By Paul Craig Roberts | IPE | August 13, 2018

Robert Mueller is supposed to be investigating Russiagate, which has been shown to be a hoax concocted by former CIA director John Brennan, former FBI director James Comey, and current deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. As Russiagate is a hoax, Mueller has not been able to produce a shred of evidence of the alleged Trump/Putin plot to hack Hillary’s emails and influence the last presidential election.

With his investigation unable to produce any evidence of the alleged Russiagate, Mueller concluded that he had to direct attention away from the failed hoax by bringing some sort of case against someone, knowing that the incompetent and corrupt US media and insouciant public would assume that the case had something to do with Russiagate.

Mueller chose Paul Manafort as a target, hoping that faced with fighting false charges, Manafort would make a deal and make up some lies about Trump and Putin in exchange for the case against him being dropped. But Manafort stood his ground, forcing Mueller to go forward with a false case.

Manafort’s career is involved with Republican political campaigns. He is charged with such crimes as paying for NY Yankee baseball tickets with offshore funds not declared to tax authorities and with attempting to get bank loans on the basis of misrepresentation of his financial condition. In the prosecutors’ case, Manafort doesn’t have to have succeeded in getting a loan based on financial misrepresentation, only to be guilty of trying. Two of the people testifying against him have been paid off with dropped charges.

Mueller’s investigation is restricted to Russiagate. In other words, Mueller has no mandate to investigate or bring charges unrelated to Russiagate. In my opinion, Mueller gets away with this only because the deputy Attorney General is in on the Russiagate plot against Trump. Mueller and Rosenstein know that they can count on the presstitutes to continue to deceive the public by presenting the Manafort trial as part of Russiagate.

The trial judge has twice criticized the prosecutors, asking them on one occasion if they had any evidence of successful fraud. In other words, the judge can tell the difference between actual fraud and a failed attempt at fraud, a distinction the prosecutors don’t want the jury to consider.

However, prosecutors can frame a judge, just as they are trying to frame the presidents of the United States and Russia. Realizing that, the judge backed off.

What the Manafort trial should tell you is how utterly and totally corrupt the United States is. In my opinion there is nowhere an organization as corrupt as the US Dept of Justice (sic).

That Russiagate continues on its corrupt course should tell you how powerless President Trump is. Trump cannot even influence his own Department of Justice, which is doing its best to destroy him.


Contributed by Paul Craig Roberts of Institute for Political Economy


SHARE:

By Aaron Kesel | Activist Post | August 8, 2018

The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, has been asked to testify before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee as part of their Russia investigation, according to a letter signed by Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Mark Warner (D-VA) posted by the WikiLeaks Twitter account.

The letter was delivered to Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

“As part of the inquiry, the Committee requests that you make yourself available for a closed interview with bipartisan Committee staff at a mutually agreeable time and location,” the letter reads.

WikiLeaks says their legal team is “considering the offer but testimony must conform to a high ethical standard,” after which the whistleblower organization added a tweet linking to a list of 10 Democratic senators who demanded in late June that Assange’s asylum be revoked in violation of international law.

Recently, Activist Post reported that “The War Is On To Stop The Extradition Of Julian Assange” and that Ecuador and Britain are in high-level discussions over Assange’s situation, according to a report by the Sunday Times of London.

Assange has been arbitrarily detained according to the UN for nearly 6 years in the Ecuadorian embassy. Now Ecuador has expanded that arbitrary detainment to solitary confinement by forbidding Assange from any human contact including visitations, phone calls and barring his Internet usage — all without Assange ever being convicted of a crime besides publishing documents exposing corruption and shedding light on the truth.

In March, Ecuador and its leader Lenín Moreno pulled the plug on Julian Assange’s Internet connection. Then, Ecuador further demanded Assange remove a specific tweet referencing a foreign political prisoner Carles Puigdemont. The irony here is that Ecuador accused Assange of “interfering in a state” for mentioning another political prisoner and Assange himself had more of his own rights taken away.

“In 1940 the elected president of Catalonia, Lluís Companys, was captured by the Gestapo, at the request of Spain, delivered to them and executed. Today, German police have arrested the elected president of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, at the request of Spain, to be extradited,” Assange tweeted.

Ecuador has clarified its position on Julian Assange’s asylum by drafting new rules limiting his communications according to WikiLeaks.

