You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘social media’ tag.

Yesterday’s post covered Day 1 of Donald Trump’s and Emmanuel Macron’s first G20.

I also wrote about the riots and looting which occurred in host city Hamburg during the conference.

Day 2 — Saturday, July 8, 2017 — was equally eventful for world leaders, especially President Trump.

While Big Media were banging on about Russia or Trump’s mental health, some outlets actually reported on the G20 and two major victories for the American president (emphases mine below):

Hamburg (AFP) – US President Donald Trump won key concessions on climate and trade Saturday from world leaders at the most fractious G20 summit to date, in exchange for preserving the unity of the club of major industrialised and emerging economies.

In a final statement agreed by all 20 economies, 19 members including Russia, China and the European Union acknowledged Trump’s decision to go his own way on taking the US out of the 2015 Paris climate accord.

But they also accommodated Washington’s wish to “work closely with other countries to help them access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently”.

While renewing a key anti-protectionist pledge, the communique for the first time underlined the right of countries to protect their markets with “legitimate trade defence instruments”.

Such wording gives room for Trump to push on with his “America First” policy

Everyone in the media predicted that America First would not play overseas. Everyone in the media was wrong.

The Conservative Treehouse has an excellent analysis of what Trump’s wins mean not only for America but also allies who think similarly:

Team Trump focuses exclusively on bilateral trade deals with specific policy only looking out for the national interests of the United States and those who are allied with a similar perspective.

Under President Trump’s Trade positions exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped. This puts the multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding interest of an asset they cannot exploit

There are trillions of dollars in economic activity now being restructured by President Trump. The downstream consequences are seismic shifts in geopolitical and strategic alliances. Through the use of economics America will engage in a process of protecting allies and simultaneously advancing freedom and democracy.

Simply put this approach destroys the cancer of elitist controlled leftist economic construct; which are entirely intended to benefit a small number of global elites who control the multinational banking and multinational corporate institutional systems …

Trump impressed Russian president Vladimir Putin during their meeting the previous day:

He was also taken with First Lady Melania Trump that evening:

On Day 2, Trump met with British Prime Minister Theresa May to discuss trade post-Brexit:

Theresa May has hailed the “powerful vote of confidence” in Britain Donald Trump and other world leaders have shown with their “strong desire” to strike new trade deals after Brexit.

The Prime Minister said she is “optimistic and positive” about a future pact with the US after the president said he believed an agreement could be reached “very, very quickly”.

Even before their meeting, Trump said:

I’d like to thank Prime Minister May for being with us. We’ve had tremendous talks. There is no country that could possibly be closer than our countries. And I just want to say thank you very much. We are working on a trade deal — a very, very big deal, a very powerful deal. Great for both countries. And I think we’ll have that done very, very quickly.

Meanwhile, Mrs Trump joined G20 spouses on a local tour before rejoining her husband at the conference:

The Daily Mail has more on Mrs Trump’s G20 attire, including stunning photographs.

Elsewhere, at the Vatican, Pope Francis fretted. He told Eugenio Scalfari, a journalist with Italy’s La Repubblica, of his concern about the G20. Leo Lyon Zagami, who is in the process of uncovering recent Vatican scandals (yes, he is a Mason but I will have more on his reporting), summarised and translated the article:

Pope Francis told him [Scalfari] during the encounter to be very concerned about the summit meeting of the “G20” in Hamburg, that witnessed President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, together for the first time.

Pope Francis said to Scalfari: “I’m afraid there are very dangerous alliances between powers which have a distorted view of the world: America and Russia, China and North Korea, Russia and Syria’s Assad in war”.

The Pope was also worried that the G20 might end mass immigration to Europe:

” … they fear an invasion of migrants. That’s why the G20 worries me.”

Then to save his idea of Europe, he promotes the destruction of the sovereignty of the single European countries, and the coming of a Federal Government for Europe, that will take over the decision making from the single countries: ”For this, and other reasons, I came to the conclusion that Europe must assume a federal structure. Laws and political behaviors arising here shall be decided by the Federal Government, and the Federal Parliament, not by individual confederated countries.”

That afternoon, a huge flap arose over Ivanka Trump presiding temporarily over a meeting when her father was called into a private one. The media — and abetted by NeverTrumpers (John Dean and Richard Painter) — went berserk:

Trump had addressed those attending the Women’s Entrepreneurship Finance Event then excused himself to attend the meeting. Afterwards, he returned.

Regardless, host Angela Merkel was bombarded with questions from the media. She explained that this is normal at a conference such as the G20:

Reaction from citizen journalists back home was outrage at the media:

Alternative media’s Jack Posobiec noted:

Media More Outraged at Ivanka Sitting in a Chair than Antifa Army Burning Hamburg

He wrote:

Today at the G20 meeting, Ivanka Trump briefly sat in a chair. The media utterly lost their minds. They also seemed to completely not notice the Antifa Army burning the streets of Hamburg outside the meeting.

Perhaps they do not think a woman should be representing the United States?

Ivanka was sitting in the back and then briefly joined the main table when the President had to step out, and the president of the World Bank started talking as the topic involved areas such as African development — areas that will benefit from the facility just announced by the World Bank.

When other leaders stepped out, their seats were also briefly filled by others, but the media didn’t seem to notice that, either.

Precisely.

Later that day, Trump tweeted:

Here is the White House transcript of the public remarks of that meeting.

USA Today reports that Trump spent much of Day 2 with Asian leaders:

HAMBURG — President Trump met with his Chinese counterpart at the G-20 summit Saturday, hoping to revamp a relationship that he once hoped could provide the key to resolving the North Korea crisis …

In a separate meeting Saturday with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Trump also addressed what he called “the problem and menace of North Korea.”

Abe said the security situation in the region had become “increasingly severe.” Addressing Trump by his first name, Abe said he “would like to demonstrate the robust partnership as well as the bond between Japan and the United States.”

Trump’s final day of his second foreign trip took what his predecessor, Barack Obama, might have called an “Asia pivot.” Having already met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, Saturday afternoon’s meetings were dominated by Pacific Rim nations

President Widodo of Indonesia was delighted to meet with Trump. USA Today reported:

Meeting with Indonesian President Joko Widodo, Trump said the U.S. would soon be doing “a lot of business” with the Island nation. “We’re going to be doing a lot of deals together — trade deals,” Trump said.

Widodo said Trump had “millions of fans” in his country who wanted him to visit.

“We’ll get there,” Trump said. “It’s a place I’d like to go.”

Singapore’s prime minister, Lee Hsein Loong, must be equally as positive:

Trump said the U.S. had a “big relationship” with the small city-state, and he expected the relationship to “get bigger.”

Before leaving Hamburg, Mrs Trump tweeted:

This brief video has highlights of Trump’s G20 conference:

Although the media emphasised the negative …

… from watching G20 coverage on YouTube, Bernie Sanders and Green supporters in the US were pleasantly surprised to find out about the ceasefire in Syria that Trump and Putin negotiated on Day 1.

Former Senator Bob Dole (R – Kansas) had high praise for the American president’s trips to Poland and Germany:

The Trumps flew back to the White House:

When Trump reached the White House, the press asked the usual questions about Russian hacking. Give it a rest, guys! The president ignored them.

Earlier, at Joint Base Andrews, he retrieved a Marine’s cover in the strong wind:

Mrs Trump did not return to the White House with her husband. My guess is she went to collect 11-year-old Barron.

I’ll close with this:

Neither Trump nor Obama was ever in the military, but you can certainly see how differently they view the armed forces.

That view, in my estimation, will determine a shift in foreign intervention during the present administration. Any US action will be carefully considered.

