Another reason to clean: Researchers claim your sink drain could be home to deadly bacteria

Image: Another reason to clean: Researchers claim your sink drain could be home to deadly bacteria

(Natural News)
Every surface of the house is swarming with germs, some more so than others. An area that we expect to be dirty is the toilet, in which waste is regularly discarded. However, new research shows that a surprisingly bacteria-infested environment is our humble sink. Researchers have told Daily Mail online that the sink plughole is the next dirtiest place in the house – filled with harmful bacteria that create dangerous “biofilms.”

Researchers from the University of East Anglia said that sink plugholes and bath drains house a concoction of deadly bacteria, “many of which are opportunistic pathogens and present threats to patients and house owners.

“There is a distinct lack of recent experiments focused on this microbial reservoir making future research into them paramount,” the researchers added.

The accumulation of hair, soap, and dead skin in the shower drain create harmful biofilms, a collection of one or more types of microscopic organisms including bacteria, fungi, diatoms and algae, that mostly stick to wet surfaces. In the bathroom, the drain can house a species of fungus called Fusarium solani, which can lead to permanent vision damage. The toilet also houses various bacteria that linger on the surfaces even after flushing.

In the kitchen, the plug accumulates parts of raw food washed in the sink, such as chicken, that may have been infected with salmonella, or ground beef contaminated with Escherichia coli (E. coli). The bacteria can seep out the sink plug and will target weak immune systems.

Authors of the study noted that “these pathogens can easily… accumulate and proliferate within the kitchen sink drain.”

Another type of bacteria found in water pipes is the Enterobacter cloacae, exposure to which can lead to urinary tract infection.

Bathroom boarders

The bathroom is one of the dirtiest places in the house, and it’s no wonder – all the germs and dirt and sweat of the day get washed off in it. Here are other parts of the bathroom where most bacteria tend to reside:

  • Shower and tub – If not cleaned properly, the soap scum, hair products and all other substances we use for washing can be home to Mycobacterium avium, a pathogen linked to pulmonary disease. It’s best to keep your shower and tub dry after using them and leave a window open to let the air circulate.
  • Tiles and walls – Biofilms often hang out in your tiles and walls, especially the ones in the shower area, where all the dirt and dead skin get sloughed off. Use scrubbing pads and brushes to remove these deposits. An old toothbrush can do the trick as well.
  • Fiber glass doors – Like the walls and tiles, bathroom doors trap germs that have been sloughed off your body. These can stay there, if left uncleaned. Foggy glass doors can be cleaned with white vinegar or baking soda, but use non-abrasive materials for glass doors to avoid leaving scratches on the surface.
  • Hand towels – These are usually shared with the rest of your family, and are often left damp, which is the perfect environment for bacteria. (Related: Bathroom hand dryers aerosolize dangerous germs at 2,700% higher rate than using paper towels, study claims.)
  • Ventilation fan – This absorbs most of the airborne bacteria in the bathroom – which can remain sitting on its blades and vent – as it replaces the soiled air with fresh air. Use paintbrush and a small vacuum to clean the blades without damaging them.

Read more about scientific research at

Sources include:



Source Article from

From Paul Martin to John Moore-Most Experts Claim World War III Is Imminent

I recently interviewed Paul Martin and we are getting matching intel which speaks to the fact that all of our military is on high alert and World War III could come at a moments notice.. All 50 National Guard Units are on alert. Hospitals triage techniques. Everyone from John Moore to Paul Martin are saying that World War is almost upon us. Youtube has already moved to restrict this video. Would they do so if the contents were not accurate?



Please donate to offset the costs of The Common Sense Show



The official storable food of the CSS. Take 5% off with Promo Code “Hodges9”. Click here

This is the absolute best in food storage. Dave Hodges is a satisfied customer.  Listeners to The Common Sense Show will receive 5% off their next order by mentioning “Hodges9” in the coupon code box.  Don’t wait until it is too late. Click Here for more information.