Last year, Moreno vowed to stop Assange from revealing further corruption about the United States for the duration of his stay at the embassy, stating he would “gag Assange from revealing further corruption about the U.S.”

Although Moreno claims to support Assange’s asylum, he previously said that he would ask him to “be very delicate when he addresses international politics, especially regarding countries with which we have good relations,” reported Latin American news outlet teleSUR.

It’s interesting to note the former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, who gave Assange asylum is now being threatened with extradition from his current country in Belgium for an unrelated matter dealing with the alleged brief kidnapping of opposition lawmaker Fernando Balda in 2012.

Meanwhile, it’s been reported that the UK’s Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt dared Assange to walk out of the Ecuadorean embassy. He might have said a little too much about an active investigation when he said that Assange was facing “serious charges,” because the article is now absent from News.com.au’s website.

In May, Swedish prosecutors decided to discontinue their investigation into the claims, which Assange denies and he has never been formally charged with.

“Chief Prosecutor Marianne Ny has today decided to discontinue the preliminary investigation regarding suspected rape concerning Julian Assange,” the prosecutor’s office said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters.

Charges against Assange in Sweden have been dropped and he is facing only a minor charge in the UK for failing to turn up to a court hearing.

So it is unknown what “serious charges” Hunt was referring to. And this may be why the article was just taken down without notice now displaying a 404 error. It’s worth noting this is exactly what happened when Tommy Robinson stories were demanded to be deleted.

The media is ignoring Assange’s plight with very few articles being circulated about Assange’s situation in the MSM. So much so, that recently Emmy Award-winning filmmaker and investigative reporter John Pilger attacked press coverage of Julian Assange in an interview with Dennis Bernstein and Randy Credico with Consortium News.

We are all Julian Assange … especially journalists, U.S. President Donald Trump has set the atmosphere for the push against fake news and licensing journalists. I guess it’s only ironic that Trump’s administration goes after an organization with a perfect record for revealing the truth.

The precedent that this can set for other journalists and bloggers in the U.S. and abroad is monstrous, and a nightmarish thought. If Assange is extradited to the United States, that’s the subsequent death of Freedom of the Press as well-known human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson QC has previously said.

Events are in the process of being planned worldwide that if something happens to Assange people all over the world are prepared to mobilize and protest in response. That information will be made available if and when the time comes.

This reporter is in a #Unity4J server helping organize the protest efforts both online and off. You can join #Unity4J and help defend Assange’s human rights and publisher rights (here.)

If the UK decides to illegally hand over Julian Assange to the U.S. in violation of two UN rulings, then it’s inevitable that we see a rain of leaks that the world has never seen. That will undoubtedly rock society as WikiLeaks has consistently for 11 years.

There are dozens of insurance files that can seemingly become public with just key phrases. Although, this reporter suspects that WikiLeaks will play a game of chess.

For up-to-date accurate information on Julian Assange’s plight, see @Wikileaks@AssangeMrs, and @Unity4J Twitter accounts. The website Unity4J will be up to date with information, live streams, and places where protests will be held in support of Julian Assange.

Assange has recommended that WikiLeaks supporters use cryptocurrency to donate to the organization in order to circumvent the blockade.


Contributed by Aaron Kesel of ActivistPost.com

Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.


SHARE:

By J.D. Heyes | Natural News | July 30, 2018

Last week 11 brave Republican lawmakers stood up for what’s right and filed an impeachment resolution against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

As reported by The National Sentinel, the lawmakers – led by House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows of North Carolina and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio – accused Rosenstein of intentionally withholding documents and information from Congress; failing to comply with congressional subpoenas; and abusing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court.

In addition, Rosenstein signed the third of three FISA applications used to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, even though Republicans note he was aware that the warrant applications relied heavily on the phony-baloney “Russia dossier” paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

“If that wasn’t bad enough, it was Rosenstein who then appointed special counsel Robert Mueller to investigate the wholly fabricated narrative of Russian collusion and obstruction of justice — further hampering POTUS Trump in his ability to run the country and conduct foreign policy,” The National Sentinel reported.

And yet, despite all of these allegations – which are based on documented evidence – Rosenstein’s supposed boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, publicly voiced support for his deputy the day the impeachment resolution was filed.

Why would he do that?