On July 7 and 8, 2017, Angela Merkel hosted the G20 conference in Hamburg.

I covered the riots and looting yesterday.

Today’s post looks at the conference itself — a first for Presidents Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron.

On Thursday, July 6, President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump spent the day in Poland. Later that day, he tweeted:

That evening, the Trumps flew to Hamburg, where the US president had meetings before the conference started:

One wonders if he and Merkel discussed the climate change pact. Only days before — on June 30 — the German chancellor appeared to be backing down because of Trump’s rejection of American participation. Breitbart reported that, publicly, Merkel is taking a strong stance, but:

Behind the scenes, however, it would appear that Merkel’s negotiating teams have been bending over backwards to tone down the climate action plan and avoid an embarrassing rejection by Donald Trump.

This can be seen by comparing the two draft climate action plans for the summit, one from March and the revised one from May. According to Climate Change News, American negotiators have watered it down considerably.

As for the conference:

Elsewhere, Trump supporters expressed concern for his safety. Click on the images below for more detail. It is true that the Trumps stayed in a guest house of the German senate:

Day 1 of G20 unfolded.

Trump was ready:

He was the only leader who refused to wear the hideous G20 lapel pin and wore his American flag pin instead.

He received questions about the Democrats:

The group photo piqued people’s interest, and not just in the media. Emmanuel Macron weirded out, making a nuisance of himself to stand next to Donald Trump.

Technically, that was the correct place for him to stand. The newest G20 participants are placed at the edges of the photo. More long-serving world leaders are in the centre. However, perhaps Macron should have stayed in the back row. He not only left a gap but disturbed everyone in attempting to get down to the first row:

It did not go unnoticed:

The same thing happened later that day in the group photo before the concert that evening. Watch Merkel position Trump and Macron:

The Macrons sat next to the Trumps at the concert, too:

The Conservative Treehouse said:

*Note* There is a coordinated effort by global political leftists (control entities within multinationals and political constructs) to physically position Emmanuel Macron next to President Trump at every opportunity. This is a structurally coordinated effort to enlarge the presence of Macron as an oppositional entity to the looming and dominant presence (figurative and literal) of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Trump had a successful day.

He and Russian president Vladimir Putin put a ceasefire in Syria in place:

Trade Secretary Stephen Mnuchin said:

We had a very productive dinner last night — Secretary Tillerson, myself, General McMaster — with President Moon Jae-in and Prime Minister Abe and their teams, discussing the importance of what’s going on in North Korea and the issues there. And then today we’ve had, already, several other bilats, and tomorrow we have another six.

The President also participated in a very important session today on trade and an important session on the environment and the economy. So I would just generally say we’ve had very productive economic meetings. There’s been very substantive issues discussed. The North Korea issue has been discussed very significantly, about the escalation in North Korea.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said, in part (same link, emphases mine):

President Trump and President Putin met this afternoon for 2 hours and 15 minutes here on the sidelines of the G20. The two leaders exchanged views on the current nature of the U.S.-Russia relationship and the future of the U.S.-Russia relationship.

They discussed important progress that was made in Syria, and I think all of you have seen some of the news that just broke regarding a de-escalation agreement and memorandum, which was agreed between the United States, Russia and Jordan, for an important area in southwest Syria that affects Jordan’s security, but also is a very complicated part of the Syrian battlefield.

This de-escalation area was agreed, it’s well-defined, agreements on who will secure this area. A ceasefire has been entered into. And I think this is our first indication of the U.S. and Russia being able to work together in Syria. And as a result of that, we had a very lengthy discussion regarding other areas in Syria that we can continue to work together on to de-escalate the areas and violence once we defeat ISIS, and to work together toward a political process that will secure the future of the Syrian people.

As a result, at the request of President Putin, the United States has appointed — and you’ve seen, I think, the announcement of Special Representative for Ukraine, Ambassador Kurt Volker. Ambassador Volker will draw on his decades of experience in the U.S. Diplomatic Corps, both as a representative to NATO and also his time as a permanent political appointment.

The two leaders also acknowledged the challenges of cyber threats and interference in the democratic processes of the United States and other countries, and agreed to explore creating a framework around which the two countries can work together to better understand how to deal with these cyber threats, both in terms of how these tools are used to in interfere with the internal affairs of countries, but also how these tools are used to threaten infrastructure, how these tools are used from a terrorism standpoint as well.

Trump also held a meeting with President Enrique Peña Nieto of Mexico:

President Trump emphasized the strong bilateral relationship that the United States enjoys with Mexico and noted the importance of renegotiating NAFTA to help workers in both countries. President Trump thanked President Peña Nieto for Mexico’s partnership on the Central America Conference last month. The leaders also discussed regional challenges, including drug trafficking, illegal migration, and the crisis in Venezuela.

After the day’s business concluded, the leaders and their spouses attended the aforementioned concert — then had dinner.

Mrs Trump was seated next to Mr Putin:

The Daily Mail has loads of photos and more on both the concert and the dinner.

Then it was time for some rest:

Trump was happy:

Tomorrow’s post discusses Day 2.

You really couldn’t make up what’s been happening in Trump’s Twitter world.

Let typos stand

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 President Trump tweeted:

Despite the constant negative press covfefe

He meant ‘coverage’, but it wasn’t long before someone started #covfefe. The Hill has more on the hashtag, which was the top Twitter trend that night.

Six hours later, Trump followed up:

Alternative media’s Jack Posobiec pointed out:

Until then, the major preoccupation besides Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner was the danger of the president giving out his mobile phone number to world leaders:

From the AP article we discover that Emmanuel Macron gave Trump his mobile number in return and that Justin Trudeau rang Trump on his mobile.

Obama never went anywhere without his mobile. No one ever questioned who had his mobile phone number. His phone was never hacked, although Angela Merkel’s was.

Now that Trump is trying to make friends with the Europeans by inviting them to call him at any time, his mobile phone is suddenly a major ‘security issue’.

Trump Twitter troll suspended

For several months, President Trump had a Twitter troll who was often the first to respond to his tweets, not once, not twice but many times in succession.

Not only were the trolling tweets annoying to read, they prevented Trump supporters’ responses from being at the top.

It was unclear whether the person responsible was able to make his Twitter account into a sort of bot that would automatically respond to Trump’s tweets.

Then, on May 29, news emerged from AnimeRight that the troll’s Twitter account had been suspended.

AnimeRight reported that the account holder allegedly worked for David Brock’s team at Media Matters. His account was hacked and his phone number posted on Twitter from his own account. The offending tweet was likely to have been a hack job, not from the account owner himself. Afterwards, the account was suspended.

Heat Street has more on the account holder who was:

a rising young star entrepeneur in Silicon Valley. He got a hundred thousand dollars from Trump savant Peter Th[ie]l to drop out of college and start a business which he apparently squandered on a failed anti-bullying Instagram clone.

Anti-bullying. Oh, the irony. I hope Thiel regrets that loan.

Strangely, the former troll’s:

main revenue generator is a tacky liberal t-shirt shop, selling clothes that say “Keep Calm and Impeach Trump.”

Then, for whatever reason, he had a go at 4chan, a site with a diverse group of forum posters who are also gamers and computer geniuses. The article rightly points out that the troll:

broke one of the internet’s earliest and most basic rule, don’t [mess] with 4chan. He wrote some kind of haiku of a tweet saying he owned 4chan. Within a few days, LeGate’s account was hacked — tweeting out his personal phone number — then completely deleted off the internet.

The troll also became a target of Photoshopping and rumours.

Now, thankfully, he is silent.

This hashtag, which has more on the story, was every bit as popular as #covfefe. Amazingly, the two trended concurrently.