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at Take 5% off the cost of your order with coupon code DAVE5

From the Hagmann blood sugar protocol to the Hodges joint protocol, Dr. Broer has helped hundreds of thousands of people. There is something for everybody at  FOR COMMON SENSE SHOW LISTENERS, YOU CAN TAKE 5% OFF OF ALL ORDERS FROM HEALTHMASTERS.  ACT NOW, THIS IS A VERY LIMITED TIME OFFER. USE THE COUPON CODE “5HODGES”



Source Article from

In 1997, NASA Was Sued For Trespassing By Men Who Claim Mars Belonged To Their Ancestors 3,000 Years Ago

You don’t get a lot of property related lawsuits (or do you) when you are in the business of sending rovers and satellites onto distant planets, but this happened to NASA 18 years ago. It was back in 1997 when three guys from Yemen decided to file a lawsuit to the country’s prosecutor general in Sana’a. The case was not about intellectual property; they claimed they owned Mars! They were suing NASA for trespassing.

We inherited the planet from our ancestors 3,000 years ago,” they told the weekly Arabic-language newspaper Al-Thawri.

Adam Ismail, Mustafa Khalil, and Abdullah al-Umari based their claims on family history, supposing that they are descended from the Himyarites and Sabaeans, ethnic groups who lived in southern Arabia. According to their mythologies, these long-lost civilizations had seven temples on each of the planets in the solar system. As stated in a local newspaper, the trio presented “legal” documents that support their claim.

Nobody except the prosecutor saw these documents, and after throwing out the case, he described this group of people as “abnormal,” warning them with jail time if they try to sue again. It makes you wonder what a document for owning a planet looks like!?

The events that prompted this were NASA’s exploratory Pathfinder and Sojourner missions.

CNN report from July 1997 notes the rather humorous legal charge filed by Adam Ismail, Mustafa Khalil, and Abdullah al-Umari, who stated: “Sojourner and Pathfinder, which are owned by the United States government, landed on Mars and began exploring it without informing us or seeking our approval.

They demanded that the current exploration of Mars is stopped and any further Mars research should go through them. The men also explained that they were only seeking their right now because of the anniversary of several of their ancient cities’ foundations, and the desire to raise money to refurbish them.

Apparently, this is not the only case of extraterrestrial estate claims: There was a guy (Sylvio Langevin) who declared he owns all of the planets in the solar system. And another guy who tried to own the moon; Dennis Hope, claimed ownership of the moon back in the 1980s and, according to him, he has sold over 2 million acres of land on the moon at $20 per acre. There was also the “Nation of Celestial Space” which claimed to own everything in space, and Gregory Nemitz who laid claim to an asteroid.

Interestingly enough, the story about the Yemen trio didn’t end with their lawsuit rejected. The next year they started selling pieces of the Red Planet for $2 per square meter. A really nice bargain! They also assured buyers that they would issue a deed of ownership for their new property.

Owning a piece of extraterrestrial property may sound like a nice idea, but in reality, it is not really possible. Back in 1967, the United Nations issued the Outer Space Treaty (and Yemen signed it!) which holds that no country can claim ownership over extraterrestrial territory.

All of these cases may sound like a big scam now, but we are moving fast into the future, already planning to colonize Mars, mine asteroids and build moon bases. Things could change. The outer space treaty is not signed by every country and making new treaties that allow people to own something they don’t is not so difficult.

However, it is safe to say that NASA won’t have any bigger problems with the Yemen Martians in the close future.


Source Article from

Is Eating Eggs Just As Bad For Your Health As Smoking Cigarettes? The Science Behind The Claim

Next Story

*Re-Published Article

Science, and in particular health science, has entered a new era. Since the emergence of powerful corporations who put profit before all else, science has, as the editor-in-chief of the Lancet stated a few years ago, “taken a turn towards darkness.” This has been the topic of discussion among many health professionals and scientists throughout the years, and numerous publications have also emerged showing the need for immediate attention, but it’s still something that has yet to be discussed or even publicized as it should within the mainstream. You can read more about that in an article we published regarding “peer-reviewed” science, and what that really means today, here.

As a result, debates regarding various aspects that surround our human experience have emerged in abundance, and one of the most sensitive areas deals with our food — what we eat, how we eat it, and if what we’ve been taught for the past few decades is actually accurate. Given historical trends, it’s probably not, as the only constant of human knowledge and learning is that it changes and adapts all the time. Could the health benefits of eggs fit into the same category?

Recent studies over the past few years have been giving vegetarianism as well as veganism more credibility in the eyes of mainstream science. As Harvard Medical School recognizes“Studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.” 

