• US defence chief visits aircraft carrier in South China Sea: AFP

    05/Nov/2015 // 355 Viewers

    © US Navy/AFP/File | The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, pictured as it transits the South China Sea on October 29, 2015



    US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter visited an aircraft carrier in the South China Sea on Thursday, amid rising tensions over Chinese sovereignty claims in the disputed waterway.

    "There's a lot of concern about Chinese behaviour out here," Carter said during his three-hour visit to the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

    He called the ship's presence "a sign of the critical role that United States military power plays in what is a very consequential region for the American future".

    Read More
  • BREAKING: Dept of Homeland Security Chairman officially indicts Hillary Clinton for treason

    05/Nov/2016 // 1841 Viewers


    The Department of Homeland Security just went on the air with Fox News and told the American People that Hillary Clinton is guilty of treason.

    In the damning announcement, Department of Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul revealed that Hillary Clinton clearly acted against the multiple security warnings she received while Secretary of State.

    Furthermore, he went on to release that Hillary Clinton took multiple devices overseas. Not only that, these devices were proven to be hacked by China, Russia, and the Islamic State of Iran.

    The intent is clear. Hillary Clinton used the secret server to hide her actions from the American People. She committed pure treason against the United States.

    Obama was also involved in the highly illegal email activity. He even used an alias to help protect his identity. FBI security experts easily cracked the alias, revealing hundreds of secret conversations between Obama and Hillary about foreign and domestic policy!

    And now that the FBI has found massive evidence that Hillary used the Clinton Foundation to make millions, it means the email server was undoubtedly used to rob the American People.

    What’s worse, Daily Mail reported on the WikiLeak that Hillary and Obama’s Chief of Staff John Podesta were warned ahead of time of the impending investigations. Because of this, they were able to delete and acid-wash all of the 33,000 emails just 5 days before her trial!

    The actions of Clinton go far beyond political corruption. They show a clear and decisive intent to destroy American Justice and Democracy. And it’s not just Hillary Clinton. Our very own Commander in Chief was involved the entire time.

    Oh, and the Department of Justice is being led by Loretta Lynch, who secretly met with Bill Clinton on a landing Strip in Phoenix mere days before Hillary was acquitted! As of today, Lynch is being sued to disclose the details of the meeting.

    When the American Constitution was crafted, a very meaningful and necessary clause was added:

    “that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government”
    We are now on the forefront of what our grandchildren will come to know as the Second American Revolution. The government is no longer of the people; instead, corrupt officials use citizens as pawns in a twisted game of death and destruction.

    Truly, the fate of our nation will be decided in just five short days.

    Click Here 

    Read More
  • WATCH: Video footage shows Clinton bribed State Department to block FBI investigation

    05/Nov/2016 // 472 Viewers


    We all knew the system was rigged, bought, crooked, and corrupt–Clintonized, in other words–but sometimes getting more proof of that fact hits you just as hard as the first time you “took the red pill.” Sorry, but, Uncle Sam is not your best buddy and not always looking out for you, the little guy.
    As he’s been doing for weeks, James O’Keefe, with the Project Veritas Action (PVA) investigative journalism group, has just released undercover footage that proves how far the government is willing to go to protect the Queen of Corruption herself, Hillary “Rigging” Clinton.
    Before we get into O’Keefe’s video, though, let me tell you something interesting that happened to me last night:
    A Martian landed in my backyard.
    And he said he’d had enough.
    “Elliot,” he told me telepathically while I slept, “you humans are a strange bunch.”
    “True,” I nodded in my sleep.
    “But based on what I’ve been observing for the last few years,” he thought, “I’m afraid you Americans are the looniest bunch right now.”
    “Why?” I thought back.
    “Just look at your government, your–how do you call it? Ah, yes, your ‘Alphabet Soup’,” he recalled.
    “Yes?” I wondered.
    “Let’s start with ‘the FBI’. If I didn’t know any better, I’d say it meant the Faking Bureau of Investigation! And the DOJ? More like the Department of Just-Kidding. And then there’s the CIA, or the Clinton Insurance Agency. Hello? Earth to Americans! I can’t just sit idly by and say nothing about it, so why do you!?”
    And then I woke up.


