Monday, January 30, 2017

892 CIA & Soros trying to get Electoral College to vote for Hillary, claim Russia hacked her emails. But former UK Ambassador says Whistleblower was the source

CIA & Soros trying to get Electoral College to vote for Hillary, claim
Russia hacked her emails. But former UK Ambassador says Whistleblower
was the source

Newsletter published on 16 December 2016

(1) The Jewish century is over?
(2) CIA trying to get Electoral College to vote for Hillary, claims
Russia hacked her emails. But former UK Ambassador says Whistleblower
was the source
(3) Former British ambassador to Uzbekistan: Clinton emails given by
Whistleblower
(4) Soros & Lessig try to sway Electoral College
(5) Soros & Hillary trying to reverse the vote of the Electoral College
(6) Deep State vs. Trump
(7) Senate quietly Passes "Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act"
targeting Dissident News on Internet

(1) The Jewish century is over?
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 21:55:30 -0800 Subject: Re: The Jewish century is
over, with the election of Trump - Israel Shamir From: James Morris
<justicequest2000@yahoo.com>

Israel Shamir apparently doesn't know about the Jews advising Trump:
http://america-hijacked.com/2016/08/01/who-is-running-trumps-campaign/

(2) CIA trying to get Electoral College to vote for Hillary, claims
Russia hacked her emails. But former UK Ambassador says Whistleblower
was the source


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-14/former-uk-ambassador-says-source-clinton-emails-was-disgusted-democratic-whistleblow

Former UK Ambassador says Source of Clinton Emails was "Disgusted"
Democratic Whistleblower

by Tyler Durden

Dec 14, 2016 11:25 PM

Just as the CIA/Democrat/Mainstream Media narrative of Russia's
involvement in the election jumps the shark with fact-less accusations
of Putin's personal involvement, The Daily Mail blows the entire 'hack'
meme out of the water. As an evoy for Wikileaks, former UK ambassador
Craig Murray claims he flew to Washington for a clandestine handoff with
one source, who "had legal access to the information. The documents came
from inside leaks, not hacks... Neither of [the leaks] came from the
Russians."

Murray, who blasted The CIA's "blatant lies" in a recent op-ed, has now
come forward with more details on how he knows they are lying... (as The
Daily Mail reports)

     Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close
associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, told Dailymail.com that
he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the
email sources in September.

     'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,' said Murray in an
interview with Dailymail.com on Tuesday. 'The source had legal access to
the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

While Murray is a controversial figure who was removed from his post as
a British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct. He was cleared of
those but left the diplomatic service in acrimony. His links to
Wikileaks are well known.

His account contradicts directly the version of how thousands of
Democratic emails were published before the election being advanced by
U.S. intelligence.

     Murray insisted that the DNC and Podesta emails published by
Wikileaks did not come from the Russians, and were given to the
whistleblowing group by Americans who had authorized access to the
information.

     'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,'  Murray said. 'The
source had legal access to the information. The documents came from
inside leaks, not hacks.'

     He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of
the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing
field against Bernie Sanders.'

     Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a
clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in
northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original
person who obtained the information, but an intermediary [...].

As Murray concluded in his recent op-ed, the continued ability of the
mainstream media to claim the leaks lost Clinton the election because of
"Russia", while still never acknowledging the truths the leaks reveal,
is Kafkaesque.

It is terrible that the prime conduit for this paranoid nonsense is a
once great newspaper, the Washington Post, which far from investigating
executive power, now is a sounding board for totally evidence free
anonymous source briefing of utter bullshit from the executive.

The worst thing about all this is that it is aimed at promoting further
conflict with Russia. This puts everyone in danger for the sake of more
profits for the arms and security industries – including of course
bigger budgets for the CIA. As thankfully the four year agony of Aleppo
comes swiftly to a close today, the Saudi and US armed and trained ISIS
forces counter by moving to retake Palmyra. This game kills people, on a
massive scale, and goes on and on.

(3) Former British ambassador to Uzbekistan: Clinton emails given by
Whistleblower


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html#ixzz4SrXxe0KD

EXCLUSIVE: Ex-British ambassador who is now a WikiLeaks operative claims
Russia did NOT provide Clinton emails - they were handed over to him at
a D.C. park by an intermediary for 'disgusted' Democratic whistleblowers

     Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and associate
of Julian Assange, told the Dailymail.com  he flew to Washington, D.C.
for emails

     He claims he had a clandestine hand-off in a wooded area near
American University with one of the email sources

     The leakers' motivation was 'disgust at the corruption of the
Clinton Foundation and the  'tilting of the primary election playing
field against Bernie Sanders'

     Murray says: 'The source had legal access to the information. The
documents came from inside leaks, not hacks'

     'Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the
documents Wikileaks published did not come from that,' Murray insists

     Murray is a controversial figure who was relieved of his post as
British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct but is close to Wikileaks

By Alana Goodman In Washington, Dc For Dailymail.com

Published: 07:33 +11:00, 15 December 2016 | Updated: 10:01 +11:00, 15
December 2016

A Wikileaks envoy today claims he personally received Clinton campaign
emails in Washington D.C. after they were leaked by 'disgusted'
whisteblowers - and not hacked by Russia.

Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close
associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, told Dailymail.com that
he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the
email sources in September.

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,' said Murray in an
interview with Dailymail.com on Tuesday. 'The source had legal access to
the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

His account contradicts directly the version of how thousands of
Democratic emails were published before the election being advanced by
U.S. intelligence.

Murray is a controversial figure who was removed from his post as a
British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct. He was cleared of
those but left the diplomatic service in acrimony.

His links to Wikileaks are well known and while his account is likely to
be seen as both unprovable and possibly biased, it is also the first
intervention by Wikileaks since reports surfaced last week that the CIA
believed Russia hacked the Clinton emails to help hand the election to
Donald Trump.

Murray's claims about the origins of the Clinton campaign emails comes
as U.S. intelligence officials are increasingly confident that Russian
hackers infiltrated both the Democratic National Committee and the email
account of top Clinton aide John Podesta.

In Podesta's case, his account appeared to have been compromised through
a basic 'phishing' scheme, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.

U.S. intelligence officials have reportedly told members of Congress
during classified briefings that they believe Russians passed the
documents on to Wikileaks as part of an influence operation to swing the
election in favor of Donald Trump.

But Murray insisted that the DNC and Podesta emails published by
Wikileaks did not come from the Russians, and were given to the
whistleblowing group by Americans who had authorized access to the
information.

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,'  Murray said. 'The
source had legal access to the information. The documents came from
inside leaks, not hacks.'

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the
Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field
against Bernie Sanders.'

Murray claims he met with the person who passed the emails over in a
Washington, D.C. part near American University

His account cannot be independently verified but is in line with
previous statements by Wikileaks - which was the organization that
published the Podesta and DNC emails.

Wikileaks published the DNC messages in July and the Podesta messages in
October. The messages revealed efforts by some DNC officials to
undermine the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was
running against Hillary Clinton.

Others revealed that Clinton aides were concerned about potential
conflicts and mismanagement at the Clinton Foundation.

Murray declined to say where the sources worked and how they had access
to the information, to shield their identities.

He suggested that Podesta's emails might be 'of legitimate interest to
the security services' in the U.S., due to his communications with Saudi
Arabia lobbyists and foreign officials.

Murray said he was speaking out due to claims from intelligence
officials that Wikileaks was given the documents by Russian hackers as
part of an effort to help Donald Trump win the U.S. presidential election.

'I don't understand why the CIA would say the information came from
Russian hackers when they must know that isn't true,' he said.
'Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents
Wikileaks published did not come from that.' [...]

(4) Soros & Lessig try to sway Electoral College

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/09/activist-served-george-soros-financed-boards-behind-scheme-usurp-trumps-electoral-college-votes/

Activist Who Served on George Soros-Financed Boards Behind Scheme to
Take Trump’s Electoral College Votes

by Aaron Klein

9 Dec 20161,595

NEW YORK – Harvard law professor and progressive activist Larry Lessig
has announced that he is teaming up with a California-based law firm to
offer "free and confidential" legal services to any members of the
Electoral College who will vote against President-elect Donald Trump in
violation of state law.

Lessig, a one-time presidential candidate, has served on the boards of
numerous groups financed by billionaire George Soros.

Lessig’s Electoral College scheme, which is being called the Electors
Trust, is a last-ditch effort to stop Trump from becoming president.

It comes after a petition drive by the Soros-funded MoveOn.org activist
organization sought to abolish the Electoral College altogether.

Lessig’s project also follows the largely failed recount efforts of
Green Party candidate Jill Stein, who was aided by Hillary Clinton’s
campaign. Breitbart News reported that the lawyer representing Clinton’s
recount efforts, Marc Elias, recently led legal battles against state
voting laws with an infusion of funding from Soros.

Lessig’s effort to help electors vote against Trump was first reported
on Monday by Politico:

     Lessig says his new effort, which he calls "The Electors Trust,"
will provide free counsel to electors, provided by the midsize firm,
Durie Tangri, whose partner Mark Lemley is a longtime associate of Lessig’s.

