Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
BLOGOESPOT.COM
Monday, Dec. 24, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
The Next Crucial Step: President Trump Declassifying All the Spygate Documents
A real Christmas story...NYC Subway Rider Turns in Chanel Purse Stuffed with $10,000
A New York City subway rider made a fellow passenger’s Christmas a little bit merrier after he found a purse stuffed with $10,000 and returned it.
Richard Taverna told WABC he found the blue Chanel bag Thursday morning while on the platform at the Lincoln Center subway station in Manhattan.
“I picked it up to see if there was an identification so I could get it to the right person,” said Taverna.
Taverna looked around the purse to see if he could identify the owner, but all he found was an indecipherable note in Russian. When he could not find an agent at the station, Taverna took the bag home before searching through it some more.
Upon further inspection, Taverna found an envelope containing $10,000. Taverna then placed the one hundred $100 bills on a counter, took a picture, and delivered the cash-filled purse to the NYPD’s 20th Precinct.
Turns out, it was the same place where the owner of the purse reported it missing before she left on a trip to Russia.
Although his good deed would make anyone proud, Taverna brushed it off as something “most people would have done.”
“I don’t really think I did anything that extraordinary,” Taverna said. “You feel good when you do the right thing.”
“Somebody lost $10,000, so obviously they’re probably going through a lot of duress,” Taverna added.
Richard Taverna, Merry Christmas, you’ve earned it.
Hillary Clinton
Knew About, Approved and Paid for Trump-Russia Dossier
by Jim Hoft
Hillary Clinton knew about, approved, and paid for the Trump-Russia dirty dossier from the beginning and hid the fact from the press.
The Democrat candidate for President in 2016 was an experienced pro, who had seen her way through many political campaigns, including contentious primaries against Obama, for the US Senate in New York, in Arkansas, and of course twice for her very husband, Bill– the 42nd President.
Clinton had a reputation for toughness and a harsh spirit with a knack for details and a large sized ego to match.
Some saw her as “bitch”, conceited, and a Yale Law School, Ivy League, feminist, know it all. Others, who worked with her, had a more benign view but nonetheless readily admitted — she made all the decisions.
Nothing got past her, her grip, or her two cents.
There wasn’t a policy, a message, or a statement that went out that she did not see and did not approve. In fact, she often revised things two or three times slowing down the well-oiled machine.
But she wanted it that way. She didn’t want to lose, damage her image, — or most definitely, lose control.
So throughout the primary she milked all her contacts in the DNC, in the media, and in the government.
Hillary knew just about everybody given her decades in government and kept close track of what they said about her, what they owed her, and how much they contributed to her. She had a list of no-goes and of people she flatly refused to see, hear, or listen to.
If you crossed her you were off her good list. Toast.
She worked every angle and source and played nice, when necessary, putting on a smile and even a grinning grandmotherly look, complete with the light blue, extra-wide pants suit.
The ‘woman’ card was the ace up her sleeve or so she thought.
How could any woman seriously vote against her?
Didn’t every woman want to break that impenetrable glass ceiling and see her become the first female President?
In the primary she had a pesky leftist, old fart nemesis named, Bernie Sanders, as her sole opponent.
He was an Independent (actually Socialist) Senator from the green State of Vermont. His politics were left of left and he liked to promise just about everything – and all for free.
Hillary had to bend her progressive views to get the nomination but as a Clinton she could be a chameleon and do anything to win the big prize.
She stacked the cards against poor Bernie from the very start, who she slandered and maligned just slightly so as not to lose all his kooky, and especially young followers.
Clinton stacked the Democrat Super Delegates to her cause and put all her people into the DNC and its organs, so that she could not possibly lose.
She owned the Party. Even a former Party Chairperson, in her own tell-all book after the election said, “Clinton cheated.”
That was news!
Clinton had cheated before and she had also lost in the primaries to that useless and inexperienced community organizer, black Senator, Barrack Obama and it wasn’t going to happen again. Her side even said he was not born in the United States.
Oh no.
Once she secured the Democrat nomination crookedly she figured there was absolutely no way she could lose the general election, especially to a buffoon like Donald Trump.
After all, his entire base was a bunch deplorables, irredeemables and the rankest members of society just clinging to their guns and religion.
Hillary had her own theories about the vast right wing conspiracy and their ilk, and there wasn’t a chance in hell that she would not get back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue because of them.
She knew all the nooks and crannies in that Big House and this time the Oval Office would be hers—alone.
No Bill and NO Monica!
To tie down all the pieces, Clinton brought in a top-notch team and hired her old pal, John Podesta to chair the very organized and overly planned campaign.
They would take care of it this time. No holes were barred and nothing was to be left undone.
