CAPITAL STORIES FOR CHILDREN

- Hallo friendsCAPITAL STORIES FOR CHILDREN, In the article you read this time with the title , We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article ADVENTURE, Article ANIMATION, Article LATEST DONGENG, Article WORLD OF ANIMALS, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title :
link :

http://ift.tt/2t3211e
.BLOGSPOT. COM.
For Mon., Nov. 20, 2017
~All Gave Some~Some Gave
All~God Bless America

Moore and the yearbook

James Simpson

Many women have now come forward with allegations that Roy Moore harassed, fondled, or otherwise solicited them, the two most serious coming from women who claimed they were 14 and 16 at the time. Moore has consistently denied wrongdoing. His claims have been supported by other Alabamans who have known him for years.

So where does the truth lie?

Well, considering the mountains of defense, denials, misdirection, flat-out lies, and when that fails, stony silence, about serial sexual predators like Bill Clinton, Teddy Kennedy, Gerry Studds, Barney Frank and others, the media seems to be hysterically out of character to be spending so much ink on the Moore story. Then again, all those others were left-wingers.

But since they have gone after Moore with a vengeance, let’s look at the most important allegation to surface yet – that of Beverly Young Nelson. Represented by left-wing feminist lawyer and commentator Gloria Allred, she claims that Moore attempted to force a sexual act on her when she was only 16 in 1977. To bolster her story, she claims that Moore signed her yearbook “To a sweeter, more beautiful girl I could not say ‘Merry Christmas.'”

Here’s the evidence:

Phillip L. Jauregui, Moore’s attorney, fired back against these allegations. He and others point out the difference between the sevens in “Christmas 1977” and “12-22-77.” I would add that switching writing styles from cursive to block print seems incongruous.

While Gloria Allred claims the “D.A.” following Moore’s signature is an abbreviation of “District Attorney,” Jauregui says that Moore was assistant district attorney at the time. He explained that “D.A.” are the initials of Moore’s assistant, Debra Adams, who added her initials when she stamped Moore’s signature on documents.

Thomas Wictor, a noted journalist and author who also analyzed the signature, says it looks like a fraud. Moore and his lawyer have called it a forgery and the Moore team sent a letter to Allred demanding that the document be made available within 48 hours.

Of course, the media has lunged to discredit Moore’s explanation of the yearbook entry. CNN’s Chris Cillizza calls it “Moore’s appalling ‘yearbook’ defense.” Cillizza has not made even a peep about the latest allegations against sitting Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), but never mind, he’s a liberal so it doesn’t count.

Now evidence has been produced, however, that points toward forgery. While Moore denies knowing the young Nelson, as a circuit judge he did sign her divorce decree in 1999. Here is the signature from that document:

Once again, we see the “D.A.” following Moore’s signature. Clearly, it is not an abbreviation for “district attorney.” If, as Jauregui says, these are the initials of Moore’s assistant, then we have to believe either that it was his assistant who signed the yearbook note, which makes no sense at all, or it is a forgery, copied from a genuine document like the divorce decree. The Washington Examiner further points out that Moore includes his middle initial “S” in many signed documents, but not the yearbook.

Handwriting experts say it is essential to examine the actual yearbook. Inks can be analyzed and dated, the imprint left by the pen can be measured for consistency and other factors can be evaluated to allow for a more conclusive determination regarding the signature’s veracity. Judge Moore would likely not have demanded to see the document if he were worried about that.

For her part meanwhile, Gloria Allred has stalled and maneuvered in an effort to withhold the yearbook from the Moore team. She said she would be willing to have the document examined only in a Senate hearing, “within the next two weeks,” something unlikely to occur. In an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Allred repeatedly refused to deny the signature was a forgery. When Blitzer asked if she would make the yearbook available if the Senate did not agree to a hearing, she said, “We think that this should be done in a professional setting, and this is what we have proposed, and we are not going to be distracted…”

In other words, no.

While there may be other questions about some of the allegations, it has always seemed suspicious that, given Moore’s controversial character and the Left’s repeated efforts to destroy him over the years, these allegations would have surfaced long ago if they had any validity.

