Become a Patron!
To Date which US Presidential candidate will you be voting for & why?
- Thread starter SMOKIE
- Start date
- Status
DELINGPOLE: ‘Global Warming’ Is a Myth, Say 58 Scientific Papers in 2017
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...al-warming-is-myth-58-scientific-papers-2017/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...al-warming-is-myth-58-scientific-papers-2017/
Texas Leads 16-State Coalition in Support of Travel Ban
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2017/06/06/texas-leads-16-state-coalition-support-travel-ban/
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2017/06/06/texas-leads-16-state-coalition-support-travel-ban/
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40184641
Iran's parliament and Khomeini mausoleum attacked by gunmen
Attackers have opened fire at the Iranian parliament and Ayatollah Khomeini's mausoleum in the capital, Tehran, causing a number of casualties.
Iran's parliament and Khomeini mausoleum attacked by gunmen
Attackers have opened fire at the Iranian parliament and Ayatollah Khomeini's mausoleum in the capital, Tehran, causing a number of casualties.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/...ran-parliament-mausoleum-170607063232218.html
Gunmen attack Iran's parliament, Khomeini shrine
Several killed in attacks on parliament and Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini in Tehran, as ISIL claims responsibility.
Gunmen and suicide bombers have attacked Iran's parliament in central Tehran and the Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini in south of the city, killing several people.
Four armed assailants attacked parliament office buildings on Wednesday morning, while the shrine of revolutionary founder Ruhollah Khomeini was struck by a female suicide bomber, state media reported.
One of the attackers on Iran's parliament complex blew himself up on the fourth floor amid an ongoing siege, state broadcaster IRIB reported.
Gunmen attack Iran's parliament, Khomeini shrine
Several killed in attacks on parliament and Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini in Tehran, as ISIL claims responsibility.
Gunmen and suicide bombers have attacked Iran's parliament in central Tehran and the Mausoleum of Ayatollah Khomeini in south of the city, killing several people.
Four armed assailants attacked parliament office buildings on Wednesday morning, while the shrine of revolutionary founder Ruhollah Khomeini was struck by a female suicide bomber, state media reported.
One of the attackers on Iran's parliament complex blew himself up on the fourth floor amid an ongoing siege, state broadcaster IRIB reported.
NATO is based on the principle of collective defense: an attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all. So far that has only been invoked once -- in response to the September 11 attacks.
To make the idea work, it is important for all members to make sure their armed forces are in good shape. So NATO sets an official target on how much they should spend. That currently stands at 2% of GDP.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...ato-budget-germany-1465-13-allies-pay-below-1
US Pays 22.1% of NATO Budget; Germany 14.7%; 13 Allies Pay Less Than 1%
NATO is based on the principle of collective defense: an attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all. So far that has only been invoked once -- in response to the September 11 attacks.
They never seem to produce graphs of total historical contributions by country for NATO & UN do they?
To make the idea work, it is important for all members to make sure their armed forces are in good shape. So NATO sets an official target on how much they should spend. That currently stands at 2% of GDP.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...ato-budget-germany-1465-13-allies-pay-below-1
US Pays 22.1% of NATO Budget; Germany 14.7%; 13 Allies Pay Less Than 1%
They never seen to produce graphs of total $ contribution by country for NATO or UN do they? Wonder why?
https://www.rt.com/news/391171-oliver-stone-putin-hot-war/
Nobody would survive’: Putin to Oliver Stone on ‘hot war’ between Russia & US
No country on earth would survive should the world’s most powerful nuclear states unleash their atomic weapons, Vladimir Putin has said. His remarks form part of a series of interviews with American film director Oliver Stone.
The question of whether the human race would survive a potential global nuclear war has tormented the minds of generations, and indeed Stone, who wondered if the Russian president believes the US might emerge victorious if such a conflict were to break out.
“In a hot war is the US dominant?” the American director asked the Russian president.
“I don’t think anyone would survive such a conflict,” Putin replied in a short Showtime teaser, a precursor to a documentary titled 'The Putin Interviews' that will be aired next week.