The ‘dirt’ on Trump would be easy to secure so she herself hired the Fusion/GPS boys to dig harder, to get more. Using the DNC and a private law firm as the go betweens, she figured she had her ass covered and didn’t need to know everything or how, just the dirt—and the more the better.
It was both oppo research and an “insurance policy”—just in case.
Giving approval to everything her campaign did was not unusual for such a deliberate, maniacal, cannot fail candidate.
Behind her were still wayward Bill, who was a tad old and now rather clumsy, and her daughter, a reputed Satanist, Chelsea.
Her surrogates were legion and there wasn’t anybody in the media, with the possible exception of only one or two people at FOX News, who thought she wasn’t a shoe-in to win.
All the newspapers endorsed her, all the pundits kowtowed to her, the pollsters all predicted her inevitable victory, and she said she won the televised debates.
The only question was how much she would run up her tallies and numbers in the Electoral College.
How big a landslide could it possibly be?
Sure, she had a record of coyness and sometimes did not follow through on her word but her ratings were astronomical and her field game was second to none.
They would turn out the vote and make identity politics work like a charm.
The odds were 8 to 1 she would win in Las Vegas betting.
Getting the word out on how bad Trump was, was absolutely imperative.
Trump was a sleaze in Clinton’s eyes; wouldn’t the overall electorate agree that, even the dumbasses she so loathed?
She would hold nothing back.
She would throw everything at him — from disgraces to scandals to character flaws to Russia.
The Obama forces, even if there were past ‘histories’ between them, would help to elect her as a kind of “third term” to Barrack, who had achieved so little in his eight years in office.
His cronies would be her cronies.
They would do her bidding.
They would protect her and most certainly, fail to indict her. They would use the deep state, where needed, to do her work — behind the scenes.
And at the center of the whole design was the grand conspiracy called the Trump-Russia Dossier.
She paid for it and approved it from the get-go.
It was good as gold.
Rush Limbaugh left his audience speechless when he told them about one call with Trump
Trump supporters were nervous.
It looked like the President might back down on his threat to shutdown the government over funding his border wall.
But then Rush Limbaugh left his audience speechless when he told them about one phone call with Donald Trump.
Limbaugh was one of many Trump supporters in conservative media urging the President to veto any government funding bill that did not fund the border wall.
As of Thursday night, it looked like Trump might sign the legislation.
But then after a White House meeting with House Republicans, Trump picked up the phone and dialed up Limbaugh.
Limbaugh excitedly told his audience that Trump told him he would veto any bill that did not fund the wall.
Breitbart reports:
Conservative talk radio legend Rush Limbaugh revealed on his program that President Donald Trump informed him that he was prepared to veto a government funding bill if it failed to include wall funding.
“The president got word to me 20 minutes ago that if it comes back to him without money, if whatever happens in the House and Senate comes back to him with no allocation of $5 billion for the wall than he’s going to veto it,” Limbaugh told his listeners on his radio show just moments after Trump met with members of Congress on Thursday.
Trump supporters cheered this decision.
The Republicans would have no leverage once the Democrats took over the House on January 3.
Establishment Republicans tried to fool Trump into thinking a fight starting February 8 would be more advantageous for Trump.
That was rubbish.
Shutting down the government now is Trump’s only chance to win funding for his signature border wall proposal.
Here’s Why Trump Made The Right Decision On Troops In Syria
An in-depth look, as someone who has spent time on the ground in Iraq and Syria with U.S. troops, local tribal militias, and rebel forces since 2005.
President Trump has made a bold and immensely consequential decision in pulling U.S. troops out of Syria. His detractors on both the right and left will be many. But as someone who has spent time on the ground in Iraq and Syria both with U.S. troops, local tribal militias, and rebel forces since 2005, I can tell you that it was the right one to make.
Throughout this summer, i drove into the part of northern Syria cleared of the Islamic State (daesh) that does not have a U.S. military presence. Syrian northern cities of Azaz and Jarablus were the sites of two separate stages of the Syrian war. First rebels battled the Assad regime, then against daesh. Transnational terrorists haven’t had a foothold in those areas — jointly managed by Turkish armed forces and their newly created Syrian National Army — for years. It is a template that could help fill the vacuum left behind as the U.S. military leaves.
Life was bustling in these cities when I visited, though scars of the sieges they faced by the Assad regime and daesh were visible everywhere. The rolling landscape along the northern Syrian countryside could easily be mistaken for the gentle farmlands of the American midwest. The kebab shops were open, motorcycle repair shops (the most popular way of getting about in these parts of the world) were bustling, and the two-lane road was packed with the traffic of trucks carrying goods into a swath of territory that is now governed by an interim government — an entity recognized by officials Ankara, but certainly not by that of the Assad regime in Damascus (nor Russia for that matter).
Nonetheless, reminders that the war was still raging in other parts of the country were everywhere. Newly built camps for internally displaced persons who were forced from their homes in other parts of Syria dotted the landscape as far as the eye could see.
