[Mail] The CIA has been accused of political bias by trying to stall publication of an explosive memoir which could damage Hillary Clinton's chances of reaching the White House.
The book tells the story of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, who was imprisoned in Pakistan in 2011 after shooting two men in self defense before being released in a controversial blood-money deal.
According to the authors, the CIA held the book manuscript for several months before demanding a swathe of redactions - even on information that is publicly available - pushing the publication of the book from September 2016 to March 2017.
Davis and his co-author Storms Reback believe the book - entitled The Contractor - could be seen as another 'Benghazi situation' for presidential candidate Clinton - which may explain the agency's attempts to delay publication until after the November 2016 election.
They also accuse the State Department - under Clinton's rule - of withholding two key interviews carried out for the book, which almost prevented the memoir from being written at all.
In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, the book's co-author Storms Reback revealed how Army veteran Davis has 'zero trust' in Clinton as a potential president and believes she would have abandoned him in a Pakistani prison, facing possible execution.
He thinks that had it not been for the U.S. military's plans to kill Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil, Davis would still be languishing in prison - or worse still, dead.
Author Reback, 46, said: 'Both Ray and I believe the CIA are acting politically by delaying publication - they held on to the book for six months and slowed the whole thing down.
'It definitely seems like there is something funny going on behind the scenes - the book was supposed to come out the third week of September and the CIA went out of its way to delay the whole process.
'We turned the manuscript in months ago, then they redacted it, we responded and then they weren't happy with the changes. It kept getting delayed until the point where we had to push publication to March 2017.
'Ray does think that maybe the CIA, even though he is loyal to them, didn't want it to be published right before the election because it could have an influence on it.
'Although this incident isn't exactly the same, it could be seen as a mini-Benghazi for Hillary Clinton.
I have been trying to share the Project Veritas videos on Twitter.
They're important:
The first one shows Clinton campaign staff bragging about hiring agitators to cause trouble at Trump rallies including the violence in Chicago that prevented the Republican nominee from speaking, and the this lady who pretended she was punched and deliberately fell on the floor.
Hillary capitalised on it and her surrogates and media shills all sung "where Trump goes, violence follows".
The second one shows Clinton campaign staff bragging they commit electoral fraud by buying used cars and hiring "staff" with shell companies to vote multiple times in multiple states.
But because of pressure they had to put him back online.
When the wikileaks dump happened showing the Clinton camp lied about foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation both to WaPo reporters (and again in the 3rd Debate) I tried to share links to the relevant wikileaks email plus the James O'Keefe Project Veritas videos with the journalists affected and news outlets.
I tweeted a lot that day - but no responses. Usually someone will "like" or answer back they disagree or retweet or say thanks for the news tip.
But no reply
Then I went from my sister's account to look - and couldn't see any tweets for weeks.
I went back from my own account - sure enough it looked like the tweets were there.
Twitter is shadow-banning these links trying to stop them from trending or being seen - but not outright banning people to prevent them from being angry at being censored.
YOU think you've tweeted, but nobody can see.
This is disturbing as it shows how long the arm of the Clinton Corruption has become.
Clinton has:
* Leaned on Ecuador (via John Kerry) to cut Assange off the internet (while spreading wild conspiracy theories that Wikileaks is Russia)
* Stitched up the Mainstream Media so only favourable coverage goes out about her and only negative about Trump (eg: here)
* Got Reddit effectively censored, with subreddits like r/Politics acting like campaign sites for Hillary
* Got phoney media sites like alternet (at which Sidney Blumenthal's son is a senior boss) spewing out propaganda dressed as news
* Allowed her family foundation to accept money from foreign countries while she was Secretary of State in a clear conflict of interest, giving them access and policy favours in return
* Hocked the US into a proxy war between Saudi and Iran that practically nobody even knows we are in and we shouldn't even be there. (Yemen anyone?)