The plethora of data that’s emerged has also justified the use of these findings in a clinical setting, and many doctors are now urging their patients to adopt a plant-based diet to treat and avoid several diseases, including heart disease and diabetes.

Take for example Michelle McMacken, an Assistant Professor of Medicine at NYU School of Medicine and the Director of the Bellevue Hospital Weight Management Clinic. She reveals the grim reality of trying to treat disease without addressing diet:

Day in and day out, I treated symptoms and blood test results related to diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, fatty liver, osteoarthritis, and peripheral vascular disease — but I rarely got to the common root of these conditions. My approach was usually reactive rather than proactive. My patients didn’t get much better – the best I felt I could hope for was that their disease state was ‘managed’ and didn’t get worse.

“Like most physicians,” she continues, she “had little to no nutrition instruction during [her] training, and [she] felt ill equipped to counsel” her patients with regard to their food.

But she did her research, attended conferences with like-minded practitioners, and has since seen an enormous change:

The results have been nothing short of tremendous, both for my patients and for me personally. No longer do I automatically reach for the prescription pad when I see a patient with diabetes and high cholesterol. . . . In just a short time, I’ve seen many patients avoid or decrease medications, prevent diabetes, lose weight, and reduce their cardiovascular risk by moving towards or fully adopting a plant-based diet.

Another example is Kim A. Williams, M.D., the former President of the American College of Cardiology who also adopted a vegan diet. He often sees patients who are overweight and struggling with hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol. One of the things he advises them to do specifically is to go vegan. He is also the Chairman of Cardiology at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago. His enthusiasm for a planet-based diet comes from his interpretation of medical literature, having investigated several studies proving that people who pursue vegetarian diets live longer than meat eaters and have lower rates of death from heart disease, diabetes, and kidney problems.

The list of studies and practitioners is long, so if you’re of the belief that a vegan or vegetarian diet is or can be harmful, the truth of the matter is, there is no scientific basis to support it. As far as what humans are “meant” to eat, that’s also a major debate within the scientific community, yet we are presented with one perspective from a young age, and proponents of the evolution theory also seem to use that argument quite a bit. An article by Rob Dunn written for Scientific American titled “Human Ancestors Were Nearly All Vegetarians” explores this issue from an evolutionary perspective, revealing how our guts might be evolved to perform best on a vegetarian diet. This perspective also complements all of the science that is emerging today.

The fact is, people go plant based for a number of reasons. These include losing weight, reducing their risk of heart disease, decreasing the number of pills they have to take, increasing their energy levels, and more. There are several reasons, and if you’re curious, here are nine things that happen when you stop eating meat.

What About Eggs? Can They Really Be Compared to Cigarettes? 

According to the perspectives presented above, eggs would fit into the same category. They have been promoted as both healthy and unhealthy at various stages, so perhaps moderation is the best answer? It’s difficult to say, particularly when you have multiple studies condemning the consumption of eggs, linking them to cancer and heart disease, and others praising the consumption of eggs, showing complete opposite results.

For example, a study published in 2011 found that daily consumption of cholesterol appeared to cut a woman’s life short as much as smoking 25 thousand cigarettes, or 5 cigarettes a day for 15 years.

Following up on their research a year later, a study published in the Journal of Atherosclerosis Research found that regular egg consumption could put your health at grave risk. Canadian researchers examined 1,231 patients with an average age of 62. They used ultrasound measurements of the carotid arteries to establish the presence and quantity of atherosclerotic plaque. Smoking was measured in “pack-years” and egg yolk consumption in “egg yolk-years.” The researchers discovered that eating one egg per day was just as bad for your heart as smoking five cigarettes per day.

A more recent study conducted by researchers at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital followed more than 130,000 people for 36 years, monitoring illnesses, lifestyles, diets, and mortality rates.

They found that substituting between 15g and 19g of animal protein, the equivalent of a single sausage, for legumes, pulses, nuts, and other planet protein, significantly decreased the risk of early death. Replacing eggs with plant-based protein also led to a 19% reduction in death risk.

Researchers found that a 10% higher intake of meat was associated with a 2% higher mortality rate and an 8% higher chance of cardiovascular death.

