Well so far the Demorats have not been able to stop the job growth.
Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,
I don’t believe it is as pervasive as certain people may think, but there is a notion among some in the liberty movement that with Donald Trump in the White House the need for crisis preparedness has subsided. Because preppers and survivalists tend to lean towards the conservative side of things, the urgency for prepping almost always explodes when the Democratic party is “in power.” As they say, for example, Barack Obama was perhaps the greatest gun salesman in history with the gun industry growing over 158% during his two terms.
Now with Republican dominance in Congress, Senate and White House, there is a possible temptation for conservatives to become complacent and comfortable once again. In 2017 so far, ATF background checks have dropped by at least half a million since this time last year, and gun company stocks are turning negative. There are also rumors floating around that survival food companies are suffering from a severe crunch in sales. Though I have not yet found this to be substantiated, I can verify that many preppers I deal with on a daily basis seem to have relaxed their guard.
I would point out that this is not necessarily all due to Trump. The gun market is likely saturated after eight years of Obama, and one must also consider that as the U.S. economy continues to decline, surplus cash used for prep gear is going to dry up. That said, I do think it is important to examine any assumptions liberty activists might have in terms of a Trump driven “recovery.”
When I began publishing my post-election analysis on what I felt was a predictable Trump win, I did find anger among some activists who decided I was being “too pessimistic,” and that I should join the movement in celebration. Being that I called a Trump presidency half a year in advance based on the premise that the globalists needed a conservative scapegoat for the next phase of the ongoing financial crisis, it was hardly a moment of celebration for me.
There is a common delusion among those that invest themselves in politics that all that is needed to reverse the course of any nation or situation is a “strong leader” with ample cheerleading from the populace. In reality, social and geopolitical disasters are usually far beyond the means of any one politician to change. Economic disasters are even more irreversible. I wish I could pretend to be optimistic, but I am rather well studied in the history of these kinds of events.
Conservatives are especially vulnerable to the idea of a “protector on a white horse” coming to their rescue; a God-fearing hero and statesman, a general and leader of men. But, such people do not exist. There are no supermen. There are no worldly saviors. There are only common men, with common failings, destined to face extraordinary obstacles. The great men of history are not born before hand — they are forged in the crucible of crisis. Great men are not great men until proven otherwise. To assume any political leader is a great man beforehand is foolish, to say the least.
This is why blind faith in a post-Trump renaissance is misplaced. It is something that has yet to be proven, and in the meantime, there are numerous and highly visible dangers on the horizon that demand continued vigilance and preparedness. I will examine one of these primary dangers now…
The Growing Threat Of Civil Unrest
As I noted in my post-election analysis, the political Left has been shell shocked by the rise of Trump and their emotional response would undoubtedly be to double down and become progressively more volatile and more violent. I predicted that this would be evident as winter broke and the cold weather subsided.
The first signs of this are surfacing as May Day is becoming a rally date for social justice mobs bent on disrupting any agenda the Trump administration might have for enforcing immigration laws. The largest of these protests is to be held in Los Angeles, but similar protests are planned nationwide as well.
From what we have seen from previous rallies, it would not be unfair to expect rioting in May. I say this because a tone shift in the left is taking place and extreme reactions are more frequent. The following video illustrates this clearly, I think…
Warning – Explicit
In case you missed it, this guy just pulled an AR-15 on someone simply because they had a MAGA flag on their truck. Not only that, but he FILMED HIMSELF doing it and and apparently posted it on social media. That is how brazen and insane these people are becoming.
Think of it this way — could you have even imagined something like this happening during the 2012 election? It is important not to become conditioned to such behavior as being “normal.”
To be sure, this sort of thing will not be happening in certain parts of the country. In my state of Montana, the assailant would have been shot two dozen times over by our highly armed population regardless of his politics just on the self defense principle. And frankly, I am fine with that. Citizens providing security for citizens is the American way.
What I do have a problem with, though, is the increasing potential for an extreme response from conservatives in the face of leftist lunacy. Meaning, I worry about martial law with conservative support, which in my view is more and more likely over the next two years.
Contrary to popular belief among tough-government champions, martial law often instigates more violence than it solves. The harsher the crackdown, the more vicious the push-back; the more vicious the push-back the more totalitarianism is rationalized by authorities. It’s a terrible cycle.
