Why the Melted Fuel Under Fukushima Could Poison Our Planet With Nuclear Radiation for 1000s of Years

Six years ago, an absolutely devastating tsunami caused a triple meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power facility. It was the worst environmental disaster in all of human history, and even though six years have passed since that time, nobody knows where the three melted cores are. Just recently, authorities believe that they spotted some melted fuel underneath reactor 2, but even from a distance the level of nuclear radiation that was detected was being described as “unimaginable”. Essentially what we are talking about are three enormous “dirty bombs” that are continuously emitting tremendous amounts of nuclear radiation into the air, water and soil. Some of the radioactive elements that are being released have half-lives that are measured in tens of thousands of years, and so the poisonous effect of these “dirty bombs” could potentially be with us for generation after generation.

Personally, I don’t know why the big mainstream news outlets in the U.S. are almost entirely ignoring Fukushima these days. Fox News did a story on the “unimaginable” radiation at Fukushima just a few days ago, but that was about it.

To me, it is certainly newsworthy that nuclear radiation inside reactor 2 at Fukushima is at the highest level ever recorded…

Radiation levels inside a damaged reactor at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant have hit a record high, and are the worst since the plant suffered a triple meltdown nearly six years ago. The latest readings now pose a serious challenge as officials prepare to dismantle the stricken facility.

Radiation levels inside the containment vessel of reactor No. 2 at Fukushima has reached 530 sieverts per hour—a figure described by experts as “unimaginable.”

Previously, the highest level of radiation measured at Fukushima was 73 sieverts per hour, and just a small fraction of that amount would be fatal to most humans…

Needless to say, this plant is not fit for human life. Just one dose of a single sievert is enough to cause radiation sickness and nausea. Exposure to four to five sieverts would kill about half of those exposed to it within a month, while a single dose of 10 sieverts is enough to kill a person within weeks.

At 530 sieverts per hour, the radiation is so intense that even robots can only last for a couple of hours in that environment. The Japanese hope to eventually remove the melted fuel from these reactors someday, but first they have to figure out if it is even possible.

And the truth is that the level of radiation in reactor 2 may actually be far higher than 530 sieverts per hour. That is because the recent reading was taken “some distance from the melted fuel”…

The 530 sievert reading was recorded some distance from the melted fuel, so in reality it could be 10 times higher than recorded, said Hideyuki Ban, co-director of Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center.

Experts are also warning that the levels of radiation may be much higher than 530 sieverts per hour in reactors 1 and 3. Nobody knows, because the melted fuel in those reactors has not even been located yet.

Even though so much time has gone by, there is still very much an urgency to this crisis. In a newly published article, Mike Adams of Natural News explained why this is the case…

In effect, Fukushima has become the world’s largest dirty bomb, and the remaining fuel rods could explode (achieve criticality) at any moment. Even right now, the radiation is so intense that robots built to explore the wreckage can only survive for a few hours before their circuits are destroyed. Thus, there’s almost no scenario in which Japan, Tepco or anybody in the world figures out how to clean up the wreckage, reclaim the melting fuel rods and reestablish control over the nuclear reactions that are still ongoing.

You can’t even successfully build a containment vessel on top of it all because the melting nuclear fuel has already burned a massive hole in the floor and is melting its way into the ground water.

What most people don’t understand is that the melted nuclear fuel under Fukushima is going to be with us for a very, very long time. Some of the fuel rods contained plutonium-239, and plutonium-239 has a half-life of approximately 24,000 years…

Do they think a one-meter hole magically appears in nuclear containment vessels due to random chance? No, it’s melting fuel rods, you morons. And some of that fuel is MOX fuel, which contains plutonium-239 that boasts a half life of 24,000 years. So sometime in the year 26000 A.D. the Fukushima nightmare will be HALF as toxic as it is right now. What a wonderful, progressive future to look forward to, eh?

Plutonium-239 is one of the most dangerous substances known to humanity. As nuclear expert Steven C. Jones once explained, it would not take much plutonium-239 to kill every man, woman and child on the entire planet…

To give one an example of how lethal radiation is, one pound of plutonium evenly distributed into everyone’s lungs would kill every man, woman and child on Earth. There are literally “tons” of radioactive plutonium (among other radioactive elements) that have been released into the air and ocean environments since March 11th. Another critical fact to remember is that radioactive plutonium, for example, remains lethal (killing life) for thousands years as it has a half-life of 24,000 years. Some other radioactive elements such as uranium have a half-life of 4.47 billion years.

And remember, more radioactive material is being released from Fukushima every single day. The following comes from an interview with Kevin Kamps, the radioactive waste monitor at Beyond Nuclear…

There are claims that “it’s all contained, don’t worry about it.” It is indisputable that there is a daily flow of radioactively contaminated groundwater into the ocean. The figures something like 80,000 gallons per day of relatively low-level radioactive waste water. Then you’ve got those storage tanks – we’re talking 800,000 tons of highly radioactive water stored in tanks. Every day they pour a hundred tons of water on each of these three melted down cores. Sometimes they lose those tanks. They leak, they overflow – it is an ongoing catastrophe.

Are you starting to understand how serious this is?

Once nuclear material escapes from Fukushima, it literally gets distributed all over the planet.

That means that it is getting into our air, our water and our food supply.

And I find it extremely interesting that the EPA was moving to dramatically raise the “safe limits” on radioactivity in our drinking water right at the end of the Obama administration. The following comes from a Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility press release dated December 22, 2016…

“Following Japan’s Fukushima meltdown in 2011, EPA’s claims that no radioactivity could reach the U.S. at levels of concern were contradicted by its own rainwater measurements showing contamination from Fukushima throughout the U.S. well above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. In reaction, EPA prepared new limits 1000s of times higher than even the Fukushima rainwater because ‘EPA experienced major difficulties conveying to the public that the detected levels…were not of immediate concern for public health.’”

Why in the world would the EPA do that?

Here are some more of the details…

The documents obtained by PEER revealed that the EPA plans to raise maximum allowable limits of iodine-131, cobalt-60 and calcium-45 to more than 10,000 times the levels allowed under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Others would be hundreds or thousands of times higher under the new guidelines.