    As this year has taught us, sometimes it takes an outsider to makes things right on the inside. Donald Trump, a political outsider, has revitalized American patriotism and unity. Julian Assange, a cyber-intelligence outside, has forced the U.S. government to be transparent for once in our lives. And James O’Keefe, a journalistic outsider who is constantly attacked and lied about by the professional media elites, has “redpilled” millions of truthseekers by exposing how the Democrats have gleefully incited false-flag violence, funded and mobilized illegal voters and ballot destruction, taken illegal foreign donations, told union bosses to lie about candidates, and demonized minorities who dare step off the Democratic plantation.
    In his latest report, O’Keefe joined forces with Lee Stranahan, lead investigative reporter at Breitbart News. Now that the FBI has reopened its investigation into Hillary’s criminal negligence as Secretary of State. The very fact that the FBI felt compelled to reopen the investigation suggests that the original investigation was inadequate.

    Read More
  • Breaking News! Pentagon buries evidence of $125 billion in bureaucratic waste

    06/Dec/2016 // 386 Viewers


    The Pentagon has buried an internal study that exposed $125 billion in administrative waste in its business operations amid fears Congress would use the findings as an excuse to slash the defense budget, according to interviews and confidential memos obtained by The Washington Post.
    Pentagon leaders had requested the study to help make their enormous back-office bureaucracy more efficient and reinvest any savings in combat power. But after the project documented far more wasteful spending than expected, senior defense officials moved swiftly to kill it by discrediting and suppressing the results.
    The report, issued in January 2015, identified “a clear path” for the Defense Department to save $125 billion over five years. The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel. Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.
    The study was produced last year by the Defense Business Board, a federal advisory panel of corporate executives, and consultants from McKinsey and Company. Based on reams of personnel and cost data, their report revealed for the first time that the Pentagon was spending almost a quarter of its $580 billion budget on overhead and core business operations such as accounting, human resources, logistics and property management.
    [The Defense Business Board’s 2015 study on how the Pentagon could save $125 billion]
    The data showed that the Defense Department was paying a staggering number of people — 1,014,000 contractors, civilians and uniformed personnel — to fill back-office jobs far from the front lines. That workforce supports 1.3 million troops on active duty, the fewest since 1940.
    The cost-cutting study could find a receptive audience with President-elect Donald Trump. He has promised a major military buildup and said he would pay for it by “eliminating government waste and budget gimmicks.”
    For the military, the major allure of the study was that it called for reallocating the $125 billion for troops and weapons. Among other options, the savings could have paid a large portion of the bill to rebuild the nation’s aging nuclear arsenal, or the operating expenses for 50 Army brigades.
    But some Pentagon leaders said they fretted that by spotlighting so much waste, the study would undermine their repeated public assertions that years of budget austerity had left the armed forces starved of funds. Instead of providing more money, they said, they worried Congress and the White House might decide to cut deeper.
    So the plan was killed. The Pentagon imposed secrecy restrictions on the data making up the study, which ensured no one could replicate the findings. A 77-page summary report that had been made public was removed from a Pentagon website.
    “They’re all complaining that they don’t have any money. We proposed a way to save a ton of money,” said Robert “Bobby” L. Stein, a private-equity investor from Jacksonville, Fla., who served as chairman of the Defense Business Board.
    Stein, a campaign bundler for President Obama, said the study’s data were “indisputable” and that it was “a travesty” for the Pentagon to suppress the results.
    “We’re going to be in peril because we’re spending dollars like it doesn’t matter,” he added.
    The missed opportunity to streamline the military bureaucracy could soon have large ramifications. Under the 2011 Budget Control Act, the Pentagon will be forced to stomach $113 billion in automatic cuts over four years unless Congress and Trump can agree on a long-term spending deal by October. Playing a key role in negotiations will likely be Trump’s choice for defense secretary, retired Marine general James Mattis.
    The Defense Business Board was ordered to conduct the study by Deputy Defense Secretary Robert O. Work, the Pentagon’s second-highest-ranking official. At first, Work publicly touted the efficiency drive as a top priority and boasted about his idea to recruit corporate experts to lead the way.
    After the board finished its analysis, however, Work changed his position. In an interview with The Post, he did not dispute the board’s findings about the size or scope of the bureaucracy. But he dismissed the $125 billion savings proposal as “unrealistic” and said the business executives had failed to grasp basic obstacles to restructuring the public sector.
    “There is this meme that we’re some bloated, giant organization,” he said. “Although there is a little bit of truth in that . . . I think it vastly overstates what’s really going on.”