Militant social media

For years the Democrats and their fellow left-wing travellers have conducted attacks on well-meaning conservatives.

Now the tide is turning. Driving the aforementioned troll off Twitter is but one recent and powerful example of what 4chan readers and contributors have done.

Someone on The_Donald wrote that the tide has now turned in favour of Trump supporters. It should be noted that many of them were also left-wing at an earlier point in their lives, so they understand how this game works (emphases mine):

If you understand politics and the crafty takeover of the media, Hollywood, academia, and social media platforms by the left to use Saul Alinsky style tactics to attack people and ideas on the right, you should be in awe of what 4 Chan is doing. As funny as #NippleLeGate is, it’s actually incredible and inspiring looking at how quickly they took him down. The same can be said for Shia LaBeouf, Bike Lock Professor, and on and on and on.

Not to drudge up history, but the left has done this to any person on the right that they find a threat. And they are very successful at it. Now we have their “Rules for Radicals” playbook and we’re giving it back. As Trump would say, were hitting back 10X harder.

We’re going to be the community that breaks the Seth Rich story, I can feel it. During the midterms and 2020, I guarantee you that it’s going to be 4 Chan and The_Donald that finds and weaponizes the dirt on the Dems. We’re going to be the difference.

I’m here to serve in this company of heroes until we force every leftist faculty member of academia to retire, until we bring to light the corruption and sickly pedophilia of every member of congress Republican or Democrat, until we rightfully take down every MSM organization and make them report actual news again. Until every radical Islamic organization is wiped from the face of the earth whether be from bombs or the embarrassment we’ll lob on the “losers”.

I’ll be right here fighting the entire way, because you bet … the left is trying to do the same to us and even worse.

The 2016 election was really just the beginning. The left hasn’t seen what we’re capable of yet. And when they do, we’ll take them down so fast they won’t know what hit them. The revolution is afoot and we’re at the front lines. Let’s go!!

The energy, the skill and the determination that young Trump supporters have is splendid to see in action.

Are we tired of winning? Never. Bring it on. MAGA!

Summer’s nearly here and it will be a long, hot one where Big Media and the White House are concerned.

The Russian narrative still shows no signs of abating.

On Tuesday, May 16, Dr Stephen F Cohen, a longtime academic and expert on Russia, appeared on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show:

Cohen is left-wing politically, and writes for The Nation. Therefore, he is no fan of President Donald Trump. However, he has an objective outlook. I’ve seen him on Tucker Carlson before and he speaks sense.

On May 16, he warned that the media assault is not only unwarranted, it is dangerous to the fabric of the United States. The clip below is a minute long:

The day before, Big Media stories circulated accusing Trump of giving away security secrets to the Russians. A salient comment at The_Donald explains why this is not only fake, but also dangerous news. Highlights in bold are from the original. Those in purple are mine:

Trump didn’t help ISIS or endanger lives – the media helped ISIS and endangered lives.

Day 1: Trump has a meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister and Ambassador. Nobody knows what is being discussed other than the people in the room.

Unknown to the outside world, Trump is supposed to have told them (disputed) that an intelligence source in a specific ISIS city has found that they are having a new focus on laptop bombs. Laptop bombs are very old news, we already have to send laptops through X-ray separately, but not everyone might do this at small airports, particularly in Russia. It’s useful information for Russia to prevent terrorists blowing up planes. In 2015 a Russian plane was blown up in the air killing 224 people.

Day 2: “Anonymous sources” tell the media that Trump endangered a source by doing this. The source could be killed, Trump is risking lives. The usefulness for preventing more Russian civilian aircraft being blown up is completely absent from reporting.

In reality, the danger to the source is very small. Why? Because only the top Russian leadership have been told. It would not get published in newspapers. Nobody knows outside of the people in the room. The “danger to the source” the media is crying about would require a complete leak. Not just about laptop bombs, because that’s old news and could have been found through digital interception. But the entire conversation from the White House between Trump and the Russian Foreign minister and ambassador would have to get leaked to ISIS.

To point out again: How would ISIS find out and kill the spy? They don’t know what was discussed in the meeting. Their only knowledge would be when in a few months airports start paying some extra attention to scanning laptops, maybe some Russian airports get X-ray machines installed. The danger to the source is extremely small.

Day 3: The media tells the entire world the full details of the conversation, from their “anonymous sources” – that Trump talked about a new ongoing programme, revealed by a spy, in a specific city. Most likely this is the only city this development is happening in – it’s quite technical, and needs an expert to disguise batteries as bombs to pass X-ray scans.

ISIS can immediately round up everyone around this programme. Because now ISIS knows both the city and the programme the spy has access to.

They didn’t before, but the media just told them everything they need to know.

Basically, the media are complete sociopaths, holy extreme boundless warriors with terrorist mindsets, out to destroy the Trump administration. They don’t give a [—-] about getting a spy killed. Thanks to Washington Post, the probability of that spy being killed increased from the 1% range to the 50%+ range.

Trump had this to say about the aforementioned article in the Washington Post:

The Gateway Pundit pointed out that Trump did not even know what city was concerned, but someone at the White House did and released the information to the Washington Post (emphasis in the original):

The real scandal is that WaPo claimed in their article that President Trump disclosed the city of where the intelligence was gathered to the Russians but the President was never even briefed on this information.

There is also the organised brigading by David Brock’s left-wing Shareblue media initiative which emerged from the Correct The Record PAC which plastered propaganda all over the web for Hillary Clinton during her 2016 presidential campaign.

Two of my previous posts mentioned Brock in passing. In March 2017, I wrote that Brock’s organisation pays people to comment on pro-Trump social media. In April, I wrote about the accusations that Brock’s organisation, Media Matters, made against Fox News’s Judge Andrew Napolitano:

Napolitano has great insight into the inner workings of Washington, DC, particularly with regard to recent claims of surveillance of President Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign …

On March 17, Media Matters, founded by the highly powerful Democrat operative David Brock, currently recovering from a heart attack, accused the judge of obtaining his ‘conspiracy theory’ from ‘Russian media’.

In January, Brock’s team issued a blueprint about bombarding social media with more anti-Trump, pro-Left propaganda, including leaks:

On May 16, the Seth Rich story entered the mainstream. Rich was murdered in mysterious circumstances in Washington, DC on July 10, 2016. He worked for the DNC (Democratic National Committee) at the time. It is thought that he might have been involved in leaking more than 44,000 incriminating DNC emails to WikiLeaks. However, at this time, no one really knows for certain.

In any event, the contents of those emails clearly showed that the DNC were determined to take down Bernie Sanders’s candidacy. The DNC convention took place at the end of July 2016. Before then, because of the strength of the leaked emails, the then-chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz had to resign.

For those unfamiliar with Seth Rich, WikiLeaks tweeted that the best and most concise source of information so far is a Fox 25 (Washington DC Fox affiliate) article. On May 16, Fox News ran with the story. (Also see this Fox 25 article from May 17.)

The bigger print media outlets immediately came up with the aforementioned Trump-Russia story about the president giving Russia state secrets. Those articles took Rich’s story off the front pages.

There is a reason for that.

The Rich story could be a huge link to goings-on in the US capital. The DC police are not commenting on his murder.

Furthermore:

Fox 5 is standing by the story, but several federal and local law enforcement sources told the Washington Post they were unaware of Rich sending any DNC information to WikiLeaks. Nothing in their examination of Rich’s computer and email activity connected him to WikiLeaks.

“There is nothing that we can find that any of this is accurate,” police spokesman Dustin Sternbeck told the [Washington] Post.