The agency’s justification for withholding the new proposed limits from the public until after the proposal had been adopted was that it wanted to “avoid confusion.”

Radioactive material is also getting into our food supply. If you love to eat fish this next item may be a bummer, because it is being reported that radiation from Fukushima was recently found in salmon off the coast of Oregon…

Fish contaminated by radiation from the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan have been detected 6,000 miles away of the US west coast.

Salmon carrying traces of caesium 134 particles – the so-called fingerprint of the Fukushima – were found by researchers in the seas off Oregon.

One we eat something that has been contaminated, radioactive material will often migrate to key organs in our body, and once it is there it can poison us indefinitely. In a previous article I included a quote from author Helen Caldicott, the author of “Crisis Without End: The Medical and Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Nuclear Catastrophe“. I am including the quote once again in this article because it is absolutely imperative that we all understand the danger that we are facing…

Internal radiation, on the other hand, emanates from radioactive elements which enter the body by inhalation, ingestion, or skin absorption. Hazardous radionuclides such as iodine-131, caesium 137, and other isotopes currently being released in the sea and air around Fukushima bio-concentrate at each step of various food chains (for example into algae, crustaceans, small fish, bigger fish, then humans; or soil, grass, cow’s meat and milk, then humans). After they enter the body, these elements – called internal emitters – migrate to specific organs such as the thyroid, liver, bone, and brain, where they continuously irradiate small volumes of cells with high doses of alpha, beta and/or gamma radiation, and over many years, can induce uncontrolled cell replication – that is, cancer. Further, many of the nuclides remain radioactive in the environment for generations, and ultimately will cause increased incidences of cancer and genetic diseases over time.

The amount of cesium-137 that has been released at Fukushima is equivalent to hundreds of Hiroshima bombs.

But because we can’t see, touch, taste or hear the danger, to many people it may not seem real.

Nuclear radiation is a silent killer, and unless a miracle happens the consequences of the Fukushima nuclear disaster will be felt for generations to come. (For more from the author of “Why the Melted Fuel Under Fukushima Could Poison Our Planet With Nuclear Radiation for 1000s of Years” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Globalists Strike Back With a Major Push Toward a Cashless Society

Their agenda may be on the rocks in the United States at the moment, but that doesn’t mean that the globalists are giving up. In fact, a major push toward a cashless society is being made in the European Union right now. Last May we learned that the 500 euro note is being completely eliminated, and just a few weeks ago the European Commission released a new “Action Plan” which instructs member states to explore “potential upper limits to cash payments”. In the name of “fighting terrorism”, this “Action Plan” discusses the benefits of “prohibitions for cash payments above a specific threshold” and it says that those prohibitions should include “virtual currencies (such as BitCoin) and prepaid instruments (such as pre-paid credit cards) when they are used anonymously.”

This new document does not mention what an appropriate threshold would be for member states, but we do know that Spain already bans certain cash transactions above 2,500 euros, and Italy and France already ban cash transactions above 1,000 euros.

This is a perfect way to transition to a cashless society without creating too much of an uproar. By setting a maximum legal level for cash transactions and slowly lowering it, in effect you can slowly but surely phase cash out without people understanding what is happening.

And there are many places in Europe where it is very difficult to even use cash at this point. In Sweden, many banks no longer take or give out cash, and approximately 95 percent of all retail transactions are entirely cashless. So even though Sweden has not officially banned cash, using cash is no longer practical in most situations. In fact, many tourists are shocked to find out that they cannot even pay bus fare with cash.

So most of Europe is already moving in this direction, and now this new Action Plan is intended to accelerate the transition toward a cashless society. The public is being told that these measures are being taken to fight money laundering and terrorism, but of course that is only a small part of the truth. The following comes from the Anti-Media…

The European Action Plan doesn’t mention a specific dollar amount for restrictions, but as expected, their reasoning for the move is to thwart money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Border checks between countries have already been bolstered to help implement these new standards on hard assets. Although these end goals are plausible, there are other clear motivations for governments to target paper money that aren’t as noble.

In a truly cashless society, governments would be able to track where everybody is and what everybody is doing all the time. And in order to have access to the cashless system, people would have to comply with whatever requirements governments wanted to impose on their helpless populations. The potential for tyranny that this would create would be off the charts, but very few people seem greatly alarmed by the move toward a cashless system all over the globe.

Even in the United States there are calls for a cashless system. For example, the former chief economist for the IMF wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal not too long ago in which he recommended the elimination of the $100 bill…

“There is little debate among law-enforcement agencies that paper currency, especially large notes such as the U.S. $100 bill, facilitates crime: racketeering, extortion, money laundering, drug and human trafficking, the corruption of public officials, not to mention terrorism. There are substitutes for cash—cryptocurrencies, uncut diamonds, gold coins, prepaid cards—but for many kinds of criminal transactions, cash is still king. It delivers absolute anonymity, portability, liquidity and near-universal acceptance.”

Over in Asia restrictions are being put on cash as well. Legendary investor Jim Rogers commented on what is currently happening in India during one recent podcast…

The time will come when you won’t be able to buy a cup of coffee without being traced, warns investment guru Jim Rogers. To control people, governments will increasingly seek to hunt down cash spending, he adds.

“Governments are always looking out for themselves first, and it’s the same old thing that has been going on for hundreds of years. The Indians recently did the same thing. They withdrew 86 percent of the currency in circulation, and they have now made it illegal to spend more than, I think it’s about $4,000 in any cash transaction. In France you cannot use more than, I think it’s a €1,000,” said Rogers in an interview with MacroVoices Podcast.

The reason why this is taking place all over the planet is because this is a global agenda.

The globalists ultimately plan to completely eliminate cash, and this will give them an unprecedented level of control over humanity.

One thing that many fear may someday be implemented is some form of microchip identification system. In order to access the cashless grid, you would need your “ID chip” so that the system could positively identify you, but of course there are millions of people around the world that do not intend to get chipped under any circumstances.

In the old days, you would be labeled a “conspiracy theorist” just for suggesting that they may try to chip all of us one day, but in 2017 things have completely changed.