    Work said the board fundamentally misunderstood how difficult it is to eliminate federal civil service jobs — members of Congress, he added, love having them in their districts — or to renegotiate defense contracts.
    He said the Pentagon is adopting some of the study’s recommendations on a smaller scale and estimated it will save $30 billion by 2020. Many of the programs he cited, however, have been on the drawing board for years or were unrelated to the Defense Business Board’s research.
    Work acknowledged that the push to improve business operations lost steam after then-Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was replaced by Ashton B. Carter in February 2015. Carter has emphasized other goals, such as strengthening the Pentagon’s partnerships with high-tech firms.
    “We will never be as efficient as a commercial organization,” Work said. “We’re the largest bureaucracy in the world. There’s going to be some inherent inefficiencies in that.”
    ‘Dark matter’
    Work, a retired Marine officer, became deputy defense secretary in May 2014. With the military budget under the most pressure since the end of the Cold War, he sought help from the Defense Business Board, an advisory panel known for producing management studies that usually gathered dust.
    Work told the board that the outcome of this assignment would be different. In a memo, he directed the board to collect sensitive cost data from the military services and defense agencies that would reveal how much they spent on business operations.
    Pentagon officials knew their back-office bureaucracy was overstaffed and overfunded. But nobody had ever gathered and analyzed such a comprehensive set of data before.
    Some Defense Business Board members warned that exposing the extent of the problem could have unforeseen consequences.
    “You are about to turn on the light in a very dark room,” Kenneth Klepper, the former chief executive of Medco Health Solutions, told Work in the summer of 2014, according to two people familiar with the exchange. “All the crap is going to float to the surface and stink the place up.”
    “Do it,” Work replied.
    To turn on the light, the Pentagon needed more outside expertise. A team of consultants from McKinsey was hired.
    In a confidential August 2014 memo, McKinsey noted that while the Defense Department was “the world’s largest corporate enterprise,” it had never “rigorously measured” the “cost-effectiveness, speed, agility or quality” of its business operations.
    Nor did the Pentagon have even a remotely accurate idea of what it was paying for those operations, which McKinsey divided into five categories: human resources; health-care management; supply chain and logistics; acquisition and procurement; and financial-flow management.
    McKinsey hazarded a guess: anywhere between $75 billion and $100 billion a year, or between 15 and 20 percent of the Pentagon’s annual expenses. “No one REALLY knows,” the memo added.
    The mission would be to analyze, for the first time, dozens of databases that tracked civilian and military personnel, and labor costs for defense contractors. The problem was that the databases were in the grip of the armed forces and a multitude of defense agencies. Many had fought to hide the data from outsiders and bureaucratic rivals, according to documents and interviews.
    Information on contractor labor, in particular, was so cloaked in mystery that McKinsey described it as “dark matter.”
    Prying it loose would require direct orders from Work. Even then, McKinsey consultants predicted the bureaucracy would resist.
    “This is a sensitive exercise conducted with audiences both ‘weary’ and ‘wary’ of efficiency, cost, sequestration and budget drills,” the confidential memo stated. “Elements of the culture are masterful at ‘waiting out studies and sponsors,’ with a ‘this too shall pass’ mindset.”
    Overstaffed chow hall
    From the outset, access to the data was limited to a handful of people. A $2.9 million consulting contract signed by the Pentagon stipulated that none of the data or analysis could be released to the news media or the public.
    Moreover, the contract required McKinsey to report to David Tillotson III, the Pentagon’s acting deputy chief management officer. Anytime the Defense Business Board wanted the consultants to carry out a task, Tillotson would have to approve. His office — not the board — would maintain custody of the data.
    “Good news!” Work emailed Tillotson once the contract was signed. “Time to cook.”
    In an Oct. 15, 2014, memo, Work ordered the board to move quickly, giving it three months to produce “specific and actionable recommendations.”
    In a speech the next month, Work lauded the board for its private-sector expertise. He said he had turned it into “an operational arm” of the Pentagon leadership and predicted the study would deliver transformational results.
    In an aside, he revealed that early findings had determined the average administrative job at the Pentagon was costing taxpayers more than $200,000, including salary and benefits.
    “And you say, hmmm, we could probably do better than that,” he said.
    The initial results did not come as a surprise.
    Former defense secretaries William S. Cohen, Robert M. Gates and Chuck Hagel had launched similar efficiency drives in 1997, 2010 and 2013, respectively. But each of the leaders left the Pentagon before their revisions could take root.
    “Because we turn over our secretaries and deputy secretaries so often, the bureaucracy just waits things out,” said Dov Zakheim, who served as Pentagon comptroller under President George W. Bush. “You can’t do it at the tail end of an administration. It’s not going to work. Either you leave the starting block with a very clear program, or you’re not going to get it done.”