Instead, we have an October – or in this case November – surprise, exploding in headlines mere weeks before this critical election, when the Left and establishment Republicans both want to see Moore go down in flames and called for him to drop out of the race almost as soon as the allegations hit the airwaves. Rush Limbaugh has called it “a multi-faceted search and destroy mission,” a coded message to Steve Bannon from the establishment that he is not going to have his way without a fight.

I judge the whole thing to be fake news.

Gowdy Drops Massive Hillary Bombshell, She’s Busted

William Widener

The misdeeds of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have not been forgotten. As Judicial Watch continues to fight Fusion GPS in court, more details of the corruption in the Clinton campaign have emerged. One Congressman is paying close attention to these details, and he isn’t letting the issue go.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace to discuss whether or not the actions of the Hillary Clinton campaign are laundering crimes.

Rep. Gowdy stated, “I’m not an election law expert, Chris, but the good news is you don’t have to be to understated the absurdity believing you can just launder all of your campaign money by just hiring a law firm.”

Mr. Wallace summed up the issue: “The Clinton campaign and the DNC — which paid $12 million to the law firm Perkins Coie that paid for the opposition research that led to the dossier — that in the FEC filings it simply says ‘12 million dollars to Perkins Coie, the law firm, for legal work.’ No mention of the fact that it was also paying for oppo research that went to Christopher Steele.”

The Clinton campaign paid attorney Marc Elias and his firm Perkins Coie, for “legal services.” Perkins Coie then made payments to Fusion GPS for supposed “opposition research.” Fusion GPS then hired Steele, a former British spy, to create a dossier.

Steele took his paid investigation to the Kremlin, where more money exchanged hands for information he used to create the dossier from a series of memos. The series of money exchanges certainly raises suspicion.

Wallace then added, “As I understand it, that willful misrepresentation of campaign expenditures is a criminal offense.”

Rep. Gowdy explained, “Imagine if you and I were running for Congress and we just hired a law firm and said ‘Hey, you go do all the oppo, you go buy all the television, you go buy all the bumper stickers, you go hire all the experts.’ And we’re going to launder all of this through a law firm. I can’t think of anything that defeats the purpose of transparency laws more than that.”

Rep. Gowdy then remarked that Democrats involved with the circumstances claim they can’t remember who paid for the research. “I’m also interested in sharing some memory tricks with folks at the DNC because no one can remember who paid $10 million to a law firm to do oppo research. I find that stunning! $10 million and no one can remember who authorized it, who approved it, who said ‘yeah, this is a really good idea,’” he said.

“You’ve got two issues: a memory issue, and then the lack of transparency by laundering money through a law firm,” Rep. Gowdy concluded.

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton recently appeared on Lou Dobbs Tonight and stated, “We’ve got a real crisis here … It’s one thing to have Democratic lawyers or Fusion GPS lawyers protecting the dossier information payments about it. It’s another thing to have the FBI and Justice Department fighting to keep the public in the dark about this.”

Dobbs lamented on the absurdity of how the issue is being handled, from documents hidden from the public to closed-door meetings. “It’s a joke … The thing that’s broken here is the integrity of our committees in Congress, the integrity of our intelligence agencies. And I’m saying it out loud because there is every evidence of corruption across all of those agencies.”

Judicial Watch has already made progress in forcing Fusion GPS to reveal information that sheds light on the Clinton campaign involvement in the creation of the dossier. They will continue to fight to obtain Fusion GPS bank records to uncover the intricacies of money exchanges. They may be able to prove that Clinton was involved in money laundering, proving Rep. Gowdy correct.

Antifa Hit With Devastating Blow, They Deserve This

Ben Baker

Antifa has been plaguing the nation with hate-filled rhetoric and open violence since they rose to prominence in 2016.

According to Vice, many of the individuals who engaged in terrorism during the Presidential Inauguration to voice their opposition to the election may be finally held accountable. Around 194 people arrested for their violent acts during President Trump’s inauguration could be facing decades of prison time.

The streets during the inauguration were a scene of chaos. Antifa protesters swarmed entire blocks, smashing windows, setting fire to a limo, clashing with President Trump supporters and even harassing police.

As a result, the US Attorney for Washington DC has charged nearly all of the 194 arrested protesters with felony charges, citing incitement to riot and destruction of property. The first batch of trails supposedly started yesterday with six individuals facing charges.