     More significantly, Lessig said, the Trust will offer a platform –
with guaranteed anonymity – for electors to strategize about stopping
Trump from taking the White House. It’s a platform, he said, that could
help electors coordinate to determine whether they’ve gathered enough
support to stop Trump from winning the presidency.

     "It makes no sense to be elector number five who comes out against
Trump. But it might make sense to be elector 38," Lessig said in a phone
interview.

Writing at Medium.com, Lessig elaborated on his electors plot:

     With their permission, the electors can allow others to know that
they are considering a vote of conscience. But that information will not
include either their identity or their state. Our primary objective is
to provide a safe and confidential legal context in which electors can
seek advice and support, and depending on the facts, an opportunity to
litigate to defend their freedom.

Reached for comment, Lessig refused to provide Breitbart News with the
specific numbers of electors who are allegedly considering switching
their votes from Trump.

""I’m not in the information flow for that. We’re being very careful to
assure anonymity," Lessig said.

Politico reported advocates of the bid to turn the votes of electors
against Trump have briefed allies close to Hillary Clinton.

Reported Politico:

     Clinton’s team and the Democratic National Committee have
steadfastly refused to endorse the efforts spearheaded by a group of
electors in Colorado and Washington state. But, as with the ongoing
recounts initiated by Green Party nominee Jill Stein, the Clinton team
has not categorically rejected them, leaving the collection of mainly
Democratic electors to push forward with no explicit public support from
the failed Democratic nominee or any other prominent party leaders.

Lessig launched his project after one Republican elector, Chris Suprun
of Texas, published a news-making op-ed in the New York Times announcing
his intentions not to vote for Trump when the Electoral College meets on
Dec. 19 to formally elect the president.

Lessig’s movement seems to be gaining some momentum, even if it is a
long shot. On Tuesday, the New York Times published an opinion piece by
Elizabeth Williamson citing Republican insiders saying there are other
quiet "faithless electors" like Suprun plotting to vote against Trump.
Still, Williamson, a Times editorial writer who specializes in national
politics, admitted the chances of the effort succeeding amount to a
"moon shot."

Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker also advocated for the scheme
in a piece titled, "The electoral college should be unfaithful."

Parker claimed renegade electors would write a new history of "heroism":

     Electors are scheduled to meet Dec. 19 in their respective states
to cast their final ballots. If there are 37 Republicans among them with
the courage to perform their moral duty and protect the nation from a
talented but dangerous president-elect, a new history of heroism will
have to be written. [...]

With research by Joshua Klein and Brenda J. Elliott.

(5) Soros & Hillary trying to reverse the vote of the Electoral College

http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-foreign-policy-and-the-electoral-college-vote-towards-a-december-19-surprise/5561928

U.S. Foreign Policy and the Electoral College Vote. Towards a December
19 Surprise?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, December 12, 2016

In a previous article entitled Constitutional Crisis, Movement to
Undermine President-elect Donald Trump’s Accession to the White House? I
focussed on the process of confrontation between the Trump and Clinton
factions leading up to the Grand Electoral College Vote on December 19th.

While the Hillary Clinton faction supported by mainstream media
propaganda is accusing Moscow of intervening in the US elections on
behalf of Trump, they are  also intent upon shifting the Electoral
College vote in favour of Clinton with a view to blocking
president-elect Trump’s accession to the White House.

If this were to succeed, the U.S. would be precipitated into a
deap-seated political crisis. It should be noted that this process is
also coupled with  extensive anti-Trump protests across America,
organized by the Clinton faction.

What is a stake: "are fundamental rivalries within the US establishment
marked by the clash between competing corporate factions, each of which
is intent upon exerting control over the incoming US presidency."  (Ibid)

Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State

Since the publication of  my earlier article, ExxonMobil Chief Rex
Tillerson has been chosen by Trump to occupy the key position of  US
Secretary of State.  This appointment potentially points to a major
shift in US foreign policy (including an openly anti-China stance by
Trump).  It is also points to rising divisions within the US
establishment.  Tillerson not only has a good relationship with
president Vladimir Putin, ExxonMobil also has  sizeable business
interests in the Russian Federation including drilling projects in the
Arctic, Black Sea and Siberia in partnership with Russia’s Rosneft.
Needless to say these projects have been affected by Obama’s economic
sanctions regime directed against Russia.

In response to this controversial appointment, the Neocon faction linked
both to the bi-partisan "War Party" has promised to block the
confirmation of  Tillerson’s candidacy in the US Senate.

