Connect with us

News

Mass Firing Coming! Entire White House On Edge Over What’s About To Come Out – Nobody Safe

Who’s next?

Published

on

The Justice Department inspector general’s report is due to be released anytime now and it could be very explosive. Attorney General Jeff Sessions bluntly came out and said that the long-awaited watchdog report on the Hillary Clinton email case could lead to perhaps a mass firing. Workers at the White House is on edge waiting to see what is in the report. The report reviews the FBI and DOJ’s handling of that case and should be released today. Anyone connected to that investigation is not safe by any means here.

In an exclusive interview with The Hill’s new Internet show “Rising” on Wednesday, Sessions said the option of “termination” is on the table for those accused of serious wrongdoing. “If anyone else shows up in this report to have done something that requires termination we will do so,” Sessions said. IG Michael Horowitz is sure to nail several people in the report.

“I think it will be a lengthy report and a careful report,” Sessions said, adding that he thinks it will “help us better fix any problems that we have and reassure the American people that some of the concerns that have been raised are not true.” Well, I hope so. But most Americans are convinced that their concerns are indeed true and are just waiting to see if any of these politicians will, in fact, have to answer for their alleged crimes. Sessions is not the most reliable source anymore on this. His credibility has been damaged by missteps and inaction while attorney general.

For instance, former FBI Director James Comey “deviated” from bureau and Justice Department procedures in handling the probe into Hillary Clinton, damaging the agencies’ image of impartiality even though he wasn’t motivated by politics, the department’s watchdog reportedly said according to Bloomberg. “While we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias on Comey’s part, we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice,” Inspector General Michael Horowitz said in the report’s conclusions, which were obtained by Bloomberg News.

Trending: Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’

Comey was fired in May 2017, upon recommendation by current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. His handling of the Clinton case was cited, though President Trump later indicated the Russia probe was also a factor. Trump has continued to label that investigation as a “witch hunt” and is likely to seize on the IG findings to further question the FBI’s integrity. At the same time, some of the IG findings may hit the bureau for actions seen as harmful to Clinton. Again, let’s hope so. Even Sessions believes the firing of Comey was justified. “It was the right thing to do. The facts were pretty clear on it. He made a big mistake and he testified only a few weeks before the termination that he would do it again [announce reopening the Clinton probe] if he had the opportunity,” Sessions said.

Topics the inspector general reviewed include Comey’s announcement in July 2016 that no prosecutor would find grounds to pursue criminal charges against Clinton for improperly handling classified information on her private email server, as well as Comey’s decision to inform Congress only days before the election that the Clinton investigation was being re-opened. Comey’s public announcement of findings angered Republicans, while his reopening of the inquiry outraged Democrats.

“I think it’s going to put a lot of the missing pieces in this giant puzzle together,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) said on Fox News. Among the officials expected to come under scrutiny in the report are former FBI Director James Comey, then Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and FBI official Peter Strzok. Both Comey and McCabe have already been fired in connection with all this. Others have resigned in anticipation of these findings.

From Fox News on McCabe:

“McCabe wasn’t fired until March of this year, following a separate inspector general finding that he leaked a self-serving story to the press and later lied about it to Comey and federal investigators. Horowitz’s office sent a criminal referral for McCabe to the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington.”

“In this report, though, Horowitz has investigated whether McCabe should have recused himself from the Clinton email investigation due to this family’s ties to the Democratic Party. He did not decide to do so until a week before the election. McCabe could also come under scrutiny over the timeline of his knowledge of additional Clinton-tied emails found on disgraced Rep. Anthony Weiner’s laptop. McCabe and others knew that the emails were found as early as September 2016, but the FBI did not work to obtain a warrant to review them until October.”

“This week, lawyers representing McCabe filed a suit against the Justice Department and the FBI alleging that they wouldn’t give up files connected to his firing.”

Strzok is a different matter here. He was not fired. Instead, he was re-assigned from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team to the FBI’s Human Resources Department last year. He came under fire when Horowitz found a trove of anti-Trump text messages between him and former FBI employee Lisa Page, with whom he was allegedly romantically involved. She has since resigned. Considering his texts smearing, attacking and ranting over President Trump, the guy should be gone. At least one email hinted at a coup of the presidency. I don’t know why Strzok still has a job frankly.

Loretta Lynch is also being sized up over the infamous Arizona tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton, just days before the FBI announced it would not press criminal charges against Hillary Clinton. Lynch has claimed she and the former president only discussed “innocuous things” and that the meeting was just a “chance encounter.” They talked about grandchildren… right.