Those who have been following the Seth Rich murder for the past ten months think there is a cover-up, because, to quote a contributor to The_Donald:

Seth Rich is a domino. Once this is exposed the rest will fall one by one.

The Fox 25 article states:

If true, Rich being WikiLeaks’ source would undercut the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia hacked email accounts linked to Clinton to hurt her campaign. It would also refute Democrats’ allegations that Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to release and promote this information.

Once the Russian narrative dies — it’s sure to continue throughout the summer — then Trump’s Department of Justice will become front and centre news.

James Comey, a big source of protection for politicians and media, is gone. It is almost certain that many of these people are panicking. They, along with the possible collusion of law enforcement agencies, know about big, undercover crimes going on. Some of them could well be put on trial, with a number of them facing prison sentences.

Why else have there been constant calls this month for Trump’s impeachment? Why else have there been accusations that if Trump isn’t insane, he at least has Alzheimer’s and is, therefore, unfit for office?

This comment from 4chan.org/pol/ — posted at The_Donald — says it all:

 

It seems very likely that an incorruptible FBI director and the Department of Justice can make tremendous inroads in draining the Swamp, just as Trump pledged.

Yesterday, I profiled The Rebel Media’s Jack Posobiec, whom Emmanuel Macron is targetting for summarising news on his financial affairs based on a data dump from 4chan.

In that post, I mentioned a much more incriminating Twitter hash tag than the one Posobiec was posting on.

#EmmanuelCahuzac was used by the French to discuss financial documents that came out in French media earlier this year — at a time when North Americans were largely unaware of them.

My post on Posobiec explains why #EmmanuelCahuzac is so called. (There is also #MacronCahuzac.) Again, no one is implying that Macron was involved in the Cahuzac affair. People commenting are concerned that Macron’s financial situation, if investigated, could be of the same magnitude. No one wants to see another Cahuzac affair, which took three years to investigate.

That said, as far back as February 25 — before these hashtags were created — a Twitter user asked people not to forget that Macron got his start in politics thanks to Dr Cahuzac, a surgeon, later parliamentarian, who served as junior minister to the budget in François Hollande’s administration. He is now serving three years in prison, as of December 2016:

Earlier that month, on February 3, Le Figaro reported that Macron was quick off the mark in winning the support of the former anti-corruption judge Eric Halphen in Lyon. It could stand him in good stead.

On February 18, a Journal du Dimanche (JDD, ‘Sunday Journal’) article asked probing questions about Macron’s finances and wondered why Big Media were giving him a pass.

On March 2, Le Monde reported that the Belgian newspaper Le Soir stated that Macron:

was financed ‘more than 30%’ by ‘the kingdom of Saudi Arabia’.

However, Le Monde stated, there was a problem. The allegation came from lesoir.info, not lesoir.be. Lesoir.be is the real link to the genuine Le Soir. Therefore, the Saudi story was fake news.

The rest of this post documents highlights in the #EmmanuelCahuzac timeline from the beginning — March 14 — through May 5, before the 44-hour media blackout.

This is to demonstrate that American alternative media journalists have very little to do with Macron. They came in at the end. A lot of information had already been circulating in France and Belgium before then. That also means Hillary Clinton should stop braying about Russian hacking.

Important articles are also included, indicated by green arrows.

Translation and emphases mine throughout, unless otherwise indicated.

Mar 14: This is the first #EmmanuelCahuzac tweet asking what happened to Macron’s millions:

=> => The Challenges article, also from March 14, says that the French anti-corruption organisation, Anticor, had contacted the Haute Autorité pour la Transparence de la Vie Publique (HATVP) — High Authority for Transparency in Public Life — regarding Macron’s financial situation. Anticor stated that there appears to be a ‘lack of coherence between revenue and declared holdings’. Le Parisien broke the story on March 13.

=> => On March 16, Macron signed a nine-page financial disclosure form for the HATVP.

=> => On March 22, Les Crises said that the March 16 HATVP disclosure of Macron’s finances answered some of their questions, particularly regarding his recent book sales. That said, Les Crises pointed out that several of their questions concerning Macron’s financial situation remained unanswered.

=> => On March 24, Médiapart published an article, ‘Luxembourg, the preferred tax haven for those close to Macron’. They do not mention family, only close associates.

=> => On April 3, Entreprise.news asked what exactly happened to Macron’s earnings from Rothschild during his employment there:

More than three million euros in salary and bonuses over three and a half years.

The author states:

it is often the practice in large international investment banks to pay these bonuses in Luxembourg investment fund shares, for example: nothing is illegal, but it may be wise to turn them into pseudo work on the family homePeople like Macron in France are constantly sailing close to the wind, very close to insider behavior, and would certainly be worried if we were in the Anglo-Saxon world or if the influence of large institutions were not so dominant in our country.

As for François Fillon, the conservative candidate and former prime minister who was dogged by alleged financial scandals from the beginning of the year because Macron never could have beaten him otherwise, the article says:

By the way, François Fillon: you are a small player with your mini-scandal. The technocratic government has known for a long time how to reconcile the moral postures of champagne socialists with an inextinguishable thirst for easy money without the citizens realizing it.

=> => On April 10, an article in Contrepoints states that, based on the aforementioned Enterprise.news article, the conservative think tank IREF has contacted the public prosecutor’s department regarding a declaration of Macron’s assets, one which raises many questions. Contrepoints shows the IREF’s request in full, then explains:

The analysis here is essentially technical and shows that, if Emmanuel Macron really invested €500,000 in work on his wife’s house, he could not account for the transactions he presented in his declaration of assets …

Does this mean that Emmanuel Macron has deliberately sought to defraud? Probably not in the sense that some understand it, that is, with the premeditation worthy of a great, money-grubbing mafioso. On the other hand, it is more plausible that Emmanuel Macron found a convenient way to escape tax by exploiting a loophole, the risk of which he did not properly assess at the time.

For the big institutions, however, the zeal shown against Les Républicains [Fillon] and the Front National, as well as the passivity towards a presidential candidate who appears in many respects as a man of the the establishment becomes a real problem, the importance of which cannot be underestimated, especially if Macron were to qualify for the second round.

=> => On April 14, the aforementioned think tank IREF elaborated on their reasons why they wanted Macron’s finances investigated. Their article poses 15 questions which, they state, have not yet been answered. They conclude (emphasis in the original):

These elements [of the story] cannot be dismissed out of hand. Mr Macron must explain himself without delay or the judicial authorities will get involved. Transparency in public life must be applied with equal rigour to everyone.

=> => Also on April 14, a Médiapart reader posted an article on the readers’ site, Club Médiapart, which proved explosive, creating a firestorm of media reaction. Essentially, it asked if Emmanuel Macron was a new Cahuzac. (I will address it in a future post.) Médiapart‘s editor Edwy Plénel had to tell the media that the views expressed on Club Médiapart have nothing whatsoever to do with Médiapart‘s editorial line. That said, despite numerous requests to take the article down, Plénel refused, saying it did not violate any of their terms and conditions. Note the aforementioned real-deal Médiapart article from March 24.

April 16: the constant accusations against François Fillon and his family actually began attracting undecided voters before the first round of voting on Sunday, April 23. RMC (talk radio) received calls and heard from their guests that he and his family were being dragged through the mud. None of it seemed right, especially when no one was looking at Macron’s finances. A Twitter user complained about coverage on RMC’s sister channel, BFMTV:

On April 17, the JDD (also see their aforementioned article from February 18) reported on Macron’s interview with Jean-Jacques Bourdin on BFMTV, wherein the candidate — now president — called speculation on his finances fausses nouvelles —  ‘fake news’. Already talk was circulating about an offshore account. The JDD reported:

“People said, ‘There has been some trickery,'” said the former business banker, who wanted to cut short the rumours about a possible “hidden account” in a tax haven: Totally false. “

He also told Bourdin something incredible:

In six years, I earned €3mAt the end, I had €270,000 in savings.