Many on the Left claim this legal action is meant to stifle activism against President Trump. Yet the individuals targeted by police and the US Attorney were believed to have been the perpetrators of the chaos, not the peaceful protesters.

These violent individuals who used “Black Bloc” tactics to hide their identities were looking to do damage and initiate fights. Prosecutors said they intentionally concealed their identities to avoid being held accountable for the crimes they committed.

The spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Police Department, Rachel Reid, clarified that only the violent thugs were being charged, not the peaceful protesters: “During the 58th Presidential Inauguration, there were thousands of individuals who exercised their constitutional right to peacefully assemble and speak out for their cause.

Unfortunately, there was another group of individuals who chose to engage in criminal acts, destroying property and hurling projectiles, injuring at least six officers.”

Initially, 230 people had been arrested, but dozens were released when it was revealed they were either under 18 or were not participating in the violence. The remaining 194 were believed to be, due to evidence or witness accounts, the ones who committed the criminal acts.

In spite of this, the Left maintains that the US government under President Trump is still overreaching its bounds and trying to stamp out activism. Tim Zick, a law professor at the College of William & Mary, said: “The dangers for protesters and free speech and assembly are serious.”

He believes these blanket legal charges could dissuade people from participating in protests for fear of being falsely accused: “This could result in a significant chilling of protest activities, as individuals may be reasonably concerned that they could be falsely charged (i.e., through misidentification) or subject to prosecution for merely associating with ‘anarchist’ groups.”

Obviously, there’s a concern that some may be wrongly accused of simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Considering the inauguration was almost a year ago and legal proceedings are just now occurring shows that investigators have done their due diligence to determine guilt or innocence.

These violent Antifa protesters need to be held accountable for their aggressive behaviors and disregard for the safety of themselves and others. Peaceful protest is a constitutional right; setting a car on fire is not, regardless of the message.

New Clinton Classified Emails Reveal More Pay for Play

While there are now belated rumbles in Washington about a Department of Justice investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email practices, we continue to steadily discover for you and the American people the nature of the corruption going on behind the scenes at her State Department.

This week we released 109 pages of Hillary Clinton emails from her tenure as secretary of state. The documents include two email exchanges classified confidential and a 2011 exchange with Sid Blumenthal about “serious trouble for the Libyan rebels.”

The newly produced emails were part of 72,000 pages of documents the FBI recovered last year in its investigation into Clinton’s use of an unsecure, non-government email system. The records include emails Hillary Clinton attempted to delete or did not otherwise disclose. These emails are also available on the State Department’s website.

Two heavily redacted emails marked Classified Confidential included a November 2011 exchange under the Subject: “Egyptian MFA on Hamas-PLO talks,” and a June 28, 2011 email from Clinton to Abedin in which Clinton writes “I have now promised the Kuwaiti PM 3 times that I will deliver an address at the Oxford Islamic Center. Pls be sure that’s on the list for next Fall/next year.”

On March 9, 2011, Sid Blumenthal emailed Clinton about the situation in Libya, with the subject line “H: serious trouble for Libyan rebels. Sid” The email discusses urging leaders of the National Libyan Council (NLC) “to consider hiring private troops (mercenaries) to support, organize, and train the rebel forces in Libya.” Blumenthal adds: “A small number of private troops could turn the battle against Qaddafi’s forces, particularly if they are equipped with sophisticated anti-aircraft weapons.” Clinton asks former aide Huma Abedin to “print for me w/o any identifiers”.

The Washington Times reported Libyan officials were deeply concerned in 2011 that Clinton was responsible for weapons being funneled to NATO-backed rebels in Libya with ties to al Qaeda.

On October 6, 2009, Clinton’s then-Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills emails “I am purposefully on gmail” to Abedin and Maggie Williams, former campaign manager for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. [Emphasis added] Mills was responding to an October 4, 2009, email from Clinton, most of which was redacted.

On January 6, 2012, Clinton can be seen “expediting” a citizenship request so the requestor can get a government job in policy or law enforcement:

I am told by Citizenship and Immigration (CIS) caseworkers that it may be at least another 8 months before they get to me, making the total time more than a year (they advertise 6 months total turnaround time).

Would you consider helping me by reaching out to DHS Secretary Napolitano or CIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas who reports to her on my behalf? The ask is to simply consider moving up my applications for review ASAP. My application is complete, straight forward and I have nothing to hide.”