Nobody would survive’: Putin to Oliver Stone on ‘hot war’ between Russia & US
No country on earth would survive should the world’s most powerful nuclear states unleash their atomic weapons, Vladimir Putin has said. His remarks form part of a series of interviews with American film director Oliver Stone.
The question of whether the human race would survive a potential global nuclear war has tormented the minds of generations, and indeed Stone, who wondered if the Russian president believes the US might emerge victorious if such a conflict were to break out.
“In a hot war is the US dominant?” the American director asked the Russian president.
“I don’t think anyone would survive such a conflict,” Putin replied in a short Showtime teaser, a precursor to a documentary titled 'The Putin Interviews' that will be aired next week.
They want you to find out the GDP of each member and do the math..LOL
This from CNN is the closest pie
There is a good comparison in dollars as well as each nation's GDP in dollars in this
NATO publication:
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2017_03/20170313_170313-pr2017-045.pdf
Last edited:
If there is a group of beings void of any sembelance to a human being it would be Monsantos...It would be easy to dismiss the threat to the existence and health of Humanity that Monsantos poses as nothing more than a group of profit driven rascals. That however doesn't ring true.Monsantos has at it's disposal a massive amount of money, it has at it's disposal a huge brain trust of scientists. If Monsantos simply wanted to develop the means to boost food production worldwide it has all the means neccessary. Monsantos rather, with all it's resources has determined to engineer and promote products that are nothing short of genocidal. We stand by and watch a Holocaust being enacted, and because it is hidden by the canard of "saving the planet" by increasing food yeilds we swallow it literaly hook line and sinker. we refuse to accept facts and science and cling onto the assurances of the lying pieces of crap of our political class. Knowing that our political class are corrupt and evil. No I can't simply write off the evil that Monsantos is, as nothing more than a bunch of robber barons...their motives are not near sighted and stupid...their motives are far seeing and well thought out, and they are to committ genocide, their motive are clearly hostile toward the whole human race, they are not merely driven by greed.They are using their resources to annihilate humans.
Hmmm...jewish or are her features more of the reptilian nature...that's more of a snout than a nose.
Agreed. Agenda 21 is immoral & disgusting. We are herd animals to this elite class of greedy robber barons that exits to serve and to be put down when we are no longer useful to them.
Robert David Steele & others like him are our best hope to end these perversions inflicted on humanity. We can't wait for Trump to do it for us. We citizens, republican and democrat alike have to join in this effort to free humanity from the grip of these criminals, confiscate their wealth and put them down.
Last edited:
Change the names add reference to allah... you got reasoning for Jihad......
No stooping to thier level is not the answer.
Otherwise your right. THEY are a problem WE need to deal with..... BUT... until WE get on the same page... THEY will continue to dominate. THEY win when WE pick sides.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
So does that mean you are supporting RDS in this or not?
Comey Speaks (actually, he reads)
Transcript of Comey's written testimony
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-idUSKBN18Y0BJ
Ex-FBI chief Comey tells U.S. senators Trump pressured him on Russia probe
Former FBI Director James Comey said on Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump asked him to drop an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of a probe into Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
In written testimony released the day before he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Trump told him at a meeting in the White House in February: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go."
The testimony puts more pressure on Trump, a Republican, whose presidency has been overshadowed by allegations that Moscow helped him win last year's election.
Some legal experts said Comey’s testimony could strengthen any impeachment case built on obstruction of justice, but U.S. markets shrugged off the news from the testimony for lack of any major disclosures.
To build a criminal obstruction of justice case, federal law requires prosecutors to show that a person acted with "corrupt" intent. It does not matter whether the person succeeds in impeding an investigation.
While a sitting president is very unlikely to face criminal prosecution, obstruction of justice could form the basis for impeachment.
Comey said he had told Trump on three occasions he was not being investigated, confirming an earlier account from the president.