According to Dr. T. Colin Campbell, known for his work on the “China Study“:

What I did during the early part of my career was nothing more than what traditional science would suggest. I made the observation that diets presumably higher in animal protein were associated with liver cancer in the Philippines. When coupled with the extraordinary report from India showing that casein fed to experimental rats at the usual levels of intake dramatically promoted liver cancer, it prompted my 27-year-long study The China Project, of how this effect worked. We did dozens of experiments to see if this was true and, further, how it worked.

In the study, Campbell emphasizes his use of traditional criteria to decide what is a carcinogen (in regards to animal-based proteins) from the government’s chemical carcinogenesis testing program. Campbell also stated that, “this is not a debatable subject and the implications of this conclusion are staggering in so many ways.”

The study also showed that animal protein is very acidic, forcing the body to leach calcium and phosphorus from the bones to neutralize the acidity.

Other Factors to Consider, Beyond Science

Scientific fraud is another important issue to consider. While there is some science showing that certain nutrients found within eggs are healthy, that doesn’t take away from the fact that consumption of eggs is doing other things in the body, too. It reminds me of blood pressure pills, for example. Yes, they reduce blood pressure, but they also create a cascade of other negative health effects, much like statins for heart problems do.

Scientific fraud is seen at all levels, from dangerous prescription drugs being pushed onto the market to the FDA manipulating media and science press and approving foods as safe for consumption without adequate study. There are countless examples here to choose from. What we have today is an inundation of corporately influenced science.

Today, if studies are funded by big food corporations, and many of them are, we’re most likely looking at advertising rather than actual science. This is why it’s so important to consider the unbiased studies that are emerging every day that entirely contradict government nutritional guidelines.

When it comes to uncovering fraud, as linked just above, there are multiple examples. When it comes to the egg industry specifically, Dr. Michael Greger is the one to consult. He’s an American physician, author, and professional speaker on health issues. He used the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to uncover how public perception can be manipulated so that food corporations profit.  Take a look.

For more short videos on eggs, the industry, and the science, made by Greger, you can visit this page of his website.

How Eggs Are Mass Produced

Another thing to consider is animal cruelty. While there are some humane egg farmers, when it comes to the eggs we most commonly find in fast food restaurants and grocery stores, this is the harsh reality.

The following video by activist Erin Janus perfectly depicts what’s wrong with the way eggs are mass produced.


Related CE Articles:

These are a select few of many. Please sift through our website to read more if interested.

9 Things That Happen When You Stop Eating Meat

The Heart Disease Rates of Meat-Eaters Versus Vegetarians & Vegans. The #1 Killer In The US

Internal Medicine Physician Shares What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Eating Meat

A Very Informative TEDX Talk Sharing Pure Facts About Eating Meat That Some People Still Don’t Believe

What Would Native American Wisdom Say About Going Vegan/Vegetarian? Would It Agree or Disagree

Plant-Based Protein VS. Protein From Meat: Which One Is Better For Your Body


Get Your In Depth Numerology Reading

Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.

With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.

Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.


Source Article from

NYPD Cops Accused Of Rape Claim Victim Isn’t Credible Because She Posted ‘Provocative Selfie’ On Social Media

Next Story

Far too often, survivors of rape end up being wrongfully blamed for their rapists’ actions, as if they had somehow suggested to their rapists that they wanted to be raped. This happens constantly, when in reality it should go without saying that a rape survivor is never responsible for their rape. 

However, it seems that even law enforcement sometimes fails to grasp this concept, blaming the victims for their perpetrators’ actions. In a recent court case against NYPD cops, officers attempted to argue that the young girl accusing them of rape shouldn’t be viewed as credible because of her “provocative selfies” on social media.

Sadly, this is one of countless examples of women being blamed for their rapists’ crimes, suggesting that their appearance somehow implied that they were “asking for it.” It’s difficult to envision anyone actually using this argument, let alone the people we’re supposed to trust to stop rapes from occurring in the first place.

NYPD Cops Accused Of Rape Are “Smearing” Their Victim

An 18-year-old girl recently came forward to report two policemen who allegedly raped her. The young girl claims that she was handcuffed and forced into a police van by two policemen, who then drove her to a parking lot where they forced her to perform oral sex on them both. One of the policemen then raped her. The young girl maintains that all of this was not consensual and that she remained in handcuffs the entire time.

