Does Trump Work For Putin Directly? The FBI Has Been Asking Since May of 2017.

Does Trump work for Putin directly? The FBI's been looking into it- and so have we.

One of the biggest bombshells yet in the Russiagate case was dropped on America this evening. As the #TrumpShutdown entered its third week and the first missing paycheck came up for millions of Americans, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has announced that it has been pursuing an investigation into whether Donald Trump was working for Vladimir Putin directly, either knowingly or unwittingly.

The New York Times reported late Friday that federal investigators are said to have become so alarmed by Trump’s conduct after he fired former FBI director James Comey that they at once opened a probe into whether the orange infant in the White House has been secretly working with Russia, all along, for Putin himself.

According to sources considered reliable by that venerable newspaper, counterintelligence officials were assigned to the case.

Let’s talk about that word for a minute, counterintelligence. Google Dictionary gives an excellent working definition. It refers to activities designed to prevent or thwart spying, intelligence gathering, and sabotage by an enemy or other foreign entity. Therefore, counterintelligence agents are only assigned to cases serious enough to be considered a risk to national security.

In other words, this is earth-shaking beyond all belief for Donald Trump.

Russia is and has for much of our history been the chief global rival of America. For our president to be in the actual employ of their president is clearly a worst-case scenario. We’ve been saying this for years, of course.

Now the big boys are saying it too.

For a counterintelligence committee to be examining not only whether Trump’s actions were undermining national security, but also whether he was working at the behest of the Kremlin, is clearly of the most phenomenal importance.

On Rachel Maddow‘s Friday night television show, AM Joy Reid of MSNBC was standing in, and hosted Former Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Frank Figliuzzi for an interview. He said that the FBI would only even consider a decision of this magnitude without having evidence of the most utterly compelling nature, something on the level of taped conversations and the like.

Trump has been screaming for years that the whole Russian collusion story is nothing but fake news, and his sheer vehemence gave him some early successes in getting people to stop using the word.

Collusion is back on the table to stay, after this.

In related news, it came out this week that Paul Manafort broke the terms of his plea agreement in regards to his actively sharing and exchanging data from the Trump campaign with his Russian handlers. Turns out that $19 million dollars Manafort owed to Oleg Deripaska, Putin’s buddy the aluminum oligarch, came back to haunt him after all.

Just last week Time tracked down the man Deripaska used to get Manafort to pay up. “He owed us a lot of money,” Victor Boyarkin told Time. “And he was offering ways to pay it back … I came down on him hard.”

As much as Manafort is a detestable character, what does it say about America, that Russians can come over here and push our people around like this with impugnity? This has to be stopped at once. It is our opinion that the Russian Mafia, the feared ROC, should be pored over and removed from its influence from every scrap of our fair nation. Not even the garbage should be left over for them- aluminum cans are worth billions! Just ask Oleg Deripaska.

Manafort had a good friend from his glory days fixing Ukrainian elections for Putin, Konstantin Kilimnik, pictured here in this photograph, not far from Tad Devine of the Bernie Sanders campaign.

Top consultant to the Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign Tad Devine, hanging out with Paul Manafort and Konstatin Kilimnik.
Top consultant to the Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign Tad Devine, hanging out with Paul Manafort and Konstatin Kilimnik.

Kilimnik, a shadowy and truant figure long believed to hold many pieces of this puzzle, is known by the nickname of Manafort’s Manafort. He is connected to Russian intelligence services like the GRU, which also hosted Fancy Bear and Guccifer 2.0, the hackers who got Julian Assange the hacked DNC emails that he dumped on us through Wikileaks.

The Wikileaks succeeded beyond their wildest imaginations.

Nevertheless, the Bernie Bots and Bros rioted in the streets of Philadelphia over minor written exchanges proving that Debbie Wassermann-Schultz and Bernie did not like each other. It was the biggest single coup of the Trump campaign’s whole summer, and also the night that Russiagate became something tangible.

The Russians were said to be overjoyed. The emails themselves were played up so much by Trump and his base that by the time they were released, it did not matter what was in them, and it turned out to be nothing to an extent that was simply huge.