This new reality in Syria — one where transnational terrorists do not have the luxury of a safehaven to plot attacks against the U.S. homeland and its allies — is very much possible without the need of permanent U.S. military presence. The withdrawal of U.S. forces need not lead to the doom and gloom scenario of a daesh resurgence that many Washington pundits are predicting.
Other countries like Turkey who are more invested and have longer term interests are footing the bill of stabilization and they are able to do it much more efficiently and effectively for a variety of reasons — to include cultural and historical connections to local communities and the land.
A few kilometers away from the parts of northern Syria I traveled through, stood an invisible dividing line that artificially separates the part of northern Syria controlled by Turkey and that by U.S. forces. To get a better understanding of the frustratingly forever-nature of the same battle being fought over and over again, consider that a decade prior to the ongoing U.S. military campaign against daesh in eastern Syria, U.S. special forces operators and Sunni Arab tribal fighters were busily targeting and rounding up the al-Qaeda in Iraq network in the remote jazeera desert in north western Iraq along the border with Syria — not far from where American service members are fighting today.
Despite most intelligence and military analysts’ conclusion at the time that al-Qaida in Iraq’s leadership and middle management was essentially decapitated, a sufficient small number managed to survive. Some did so by hiding out in Syria under the nominal watch of the Assad regime, others eventually managed to break out of Iraqi prisons due to gross incompetence and corruption by local authorities. And from there, the seedling of what grew to be the “Islamic state” was able to regenerate a few short years later.
So how can this current war-without-end be ever properly concluded? For starters, fresh thinking and a new approach in Syria is long overdue. The Pentagon-sponsored media tours of the Syrian cities that have been liberated from daesh and the local USAID funded projects that are meant to project a sense of progress, are in actuality more of a hollow chimera. Let’s face it, there would likely never have been a condition sufficient enough for Pentagon brass where they would have recommended withdrawal of U.S. troops.
The “metrics” for success are dutifully repeated by the public affairs officers — but the basic elements of the forever war remain in place: namely, the total dependence on the presence of U.S. forces.
In Syria, the U.S. military leaned almost entirely upon the Kurdish-dominated YPG forces, which at the behest of U.S. generals rebranded under a more neutral sounding moniker “the Syrian Democratic Forces.” Unfortunately, the U.S. military in Syria may be echoing past mistakes made by the French colonial forces. France once occupied Syria and heavily armed and favored the Alawite ethnic minority group as a means of maintaining control and security. That approach may have made tactical sense at the time, but it ultimately built divisions and set the stage for deadly internecine conflict.
Remember, a decade ago in Iraq, the U.S. helped empower the sectarian regime of Nuri al-Maliki, all the while dutifully briefing a steady line of reporters and think tank scholars that a new Iraqi military was being built that would eventually stand on its own. I would know, I helped craft some of the powerpoint slides as a junior defense analyst who deployed for a year in Iraq. The briefings looked great on paper and for the truncated weekly fly-in visit by pundits and scholars, but reality quickly caught up with the notional narrative of success.
An indirect approach to training and fielding asymmetric forces can and should be implemented in Syria that doesn’t require a perpetual U.S. footprint on the ground. Is it going to be perfect? Not by a long shot. But the massive failure of billions of U.S. government dollars spent to achieve the perfect model in Iraq should offer a sobering lesson in that regard. Again, take into account that fourteen Iraqi divisions trained and equipped by the U.S. military in a top-down model based on U.S. military doctrine all vanished overnight, when daesh launched its assault from its Syrian safe haven into Iraq in 2014.
In that context, the withdrawal of U.S. forces should not be seen as folly. The U.S. can help sustain gains made against daesh by supporting its NATO ally Turkey and local Sunni Arab forces to prevent daesh from re-emerging. After all, it was Turkey that has faced a number of daesh or daesh inspired attacks on its territory. It has more skin in the game.
Indeed, stenciled along the walls of the towns and villages I visited, we would see the slogan in Arabic and Turkish “brotherhood has no borders” — a reminder that a long-term stabilization solution much closer to home was available.
Additionally, a professional Syrian national army is currently being trained by Turkey. One that draws from the local community. I spent a good part of the summer driving into Syria to speak with them. Some, like the leader of the Mutassim brigade, were formerly part of a now defunct Pentagon program to arm and train local rebels to fight extremists. The Obama-era effort failed because it wasn’t launched in conjunction with local realities on the ground and did not incorporate the input and cooperation of the one country which shares a common social and historical bond with much of northern and eastern Syria — Turkey.
The U.S. can take an “overwatch” position without an open ended military commitment in Syria by empowering the Turks as they train and support Sunni Arab forces that will serve as a long term bulwark against the re-emergence of daesh. Doing so would also inoculate against al-Qaida’s transnational network, which once was heavily concentrated in northern Syria. All of the Sunni fighters I interviewed were firmly against al-Qaida’s agenda.