Preparedness in terms of self defense should be self-explanatory here. During widespread mob action the rule of law is usually the first casualty, even when martial law is instituted. You also never know when some nutcase might declare you a “Trump supporter” (whether you are one or not) as he reaches for a weapon.
It is fascinating to me the level of cognitive dissonance with some liberty activists who seem to think Trump’s first term will be anything other than pure chaos. George Soros, an elitist who often funds the very groups organizing mobs to protest Trump, said it plainly:
“I think Trump will fail.”
“What’s more Soros predicted that the market’s Trump high will soon turn into a hangover. He called Trump unpredictable and unprepared, and said that combination will end up bad for the market.”
Soros and his globalist colleagues do not need to field guesses; they ENGINEER the outcomes that they “predict.” Social unrest at this fragile time would result in the exact market instability Soros mentioned, among other problems.
Look, you may believe Trump is being threatened on all sides by the so-called “deep state,” or you may believe that he has willingly surrounded himself with global elitists because he is a Trojan horse. Either way, the diagnosis for the future is not rosy. It would be naive to think that the globalists would not do everything in their power to foment calamity in the near term. It would be equally naive to believe that such an agenda could be repelled through political means.
The answer, as always, is a prepared citizenry. This can act as a deterrent as much as a measure of comfort. The more prepared the public is for any eventuality, the less affected we will be by disaster. The less affected we are by disaster, the less fearful we will be when it strikes and the less likely we will be to make stupid decisions such as throwing our support behind martial law and the wholesale erasure of the constitution. The more prepared we are, the fewer options available to the establishment when attempting to lure us into poor collective decisions.
Prepping means freedom in the face of uncertainty, and times have never been more uncertain. To summarize: A Trump White House calls for more caution, not less.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has apparently decided she’s not willing to take the chance of becoming the latest politician to fall victim to the same “Russian hacking” and “fake news” campaigns which ‘undoubtedly’ caused the downfall of America’s liberal darling, Hillary Clinton (forget those pay-for-play scandals, federal record retention violations and willful non-compliance with Congressional subpeonas…total non-factors in the 2016 election).
And since they can’t really control the actions of those pesky ‘Russian hackers,” Germany’s cabinet has instead decided to pass legislation that would impose serious fines of up to 50 million Euros on any social networks that fail to swiftly remove content that could be deemed “hateful” or “fake news.” Per Yahoo News:
Germany’s Cabinet on Wednesday approved a new bill that punishes social networking sites if they fail to swiftly remove illegal content such as hate speech or defamatory fake news
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Cabinet agreed on rules that would impose fines of up to 50 million euros (53.4 million dollars) on Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms.
German Justice Minister Heiko Maas said that the companies offering such online platforms are responsible for removing hateful content. He said the new bill would not restrict the freedom of expression, but intervene only when criminal hatred or intentionally false news are posted.
Of course, all of this begs the question of exactly how German officials define “fake news” as the lines between what is pure ‘fact’ versus ‘opinion’ often grow very blurred in politics. Moreover, politicians themselves are often the biggest purveyors of “fake news”…so if someone quotes the erroneous comments of a German politician on FaceBook is the social network then liable? All questions that would have seemed silly just a year ago…
Nevertheless, German Justice Minister Heiko Maas is convinced that “verbal radicalization” of snowflakes over twitter and Facebook is often a precursor to “physical violence.”
Social networks need to ensure that obviously criminal content — as defined by German law — will be deleted within 24 hours and other illegal content after seven days.
“Just like on the streets, there is also no room for criminal incitement on social networks,” Maas said.
“The internet affects the culture of debate and the atmosphere in our society. Verbal radicalization is often a preliminary stage to physical violence,” he added.
But nevermind the actual ‘radicalization’ occurring in migrant communities throughout Europe at the moment…that is also just “fake news.”
As we noted last week, Assemblyman Ed Chau (D-Monterey Park) recently introduced a similar piece of legislation in California, the so-called “California Political Cyberfraud Abatement Act” or AB 1104 for short, that would have effectively made it a crime to be wrong on the Internet. The text of the bill implicated anyone who writes, publishes or even shares news stories that could be false, if those news stories are later found to have had an impact on an election. From the bill:
This bill would modify the definition of the terms “political cyberfraud” and “political Web site” to include Internet Web sites that urge or appear to urge the support or opposition of candidates for public office. The bill would also make it unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on a Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on a Web site, a false or deceptive statement designed to influence the vote on any issue submitted to voters at an election or on any candidate for election to public office.