The information pipeline that got all this done featured Manafort, his campaign deputy Rick Gates, and Kilimnik funneling many files full of Trump campaign information to bring back to Deripaska, and received many back in return. It was reciprocal and totally coordinated. Manafort knew what he was doing to America every last step of the way.

Deripaska’s not that much of a political guy, but he does have one big interest in giving Trump a hand. He is extremely close to Putin and relies on him to keep his personal fortune. All of Russia works and eats at Putin’s order; he has more control than Stalin did over there.

Even Fox News hosts have been admitting that what Manafort did with the Russians constitutes collusion. There is no doubt about it, and this is, in its own way, even more damning for Trump than the Mueller investigation.

In the last analysis, Manafort was not chosen because of his consummate skill or charming personal characteristics. He was chosen because he was convenient, due to the money he owed for those Cayman Island hotels he burned up Deripaska’s friendship for. Many email exchanges between the two indicate Manafort’s frequent and pleading queries as to whether or not the two of them were “good”. He had that Boyarkin ogre ready to pick his bones, he was scared, and he’d been their guy so long by then that he felt there was no turning back.

So he made a devil’s bargain to sell out his country, in order to save his behind. That is the most rotten and cowardly choice that anyone can ever make. Manafort’s name will be reviled throughout all of human history, and as with the Benedict Arnolds and Vidkun Quislings of history, his name will be held up as an example of greed and cowardice to serve mankind’s final generations with a lesson that resounds with eternal importance.

Going forward, we must reexamine the entire concept of treason. We should view the Cold War as a conflict which never ended, but rather shifted forms and chosen new battlefields in the virtual realms of politics. In that scenario, Trump would be a traitor by every metric, and this is the most truthful narrative.

Advertisements

Bernie Attacks Obama For MLK’s 50th! Calls Democrats Failures.

#NeverBernie

Bernie Sanders is at it again. This guy never quits. He’s like a zombie on the Walking Dead.

This time, he has triggered a backlash by verbally savaging Barack Obama on the 50th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King.

The senator for Vermont went after the first black US President as he branded the Democratic Party a “failure”.

Here’s Bernie, speaking in Jackson, Mississippi.

“The business model, if you like, of the Democratic Party for the last 15 years or so has been a failure,’ said the Vermont Senator.

“People sometimes don’t see that because there was a charismatic individual named Barack Obama. He was obviously an extraordinary candidate, brilliant guy. But beyond that reality…”

Sanders’ comments were immediately called out as being “patronizing” and “deplorable”, but he wasn’t finished yet.

He then went on to say that Democrats had lost a record number of legislative seats.

Unbelievable! Even the likes of Corey Lewandowski are waxing biblical about how many seats we’ve taken back from the GOP since Trump was elected.

“The Democrats are highly motivated,” Lewandowski told the crowd at Dolphin Aviation.

“They are winning elections in places where they shouldn’t. We’ve seen them win state House races in Wisconsin. We’ve seen them win big mayor’s races in New Hampshire. Fifty seats have already changed hands from the Republicans to the Democrats since Donald Trump was elected.”

Politifact points out that as of February the actual number of recaptured seats was 39, but the trend is clear as day- to everyone except Bernie Sanders, the perpetual sour grape.

He’s always there to run down anything we do and to make light of all our accomplishments. That’s what you do when you haven’t got anything of your own.

Next time we need a post office renamed, Senator Sanders, we’ll give you a call.

In reality, of course, it’s Bernie’s pets that can’t win an election, and why? Because his endorsement is like the kiss of death!

Just in the first few post-election months, Sanders formally endorsed candidates in many different races.

Keith Ellison for chair of the Democratic National Committee, James Thompson for U.S. Representative, Tom Perriello for the position of VA Governor, Heath Mello for Omaha Mayor, Steve Zimmer and Imelda Padilla for Los Angeles School Board, as well as Rob Quist for US Representative.

Every candidate lost, and that trend has continued. Jon Ossoff of Georgia nearly won, and might have, if Sanders hadn’t waited until the last minute to endorse him, and had he not sneeringly referred to him as “no true progressive.”