It should be noted that Wall Street is also divided. Financial
institutions are engaged in an internal war. Donald Trump announced on
December 12 his choice to head the White House National Economic Council
(NEC): the appointee is Gary Cohn, Goldman Sachs President and Chief
Operating Officer. The NEC director occupies a central advisory position
regarding the formulation of government economic policy. Ironically,
Cohn is a Democrat and Goldman Sachs is known to have supported the
Hillary Clinton campaign.

Global Military Agenda

We are not dealing with "class conflict". What is at stake are
rivalries, confrontations and deep divisions within the elite structures
with regard to America’s global military agenda. [...]

The fake Moscow interference in the US elections is being used as a
propaganda ploy to shift the Electoral College vote in favour of Clinton
on December 19th. [...]

The political implications are potentially devastating.

(6) Deep State vs. Trump

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/12/virgil-the-deep-state-vs-donald-trump/

Virgil: The Deep State vs. Donald Trump

by Virgil12 Dec 20164,150

1. The War Against Trump

Do the Democrats want Donald Trump to become the 45th president?  Of
course not.  And how about the Democrats’ handmaiden, the Main Stream
Media?  Do they want Trump in the White House?  Of course not.  And how
‘bout all the other affluent residents of the Washington "swamp," which
Trump has pledged to drain—do you think any of them want Trump? Of
course not.  Together, these anti-Trump constituencies help form what
has been called the Deep State, which is a real and serious thing, and
which we will explore further in a moment.

Yet first, we can take a look at the latest news, because let’s not kid
ourselves: These anti-Trump constituencies might have lost the 2016
presidential election at the ballot box, but they don’t intend to lose
their power.  And to that end, they have real clout, and they are using it.

In particular, wily in the ways of Washington, the anti-Trumpers are
operating behind the scenes, using their well-greased legal and
political machinery to block the President-elect, or at least to
discredit and de-legitimize him, such that his presidency is crippled.
And as a part of that backroom effort, the MSM is always ready with a
supportive, momentum-building headline or two—or two thousand.

We all remember the anti-Trump protests that immediately erupted after
the election—some of them, it would seem, funded by George Soros and his
ilk. But such "guerrilla theater" in the streets was just an overture;
the real battle, today, is in the suites.

So on Saturday, December 10, Sen. Harry Reid, the outgoing leader of the
Senate Democrats, helped set the new anti-Trump agenda in an appearance
on MSNBC; hence this headline: "Reid: Russian Involvement In Election ‘A
Hanging Chad 1,000 Times Over,’ Trump ‘Lost the Election.’"  The words
"hanging chad," of course, are a reference to the 2000 presidential
election—that being another time when the Democrats lost and responded
by seeking to derail the victor, Republican George W. Bush.

Today, the looming flashpoint, of course, is the December 19 convening
of the electoral college.  Normally, these sessions in the 50 states are
just a formality, in which the 538 electors ratify the candidate who won
the most electoral votes as the next president.  And since Trump won 306
electoral votes in November, a clear majority, there should be no doubt
as to who will be inaugurated on January 20—but maybe there is.

Yes, we must ask: What will actually happen on the 19th of this month?

For weeks now, Harvard Law School professor Lawrence Lessig has been
agitating to overturn the presidential election results.  Back on
November 24, he wrote in The Washington Post that the electoral college
should meet and vote Hillary Clinton into the White House.

Since then, Lessig has helped to form a group, HamiltonElectors.com,
aimed at encouraging "faithless electors," of which there have been a
few over the years, to be faithless, now, in record numbers.  Today,
Lessig’s website says merely that it wants the electors to break from
Trump and vote for a "qualified Republican alternative."

But of course, in such a chaotic situation, if the electors feel free to
break faith with their commitment to Trump, anything could happen. And
Lessig himself is just as much of a Democrat as ever and so, too, we can
assume, are his financial backers.  (Interestingly, the site is rather
coy about the identity of its funders.)

As the Lessig site declares, "Together We Can Stop Trump."  Yes, that’s
one goal, and yet it’s also safe to assume that if Lessig & Co. get what
they really want, then Hillary will become the 45th president.

And in fact, one Republican elector, Christopher Suprun of Texas, has
already declared that he won’t vote for Trump next week.  And guess
what: Suprun has become a hero to The New York Times and the rest of the
MSM.

So in the meantime, for the next week or so, the anti-Trump goal is
simply to encourage chaos because from their point of view, only good
things could happen.  And here, once again, the always dutiful Politico
is happy to help; hence this trio of headlines, which are just a
sampling: "Rogue electors brief Clinton camp on anti-Trump plan,"
"Washington state presidential electors file third lawsuit in anti-Trump
effort," and "Dem congressman: Electoral College has ‘right’ to weigh
Russian hacking."