Clinton responds: “I’m copying Huma [Abedin] and asking her to see if we can help expedite this for you because we want you to be a citizen as soon as possible! I’ve got my fingers crossed.  Happy New Year–H.”

On August 4, 2009, Terrence Duffy, a donor to the Clinton Foundation and executive chairman of the derivatives giant CME Group, asks Clinton for her assistance in setting up meetings with Asian leaders.

I am planning a trip to Asia for October 3-10. While there, I will be traveling to Beijing, Tokyo, Hong Kong and Singapore and I was wondering if there is any way you could help set up a meeting or 2 with some elected officials in any of those regions. Once again, you’re doing an amazing job and all of America is very fortunate to have you as our Secretary of State.”

Clinton responds: “Terry–I’m emailing from Capetown [sic], one of my favorite cities in the world. I’m copying your email to Huma so she can follow up w you regarding your Asia trip. Hope you’re well. All the best, H.”

We previously reported that Duffy had also asked Clinton in September to arrange “government appointments” for his October trip. Duffy gave $4,600 to Hillary’s 2008 presidential campaign; in November 2013 CME Group paid Hillary Clinton a $225,000 speaking fee and has donated between $5,001 and 10,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

In November 2016, the State Department was ordered to produce no less than 500 pages of records a month to Judicial Watch. We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in May 2015 after the State Department failed to respond to a March 18, 2015, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)). The lawsuit seeks:

All emails sent or received by former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in her official capacity as secretary of State, as well as all emails by other State Department employees to Secretary Clinton regarding her non-“state.gov” email address.

Under the current pace of production, the Clinton emails and other records won’t fully be available for possible release until at least 2020.

These new Clinton emails add to the pile of evidence demonstrating the need for a serious criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton and her associates. It is shameful that this State Department is releasing these Clinton emails so slowly.

I trust President Trump agrees the State Department and Justice Department need to follow the rule of law and stop covering for Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.

Schweizer: ‘Very Inside Guy,’ Whistle-blower Coming Forward on Uranium One
by JEFF POOR

Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Breitbart editor at Large Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and author of “Clinton Cash,” reacted to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s dismissal of the Uranium One deal that happened under her tenure as secretary of state.

In an interview with Mother Jones magazine, Clinton claimed wrongdoing involving the deal had been “debunked countless times” and described it as “false charge.” She also went on to say that further investigation into the matter by the Trump administration would be “an abuse of power.”

Schweizer laid out the timeline and reiterated how Clinton and her husband former President Bill Clinton had ties to Canadian investor Frank Giustra and went on to say a new whistleblower would be coming forward with the details on the possible wrongdoing.

Partial transcript as follows:

HANNITY: Here more with reaction, author of the bestselling book “Clinton Cash.” Really? We’re going to get a lecture on the rule of law? You know, I watch people now assail you even the Trump crowd is now trying to come to the defense I noticed of Hillary Clinton. I want to give you a chance to respond and explain to people all of the connections here. I’ll hand it to you.

SCHWEIZER: Well thanks, Sean. Look, this is a story that begins in 2005. Bill and Hillary Clinton helped Frank Giustra, a Canadian investor get very, very rich, and uranium deposits in Kazakhstan from the Kazakh’s government. And we now have a video deposition from the Kazakhs uranium minister at the time, going through detail how they were extorted by then-Senator Hillary Clinton to grant those concessions to Frank Giustra. She was on the Armed Services committee. She wouldn’t meet with Kazakhs officials. Her committee had the responsibility of the distribution of funds for Kazakhstan. She made it clear, no uranium for Giustra. You are not going to get your support from the federal government. After Giustra got the uranium deposits, he sent $30 million to the Clinton Foundation.

HANNITY: What is the timeline on that?

SCHWEIZER: Yes. So, that is 2005, that is when the deal happens. Within two months he sends the first $30 million to the Clinton foundation. 2007 they do what was called a reverse merger. They take those Kazakhs assets, they put them in a company called uranium one. They acquire uranium assets in the United States. In 2010, the Russian government said we want to buy uranium one. That triggers the federal approval of the United States. As the U.S. federal government and the State Department is considering that deal, the chairman of Uranium One Ian Telfer sends $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation, to a private foundation. It was never disclosed. It was only discovered by going through Canadian tax records. Bill Clinton gives a half-million dollar speech. That is going through for approval to a company in Russia that is involved financially with uranium one. The ties and the deals go on and on.