Policemen took the young girl during a traffic stop, where they found prescription drugs in her car. “You’ll spend three hours in the precinct. This is what you’re going to do for us, and we’ll let you go,” the cops allegedly told her, as explained by her lawyer, Michael David.

“There was zero consent,” David clarified. “The cops were over 6 feet tall. She’s very petite, like 5-2 and maybe 100 pounds. There’s nothing she could do.”

DNA from both officers was also found on the teenager. As a law enforcement source stated, “DNA samples taken from both suspects came back as a match when compared to the rape kits.” Although the two NYPD detectives accused of the rape, Eddie Martins and Richard Hall, admitted to having sex with the victim, they claimed it was consensual.

The woman who accused the cops of raping her chose to go public with her allegations, taking to her social media to publicize her experience and increase awareness. The two officers have since been suspended until further notice.

The New York Post reported that, according to a legal document sent to the newspaper, the officers are attempting to discredit her accusations by “shaming” her for her social media posts. The document states that “this behaviour is unprecedented for a depressed victim of a vicious rape,” which was in reference to a “provocative selfie” and “bragging about being followed by paparazzi.” Apparently, the cops believe that because of her social media activity, her claims should be rendered “dubious.”

The letter continued: “She has posted Instagram videos of herself using drugs and rapping about the case while joking about the millions that will be ‘in her bank account.’ “

It’s important to note that, despite the language used in this letter, there is no “normal” behaviour or reaction experienced by rape survivors. This should not be an argument used by anyone, especially law enforcement. Rape affects each and every person differently, and although depression may be a common part of a rape survivor’s healing, that does not mean it needs to be a part of every survivor’s journey.

There is no guidebook to determine how best to handle being sexually assaulted or raped, or any other trauma, for that matter. We all grieve differently, we all love differently, we all communicate differently, and it would be ignorant to assume that we’d all react to being raped in the same manner. We are all souls living out our human experience, and no one experience is the same, and thus no one reaction is the same.

This reminded me of one story that was shared amidst all of the Harvey Weinstein allegations, discussing one woman’s reason why she felt uncomfortable posting #MeToo on social media (a social media hashtag users were posting to show their support for victims). It wasn’t that she hadn’t experienced sexual harassment, abuse, or rape in the past, but rather, hadn’t necessarily faced the reality of those situations herself.

Since her experiences weren’t extremely violent, and because she hadn’t felt “traumatized,” she felt that they were somehow unworthy of being called “sexual harassment” or “rape.” You can read more in our CE article here.

In reality, many of us who have been subjected to sexual harassment or assault tend to minimize our experiences because they’re not full of violence, or because our reactions don’t fit society’s stereotypes about rape victims. If we don’t feel “damaged” or if we don’t really feel anything, for that matter, we start to question whether or not what we went through was actually sexual assault, rape, etc.

Rape is not defined by the aftermath of your experience, nor is it classified by how “traumatic” the experience was or how it ended up shaping your life. Rape does not look the same in all cases, and so it’s completely understandable that our reactions wouldn’t parallel one another’s, either. These stereotypes surrounding the “expected behaviour” of rape survivors does not help their healing, but rather further perpetuates rape culture.

Final Thoughts 

Although it’s unclear whether or not the sex was consensual, what has been made abundantly clear is that these cops are perpetuating the false notion that a woman’s appearance can somehow justify rape. Claiming her appearance on social media somehow discredits her word highlights precisely the issue with the way in which we handle rape as a society.

We should be creating a safe and open space for survivors of sexual violence to come forward and share their experiences with us, not telling them they’re somehow to blame for their perpetrators’ actions. What we wear, what we post on social media, or what we “appear to want” do not justify rape, because rape can never be justified. 

Even if this case involved consensual sex, these cops are still misusing their positions of authority and wasting taxpayers’ dollars, and they violated policy. No matter what, they took advantage of their authority inappropriately, which occurs far too often.

I’d like to end this article by quoting a recently published piece in The Atlantic written by Brit Marling, in which she discusses the economics of consent. Sometimes, rape survivors feel that they cannot share their experiences with the public, or that they cannot say “no” in the first place, for financial reasons or because of the hierarchy that exists within society.