And even though author Ed Chau described AB 1104 as “an important step forward in the fight against ‘fake news’ and deceptive campaign tactics”, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital-rights advocacy group, said the bill was “so obviously unconstitutional, we had to double check that it was real.”
Memo to California Assemblymember Ed Chau: you can’t fight fake news with a bad law.
On Tuesday, the California Assembly’s Committee on Privacy and Consumer Affairs, which Chau chairs, will consider A.B. 1104—a censorship bill so obviously unconstitutional, we had to double check that it was real.
This bill will fuel a chaotic free-for-all of mudslinging with candidates and others being accused of crimes at the slightest hint of hyperbole, exaggeration, poetic license, or common error. While those accusations may not ultimately hold up, politically motivated prosecutions—or the threat of such—may harm democracy more than if the issue had just been left alone. Furthermore, A.B. 1104 makes no exception for satire and parody, leaving The Onion and Saturday Night Live open to accusations of illegal content. Nor does it exempt news organizations who quote deceptive statements made by politicians in their online reporting—even if their reporting is meant to debunk those claims. And what of everyday citizens who are duped by misleading materials: if 1,000 Californians retweet an incorrect statement by a presidential candidate, have they all broken the law?
At a time when political leaders are promoting “alternative facts” and branding unflattering reporting as “fake news,” we don’t think it’s a good idea to give the government more power to punish speech.
But, unlike in Germany, California actually realized how idiotic their bill was before passing it into law…
The term: “for domestic consumption” is a term generally familiar to political observers who are accustomed to filtering out and separating ‘noise’ from ‘action’ when reviewing remarks made by international leaders outside the U.S.
However, in modern U.S. geo-political review it becomes important to apply the same cognitive transparency toward U.S. President Trump as he faces the three-headed swamp guardian, Cerberus.
The three heads of the modern Cerberus we identify as: •Deep State (foreign policy adversaries), •Big Club (domestic economic adversaries) and •U.S. Media.
All three oppositional entities view the insurgent Presidency of Donald Trump as adversarial to their long-term globalist interests.
Against the backdrop of Jordans King Abdullah II visiting President Trump in the White House; and knowing Jordan has approximately 2.8 million Syrian refugees, most of whom oppose Syrian President Bashir Assad; and in the aftermath of a “chemical agent” attack in Syria – President Trump was in a precarious position. The Deep Globalist State had laid their trap.
Within the 30,000 foot review, and against the historic backdrop of precedent for this type of action, we find the motive. However, it’s a motive that is virtually impossible to discuss from the office of the presidency while the adversarial U.S. media is also poised to strike.
Knowing King Abdullah is an ideological ally in the quest for the longer goal of peace, President Trump takes an outward approach (two-nation domestic consumption) to blame Syria’s Bashir Assad. This strategic approach deflects the fangs of Deep State, inoculates against a follow-up attack by MSM, and protects the domestic position of Abdullah.
The prudent President Trump approach also allows the freedom alliance of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi (Egypt), King Abdullah II (Jordan), King Salman (Saudi Arabia), Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), and Mahmoud Abbas (Palestinian Authority) to move forward toward a much larger, more stable and more significant geo-political alignment. King Abdullah publicly signaled these intentions today during remarks with President Trump at the White House.
The back-channeling signals and conversations with Vladimir Putin (Russia), and Bashir Assad (Syria) become more important than the public optics for ‘domestic consumption’. Actions speak louder than words. Knowing the rather extensive ground work that has already taken place, there’s no immediate reason to believe Putin and Assad do not recognize President Trump’s larger strategy.
♦ Immediately following his inauguration, President Trump spoke to Saudi Arabia’s King Salman and gained his ideological and financial support for building a safe zone for Syrian’s as they rebuild.
♦ A week later, President Trump spoke at length to Egypt’s Fattah al-Sisi about their efforts.
♦ At the beginning of February – King Abdullah III of Jordan traveled to Washington to meet with Vice-President Mike Pence and discuss aide and assistance for regional security. Previously, in November 2016, King Abdullah spoke to President-elect Trump
♦ A week later – Benjamin Netanyahu arrived in Washington DC for a very warm and optimistic meeting with President Trump for talks on regional security.
♦ At the beginning of March – Egyptian foreign minister Sameh Shoukry visited Washington, met with members of Congress and held a long discussion with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson,
♦ Mid-March Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas met with an envoy from President Trump and told him that a peace deal is possible under the new president.