The guy was 29, and had never held office before. Just how much chance had he received, to make any progress?

Bernie, you didn’t even vote until you were 40! And that was for yourself!

 In addition, a group created to continue the progress Sanders made in the 2016 primaries called “Our Revolution” endorsed 25 candidates that lost their 2017 elections and only endorsed 12 winning candidates, giving the group a 32 percent success rating.
And yet he wants to point the finger, labeling us as unsuccessful. If that’s true, Bernie, then why have real Democrats kicked the can with your boys, all the way around the whole country?
That fact always seems to get ignored, though, as do most facts in the wonky world of Bernieland.
Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat. It all comes down to that. Everything he does makes perfect sense, once you’ve considered that he isn’t on our side. This attack on President Obama, who gave us the best eight years that anyone in the world could have, is certainly disgusting. But it’s hardly the first time.
In 2016, the primary started out well enough. Both sides were respectful and willing to dialogue. Both agreed that they had more in common than not, and that the entire thing basically amounted to a quarrel between family.
We had a passionate, issues-focused, ideologically driven primary. It exemplified all that is right with the American political system. Everything was going fine.

Then Bernie started losing.

April was the turning month. On the seventh, he reviled Hillary Clinton in a speech in Philadelphia, calling her “unqualified” to be President, a blatantly sexist and stupid thing to say. It drew him a monstrous backlash from across the country, and from that day forward things began to change.

By July it was too late. His overzealous devotees rioted in the streets of Philadelphia, over a lot of nothing contained in criminally acquired documents dumped by the Russian mouthpiece Wikileaks, and the rift thus torn was permanent.
It has continued to widen, ever since.
So-called progressives have continued getting together all over the country, hijacking local chapters of the Democratic Party. They are attacking our candidates everywhere.

There has never been a set of midterms so crucial. Everyone on every side knows this. The best chance we’ve got of getting rid of Donald Trump before 2020, except maybe for the 25th Amendment, is to turn the Congress blue.

In spite of all this, there’s a certain element in the party that refuses to care, and insists instead on fighting their own people.

When Bernie Sanders reviled Barack Obama the other day, he made it clear he’s still wanting to lead the charge. Not for ideological reasons, but because he’s a sore loser. We’ll never be able to please him and he won’t come to terms with us.

Yesterday Paul Waldman wrote something in the Washington Post that sums the whole thing up perfectly.
“No matter how much the party moves to the left — and it has moved a great deal in the last few years — there will never be a point where Sanders says, “I’m really pleased with where the Democratic Party is right now.”
“Because once he said that, there would cease to be any need for Bernie Sanders to exist.”

The Betrayal of Roger Stone-Guccifer 2.0 Is A Russian Agent.

His boss is a crook.

It is the opinion of Millennial Democrats that Roger Stone has finally crossed the line.

He has now made himself into something much worse than merely dishonest. Finally, he is making Lee Atwater proud.

Recently it was discovered that the hacker who claimed responsibility for the Wikileaks release of those DNC emails last summer, Guccifer 2.0, is a Russian intelligence officer whose name and location are both known to Robert Mueller.

Roger Stone had always been very proud of his friendship with Guccifer. He has boasted about it many times. He wrote on August 14, 2016, “Delighted you are reinstated. F–k the State and their MSM lackeys.”

Stone also published an article on Breitbart News, saying, “It doesn’t seem to be the Russians that hacked the DNC, but instead a hacker who goes by the name of Guccifer 2.0.”

But just recently, the amazing Guccifer made a mistake. He failed to activate the VPN that he’d been using to mask his location from American authorities, and they found him. And now, all of a sudden, Roger Stone has begun backpedaling.

Stone recently made a statement, saying: “To reiterate, I myself had no contacts or communications with the Russian State, Russian Intelligence or anyone fronting for them or acting as intermediaries for them. None. Nada. Zilch.”

Not long after that one, he reversed himself completely.

“Did in fact have a short and innocuous Direct Message exchange with Guccifer 2.0.”

