Did President Trump call neo-Nazis “very fine people” during a famous press conference following the Charlottesville riots of August 2017? The major media reported that he did. But what if their reporting is wrong? Worse, what if their reporting is wrong and they know it’s wrong? A straight exploration of the facts should reveal the truth. That’s what CNN political analyst Steve Cortes does in this critically important video.

By Jon Dougherty
TheNationalSentinel.com

For years, we have known that the so-called “mainstream” media has been in the tank for the Democrat Party, serving as its propaganda division.

In the age of President Donald Trump, it became obvious that the Washington establishment press has also served as a ‘useful idiot’ conduit for the deep state, essentially regurgitating whatever information an intelligence or federal law enforcement official fed them.

So long as it negatively impacted the president.

On Friday, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton discussed a rarity — actual evidence of media-deep state collusion in an ongoing attempt to knock off our duly elected president, proving without question that the Fourth Estate in America has allowed itself to become precisely the thing our founders attempted to prevent: An official organ of government.

In particular, Fitton, during an appearance on Fox Business Network, addressed information his organization uncovered showing that a reporter at The New York Times was feeding bogus information to the FBI to help effectuate the “Spygate” scandal.

“Just revealed that the Failing and Desperate New York Times was feeding false stories about me, & those associated with me, to the FBI. This shows the kind of unprecedented hatred I have been putting up with for years with this Crooked newspaper. Is what they have done legal?” POTUS tweeted regarding the discovery on Friday.

“I know the New York Times is trying to defend itself today,” Fitton said, but “the emails speak for themselves.”

JW uncovered an email to the spokesman of the Justice Department from the Times reporter “describing a story that his colleagues were working on about Jared Kushner and Russia — a story that we know was planted to make Donald Trump look bad…none of which have panned out,” Fitton noted further.

“The reporter wasn’t asking for a comment, he sent the information along” to the Justice Department, which “seemed unusual,” Fitton continued.

He noted there is a second email “where the New York Times is willing to give the FBI leadership a heads-up, a preview, on a story,” he said. “So..if that’s journalism, I think Americans would be upset about it because it looks like the media is working with the FBI [to get] Trump.”

The Washington Examiner, in an updated story, noted:

Journalist Michael Schmidt sent an email on March 23, 2017, to FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs Michael Kortan, stating that his colleagues were reporting on the FBI’s Russia investigation and had stumbled onto some information about President Trump’s son-in-law and top adviser.

Journalist: Media's Mueller leaks are a sign of desperation. The Intercept co-founding editor Glenn Greenwald on what we've learned from the Mueller report leaks.

Tucker Carlson Outs CNN as Being Shills for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrat Party; She Says Pivot to Healthcare from Russia Hoax and They Obey: ‘CNN is Not a News Outlet, It’s a Super PAC; It’s Running Unregulated Campaign Ads 24 Hours a Day; Someone Out to Call the FEC About It’

Who's the 'conspiracy theorist' now?

By David Blackmon
dbDailyUpdate.com
 

The Witch Hunt is dead! Long live the Witch Hunt! – In case you are wondering why every Democrat from Hawaii to Maine is screaming for Attorney General William Barr to “release the full, unredacted Mueller Report!”, it’s because they know that will never happen.

They know that Mueller’s report – assuming it is a fullsome narrative and not just the listing of indictments, prosecutions and deferrals required by the governing statute – will certainly be chock-full of classified information and other passages that the FBI and intelligence agencies will want to redact under their handy “sources and methods” rubrick.  They also know that AG Barr is an old pro, a guy who is going to play this situation strictly by the book, which likely means he is going to compile his own summary report that fully eliminates such concerns and release that to congress and the public instead.

Thus, their cynical and unfillable demand for the “full, unredacted report” will then be transformed into claims that Barr, the disciple of George H.W. Bush who most of them were praising just a few months ago, is now just a Trump toadie who is engaged in a coverup, claims that the Democrats plan to keep pounding right on through Election Day, 2020.

This claim of coverup will become a major part of the Democrat justification for mounting their own Witch Hunts that will consume most of the time over the next 18 months of at least three House committees:  Judiciary, Intelligence and Oversight. Party leaders feel they have no choice but to keep all of this anti-American nonsense alive in order for one of their array of freaks, miscreants, commies and outright nutjobs to have any chance of defeating President Donald Trump at the ballot box next year.