Trump, who spent part of Wednesday in Ohio talking about the need to fix the nation's crumbling infrastructure, ignored reporters’ shouted questions about Comey. On returning to the Oval Office, Trump went into a meeting with top advisers, including chief of staff Reince Priebus.
Later, his outside counsel released a statement saying Trump felt "completely and totally vindicated" by Comey's account.
"The president is pleased that Mr. Comey has finally publicly confirmed his private reports that the president was not under investigation in any Russian probe," Marc Kasowitz, Trump's attorney, said in a statement.
[ETC]
Transcript of Comey's written testimony
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/os-jcomey-060817.pdf
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-idUSKBN18Y0BJ
Ex-FBI chief Comey tells U.S. senators Trump pressured him on Russia probe
Former FBI Director James Comey said on Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump asked him to drop an investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of a probe into Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
In written testimony released the day before he appears before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Trump told him at a meeting in the White House in February: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go."
The testimony puts more pressure on Trump, a Republican, whose presidency has been overshadowed by allegations that Moscow helped him win last year's election.
Some legal experts said Comey’s testimony could strengthen any impeachment case built on obstruction of justice, but U.S. markets shrugged off the news from the testimony for lack of any major disclosures.
To build a criminal obstruction of justice case, federal law requires prosecutors to show that a person acted with "corrupt" intent. It does not matter whether the person succeeds in impeding an investigation.
While a sitting president is very unlikely to face criminal prosecution, obstruction of justice could form the basis for impeachment.
Comey said he had told Trump on three occasions he was not being investigated, confirming an earlier account from the president.
Trump, who spent part of Wednesday in Ohio talking about the need to fix the nation's crumbling infrastructure, ignored reporters’ shouted questions about Comey. On returning to the Oval Office, Trump went into a meeting with top advisers, including chief of staff Reince Priebus.
Later, his outside counsel released a statement saying Trump felt "completely and totally vindicated" by Comey's account.
"The president is pleased that Mr. Comey has finally publicly confirmed his private reports that the president was not under investigation in any Russian probe," Marc Kasowitz, Trump's attorney, said in a statement.
[ETC]
https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...nother-intelligence-director-lie-to-sen-wyden
Did Another Intelligence Director Lie to Wyden About Surveillance?
Privacy advocates and journalists want to know what Sen. Ron Wyden is up to -- and whether the Oregon Democrat elicited another lie about surveillance from a director of national intelligence during Wednesday's Senate intelligence committee hearing.
Wyden asked one of the final questions at the hearing that dealt with the investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 election and with Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which expires later this year if Congress does not act.
Wyden, a forceful privacy advocate, asked Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, with whom he had sparred earlier, a simple standalone question: “Can the government use FISA Act Section 702 to collect communications it knows are entirely domestic?”
Coats replied: “Not to my knowledge. It would be against the law.”
Surveillance policy experts immediately recalled the 2013 hearing where James Clapper, Coats' predecessor, lied to Wyden by saying "no sir" and "not wittingly" in response to a question about mass surveillance. Clapper apologized months later after whistleblower Edward Snowden's disclosures.
"Wyden knows something that we don't know and he was trying to get Coats on the record about whatever this thing is," says Liza Goitein, a privacy expert at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.
"I strongly suspect he is getting at something here and that the reason he is not spelling it out is because it relates to something classified about which he has knowledge but the public does not," she says.
He certainly looked worried when Wyden was done," Goitein says about Coats. "Wyden has a method and we've seen the method before and I am personally glad he's on the case, even though I don't know yet what that case is."
The opinion that Wyden was asking about something beyond the "incidental" collection of American records under Section 702 programs is widespread.
"This feels like Wyden is up to something, like the famous Clapper question in 2013," tweeted New York Times reporter Charlie Savage, who routinely breaks major news about U.S. intelligence agencies.
"Coats looked concerned after Wyden said 'Thank you, no further questions,'" Reuters reporter Dustin Volz wrote.
"It was certainly odd," says Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.