Cops, politicians, big shot executives, and other higher-ups and government officials use their power of authority to commit sexually violent acts against men, women, and children all the time, and then they get off scot-free. Why? Because within the constraints of our current economic system, money and power far too often trump ethics.

As Marling says, “It’s not these bad men. Or that dirty industry. It’s this inhumane economic system of which we are all a part.”

How would YOU change the future?

Will “business as usual” take our planet and civilization down the road to complete destruction?.

In this new film called Prosperity, you can learn the ways in which companies are changing the game in order to change our world. CE’s founder Joe Martino is in this film talking about CE’s business practices.

Watch the film free to see how things are changing.

How would YOU change the future?

Watch the new film Prosperity for free and learn how the game is changing on this planet. Watch now!


Source Article from

I Was Possessed By A Demon: Shocking Claim Evil Spirit Took Over Man’s Body

Gert Brouwer said he was left unable to breathe and a neighbour had to rescue him after the paranormal monster took control of him when he was aged 21.

He made the astonishing claim at the Paraforce UK paranormal convention in Witham, Essex.

Mr Brouwer, who was visiting from the Netherlands, told the stunned audience that in the year before his possession, a terrible series of events happened.

He said: “I had a car crash the same year aged 20, I lost my girlfriend in the same year and a friend of mine was murdered.

“I thought ‘why am I getting so much bulls*** in my life.’”

He said he got himself a new apartment, but after just two months of being there he “saw a web coming down with a big spider in it”.

He said: “I put the lights on and there was nothing there.

“I came home two weeks later and could not breathe anymore.

“A neighbour was knocking on the door saying Gert, Gert, Gert… she wanted to help me, but I couldn’t breathe anymore.

“I had scratches, my brain was not working anymore and I couldn’t breathe, so I went to see a shrink.”

Mr Brouwer began writing two blogs – one called “Me” and the other “He”.

He said: “I was asked why do you call it he, and I said I felt ‘He’ was a demon. I hope no one here will get caught with something like that.”

Mr Brouwer said after about two and a half months, he decided he could defeat the creature.

He said: “I changed my stance and had the psychology ‘I want to beat you… I want to win this battle’.

“I needed to reschedule my thoughts because I was mixed up with a demon.”

He decided to train as an exorcist to be able to fend off the hellish spirit.

He said he now knows just how rare demonic possession cases are.

Mr Brouwer, who was born in the Netherlands, and now lives there in Breda, said: “In 95 percent of possession cases there is no demon involved, it is just the emotions of an entity.”

He told the convention, he had paranormal experiences from as young as 11, when he also saw a psychiatrist.

Mr Brouwer said: “Aged 11 I would see things, pictures, and told my shrink what would happen in the future.”

He went on to found Paranormal Society World and GJB Media and describes himself as a demonologist, medium and exorcist.

The website of the society says he has won 14 awards for his paranormal work and appeared on TV.

His profile on the website states: “From a young age, Gert could communicate with the immortal.

“He uses all his senses in the field. At his 21st year, he was confronted with a demon in his apartment. This was also his first negative experience in the paranormal.

“This made the road open for Gert as an exorcist and the occult.”

There is no scientific evidence that possession is real, but many religions carry out exorcisms to rid people of evil spirits.

The oldest references to demonic possession are from the Sumerians, from around 4,000BC.

They believed all diseases of body and mind were caused by “sickness demons” called gidim or gid-dim.


Source Article from

Trump defends false claim that predecessors didn't call fallen soldiers' families: 'There’s nothing to clarify'

President Trump is refusing to clarify his false claim that former presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not call all of the families of fallen U.S. soldiers.

“There’s nothing to clarify,” Trump said in a Fox News Radio interview on Tuesday. “I think I’ve called every family of somebody that’s died, and it’s the hardest call to make. And I said it very loud and clear yesterday. The hardest thing for me to do is do that. Now, as far as other representatives, I don’t know. I mean, you could ask Gen. Kelly did he get a call from Obama. You could ask other people. I don’t know what Obama’s policy was. I write letters, and I also call.”

Kelly’s son, Marine 1st Lt. Robert Michael Kelly, died while serving in Afghanistan in 2010. John Kelly, a retired Marine general, is the highest-ranking military officer to lose a child in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Trump said he believes he has called every grieving military family during his first nine months in office.

