Friday, May 15, 2020
Hot Dogus Interruptus...
More Fantastic Gifs:
The Tragedy Of Alcohol Abuse...
More Amazing Animated Gifs HERE
Animated Gif Collection #2 HERE
Animated Gif Collection #3
Animated Gif Collection #4
Animated Gif Collection #5 -OR- Motorcycles And Bulls Don't Mix..
Animated Gif Collection #6 or Bet She Lost Some Teeth...
Animated Gif Collection #7 -OR- This Is What Happens When You Fall Asleep While Driving...
Animated Gif Collection #8 -OR- Fish: 1, Dog: 0
Animated Gif Collection #9 -OR-Out Of Control Bus -OR-
Animated Gif Collection #10 -OR- How To Launch An Oil Truck Into The Air
Animated Gif Collection #11 -OR- Man That Must Have Hurt
Animated GIF Collection #12 -OR- This Is Brutal
Animated Gif Collection #13 -OR- This Guy Was Inches From DEATH!
Animated Gif Collection #14
Animated Gif Collection #15
Animated Gif Collection #16 -OR- Make It Rain!
Animated Gif Collection #17 -OR- THIS IS NOT HOW YOU KILL THE CHINESE CORONA VIRUS!
Taxpayer-funded PBS stations produced a pro-Beijing documentary — and didn’t disclose China ties The stations receive millions in federal funds every year
Two PBS affiliate stations — which receive millions in taxpayer funding every year — are airing a pro-Beijing documentary, which was produced in conjunction with China Global Television Network, a Chinese media outlet controlled by the country's communist government.
What are the details?
Investigative reporter Chuck Ross broke the news Thursday about the film, "Voices from the Frontline: China's War on Poverty," which touts Chinese President Xi Jinping's plan to end poverty in the country by 2020.
PBS affiliate KOCE, known as PBS SoCal, helped produce the film and premiered it Monday. KCET, which merged with KOCE in 2018, will air the show on Saturday. Other PBS affiliates, including in Idaho and Las Vegas, have either already aired the film or plan to do so later this month.
The one-hour documentary touts Chinese President Xi Jinping's initiative to alleviate poverty in China by this year.
"In the last forty years, China's economic development has lifted more than 700 people out of poverty," reads the introductory script in the film.
"To President Xi Jinping, ending poverty is his most important task," the script states.
In his report, Ross noted that the film does not disclose CGTN's links to the Chinese government nor does it disclose film producer Robert Lawrence Kuhn's ties to officials at China's State Council Information Office, which reportedly specializes in foreign propaganda.
In February 2019, CGTN, China's primary state broadcaster, filed with the U.S. government as a foreign agent of the Chinese government, yet this goes without mention in the film.
What else?
According to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting records, KCET received $5.6 million in federal funding last year, and more...
Making of a myth: Timeline of media's role in selling 'Trump-Russia collusion' tale
Four years of leaks, misinformation, and manipulation in the construction of a conspiracy theory.
When it comes to misinformation, disinformation and the now-disproven Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory, it would not have been possible without a strong dose of media support.
Here is a timeline that breaks out some important reports by — and leaks to — the news media.
March 25, 2016:
Ukrainian-American operative for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Alexandra Chalupa meets with top Ukrainian officials at Ukrainian Embassy in Washington D.C. to "expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia," according to Politico. Ukrainian embassy proceeds to work "directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions," according to an embassy official (though other officials later deny engaging in election-related activities).
March 30, 2016:
Chalupa briefs DNC staff on Russia ties to Manafort and Trump. Ukrainian embassy officials and Chalupa "coordinat[e] an investigation with the Hillary team" into Manafort, according to a source in Politico. This effort reportedly includes working with U.S. media.
April 2016:
Ukrainian member of parliament Olga Bielkova reportedly seeks meetings with five dozen members of U.S. Congress and reporters including former New York Times reporter Judy Miller, David Sanger of New York Times, David Ignatius of Washington Post, and Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt.
Week of April 6, 2016:
Chalupa begins working with investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, according to her later account.
April 26, 2016:
Isikoff publishes story on Yahoo News about Manafort's business dealings with a Russian oligarch.