Let me just add, Sean, by the way, it’s about to get more interesting, because we know some details about this lobbyist, this source has come forward.

His name is William Campbell who lives in Florida. He was with Cassidy and Associates — which is one the  big lobbying firm in D.C. where he lobbied on Russian interests from 2007 to 2008. He then started his own firm and was paid $50,000 a month by the Russians for lobbying. His contract was for, quote, “to improve the media and political environment in the U.S. in respect to the surprise of the Russian uranium products,” and quote, “to set up meetings with U.S. administration officials, members of Congress and other key opinion elite and Russian government officials.” This is a very inside guy coming forward is this whistle-blower.

HANNITY: We had Putin bad actors in the United States. Mueller was the FBI director. Eric Holder was one of the nine signing off on the deal … Then you have got bribery extortion, kickbacks, money laundering, and racketeering. Mueller had to know because they had an FBI informant. He had his only personal experience, ended up four years informant, then he got tapes, documents, emails firsthand account. Putin was using, breaking all of the laws to get a foothold in the uranium market and they knew in 2009.

SCHWEIZER: You’re right, Sean. In fact the purchase of Uranium One was announced by Vladimir Putin himself. It was reported in the Moscow Times, which was an English language publication in Moscow. He personally released the funds to purchase Uranium One in the United States. And look, the argument the Clinton defenders use is other government agencies that were involved in the process. She didn’t do it by herself. From the standpoint of bribery, that is irrelevant.

If you’re a congressman sitting on a committee and the committee votes unanimously for something, but you got paid to vote for that, it doesn’t matter what your colleagues did. You committed bribery, and that’s why this needs to be investigated.

HANNITY: All right. Peter, we will stay in on this. And by the way the FBI informant, we are just talking about, his name was revealed today.

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

DOJ Issues Shock Comey Announcement, Look What He Did

Mark Prvulovic

Former-FBI Director James Comey’s leaking of the ‘Flynn’ memo has now come under official scrutiny by the Trump administration.

The Department of Justice recently announced that the leak FBI Director James Comey committed is equal to that of Wikileaks, suggesting that Mr. Comey’s actions regarding the “Flynn” memo he leaked are comparable in both scope and severity to that of a significant security compromise, according to Judicial Watch.

After Mr. Comey was fired by President Trump on May 9th, 2017, the former-FBI Director gave the New York Times a memo written about several one-on-one conversations he had with President Trump concerning his former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, a move that many experts suspect wasn’t legal.

The Justice Department asserts that significant portions of the Comey memo contained classified material. “We now have the Justice Department confirmation that Comey was wrong to have leaked records to the media to settle a score with President Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who added that the DOJ should release the memos so that the public could better understand the scope of Comey’s “vendetta” against the President.

Mr. Comey testified under oath that he authored nine such memos regarding his conversation with the President. He admitted, during his testimony, “I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter [for The New York Times] … I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.” The next day after the memo was published, Special Counsel Robert Mueller was appointed to investigate possible Russian interference in the election.

“Mr. Mueller may have an interest in protecting Comey, but the public’s interest demands transparency about Comey’s vendetta against President Trump,” wrote Judicial Watch.

According to Fox News, a source close to the former FBI director said that his Senate testimony was “closely coordinated” with Robert Mueller, adding that the two were in contact. Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano commented, “It would be unheard of for a prosecutor to allow his star witness to testify before Congress without heavy coordination.”

Judicial Watch also mentioned that if Mr. Comey was indeed coordinating his Senate testimony with the Special Counsel’s office, it would amount to a drastic scandal – especially since he “may have violated the law in leaking these memos.”

Mr. Comey initially claimed that the documents he released were unclassified, saying in his Senate hearing, “I understood this to be my recollection recorded of my conversation with the President. As a private citizen, I thought it important to get it out.” However, The Hill reports that the FBI claimed that all of the Comey memos were, in fact, deemed to be classified government documents.

