama is crazy and is trying to get a war started to blame on trump!

Calif. college professor goes into hiding after calling election of Trump ‘white supremacist terrorism’ — Fellowship of the Minds


A California college professor has discovered actions have consequences. Olga Perez Stable Cox, who teaches human sexuality at Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa, CA, went into hiding after a video…

Source: Calif. college professor goes into hiding after calling election of Trump ‘white supremacist terrorism’ — Fellowship of the Minds

Why is this even a college course!

trump-drain-the-swamp1211111111111121111111111111111111111121111111111111111111111111121111

The Cycle of Assassination & War Bottomed in 2014


War-Cycle-2014

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; you previously wrote that if Trump were elected he might be assassinated. Do you still see that as a potential?

ANSWER: Absolutely. There is an 11-year average cycle for attempts to assassinate the president. Here is the list below:

assassinations

The assassination cycle actually bottomed in 2014 with the Cycle of War. This means we are on an uptrend that may be the strongest uptrend in U.S. history. We have to understand that there will be an uptick in the anarchist philosophy that rose side-by-side with Marxism. There will be a VERY BIG risk that attempts on Trump will take place. It is possible they could even succeed and this would clearly fuel the civil unrest by pitting left against right in violent confrontations. This cycle may not peak until 2022-2024.

Is CIA Trying to Cover Its Own Hack or Accommodating Obama?


cia-seal

Obama’s parting shot across the bow is his order of a full review into hacking aimed at influencing US elections going back to 2008. Instead of targeting the CIA or the NSA, WikiLeaks has gone after an organization Democrats actually care about — the Democratic National Committee and exposed its internal corruption. If Obama could, he would declare Wikileaks a Terrorist Organization and anyone who published its stuff should be thrown in prison.

Nevertheless, this latest act by Obama is clearly a politicized action that seems more about widening the divide in the country and to continue to smear doubt over the election. The CIA claim that Russia hacked the DNC and gave the data to Wikileaks to help Trump against Hillary, is really questionable since there is no evidence of a hack. The FBI said that Hillary’s emails had been hacked by five foreign governments. They could not be 100% sure who, or what they got since the really classified stuff was omitted, but the CIA is now claiming it was Russia who hacked the DNC and got this collection of 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments from the DNC. There is absolutely NO WAY that a professional hacker who leaves no concrete trace with Hillary’s emails, would be sloppy enough to leave such a trace at the DNC.

Furthermore, Julian Assange  came out and stated publicly it was a leak and not a hack but declined to say who was the leak. Backing up Assange, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, confirmed he has met the person who gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks and said publicly it was not the Russians. That was reported by BizPac Review, which is a contributor to Google News. Additionally, there is just no hard evidence whatsoever. This is clearly a false flag report by the Obama Administration supported by the highly partisan Washington Post, which has lost all credibility during this election. Yes, Trump was correct, 77% of all press reporting during the election was negative against him according to a Harvard study.

There is absolutely no evidence that the votes were hacked in any state by Russia, China, Bangladesh or Canada just so Justin Pierre James Trudeau who have someone to talk to if Hillary won. So exactly how is this sinister hack supposed to have influenced the election? Oh, that’s right, it revealed that the Democrats conspired with the press to make sure Trump would be the pick because they thought they could demonize him and beat him easily. Then they conspired to stop Bernie take California and cheated to give that to Hillary to the point the head of the DNC had to resign. But hey! What Obama is really saying is if they DNC hack had not taken place, then the Democrats would have gotten away with it fair and square?

There is something else behind the curtain. That is, there were plenty within the FBI and the Intelligence Community who wanted Hillary indicted. There was talk that the hack of the DNC was home grown from within the CIA and handed to Wikileaks. So is the CIA now trying to cover its own trail? Or is Obama trying to set the stage for the next election saying Trump was really not the president? There cannot be any hard-core proof Russia was behind that hack. This seems to be a false-flag to clean the deck before leaving office and to try to shift the proof that the DNC was rotten to the core.