    Arnold Punaro, a retired Marine general and former staff director for the Senate Armed Services Committee, said lawmakers block even modest attempts to downsize the Pentagon’s workforce because they do not want to lose jobs in their districts.
    Without backing from Congress, “you can’t even get rid of the guy serving butter in the chow hall in a local district, much less tens of thousands of jobs,” he said.
    ‘Time to hunt!’
    The Defense Business Board assigned five members to conduct the study alongside consultants from McKinsey. Scott Rutherford, senior partner at McKinsey’s Washington office, declined to comment.
    The team ran into resistance as several Pentagon offices delayed requests for data, according to emails and memos. Work and Tillotson had to intervene to get the data flowing. At one point, more than 100 people were feeding data from different sectors of the bureaucracy.
    Laboring under its tight deadline, the team hashed out an agreement with Pentagon officials over which job classifications to count in their survey. The board added a sixth category of business operations — real property management. That alone covered 192,000 jobs and annual expenses of $22.6 billion.
    On Christmas Eve, Klepper emailed Work and Tillotson to thank them for putting their muscle behind the project. Without it, he said, “this would all have been DOA and the naysayers would all have been right.”
    He hinted the board would make some eye-catching recommendations and expressed relief its work had not been torpedoed.
    “I have to admit, with all the caution, negative reaction and pushback,” Klepper said, “I had a bit of concern at the end of the analysis some form of censorship would stop us from showing the true opportunity.”
    Work replied that he could not be happier.
    “Time to hunt!” he said in an email, adding that he was “very excited about 2015” and ready to make “some bold moves.”
    The year kicked off with promise. On Jan. 21, 2015, the Pentagon announced Stein, the private-equity investor, had been reappointed as the board’s chairman and praised him for his “outstanding service.”
    The next day, the full board held its quarterly public meeting to review the results of the study. The report had a dry title, “Transforming DoD’s Core Business Processes for Revolutionary Change,” and was packed with charts and jargon. But it began plainly enough.
    “We are spending a lot more money than we thought,” the report stated. It then broke down how the Defense Department was spending $134 billion a year on business operations — about 50 percent more than McKinsey had guessed at the outset.
    Almost half of the Pentagon’s back-office personnel — 457,000 full-time employees — were assigned to logistics or supply-chain jobs. That alone exceeded the size of United Parcel Service’s global workforce.
    The Pentagon’s purchasing bureaucracy counted 207,000 full-time workers. By itself, that would rank among the top 30 private employers in the United States.
    More than 192,000 people worked in property management. About 84,000 people held human-resources jobs.
    The study laid out a range of options. At the low end, just by renegotiating service contracts and hiring less-expensive workers, the Pentagon could save $75 billion over five years. At the high end, by adopting more aggressive productivity targets, it could save twice as much.
    After a discussion, the full board voted to recommend a middle option: to save $125 billion over five years.
    Hordes of contractors
    Afterward, board members briefed Work. They were expecting an enthusiastic response, but the deputy defense secretary looked uneasy, according to two people who were present.
    He singled out a page in the report. Titled “Warfighter Currency,” it showed how saving $125 billion could be redirected to boost combat power. The money could cover the operational costs for 50 Army brigades, or 3,000 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters for the Air Force, or 10 aircraft-carrier strike groups for the Navy.
    “This is what scares me,” he said, according to the two people present. Work explained he was worried Congress might see it as an invitation to strip $125 billion from the defense budget and spend it somewhere else.
    A few weeks later, Carter replaced Hagel as defense secretary. Carter sounded as though he would welcome the kind of revolutionary change the board was urging.
    “To win support from our fellow citizens for the resources we need, we must show that we can make better use of every taxpayer dollar,” Carter said in an inaugural message in February 2015. “That means a leaner organization, less overhead, and reforming our business and acquisition practices.”
    In briefings that month, uniformed military leaders were receptive at first. They had long groused that the Pentagon wasted money on a layer of defense bureaucracies — known as the Fourth Estate — that were outside the control of the Army, Air Force and Navy. Military officials often felt those agencies performed duplicative services and oversight.
    But the McKinsey consultants had also collected data that exposed how the military services themselves were spending princely sums to hire hordes of defense contractors.
    For example, the Army employed 199,661 full-time contractors, according to a confidential McKinsey report obtained by The Post. That alone exceeded the combined civil workforce for the Departments of State, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development.