Just look at what is happening in Nevada. A bill has been introduced in the state senate that would outlaw the “forced microchipping of people”…

State Sen. Becky Harris said a bill to prohibit forced microchipping of people is not as far-fetched as it might seem, because it happens in some places around the world.

Senate Bill 109 would make it a Class C felony to require someone to be implanted with a radio frequency identifier, such as microchips placed in pets.

The idea for the bill came from a constituent, the Las Vegas Republican said.

If that sounds very strange to you, then you may not know that companies all around the globe are already starting to explore this type of technology. For instance, a company in Belgium called NewFusion has actually begun to microchip their employees…

In a move that could be lifted straight from science fiction, workers at a Belgian marketing firm are being offered the chance to have microchips implanted in their bodies.

The chips contain personal information and provide access to the company’s IT systems and headquarters, replacing existing ID cards.

The controversial devices raise questions about personal security and safety, including whether they may allow the movements of people with implants to be tracked.

Technology like this often starts off being “voluntary”, but then after enough people willingly accept it the transition to “mandatory” is not too difficult.

We live at one of the most critical moments in all of human history, and the globalists are certainly not going to lay down and die just because Donald Trump won the election.

The U.S. represents less than five percent of the population of the planet, and in most of the world the agenda of the globalists is on track and is rapidly advancing.

The globalists want a unified one world economy, a unified one world religion and a unified one world government. The election of Donald Trump was a blow to the globalists, but it has also made them more dangerous, more ruthless and more determined than ever before.

And in case you think that using the term “globalists” is a bit strange, the truth is that even the New York Times is using it to describe the global elite and their global agenda.

We are in a life or death battle for the future of our society, and the globalists are never going to give up until they get what they want. So now is not a time for complacency, because the very future of our country is at stake. (For more from the author of “The Globalists Strike Back With a Major Push Toward a Cashless Society” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Texas Lawmakers Are Taking the Longhorns to the Bathroom Crybullies, and It’s Freakin’ AWESOME

When it comes to taking on the LGBT lobby’s cultural cronies, officials in Texas are setting a new standard for conservative lawmakers, and going on the offensive against recent threats from the National Football League.

It all began when legislators introduced SB 6, a state-level privacy bill that would dare violate and blaspheme the LGBT lobby’s latest commandment: “Thou shalt not leave bathroom safety policies up to private institutions.”

Of course, the anticipated dragoons of artists and musicians deployed in an initial strike against the bill, as they have done countless other. But now the professional sports have gotten involved.

The most pertinent development in the brewing Lonestar Bathroom Battle™ came when the NFL issued a statement saying that, if passed, the legislation might interfere with future Super Bowls in the state.

“The NFL is walking on thin ice right here,” Republican Governor Greg Abbott told Glenn Beck Tuesday. “The NFL needs to concentrate on playing football and get the heck out of politics.”

A day later, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick doubled down, going after NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s alleged hypocrisy on the issue:

“The NFL embraces inclusiveness,” an NFL spokesman told the Houston Chronicle in an email last week. “We want all fans to feel welcomed at our events, and NFL policies prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, or any other improper standard.”

Of course, the NFL, its teams, its owners, and its vendors can embrace whatever bathroom policy they want at games and events. The Texas bill – just like its maligned and misrepresented sister in North Carolina – is written to give private institutions the freedom to do so. If the NFL wants to enforce that everyone in the stands be assigned a different set of restrooms every quarter and institute a free-for-all co-ed scenario during halftime at every Cowboys game, the state would have no recourse under the provisions of SB 6.

These, however, are facts — “stubborn things” that should never be allowed to get in the way of a tear-jerking leftist narrative. Meanwhile, rather than wait out the inevitable storm, Patrick and Abbott are taking the fight to the cultural cronies themselves – disarming the playbook and pointing out the Left’s absurdity before it happens in full form. (For more from the author of “Texas Lawmakers Are Taking the Longhorns to the Bathroom Crybullies, and It’s Freakin’ AWESOME” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Like Oil and Water: Ashton Kutcher’s Open Borders Stance and Anti-Human Trafficking Work Just Don’t Mix

Ashton Kutcher has been widely commended for his humanitarian efforts to protect children around the world from sexual exploitation and abuse. He’s also received praise for his open-borders advocacy. The problem is, these two causes are at war with each other.

Kutcher delivered an impassioned speech on combatting the global problem of child sex trafficking. Wednesday at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting. The actor and activist called on leaders to join him in tirelessly defending every child’s “right to pursue happiness.”

Kutcher’s testimony came weeks after he delivered a similarly passionate speech at the annual Screen Actors Guild (SAG) Awards, voicing his disapproval of President Donald Trump’s executive order that temporarily banned travel from seven Islamic-majority countries deemed a “security risk.”

“Hello to everyone watching at home and in airports that belong in my America,” he said before presenting the first SAG Award. “You are part of the fabric of who we are, and we love you and welcome you.”

Kutcher should be commended for his work to combat child sex trafficking; it is always right and just to look out for society’s most vulnerable. But unfortunately, his views on immigration directly contradict this effort.

Consider all of the people — women and children especially — who have suffered abuse as a result of lazy vetting. Think of all the “rapefugee” incidents in Europe. The Gatestone Institute has worked tirelessly to document and draw attention to the crisis that has affected the entire continent.

If you care about the vulnerable, you care about vetting out jihadists and rapists. You care about national security.

Sex trafficking is, as of now, a bipartisan issue. Experiencing life as a sex slave is one of the most tragic and regrettable situations imaginable. If only liberals could see how their blind, idealized view of all refugees and immigrants harms the very groups they wish to protect. (For more from the author of “Like Oil and Water: Ashton Kutcher’s Open Borders Stance and Anti-Human Trafficking Work Just Don’t Mix” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Mainstream Media Treatment of Trump and Russia Smacks of Fake News

When the main stream media rely on anonymous sources, friendly relationships with current and former government officials, and recycling previously reported stories to promote an agenda, readers are right to suspect a set up.