Traitors John McCain and Lindsey Graham JOIN DEMOCRATS to DELEGITIMIZE President-Elect Trump


McCain is way over the hill and has no clue about anything any more

Senator Joe Manchin and Carly Fiorina Meet With President Elect Donald Trump…


There’s a few interesting decisions that may come out this week.  The Secretary of Energy seems a possibility, and names of Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Governor Rick Perry (TX) both surfac…

Source: Senator Joe Manchin and Carly Fiorina Meet With President Elect Donald Trump..

trump-drain-the-swamp121111111111112111111111111111111111112111111111111111111111111112111111

FBI Disputes CIA’s “Fuzzy And Ambiguous” Claims That Russia Sought To Influence Presidential Election


Tyler Durden's picture

Since election day, Democrats have engaged in a panicked attempt to leverage their last couple of weeks in control of the executive branch to delegitimize the Trump presidency.  Obama has even gone so far as to order a “full report” on Russian tampering in the 2016 election cycle to be completed before he leaves office (see “A “Soft Coup” Attempt: Furious Trump Slams “Secret” CIA Report Russia Helped Him Win“).  Of course, we should simply ignore the fact that a true investigation of such allegations would take much longer than the one month that Obama has left in office because any delay could run the risk of a bipartisan/independent review and that’s just not how the Obama administration plays the game.

But at least one investigative agency, the FBI, isn’t buying the “fuzzy and ambiguous” assertions from the CIA that Russia “quite” clearly meddled in the U.S. elections on behalf of the Trump campaign.  Meanwhile, the FBI’s unwillingness to play along is infuriating Democrats.  Per the BizPac Review:

  The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week.

A senior FBI counterintelligence official met with Republican and Democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in order to give the bureau’s view of a recent CIA report. The official did not concur with the CIA, frustrating Democrats.

The CIA believes Russia “quite” clearly intended to send Trump to the White House. The claim is a bold one and concerned Democrats and some Republicans who are worried about Trump’s desire to mend relations with an increasingly aggressive Russia. The CIA report was “direct, bold and unqualified,” one of the officials at the meeting told The Washington Post Saturday.

The FBI official was much less convinced of the claims, providing “fuzzy” and “ambiguous” remarks.

The Washington Post compiled the following comments from the weekend talk show circuit highlighting where various DC players stand on the Russia allegations.

 Meanwhile, the Washington Post also points out that the whole disagreement likely comes down to “cultural” differences between the FBI and CIA.  Apparently the FBI “wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something” while the CIA is “more comfortable drawing inferences.” 
 The competing messages, according to officials in attendance, also reflect cultural differences between the FBI and the CIA. The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior.

“The FBI briefers think in terms of criminal standards — can we prove this in court,” one of the officials said. “The CIA briefers weigh the preponderance of intelligence and then make judgment calls to help policymakers make informed decisions. High confidence for them means ‘we’re pretty damn sure.’ It doesn’t mean they can prove it in court.”

The FBI is not sold on the idea that Russia had a particular aim in its meddling. “There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way, but it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals,” said one U.S. official.

Well, that certainly seems reasonable…who needs “facts and tangible evidence” when the CIA can just “draw inferences“…they’re supposedly really smart so we should probably just believe them.

Trump Slams “Conspiracy Theory” After John Bolton Suggests Russian Hack Was “False Flag” By Obama Administration


Tyler Durden's picture

With the unconfirmed report of Russian hacking of the US presidential election to benefit Donald Trump, coupled with the ongoing crackdown against Russian propaganda “fake news”, dominating the US media today, overnight the former neocon ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, who has been floated for the possible second highest role in Donald Trump’s State Department supporting Rex Tillerson, poured fuel on the fire with questions about Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election, going so far as to suggest that the “Russian hacks” were in fact a false flag operation by the current administration.