    The average cost to the Army for each contractor that year: $189,188, including salary, benefits and other expenses.
    The Navy was not much better. It had 197,093 contractors on its payroll. On average, each cost $170,865.
    In comparison, the Air Force had 122,470 contractors. Each cost, on average, $186,142.
    Taking fire
    Meantime, the backlash to the $125 billion savings plan intensified.
    On Feb. 6, 2015, board members briefed Frank Kendall III, the Pentagon’s chief weapons-buyer. Kendall’s operations were a major target of the study; he oversaw an empire of purchasing agents and contractors that were constantly under attack from Congress for cost overruns and delays.
    Kendall put up a stiff fight. He challenged the board’s data and strenuously objected to the conclusion that his offices were overstaffed.
    “Are you trying to tell me we don’t know how to do our job?” he said, according to two participants in the meeting. He said he needed to hire 1,000 more people to work directly under him, not fewer.
    “If you don’t believe me, call in an auditor,” replied Klepper, the board’s restructuring expert. “They’ll tell you it’s even worse than this.”
    In an interview, Kendall acknowledged he was “very disappointed” by the board’s work, which he criticized as “shallow” and “very low on content.” He said the study had ignored efforts by his agencies to become more efficient, and he accused the board of plucking the $125 billion figure out of thin air.
    “It was essentially a ballpark, made-up number,” he said.
    Still, Kendall knew that lawmakers might view the study as credible. Alarmed, he said, he went to Work and warned that the findings could “be used as a weapon” against the Pentagon.
    “If the impression that’s created is that we’ve got a bunch of money lying around and we’re being lazy and we’re not doing anything to save money, then it’s harder to justify getting budgets that we need,” Kendall said.
    More ominously, board members said they started to get the silent treatment from the Pentagon’s highest ranks.
    Briefings that had been scheduled for military leaders in the Tank — the secure conference room for the Joint Chiefs of Staff — were canceled. Worse, the board was unable to secure an audience with Carter, the new defense secretary.
    Stein, the board chairman, accused Carter of deliberately derailing the plan through inaction. “Unfortunately, Ash — for reasons of his own — stopped this,” he said in an interview.
    Peter Cook, a spokesman for Carter, said the Pentagon chief was busy dealing with “a long list of national security challenges.” He added that Work and other senior officials had already “concluded that the report, while well-intentioned, had limited value.”
    The fatal blow was struck in April. Just three months after Stein had been reappointed as board chairman, Carter replaced him with Michael Bayer, a business consultant who had previously served on the panel and clashed with Stein. Bayer declined to comment.
    A few weeks later, Klepper resigned from the board. The $125 billion savings plan was dead.
    In an interview, Tillotson, the Pentagon’s acting deputy chief management officer, called the board’s recommendations too ambitious and aggressive. “They, perhaps, underestimated the degree of difficulty we have in doing something that in the commercial sector would seem to be very easy to do.”
    Yet he acknowledged that its overall strategy for scaling back the bureaucracy was sound and that, given more time, it would be possible to realize huge savings.
    “If we had a longer timeline, yes, it would be a reasonable approach,” he said. “You might get there eventually.”
    Ending the debate
    Frustration, however, persisted in some corners over the Pentagon’s unwillingness to tackle the inefficiency and waste documented by the study.
    On June 2, 2015, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus delivered a speech at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. He complained that 20 percent of the defense budget went to the Fourth Estate — the defense agencies that provide support to the armed forces — and called it “pure overhead.”
    He singled out the Defense Finance and Accounting Service and the Defense Logistics Agency, which together employ about 40,000 people, as egregious examples.
    When a reporter in the audience asked whether he thought the agencies should be abolished, Mabus resisted the temptation to say yes.
    “Nice try on getting me into deep trouble,” he replied.
    But trouble arrived in Mabus’s email the next day.
    “Ray, before you publicly trash one of the agencies that reports through me I’d really appreciate a chance to discuss it with you,” wrote Kendall, the Pentagon’s chief weapons-buyer, whose management portfolio included the Defense Logistics Agency.
    He said that if Mabus had a complaint, he should raise it directly with their mutual bosses, Carter and Work, and copied the email to both.
    In his interview with The Post, Kendall said he was “completely blindsided” by the Navy secretary’s criticism, “so I sent him what I thought under the circumstances was a pretty polite note.”
    Mabus did not back down. In an emailed retort to Kendall, he referred to the ill-fated Defense Business Board study.
    “I did not say anything yesterday that I have not said both publicly . . . and privately inside this building,” he said. “There have been numerous studies, which I am sure you are aware of, pointing out excessive overhead.”
    That prompted a stern intervention from Work.
    “Ray, please refrain from taking any more public pot shots,” Work said in an email. “I do not want this spilling over into further public discourse.”