April 27, 2016:
The BBC publishes an article titled, “Why Russians Love Donald Trump.”
April 28, 2016:
Chalupa is invited to discuss her research about Manafort with 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine at Library of Congress for Open World Leadership Center, a U.S. congressional agency. Chalupa invites Isikoff to "connect(s) him to the Ukrainians.” After the event, Isikoff accompanies Chalupa to Ukrainian embassy reception.
May 3, 2016:
Chalupa emails DNC that she'll share sensitive info about Paul Manafort "offline" including "a big Trump component that will hit in next few weeks.”
May 4, 2016:
Trump locks up Republican nomination.
June 7, 2016:
Hillary Clinton locks up Democratic nomination.
June 17, 2016:
Washington Post publishes front page story linking Trump to Russia: "Inside Trump's Financial Ties to Russia and His Unusual Flattery of Vladimir Putin.”
July 2016:
Ukraine minister of internal affairs Arsen Avakov attacks Trump and Trump campaign adviser Paul Manafort on Twitter and Facebook, calling Trump "an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism.”
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk writes on Facebook that Trump has "challenged the very values of the free world."
Late July 2016:
Chalupa leaves the (DNC) to work full-time on her research into Manafort, Trump and Russia; and provides off-the-record guidance to "a lot of journalists.”
Aug. 4, 2016:
Ukrainian ambassador to U.S. writes op-ed against Trump.
Aug. 14, 2016:
New York Times breaks story about cash payments made a decade ago to Paul Manafort by pro-Russia interests in Ukraine. The ledger was released and publicized by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.
Aug. 15, 2016:
CNN reports the FBI is conducting an inquiry into Manafort's payments from pro-Russia interests in Ukraine in 2007 and 2009.
After a meeting discussing the election in FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's office, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok texts FBI attorney Lisa Page referring to the possibility of Trump getting elected. "We can't take that risk," he writes. They speak of needing an "insurance policy.”
Aug. 19, 2016:
Paul Manafort resigns as Trump campaign chairman.
Ukrainian parliament member Sergii Leshchenko holds news conference to draw attention to Paul Manafort and Trump's "pro-Russia" ties.
Sept. 2, 2016:
FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text that "[President Obama] wants to know everything we're doing.”
Sept. 23, 2016:
Yahoo News publishes article by Isikoff about Carter Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow. (The article is apparently based on leaked info from Fusion GPS Steele anti-Trump "dossier" political opposition research.)
End of September 2016:
Fusion GPS' Glenn Simpson and former British spy Christopher Steele meet with reporters, including New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New Yorker and CNN or ABC. One meeting is at office of Democratic National Committee general counsel.
Sept. 23, 2016:
Michael Isikoff and Yahoo News report “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser [Carter Page] and Kremlin.” It is later revealed that the FBI improperly wiretapped Page for a year.
Early October 2016:
Steele, the author of anti-Trump "dossier," meets in New York with...
4 Big Unanswered Questions About the ‘Unmasking’ Scandal
As the “unmasking” scandal unfolds, the Senate Judiciary Committee will delve into the conduct of the Obama administration and the intelligence community in secretly investigating the incoming Trump administration.
Two Senate Republicans released previously secret information Wednesday listing top Obama administration officials who made the same request in early 2017: that the intelligence community disclose to them that retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was the American whose phone conversation with the Russian ambassador had been intercepted by intelligence officials.
Flynn at the time had been chosen by President-elect Donald Trump as his first national security adviser. Flynn’s “unmasking” at the request of some of outgoing President Barack Obama’s closest advisers set in motion events that led to Flynn’s resignation after only 23 days in office during the new Trump administration.
Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, both Republicans, released the names of the Obama officials requesting Flynn’s identity as part of information declassified by Richard Grenell, acting director of national intelligence.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced Thursday that his committee would hold hearings in June examining issues surrounding the Flynn case and related to the initial FBI investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
In a joint statement, Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Senate’s chief oversight panel, and Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said:
Our investigation of these matters has been ongoing for years, and as information finally comes to light, our focus on these issues is even more important now. The records are one step forward in an important effort to get to the bottom of what the Obama administration did during the Russia investigation and to Lt. General Flynn. We will continue to review this information and push for additional relevant disclosures until we are satisfied that the American people know the full truth.
Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut continues to look into the origins of the Russia investigation, and the Justice Department has said that the Flynn unmasking requests is one part of that probe.
Here are four big unanswered questions as the Senate and the Justice Department scrutinize actions taken by the Obama administration between Trump’s election on Nov. 8, 2016, and his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017.
1. Can Obama Be Compelled to Testify?
It might well be must-see TV, but at this point it seems highly unlikely that Obama himself would be subpoenaed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Trump made the demand in a tweet Thursday.
If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama. He knew EVERYTHING. Do it @LindseyGrahamSC, just do it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk!
111K people are talking about this
“If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama,” Trump said in the tweet. “He knew EVERYTHING. Do it @LindseyGrahamSC, just do it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk!”
The previously classified documents released this week show that in the waning days of the Obama administration, these six well-known officials each submitted an unmasking request that would reveal Flynn’s otherwise protected identity under U.S. law: FBI Director James Comey, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, Vice President Joe Biden, United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power, CIA Director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
The Justice Department’s case against Flynn for lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador largely fell apart after other documents recently surfaced. They included notes of a discussion among Comey and two other top FBI officials about whether the goal in questioning Flynn at the White House was to “get him to lie” so that he could be fired or prosecuted.
The Justice Department last week dropped the case against Flynn for misleading the FBI, but a federal judge this week called in outside authorities to dispute that action.
Graham, in a statement Thursday, appeared to be reluctant about Trump’s call for Obama to testify.
“I am greatly concerned about the precedent that would be set by calling a former president for oversight,” Graham said. “No president is above the law. However, the presidency has executive privilege claims against other branches of government.”
Graham continued:
To say we are living in unusual times is an understatement.Graham is striking the correct balance, said Charles Stimson, a senior legal fellow for national security at The Heritage Foundation.
We have the sitting president (Trump) accusing the former president (Obama) of being part of a treasonous conspiracy to undermine his presidency. We have the former president suggesting the current president is destroying the rule of law by dismissing the General Flynn case.
All of this is occurring during a major pandemic.
As to the Judiciary Committee, both presidents are welcome to come before the committee and share their concerns about each other. If nothing else it would make for great television. However, I have great doubts about whether it would be wise for the country.
“Chairman Graham should go after the facts, and see where that leads. He’s going to hold hearings,” Stimson told The Daily Signal on Thursday. “To take the president up on that suggestion [of calling Obama to testify] would risk looking political and could delegitimize the inquiry.”
2. What Are the Legal Issues?
Graham said the first part of his committee’s comprehensive inquiry would be of the Flynn matter.
“Our first phase will deal with the government’s decision to dismiss the Flynn case as well as an in-depth analysis of the unmasking requests made by Obama Administration officials against General Flynn,” Graham said in his written statement. “We must determine if these requests were legitimate.”
If Obama administration officials engaged in improper conduct, it’s not clear whether a law was broken, or who violated the law if one was broken.
Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, U.S. intelligence agencies may intercept and listen to the telephone calls of foreign citizens, including foreign officials. That would include Flynn’s call with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016, roughly three weeks before Trump’s inauguration.
If a foreign citizen is speaking to an American citizen on the intercepted call, the law requires the name of the American citizen to be blacked out, or masked, in documentation.
So unmasking is the process by which authorized federal officials request to see information regarding American citizens mentioned anonymously in classified transcripts of calls or other communications involving foreigners.
However, someone leaked Flynn’s communication with the Russian ambassador to the media shortly after the unmasking requests were made. Leaking classified information is a crime.
Brennan, Clapper, Comey and the others named in the documents released by Grenell were authorized to ask for the unmasking. The question is whether there was a legitimate reason to ask for the unmasking, Stimson said.
Another question is whether the unmasking was an attempt by officials of the outgoing Obama administration to undermine the incoming Trump administration.
“I’m not there yet. I want to see more facts,” Stimson told The Daily Signal.
Stimson added that congressional hearings typically seem political, but could produce further lines of inquiry.
He said he is more focused on the probe by Durham, whose career has been as a “stand-up, just-the-facts-ma’am, Joe Friday type of guy.”
3. How Did FISA System Go ‘Off the Rails’?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)