"Wyden, of course, understands full well that the statute prohibits the collection of communications 'known at the time of acquisition' to be wholly domestic, which makes the question a bit unusual, especially given that he didn't subsequently follow it up," Sanchez says in an email.
Did Another Intelligence Director Lie to Wyden About Surveillance?
Privacy advocates and journalists want to know what Sen. Ron Wyden is up to -- and whether the Oregon Democrat elicited another lie about surveillance from a director of national intelligence during Wednesday's Senate intelligence committee hearing.
Wyden asked one of the final questions at the hearing that dealt with the investigation into Russia's role in the 2016 election and with Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which expires later this year if Congress does not act.
Wyden, a forceful privacy advocate, asked Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, with whom he had sparred earlier, a simple standalone question: “Can the government use FISA Act Section 702 to collect communications it knows are entirely domestic?”
Coats replied: “Not to my knowledge. It would be against the law.”
Surveillance policy experts immediately recalled the 2013 hearing where James Clapper, Coats' predecessor, lied to Wyden by saying "no sir" and "not wittingly" in response to a question about mass surveillance. Clapper apologized months later after whistleblower Edward Snowden's disclosures.
"Wyden knows something that we don't know and he was trying to get Coats on the record about whatever this thing is," says Liza Goitein, a privacy expert at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.
"I strongly suspect he is getting at something here and that the reason he is not spelling it out is because it relates to something classified about which he has knowledge but the public does not," she says.
He certainly looked worried when Wyden was done," Goitein says about Coats. "Wyden has a method and we've seen the method before and I am personally glad he's on the case, even though I don't know yet what that case is."
The opinion that Wyden was asking about something beyond the "incidental" collection of American records under Section 702 programs is widespread.
"This feels like Wyden is up to something, like the famous Clapper question in 2013," tweeted New York Times reporter Charlie Savage, who routinely breaks major news about U.S. intelligence agencies.
"Coats looked concerned after Wyden said 'Thank you, no further questions,'" Reuters reporter Dustin Volz wrote.
"It was certainly odd," says Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.
"Wyden, of course, understands full well that the statute prohibits the collection of communications 'known at the time of acquisition' to be wholly domestic, which makes the question a bit unusual, especially given that he didn't subsequently follow it up," Sanchez says in an email.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/four-top-law-firms-turned-requests-represent-trump-122423972.html
Four top law firms turned down requests to represent Trump
Top lawyers with at least four major law firms rebuffed White House overtures to represent President Trump in the Russia investigations, in part over concerns that the president would be unwilling to listen to their advice, according to five sources familiar with discussions about the matter.
congressional committees as well as Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.The unwillingness of some of the country’s most prestigious attorneys and their law firms to represent Trump has complicated the administration’s efforts to mount a coherent defense strategy to deal with probes being conducted by four congressional committees as well as Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.
Before Kasowitz was retained, however, some of the biggest law firms and their best-known attorneys turned down overtures when they were sounded out by White House officials to see if they would be willing to represent the president, the sources said.
.
Four top law firms turned down requests to represent Trump
Top lawyers with at least four major law firms rebuffed White House overtures to represent President Trump in the Russia investigations, in part over concerns that the president would be unwilling to listen to their advice, according to five sources familiar with discussions about the matter.
congressional committees as well as Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.The unwillingness of some of the country’s most prestigious attorneys and their law firms to represent Trump has complicated the administration’s efforts to mount a coherent defense strategy to deal with probes being conducted by four congressional committees as well as Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller.
Before Kasowitz was retained, however, some of the biggest law firms and their best-known attorneys turned down overtures when they were sounded out by White House officials to see if they would be willing to represent the president, the sources said.
.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/two-us-intel-chiefs-were-never-pressured-white-174102139.html
Two US intel chiefs say were never pressured by White House
Washington (AFP) - Two US intelligence chiefs insisted Wednesday they never felt pressured by the White House over the investigation into alleged Russian election meddling, but stonewalled lawmakers' questions over their conversations with President Donald Trump.