    Read More
  • VIDEO: Hear what TRUMP says about JESUS

    06/Dec/2016 // 3010 Viewers


    PARIS, DECEMBER 6, 2016: (DGW) THE US President-elect is doubtless a man of many parts. Trying to understand him amounts to trying to contract several contradictions and, finally, arrive at a tingling melody. He is one man whose words and actions are not only deeply philosophical but rousingly challenging.

    In the video below, Trump talks about the Christian Jesus who he says is the source of his daily sustenance , someone he can think about for security and confidence , someone he could revere in terms of bravery and in terms of courage  and that he considers the Christian religion so important. He talked lots more about the Lord Jesus. 

    As one who is deeply religious spoke volumes for his stance against gay rights which he says must stop throughout the US on assumption of office.

    Watch video below:


    Read More
  • BREAKING: NYC MAYOR DE BLASIO Heads for jail for supplying fake IDS to illegal immigrants

    06/Dec/2016 // 1652 Viewers

    Is this cop the envy of every NYPD officer?
    Here’s a meme I saw on the Internet a few days ago:
    Yet, no matter how simple and true the point is about the importance of voter I.D. liberals in America have an obsession with demonizing anyone who tries to promote voter I.D. policies.
    And make no mistake: this is an almost exclusively American problem. As John Fund explains at The National Review, virtually all other modern nations, and a vast majority of everyday Americans, are in favor of voter I.D. regulations.
    Polls have shown that voter-ID laws and similar measures enjoy great popular support all over the world. In the U.S., … support crossed all demographic lines — 66 percent of independents, 60 percent of Democrats, 65 percent of African Americans, and 64 percent of Hispanics. … “I think that party leaders have tried to make this a Republican versus Democrat issue,” former Democratic state representative Jon Brien, who shepherded Rhode Island’s 2011 voter-ID law through a Democratic legislature, told the Pew Center’s Stateline news service. “It’s not. It’s simply a good-government issue.”
    Think about it: a meddling woman like Jill Stein is suing for recounts in three states that Trump won just so we can confirm the “integrity” of our voting system; yet she vehemently rejects voter I.D. requirements as racist, elitist, classist, etc. It makes no sense, which is why liberals politicians have to keep it out of the public eye.


    Alan Schulkin, Commissioner of Board of Elections in New York and lifelong Democrat, finally got disgusted by the rampant voter fraud he witnessed under Mayor Bill de Blasio. He resigned from the Board of Elections after this footage was posted online.
    Eventually, though, the truth will out, and now De Blasio is feeling the heat for his hypocritical and massively illegal I.D. policies in New York City.
    According to VDare.com, “since 2007, various States and municipalities have been issuing identification cards and driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. New York City has been doing so since 2015.”
    I think the only reason NYC was so late to the game on this is because it’s usually under greater scrutiny. That, or they already had successful traditions of ‘managing’ illegal aliens (i.e., exploiting them for votes) which didn’t require I.D. After all, isn’t requiring I.D. “racist”?!
    At some point, though, I.D. documents seemed like a good idea to issue “to aid and abet illegal aliens to remain in the United States,” VDare writes. The problem is that issuing I.D. to harbor illegal aliens “is a violation of Title 8 of the United States Code, Section 1324.” As a result, New York City and the elected officials, officers, and employees who administer that program–including Mayor De Blasio!–are “individually criminally liable for each and every ID card issued to an illegal alien.”
    Now that their bet on Hillary’s victory has gone up in smoke, these crafty New Yorkers are trying to send the I.D.’s up in smoke, too. But this is just to open another can of worms.
    As the VDare writer explains, “New York City does not have a policy of quickly destroying records in any other agency or department”. So they’re not even allowed to do this according to their own state laws.