Horowitz is expected to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week on the report. By then, numerous people could lose their job.

Is this what Trump calls “draining the swamp?”

What do you think should happen?

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’

Published

on

Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.

From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.

His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”

But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund.  In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.

Fox News reports:

“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.

The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”

It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’

Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.

The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”

Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.

The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”

The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The group advocates that –

  1. That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
  2. All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
  3. Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.

Fox News continued:

Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.

“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.

“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.

Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.

Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.

Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?

Continue Reading

News

Trump Issued Major Warning: ‘We Will Look Into Discriminatory and Illegal Practice’ – It’s On!

Huge problems and everyone needs to know!

Published

on

President Donald Trump voiced his concerns over “discriminatory and illegal practice” when he posted about the alleged controversy going on with Republicans being censored on Twitter. The tactic is sometimes referred to as “shadow banning” and it seems to be a strategy that social media platforms use to limit the visibility of some people. For example, ever wonder why someone who is genuinely popular might have tons of followers but their posts don’t seem to get many responses? It could be one of several reasons. Either they have fake followers, the post is no good, or they are being censored. In many cases, it’s a form of censorship that’s the obvious result. When a social media user goes from getting a lot of replies and views on their posts, then all of a sudden there’s very little replies and it seems like no one has seen the post – then they were hit with that form of censorship or suppression.

Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been called out for suppressing the content of certain Republican voices or those who support President Donald Trump. Well-known stars like Diamond and Silk have made it very public that they feel targeted for the views and opinions on their pages. That’s just the tip of the iceberg because the problem spans from targeting well-known mainstream people all the way down to the independent publishers. Censorship like this is affecting people’s careers and causing an unbalanced platform in which people with certain views are being limited. It might not be listed as a “ban” but it’s certainly limiting the viewership of certain people. The content that would once appear in people’s feed or timeline now requires a fine-tooth comb to find and it seems like people are realizing this more often and being upset with it.

Trump spoke about it on Twitter and Vice News completed a report on it.

Vice News reported: “Twitter is limiting the visibility of prominent Republicans in search results — a technique known as “shadow banning” — in what it says is a side effect of its attempts to improve the quality of discourse on the platform.

The Republican Party chair Ronna McDaniel, several conservative Republican congressmen, and Donald Trump Jr.’s spokesman no longer appear in the auto-populated drop-down search box on Twitter, VICE News has learned. It’s a shift that diminishes their reach on the platform — and it’s the same one being deployed against prominent racists to limit their visibility. The profiles continue to appear when conducting a full search, but not in the more convenient and visible drop-down bar. (The accounts appear to also populate if you already follow the person.)

Democrats are not being “shadow banned” in the same way, according to a VICE News review. McDaniel’s counterpart, Democratic Party chair Tom Perez, and liberal members of Congress — including Reps. Maxine Waters, Joe Kennedy III, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan — all continue to appear in drop-down search results. Not a single member of the 78-person Progressive Caucus faces the same situation in Twitter’s search.

“The notion that social media companies would suppress certain political points of view should concern every American,” McDaniel told VICE News in a statement. “Twitter owes the public answers to what’s really going on.”

Presented with screenshots of the searches, a Twitter spokesperson told VICE News: “We are aware that some accounts are not automatically populating in our search box and shipping a change to address this.” Asked why only conservative Republicans appear to be affected and not liberal Democrats, the spokesperson wrote: “I’d emphasize that our technology is based on account *behavior* not the content of Tweets.”

Twitter directed VICE News to a May 15 blog post that explained the company’s new approach to combating “troll-like behaviors.” After making changes to its platform, the company said that “[t]he result is that people contributing to the healthy conversation will be more visible in conversations and search.”

Twitter did not respond to a follow-up question.

Twitter’s troll hunt, however, has ensnared some of the most prominent Republicans in the country. Type in the names of McDaniel, conservative members of Congress like Reps. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz, and Trump Jr.’s spokesman Andrew Surabian, for example, and Twitter’s drop-down search bar does not show their profiles. The search menu also does not display the verified profile of Rep. Devin Nunes of California, only his unverified one that he seldom uses to post.

That limits their visibility and the ease of finding their profiles compared to their liberal counterparts.

UPDATE: July 26, 10:00 AM: Twitter appears to have adjusted its platform overnight to no longer limit the visibility of some prominent Republicans in its search results.”

At what point do social media platforms give the control back to the people? Users should not have to worry about their views being censored by the machine.

Censoring any content that is not illegal should not be tolerated by the users.

Continue Reading

Like Us on Facebook

Recent

Trending

No trending posts found at this time.