=> => Following the BFMTV interview on April 17, Marianne posted an article that afternoon warning that Macron should be more forthcoming in his answers:

In any event, his declarations du jour will have to be addressed at some point, because the candidate of En Marche does not keep any documents in the public domain or available to journalists, which would make it possible to confirm his statements.

April 17: A Belgian researcher put together a brief slideshow showing how many fake Twitter accounts had been created using @Médiapart, after the aforementioned Club Médiapart editorial of April 14 — which, again, has nothing to do with the magazine’s editors or editorial line. The Belgian thinks the new Twitter accounts are bogus. It could be that those were Club Médiapart members who wanted to contribute to #EmmanuelCahuzac. This researcher, by the way, was the one who implicated Jack Posobiec in another anti-Macron hashtag. The only problem with that argument is that Posobiec created his Twitter account in 2012:

=> => Also on April 17, the Huffington Post (French edition) tied all these strands together and said that Macron was behind the curve if he thought that his aforementioned BFMTV interview would clear the air. The online chatter had already started with #EmmanuelCahuzac, the Club Medipart editorial and Nicolas Vanderbiest’s findings on supposed fake Twitter accounts.

April 17: Someone says that Macron’s stepchildren (he has no children of his own) have Swiss bank accounts (fric is slang for ‘money’) and that there is something not right about the house renovation:

April 21: L’Express deleted an article published on this date:

May 3: At this point, the English-language articles began circulating, the first being from ZeroHedge, which discussed the Disobedient Media investigation into an alleged Limited Liability Company (LLC) in Nevis called La Providence, after the Jesuit school Macron attended in Amiens.

May 4: Le Monde reported that, during the presidential debate the previous evening, Marine Le Pen told Macron:

Be careful in what you say, Mr Macron. I hope we won’t learn anything in the coming days … I hope we won’t find out you have a hidden account in the Bahamas.

I recall reading an American tweet at the weekend: ‘It’s not in the Bahamas. It’s in the Caymans.’

May 5: A French Twitter user found the Got News article that Posobiec referenced in his video of May 5. She asks whether BFMTV was economical with the truth regarding documents linked to a possible offshore account of Macron’s:

May 5: Police seized a Frenchman’s banderole, which had writing equating Macron with Cahuzac, and held him for questioning for two hours.

May 5: Lara.Poutou saw Jack Posobiec’s tweet on 4chan data dump. La toile means ‘the web’:

That was nearly the final tweet on #emmanuelcahuzac.

In conclusion, the French had far more to do with questioning Emmanuel Macron’s finances than the American alternative media did.

The only thing that might have really riled Macron up was their pursuit of an alleged offshore account.

WikiLeaks is investigating the authenticity of the 4chan /pol/ data dump.

There’s more good news for alternative media.

On April 3, 2017 Rebel Media hired former political operative Jack Posobiec as their Washington Bureau Chief.

In 2016, Posobiec (pron. ‘Posobik’), his Twitter feed and YouTube videos were popular with Trump supporters, especially Millennials.

Posobiec describes his career as follows:

Last year, I served as the Special Projects Director for Citizens for Trump, the largest Trump grassroots organization in the US.

Originally from the Philadelphia area, I’ve worked for four presidential campaigns, as well as numerous candidates for Senate, Congress, and Governor.

I’m also a US Navy veteran with multiple deployments overseas. 

Posobiec’s Rebel Media work can be found here.

He’s a good reporter. He speaks clearly, concisely and logically.

The video below from Monday, April 3, 2017 was his one of his first reports for Rebel Media. He explains the surveillance scandal involving President Donald Trump and others during the 2016 campaign season. He includes video clips from a variety of Big Media sources and lays out the timeline well:

The Rebel Media was founded in Canada in 2015 by a former Sun News Network host, Ezra Levant. Rebel’s hosts and commentators are controversial but highly popular among Millennials. Canadian Gavin McInnes is the best known in the United States.

The Rebel Media — also known as The Rebel — is an organisation that one either loves or loathes. That said, their programmes will make one think.

Contrary to the way it has been portrayed by Big Media in Western countries, The Rebel is not ‘far-right’ but libertarian-to-conservative alternative media.

Jack Posobiec and Rebel Media unintentionally broke out of their US-Canada market during the weekend of the French election. Now they’ve gone international.

In short, contributors to the /pol/ forum board on 4chan obtained a huge volume of data that supposedly relates to France’s new president, Emmanuel Macron. Macron threatened to sue anyone who discussed these data online during the 44-hour media blackout of the election prior to Sunday, May 7 — the second, and final, round of voting.

Disobedient Media, by investigative citizen journalist William Craddick, reported on the data dump between Wednesday, May 3 and Friday, May 5: here, here, here and here.

Posobiec posted the video below at The Rebel on Friday, May 5, referencing Craddick’s work. Posobiec said that he himself had just been labelled by a Belgian researcher as a Russian agent. Posobiec is a Polish name. This person alleges that Posobiec’s Twitter account appeared in a list of what were brand new Twitter accounts, thought to be bots. The researcher was already hard at work establishing notional bots on April 15. (N.B.: Posobiec opened his Twitter account in 2012.)

Posobiec went on to say that he spoke with 4chan members who said that they found the Macron documents on ‘the deep web’ — the dark net. Posobiec also cited a May 4 article on Got News by an independent auditor for the Big Three accounting firms who examined the data dump. ‘Jessica Gomez’ (not her real name) claimed that the documents are not fake and that the French people should be able to examine them prior to Sunday, May 7:

That weekend, someone on social media suggested that there should be a place on Twitter to discuss the data dump. Posobiec was the first to post at  #MacronLeaks.

Macron has since taken legal action against him and/or Rebel Media.

On Monday, May 8, Posobiec gave Alex Jones an interview in which he said that Rebel Media had their lawyers on the case. He was confident and composed.

My post tomorrow will address a) the speculation about Macron’s finances and b) much worse hashtags — #MacronCahuzac and #EmmanuelCahuzac — both of which started in France months ago. I will look at the latter hashtag  tomorrow.

The Cahuzac affair was the worst financial scandal to take place in France in recent years. It involved tax fraud and money laundering. In the end, Dr Jérôme Cahuzac — a surgeon who became a  parliamentarian then Junior Minister for the Budget in François Hollande’s administration — was sentenced to three years in prison on December 8, 2016. He is also ineligible to serve in public office for five years.

The name Cahuzac has been toxic since his scandal first came to light in 2013. 

Therefore, it’s interesting that Macron would take legal action against an American alternative media reporter when so much information — including the Cahuzac tag — was already circulating in investigative French media outlets.

To be clear: linking Cahuzac’s name with Macron is not saying Macron was involved, but rather the possibility that whatever might be uncovered about Macron’s finances could be as huge as the Cahuzac affair.

I wish Jack Posobiec — and his fiancée Tanya Tay — all the best, especially in the Macron dust-up, and hope that he continues to hold the centre ground in his coverage.

UPDATE: Thank you, Jack, for the tweet. Much appreciated!

.

Congratulations to everyone in the United States who got involved online in discussing and analysing France’s presidential election, the second round of which was held on Sunday, May 7, 2017.

It was refreshing to see Americans engage so well with this historic election an ocean away.

As predicted, Emmanuel Macron is the new resident of the Elysée Palace in Paris. He won with 66% — two-thirds — of the vote. Turnout was around 74% — high, compared with other Western countries — but was the lowest for France since 1969.