* Lied about deleting her emails to the House Committee on Benghazi
* Paid agitators to smear her election opponent as "violent", "sexist" and "racist" including provoking civil unrest
And despite all this and more she is running for President and the entire media is acting as though she is wonderful and Donald Trump is the devil.
How is it possible that US citizens are going to be able to vote fairly and freely when they have no chance of being informed or even hearing the other side of the story?
The media won't cover stories like they normally do and social media is censoring in such a way that the person is shouting into a void, wasting time, when they don't even know nobody can see what they've written.
AND WORSE: When Hillary gets into the White House she is going to purge the NSA and the intel organisations and put her people in there. She will use those massive powers that Snowden told us about to get revenge on the people who stood against her.
#4
AND WORSE: When Hillary gets into the White House she is going to purge the NSA and the intel organisations and put her people in there. She will use those massive powers that Snowden told us about to get revenge on the people who stood against her.
That would be by her count of "17 intelligence agencies." Obama had his "57 states." The beest can have her "17 intelligence agencies." It's only fair.
#5
When Hillary gets into the White House she is going to purge the NSA and the intel organisations and put her people in there. She will use those massive powers that Snowden told us about to get revenge on the people who stood against her.
Yeah, but Trump SAID A BAD WORD!!!!!!
And as we all know, Troo Cunservatizm is all about losing with class and watching our posterity destroyed or enslaved while maintaining absolute decorum.
#6
A well done round-up, anon1. Thank you. I fixed the links.
Sometimes, for reasons that pass understanding, the standard double quotation marks Fred's link-making icon puts around the URL causes problems of precisely this sort. The answer is to remove the double quotes, at which point this intermittant problem evaporates.
[LEADERSHIP.NG] The intensification of protest by members of the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN), popularly known as "Shi’ites", which the media has reported to have claimed 16 lives in Kaduna, Katsina, Sokoto and Kano States, is disturbing. As the group continues this fight for the release of their leader, Sheik Ibraheem El-Zakzaky, anyone with historical knowledge of the birth and rise of Boko Haram ... not to be confused with Procol Harum, Harum Scarum, possibly to be confused with Helter Skelter. The Nigerian version of al-Qaeda and the Taliban rolled together and flavored with a smigeon of distinctly Subsaharan ignorance and brutality... ’ will agree that the existing situation signals danger.
As we all react in anger to these horrible attacks and boorish protests, we need to also reflect, candidly, on the causes of terrorism, and adopt the best solutions to restore peace to our agitated communities. Analysts have in the past argued that terrorism feeds on poverty and unemployment. I certainly do not buy into this highly publicised link between poverty or unemployment and extremism. By way of example, Haiti and Liberia are countries with eighty per cent (80%) of their population living below poverty line, yet they have not noted cases of extremism terrorism.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
10/21/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
Long but worthy article. The last paragraphs are the BLUF:
Could we ever have won the referendum? We lost by a serious margin. Outside of London, Scotland and Northern Ireland, every major region in the country voted to leave the EU. A recent analysis by the London School of Economics suggests that once methodological artifacts are controlled, Leave was almost certainly ahead of Remain during the entire last month of the campaign — and maybe during all of 2016. At the same time the margin of victory was not so large as to in hindsight appear completely unbridgeable.
To be sure, it would certainly have been extraordinary if we did win. Britain has a long history of Euroskepticism, and these are populist times, in which voters are ready to reject the status quo. It also has to be said that we faced an extraordinarily hostile media. Team Cameron was used to having the main broadsheets and key tabloids on its side. We weren’t used to a campaign where we could land next to nothing in the newspapers because of their Euroskeptic viewpoints and had to contend with a BBC position on impartiality that was bordering on the absurd. We kept trying to win the 6 and 10 o’clock news with big stories but with little success.