♦ On Monday – Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi came to the White House for an official state visit, and a very warm greeting by President Trump.
♦ Today – Jordan’s King Abdullah II follows al-Sisi with a visit to the White House and receives another very warm greeting by the U.S. President
Jordan’s King Abdullah and Egypt’s Fattah al-Sisi have a very close regional relationship.
Egyptian President al-Sisi previously secured most of the Sinai border region. The current challenge, for all regional interests, is to keep the extremist elements in check and undermine their destabilizing efforts. A big part of that stability includes Syria, Russia and the U.S. defeating the remnants of ISIS.
Under-reported in Western media, during the fall/winter of 2014 and spring/summer of 2015 al-Sisi removed every Hamas tunnel and relocated thousands of homes to create a miles-wide buffer zone no longer useful by terrorists.
The scope of what Egypt did to secure the Southern and Eastern border of Israel/Gaza is quite remarkable, and they have paid a high price battling extremists every inch of the way.
Simultaneously, as his Egyptian forces were removing the most significant security threat, al-Sisi brokered a peace deal between Abbas and Netanyahu and forced the Palestinian Authority to speak with one voice. That’s why Egypt was so furious when John Kerry insisted on poking his nose into the agreement.
After the peace deal, and after he constructed the border security zone, Fattah al-Sisi then set up the construct for a Joint Arab Intervention Force.
We have continued to express optimism for a confluence of events, people and activity that is happening quietly, and could stun the geo-political world. The timing is right, because we view these activities through a different prism. We review against the backdrop of President Obama’s mid-east failure, equitable misery.
The reality of President Obama’s expressed foreign policy of regime change -regardless of cost or consequence- has left millions of Mid-East communities in peril; far worse off today than they were nine years ago. In an odd and accidental way, President Obama created equitable misery.
• The Egyptian people, in no way a populist entity favorable to Israel, suffered through two years of brutal dictatorship from the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohammed Morsi. Their very survival only due to a successful return of cultural and economic stability at the hands of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
• The Syrian people, again holding no favorable disposition toward Israel writ large, only just now coming out of the shadows of a horrific five-year civil war and seeing sunlight for the first time in half a decade. Breathing room.
• The Libyan people, caught amid an ongoing crisis of regional and tribal strife suffering through ongoing extremist violence that has taken them into the depths of economic and social chaos. And before the fighting is even over, Europe is outlining demands of the North African gates.
• The Jordanian people, again a tenuous and precarious Muslim nation, who has watched the most barbaric and horrific consequences from extremist violence in their lifetimes. The Jordanians are aiding more than 2.8 million refugees from the civil war in Syria.
The end result of almost all far-left policies when carried out to their natural conclusion is equitable misery. At no moment in recent history has the choking consequence of a decade-long ideological war left a larger population of people so exhausted than at this very moment.
Think of the nationalist possibility. ♦ Fattah al-Sisi (Egypt), ♦ King Abdullah II (Jordan), ♦ Benjamin Netanyahu (Israel), ♦ Mahmoud Abbas (Palestinian Authority), ♦ King Salman and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (Saudi Arabia), and ♦ U.S. President Donald Trump. Together they have a remarkable canvas.
The anti-Trump media jumped into a level of gleeful frenzy today amid a required security filing noticing that Senior Trump Adviser Steve Bannon was no longer a member of the “principals committee” on the National Security Council.
The hilarity cemented itself when competing media outlets were arguing about Steve Bannon being on the NSC, or being kicked-off the NSC, while Bannon walked past them en route to today’s NSC meeting. Wait, wha… huh? Yeah -{Insert Laugh Track HERE}-
Nothing ever happens in a vacuum, and today is no exception. No, Steve Bannon is not being removed from the Senior advisory role to President Trump and will attend NSC meetings with the President. Bannon’s security clearance therein remains unchanged.
However, Bannon is removing himself from the Principal’s Committee of the H.R. McMaster NSC (*note* he never attended the committee meetings, well, that is, he did, once), now that the political weaponization of NSC intelligence operations has been removed; and McMaster has recalibrated the incoming intelligence agencies to remove the political intelligence they were previously used to sending.
What does that prior paragraph mean?
Start by reminding yourself of the current headlines about National Security Adviser Susan Rice requesting raw intelligence to the NSC based on Obama’s political agendas’, not national security.