“I have called — I believe — everybody, but certainly I’ll use the word virtually everybody,” Trump said. “I don’t know what Bush did; I don’t know what Obama did. You could find out easily what President Obama did. All you have to do is ask the military people, but I believe his policy was somewhat different than my policy.”

The president sparked a fury of criticism during a press conference in the White House Rose Garden on Monday when he was asked whether he had made contact with the families of four soldiers killed in an Oct. 4 ambush in Niger. Trump said that he had written letters and planned to call them — suggesting his predecessors did not do both.

“If you look at President Obama and other presidents, most of them didn’t make calls,” Trump said. “I like to call when it’s appropriate, when I think I’m able to do it.”

Later, when pressed, Trump said he wasn’t sure what Obama did.

“I was told that he didn’t often, and a lot of presidents don’t. They write letters,” Trump said. “President Obama, I think, probably did sometimes, and maybe sometimes he didn’t. I don’t know. That’s what I was told. … Some presidents didn’t do anything.”

Trump’s Rose Garden remarks were met by›››››››››› immediate backlash from former top Obama officials.

“That’s a f***ing lie,” Alyssa Mastromonaco, Obama’s former deputy chief of staff, wrote on Twitter. “He’s a deranged animal.”

“Stop the damn lying — you’re the President,” Eric Holder, Obama’s attorney general, tweeted. “I went to Dover AFB with 44 and saw him comfort the families of both the fallen military & DEA.”

On Monday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders insisted that Trump wasn’t lying but “stating a fact.”

“Sometimes they call, sometimes they send a letter; other times they have the opportunity to meet family members in person,” Sanders said.

“President Trump’s claim is wrong,” a former Obama White House official said in a statement to Yahoo News. “President Obama engaged families of the fallen and wounded warriors throughout his presidency through calls, letters, visits to Section 60 at Arlington, visits to Walter Reed, visits to Dover, and regular meetings with Gold Star Families at the White House and across the country.”

“This is an outrageous and disrespectful lie even by Trump standards,” Ben Rhodes, Obama’s foreign policy adviser, tweeted.

Following his latest remarks, Delilia O’Malley, whose brother was killed while serving in the Iraq War, also tweeted her disgust.

“’When my brother was killed, Pres Bush listened while I screamed at him & then held me as I sobbed, you fat f***ing liar.”

Read more from Yahoo News:

Source Article from

‘Hardball’ Bemoans ‘False Statements’ by WH, Claim Media Bias Cries Aim to Discredit Russia Probe

MSNBC’s Hardball
October 5, 2017
7:10 p.m. Eastern

CHRIS MATTHEWS: It seems to me that Trump doesn’t care about opinion from me or anybody else. He cares about straight, front-page news reporting. It drives him crazy. He hates facts. 

ANNE GEARAN: Well, I’d love to think he was reading the front pages every day. He certainly gets a lot of his news from what’s on television and he processes information visually and, I think, on a gut level and if he likes what he hears, if he thinks it is — has a positive spin about what he’s doing, he likes it. And he — and if he doesn’t, he blasts with equal opportunity at anybody who has reported.

MATTHEWS: What do you — Glenn, what do you think of this big investigation about the Intel community? I think you said earlier today, you wouldn’t mind if he did investigate all the reporters. So what? 

GLENN THRUSH: It would be hideous from a constitutional perspective, but I think there are a lot of reporters in that briefing room who wouldn’t mind having the entire panoply of west wing staff being forced under oath to testify all of these stories are incorrect. Because you know why? They’re not. They’re totally true. 

MATTHEWS: Andrea, you work for a major news organization I’m lucky to serve in a different capacity. The seriousness with which the news industry at a high level like NBC, The New York Times, The Washington [Post] is so serious and so grown-up and to be criticized by this President who says things like Obama is an African, says things that don’t mean anything, is an absurdity. 

ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, we have systems at all of our news organizations have systems, have people in charge of standards, in charge of legal review. Everything gets reviewed and mistakes can happen that everyone is human, but we double and triple-source. But to compare that with the false statements that are made on a daily basis by government officials is pretty astounding and I do think it undermines the credibility and in this — in this environment, it is directed at, I think, undermining the credibility of the news media, particularly on the Russian probe, because that will, I think he believes and it’s probably having its effect make a lot of people not respect the findings of either Robert Mueller, the committees, or the reporting.