All FBI agents are required to sign an employment agreement that outlines “all information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America” and that an agent “will not reveal, by any means, any information or material from or related to FBI files or any other information acquired by virtue of my official employment to any unauthorized recipient without prior official written authorization by the FBI.” Although it’s not clear whether Mr. Comey signed the same agreement as his agents, the document is considered official policy in the Bureau.

This is not the only case where the former FBI Director violated protocol in favor of politics. Last month, the Bureau released documents that proved Mr. Comey had begun drafting a letter exonerating Hillary Clinton in the email investigation months before conducting key interviews, including that of Mrs. Clinton herself.

The public deserves to know the truth regarding Mr. Comey’s actions, and to what degree they violated not only FBI protocol, but the law as well.

Trump reverses elephant trophy ban after public outcry and says it will stay in place while his decision is under review

• President Trump Friday reversed his decision to allow elephants hunted and killed in Zimbabwe to be imported into the US
• Thursday the administration said they would allow the big game to be imported, but the decision was loudly decried
• Animal rights groups around the globe condemned the 'reprehensible' move
• Trump's sons Donald and Eric have sparked controversy with pictures of big game they killed, including an elephant

By JESSICA FINN and ASSOCIATED PRESS

President Donald Trump has dramatically reversed his decision to repeal the elephant trophy ban after a public outcry.

He tweeted late Friday that he will uphold a ban on importing trophies of elephants hunted and killed in Zimbabwe, pending further review.

The move went against his own administration's decision from Thursday, which sparked a huge public backlash.

'Put big game trophy decision on hold until such time as I review all conservation facts. Under study for years. Will update soon with Secretary Zinke. Thank you!' Trump tweeted.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said the pair came to the decision after they 'talked and both believe that conservation and healthy herds are critical.'

Donald Trump says he will keep a ban on elephants killed on hunts being imported back to America in place while he reviews his decision to reverse the ban after public outcry

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

David Shulkin: Fixing VA 'a matter of national security'

by Sarah Westwood

Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, whose efforts to transform the agency have earned him a spot in President Trump's good graces, said a reflection on the VA's failures is the first step toward fixing a department Trump has called a "disaster." (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Allowing systemic problems at the Department of Veterans Affairs to persist could ultimately put the entire country at risk, according to VA Secretary David Shulkin.

“I think both the president and I believe not only have veterans earned this, but this is actually a matter of national security,” Shulkin told the Washington Examiner in an interview this week. “If we have a system that, when people are deciding if they want to serve their country, that they don’t believe that when they get home, they have a system that’s going to take care of them that they can rely upon, the approach towards having a voluntary Army and people who want to come and protect the country is at risk, and I think we have seen some recent reports that it’s getting tougher to meet recruitment standards.”

The VA secretary, whose efforts to transform the agency have earned him a spot in President Trump’s good graces, said a reflection on the VA’s failures is the first step toward fixing a department Trump has called a “disaster.”

Under Trump’s predecessor, the VA suffered through a series of controversies ranging from filthy conditions at some of its hospitals to VA workers who wrongly declared living veterans dead and stripped them of their benefits.

But the biggest scandal to strike the agency came in 2014, when whistleblowers revealed a nationwide scheme to conceal long delays in healthcare by using fake patient waiting lists. The fallout from the wait time controversy led to the resignation of then-VA Secretary Eric Shinseki and to a number of changes in the way VA officials manage and report wait times.

Trump made the VA a top target during the presidential race, holding up its failures as evidence of the Obama administration’s broader ineptitude.

Shulkin, who has worked at some level of the VA since June 2015, said he agrees with Trump’s criticism of the agency he now oversees.

“People say, ‘Well, you know, he’s been so critical of the VA.’ Well, you know, I actually think that’s a good thing,” Shulkin said of Trump’s past comments. “When you’re the boss, you get to hold up a mirror and tell people where the problems are and if you don’t do it, then the rest of the organization doesn’t really have a chance to respond.”

Although Shulkin served for more than a year as undersecretary for health in former President Barack Obama’s VA, he said his ascension to the top of the organization has given him a chance to “reboot” an agency in need of an overhaul.

“I had a very different experience under the last administration. I came in in the last 18 months of an eight-year administration that pretty much had a certain way of doing things and I wasn’t in the role of secretary,” he said. “They all have different management styles, they all have different ways of accomplishing things, so I don’t, I really don’t have criticism of the last administration.”