HR McMaster, the current National Security Adviser of President Trump, had to reset and re-instruct each of the heads of the intelligence agencies who provide intelligence to the NSC to remove the political intelligence.
McMaster needed to visit with each agency, CIA, NSA, State Department and Defense to reorient them on what national intelligence the Trump administration wishes to receive within the National Security Council.
President Trump doesn’t want the national intelligence agencies sending him updates on what Senator Schumer had for lunch, where and who he dined with. Instead President Trump prefers the intelligence agencies focus on global security issues that are actually vital to the national security interests of the country.
H.R McMasters instructions toward he intelligence agencies has just freed up thousands of hours of operational intelligence (spying and analysis) to focus on real threats unrelated to domestic politics. Subsequently with the new direction established, Steve Bannon doesn’t need to be a pre-filter for NSC raw intel any longer. Bannon can now be a consumer of that intelligence, just like President Trump.
White House Chief Legal Counsel Don McGahn’s job also just got a lot less stressful.
Secondly, with the anticipation of President Obama’s Nat Sec Adviser Susan Rice remaining in the headlines as more is discovered about her role in the weaponization of intelligence for political use, there’s no better time for political Bannon to exit the NSC Principals Committee than right now.
It would be a little sketchy for Rice’s political weaponization of the NSC to be exposed in the media headlines while Steve Bannon, painted as a pure political partisan, sat on the Principals Committee of the Trump NSC.
CTH Susan Rice Back Story:
Today, Catherine Herridge is reporting the unmasking requests made by former National Security Adviser were requests for details of daily surveillance of President Trump’s transition team regarding their daily life activity.
(New York) The intelligence reports at the center of the Susan Rice unmasking controversy were detailed, and almost resembled a private investigator’s file, according to a Republican congressman familiar with the documents.
“This is information about their everyday lives,” Rep. Peter King of New York, a member of the House Intelligence committee said. “Sort of like in a divorce case where lawyers are hired, investigators are hired just to find out what the other person is doing from morning until night and then you try to piece it together later on.”
On the House Intelligence Committee, only the Republican chairman, Devin Nunes of California, and the ranking Democrat Adam Schiff, also of California, have personally reviewed the intelligence reports. Some members were given broad outlines.
Nunes has consistently stated that the files caused him deep concern because the unmasking went beyond the former national security adviser Mike Flynn, and the information was not related to Moscow. (read more)
The EU will be gone by the end of 2018
France holds its first round of voting on the 23rd of April, 2017. Unless one candidate wins more than 50% of the vote, the two leading contenders will go to a second round on May 7th. The French Debate took place and of course Emmanuel Macron the press is cheering as the victor. Of course, we have seen how the press tries to manipulate the public in Britain against BREXIT and in the USA against Trump. The press agenda in France is no less corrupt.
Macron attacked Ms Le Pen’s nationalist proposals declaring “Nationalism is war. I know it. I come from a region that is full of graveyards,” Reported Reuters. Macron is showing how nasty he really is as a person. He then attacked Le Pen’ dead father “You are saying the same lies that we’ve heard from your father for 40 years.”
Francois Fillon, the scandal plagued conservative who paid his wife to be an assistant more than the President of the United States is paid, said that France needed Europe when up against the US and China. Fillon would never change anything and doom France in the process the same as Macron. Indeed, Fillon tried to also attack Le Pen and she responded to Mr Fillon: “You shouldn’t pretend to be something new when you are speaking like fossils that are at least 50 years old.”
Francois Asselineau, who is the nationalist right-wing outsider, chimed in and said that he was “the only true candidate of Frexit”, and promised to trigger Article 50 as has Britain to begin the divorce from the EU immediately if he were to win power.
While the press is now touting Macron as the leader, what is very clear is that the failure to elect Le Pen will really be devastating for the EU. Why? Because a Le Pen victory would be far more of a soft-landing for the EU and actually raise hope that Brussels would be forced back to just a trade union rather than a political union demanding the surrender of individual nation sovereignty. That will actually raise the risk far greater for a European war. Brussels will wipe its brow and declare “populism” is dead and press full stream ahead to federalized Europe.
But the economics of the EU are crumbling and this indicates that no matter how hard Brussels tries to keep this mess together, it will crumble and fall apart. A Le Pen victory would be the soft-landing and political reform would then be possible in Europe. A Le Pen defeat, will only invite civil unrest that can turn to war within Europe because Brussels will not reform and it will only get worse.