We expect less from outlets like the Gateway Pundit, who rely on hyper-sensationalized headlines and slanted, even made-up, stories to generate clicks to their websites. The public demands, and serious consumers of news expect, a higher standard from established newspapers and cable news operations.

Instead, we get stories that are so selective, and so coordinated, as to constitute a subtler form of fake news. At the moment, the media have latched on to anything remotely related to Russia to tarnish the Trump administration, especially in the wake of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s resignation as National Security Adviser.

The flood of weakly-related and even unsupported Russia stories smacks of a partisan effort to destroy the Trump administration, not an objective search for truth.

For example, CNN is still recycling reports about the evidence-starved Russian “dossier” that had been examined by the intelligence community and the press for months before Buzzfeed dumped them on its website in early January. The New York Times and CNN took Buzzfeed to task for publishing the unverified reports; but they are still being cited.

Another example is this breathless reporting of Russian cruise missiles.

The New York Times and Washington Post, along with CNN have all written similar stories about the Russian deployment of the ground-launched cruise missile known as the SSC-8, which is a violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. The INF treaty was signed in 1987 by President Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev of the former USSR. It bans ground-launched cruise missiles with a range between 300 and 3400 miles.

The Russians first tested the SSC-8 in 2008. President Obama’s administration declared Russia in violation of the INF treaty in 2014. Do you have any memory of that? Probably not. But suddenly, this is a front-burner issue, because it provides yet another chance to connect Russia with Donald Trump.

A third example is the Russian spy ship sighted off the U.S. eastern seaboard. How is this news? The Russians have for years deployed spy ships to America’s Atlantic coast and the Caribbean. It’s only top news because … well, you know why.

In reality, there is no “crisis” with Russia that didn’t exist before the Trump administration. There are no “new” facts relating to U.S.-Russian relations since Trump took office.

Flynn’s downfall was hurried along by leaks of highly classified information within the Trump administration of telephone intercept transcripts of a call between Flynn and the Russian ambassador. Yes, the call took place, but it now appears the details discussed on the call were innocuous. But again, the use of anonymous sources, who may have an axe to grind with Trump, and the selective reporting of details, is at best editorializing, not fair reporting.

Bloomberg reported Tuesday that there’s evidence of a pattern in the media reports:

Representative Devin Nunes, the Republican chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told me Monday that he saw the leaks about Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak as part of a pattern. “There does appear to be a well orchestrated effort to attack Flynn and others in the administration,” he said. “From the leaking of phone calls between the president and foreign leaders to what appears to be high-level FISA Court information, to the leaking of American citizens being denied security clearances, it looks like a pattern.”

This confluence of government leaks, anonymous sources, hyper-sensational headlines, and unsupported stories does nothing to contradict Trump’s accusations that the media is engaged in reporting “fake news.” If the media don’t want the Trump administration to treat them as the opposition, then they need to quit playing the role of opposition so blatantly. (For more from the author of “The Mainstream Media Treatment of Trump and Russia Smacks of Fake News” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Real Crime in the Michael Flynn Saga

Washington is abuzz with the saga of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s resignation, the Russia connection, and the melodrama of who knew what, when and what they did about it.

There are, to be sure, myriad aspects of this story that will consume the media, the Hill, civil society and the like for a while.

We want to highlight one — and only one — serious aspect of this story that has been underreported: the unauthorized (and criminal) leaks of highly classified information to the media by a person or persons in the government.

We will not weigh in on the panoply of issues related but not limited to the role of the White House counsel and his discussions with then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates, Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee, the communications that Trump campaign operatives may have had with Russians before the election, or the proper role of Congress or the press going forward.

It goes without saying that Flynn had a duty to be honest with Vice President Mike Pence about what he discussed with the Russian ambassador, and whether the issue of U.S. sanctions against Russia was any part of those conversations.

Regardless of whether you think President Donald Trump should have asked for Flynn’s resignation, the president had the right to ask him to resign. But not telling the truth to the vice president is not a crime under these circumstances.

Flynn had a legal duty to tell the truth to FBI agents, who apparently questioned him about the calls. Failure to tell the truth to the FBI could have negative legal consequences for Flynn, depending on what he said and the exact questions asked.

With respect to the leaks, what we have so far are allegations from anonymous government sources about what was supposedly said in the conversation between Flynn and the Russian ambassador. The transcript is not public yet, so we don’t really know the content, context or circumstances of the conversations.

Perhaps these sources who refuse to go on the record are being 100 percent accurate about what was said — but without the actual transcript, we don’t really know.

Just as we assume that foreign governments, even allies, monitor the calls of U.S. ambassadors (and other U.S. personnel) stationed overseas, ambassadors (and other embassy personnel) from other countries stationed in Washington, D.C., have good reason to believe that the U.S. monitors the communications of foreign embassies and consulates.

It is one thing to assume it is happening, but not know for sure. It is entirely another thing to illegally disclose the fact that we have been recording the calls of the Russian ambassador and other top Russian personnel.

Now they know.

Exposing US Secrets for Political Purposes

Alerting the Russians about our lawful surveillance of them — during an ongoing investigation — for the purpose of knee-capping Flynn is inexcusable. As New York Times Pulitzer Prize-winning author Charlie Savage wrote in his book, Power Wars: Inside Obama’s Post 9/11 Presidency, “There have always been unauthorized disclosures of information to the news media. It’s how Washington works and has always worked.”

But compared to the nine major leak cases highlighted in Savage’s book (Leibowitz, Drake, Manning, Kim, Sterling, Kiriakou, Snowden, Sachtleben and Petraeus), where none of the leakers disclosed classified information for the purpose of targeting one senior government official, these leaks were designed to do exactly that.

Savage opposes the criminalization of unauthorized disclosures because they are a “counterforce against overclassification.” But he also admits that “there can be bad leaks, the disclosure of information whose publication impose social costs that outweigh its social benefits.”

Ask yourself this: Was it better to keep the Russians guessing about what we had on them during the government’s investigation, or was it more important to let them know what we were doing, and how we were doing it, in order to embarrass Flynn?

What we can say with some confidence is that the motivations behind these leaks seem to be purely political and were specifically aimed at bringing down Flynn.