Now he and his En Marche! — formerly a movement, now a political party — must work with the Socialists (PS) and others on the left for les législatives (parliamentary) elections on June 18.

It’s interesting that the supposedly independent, free-thinking Marianne newsweekly put Macron on its cover for the second week in a row. Earlier this year, they criticised other news magazines for multiple Macron covers. Sadly, they have fallen in step with the other sheeplike outlets:

Marine Le Pen

Marine Le Pen (FN, Front National) was upbeat in her concession speech. For the next few weeks, the FN are now the party of opposition.

That said, I expect Les Républicains (LR, conservatives) to regain that position on June 18.

Unlike Hillary Clinton, who hid herself away crying when she lost, Le Pen got on the dance floor with her campaign workers:

Discussions on RMC (French talk radio) this morning centred around her renaming her father’s party to Les Patriotes. No one really thought a new name would give the FN better traction among the French electorate.

Emmanuel Macron

On Sunday evening, Macron supporters waited at the Louvre for him to speak in front of the museum’s glass pyramid:

Hillary Clinton concurred:

She referred to the 48-hour media blackout prior to a French election. This is so that voters are not unduly swayed one way or the other. We have the same thing in the UK.

I watched BFMTV’s coverage and tuned in as the presidential entourage was making its way along part of the Tour de France route to a secret location where he, his family and main supporters had drinks and dinner. Everyone entered by the back in a narrow side street, heavy with security. No one was allowed in the road unless they were going to his victory dinner.

How France voted

Matthieu Gallard of the French division of the polling company IPSOS, has a lot of excellent statistics of which parts of the French population voted for Macron and Le Pen:

Voter profiles

If you click on his tweet, you can see that Gallard also has IPSOS charts which show that Macron did better across the board with executives (cadres), professionals (prof. intermédiaires) and the retired (retraités). The only group where Le Pen dominated was the working class (ouvriers).

Even education levels did not make a difference overall. Macron won every demographic there, from those who had not completed high school to those with post-graduate degrees.

Tactical voting

Forty-three per cent voted Macron only to stop Le Pen (the historical toxicity of the FN).

However, that is not necessarily positive. This will become clearer in June, because IPSOS also has another chart (see Gallard’s other tweets) showing that 61% of the French do not want Macron’s En Marche! to have a majority in parliament (l’Assemblée Nationale).

Regions

The New York Times has a good map of regions where Le Pen dominated:

Someone from an English-speaking country surmises that this has to do with ancient linguistics:

No. It has to do with immigration patterns. The North and Bordeaux (west) have had enough. The voters along the southern coast have the same issue.

Paris also has a big problem, but, like all other Western capitals and major cities, votes for the Left — regardless.

You can see more charts and statistics here.

Francophone reaction to foreign opinion

French-speaking media people were most unhappy with alt-media journalist Mike Cernovich‘s reaction to the outcome.

Cernovich tweeted that America should accept Le Pen voters as political refugees.

Oddly, the responses I’ve seen came from countries other than France.

A Belgian journalist who works at the European Parliament picked up on it, calling Cernovich a ‘little protege’ of President Trump. Frankly, I’m not sure they’ve even met each other:

A Genevan journalist from Le Temps dismissed Cernovich as a ‘conspiracy writer’:

Visit to Germany

Macron’s first trip will be to Germany to visit Angela Merkel.

I have seen several journalists jump on this as being Macron-specific.

However, a trip to Germany is normal for incoming French presidents. François Hollande also went to see Merkel within 48 hours of his election in 2012.

Conclusion

Ultimately, only the parliamentary elections in June can end the debate that is currently going on in France. The first statistic, incidentally, was the result of the Brexit referendum in 2016:

Coming soon: why the election result was not rigged

Tomorrow: Alternative media and Macron’s financial situation

A few weeks ago, President Donald Trump and Julian Assange connected on Twitter.

Throwing out a question, as he does, Trump received the following reply from Assange shortly afterwards.

The exchange took place on Monday, April 3, 2017. It concerns whether Hillary Clinton received a set of debate questions during the Democratic primary season from DNC operative Donna Brazile, who also worked for CNN at the time:

At that time, I thought that was excellent, hoping there will be more of those exchanges in future.

Since then, things have changed. CIA director Mike Pompeo strongly criticised WikiLeaks. President Donald Trump — who owes his victory in large part to WikiLeaks — followed suit.

On April 17, Roger Stone, a longtime friend of Trump and, briefly, his first presidential campaign manager, wrote (emphases mine):

Sadly, Donald Trump’s appointee of Director of Central Intelligence has clearly been conned by the Neo Con careerists at the CIA. Former Congressman Mike Pompeo was appointed at the behest of Vice President Pence who was friendly with Pompeo in the House. While Mr. Pompeo is a Harvard lawyer, his training at West Point was in mechanical engineering. Although he served on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence at no time has he expressed any concern about the CIA’s sorry track record of insisting that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that prisoners of war are not being tortured at Abu Ghraib prison, that the United States was farming terrorists out to 3rd party countries which utilized torture in a practice called rendition, that our mission in Benghazi was attacked by a mob whipped into a frenzy by an anti-Islamic video shown in Turkey, as well as the Intelligence agencies role in the collection of metadata on millions of Americans in violation of the US Constitution.

President Donald Trump said on Oct, 10, 2016 “I love Wikileaks” and Pompeo who previously had praised the whistleblowing operation now called Wikileaks “a non-state hostile Intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia”.  Mr. Pompeo must be pressed to immediately release any evidence he has that proves these statements. If he cannot do so ,the President should discharge him.

Julian Assange issued the following statement:

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9aDKGhUIAAXxHX.jpg:small

 

Stone had more in his post:

After some soul searching I have elected to support the President’s limited incursion into Syria because of the strong geo-political message it sends the North Koreans, Iranians and Chinese. It also underlined the foolish of the entire “Russians helped Trump” narrative.

Acting on faulty intelligence endorsed by Director Pompeo, the President has now violated international law, the UN Charter and the War Powers Agreement with Congress. While he has won praise from hawks on both sides of the aisle, who have denounced him in the past, and has been lauded by the mainstream media, which holds him in contempt. A further expansion of the war in Syria would mean violation of end of the non-interventionism, the very concept that won Donald Trump the presidency. It would be the functional end of “Trumpism”.

The competence of Wikileaks, which has yet to release even one inauthentic email, compares very favorably with the performance of the CIA, which neither anticipated the collapse of the Soviet Union or the “terrorist attack” of 9/11. But not only is the public shortchanged by an agency that all-too-often misses either the boat or gets things wrong, its operations around the world have gone far beyond the scope of its charter. The agency is out of control.( See “The CIA’s Record of Duplicity” on the StoneCold Truth.com ) …

Assange is a hero who has rendered valuable service to the American people. Mr. Pompeo has demonstrated that he is far too gullible to serve as the CIA Director and will pretty much swallow anything that the spooks in Langley dish out to him despite the obvious lack of any hard evidence whatsoever. Clearly Mr. Pompeo should resign.

The folks at The_Donald, where a forensic examination of every Podesta WikiLeaks dump can be found, are equally disappointed in Pompeo. They think Trump should ask him to resign.

Trump won over a lot of twenty- and thirty-somethings who read The_Donald and their WikiLeaks analyses. Many of these people were Obama voters or Bernie supporters. Trump should be offering Assange residence in the United States — with no charges against him.

No, Assange isn’t perfect. Nor is Trump. Nor is Pompeo (obviously). However, let’s give credit where credit is due.

If Pompeo doesn’t like WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 releases over the past few weeks, he shouldn’t blame the messenger. He needs to look inside his own agency. They’re the ones who made that software available to all and sundry, for nefarious means.