Winning would have required a much greater effort, much earlier on, to sway the electorate. One more attack on Boris Johnson, or another speech by Cameron would not have been enough. There were loads of things in hindsight that we should have done — such as deploy Ruth Davidson and Sadiq Khan much earlier or have gotten Cameron out on the road earlier — but I doubt they would have been critical. And while all of Cooper’s focus groups said it was a head (economics) vs heart (immigration) contest, it was a mistake not to attempt to engage emotionally. We may never have been able to win those arguments but we should not have vacated the ground entirely.
But our biggest mistake was our failure to deliver the kind of deal we — and especially the media — had given the impression was possible. From the moment Cameron promised a referendum we should have built up the case for European cooperation, preparing the electoral battlefield we would eventually have to fight on. We didn’t. And so a better organized, more passionate adversary won.
#2
I'm just an engineer, not an economist. I think I understand the lower pound will bring in more tourists, since the incredibly high cost of living is lower if you have other currency. I appreciate that it makes imports more expensive. But what effect does it have on things made or grown in Britain (assuming there are any of those things left)? What effect does it have on the middle class?
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/21/2016 7:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
But what effect does it have on things made or grown in Britain
It's only a niche hobby market, but among my fellow participants in it, the opportunity to buy cheap is causing a lot of purchases that would have been timely deferred or passed up otherwise. Those British 'shopkeepers' though small in relative enterprise, are probably happy.
What effect does it have on the middle class?
Brits define 'middle class' different than Americans. We'd consider the 'shop keeper' middle class, the Brits probably not.
#4
Most of this is so typical of the Democrats over here.
It's all about how we didn't sell the message properly; just need louder screaming, etc. It's never about how the message sucks and people don't want to buy what you're selling.
It's also odd that they complain that the MSM was against the Remaniacs. That's not the way it looked from here.
[PJ] Having already gotten Democrat operatives Scott Foval and Robert Creamer (Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky's husband) to "resign" after the release of the first two parts of his recent sting, James O'Keefe just hinted that he's got bigger fish to fry.
The MSM has been dismissing the videos that sunk Foval and Creamer with weak nonsense about them being "low-level" and "unknown," despite the fact that Creamer is married to a member of Congress. If Brazile is forced to go, look for a lot of unfounded attacks on O'Keefe designed to distract. Brazile has her current job because her predecessor was forced to step down under scandalous circumstances. I would say "resign in disgrace," but Democrats really aren't embarrassed by their behavior.
#4
As is found in our politically correct, apologetic society, any accusation made against such a person of colour will be seen as 'white vs black' or 'one villain - one victim.'
[PJ] I can't recall another election when a presidential candidate so honestly and brutally punched through the lies the left tells about abortion as Donald Trump did in last night's debate. Christians ought to be celebrating. Donald Trump forcefully proclaimed that Hillary Clinton supports ripping a baby to pieces until the very moment of birth at a full 40 weeks of gestation. This is 100% true; Clinton has stated on camera several times that she believes a pre-born person has no Constitutional rights and therefore can be (and should be) murdered at whim.
Clinton shamelessly tried to deflect the truth that wholly formed viable babies are torn apart during abortion and incredibly claimed that's "not true." Excuse me? How else do you end a third-trimester abortion? You're not going to sprinkle it with fairy dust and wish it away, I can tell you that. There's only one way to get rid of a baby and that's to dispose of its body in some way. One of the chosen methods of the abortionist is "extraction and dilation," where they pull the baby, breech (feet first), and stab it in the back of the neck with something sharp while still in the birth canal. The other method widely used by Planned Parenthood "doctors" is to literally tear the boy or girl into pieces, pulling limbs and parts out of the woman one at a time. Then they get to put that puzzle from Hell back together again to make sure they didn't leave any pieces behind. Keep in mind that Democrats like Hillary Clinton have even fought against measures to give the babies pain relief during this process because that would be admitting they feel pain or something, and they can't have that, lest anyone figure out they are demonic wretches. These poor babies are torn piece by piece from their mothers' wombs because the women carrying them wanted fewer responsibilities.