In doing so, the leakers were willing to compromise the national security of the nation by telling the media that we were successfully listening to the phone calls of the Russian ambassador to the United States, and other Russians, in connection with Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

Could Flynn Be Prosecuted?

Some have suggested Flynn may have violated the Logan Act — the 1799 act that was designed to prevent private citizens from specifically engaging in “any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government … in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States.”

No one has ever been prosecuted under that act (18 U.S.C. §953), which has been roundly (and rightly) criticized by distinguished legal scholars from the left and the right as a content-based restriction on First Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.

Keep in mind that this law was passed just a year after the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The Sedition Act of 1798 is probably one of the worst violations of the First Amendment ever passed by Congress. The Logan Act follows pretty closely behind the Sedition Act in its basic abrogation of First Amendment rights and has never been used against the many Americans who may have technically violated it.

A 2015 Congressional Research Service report details the problems with the act, although it neglects to mention the specific intent requirement in its analysis.

Again, we don’t really know what Flynn said to the Russians as a private citizen, but whatever it was — regardless of whether one thinks it was prudent to do so or not — there is almost zero probability of a successful prosecution under the Logan Act, given its constitutional infirmities.

As Susan Hennessey and Helen Murillo detail in a blog post on lawfareblog.com, the administration has a host of criminal statutes to use against the leakers, including the Espionage Act of 1917, codified at 18 U.S. C. § 793, which prohibits the improper accessing, handling or transmitting of “information respecting the national defense” with the intent of injuring the United States or aiding a foreign nation.

Another related statute, 18 U.S.C. § 798, prohibits the disclosure of classified information, including information “concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government.”

As Hennessey and Murillo also note, government employees in sensitive posts are required to sign nondisclosure agreements, a violation of which can expose the leakers to legal action.

No doubt, there are various aspects of this saga that can and will be investigated by the media and the Congress. But the deliberate, orchestrated and criminal leaks in this case must be investigated. And the leakers must be held to account. (For more from the author of “The Real Crime in the Michael Flynn Saga” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Abandoned Syria’s Christians. Now Trump Can Save Them.

The Trump administration stated that it wants to eradicate ISIS and protect persecuted Christians in the Middle East. If it’s to have any real hope of accomplishing these crucial goals, the president and his team need to work with America’s allies who are already succeeding on the ground: the Federation of Northern Syria, which coordinates efforts of Kurdish, Arab, Syriac Christian and other resistance groups.

The Syriac-Assyrian Christian co-president of the Federation is appealing to the Trump administration to send support to the brave Christian fighters in Syria — whom President Obama refused to help. The Syriac-Assyrian Christian forces there are fighting bravely, but in desperate need of military and humanitarian aid, as can be seen in the new video below, which was provided as an exclusive to The Stream. Supporters of Syrian Christians hope Christians in the U.S., and this new Administration, will support them in ending ISIS and bringing freedom to the Middle East.

Fake News and Turkish Propaganda Target Syrian Christians

One big obstacle to this goal is “fake news” and propaganda, circulated by those who support (knowingly or not) the intolerant policies of Turkey’s autocratic, Islamist government — which will do almost anything to prevent the long-stateless Kurdish people from obtaining real autonomy. The Turks fear that any progress for Kurds in Iraq or Syria will stir up the millions of Kurds whom Turkey represses within its borders. Yet the Kurds have proved one of the few forces on the ground willing to protect Syriac Christians, Yazidis, and other oppressed minorities, as I learned from my experience in and with the area and have reported here at The Stream. In fact, the Kurds have formed a self-governing region (the Federation of Northern Syria) which grants Christians, women, and Yazidis real political participation—which they lack elsewhere in the region.

The Nation Swallows the Turkish Government Line

According to a highly misleading article in the leftist magazine The Nation, the Federation is little more than a fig leaf for the Kurdish militia, the YPG — which it alleges has been driving away the Arab population as well as dissident Kurds and others on a massive scale. According to the same article, the YPG is actually controlled by Iran and has a hidden agreement with both the Assad regime and ISIS. As evidence for this elaborate conspiracy theory, the article cites many anonymous sources. The reporter did some ‘fact finding’ of his own, but seems to have only traveled to Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan (KRG), which is controlled de facto by Turkey and its allies.

One interesting accusation he makes is that that the YPG allowed ISIS to take the whole region around Kobane, and only put up a token defense in the city center, in order to make sure that the fighting cleansed the area of Arabs. By this reporter’s account, the YPG is a masterful, diabolically cunning organization, which can predict and precisely control the outcomes of a shifting, chaotic battlefield — something that any military officer would know is quite impossible.

The use of evidence by the article in The Nation is interesting in its own right. It is widely known that it is not possible to do independent research among refugees in Turkey. Free journalism does not exist in Turkey anymore; just ask the hundreds of journalists languishing in prison for “thought crimes.” Turkey is furthermore a self-declared enemy of the YPG, and is the only country that has declared the YPG a terrorist organization. This means that anyone doing research in Turkey among refugees related to the YPG will be strictly monitored. Turkey’s secret police will send ‘witnesses’ to the reporter and manipulate his research. Finding ‘people who fled the YPG’ in Turkey is a strange thing in its own right, since Turkey blocked the border with the Federation and regularly kills those who try to cross.

Erasing the Syrian Christians Who Fight for Freedom

The Nation article contradicts the facts on the ground. The author suggests that the Kurdish YPG acts as the only fighting force in the Federation of Northern Syria (North-East Syria). This is simply untrue. I myself have been in Syria at the bases of both the Syriac-Assyrian forces and the Arab forces who cooperate with the YPG in the larger structure of the Syrian Democratic Forces. They are not in this for the show, as this video demonstrates very clearly:

The idea that the Arabs themselves would support Kurdification by driving Arabs out of the area is obvious nonsense. The multi-ethnic reality of the Syrian Democratic Forces is intentionally omitted from The Nation piece because it makes nonsense of the author’s premise. Would Arabs, Kurds and Syriac Christians drive away their own families and peoples? It would mean a constant war inside these areas, which is clearly not happening. The reverse is true: these peoples work together in governance and defense in a unique multi-ethnic alliance.