And just on December 12 came the news—or perhaps we should we put "news"
in quotes, since it’s just a press release—that the Hillary Clinton
campaign wants the electoral college to be "briefed" on the Russia
hacking allegations—which presumably means rehashing all the news
stories.  In other words, the Clinton campaign wants yet another chance
to rehash the same suppositions and suspicions, as opposed to actual
facts, of which there seem to be none.  Again, the mission is simple:
throw sand in the gears of the constitutional machinery.

Meanwhile, others are joining the anti-Trump effort.  For example,
here’s another one of CNN’s contributions to the anti-Trump cause,
focused on the words of Robert Baer, who made a name for himself as a
critic of George W. Bush in the ‘00s: "Ex-CIA operative: We may need a
new vote."

There’s nothing in the Constitution, of course, about a
presidential-election do-over, and so there’s zero precedent for any
such national re-vote, and yet, as we have seen, the minimum goal of the
anti-Trump forces is to sow massive confusion. [...]

(7) Senate quietly Passes "Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act"
targeting Dissident News on Internet


From: Outlook Team <timos2003z@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016
20:49:46 +0000

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-02/house-quietly-passes-bill-targeting-russian-propaganda-websites

Senate Quietly Passes The "Countering Disinformation And Propaganda Act"

by Tyler Durden

Dec 10, 2016 7:13 PM

While we wait to see if and when the Senate will pass (and president
will sign) Bill  H.R. 6393, "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2017", which was passed by the House at the end of November with an
overwhelming majority and which seeks to crack down on websites
suspected of conducting Russian propaganda and calling for the US
government to "counter active measures by Russia to exert covert
influence … carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of,
political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and
the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged
publicly," another, perhaps even more dangerous and limiting to civil
rights and freedom of speech bill passed on December 8.

On November 30, one week after the Washington Post launched its witch
hunt against "Russian propaganda fake news", with 390 votes for, the
House quietly passed "H.R. 6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2017", sponsored by California Republican Devin Nunes (whose
third largest donor in 2016 is Google parent Alphabet, Inc), a bill
which deals with a number of intelligence-related issues, including
Russian propaganda, or what the government calls propaganda, and hints
at a potential crackdown on "offenders."

A quick skim of the bill reveals "Title V—Matters relating to foreign
countries",  whose Section 501 calls for the government to "counter
active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in
coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the
security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian
Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly."

The section lists the following definitions of media manipulation:
   Establishment or funding of a front group.
   Covert broadcasting.
   Media manipulation.
   Disinformation and forgeries.
   Funding agents of influence.
   Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
   Assassinations.
   Terrorist acts.

As ActivistPost correctly notes, it is easy to see how this law, if
passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to
target, threaten, or eliminate so-called "fake news" websites, a list
which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that
does not share the mainstream media's proclivity to serve as the Public
Relations arm of a given administration.

Curiously, the bill which was passed on November 30, was introduced on
November 22, two days before the Washington Post published its Nov. 24
article citing "experts" who claim Russian propaganda helped Donald
Trump get elected.

As we reported last week, in an article that has been widely blasted,
the WaPo wrote that "two teams of independent researchers found that the
Russians exploited American-made technology platforms to attack U.S.
democracy at a particularly vulnerable moment, as an insurgent candidate
harnessed a wide range of grievances to claim the White House. The
sophistication of the Russian tactics may complicate efforts by Facebook
and Google to crack down on "fake news," as they have vowed to do after
widespread complaints about the problem."

The newspaper cited PropOrNot, an anonymous website that posted a hit
list of alternative media websites, including Zero Hedge, Drudge Report,
Activist Post, Blacklisted News, the Ron Paul Report, and many others.
Glenn Greenwald penned an appropriate response two days later in
"Washington Post Disgracefully Promotes a McCarthyite Blacklist From a
New, Hidden, and Very Shady Group."

PropOrNot has pushed a conspiratorial thesis, without any actual proof,
that the listed websites have been either used directly or covertly by
the Russians to spread propaganda.

While the bill passed the House with a sweeping majority, it is unknown
if and when the bill will work its way through the Senate and be passed
into law, although one would think that it has far higher chances of
passing under president Obama than the President-Elect. It is also
unclear if it will be used to shut down websites anonymously
characterized as "useful idiots" or subversive elements used in
disseminating supposed Russian propaganda.

Those interested can read the full "H.R. 6393: Intelligence
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017" at the following location" bill
that may soon proclaim much of the internet to be criminal "Russian
propaganda" at the following link.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr6393/text


No comments:

Post a Comment