Shulkin has stood out in the Trump administration as one of the president’s favored Cabinet officials.

In public appearances, Trump has repeatedly touted the unanimous Senate vote that confirmed Shulkin to his position in February.

And Trump has cited reforms at the VA as a bright spot amid the stagnation of his legislative agenda and the delay of his immigration executive orders by the courts.

While Shulkin’s disciplined and apolitical approach to his post is seemingly an odd match for Trump’s brash style, the VA secretary said he works well with Trump because they have professional chemistry.

“I think that for me, it’s just a good management style fit,” Shulkin said. “When we’re together, he’s very candid, he’s very inquisitive, he understands the issues very well, and we are able to have direct conversations. It’s not a lot of formality. I mean, it’s — I appreciate that, and it helps me in performing my job better.”

Shulkin said one of his top priorities since taking the helm at VA has been to shift more of the agency’s resources into providing services unique to veterans — such as treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injuries — and away from services veterans can easily obtain from private doctors.

“They don’t need us to do things that can be done well in the community, like making eye glasses. They need eye glasses, but it doesn’t mean the VA always has to be the one to do that. Every shopping mall in America has a place you can get eyeglasses,” Shulkin said. “But for those issues that, frankly, aren’t done well in the private sector, that are important to veterans, we need to do those well. So I’m asking my medical centers to actually move more money into those services — that it’s one thing when you say they’re important, it’s another where you watch where the money goes.”

Shulkin blamed the VA’s past efforts to provide all aspects of care to all veterans for some of the agency’s failings over the past several years, such as the long wait times patients faced and the resource shortfalls that some facilities have encountered. As a result, Shulkin said, his strategy has focused on expanding veterans’ access to care in the private sector to supplement what they receive directly from the VA.

“I think, if anything, the wait time crisis in 2014 taught us that VA cannot do this alone,” he said. “You cannot take care of the health needs of every nook and cranny in this country by VA doing this alone, and so this is probably a strategy that tries to make actually a common sense approach to meeting the needs of veterans, and it doesn’t fit into the political spectrums.”

Shulkin has long resisted suggestions that his effort to expand veterans' access to private sector care means he aims to privatize the VA. Privatization fears have long underpinned resistance to the expansion of programs that allow veterans to seek treatment outside the agency.

The VA secretary said his plan will ideally let veterans choose a combination of private and public services.

"I have come out pretty clear that I am not in favor of privatization. I think that would be a huge mistake for the country to do that, and particularly for veterans, but that doesn’t mean that we need to stick to the status quo," Shulkin said. "You know, some people say, ‘Oh, you must be privatizing!’ or ‘You must be ignoring the private sector!’ This is saying, ‘No, we’re going to pick what’s right for veterans.’"

Trump and WikiLeaks: Five things to know

BY MORGAN CHALFANT

The revelation this week that Donald Trump Jr. corresponded with WikiLeaks during the presidential campaign has added a new wrinkle to the competing probes into Russian interference.

Legal experts say the development is likely to intensify scrutiny of Trump’s eldest son, who is already under the microscope for a controversial June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer.

Separately, a pair of senators revealed Thursday that Trump’s senior adviser and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, had received correspondence about WikiLeaks prior to the election. They said Kushner has not yet turned over those documents to congressional investigators.

Here are five things you need to know about Russia, WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign.

WikiLeaks was implicated in U.S. intelligence community assessment

An unclassified assessment released by the U.S. intelligence community in January explicitly implicated WikiLeaks in Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 election.

Specifically, intelligence officials concluded “with high confidence” that Russia gave hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta to WikiLeaks.

“Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self-proclaimed reputation for authenticity. Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries,” the report stated.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has repeatedly denied that Russia was the source of the hacked emails the organization released prior to the election.

Former FBI Director James Comey testified in March that Russia did not deal directly with WikiLeaks but instead used “some kind of cut-out.”

Trump associate Roger Stone has been linked to Assange

Trump adviser and longtime confidant Roger Stone has been scrutinized for his links to Assange.

Stone claimed in an interview last August that he had communicated with the WikiLeaks chief, though he later clarified it was done through an “intermediary.” WikiLeaks has denied communicating with Stone.

Stone also raised questions with several posts on Twitter last year in which he appeared to hint at email releases from WikiLeaks before they went public.