“My deputy, Rod Rosenstein, is highly capable. I have the highest confidence in him,” Sessions – a former long-serving U.S. senator – said, as reported by Reuters. “What I would like Congress to do is to focus on some of the legal challenges that are out there,” especially when it comes to dealing with illegal immigration.

Reuters noted further:

Rosenstein has become a frequent punching bag for Trump supporters for appointing Mueller to take over the Russia investigation from the FBI. The president has denied collusion with Moscow and characterizes the probe as a “witch hunt.” Russia has denied interfering in the election.

Does the Deep State have something on Sessions?

It’s hard to take such reporting seriously – there wasn’t any Russian collusion between Team Trump and Moscow and most people in the establishment media know, or should know that, given the dearth of evidence following a lengthy investigation into the allegations by Muller. (Related: Jeff Sessions is not serving up the justice that Trump and the American people deserve on Comey, Clinton, and others.)

But it’s equally difficult to hear Sessions say such things with a straight face, especially since not all that long ago as a serving lawmaker he was very likely frustrated by the Obama administration’s repeated refusals to turn over information to congressional committees in a timely manner. And does he remember that Obama’s first AG, Eric Holder, was held in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate on the “Fast and Furious” scandal; does he want to be remembered as running the same kind of Justice Department?

Rosenstein hasn’t just been withholding documents and thwarting Congress’ constitutional oversight role. Many of the documents he has ‘allowed’ to be transferred to various committees are so redacted as to nearly be useless. He claims the redactions are heavy because of “ongoing investigations” but a) these lawmakers are cleared to see sensitive information; b) they’re entitled to see it; and c) many long-time Washington watchers know that heavy redactions most often are done to protect certain people or agencies from embarrassment or criminal exposure.

There are also reports that Rosenstein, increasingly angry with the aggressiveness of Republican congressional investigators, threatened them with subpoenas for their personal records, emails, and phone calls during a tense meeting earlier this year. Some aides described the threat as a “personal attack.”

“For nine months, we’ve asked for documents, and that’s all we want,” Meadows told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham last week. “Not only have subpoenas been ignored, but information has been hidden, efforts have been stonewalled.”

Jordan added: “We’re tired of the Justice Department giving us the finger.”

So are we. And we’re tired of Jeff Sessions allowing it to happen. He needs to go.

Read more about conservative efforts to clean up Obama corruption at Conservative.news.


Contributed by J.D. Heyes of NaturalNews.com

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.


SHARE:

Politicians and mainstream media are praising the appointment of former FBI Director Robert Mueller as head of an investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and President Donald Trump. But Mueller’s poor handling of the 2001 anthrax attacks should give many cause for concern.

Robbie Martin | May 31, 2017 

 

OAKLAND (Analysis) — Amidst the overwhelming bipartisan praise given to former FBI Director Robert Mueller for his appointment as special counsel in the Trump-Russia investigation, few media outlets have voiced concern over his credentials. Mueller’s unforgivably poor performance during an investigation into the 2001 anthrax scare should give pause to those who hope to find out the truth about Russia’s alleged involvement in U.S. politics.

In October 2001 – less than a month after the 9/11 terror attacks – weaponized anthrax spores were sent through the U.S. mail system to prominent politicians and journalists. The anthrax attacks generated hysteria and panic, as well as created the perception that terrorism was going to remain a major threat, with 9/11 representing just the first wave.



The anthrax attacks also provided the George W. Bush administration with the opportunity to create a three-way connection in the public consciousness between the 9/11 attacks, the anthrax attacks, and Saddam Hussein. The “WMD lies” that would lead the U.S. into war in Iraq were hatched from one initial lie: that the anthrax mailings had fingerprints that could be traced back to the Iraqi government’s biological weapons program and that they represented a second wave of terrorism.

Major players in the U.S. government made strong efforts to link the anthrax attacks to the Iraqi government – efforts that Mueller played no part in. But in the following six years, Mueller did participate in a public disinformation campaign that muddied the waters regarding the 2001 anthrax attacks.

He and his bureau were in a position to unravel the underlying rationale for mounting an illegal invasion that left over a million Iraqi civilians dead. Instead, they worked to bury that rationale and stoke fears that would help to prop up public support for the invasion. Looking back at the way in which the case was handled, it is clear that Mueller may not be the most suitable candidate for heading the ongoing investigation into “Russiagate.”

.. Read the full article at MintPress News