“It is not at all clear to me, just viewing this from the outside, that this hacking into the DNC and the RNC was not a false flag operation,” he told Fox News’ Eric Shawn on Sunday.  Asked about the use of the phrase “false flag” and whether he was accusing the US government of involvement, Bolton said, “We just don’t know.”

While skeptics have been quick to tear apart his allegation, where he was accurate is his assessment that “intelligence has been politicized in the Obama administration to a very significant degree.”

The topic of Russian interference surged on Friday after a Washington Post story revealed that according to a “secret” CIA assessment, Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win the presidency. Curiously, the FBI – and many others – have disagreed; so far no evidence has been presented to substantiate the story.

Various entities have been identified who helped the Russian government leak hacked documents from Democratic sources, including the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, to WikiLeaks, according to the report. On Sunday morning, Trump assailed Democrats over the issue, saying it was “ridiculous” to think Russia interfered in the election to help him get elected, even as a bipartisan group of senators called for an investigation.

But, “if you think the Russians did this, then why did they leave fingerprints?” that led the CIA to its conclusion, Bolton questioned.

“We would want to know who else might want to influence the election and why they would leave fingerprints that point to the Russians. That’s why I say until we know more about how the intelligence community came to this conclusion we don’t know whether it is Russian inspired or a false flag.”

 

Meanwhile, moments ago Trump also joined the fray, tweeting “Can you imagine if the election results were the opposite and WE tried to play the Russia/CIA card. It would be called conspiracy theory!”

He followed this by adding “Unless you catch “hackers” in the act, it is very hard to determine who was doing the hacking. Why wasn’t this brought up before election?”

Lockheed Martin Tumbles After Trump Tweets On “Out Of Control” F-35 Costs


Tyler Durden's picture

After running up dramatically post-Trump’s victory, Lockheed Martin shares are tumbling again this morning after the president-elect tweeted, questioning the costs of the company’s F-35…

The reaction was a swift 3% plunge in the share price…

In Feb., Lockheed Martin said in a filing that “The F-35 program is our largest program, generating 20% of our total consolidated net sales, as well as 59% of Aeronautics’ net sales in 2015”

The tweet appears to have come in response to this story exposing “The Pentagon’s most expensive weapons program”… (via ABC)

  U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter was visiting Israel Monday as it prepared to receive the first two next-generation F-35 fighter jets that will help preserve the country’s military edge in the volatile Mideast.

The F-35 is the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons program, with an estimated cost of nearly $400 billion. Israel is among a small number of allies to get the plane.

Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the fighter jets “present another component in maintaining air superiority in our region” and expressed gratitude to Carter, who was welcomed with a military honor guard at a Tel Aviv army base.

The jets were supposed to touch down in Israel in the early afternoon, but the Israeli military said their arrival was delayed due to weather conditions in Italy. Neither U.S. nor Israeli officials provided further details.

First Boeing, now Lockheed Martin… Raytheon next? Maybe the swamp of wasting taxpayer money is being cleaned up after all?

KOMMONSENTSJANE – THE ANGRY MAN (AND WOMAN)


We the people (all Americans citizens) have had enough withe the progressive liberal socialist agenda we are taking back OUR country like it or not!

kommonsentsjane's avatarkommonsentsjane

December 11, 2016 9:29 AM

The Angry Man–(and Woman)

FROM ONE IRREDEEMABLE, UNREPENTING DEPLORABLE TO (hopefully) ANOTHER–

THIS IS GREAT !

The Angry Man —(and Woman)

For all the interest group pandering that shapes modern American politics, the group that may well have decided the election has come down to the demographic of “The Angry Man.”

The Angry Man is difficult to stereotype. He comes from all economic backgrounds, from dirt-poor to filthy rich. He represents all geographic areas in America , from sophisticated urbanite to rural redneck, Deep South to Yankee North, Left Coast to Eastern Seaboard.

No matter where he’s from, Angry Men share many common traits; they aren’t asking for anything from anyone other than the promise to be able to make their own way on a level playing field. In many cases, they are independent businessmen and employ several people. They pay more than their share of…

View original post 774 more words