Now Attorney General Jeff Sessions is getting in on the act.

I was disappointed to see the following in Trump’s interview with the AP of April 23:

AP: If I could fit a couple of more topics. Jeff Sessions, your attorney general, is taking a tougher line suddenly on Julian Assange, saying that arresting him is a priority. You were supportive of what WikiLeaks was doing during the campaign with the release of the Clinton emails. Do you think that arresting Assange is a priority for the United States?

TRUMP: When Wikileaks came out … never heard of Wikileaks, never heard of it. When Wikileaks came out, all I was just saying is, “Well, look at all this information here, this is pretty good stuff”

AP: Can I just ask you, though — do you believe it is a priority for the United States, or it should be a priority, to arrest Julian Assange?

TRUMP: I am not involved in that decision, but if Jeff Sessions wants to do it, it’s OK with me. I didn’t know about that decision, but if they want to do it, it’s OK with me.

I do not think that Trump has the full information on all of this.

I do hope that someone fills him in. Steve Bannon must surely know. So must others within close proximity to the Oval Office.

I have written previously about alternative media’s Mike Cernovich with regard to his recent 60 Minutes interview and its full transcript.

On Sunday, April 2, 2017, Cernovich tweeted:

On Monday, he reported more about his first mainstream news scoop, excerpted below (emphases mine):

Susan Rice, who served as the National Security Adviser under President Obama, has been identified as the official who requested unmasking of incoming Trump officials, Cernovich Media can exclusively report.

The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to them.

Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes.

“Unmasking” is the process of identifying individuals whose communications were caught in the dragnet of intelligence gathering. While conducting investigations into terrorism and other related crimes, intelligence analysts incidentally capture conversations about parties not subject to the search warrant. The identities of individuals who are not under investigation are kept confidential, for legal and moral reasons.

James Rosen, a former Bill Clinton adviser who now works for Fox News, says that this is a huge story which could explain why General Mike Flynn had to resign earlier this year. The tweet below says Fox News acknowledged that Cernovich broke the story. I did not see that in the clip, but am posting it anyway so that you can read what Rosen says:

The Daily Caller explained Big Media’s reaction to Cernovich’s scoop and how they reported it:

Mike Cernovich, a journalist who has promoted conspiracy theories and was deemed “fake news” by “60 Minutes,” was the first to break the news that Obama’s former national security advisor Susan Rice made requests to unmask the identities of Trump associates.

Cernovich said in his report Sunday that New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman knew about the Rice requests, and “has chosen to sit on it in an effort to protect the reputation of former President Barack Obama.” A New York Times spokeswoman told The Daily Caller, “Cernovich’s claim regarding Maggie Haberman is 100 percent false.”

Bloomberg’s Eli Lake confirmed Cernovich’s report Monday, but did not include any details about Haberman sitting on the story. Cernovich told TheDC in an interview that Lake also sat on the story over the weekend. Lake tweeted Tuesday, “Reports that I sat on the Susan Rice story are false.”

The Bloomberg story didn’t give Cernovich any credit for his scoop and he said he wasn’t upset as he has more influence than Bloomberg.

Cernovich revealed how he got the story:

Zero Hedge provides a partial transcript of the video (emphases in the original):

I’m showing you the politics of ‘real journalism’.  ‘Real journalism’ is that Bloomberg had it and the New York Times had it but they wouldn’t run it because  they don’t want to run any stories that would make Obama look bad or that will vindicate Trump.  They only want to run stories that make Trump look bad so that’s why they sat on it.

So where did I get the story?  I didn’t get it from the intelligence community.  Everybody’s trying to figure out where I got it from.  I got it from somebody who works in one of those media companies.  I have spies in every media organization.  I got people in news rooms.  I got it from a source within the news room who said ‘Cernovich, they’re sitting on this story, they’re not going to run it, so you can run it’.

If you’re at Bloomberg, I have people in there.  If you’re at the New York Times, I have people in there.  LA Times, Washington Post, you name it, I have my people in there.  I got IT people in every major news room in this country.  The IT people see every email so that’s how I knew it.

On Wednesday, April 5, Cernovich wrote about what happened next:

– Rice said she unmasked but it was legal.

– Fake news does not call Rice a liar for saying she never unmasked anyone, instead….

– Fake news attacks Cernovich’s character.

– Fake news claims Trump said he was “illegally” spied on (not what he said).

Susan Rice

Since Cernovich’s story broke, Susan Rice has given several television interviews this week to friendly outlets, such as MSNBC and PBS.

Rice’s husband, Ian Cameron, was a senior producer of successful news programmes for ABC. Although he is no longer working for them, preferring to spend time with his family, Heavy contacted the network to find out why they were not giving the Rice story much coverage:

Heavy has reached out to ABC News’ PR staff to see whether Cameron still has any link to ABC News, as his LinkedIn profile and past articles say he left the network several years ago. This story will be updated if a response is received.

Fox News is the only channel doing any critical coverage of the story. On April 5, they reported  (emphases mine):

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.

Alternative media have been digging deeply. Circa, which has excellent reports on intelligence, posted an article about the Rice controversy on Monday, April 3, the same day that Cernovich’s scoop appeared. Circa analysed what might have occurred with Rice, intelligence information and others in the Obama White House. A brief excerpt follows:

How the information was disseminated beyond Rice will also be a potential focus of congressional oversight, since lawmakers may want to know if it was briefed to Obama or shared with members of her larger circle of advisers, like deputy Ben Rhodes.

Rice has not returned repeated calls for comment from Circa. But in an interview with PBS recently, she said she had no idea what House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes was talking about when he said Obama officials were monitoring Trump associates after the election.

One intelligence professional with detailed knowledge of how the NSA and other intelligence agencies share information with the White House during transitions told Circa that U.S. intelligence reporting on foreign leaders’ perceptions of Trump spiked after his unexpected election win in November, creating a trove of information that could be accessed by the outgoing White House.

More will surely follow in the days and weeks ahead.

Steve Bannon

In closing, I would like to clarify what happened with Steve Bannon, one of President Trump’s closest advisers.

On Wednesday, April 5, The Drudge Report had headlines from Big Media outlets saying that said Bannon had lost his security clearance and was threatening to quit. Cernovich explains why these reports are false: look at who wrote them.

That day, The Conservative Treehouse reported that what really happened. Excerpts follow, emphases mine.

First, Steve Bannon continues to attend National Security Council (NSC) meetings:

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.

Secondly, Lt General McMaster is realigning the NSC meetings to emphasise security threats over politics, a holdover from the Obama administration — a big part of the Susan Rice revelations. This is where the Big Media story about Bannon is coming from because:

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.

This is what McMaster is doing:

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 McMaster’s 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.

Stories on security topics and alternative media will continue after Holy Week and Easter. This year, Palm Sunday falls on April 9.

On March 28, 2017, I posted about Mike Cernovich’s interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes.

Although Cernovich’s campaign for CBS to release the full 45-minute video has not borne fruit, he does have the full transcript of the interview, which he posted on Monday, April 3.

At times such as these, it’s reassuring to receive an enthusiastic nod from the White House, in this case, the Counselor to the President:

Here is the short interview, preceded by a discussion with notional experts about what constitutes fake news:

Cernovich posted the transcript of the entire interview on Medium.com.

Excerpts follow from his exchange with Scott Pelley. Subheads and emphases are mine.

What’s Left and Right anymore?

Scott Pelley: … A-are you a right-wing person?

Mike Cernovich: I consider myself center-right. But these labels don’t really make much sense. I believe in some form of universal basic income. Well that isn’t a, quote unquote, conservative position because we have automation coming. What are you going to do?