Stone also had what he insists is a “Perfectly Legal” back channel to Wikileaks criminal Julian Assange. He sent a tweet out right before Wikileaks dumped the DNC emails the supporters of Bernie Sanders rioted in the streets over, saying “Trust me, it will soon be the Podesta’s time in the barrel.

An independent observer will remember that “time in the barrel” is the exact same term he used when he cooked up a scandal with Fox News host Leeann Tweeden to hurt the former Democratic Senator Al Franken from Minnesota, the other big time he got some dirt from his KGB friend Guccifer.

Criminally acquiring dirt and boasting. This is the M.O. of Roger Stone.

That was all over the Roy Moore scandals, which were an inescapable disaster for them. They knew that Al Franken would be accused of sexual assault hours before the story actually broke.

“Let’s just say Sen. Franken’s time in the barrel is about to come,” Stone told The Daily Caller over text early Thursday morning, hours before Leeann Tweeden came out with her claims.

Stone did not care to elaborate to TheDC exactly how he knew Tweeden was going to come out with her claims. But he did. And that means it was plotted out.

The news that Roger Stone spearheaded the effort to get rid of Al Franken last year is not new. We already know what kind of a guy he is. Roger Stone is the perpetual wannabe, the crony hatchetman who’s always trying to prove how tough he is.

The news that one of the women said to be accusing Franken of sexual harassment in Minnesota wasn’t even talking about Franken is new, but just the same. It’s the latest in a long line of sneaky and dishonest political moves in the career of a guy who made his bones being sneaky and dishonest.

Many have wondered why Stone isn’t already in jail. He’s been pulling this crap since the 70’s. He’s got a huge picture of Richard Nixon’s face tattooed on his back. He’s always been a thug who walks close to the criminal line, but he’s always managed before not to cross it.

That day has now come and gone.

Stone has repeatedly rejected the notion that it would be treasonous if President Trump‘s campaign coordinated with WikiLeaks to release emails from rival Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

“I’ve been accused of being a dirty trickster. There’s one trick that’s not in my bag: That’s treason,” Stone, a longtime GOP operative and informal adviser to Trump, said on MSNBC’s “Meet The Press Daily.”

“For it to be a treasonous act, Assange would have to provably be a Russian asset, and WikiLeaks would have to be a Russian front. And I don’t think that’s the case,” he continued, referring to the founder of the anti-secrecy group.

One is not visually taxed, to imagine the smug look on his face as he emphasized the word “provably”.

Proof was always the key here. We’ve all figured for a long time. Now we know for sure. This is one more example of the Russian/Republican alliance that we’re seeing the outline of more clearly, now that the dust of 2016 is finally settling.

At any rate, the chances of Stone escaping this without punishment aren’t good. He’d been relying on former Trump staffer Sam Nunberg to protect him, but that guy suffered a major malfunction earlier this month. It was pretty funny, actually. It provided some of the best laughs we’ve had since they fired Spicey.

There’s a lesson to us all here. If you try hard enough to get yourself into trouble, you are bound eventually to succeed. For Roger Stone, that lesson is going to get learned the hard way.

At this stage of the game, it is really just a matter of time until Robert Mueller sends him to slip-and-fall school. Here’s hoping it’s sooner rather than later.

The Tangled Tale of Tulsi Gabbard- Progressive Phony.

The giant circus that the 2016 election cycle became, and the second Dark Ages that has followed it, is a time that’s seen a great many attempts to effect  the altering of the meaning of time- honored positives. Words like “Facts”, “Truth, and Justice” have all had their turn in the mud bath. However, when it comes to sheer brazen abuse of a term, “Progressive” may have taken the deepest dive of all- especially in the matter of the Hawaiian Representative, Tulsi Gabbard.

Hence, the old Sanders wing of the party is suddenly quite vocal about selecting as their champion Tulsi Gabbard, a politician who has come to embodify misguided attacks by so-called progressives on the so-called liberal elite. In point of fact, however, the evidence indicates quite otherwise. Tulsi Gabbard does not act like a progressive darling

Her voting record, world view, and connections resemble much more closely a resume, tailor- made to be both barely acceptable to the leaders of the Democratic Party, and a perfect Libertarian plant. The organization Progressive Punch is a searchable database of Congressional voting records, from the perspective of the far left. They gave Bernie Sanders an A, for his lifetime support of progressive causes. Tulsi Gabbard got an F. 