You have already the Arrogance of Brussels telling Poland and Hungary they MUST accept the refugees or get out of the EU. That is a totalitarian position and the sovereignty of individual states will no longer matter. The argument are akin to surrendering the United States to be ruled by the United Nations.
As part of its daily wrap of the Susan Rice newsflow, which focused on her first media appearance since she was “outed” as the persona responsible for “unmasking” members of team Trump, the WSJ provides two new pieces of incremental information: i) in addition to Michael Flynn, at least one more member of the Trump transition team was “unmasked” in intelligence reports due to multiple foreign conversations that weren’t related to Russia; and ii) Rice wasn’t the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking, confirming there is at least one more high-level official giving “unmasking” orders.
But first, a brief detour.
“Unmasking” is a term used when the identity of a U.S. citizen or lawful resident is revealed in classified intelligence reports. Normally, when government officials receive intelligence reports, the names of American citizens are redacted to protect their privacy. But officials can request that names, listed as “U.S. Person 1,” for example, be unmasked internally in order to give context about the potential value of the intelligence. Unmasking is justified for national security reasons but is governed by strict rules across the U.S. intelligence apparatus that make it illegal to pursue for political reasons or to leak classified information generated by the process.
It is the accusation that Rice unmasked members for purely political reasons – ostensibly in coordination with president Obama – that has gotten Republican smelling blood in the water. Republicans have for weeks signaled that they saw unmasking as the key to investigating the source of media leaks damaging to the Trump administration — such as the exposure of former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, who was forced to resign in February after media reports revealed that he misled Vice President Pence about the contents of his discussions with the Russian ambassador.
To that end, earlier this month, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) pressed FBI Director James Comey in a public Intelligence Committee hearing: “It would be nice to know the universe of people who have the power to unmask a U.S. citizen’s name… because that might provide something of a roadmap to investigate who might’ve actually disseminated a masked U.S. citizen’s name.”
He went on to press Comey on whether specific Obama officials, including Rice, would have had the authority to request that a name be unmasked. “Yes, in general, and any other national security adviser would, I think, as a matter of their ordinary course of their business,” Comey answered.
Shortly thereafter, The Hill notes Nunes made his shocking announcement that he — and he alone — had viewed documents that showed inappropriate unmasking by Obama-era officials.
Today, Susan Rice came out to defend herself and told MSNBC that “the allegation is that somehow, Obama administration officials utilized intelligence for political purposes,” Rice told Mitchell. “That’s absolutely false.”
She added that “The notion, which some people are trying to suggest, that by asking for the identity of the American person is the same is leaking it — that’s completely false. There is no equivalence between so-called unmasking and leaking.”
And yet, that is precisely what many republicans are suggesting because otherwise there is no explanation for how the WaPo and NYT received, on a virtual silver platter, stories about Mike Flynn’s communications with intel-level detail.
Perhaps Rice is simply lying as she lied on March 22 when in a PBS interview she said “I know nothing” about unmasking Trump officials. Less than two weeks later, we learn that she did.
But perhaps there is more to the story than what we know so far.
* * *
And this is where the WSJ comes in, with the new info that according to a Republican official familiar with deliberations by GOP lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee said that the names of two U.S. citizens who were part of Mr. Trump’s transition team have been unmasked in intelligence reports. One is Mr. Flynn and the other hasn’t been identified. The report involving Mr. Flynn documented phone conversations he had in late December with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.
The WSJ then reports that Rice had requested the unmasking of at least one transition official — not Mr. Flynn — who was part of multiple foreign conversations that weren’t related to Russia.
And the punchline: “The Republican official and others said Ms. Rice wasn’t the administration official who instigated Mr. Flynn’s unmasking.”
In other words, the story that Susan Rice is the unmasker is incomplete as there is at least one more person exposing the identities of people in Trump’s circle, and that the NSA and other intel agencies have been surveiling, accidentally or otherwise, at least one, so far unnamed individual, from Trump’s circle. It may well be someone that the WaPo and NYT have already published about, or it may be someone who has yet to hit the newswire, delivering the latest twist of the ongoing intelligence-fed news cycle.
For now the answer is unknown, although when Rice testifies under oath before the House Intel Committee, we hope that all outstanding questions will finally get answers.
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!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
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
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 