The key report on which the reporter relies, from the Syrian Network for Human Rights and Amnesty International, repeats the same false storyline: Kurds driving Arabs away. But independent journalists have debunked this charge, including its principal accusation — the so-called “Hajjia massacre.” This independent research also showed how unreliable are Syrian sources who work under the control of Turkish media minders. After probing questions, Amnesty International admitted that it spent far less time on research than stated and already retracted its ‘ethnic cleansing’ claim. Other independent research has demonstrated how such propaganda is manufactured and used by Turkey and its allies. Finally, if the Federation drives away Arabs, why would Arabs from Iraq flee to the Federation and be taken in there and cared for as refugees?

The One Piece of Syria Where Christians and Women are Free

My own experience of the last three years proved to me that the caricature of the Federation as a one-party, tribal state is simply untrue. I have been cooperating with a Syriac-Assyrian party there and met with the representatives of several other parties who are active in the area. The reality that I witnessed in the area is that Kurds, Arabs and Syriac-Assyrian Christians, men and women, cooperate in governing The Federation and defending it with its Syrian Democratic Forces.

Why are people leaving the Federation? The real reason for the vast majority of departures is mentioned in The Nation story itself: the crippling economic blockade imposed by Turkey and the KRG. I remember sitting down with a priest there whose only complaint was that people were leaving due to economic deprivation. The reason that Turkey and the KRG maintain this blockade is simple: they do not want multi-ethnic cooperation, democracy and especially freedom to come to the Middle East. The culture of domination and oppression serves them well and they do not want to see deep, bottom-up change that leads to freedom and real human rights. They do not favor freedom of religion, or women working freely as legal equals of men — two realities inside the Federation of Northern Syria, but in few other places in the Middle East.

This is why the accusations that the Federation of Northern Syria is actually driven by Iran, supports the Assad regime and cooperates with ISIS (all at the same time!) are so clearly ‘fake-facts.’ Ask yourself some skeptical questions:

Why would Iran support freedom of religion and freedom for women?

How can Iran support the YPG and fight against its sister-organization PJAK at the same time?

Why would ISIS cooperate with its most effective enemy?

If the Assad regime cooperates with the Federation, why did it bomb the Federation’s forces in Hassakeh until the Russians and U.S. pressured it to stop?

Why are pro-Assad agitators so angry at me when we disseminate information on the Federation of Northern Syria to interested Christians in Europe?

All these forces — Assad, ISIS, Iran, and Turkey — are united on just one point: opposing the growth of home-grown Western-style freedom in the Middle East. But it is only the emergence of such freedom that can save the region from its grim cycle of war, oppression and terrorism.

The Trump Administration Can Save Syria’s Christians

This is why the US needs to act now and act fast. With the Obama administration’s approval, Turkey has moved into Syria with forces who chant anti-American slogans, and boast of driving all Christians out of Syria. Now Turkey wants to attack the Federation with this army, just at the moment when the SDF is surrounding Raqqa, the capital of ISIS. Christian-hating Turkish forces want to destroy the Kurds and Syriac-Assyrian Christians in northern Syria under the pretext of attacking ISIS. On February 13, the Institute for the Study of War issued an urgent warning that Turkey threatens to halt U.S. anti-ISIS operations in Syria.

The Trump administration should see through Turkey’s screen of propaganda that its real allies in the region are the freedom-loving Kurds, Syriacs, Arabs and Yazidis who work and fight together as brothers — in a region too often splintered along tribal and religious lines. (For more from the author of “Obama Abandoned Syria’s Christians. Now Trump Can Save Them.” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

GOP Leaders Release Details of Plan to Replace Obamacare

House Republican leaders mapped out their proposal for how Obamacare will be repealed and replaced in a closed-door meeting Thursday, outlining plans for Medicaid reforms and refundable tax credits for Americans.

Joined briefly by newly confirmed Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden presented the details to members.

The plan comes amid mounting frustration from the chamber’s conservative wing, who want to see their leaders move faster on repealing Obamacare and decided to coalesce around their own replacement plan Wednesday after discussions over potential changes to the health care system slowed.

GOP lawmakers said repeatedly they would unwind Obamacare—a promise repeated by President Donald Trump on the campaign trail—but the conference has yet to come together on which parts of the law would be repealed and how.

And members are likely to face questions on Obamacare’s future from constituents on both sides of the aisle when they head home for the Presidents Day recess.

Ryan told reporters on Thursday that upon returning to Washington at the end of the month, lawmakers would introduce the repeal and replace legislation.

However, he noted that GOP lawmakers are waiting on cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation

“What we’re proposing is a patient-centered system where the patient designs their plan. The patient gets to decide what they want to do,” Ryan said. “The nucleus is the patient and her doctor versus the nucleus of the system being the government in Obamacare’s sake.”

According to a copy of the presentation leaders gave to Republicans that was obtained by The Daily Signal, the plan calls for Congress to pass legislation that repeals Obamacare’s taxes, individual and employer mandates, and subsidies. It also stresses that the Medicaid expansion, which loosened program eligibility requirements, would also be changed.

Then, it maps out four key components of a replacement: modernize Medicaid, use State Innovation Grants, expand health savings accounts, and provide portable, monthly tax credits.

Specifically, Americans purchasing coverage on the individual market would receive an advanceable, refundable tax credit based on age.

The plan also expands the use of health savings accounts, a policy that is the hallmark of nearly every proposal Republicans have presented over the last six years.

Brady and Walden’s replacement plan calls for an increase in the maximum contribution Americans can make to their health savings accounts. Currently, individuals can contribute $3,400 each year to a health savings account, but the Republicans’ plan would raise that limit to $6,500.

Republicans are generally in agreement on the expansion of health savings accounts and even on providing Americans some form of financial assistance, but GOP members are more divided on how to handle changes to Medicaid.

Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia expanded Medicaid, and had 100 percent of Medicaid costs for those who are newly eligible covered by the federal government from 2014 to 2016. Now, GOP senators representing some of those states have pushed for the expansion to remain in place.

The plan put forth by House Republican leaders would pare down the match rates for the expanded Medicaid population over time, but allow states to continue enrolling new beneficiaries under the expansion’s eligibility. Republicans then propose changing it to either a per-capita allotment or block grant program.

The proposal provides a transition period, though not defined, for states that did expand Medicaid.

To ease the concerns of leaders from expansion states, Ryan said Walden and Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Republican from Utah who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, have been working with Republican governors to discuss potential changes to the program.

The last item in the GOP’s replacement plan calls for the creation of high-risk pools, which would be funded by federal dollars allocated to the states and can be used to help those with pre-existing conditions.

Republicans plan to repeal Obamacare using a budget tool called reconciliation, which fast-tracks legislation in the Senate and allows it to pass with 51 votes.

Their plan is to start with a repeal bill that passed both chambers in 2015, but was ultimately vetoed by President Barack Obama.

GOP leaders are planning to build on the 2015 bill by including parts of Obamacare’s replacement.

Late last month, Ryan mapped out a timeline for Obamacare’s repeal, telling GOP colleagues the House would dismantle the bill in March or April.

But House conservatives are becoming frustrated with the speed leaders are moving and want to see action before then.

On Monday, the approximately 40 members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus voted unanimously to back the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, and on Wednesday, they endorsed an Obamacare replacement plan released by Sen. Rand Paul. (For more from the author of “GOP Leaders Release Details of Plan to Replace Obamacare” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

After Michael Flynn’s Departure, How Trump Can Stabilize National Security Council, Avoid Leaks

President Donald Trump’s first weeks as commander in chief have been challenged by upheaval within his National Security Council, the White House group tasked with coordinating and implementing foreign policy and counterterrorism strategy.

The resignation of Michael Flynn as national security adviser—head of the National Security Council—comes at a time when acute foreign policy decisions await the new administration.

As Trump seeks to recover, former NSC officials say it’s important that the White House quickly establish a functional council that can spearhead the president’s agenda.

“We have never seen anything like this,” said Kenneth Pollack, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution who has served twice on the NSC staff.

“We certainly have seen national security advisers leave basically after the first year of an administration, but never after less than a month,” Pollack said in an interview with The Daily Signal, adding:

Flynn was the one guy on foreign affairs who has been joined at the hip with Trump from the beginning. Now he’s out. No one knows what comes next. To get the policy, you have to get the person in place. Until that happens, the rest of the world to a certain extent has to wait.

Flynn’s tenure lasted only 24 days before the retired Army lieutenant general resigned after admitting he had misled the vice president and other White House officials about the contents of a phone call with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.

Pollack said new administrations sometimes experience early “stumbles” in trying to define and organize their National Security Council, an entity made up mostly of career civil servants representing different government agencies.

The NSC, originally created in 1947, has quadrupled in size over the past two decades, and doubled under President Barack Obama.

Obama replaced his first national security adviser, James Jones, after concluding the retired Marine general was a bad match to lead the NSC in the direction the president wanted to take it.

“The NSC is the president’s personal staff on foreign policy,” Pollack told The Daily Signal. “The national security adviser is supposed to be the president’s closest adviser on foreign policy. There needs to be an incredibly tight relationship with the president. The national security adviser need to know what the president wants, how to get things done for him, how to represent his views, and make sure everyone is doing what the president wants.”

“What we’ve consistently seen is the NSC stumbles around for the first months of every administration and eventually figures it out and moves forward,” Pollack added.

‘Destructive,’ but Normal

Flynn’s earliest days were marked with tension, and change.

He sought to reform the council—aiming to cut its size roughly in half from more than 400—and installing staff he knew from his military days and when he was director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Members of both parties on Capitol Hill have expressed concerns that the NSC got too big under the Bush and Obama administrations, and became overly operational and involved with details meant to be reserved to Cabinet agencies.

In addition, the White House elevated Steve Bannon, Trump’s chief political strategist, to the NSC’s exclusive principals committee, meaning he could attend regular meetings normally consisting of members of the military and intelligence communities.

Some of these changes may have made holdover staff members uncomfortable.

A senior Trump administration official told The Daily Signal that many NSC staff members—career government civil servants—who did not want to work for Trump returned to their regular agencies.

The official said that about 80 percent of an administration’s NSC usually is staffed by career government civil servants — known in government lingo as “detailees.”

The rest are direct hires—political appointees—who usually depart the agency when the administration changes.

About 15 percent of the NSC staff remains unfilled, the official said, adding that he expects the next national security adviser to maintain Flynn’s goal of staffing the council with a head count somewhere in the 200s.

None of Flynn’s direct hires have left the NSC yet despite his departure, the official said, including K.T. McFarland, the deputy national security adviser.

The official also disputed criticisms that Flynn was leaning on military hands to staff the NSC. He said only one of six deputies chosen by Flynn has a military background—David Cattler, a former Defense Intelligence Agency official tapped to oversee regional affairs.

The official, who insisted on anonymity to speak freely, disputed accounts of turmoil:

On the one hand, yes, what happened with Flynn is destructive and it’s never happened before this early in an administration. On the other hand, the NSC is doing what it’s supposed to do, holding committee meetings, preparing for phone calls and meetings with foreign leaders. The NSC is very active, so it’s unfair to say it’s in turmoil, aside from the destructive nature of the leadership change so early.

Containing Leaks

Trump’s first month—and Flynn’s brief tenure—also has been marked by a proliferation of leaks that some Republicans consider to be actions carried out by disgruntled career government employees aiming to undermine a president they don’t like. Democrats see the leaks as acts of public service meant to reveal potentially inappropriate behavior.

Drafts of executive orders, including ones Trump hasn’t issued yet, have circulated around Washington. Transcriptions of Trump’s conversations with foreign leaders have been published in news reports.

And numerous stories about Trump campaign officials’ conversations and potential connections with Russian officials—including a Washington Post story documenting Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador—have been written based on leaks from intelligence and law enforcement sources.

The senior Trump administration official said the White House is unsure of the source of the leaks, and he stressed that it’s not unusual for government bureaucrats left over from the prior administration to publicly disclose displeasure with the new president’s policies and team.

He said the White House has “changed its internal procedures” to prevent leaks, although he would not detail what that means. He insisted the White House would not seek to investigate the sources of leaks, and vowed that Trump would not punish them.

But Trump, speaking Thursday with House Republicans, seemed to contradict that, according to pool reports, telling lawmakers: “We’re going to find the leakers and they’re going to pay a big price.”

He blamed “illegal classified leaking” for Flynn’s downfall.

Legal experts say it would be illegal for the president to target employees who are protected by civil service law, as opposed to political appointees.

And former national security officials say it’s not unusual for presidents to express anger with leakers.

Obama prosecuted more whistleblowers than all of his predecessors combined.

“Leaks are a big problem for every administration,” said David Shedd, a Heritage Foundation visiting fellow who held intelligence policy positions at the NSC under President George W. Bush. “There is a particularly strong anti-Trump sentiment in the bureaucracy, so I expect that there is a greater propensity to leak.”

“That said,” added Shedd, also a former deputy director of the Defense Intelligence Agency under Obama, “leaks generally are intended to generate support or undermine support for policy positions.”

James Jeffrey, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration, said the best way to subdue a culture of leaks is for the president to create a disciplined, coherent NSC process that allows for dissenters to express concerns internally, minimizing the incentives for leaks.

Jeffrey said Trump should select an “honest broker” to replace Flynn to lead the NSC, which he said is supposed to be a management center that gathers views from across multiple agencies and then implements the decided policy.

“When you have a functioning NSC where the process is good and all ideas are vetted, even if there’s disagreement on the policy decision, you won’t get leaking,” Jeffrey told The Daily Signal. “Leaking tends to be a cry for help within the bureaucracy.”

‘Imperative’ Mission

Whoever replaces Flynn will have to organize policy in key areas, including developing a response to North Korea’s recent missile launch, implementing a strategy to defeat ISIS, and deciding how to approach the U.S. relationship with Russia.

Flynn had perhaps the strongest views of Trump’s foreign policy team on Russia, viewing that country as a possible partner to fight Islamic terrorism, and experts say it’s especially important to know how the next national security adviser envisions U.S. relations with the longtime adversary.

“There is a case for trying to reorient relations with Russia irrespective of who is national security adviser,” Michael O’Hanlon, director of research for the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution, said in an email to The Daily Signal, adding:

Plus, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Trump still favor some kind of rethinking. The question is, how do we do that in substantive terms. This is an example of where the NSC, and the national security adviser, can avoid getting bogged down in detail or micromanagement, encourage creative thinking and constructive, ideology-free debate on big issues of the day.

The task ahead for Trump is formidable — and important.

“Settling the turmoil that currently appears to exist in the NSC is imperative to ensuring national security policy gets on track,” Heritage’s Shedd said. (For more from the author of “After Michael Flynn’s Departure, How Trump Can Stabilize National Security Council, Avoid Leaks” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Blasts ‘Fake News’ and ‘Failing’ Media Outlets

President Donald Trump went toe-to-toe with the media at the White House news conference Thursday, using terms such as “fake news” and “failing” to describe many of the recent stories about his administration.

“I turn on the TV, open the newspapers, and I see stories of chaos, chaos,” Trump said. “Yet it is the exact opposite. This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine, despite the fact that I can’t get my Cabinet approved.”

He also said, “In other words, the media’s trying to attack our administration because they know we are following through on pledges that we made and they’re not happy about it for whatever reason.”

During the press conference, CNN’s Jim Acosta asked, “Aren’t you concerned, sir, that you are undermining the people’s faith in the First Amendment, freedom of the press, the press in this country, when you call stories you don’t like ‘fake news?’”

Trump said, “I’m changing it from fake news, though. Very fake news.”

Trump continued:

It’s so important to the public to get an honest press. The press—the public doesn’t believe you people anymore. Now, maybe I had something to do with that. I don’t know. But they don’t believe you.

Trump said, “I mean, you have a lower approval rate than Congress. I think that’s right.”

Trump singled out CNN more than any other news outlet, saying, “I mean, I watch CNN, it’s so much anger and hatred and just the hatred.”

Acosta later said, “Just for the record, we don’t hate you. I don’t hate you.”

Trump responded, “Ask [CNN President] Jeff Zucker how he got his job. OK?”

Major media figures, such as NBC’s Chuck Todd, expressed alarm at Trump’s comments.

However, Jeff Mason, the president of the White House Correspondents’ Association who covers the president for Reuters, had a more reserved view.

Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center, a conservative media watchdog group, who has in the past been a critic of Trump, said some aspects of the press conference amused him.

This marks the third press conference for Trump this week, after holding two prior press conferences with foreign leaders.

Regarding the story about Trump’s recent firing of national security adviser Michael Flynn and his communication with a Russian ambassador, Trump said: “The leaks are absolutely real. The news is fake because so much of the news is fake.”

Trump went on to denounce coverage about his campaign aides communicating with Russians.

“The failing New York Times wrote a big, long front-page story yesterday and it was very much discredited, as you know,” Trump said. “It was—it’s a joke, and the people mentioned in the story, I notice they were on television today saying they never even spoke to Russia. They weren’t even a part, really—I mean, they were such a minor part. They—I hadn’t spoken to them.”

He later talked about a Wall Street Journal story that said intelligence officials didn’t trust the president.

“And just while you’re at it, because you mentioned this, Wall Street Journal did a story today that was almost as disgraceful as the failing New York Times’ story yesterday.”

Trump said he’s actually having fun speaking to the press:

I’m actually having a very good time, OK? … I won with news conferences and probably speeches. I certainly didn’t win by people listening to you people. That’s for sure. But I’m having a good time. Tomorrow, they will say, ‘Donald Trump rants and raves at the press.’ I’m not ranting and raving. I’m just telling you. You know, you’re dishonest people. But I’m not ranting and raving. I love this. I’m having a good time doing it.

(For more from the author of “Trump Blasts ‘Fake News’ and ‘Failing’ Media Outlets” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.