You matter, you are important and you are capable of knowing more than you do. You know that you exist and that can lead you to knowing other truths. If you bother, you can know other people and their truths.
If you are interested in a subject, click the tag at the bottom of any post for more posts on the same general subject.
On a daily basis the corporate media discusses the need to impeach Trump, for what is not clear. I want to go back to how this began to show that this is purely political. Before Trump had even secured the nomination, the elites were saying he should be impeached if elected.
Perhaps people have forgotten this video calling for the electoral college to ignore the election and just vote for whoever they want.
The Politico article went so far as to say that Trump was going to round up Muslims and put them in concentration camps. The supposedly "liberal" corporate media calls for him to attack Iran, North Korea and Venezuela daily. The same media calls for us to stop enforcing immigration laws when just a few years ago the same ones called for building a wall or other type of barrier. We had to endure months of the media calling for him to be impeached for sleeping with a porn star once.
One of Trump's first acts was to pull out of the TPP, a trade agreement that would have let private courts to be used so that companies could sue nations who had laws that they did not like.
The fact is that while the TPP allowed nations to set their own CO2 limits voluntarily, the TPP was going to make those choices mandatory and both were going to start serious enforcement in 2030.
We are being told contradictory things. We are told the Paris Climate Accord will save our planet. We are also told that if we don't stabilize CO2 emissions by 2030 that the world will be doomed by 2050. We are told this by the exact same people; but, the facts are a little different.
The human activity caused CO2 was 37,077,404 gigatons in 2017. China produced 10,877,218 of those emissions or roughly slightly more than 1/4. The United States produced 5,107,393 of them. Australia produced 402,253 of them. China has been praised for taking a leadership role in the Paris Accord after the United States pulled out of the agreement. At the same time, China plans of increasing emissions by 100% by 2030, much of it from burning coal. By the way, since 2005, the United States has reduced it's emissions by about 1/6th.
A video showing the changes by year.
During the recent elections is Australia, their "Labor" party called for Australia to reduce their emissions by 45%. That wouldn't even make a dent in total emissions with China increasing their by 100%. This should make you wonder why the United Nations doesn't discuss this in their climate reports. This should make you ask why the media doesn't discuss it. In fact, 66% of the electrical energy in China comes from coal burning which is more than double the percentage coming from coal in the United States and China will be doubling the number of coal powered plants between now and 2030.
If every country in the world, except China, kept steady at their carbon emissions, we would still see a 25% increase in total emissions due to China alone. Include India in that equation and we are easily looking at a 35% increase overall.
Why are we moving manufacturing to the country that is the biggest user of coal and producer of CO2 if we are concerned about CO2 emissions? Why don't the climate scientists, the media pundits or Bill Nye discuss this? Why don't climate scientists use the scientific method and prove their theories using experiments?
Western countries companies will tell you how they have reduced their CO2 emissions, their carbon footprint when in fact all they have done is outsource the emissions to China. You are told that if you don't eat meat one day a week, you will save the world; but, that is not even remotely going to offset China doubling their emissions.
People in the western world are being lied to. You are being told that if you live with less, the world will be saved while jobs and industry are being sent to the biggest polluters resulting in a net increase in CO2 which is in fact harmless.
Michael Isikoff is the Chief Investigative Correspondent for Yahoo News. He is also the author of a book called, "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump" along with David Corn. Mr. Isakoff was the first person that Carter Page was being investigated and Mr. Corn was the first to talk about the Steele dossier. Mr. Corn was the person who gave a copy of the Steele Dossier to FBI General Counsel James Baker. This is funny because we now know Steele was actually working with the FBI already, so they would have had all of Steele's memos.
The reason this is interesting is because now that investigators are looking into what started the investigation, Mr. Isikoff is attempting to rewrite history to protect Mr. Baker. Here is the most recent article, which includes clips from a podcast with Baker and Isikoff.
The first video is 2 minutes and 47 seconds long. Mr. Baker comes off as seeking to burn Jim Comey. He claims he told Comey that Comey should not tell Trump that he was not a target of an investigation, which Comey did anyways. Basically everyone involved is seeking to blame Comey and make him the center of attention.
Now, I find Mr. Baker to be untruthful. The complete podcast is included in the above article, it is about 48 minutes long. Mr. Baker is asked how they went about verifying it and he claims it is complicated. Wait, Steele was working for them. Wouldn't you just start by asking Steele where he got the information from? We know from Steele's testimony in England that he never tried to verify any of it and that he didn't even travel to Russia. In fact, Steele said he got much of the accusations from random claims on the internet. It gets worse, you see Baker and Isikoff were friends and the FISA applications included using and article written by Isikoff based on the Steele Dossier and what he had been told by "government sources" which strongly implies Baker knew where Isikoff got his information from and that quoting him was just quoting the dossier, not confirmation of it.
People need to remember that the CIA and FBI claimed to have "high confidence" in their assessment even though it was based on the unverified Steele dossier. How is it they could have "high confidence" in it? Mueller did use it in his report. The people involved in this investigation are scared and they should be, Baker said he is going to completely cooperate in this new investigation and his first act is to point a finger at Comey.