The tangled tale of Tulsi Gabbard makes most sense, if you consider the possibility she might really be a carefully cultivated mole, used to leak data to our enemies. It would be clear that she makes for a powerful pivotal point strategically. The far right has often been able to use her voice and power to manipulate the far left. Stirred up radicals often end up signing off on very bad ideas. Anytime they need their opposites to go along with some plot they’re cooking up, they give the job to Tulsi. Her views are often much more in line with the conservative end of our spectrum, as exemplified by her trip to Syria recently and her unending support of Assad. 

Take the DNC mole. President Obama admitted that he had no intelligence on how Wikileaks got ahold of the Podesta emails whose release caused the supporters of Bernie Sanders to riot in the streets of Philadelphia. But a man named Chris Murray, a former British ambassador, had claimed that days earlier, a high ranking DNC member, said to be “disgusted” by the supposed favoring of Hillary Clinton by the DNC, had actually been the one to leak those emails, to him.  At this time, Tulsi Gabbard held the position of Deputy DNC Chairman. She resigned in a huff. 

Then, all of a sudden, the hacking started, and sensitive data ended up in the hands of the Russian-controlled WikiLeaks. She knew the access codes and she knew the setup.  She had a clear motive for wanting material on Clinton leaked. She has had a long-standing love affair with Syrian president Assad and with Putin, and reviled Clinton’s Syria policy with all her might, but to oppose her flat out, as a Republican, would have been suicidal due to the political climate of her home state Hawaii. This must have made the endorsement of Bernie Sanders a cheap and lightweight solution.

Neither her policies nor her personnel suggest any affiliation with the ideology of Bernie Sanders- but by endorsing someone with whom she largely disagreed on policy (and didn’t have to worry about winning), she won the unyielding adulation of his followers. And by meeting with Donald Trump on her own initiative, mere weeks after his upset of Hillary Clinton, she assured herself the undying love of the #NeverHillary branch of the Sanders wing. 


One angry supporter of Bernie Sanders wrote the following nonsense on 7/23/17, on a thread discovered on Facebook. 
“No REAL progressive is gonna vote for more of the Clinton style, corporate special interest, Big Bank donor loving, false progressive garbage. Yet…here are the Democrats showing us early on that they haven’t changed. Ready for a repeat of 2016? Personally…I will work to expose and destroy the hopes of any candidate that the DNC tries to ram down our throats again by using Super Delegates and closed Primaries…and any candidate who remained silent against the DNC’s attack on our Democracy by rigging the election against Bernie Sanders. #Sanders/Gabbard2020 #Gabbard/Turner2020
This same man later went on to beg and plead for unity among the former supporters of Sanders- so that they will have greater success in attacking not Republicans, but Democrats. Mentioned at the spearhead of this assault on their fellows in the left, is always one name- Tulsi Gabbard. 

Ironically, Gabbard is a member of the Democratic Party. She has been the United States Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district since 2013. She was also a vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee until February 28, 2016, when she resigned to endorse Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary. 


This primary was one of the most acrimonious and bitter races in history, and no one did more to make it so than did this Hawaiian representative. The real question, however, is why? What would make it so appealing to someone, to consistently act against the interests of their own party? Wouldn’t that mean they were acting against their own interests, too? 


Merriam- Webster defines the term “political operative” as a person who does secret work for a government or political organization. And no one can deny that the resume of Ms. Gabbard would be ideal for one. Although her personality and policies are very much against the grain of the usual progressive agenda, there can be no doubt that on the surface, she is a diverse and fascinating candidate. She is the first American Samoan elected to Congress. She was the first elected Hindu (she took her oath of office on the Bhagavad- Gita) and one of two female combat veterans to join Congress in 2013. At that time, at age 31, she was also the youngest female member of the Congress.