    Worse yet, if they do proceed with destroying the illegal alien I.D.’s, it is further illegal to destroy records “to prevent those records from being obtained in an investigation by the Federal government.” (Unless your name is Hillary Clinton, that is.)  Any destruction of those records held by New York City will constitute separate criminal offenses (including violation of Title 18 USC 1519, Destruction of Evidence, 18 USC 1510, Obstruction of Criminal Investigators, 18 USC 1505, Obstruction of Federal Proceedings, and 18 USC 1512, Tampering).

    Let’s take stock: not only is De Blasio and much of the New York political establishment guilty of potentially thousands of felony counts for issuing these I.D.’s, but they will be guilty of thousands more if they destroy them! A classic catch-22.

    Not surprisingly, the NYC City Council member who wrote the illegal I.D. law, Carlos Menchaca, has admitted that the law was written to allow for the destruction of the I.D.s (even though allowing that is illegal). “Protecting it from a possible Republican president was just one of the reasons” for the provision to destroy the I.D.’s, Menchaca said.

    This is a devastating admission by Menchaca [email him], because it provides evidence of intent in any investigation. The new Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, “now has all the evidence he needs to charge NYC and its employees with multiple violations of Federal law.”

    Sessions Has Voiced Displeasure With the FBI Investigation of Hillary Clinton

    As a result, if Mayor Bill De Blasio “thought he had problems with the Trump Administration, those problems just got worse.” Leaving aside any other legal infractions he might be guilty of, this illegal I.D. scam is enough to make De Blasio “the first person subject to arrest and prosecution for destruction of evidence, not to mention the harboring of illegal aliens.”

    At this point, the ball is in Trump’s court. Once Trump is in office, he and Sessions will be playing legal “doubles tennis” against NYC and De Blasio, who have laid down a challenge to the incoming President and Attorney General. Is it any wonder why Trump is moving his “HQ” to New York instead of D.C.? He wants to clean house in his own neighborhood first, then “deal from strength” on his home turf to do the same to D.C.

    Share this article to inform and inspire your friends and family!

    Read More
  • Russia must stop bombing women, children in Syria - Kerry

    06/Feb/2016 // 292 Viewers


    WASHINGTON (AFP) – US Secretary of State John Kerry urged Russia Friday to implement a ceasefire in Syria, saying its bombing campaign was killing women and children in large numbers and “has to stop.”
    “Russia has indicated to me very directly they are prepared to do a ceasefire,” Kerry told reporters, fresh from a trip to Europe focused on resolving the five-year Syrian conflict. “The Iranians confirmed in London just a day and a half ago they will support a ceasefire now.”
    “We will have a much better sense in the next few days of how serious each party is,” added Kerry, a day after he implicitly blamed Russia’s bombing campaign against the Syrian opposition for the collapse of peace talks in Geneva this week.
    Moscow, Damascus’s main ally, has stepped up bombing around the Syrian city of Aleppo in recent days, facilitating a government offensive that has forced tens of thousands of civilians to flee to the Turkish border.
    Kerry accused the Russian military of using “dumb bombs.”
    “They are not precision bombs, and there are civilians, including women and children, being killed in large numbers as a consequence,” he said, during a joint news conference with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos.
    Russian planes are also targeting hospitals and returning to bomb people rescuing those wounded in earlier air strikes, he added.
    “This has to stop”, Kerry said.
    “The Russians have made some constructive ideas about how a ceasefire in fact could be implemented,” he added. “But if it’s just talk for the sake of talk in order to continue the bombing, nobody is going to accept that.”
    Kerry’s comments represent a clear shift in tone following a months-long attempt to cooperate with Russia over a way out of the Syrian crisis.
    Washington has accused Moscow of being “partly” responsible for torpedoing peace talks in Geneva on Wednesday that had barely begun.
    The US and Russia were chiefly responsible for the resumption of diplomatic efforts to end the war.
    After meetings in Vienna and New York in late 2015, regional and global powers within the International Syria Support Group — including Washington, Moscow, Riyadh and Tehran — are to meet in Munich next week to discuss a ceasefire in a war that has killed some 260,000 people and generated millions of refugees.
    The diplomatic process was set in motion in December by a UN Security Council resolution passed by its 15 members, including Moscow.
    © 2016 AFP