The YPG militias that are partnered with the U.S. cannot offer a long term solution to preventing the Assad regime — which has proven over and over again a willingness to release international terrorists when it suits its strategic objectives — from re-establishing itself in key terrain. Likewise, maintaining an indefinite presence of American soldiers in Syria in places as far flung as Manbij, Shadaddi, and Deirzzor makes as little sense as it did to deploy troops for a decade to Iraqi outposts in places like Baquba, Yusufia, and Ramadi.
This may not be a popular idea amongst the conventional thinking chain of command in the Pentagon or U.S. Central Command’s headquarters in Tampa, but one thing is for sure: In Syria it is time that U.S. policymakers and national security practitioners stop falling into the trap of believing their own talking points, and finally accept the sunk cost of past failed strategies.
The Washington establishment had an opportunity in Syria to break the vicious cycle of the “forever war” by taking a figurative step back and collectively asking, “What are we doing?” Trump took the unprecedented step of being a leader who was able and willing to ask that hard question and then — unlike the foreign policy chattering classes — firmly take action.
Oubai Shahbandar is a former Department of Defense Middle East analyst and is currently an international
security fellow with New America.
James Comey’s Massive Lie About Hillary Clinton Left Trey Gowdy Filled With Rage
James Comey has been digging his own hole for months.
And now he may have just struck rock bottom.
That’s because the disgraced former FBI Director was caught in a career-ending lie.
James Comey, the man who oversaw the rigged investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal before being fired by President Trump, continues to make a fool of himself.
This time, he was just caught in a massive lie about the fake “Russian collusion” scandal.
The former FBI Director continues to claim – wrongly – that Republicans authorized and funded the infamous “Steele dossier” in 2016.
The Steele dossier was used to justify spying on Trump’s campaign team.
And it was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign after they brought on former British spy, Christopher Steele, to compile the material.
Comey, however, can’t help but continue to lie in front of Congressman Trey Gowdy’s Congressional Committee.
In Congressional meetings earlier this month and on Monday, Comey stated multiple times that the dossier was paid for by Republicans who were opposing Trump in the 2016 primary.
“I remember being told that Steele’s work had been funded first by Republicans opposed to Trump, then by Democrats opposed to Trump,”Comey said at Monday’s Congressional interview.
The comments come after earlier claims that Republicans funded the dossier, which Democrats later used to obtain a FISA warrant against a campaign advisor for Donald Trump.
The Daily Caller reports that on December 7th, Comey stated the following, “I thought [Steele] was retained as part of a Republican-financed effort — retained by Republicans adverse to Mr. Trump during the primary season, and then his work was underwritten after that by Democrats opposed to Mr. Trump during 110 the general election season.”
This is a lie, and Republicans can’t believe the former FBI Director would continue to make facts up about something so simple.
Christopher Steele was paid by the Democrats and the Hillary campaign to compile the dossier against Trump.
But it gets worse for Comey.
The disgraced FBI Director brazenly tried to claim that politics played zero role in the FBI’s activities in 2016.
The Daily Caller reports that in a heated exchange with Republican Congressman Mark Meadows (R-NC), Comey stated, “Whether it was Sally Smith or Joe Jones, Republican, or Sally Smith, Democrat … to me, it didn’t matter.”
Comey can’t possibly expect anyone to believe that.
Either the man is delusional or he can’t help but lie to members of Congress.
Additionally, James Comey donated the maximum individual amount to Democrat candidates in 2018.
He even went so far as to tweet advice to Democrats running in 2018.
Comey has openly supported several Democrats this year as well—many of whom will now be members of the very Congressional committees supposed to hold him and others like him accountable.
He knows full well that politics played a major role in everything the FBI did in 2016 and beyond.
He just hopes that once Democrats take the House in January, they will sweep all of it under the rug and that the American people will forget about it.
Do you think Comey lied to Congress when he claimed Republicans were responsible for the Steele dossier and that politics played no role in the FBI’s investigations?
Disgraced Democrat Allegedly Hid Prostitute in Suitcase
Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer allegedly made a habit of sneaking a Russian prostitute into his room inside a suitcase.
A Russian former escort has claimed disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer used to smuggle her into his apartment in a suitcase.
“He used to sneak me into his Fifth Avenue apartment in a black suitcase … when his wife was away,’’ Svetlana Travis Zakharova told The New York Post in an interview published on Thursday.
“My knees would be up by my face. When the doorman would ask if he could help, Eliot would say, ‘No, thanks,’” she added, noting that she was sneaked in this way at least 15 times.
The woman first became known in 2016 after she accused Spitzer of choking her during one of the sex sessions and said he threatened to kill her.
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/2018/12/www_23.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment