The hallelujah cure: Trump campaign adviser says pray away the flu

Brethren, our topic for this week’s column is the flu, because I have it.

I followed the advice of the Centers for Disease Control and got a vaccination, which may or may not have lessened my symptoms. But then I discovered I had neglected the most important prophylaxis of all: prayer.

This advice came from the evangelist Gloria Copeland, who with her husband, Kenneth, runs a religious empire based largely on faith healing. Copeland posted a video last week that argued, passionately if incoherently, either that the flu doesn’t actually exist (“We got a duck season, a deer season, but we don’t have a flu season”) or that faith can protect you from it (“inoculate yourself with the word of God”).

At a time when the CDC was warning that this year’s flu outbreak appears to be the worst in almost a decade, Copeland’s remarks went, uhh, viral. They also attracted unwanted attention to her connection to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, on whose “evangelical advisory board” she and her husband served, alongside prominent Christian and Republican figures including Jerry Falwell Jr., Michele Bachmann and James Dobson. Apparently in response, a clarification went up on the Copeland Ministries website, insisting that “Gloria did not say or imply that you shouldn’t get a flu shot or see a doctor. Gloria and Kenneth Copeland Ministries value medicine and doctors and would never counsel someone not to seek medical care.”

That disclaimer would be more convincing if there weren’t copious evidence that Copeland actually does not value medicine, at least in comparison with the kind of healing that goes on in her church and at revivals. Her statement on the website was followed by pages of testimonials like this one, from “Terri”: “Tests showed I had a growth on my gallbladder and the doctor recommended surgery.  We prayed and received healing by faith. Hands were laid on me and I never had another symptom.”  As Copeland once preached: “We know what’s wrong with you. You’ve got cancer. The bad news is we don’t know what to do about it — except give you some poison that will make you sicker. Now, which do you want to do? Do you want to do that, or do you want to sit in here on a Saturday morning, hear the word of God and let faith come into your heart and be healed?”

At least since the time of Jesus, Christians have prayed for health. But Kurt Andersen, in his indispensable guide to American irrationality, Fantasyland, traces contemporary faith healing to the advent of the charismatic, ecstatic form of Christian worship known as Pentecostalism. After its heyday in the early decades of the 20th century, it was banished to the fringes of society for decades, only to reemerge in recent years under the guise of “prosperity gospel.” As preached by the Copelands, Oral Roberts, Joel Osteen and many others, one can think of prosperity gospel as a form of “applied religion,” by analogy to, say, “applied science,” that involves trying to obtain concrete rewards in the here and now,  including financial success, personal happiness and overcoming adversity.

Such as the flu.

Andersen notes that this is not a practice confined to right-wing Christians. Seeking to cure cancer by praying is not more or less implausible than using crystals for the purpose. Oprah, that great font of national gullibility, was an early exponent of “The Secret,” a best-selling book by Rhonda Byrnes that repackaged prosperity gospel in secular form as “the law of attraction,” the idea that “the universe” would provide whatever you sought if you just thought about it long and hard enough.

Morally, this is deplorable. Byrne’s book never so much as raised the possibility that the awesome power she had discovered could be used for the benefit of anyone else — a hungry child, say — rather than grabbing jewelry, toys, lovers or a good parking spot. It’s also common knowledge that the “prosperity” in prosperity gospel mostly accrues to the people who preach it.

Metaphysically, it’s a muddle. Prayer doesn’t work all the time, obviously, so why does God heal some people and not others? How does he do it? The Bible verses that Copeland cites in support of her practice were written at a time when the human body was a black box, and there was no inherent reason to doubt that Jesus could raise someone from the dead. By 1987, though, when Oral Roberts made the same claim for himself, it was understood that restoring a corpse to life requires reversing a whole cascade of cellular processes for which there is no known, or even conceivable, mechanism. Does God go through each of the trillions of cells in a human body and jump-start the mitochondria?

Still, between coughing fits last week, I wondered: Could Copeland be on to something? I had relied on medical science to ward off the flu, and I got sick anyway. (Full disclosure: this is a self-diagnosis, based on my feeling the way Trump reportedly described the nations of Africa). What does science have to say about prayer as a form of medical prophylaxis?

It is part of the greatness of the scientific method that this question can be asked, and, within the limits of our present-day knowledge, answered. The first statistical study of so-called intercessory prayer was published in 1872 by the eminent Victorian scientist Sir Francis Galton, who noted that, notwithstanding the millions of prayers regularly offered in European countries for the health of their respective royal families, on average royals actually died younger — 64 years — than clergymen, lawyers, military officers, or members of all other genteel professions, excluding deaths by accident or violence.

I rest my case.

No, actually, I don’t, because scientists have continued to study the question — not by calculating the lifespan of kings, but with controlled experiments enlisting hundreds of subjects and modern statistical analysis. You can read an analysis by David R. Hodge of Arizona State University here, and another here. What seemed to Galton like a straightforward question of statistics turns out to pose all kinds of research conundrums. What kinds of prayer should be studied, and by whom? For what kinds of disease? Should the people prayed for be told in advance, and is their informed consent required? What measures should be used to determine if the prayers worked?

Each researcher answered those questions differently. A few studies, less than half, indicated a beneficial effect of intercessory prayer, but the effects were small. Often the outcomes involved obscure markers of recovery such as the incidence of certain specific surgical complications. God works in mysterious ways, but that’s a long way from being raised from the dead.

At least one researcher treated the whole question as a joke, and did an experiment to show that praying for patients years after they were sick — and in some cases, after they were already dead — was correlated with shorter hospital stays. (The paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal — the data was real, if nonsensical — and it has been cited by other researchers, leading to some professional angst about the ethics of scientific satire.)

The bottom line is that while we can’t prove that prayer works or doesn’t work, if it were a drug up for approval by the FDA, it likely wouldn’t qualify. Hodge says it would be classified as an “experimental” intervention.

Still, there’s no harm in it, is there? When people are sick, their families and friends want to feel they’re doing something, and praying for them, if nothing else, keeps them in mind. Last month White House press secretary Sarah Sanders asked people to pray for 9-year-old Sophia Marie Campa-Peters, who was about to undergo life-saving brain surgery. Those who responded undoubtedly felt good about themselves, Sophia and her parents took courage from the response, and Trump himself, at the National Prayer Breakfast last week, cited her recovery after “millions of people lifted Sophia up in their prayers.”  Who could be against that — given, of course, that the prayers were viewed, properly, as supplemental to the surgery, rather than a substitute for it?

But that’s the catch: Some people do substitute faith for medical treatment. The Copelands’ own church was at the center of a measles outbreak in 2013, spread by children whose parents had failed to vaccinate them. The church denied that it discourages vaccination, but as one former member explained, “To get a vaccine would have been viewed by me and my friends and my peers as an act of fear — that you doubted God would keep you safe. … We simply didn’t do it.”

As public health officials have said repeatedly, an unvaccinated child isn’t just a risk to herself, but even to those who did receive a shot; the operative concept is “community [aka ‘herd’] immunity.” More broadly, the belief that we can turn our problems over to Jesus — or the “law of attraction” — can distract us from other urgent problems that require human solutions. And environmental problems in particular require those human solutions. This is a mindset that is compounded by the fact that many of the same people who turn to God to keep them from getting the flu also believe in the imminence of the End Times, which would render the melting of the polar ice caps an irrelevant inconvenience.

James Inhofe, the chair of the Senate Environmental Committee, has been especially forceful in this regard. His view is to let God handle global warming, since it’s out of humanity’s hands anyway. “God’s still up there,” he has said. “The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.”

All I can say about that is, for Inhofe’s sake I hope he doesn’t take the same attitude toward his own health as he does toward the health of the Earth.

And as for me, I need a nap.

Read more from Yahoo News:

Source Article from

Billionaire Soros Vows to Spend Additional $138,300 on Anti-Brexit Campaign

Home » Communism, Europe, Manipulation, Politics » Billionaire Soros Vows to Spend Additional $138,300 on Anti-Brexit Campaign


Jewish billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Foundations (OSF) are set to pledge a new donation of 100,000 pounds, or roughly $138,300, to the campaign to stop Brexit, according to media reports.

The latest pledge comes on top of 400,000 pounds that Soros had earlier decided to contribute to Best for Britain campaign, the Telegraph newspaper reported on Sunday.

The spokesperson of UK Prime Minister Theresa May said Thursday, in a comment on Soros’ donation, that London’s position on the withdrawal from the European Union would not change and there would be no second referendum.

The Hungarian-American billionaire Soros said that he was a “proud supporter” of Best for Britain, claiming that Brexit was a “lose-lose proposition” both for Britain and Europe. He also wrote for the Mail that before the referendum Britain had been doing better economically than the rest of Europe.

The United Kingdom is currently in talks with the bloc on the terms of its departure and is set to formally leave the European Union on March 29, 2019.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

Obama Involved in Trump Vilification Campaign

Obama Involved in Trump Vilification Campaign

by Stephen Lendman ( – Home – Stephen Lendman)

Led by undemocratic Dems and media scoundrels, long knives tried preventing Trump’s election by devious means – now trying to oust him from office for the wrong reasons.

No US president was ever removed from office by impeachment. John Adams once said it would take a national convulsion to do it.

Impeachment and conviction require proving “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” It’s never been done. Only two presidents were impeached, neither convicted and removed from office.

Will Trump break precedent – for the wrong reasons, not the right ones? Russiagate is an unconstitutional witch hunt endangering the republic.

Paul Craig Roberts calls it “a dagger aimed at the heart of American governmental institutions,” an anti-Trump conspiracy, involving high-level undemocratic Dems, DOJ and FBI officials, supported by media scoundrels.

High-level FBI official on special counsel Robert Mueller’s team Peter Strzok was removed from the investigation because of anti-Trump text messages with bureau lawyer Lisa Page, his mistress.

A Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee report indicated they gave Obama regular updates into FBI investigative work on Hillary’s email scandal – for sure the Russiagate probe as well.

The report revealed text messages between Strzok and Page discussed ” ‘protect(ing) the country from the menace’ of Trump ‘enablers,’ and the possibility of an ‘insurance policy’ against the ‘risk’ of a Trump presidency.”

Other text messages between them discussed “Attorney General Loretta Lynch knowing that Secretary Clinton would not face charges before the FBI had interviewed Secretary Clinton and before her announcement that she would accept Director Comey’s prosecution decision.”

He failed to hold her accountable for wrongdoing, passing it off as “extreme carelessness,” a major dereliction of duty, arguably a criminal offense.

Obama wanted to “know everything” about the FBI Hillary investigation, the Senate report said. He lied saying “I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations,” adding:

“I do not talk to the FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line, and always have maintained it.”

Strzok and Page were heavily involved in the Russiagate witch hunt probe, Obama kept informed.

Comey lied to Congress under oath, claiming he didn’t consult with the DOJ or White House about the Hillary probe, based on text messages between Strzok and Page.

The Senate report “raise(d) additional questions about the type and extent of President Obama’s personal involvement in the Clinton email scandal and the FBI investigation of it,” along with the Russiagate probe.

Questions remain unanswered, including “whether, and the extent to which, any personal animus and/or political bias influenced the FBI’s investigation,” along with the “extent to which, the Obama Department of Justice or White House influenced the FBI’s investigation and…whether, and the extent to which, any personal animus and/or political bias influenced the FBI’s actions with respect to President Trump.”

Clearly long knives aim to remove him from office by impeachment or more sinister means.

The fate of the republic hangs in the balance if he’s wrongfully ousted by coup d’etat masquerading as just cause.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

Source Article from

European women fight back with anti-migrant violence campaign video

120db campaign


The campaign that was launched by German women against migrant violence is becoming very successful. Its video has over 1.5 million views and women from all over Europe are using the 120db hashtag.

The 120 decibel (120db) movement is named after the noise level of the “rape alarms” some women in Germany carry in their handbags. Its campaign was launched last week by a group of women who are increasingly worried about migrant violence and sexual assaults.

After the launch, the 120db campaign was picked up by several big social media users. For example, American conservative Ann Coulter tweeted it and said:

“I wish this ad would run during the #SuperBowl: 120 decibels #120db (the German #metoo).”

On Facebook The Rebel journalist Tommy Robinson posted the 120db campaign video and it skyrocketed to 1.5 million views in a week.

The campaign is also successful on Twitter as the hashtag #120db appears daily. It also gets more international attention as women from Europe and other parts of the world are using the hashtag. Some even post pictures of female victims of migrant violence or terror.

Independent journalist Brittany Pettibone had an interview with one of the women and she explains how it all started:

Other forms of protests have started to emerge in Germany as well. In cities like Cottbus and Kandel there were big protests against migrant violence and several new ones have been planned. Especially women play an important role in Germany’s protests. A “Women’s March” against migrant violence will be organised in Berlin on 17 February.

Source Article from

Re: UK university removes Israel brand following BDS campaign

A popular brand of Israeli hummus has been removed from the shelf of a British university shop following protests by students.

The University of Manchester (UoM) campus shop was asked to stop stocking Sabra Hummus; a brand of hummus manufactured in the occupied West Bank which the students alleged is complicit in human rights violations in occupied Palestine. They claimed that the University’s decision to stock Sabra in its shops actively endorses Israel’s illegal occupation and human rights violations in Palestine.

Sabra Hummus is a well-known brand that’s said to have captured 66 per cent of the hummus market in the US. What’s rarely mentioned is that the brand’s owner, PepsiCo and Strauss Group, “adopted” an elite Israeli military unit.

The company’s website has boasted of providing the Golani Brigade “with an ongoing variety of food products for their training or missions, and provide personal care packages for each soldier that completes the path.” The Strauss Group has also said it gives funds to the Israeli army unit for “welfare, cultural and educational activities, such as pocket money for underprivileged soldiers, sports and recreational equipment, care packages, and books and games for the soldiers’ club.”

Read: Israeli embassy accused of pressuring UK university to censor free speech

In their petition to have Sabra Hummus removed from the campus, the students cited PepsiCo and Strauss Group’s backing of Israeli soldiers and revealed that the company had proudly declared its support for the Israeli army on its website in English. However, one week after the announcement of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Sabra Hummus, Strauss Group removed their statement of support in English, but has left the statement in Hebrew.

The petition by the students listed several examples of human rights violations by the Golani Brigade, including, according to the petition “arbitrary murders, assaults, incarcerations, evictions, and arrests of children”.

“It played key roles in the Israeli army’s assault on the Gaza Strip in 2008-09 during ‘Operation Cast Lead’ [where] widespread human rights abuses and possible war crimes were committed by the Israeli army during the assault,” said the petition.

The students said that the sale of Sabra Hummus was “an endorsement of the company’s politics” and called on UoM to financially end its support for human rights violators like the Golani Brigade.

Students were informed yesterday of the shop’s decision not to stock the Israeli brand on campus. In an email to the student group, seen by MEMO, the shop manager said: “We will not be ordering this product/brand again as this will be set as ‘not available’ on our on-line system which will prevent anyone from bringing this into the stock within the shop.”

Read: Manchester University must reveal its relations with Israeli institutions

Members of the campaign group are hoping that the decision by the shop to boycott Israeli produce will encourage UoM to terminate its investment in companies that are complicit in the illegal occupation of Palestine.

“This is a great victory for the whole movement of BDS” a student activist said to MEMO “however the university still holds institutional and investment links to Israel’s war crimes including shares in companies which profit from and sustain Israel’s apartheid regime, such as Caterpillar, whose specially-modified armed bulldozers are used to demolish homes, schools, olive groves and communities in Palestine. This goes completely against the university’s own socially responsible investment policy”.

The student continued: “as a first year student, I was shocked to find out that my university was in fact not investing in the socially responsible companies that it claims to and instead hold millions of pounds worth of shares in companies which sustain Israel’s apartheid regime.”

Source Article from

FLASHBACK: Mainstream media collusion in the Clinton campaign

Hillary Clinton


In April 2015, the Clinton campaign held a private dinner party with at least 65 journalists and pundits in attendance. Individuals from CNN, CBS, The New York Times, NBC, MSNBC and more came together under the campaign’s stated goal of “framing the race” to help Clinton win. Many of the above media outlets were indeed the Clinton campaign’s biggest surrogates throughout the 2016 presidential election.

This past election cycle was unprecedented in terms of the bias and lack of objectivity exercised by the mainstream media. The emphasis on mainstream media blaming “fake news” for Donald Trump’s election is an attempt to distract and divert the feedback loop developed between the Clinton campaign and much of the press. Throughout the 2016 election, the media obsessed over Trump to elevate his candidacy. He was their preferred opponent for Hillary Clinton-after they had thoroughly subverted Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign for the Democratic nomination.

Several journalists from The New York Times, which formally endorsed Clinton twice, created propaganda for the Clinton campaign rather than independent journalism. The Times‘ Mark Leibovich allowed Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri to “veto what you didn’t want” from his interview with Clinton. Maggie Haberman was listed by the Clinton campaign as a friendly reporter with whom they could plant stories. Haberman also allowed Clinton campaign staff to proofread her pro-Clinton stories.

The Times‘ Patrick Healy published a “heroine” piece planted by the Clinton campaign about New Hampshire Clinton campaign volunteer Laura Donahoe. Jonathan Martin was revealed to have been coached through a story on the Clinton campaign by manager Robby Mook. Jason Horowitz solicited a quote from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta on a hit piece about the relationship between President Obama and Sanders.

The New York Times wasn’t alone. Politico reporter Ken Vogel had Democratic National Committee (DNC) communications director Luis Miranda review an article before he sent it to editors as part of an agreement with the DNC. Politico has since called Vogel’s actions “a mistake.” Glenn Thrush also allowed Podesta to approve articles.

CNN published an anti-Sanders Op-Ed written by Clinton lobbyist Maria Cardona-it was proofread by the DNC.

The Intercept reported in May that an Op-Ed ostensibly written by Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and intended to discredit Sanders was actually written by a Clinton lobbyist and proofread by a Clinton Super PAC, which sent the article to CNN. CNN regularly featured pundits with financial ties to the Clintons, yet failed to disclose those ties before the pundits praised Clinton. DNC interim chair Donna Brazile was revealed to have obtained CNN debate questions while working for the network and forwarded them to the Clinton campaign. CNN also allowed the DNC to compile questions to be asked during interviews with Republican candidates on air.

In the WikiLeaks release of DNC emails, The Washington Post was exposed to have hosted a joint fundraiser with the Clinton campaign. The paper published hyperbolic hit pieces on Sanders throughout the primaries, including the editorial board calling his campaign “fiction-filled” and an article published with the title claiming that nominating Sanders would be “insane.” Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s (FAIR) Adam Johnson pointed out the Post published 16 hit pieces on Sanders in the span of 16 hours in early March. Harper‘s Thomas Frank wrote also a detailed piece on how WaPo sabotaged Sanders during the primaries.

Wall Street Journal reporter Laura Meckler received a letter leaked to her from DNC communications director Miranda and used it to write a hit piece on Sanders during the primaries. Miranda used the same reporter to criticize Sanders in the media over convention platform appointments.

The Associated Press was cited by the Clinton campaign as a publication in which they could plant stories with friendly journalists Matt Lee and Bradley Klapper, including discussions regarding the private email server scandal. Robby Mook’s assistant emailed fellow Clinton staff members asking what time would they prefer the story be published by the AP. They also called the Democratic primaries for Clinton before California even voted, citing anonymous superdelegates.

MSNBC halted negative coverage of former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz after she called the network’s president, Phil Griffin, to complain. Two days after Clinton campaign staff discussed how to attack Sanders on campaign finance by citing a Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) retreat he attended several months earlier, MSNBC reporter Alex Seitz-Wald wrote a Sanders hit piece using the very same criticisms. Seitz-Wald, like many other pro-Clinton journalists, started out at John Podesta’s Center for American Progress. Seitz-Wald also propagated the chair-throwing myth at the Nevada Democratic Convention to discredit Sanders and his supporters. Meet the Press host Chuck Todd held a private party for Jennifer Palmieri while she was working as the Clinton campaign communications director. MSNBC host Joy Reid regularly pushed false narratives in order to help Clinton, especially in regards to WikiLeaks. Rachel Maddow premiered ads from Clinton Super PACs on her show.

CNBC correspondent John Harwood emailed Clinton Podesta on a regular basis, soliciting access in exchange for friendly coverage on Clinton.

Several prominent bloggers-MTV News’ Jamil Smith, Guardian columnists Sady Doyle and Jessica Valenti, Tech LadyMafia founder Aminatou Sow, America’s Voice Gabe Ortiz and Latino blogger Elianne Ramos who was later hired by the Clinton campaign-were selected by Clinton campaign staff to attend a conference call in which they could disseminate information they wanted the bloggers to propagate “without our fingerprints.”

Vox’s editor in chief, Ezra Klein, was cited by Clinton campaign staff as an attack dog they could use to push out a story they were putting together.

All these outlets and networks played significant roles in perpetuating false narratives in favor of the Clinton campaign. This includes the “Bernie Bros” myth, the whitewashing of the Sanders campaign, and adding superdelegates to Democratic primary tallies, even though they don’t cast their votes until the Democratic National Convention.

The DNC and Clinton campaign manipulated mainstream media coverage to further Clinton’s candidacy, especially in the Democratic primaries.

Clinton’s lack of press conferences during the primaries and general election are symptomatic of her not willing to deal with any media not entirely subservient to the campaign’s political agenda. As the mainstream media offers more excuses to avoid responsibility and accountability for this election, major press reforms are needed. Admitting the vast amounts of unethical, pro-Clinton coverage among media elites would be a good start.

Source Article from

Netanyahu Blames Soros for Thwarting His Immigrant Deportation Campaign

Home » Immigration, Middle East » Netanyahu Blames Soros for Thwarting His Immigrant Deportation Campaign


This is not the first time that the billionaire involves himself in the immigration policy of a foreign country. The Israeli campaign is aimed at sending African immigrants and asylum seekers to an unnamed African country, forcibly if needed.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has allegedly accused Jewish-American billionaire of Hungarian origin George Soros of undermining the state’s deportation program and “funding the protests”. The incident reportedly happened during a weekly meeting of ministers from the ruling Likud party as a response to the science minister’s comment that Israeli aid organizations had been receiving help from foreign governments and foundations, according to the local Channel 10 television channel.

Reports also claim that Netanyahu drew parallels between the Israeli deportation campaign and Obama’s deportation of “two million infiltrators,” which he noted remained undisputed. Israel’s Population and Immigration Authority began notifying immigrants and asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan that they are to be deported to an unnamed African country with a relatively “stable government.” In case they don’t go voluntarily, they will be forcibly expelled starting April 1.

Soros has already been at the epicenter of immigration scandal. In 2017, the Hungarian government launched a public campaign against Soros, accusing him in orchestrating and supporting the migration to Europe amid the 2015 refugee crisis. The campaign featured billboards attacking the alleged pro-immigration “Soros plan,” but was halted under pressure from Tel Aviv, calling it “anti-Semitic.” Soros himself called accusations by the Hungarian government “distortions and outright lies”.



Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

Source Article from

ABC, NBC Ignore Hillary Clinton Covering for Sex Harasser in 2008 Campaign

Please support NewsBusters today! (a 501c3 non-profit production of The Media Research Center)


Source Article from

BOMBSHELL: Classified memo detailing Obama targeted Trump campaign with bogus FISA court warrant… “Is this America or the KGB?” asks stunned GOP

Image: BOMBSHELL: Classified memo detailing Obama targeted Trump campaign with bogus FISA court warrant… “Is this America or the KGB?” asks stunned GOP

(Natural News)
You won’t hear about this on the Fake News Network or read much in the Washington Post, New York Times, or any other establishment media outlet because it is a scandal that is potentially damaging to their hero president, Barack Obama, his administration, and Democrats in general.

In recent days, the House Intelligence Committee voted to release a Top Secret memo detailing what is believed to be massive abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court by the Obama administration and Deep State political operatives within the Department of Justice and the FBI.

In particular, it is believed that the 44th president and his political sycophants deliberately fabricated “intelligence” — using the so-called“Trump dossier” with its baseless, unsubstantiated allegations, to justify getting a “counterintelligence” surveillance warrant from the FISA court.

What did they need the warrant for? Who was the target? That would be the campaign of Donald J. Trump.

“Fox is told that while the Intel Cmte voted in favor of the Simpson transcript, Democrats blocked the release of other documents. The committee has also voted on a motion by Rep. Pete King (R-NY) to make available to all House members a memo documenting abuse of the FISA program,” Fox News correspondent Pergram tweeted on Thursday.

In another tweet, the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York called the release a “major development. “Report contains answer to question of whether FBI/DOJ used Trump dossier to secure FISA warrant to spy on Americans, plus other issues. Now, whole House can know. Public still in dark,” he added. (Related: DEEP STATE: Rep. Jordan says FBI paid for, then based its Team Trump probe on BOGUS ‘dossier’ (Video.)

The memo, which remains Top Secret for no good reason and as such must be viewed in a secure room, has since been seen by a number of lawmakers — well, Republican lawmakers, because they seem to be the only ones who are trying to get to the bottom of this massive, scandalous abuse of our political and justice systems.

And all of them who have read it are shocked, stunned, and worried about the future of our republic. It’s that bad.

“You think about, ‘is this happening in America or is this the KGB?’ That’s how alarming it is,” Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania told Fox News, one of the few major news outlets tracking this story.

“It is so alarming the American people have to see this,” Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan added.

“It’s troubling. It is shocking,” North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows noted further. “Part of me wishes that I didn’t read it because I don’t want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.”

Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz said he could see a number of people within the FBI and DoJ who not only could lose their jobs but be indicted as well.

“I believe the consequence of its release will be major changes in people currently working at the FBI and the Department of Justice,” he said, referencing DOJ officials Rod Rosenstein and Bruce Ohr.

He told Fox News host Sean Hannity, “I believe this will not end just with firings. I believe there are people who will go to jail. I was very persuaded by the evidence.” He further noted that he believes it was entirely appropriate for GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Lindsey Graham to refer the matter to the Trump Justice Department for criminal prosecution.

“I don’t take lightly making a referral for criminal investigation. But, as I would with any credible evidence of a crime unearthed in the course of our investigations, I feel obliged to pass that information along to the Justice Department for appropriate review,” Grassley said in a statement.

Finally, former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino, who has been tracking this issue on his CRTV program, also sees trouble ahead not just for the Obama officials involved, but for the former president himself.

“Take it to the bank, the FBI/FISA docs are devastating for the Dems. The whole image of a benevolent Barack Obama they’ve disingenuously tried to portray is about to be destroyed. The real Obama, the vengeful narcissist, is going to be exposed for all to see,” he tweeted.

J.D. Heyes is also editor-in-chief of The National Sentinel.

Sources include:



Source Article from