MATTHEWS: That’s the plan. That’s the plan. Don’t you think that’s the plan? Let me go to Carol on this. Carol, I think that I’ve watched now for three days now, ever since your reporting on the word “moron,” which maybe isn’t the most important thing ever reported, but it is fascinating the way nobody has denied it. Not Huckabee Sanders, not the secretary of state, not the President. Any one of those guys could have come out with their mouths and say, he didn’t call me a moron. They haven’t. 

CAROL LEE: That’s right and that’s because it’s true. The only two people who have denied it are R.C. Hammond — 

MATTHEWS: Who doesn’t know. 

LEE: Well, who also, you know, had — said something to NBC that the Vice President’s office said was absolutely, patently false and the — Secretary Tillerson and the press secretary at the State Department. They’re the only two people who have come out and denied that Secretary Tillerson said that. So I think, you know, the secretary had multiple opportunities yesterday to knock that down and he very specifically chose not to. 

MATTHEWS: The next time the President talks about siccing investigators on the news media, the prominent news media, I think we should all recall his friends, enemies, critics and neutralists, if there are any, how he was sending down investigators, top investigators out to Hawaii to check into the president’s birth certificate and they were developing what he said, some very interesting information. All nonsense. Made up. That’s the fake news coming from the President.

Source Article from

CLAIM: Red Cross stole emergency supplies from the doorsteps of churches, then sold them for profit

ROBERT JONATHAN–A Houston-area woman has made an explosive allegation that the American Red Cross scooped up Hurricane Harvey relief supplies that poured in from all over the country, and supposedly sold some of them — like bottle water — for a profit. Other supplies were discarded in dumpsters.

In a Facebook video, Gina Nelms claimed that the Red Cross helped themselves to supplies such as clothing, baby food, diapers, and blankets that were the result of generous donations from concerned Americans that were brought in to the disaster area on 18 wheelers.

Boxes of supplies had temporarily piled up in front of churches as hard-working volunteers worked to bring them inside.

That’s when the Red Cross showed up, Nelms alleges in the Facebook video that has received almost 6 million views as of this writing.

The Red Cross was physically taking the donations from the doorsteps of these churches and putting them into their trucks. Red Cross came to the church with volunteers and began to steal the donations…from people who literally had nothing…

Nelms added that after hauling the supplies back to Red Cross shelters, Red Cross operatives tossed supplies that the organization couldn’t resell into dumpsters. She also asserts that she has pictures “of the dumpsters where they were burning millions in donations.”

The Gateway Pundit website indicated that it reached out to the Red Cross for comment, but its story has not been updated with a response as yet.

Nelms also claims that the Red Cross is protected by an Obama-era Executive Order, EO 13603, signed on March 16, 2012, regarding “National Defense Resources Preparedness.”

Although not a federal agency, the nonprofit, tax-exempt Red Cross describes itself as maintaining a “special and unique relationship” with the federal government as a “federal instrumentality” flowing from delegated authority to engage in disaster relief pursuant to its charter. Whether that brings the charitable institution under EO 13603 or not is unclear.

According to Nelms, moreover, for every $10 donated to the Red Cross, only 90 cents reaches disaster victims.

Separately, as of the end of August, the Red Cross said it had spent $50 million on Harvey relief, primarily on 232 shelters for nearly 70,000 evacuees. A Red Cross executive was unable to tell NPR at the time how much of each donated dollar was going to Hurricane Harvey relief efforts, however.

A 2016 U.S. Senate study concluded that of approximately $500 million raised by the Red Cross for Haiti earthquake relief in 2010, $124 million was spent on internal expenses.

The Red Cross is currently soliciting donations on TV for hurricane relief. As of late August, via his Twitter feed, Obama was still encouraging donations to the Red Cross to help Hurricane Harvey victims.

In 2016, Natural News founder Mike Adams revealed that the Red Cross apparently only managed to build six permanent homes in Haiti, despite the post-quake outpouring of donations. (Related: Read more about alleged improprieties at

Watch the video below and draw your own conclusions.

Source Article from