    Read More
  • Man bags life jail for killing wife and posting bloodied remains on Facebook

    06/Feb/2016 // 288 Viewers


    PARIS, FEBRUARY 6, 2016: (DGW) - Derek Medina, 33 has been sentenced to life in prison by a Maimi Court in the USA for killing his wife and posting her bloodied remains on Facebook.

    Derek in the caption had confessed that he shot the deceased. The incident, DailyGlobeWatch gathered took place in their home in August last year when Derek fired eight shots on his wife Jennifer Alfonso aged 27 who he said had threatened to kill him with a knife.

    Derek further said he  only acted in self-defence, but his claims fell flat before the jury which went ahead and slammed a life sentence on him.

    The sensational murder of Jenniffer attracted attention and became a hot potato having admitted and posting the picture of her remains on Facebook before surrendering himself to police.

    Below is the caption: “I’m going to prison or death sentence for killing my wife, love you guys, miss you guys, take care Facebook people''. “You will see me in the news my wife was punching me and I am not going to stand anymore with the abuse so I did what I did I hope u understand me.”

    Read More
  • Real Democracy in action as Trump calls for 'careful' border checks after Muslims' travel ban suffers setback

    06/Feb/2017 // 1602 Viewers


    PARIS, FEBRUAR 6, 2017: (DGW)AS the travel ban suffers setback after a federal judge blocked the executive order, President Donald Trump has told    US border officials to check people entering America "very carefully", as his travel ban remains suspended, BBC reports.

    The president criticised the courts for "making the job very difficult", and should take the blame if something happened.

    Earlier, BBC had reported that the federal appeals court on Saturday rejected the Trump administration's request to reinstate the ban.

    The ban, affecting people from seven mainly-Muslim countries, was blocked by a federal judge on Friday.

    This means that Mr Trump's directive will remain suspended and visa holders Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will be allowed to enter the US until the full case has been heard.

    The White House and two US states challenging the ban have been given a deadline of Monday to present more arguments.

    Read More
  • BREAKING: ASSANGE Just told CNN they have 48 hours until WIKILEAKS destroys them

    06/Jan/2017 // 1621 Viewers

    He is back with a vengeance!
    2017 is going to be a big year for Conservatives and those tired of Democrats ruining this great Nation. WikiLeaks single handedly dismantled the Clinton campaign and exposed more corruption than we ever imaged.
    Following the election, many have wondered if WikiLeaks and Julian Assange will quietly go away or keep fighting for justice. If you wanted them to keep fighting to expose corruption, you are in for a treat as WikiLeaks has selected their first target of the year: CNN.
    They are tired of the disgusting behavior of the mainstream media and they threatening to sue CNN now for their inflammatory remarks.
    WikiLeaks has issued a 48 hour warning to CNN and if they do not retract all of their inflammatory statements, videos, and article, they will take the mega media corporation to court and sue them for defamation.
    CNN initially thought they could just issue an apology and that would satisfy Assange. Think again.
    WikiLeaks also argued that they will expose CNN outside of the courtroom, too, if they continue to play these games.
    Photo published for CNN apologizes to Assange after commentator calls him ‘pedophile'
    One thing remains clear: WikiLeaks doesn’t plan to stop after derailing Hillary Clinton and her team of cronies. CNN is merely their first target, and plenty more will surely follow.
    They’ve put CNN on notice and they have 48 hours to air a one hour special confessing to their lies or they are in big trouble. If they or anyone think WikiLeaks are bluffing or incapable, ask Hillary Clinton how powerful Assange and his team can be.
    Do you want to see WikiLeaks expose and bankrupt CNN for their years of lies and corruption, especially during this past presidential election?
    Leave us your thoughts below and share this if you think that they should!


    Read More