Clinton lied again when she claimed to have met a woman who had to abort in the third trimester because her life was in danger. Doctors have confirmed over and over that there is NO CONDITION KNOWN TO MAN that requires a baby in utero to die to save the life of the mother. Please go find one. I dare you. Do not come back with ectopic pregnancies. Ectopic pregnancies (when a fertilized egg develops outside the uterus) are not viable pregnancies. They can never be viable pregnancies. The procedure to save the woman's life is not an abortion because the baby could never have survived and an abortionist isn't qualified to do it because it requires real surgical skill and not a vacuum and some forceps. The surgery to correct an ectopic pregnancy is usually the removal of the entire fallopian tube, called a salpingectomy. You cannot go to Planned Parenthood for a lifesaving salpingectomy. For that, I'd suggest Northwestern Hospital in Chicago. No one who has a salpingectomy tells people they had an abortion because it simply isn't true. Ectopic pregnancy is much more comparable to a miscarriage. All the other conditions the left always lists as reasons women need abortions are things like hypertension, hemorrhage, infection and the like, none of which are cured by abortion! All of those conditions can exist without being pregnant and a person who has them doesn't go to the doctor and hear, "Too bad you're not pregnant because an abortion would have saved you. There's nothing we can do." That's absurd!
Cont't.
[Daily Caller] WikiLeaks suggested in several tweets Thursday that the 2016 election for president of the United States is rigged.
In response to criticism from blogger Dan Gillmor that WikiLeaks recent leaks have outed it as picking a side and playing partisan politics in the presidential election, WikiLeaks tweeted back, "You are not a fan of publishing true information about corrupt ruling power factions who will take power on Jan 20?"
WikiLeaks then hinted that the outcome of the election was obvious from the outset: "What election? It has been clear from the beginning who is going to win. This is, in effect, a power consolidation exercise."
WikiLeaks’ current activities have consisted of leaking information damaging to the Democratic Party and the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. In late July, WikiLeaks published countless thousands of internal emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC.)
Con't.
and that if they choose to vote Trump and if Trump should get the majority of votes, that it won't be stolen or rigged or taken away from them
and just the same i hope that if Hillary legitimately wins, that we don't all think that it was only cause it was rigged
I pray for peace, and for it to be conducted in a manner befitting a civilised democracy, the only one with a constitution worth defending and according to the rule of law
and most of all i hope the corrupt crony culture in washington gets cleared out
what do you think? Does Trump have any chance to win?
Get your grandparents out to vote and their friends and everyone you know because i've never seen the media so biased
#3
anon1: what do you think? Does Trump have any chance to win?
He has a path to victory but it is narrow. It depends on the swing states. It also depends upon whether the informed voters are greater than the low-information voters who the Democrats depend upon in these swing states. Too bad you are not voting here as you would be an informed voter. As WikiLeaks brought out in the Podesta emails, the Dems rely upon an uninformed and compliant voter; one shaped by the MSM. The MSM has been absolutely awful in this country. They are an insult to our 1st Amendment rights. In addition to the MSM voter suppression efforts, Trump and O'Keefe's Veritas project have pointed out to the public the Dem election-rigging. The Dems are corrupt beyond belief. We'll see on Nov. 8th. Keeping the fingers crossed. Maybe there will be divine intervention.
#4
thanks for replying JohnQC i am hoping and hoping
and telling every US citizen here I know with the ability to vote that our media is biased and to dig deeper and look
we have a lot of expats here and the Australian media is actually WORSE than the US media
Thank goodness assange and wikileaks exposed the democrats lies in the emails
and thank goodness Project Veritas caught those people on camera
but twitter is censoring -- you cannot even tweet those links without them silencing you with a shadow-ban
That fat tub of lard Michael Moore actually wrote a piece telling the leftards that Trump will win because he went to the rustbelt and rightly told the sacked workers NAFTA stole their jobs, TPP would be worse and that he'd slap a 35% tariff on goods imported by companies that move to mexico for the cheap labor
of course he did that so as to get the Leftard complacents out and working for free for Crooked Hillary
But I'm hoping he is right.