So far, so good. And yet, for all these fantastic leftist qualifications, she gives the Democratic Party more trouble than does many a Republican. There are several reasons for this. Gabbard often sounds more like a hawkish Republican than a potential future Democratic leader. She repeatedly blasted Obama for failing to talk about “Islamic extremism”– a phrase very similar to the pet phrase of Donald Trump. 

Perhaps we can find a clue into the peculiar politics of this enigmatic woman, by examining her father. Even upon taking the most cursory glance at him, Hawaii state Senator, former Republican and anti-gay activist Mike Gabbard is a man who has had to do a lot of reforming. The elder Gabbard has made a career out of evasion. With reporters, with constituents, and with pretty much everyone except his daughter and his old cronies from the days of Chris Butler’s (Jagad Guru Siddhaswarupananda Paramahamsa, also known as #SwamiSalami) Hare Krishna cult. 

Of course, it’s predictable that he would be wary of the media. Even Googling “Mike Gabbard” will lead you to a seemingly endless series of negative stories. It seems clear there are many questions that he doesn’t want to answer. Specifically, he has been reticent on those queries concerning his ties to the aforementioned swami. The Butler cult has built a shadowy and global organization that according to some numbers in the tens of thousands, and the Gabbards are its most public and conspicuous members. 

This splinter group has given rise to a number of political candidates over the past 30 years. And two of Tulsi’s most important campaign staffers came from her father’s organization’ . Those questions must be especially touchy during election seasons, when much of his political support and money comes from Christian conservatives. 

No one should have to be held accountable for the political views of their parents. But Tulsi Gabbard’s political connections to her father go far beyond the family relationship. Despite her recent claims to socially-progressive views, the pattern established by examining her staffers and donors makes much more sense when viewed as a conservative family network than the product of more regular Democratic fundraising efforts.

In fact, according to one list of major contributors to the Tulsi Gabbard campaign, published by DailyKos in 2012, Democratic donors were actually exceptions on this list.  Many of these people have not donated to campaigns other than Mike Gabbard’s Congressional campaign, or Richard Reed’s Senate campaign, both as Republicans. Reed’s Senate campaign was allegedly connected to both the Gabbards’ and to Butler’s religious group. 

The plot continues to thicken and grow stranger. A website called the Cult Education Institute has a thread on Tulsi Gabbard and her activities and connections with Chris Butler that is literally hundreds of pages long, and provides links to a stultifying wealth of articles and other information. It should be, and is, pointed out that much of it is unverifiable. However, a great deal of it is very verifiable. And the sheer amount of it alone is suggestive. One would be hard-pressed to find another politician anywhere on the nation’s entire political coastline with such a bewildering array of data arraigned against them. The process of vetting candidates means that if you’ve got 100 pages of cult websites detailing your activities, you’re not going to make it through.

So what does it all mean? Where are they going, with all of this? A look at the politics of Hawaii might be of use in this context. The Democratic Party has had a long reign in Hawaii. Some of it comes from the popularity of the labor movement there in the 20th century, and the efforts of the Hawaii Democratic Party to push for greater inclusivity of the electoral base have traditionally been venerated. These factors have combined to earn Democrats near-complete control of the state legislature. But such an extended period of dominance has been resulting in increased voter apathy and increased factionalism within the Democratic Party of Hawaii.

This apathy is what led Mike Gabbard to try and challenge Democratic incumbent Ed Case in 2004. The elder Gabbard, known for his virulent anti-gay crusade in the 1990s, was attempting to overturn the status quo and win as a Repulican the race to represent Hawaii’s 2nd Congressional District. Unfortunately for him, that virtually no one could have won this way. At that time, a reporter for Honolulu Magazine requested an interview on the Chris Butler ties, which prompted the following rejoinder from Tulsi.
 “I smell a skunk,” she emailed back. “It’s clear to me that you’re acting as a conduit for … homosexual extremist supporters of Ed Case!”