Yahoo - "U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser and Kremlin. This is hilarious as the FBI had arrested and prosecuted two Russians based partly on information provided by Page. Carter Page worked in the energy industry and the largest energy supplier in Europe is Russia. Why would anyone be surprised that an energy person working in Europe would be dealing with Russians?
President Trump claimed over two years ago that his campaign was spied on and was openly laughed at by the media. In the last year Trump claimed that European intelligence agencies were involved and that was laughed at by the media. Oddly enough these same media pundits forgot what they said in the past that corroborated Trump's claims.
In May of 2016 George Papadopoulos met with Alexander Downer over drinks in London. Mr. Downer was the Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom. After the meeting it is claimed that Mr. Downer told the FBI that Papadopoulos had claimed that he had been offered dirt on Hillary Clinton. In March of 2016, Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor, met with Mr Papadopoulos for drinks and a discussion and claimed to have dirt on Hillary from the Russians, a claim Misfud later denies. Hard to know what Misfud would say now as he has disappeared. In September of 2016 an American intelligence asset named Azra Turk met with Papadopoulos for drinks claiming to be a research assistant to Stefan Halper, a Cambridge professor who had flown Papadopoulos to London to supposedly write a research paper. NewsMax - Papadopoulos" Undercover Agent Who Tried to Seduce Me Was CIA, Not FBI.
A little history. In March of 2016, the FBI was still investigating Hillary Clinton for using a private server which illegally housed classified information on it. In March of 2016, Joseph Mifsud is alleged to have told George Papadopoulos that he knew Russians who had thirty thousand of Hillary's e-mails. Supposedly this would be the 30,000 emails that she destroyed, illegally, that were on the server. The emails in question were not the same ones that Wikileaks published, those came from the DNC. In fact, the Hillary Clinton e-mails have never surfaced. A separate group called DCLeaks in July of 2016 published e-mails regarding Hillary's media briefings regarding her campaign which included nothing damaging. This was done just prior to Wikileaks publishing the DNC e-mails which it had previously announced it had and would publish the documents.
Two videos that summarize what has gone on so far regarding what started the investigation.
I noticed an increase in hits on Pastor Daniels posts and found this recent YouTube video.
Just to be clear, I had nothing to do with the above video. They clearly used my site and Websleuths for research material and I am totally good with that. Their podcast was respectful of the Daniels family and I believe they gave a fairly good summary with only a couple of mistakes. They are one of the few commentators who mentioned that Pastor Daniels mother asked about what happened to her purse and briefcase. Now here is a question, why did Pastor Daniels bring a briefcase, if in fact she did? I was in business and an executive for decades, yet, never carried a briefcase. When I was a preacher, I never carried anything with me. IF the briefcase is important it might be worth asking what she kept in it, I doubt it was jewelry; but, may have been notes about the town or people she dealt with. Just a thought, the police should have asked her family what she kept in the briefcase; but, apparently didn't. I myself left that little tidbit out, intentionally. I actually only ever read it once.
This is to be expected. I guarantee you the United States will seek extradition. Be careful what you ask for, Assange just might show how he got the Podesta emails and it wasn't from a hack.
Expect him to be extradited to Sweden as Britain promised Ecuador to not extradite him to a country having the death penalty. Sweden will then extradite him to the United States as they did not make that agreement. Congress will threaten Trump with impeachment for obstruction if Trump attempts to pardon Assange. Trump will NOT pardon Assange; but, Assange will not be convicted of hacking the DNC. Assange will not be convicted of treason in the United States as he is a publisher of news.
So the actual charge is of conspiring to collect and disseminate classified material. The actual action claimed to be done by Assange was that he attempted to hack a password. Oddly enough, Assange never did assist in hacking the password. In fact, there is no evidence that Assange made any attempt to hack the computers. All of that was done by Manning. The reason they are claiming conspiracy is to avoid charging Assange with publishing the information. It is a weak case. It also appears that the President of Ecuador lied, he said that England had agreed not to extradite Assange to a country that had the death penalty, what he meant was a country that would charge Assange with crime punishable by the death penalty. By charging Assange in this manner, the government avoids having to deal with the DNC Podesta emails or Assange's lawyers seeking discovery and forcing the Justice department from proving that the DNC was hacked.
Personally, I think it helps Assange to be extradited. He could not live in the embassy for the rest of his life. It has been reported that he faces five years in jail, heck, he has been in the embassy for seven. With Assange in the United States, he can be called before grand juries investigating the Trump Russia investigation and he can tell them how the DNC was not hacked; but, people leaked the information to him.
UPDATE 2:
By the way, I posted within minutes of Assange being arrested and have been searching every ten minutes for updates on YouTube. Interesting, videos from conservative sites have been blocked on YouTube almost immediately. They later get released, after an hour or so. I am talking about dozens and dozens of videos being blocked within minutes of being put on line. I have never seen this before. It is not for copyright infringement, Assange's arrest was filmed by Russian television and the same video is being used by all the mainstream media without permission I am sure.
UPDATE 3:
The media keeps saying that Assange is looking at up to 5 years for the current charges against him; but, this is misleading. IF the government can get him on the conspiracy charge then they don't have to treat him as a publisher and will charge him with additional charges for spying and publishing the classified documents and that will carry decades of jailtime.