It's so important
If Trump loses this election Western Civilisation is gone. Australia will follow the US lead of Hillary and the Islamofascists will win.
#5
One of the Podesta emails says how illegals can vote if they have a driver's license. No thanks to Bill Clinton for passing the "Motor-Voter law" in 1993 which opened yet another door for voter fraud.
John Podesta: I think Teddy’s idea scratches the itch, is pretty safe and uncomplicated.
On the picture ID, the one thing I have thought of in that space is that if you show up on Election Day with a drivers license with a picture, attest that you are a citizen, you have a right to vote in Federal elections.
These people are at war with American citizens. They have elevated Party above country--Stalin would have been proud of them.
#6
The US is conflicted, anon 1 - two-thirds don't trust Hillary, but two-thirds say they will vote for her. Perhaps not the same two-thirds.
80% of the folks have little to no respect for Congress, but they want to elect the ultimate insider to continue the leftist lean.
The last two elections have put more conservative-leaning people in the House and Senate but at the same time, re-elected Obama. Maybe more dead people voted for Obama than for members of the House of Representatives?
Conflicted. If all those who voted for Republican candidates in 2014 voted for Trump, it'd be a Trumpslide. If all those who voted for Obama in 2012 vote for Hillary ... well, you know.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/21/2016 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
#7
If Americans truly show up to the polls, it will dwarf the corruption by a long shot. It's doable.
#8
John QC: that's appalling about the motor-voter law enabling non-citizens to vote. i also saw the Clinton campaign shilling for lawyers to be election monitors, probably so they can bully pollsters into allowing non-citizens to vote. specifically lawyers they wanted.
Bobby: That is certainly a depressing thought do you really think 2/3 are going to vote clinton? or is it just the people the pollsters surveyed who might not be representative (like Brexit)
Newc: I reckon you're right, if the might US voters turn out and vote in PAPER not using the machines whose IP software is owned by a Soros-linked firm,then you're right I think Trump can win.
But what hope do they have if the internet is censored, twitter censored, google censored, facebook censored and the mainstream media acting like Pravda?
"We created an echo chamber. They were saying things that validated what we had given them to say. In the absence of rational discourse, we are going to discourse the [expletive] out of this....The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience is being around political campaigns. That's a sea change. They literally know nothing."
Thus spake a certain Ben Rhodes, literary dabbler and Don DeLillo wannabe, in a stunning interview-essay by David Samuels in the New York Times last May.
...That's why I'm still calling this election for Donald J. Trump. The polls are meaningless. Perceptions are morphing as rapidly as the new-model Terminator in the molten steel vat at the end of the movie. The election will be won and lost a dozen times between now and Election Day. And when Americans finally go into the voting booth, they will not be able to think of any reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton--only reasons to vote against Donald Trump. There are far more compelling reasons to vote against Clinton. And that's how the election will go. Of course, Spengler called Brexit wrong, so...
#4
Rhodes was describing the sale of the Iran nuclear deal to America's body politic, fed by media ignoramuses who dutifully repeated the echoes of the administration's stable of putatively independent experts.
He has a disdain for the MSM too. I take "stable of putatively independent experts" to mean paid -for-liars.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Mail] The CIA has been accused of political bias by trying to stall publication of an explosive memoir which could damage Hillary Clinton's chances of reaching the White House.
It really can't be helped. Her lying skills are dreadful sub-par and totally unacceptable for any Clinton administration position. 
[Daily Caller] WikiLeaks suggested in several tweets Thursday that the 2016 election for president of the United States is rigged.
thanks for replying JohnQC i am hoping and hoping