The Democrats held the day, in 2004, and the star of Mike Gabbard was soon to wane, but that of his daughter was on the rise. And by 2013, the situation was very different. A schism was forming in the larger Democratic Party of America that was similar to the one in Hawaii. In the absence of a super-villain like one of the Bushes, Democrats were starting to divide into the camps now roughly labeled “liberal” and “progressive”. 
Around this same time, public awareness began growing toward an occuring trend that is still reshaping the entire scale of political spectrum. The far left began linking up with the far right, unbeknownst to nearly everyone, in a plot to manipulate the national dialectic into demanding a third party.

The left and the right have often historically converged when a common friend or foe suits both of their needs, usually for different reasons. This is known as the Horseshoe Theory, and as far as Congressional Democrats go, nobody seems to personify this more than Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard. We are in the middle of watching nothing less than a full-fledged attempt at a Libertarian revival.

On the Issues, a non-partisan informational website that rates and categorizes lawmakers and candidates, describes Tulsi Gabbard as a “Libertarian-Leaning Progressive” based on her voting record. 

Progressives are not the only ones in love with Tulsi Gabbard, and the way she constantly does numbers on Democrats. The Hill reported that it was Steve Bannon who arranged the November meeting between the new president-elect and the Hawaiian congresswoman. “He loves Tulsi Gabbard. Loves her,” a source familiar with Bannon’s thinking told The Hill. “Wants to work with her on everything.” 

Following their meeting, many speculated that Gabbard might receive an appointment in Trump’s cabinet, a move that appeared to excite many Trump supporters. It seems clear that this was rejected because of the toxic effect this would have had on Tulsi’s ability to get progressives to follow her blindly. That would have blown years of hard work. 

Her political record viewed as a whole gives one the eerie impression that it was tailor-made to be borderline acceptable to the Democratic hierarchy, while actually placing her much more closely in line with the Koch brothers brand of libertarianism, an experiment that failed back in the 1980’s, but whose adherents have never really abandoned. Googling “tulsi gabbard libertarian” will lead you to an entire galaxy of Libertarian newspapers, each singing her praises more fervently then the last.

BeingLibertarian.com eagerly lists us off all the reasons why Gabbard 2020 is a shoo-in, with a headline saying “Democrat Tulsi Gabbard Will Likely Be Next President. 

ALibertarianFuture.com also goes to great effort to laud Tulsi for her willingness to work against Democratic interests, in this article explaining that Libertarian hero Rand Paul introduced Tulsi Gabbard’s Stop Arming Terrorists Act in the Senate. 

Libertarian Christians sing her praises even louder, with these next words being a direct quote from the article. “Thank you, Mrs. Gabbard, for having the courage to tell the truth. I don’t have to share your ideology to share your human conscience. You are seeing through the double-bind foreign policy trap of our bipartisan war policy: Satan casting out Satan.
In today’s world, people who consider the United States satanic tend to be receiving money from Russia. But even aside from that, it makes you wonder how such a high-powered chameleon ended up with a reputation for being an uncompromising progressive. An examination of her recent polling trends reveal she’s doing very nearly as well among people of both parties, and this is extremely troubling given the extreme and total decency gap existing between them. The Democrats gave us Obama. The Republicans gave us W. Bush and Trump.

Jacobin Magazine, long regarded as one of the most professional and serious left wing magazines out there, recently did an article on all this. They gave it the headline, “Why Tulsi Gabbard isn’t your Friend.” And there it all was. The whole tangled web. Tulsi Gabbard is the all-purpose fishing lure being trotted out by the people so carelessly trying to realign the national power structure in their interest. She’s got something for everyone, and all of it is dishonest.

A Betrayal of Justice- No Pardon For Assange

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is reportedly being considered for a pardon by President Donald Trump.

On April 20, 2017, CNN revealed that US authorities have prepared charges and will seek the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for intelligence leaks dating all the way back to 2010. There’s a grocery list of charges, but the big one is espionage, for which he could receive the death penalty.

There’s a lot of evidence against him. In 2015 Google notified representatives of Wikileaks that they had handed over all their emails and metadata to the United States government. These notifications included a list of the charges that originated the warrant to Google, as well as that the secret grand jury intends to use them against WikiLeaks and likely Assange too.