I’m pro single payer healthcare. Is that right-wing or is that left-wing anymore? Well, if you have a lot of people, a large swatch of the company, or country, are suffering, then I think that we owe it to all Americans to do right by them, and to help them out. So is that right-wing or is that left-wing? I don’t know.

I’m pro free speech. Well, I remember when my great heroes who I read in college, like Allen Dershowitz, were with the ACLU marching with the Nazis. Now I read that well, that guy’s a Nazi. Is it okay to punch him? Is it okay to hit him? So I’m pro free speech, that used to be a left-wing value. That was core left-wing value. And now we’re, we’re hearing from the left hate speech, and you should be able to punch people who disagree with political violence, and becoming more normalized.

That’s why I don’t like labels like left-wing or right-wing anymore. And don’t think they apply.

Target audience

Scott Pelley: Who’s your audience?

Mike Cernovich: The people. Regular people who feel like their voices aren’t being heard in traditional media outlets. People of all walks of life, all genders, all ages. It’s a really fun, eclectic group actually …

Scott Pelley: Help me, uh, with, uh a bit of, uh the technology behind all of this. Would your site be as successful as it is, without Facebook and Twitter?

Mike Cernovich: They’re different platforms, definitely. So it would be, Twitter is very useful for different things. But my website would get around. Word would get around one way or another.

Scott Pelley: But, uh, web, uh. Let me ask a question this way. Twitter and Facebook are useful to you how?

Mike Cernovich: Reaching people directly without an intermediary. So what, the-the way I always explain to- you’re mediators. We’re going to talk for a number of minutes about a number of questions. This is going to go through editing, and then you’re going to go to television and say this is Mike Cernovich, this is what he believes. And then you’re going to tell a narrative whether I’m a good guy, a bad guy, a misguided guy, whatever the narrative is. And that’s fine. We’re all telling a story, right?

The issue is that that media is an intermediary. With social media, I can say to the people here’s me live on video for an hour. The full thing, raw and uncut. So it bring the message directly to the people. It bypasses intermediaries in the media.

Media bias

Scott Pelley: You’re a political activist?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a social activist, absolutely.

Scott Pelley: Well, that would be the big difference between you and reporters in journalism.

Mike Cernovich: Reporters are the mouthpiece of Democratic National Convention. Most of it is pro Hillary, pro Barack Obama. Donald Trump tweets something mean, the whole world, left-wing media explodes. Barack Obama prosecutes whistle-blowers more than anybody before him. Good old Barry. We love Barry, we love Barry, we love Barry. 90% of campaign contributions that came from journalists went to Hillary Clinton.

So the idea that journalists are these unbiased bastions of truth, and they’re not human beings, is completely not consistent with reality. Not consistent with the observable data. And moreover not consistent with what we know about people.

Truth in reporting

Scott Pelley: What, What stories have you published that turned out to not be right?

Mike Cernovich: None, that come to mind.

Scott Pelley: None?

Mike Cernovich: That come to mind, no.

Scott Pelley: You know, it seems to me that the quickest way to destroy a democracy, is to poison the information.

Mike Cernovich: That’s exactly why the Iraq war was a mistake, caused by hysterical, fake news coverage. I also remember when people claimed, a Kuwaiti woman had claimed that Iraqi soldiers had went into a hospital, taking babies out of the incubators, throwing the babies away, and this was all reported true, they were untrue. So again, the idea is-

Scott Pelley: I’m talking about your work.

Mike Cernovich: I’m talking about the nature of truth though, because my work has to be contextualized relative to the structures that we resist in the media structure.

Scott Pelley: So some reporters, some where made a mistake and therefore it’s okay for you to write anything you want, whether it’s true or not.

Mike Cernovich: No, I never said that at all. I said that people are human beings, and that mistakes made by the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and Rolling Stone, and other outlets, have caused great damage to our democracy and is definitely a problem

Scott Pelley: Who[se] responsibility is it to judge whether something on your website is true, you, or the viewer?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, many people do. I have to judge it, the legal system judges it, the viewers have to judge it. Remember too, that I am an attorney. Right? You have a legal department of sixty minutes, we all know defamation, we want to avoid it. Not only because it’s not moral to harm people, dishonestly, we shouldn’t harm private people at all, but that’s a different conversation. So you’re going to be filtered through many people, but ultimately all news, all information, the personal responsibility of the person receiving it, to reach their own conclusions

Mike Cernovich: I remember when John Edwards had fathered a wo- a child out of wedlock with a woman he was cheating on while his wife had cancer, the media wouldn’t cover it.

Scott Pelley: The question’s not about John Edwards. The question’s not about John Edwards, it’s about you, what’s your standard of proof?

Mike Cernovich: We’re having a philosophical conversation about the nature of truth, and the nature of truth is that John Edwards did not have a lovechild, that is fake news. Well actually it’s true, that happened. Right? So there are many stories that are under reported.

The producer’s question

PRODUCER: Do you think that maybe you can uh, ask him uh, you know, if he thinks that what he’s doing is filling the void left open by the mainstream media.

Scott Pelley: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yes, absolutely. That’s a good one. Everybody ready? Are you filling a void that has been left open by the mainstream media?

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, that is why my profile has risen so much. Everybody kind of writes the same stories. Right now, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. That’s what I hear everywhere, that’s all I hear anywhere. I don’t hear about Saudi Arabia. I’ve actually gone through thinking of real journalism, and doing research, and using my expertise as a lawyer, I’ve gone through FAR records to see who is actually paying people to be their mouthpieces. Ukraine, big money. They pay a guy, Doug Schoen, who goes on Fox News, $40,000 a month. Victor Pinchuk does. Pays him $40,000 a month, he goes on Fox News and says “Russia’s bad, the Ukraine is good”, he never discloses that he’s getting $40,000 a month. Saudi Arabia, more than any other country, they pay for propaganda. You can go through the FA- the FAR reports. Right? I don’t see any of that on the news.

Let’s talk about how Saudi Arabia owns a percentage of Fox News. Let’s talk about how Saudi Arabia owns a percentage of Twitter. Let’s talk about how they bought bombs from Obama, and they’re murdering the, let’s talk about that. I don’t see any of that. Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. It’s like in the movie Being John Malkovich, being in Russia and America. So what I’m saying is well hey, why don’t we talk about Saudi Arabia? Why don’t we talk about Ukraine? Why don’t we talk about other stories that the media isn’t telling? Of course you’re going to draw an audience with that.

There are many news stories that Big Media do not cover.

One is Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi’s visit to Washington DC this week. Whilst I have not watched the news, there are plenty of people who have.

They have reported in comments online that, even though President Donald Trump spent much of Monday, April 3 with his Egyptian counterpart, the Big Media narrative in the US — and Australia — that day was ‘Trump White House in chaos’, referring to spying, Russia and supposed internal rifts.

Wow.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

More on Al Sisi tomorrow and on a Cernovich scoop at the end of the week.

© Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 2009-2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? If you wish to borrow, 1) please use the link from the post, 2) give credit to Churchmouse and Churchmouse Campanologist, 3) copy only selected paragraphs from the post -- not all of it.
PLAGIARISERS will be named and shamed.
First case: June 2-3, 2011 -- resolved

Creative Commons License
Churchmouse Campanologist by Churchmouse is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://churchmousec.wordpress.com/.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 994 other followers

Archive

Calendar of posts

July 2017
S M T W T F S
« Jun    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

http://martinscriblerus.com/

Bloglisting.net - The internets fastest growing blog directory
Powered by WebRing.
This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

Blog Stats

  • 1,125,198 hits