On the eve of potentially explosive testimony from sacked FBI chief James Comey over whether Russia tried to tilt the outcome of last year's election in Trump's favor, Director of Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency chief Mike Rogers both skirted questions about whether the president "asked" them to intervene in the probe.
Hours after Trump announced via Twitter that former Justice Department official Christopher Wray was his choice to head up the FBI, the Senate Intelligence Committee hit a brick wall as they probed allegations that Comey's oversight of the Russian probe lay at the root of his sacking last month.
"I have never been pressured, I've never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation," a visibly uneasy Coats said.
"In the three-plus years that I have been director of the National Security Agency, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate," echoed Rogers.
But under intense grilling, both told senators that it was "inappropriate" to discuss in a public hearing their conversations with the president.
When pressured on whether they would answer questions on those conversations in a closed, classified hearing later Wednesday, Rogers and Coats both said they would have to consult White house lawyers as to whether Trump's "executive privilege" powers would prevent them from answering.
"Because of the sensitive nature and the executive privilege aspect of this, I do need to be talking to the general counsel and the White House," Rogers said.
Two US intel chiefs say were never pressured by White House
Washington (AFP) - Two US intelligence chiefs insisted Wednesday they never felt pressured by the White House over the investigation into alleged Russian election meddling, but stonewalled lawmakers' questions over their conversations with President Donald Trump.
On the eve of potentially explosive testimony from sacked FBI chief James Comey over whether Russia tried to tilt the outcome of last year's election in Trump's favor, Director of Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency chief Mike Rogers both skirted questions about whether the president "asked" them to intervene in the probe.
Hours after Trump announced via Twitter that former Justice Department official Christopher Wray was his choice to head up the FBI, the Senate Intelligence Committee hit a brick wall as they probed allegations that Comey's oversight of the Russian probe lay at the root of his sacking last month.
"I have never been pressured, I've never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relationship to an ongoing investigation," a visibly uneasy Coats said.
"In the three-plus years that I have been director of the National Security Agency, I have never been directed to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate," echoed Rogers.
But under intense grilling, both told senators that it was "inappropriate" to discuss in a public hearing their conversations with the president.
When pressured on whether they would answer questions on those conversations in a closed, classified hearing later Wednesday, Rogers and Coats both said they would have to consult White house lawyers as to whether Trump's "executive privilege" powers would prevent them from answering.
"Because of the sensitive nature and the executive privilege aspect of this, I do need to be talking to the general counsel and the White House," Rogers said.
This is what happens when young boys are not allowed to fight in schoolyards.....they grow up to fight like a girls pajama party pillow fight...I love how they were absolutely frozen when the guy started smaking them around.
"I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go."
My God how did Comey survive standing up to such gruelling pressure...it makes the Hanoi Hilton surviors look like pussys ....that Trump never grabbed. This is insane....the DNC is not doing themselves any favors....
In honor of this guy I've changed my signature.LOL..
British Soccer Fan Stabbed Eight Times While Fighting Three Knife-Wielding Terrorists
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/201...mes-fighting-three-knife-wielding-terrorists/
British Soccer Fan Stabbed Eight Times While Fighting Three Knife-Wielding Terrorists
http://www.breitbart.com/sports/201...mes-fighting-three-knife-wielding-terrorists/
What is RDS?
I support the USA............ I support my family...... I support my friends........
See I see both the left and right of this country as a problem.... goal of both group whether they admit it or not are Progressing us to socialism...... I support FREEDOM.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
But the majority want to be led.
Very frightening to most to actually be an independent thinker.
And the fear CHANGE the most...
Note most of Trump problems really boil down to that..... because he does not act and talk like them everything he does or says scares the poop out of BOTH side in DC.
As much as people whine about how bad stuff is. Is proportionate to how much they will fight any effort to fix the issues.. due purely to a fear of change and the unknown.
Besides sheeple like having a Nanny State to care for their needs.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk
As far as our 'leaders' go yep any change rocks their base of power.
one down about 4,000,000 to go........
Scapegoat for the dark state elites....the real leakers are still there in the shadows.
- Status