Obviously, the very idea of a presidential pardon being granted to anyone who committed a series of crimes this serious, is being taken seriously in intelligence quarters, where it has caused a great deal of concern. This seems logical, since Trump has proven time and again that whether or not somebody likes him is the fundamental principle by which he evaluates their worth.

For example, Joe Arpaio was one of Trump’s campaign buddies, and he helped Trump get in. So when he got in trouble, Trump gave his buddy a pardon, in an offhand and cavalier manner that gives us every indication that he might do the same thing again.

It is the opinion of Millennial Democrats that it is very possible Assange may be pardoned as well, and for the same reason. In this case that would be unbelievably dangerous. Joe Arpaio is a deeply unpleasant man, but for all his flaws, he is not a spy or a traitor. Assange is a criminal of an entirely different order, the very worst kind. Dante reserved the lowest level of hell for traitors.

Trump has repeatedly offered praise for WikiLeaks, which recently requested a seat at the daily White House press briefings. He held up Assange as a source of higher value than our own intelligence community‘s efforts, when he cited his attempts to question their conclusion that Russia sought to influence last year’s presidential election.
What moral are people supposed to draw from that? Why on Earth would you believe Julian Assange before the intelligence community?”, asked Robert Deitz, a former senior counselor to the director of the CIA, and currently a professor at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government.

The initiative behind the Assange pardon concept comes from another man who has come under scrutiny for his ties to Russia, Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif). On Sean Hannity’s radio show Monday afternoon, Rohrabacher said he wanted to brief Trump about the contents of a meeting he recently had with Assange regarding the hacking of our election. The California congressman said that meeting was in the process of being set up.

Assange has been a criminal and a digital terrorist worldwide, of course, and for many years. He also is a suspected rapist who’s probably got plenty of STD’s.  Undoubtedly he has burned many. But it’s America who has been burned by him the worst.
Wikileaks, under his direction, has attempted to cut the throat of American intelligence time and time again. He has disrupted the functioning of our country in every way he’s been able to think up. He was involved in helping Edward Snowden, he leaked Chelsea Manning’s documents, he leaked the DNC emails last summer that led to the rioting of Bernie Sanders supporters and the resignation of Debbie Wasserman- Schultz– an event that is said to have astounded the Russians with glee. In short, he is an enemy.
Assange claims to be neutral, both in general and in regard to our 2016 election, but every single leak ever released by his outlet was designed to hurt Hillary Clinton and no one else. They would like us to believe in the absurd idea that is because no data was ever sent to WikiLeaks, about the Sanders, Trump, Stein, or Johnson’s campaign.
He recently “gave excuse after excuse” for refusing to publish a trove of documents related to corruption within the Russian government, according to chat logs obtained by Foreign Policy. That is little wonder. Assange has paid off for the Russians many times.
He was a member of the Chaos Computer Club, a European collective infamous for stealing secrets from governments and selling them to the KGB for drugs and money. Around this same time, in the 1980’s, Vladimir Putin was a young(and according to his old boss, extremely mediocre) lieutenant in the KGB. It is likely these two have known each other for a while.
Wikileaks, underneath the strategic command of Julian Assange, is an important part of a consistent and growing sequence of aggressive Russian attempts to rebuild at the expense of NATO and the United States. His involvement in Brexit, and in the French elections between Macron and Le Pen last year parallel his efforts in our election. He has also been active in attempting to undermine and hamstring Angela Merkel in Germany’s election this month. He is a willing and active participant in the worldwide far-right conspiracy being headed by Putin.
 Lawfare’s Nicholas Weaver calls this whole process the weaponization of Wikileaks.
“Wikileaks doesn’t seem to care that they are being used as a weapon by unknown parties, instead calling themselves a ‘library of mass education’. But the rest of us should,” Weaver writes.

The evidence so far suggests it’s a weapon that Putin has used to great effect.

Moving forward, Democrats will learn from the crimes perpetrated against us, and become stronger because of them. But it’s going to be important to keep our eyes out for the vipers that have struck at our heel in the past. There is none more venomous or wicked than Julian Assange, the man that our President may reward with a pardon, for subverting our entire democracy. By raising our voices and making this known, we can make sure it never happens.