So, if you are frustrated that the Democrats who have spent the last 20 months guaranteeing us that Gestapo Chief, er, “Special Counsel” Mueller has “got the goods” on the President and several members of his family now refuse to accept Mueller’s finding that there was no “Russia Collusion” or “obstruction of justice” and allow our country to return to some sense of normalcy, well, this is why. Yes, it is demented; yes, it is depraved; yes, it is utterly despicable and un-American behavior, but hey, this is the Democrats we are talking about here.

What did you expect?

So, let’s review the Mueller Witch Hunt from a statistical perspective:

• Money spent – well in excess of $30 million
• Number of days – 675
• Number of indictments – 34
• Number of indictments against Americans – 8
• Number of indictments against Russian ham sandwiches Mueller knows will never come to this country to stand trial – 25
• Number of indictments against Concorde Management, whose trial Mueller continues to desperately postpone because he has a big bag of nothing against them – 1

MOST IMPORTANTLY…

• Number of indictments related to “Collusion” or “Obstruction” – ZERO, ZIP, ZILCH, NADA

By Julie Kelly
AmGreatness.com

In his online appeal for money after being fired this week, disgraced former FBI agent Peter Strzok credited an unlikely source to vouch for his victim status: The Weekly Standard.

At one time a leading conservative magazine, the Standard declared last month that Strzok’s plight was merely an “overwrought tale of bias” and the case against him is “just sound and fury.” The article brushed off Strzok’s actions as “several bad judgment calls” and blasted Congressional Republicans for continuing a criminal investigation into the now-unemployed G-man.

Strzok is following only 32 people on his newly-verified Twitter account. Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of the Standard, is one of them.

So, what’s with the fanboying between the Standard—an allegedly serious publication dedicated to advancing conservative principles—and a corrupt government bureaucrat who embodies everything the conservative movement fought against for decades?

I found an article in the Standard archives this week that might explain why. On July 24, 2016, just days before Strzok helped launch a counterintelligence probe into the Trump campaign, Kristol gave Strzok and the Obama Justice Department a big assist from the anti-Trump Right by posting a flawed and questionably-sourced article. “Putin’s Party” is compelling evidence that Kristol and the Standard were far from mere sideline observers as the Trump-Russia collusion scam took shape in the summer of 2016.

At the very least, the timing of the article suggests there was careful coordination between the central players—including the Hillary Clinton campaign—and Bill Kristol to derail Trump’s candidacy just weeks before the election. But the article’s content also serves to raise alarming questions about the claims by many Republicans that “conservatives” had no knowledge of or involvement with the Christopher Steele dossier.

Let’s back up a bit. On the morning that Kristol’s piece posted, the Trump-Russian election collusion story was in its embryonic stage—nearly all American voters that summer remained blissfully unaware of the details in this preposterous story—but secretly it was being peddled to the media by Fusion GPS, a political opposition research firm hired by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to dig up Russian-related dirt on Donald Trump. Talking points produced by Glenn Simpson, the head of Fusion, and contained in the Steele dossier, were making the rounds in the D.C.-NYC media claque during July 2016. (At the same time, Steele was working with the FBI and alerting the agency to his dubious findings about the Trump campaign.)

“Conspiracy theory” is a term that at once strikes fear and anxiety in the hearts of most every public figure, particularly journalists and academics. Since the 1960s the label has become a disciplinary device that has been overwhelmingly effective in defining certain events off limits to inquiry or debate. Especially in the United States raising legitimate questions about dubious official narratives destined to inform public opinion (and thereby public policy) is a major thought crime that must be cauterized from the public psyche at all costs.

CIA Conspiracy Theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.

This important memorandum and its broad implications for American politics and public discourse are detailed in a book by Florida State University political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, Conspiracy Theory in America. Dr. deHaven-Smith devised the state crimes against democracy concept to interpret and explain potential government complicity in events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the major political assassinations of the 1960s, and 9/11.

CIA Document 1035-960 was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by the New York Times. The directive is especially significant because it outlines the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government” vis-à-vis the Warren Commission Report. The agency was especially interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the [Warren] investigation.”

The memorandum lays out a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” For example, approaching “friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” to remind them of the Warren Commission’s integrity and soundness should be prioritized. “[T]he charges of the critics are without serious foundation,” the document reads, and “further speculative discussion only plays in to the hands of the [Communist] opposition.”

The agency also directed its members “[t]o employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”

1035-960 further delineates specific techniques for countering “conspiratorial” arguments centering on the Warren Commission’s findings. Such responses and their coupling with the pejorative label have been routinely wheeled out in various guises by corporate media outlets, commentators and political leaders to this day against those demanding truth and accountability about momentous public events.

Make no mistake.  This is the most serious attack on our right to free speech and if it goes unchallenged, everyone else is next!