He tweeted on Aug. 21, 2016, “Trust me, it will soon the Podesta’s time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary.”

In early October, Stone also sent out a series of tweets saying “@HillaryClinton is done” and expressing his “total confidence that @wikileaks and my hero Julian Assange will educate the American people soon. #LockHerUp.” Those messages came days before WikiLeaks began publishing the hacked Podesta emails on Oct. 7.

Stone testified before the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors in September as part of its investigation into Russian interference, and was later threatened with a subpoena if he refused to turn over the name of the intermediary he used to communicate with WikiLeaks. Stone’s lawyers said he complied with the request.

Head of data firm that aided Trump reached out to WikiLeaks

Last month, it was revealed that the CEO of Cambridge Analytica reached out to Assange about Clinton’s missing emails before the 2016 election.

The data mining and analysis firm, which has ties to Trump allies Stephen Bannon and Robert Mercer, received millions from the Trump campaign for its services last year.

According to the Daily Beast, Cambridge CEO Alexander Nix told a third party that he contacted Assange about helping him release Clinton’s emails that were deleted from the former secretary of State’s private server. WikiLeaks confirmed the outreach from Nix and said it was denied, but did not expand on the content of the communication.

Later, The Wall Street Journal reported that Nix reached out to Assange in June — just as Cambridge began working for Trump’s campaign, which paid the data firm $5.9 million over the course of five months.

Prior to these revelations, Cambridge had already triggered scrutiny from the House Intelligence Committee, which requested information from the company in connection with the investigation.

Trump Jr. corresponded with WikiLeaks during the campaign

Trump Jr. released a chain of private Twitter messages with WikiLeaks after The Atlantic first reported on the contacts on Monday afternoon.

In one exchange, WikiLeaks alerted Trump Jr. of the impending launch of an anti-Trump website and offered up the password to it. “Off the record I don’t know who that is but I’ll ask around,” Trump Jr. replied. “Thanks.” It is unclear whether Trump Jr. took WikiLeaks up on the offer.

Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor, told The Hill that the exchange could lead special counsel Robert Mueller to examine potential violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act — a 1986 law that makes it illegal to access a computer without authorization.

“I think the real question is whether and to what extent it exposes Trump Jr. himself to potentially criminal liability,” Vladeck said.

The full exchange was largely one-sided, with WikiLeaks sending several messages to Trump Jr. that went unreturned. The organization, for instance, proposed that he leak his father’s tax returns to WikiLeaks so the organization could publish them and “improve the perception of our impartiality.”

Trump Jr. responded a total of three times, including to an October 2016 message in which WikiLeaks asked him to “push” a story in right-wing media accusing Clinton of joking about “droning” Assange.

“Already did that earlier today,” Trump Jr. wrote. “What’s behind this Wednesday leak I keep reading about?”

Democrats have seized on the messages as evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia-connected individuals.

“It's yet another very high-level campaign person, the president's own son, reaching out in private communication, secret communication with WikiLeaks, and they’re discussing essentially how to coordinate the disclosure of information,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, said on CNN.

But Republicans say they’re not alarmed. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) called the messages “very innocuous.”

Kushner received emails about WikiLeaks before election

Kushner received emails about WikiLeaks and Russia before the election that he has not yet, as required, given them to congressional investigators.

The revelation came Thursday in a letter to Kushner’s lawyer from the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sens. Grassley and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

“There are several documents that are known to exist but were not included in your production,” the senators wrote. “For example, other parties have produced September 2016 email communications to Mr. Kushner concerning WikiLeaks, which Mr. Kushner then forwarded to another campaign official. Such documents should have been produced in response to the third request but were not.”

The Judiciary Committee is conducting its own investigation into Russian interference, in addition to the House and Senate Intelligence committees. The committee has requested documents from Kushner as well as a transcribed interview.

The committee originally requested the documents on Oct. 18 and is now demanding the complete documentation by Nov. 27.

Kushner's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said Thursday that they provided the Judiciary Committee "with all relevant documents that had to do with Mr. Kushner's calls, contacts or meetings with Russians during the campaign and transition, which was the request." He said they are open to responding to additional requests

G’ day…Ciao…
Helen and Moe Lauzier

Thus Article

That's an article This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2017/11/httpift_19.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: