Today’s new video reveals how an ABC Good Morning America Breaking News Anchor, and 20/20 Co-Anchor had significant information regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged crimes years ago but was told by her superiors that the network would not run the story.
Some of the key findings of today’s video:

·      Amy Robach Describes How a Witness Came Forward Years Ago With Material Against Epstein: “She Had Pictures, She Had Everything. She Was in Hiding for Twelve Years. We Convinced Her to Come Out. We Convinced Her to Talk to Us. Um, it Was Unbelievable What We Had.”

Robach: “We Had Her Whole Allegations About Prince Andrew…” “I Got a Little Concerned About Why I Couldn't Get On.”

Robach Details ABC’s Initial Response to Her Acquiring This Material: “Um, First of All, I Was Told, Who's Jeffrey Epstein? No One Knows Who That is. This is a Stupid Story.”

Robach: “…It Was Unbelievable What We Had - Clinton, We Had Everything. I Tried for Three Years to Get it on to No Avail. And Now it's All Coming Out and it's like These New Revelations and I Freaking Had All of it”

Robach Discards the Possibility of Epstein’s Cause of Death as Suicide in Prison: “…So Do I Think He Was Killed? 100% Yes”

Robach Repeats a Statement from Attorney Brad Edwards on Camera,” …There Will Come a Day When We Will Realize Jeffrey Epstein Was the Most Prolific Pedophile This Country Has Ever Known,” Adding, “I Had It All Three Years Ago.”

Support Project Veritas here.
​

Start at EXPOSE CNN Part One here.

Some of the key findings of today’s video:
• Rick Saleeby, Senior Producer of The Lead with Jake Tapper, States Steve Brusk, CNN Politics Supervising Producer, Made ‘Advances’ on Female Employees During ‘Social Gatherings’ and Would “Put His Arm Around Them, Try and Touch Their Leg.”
• Saleeby Believes That Steve Brusk is “Protected by Certain People…Like Other Higher Ups” Within CNN.
• Rick Saleeby Recalls Incident with a Young Female Colleague: “She Had a Skirt on. I Could See the Hand. I Like Grab Her. It Looked Like I Was Being the Assaulter Because I Grabbed Her So Aggressively…to Keep Her from Him.”
• Saleeby: “He Had Already Been Accused of the Things Prior… Which I Found Out…”
• Saleeby Acknowledges the Gravity of the Situation: “I’ll Tell You This, In the Climate That’s Going Now, He Definitely Would Have Been Fired.”
• Nick Neville, Media Coordinator at CNN, Says It is “Open Knowledge” That a Female Colleague Got a Job Working with Steve Brusk That “Appeared Out of Nowhere,” “…It Was Never Posted Online…”
• Neville Refers to Allegedly Untoward Behavior from Brusk With the Young Female Employee: “…I Mean, He Emails All of Us, But He Would Email and Was Very Friendly to Her. And Then She Just Like Got a Job Like Working on His Team and She Was Like, Oh, It’s Hush-Hush. The Job Was Never Posted Anywhere.”
• Neville: “…I Just Thought It Was a Little Strange.”
• Christian Sierra, Media Coordinator at CNN, Continues: “That’s Unethical…That’s Unethical.”
• Steve Brusk Tells Project Veritas Journalists to Speak with CNN’s PR Team About Sexual Misconduct Allegations; When Approached in DC, Refuses to Watch Footage.
• Rick Saleeby and Jake Tapper Refuse to Speak with Project Veritas Journalists in DC When Approached for Comment.
• Project Veritas Calls CNN President Jeff Zucker’s Office for Comment on Last Week’s Multiple Releases Regarding Anti-Trump Bias in the Network; Zucker’s Administrative Assistant Replies: “We Don’t Have Any Comment, Thanks for Calling.”

Support the whistleblower here.

Support Project Veritas here.

How much longer will CNN’s parent company, AT&T, allow Zucker, and CNN, to refrain from commenting on what has been uncovered?  The public has a right to know AT&T’s official position.


Will you demand a response from AT&T and CNN?  Here is how:


AT&T Phone Number: (210) 821-4105
Warner Media/CNN Phone Number: (404)827-1700
Without CNN Insider Cary Poarch, the American people wouldn’t have known about any of this information. 

Start at EXPOSE CNN Part One here.

Some of the key findings of today’s video:

• Manager of Field Operations at CNN, Patrick Davis, Complains, “We Could Be So Much Better Than What We Are.”
• “I Haven’t Listened to a 9AM (Rundown) Call in About 15 Years…Just, I Can’t Listen to It.” Explains Davis, “It’s All Just a Bunch of Bullshit.”
• Field Production Supervisor at CNN, Gerald Sisnette: “The Only Way This Will Go Away is When He (Trump) Dies. Hopefully Soon.”
• “They Sold Themselves to the Devil. It’s, It’s Sad.” Laments Floor Manager at CNN, Mike Brevna.
• “We Used to Cover News,” Complains Senior Field Engineer at CNN, Scott Garber, adding, “We Used to Go Out and Do Stories.”

Support the whistleblower here.

Support Project Veritas here.

How much longer will CNN’s parent company, AT&T, allow Zucker, and CNN, to refrain from commenting on what has been uncovered?  The public has a right to know AT&T’s official position.


Will you demand a response from AT&T and CNN?  Here is how:


AT&T Phone Number: (210) 821-4105
Warner Media/CNN Phone Number: (404)827-1700
Without CNN Insider Cary Poarch, the American people wouldn’t have known about any of this information. 

Some of the key findings of today’s Project Veritas video:

• CNN President Jeff Zucker Pushes Kamala Harris’ Demand to Take Down Trump’s Twitter Account; “I Think it’s a Good Segment…Not Going to Happen, But it’s a Good Talking – it’s a Good Segment.”
• CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez Says, ‘Joe Biden Has a Problem’ Because of his Son’s Foreign Business Dealings; “It Looks Bad. It Smells Bad.”
• Insider Cary Poarch Wants ‘Free and Fair Election’ and Not ‘Some Ideology Shoved Down My Throat;’ Wants CNN to ‘Get Back to the Facts and Get Back to Reporting the News.’
• CNN Media Coordinator Christian Sierra: “I Think They Like Warren a Lot” “…They Don’t Like Tulsi Gabbard”

Support the whistleblower here.

Support Project Veritas here.

How much longer will CNN’s parent company, AT&T, allow Zucker, and CNN, to refrain from commenting on what has been uncovered?  The public has a right to know AT&T’s official position.


Will you demand a response from AT&T and CNN?  Here is how:


AT&T Phone Number: (210) 821-4105
Warner Media/CNN Phone Number: (404)827-1700
Without CNN Insider Cary Poarch, the American people wouldn’t have known about any of this information. 

Some of the key findings of today’s Project Veritas video:
​

• Cary Poarch, Who Works at CNN’s Washington DC Bureau, Says: “I Decided to Wear a Hidden Camera…to Expose the Bias”
• Records Zucker’s 9AM Daily Rundown Calls
• Zucker Emphatically States Fox News is “Beyond Destructive for America”
• Zucker to Staffers: “Impeachment is the Story,” Ignore Other Stories
• Employees Ordered by Zuckerto ‘Knock Off’ Their Friendliness Towards Lindsey Graham
•  Nick Neville, CNN Media Coordinator: “Jeff Zucker…has a Personal Vendetta Against Trump,” “…Then You Get on the 9AM Call and the Big Boss, Jeff Zucker, F**king Tells What to Do”
•  Neville: It’s About ‘Ratings,’ “…It’s, Like, They Pulled Names Out of a Hat and It’s Like We’re Watching the Gameshow Network”
• CNN Floor Manager Mike Brevna: “It’s the Trump Network, Dog…They Sold Themselves to The Devil”
• Brevna Recalls Colleagues ‘Sobbing,’ And Says The “Office Was Like a Funeral” After Trump Election Victory
• CNN Media Coordinator, Christian Sierra, Confesses CNN Prepares ‘Softball Interviews’for Democrats Compared to Republicans, and Suggests “Anti-Trump Crusade” After 2016 Election
• Top Network Executive David Chalian Says Republicans are ‘Delusional, Defiant, or Silent’ With Regards to Trump’s Impeachment Story
• CNN Floor Director Hiram Gonzalez: “…We Created This Monster…Media Created the Trump Monster”

Support the whistleblower here.

Support Project Veritas here.

How much longer will CNN’s parent company, AT&T, allow Zucker, and CNN, to refrain from commenting on what has been uncovered?  The public has a right to know AT&T’s official position.


Will you demand a response from AT&T and CNN?  Here is how:


AT&T Phone Number: (210) 821-4105
Warner Media/CNN Phone Number: (404)827-1700
Without CNN Insider Cary Poarch, the American people wouldn’t have known about any of this information. 

I have a colleague who provides an informed opinion on Turkey and the Kurds.

This Army Colonel (R) and military college professor was a Foreign Area Officer, lived in Turkey, and has studied the region the last 30 years:

Dwayne....

“I note with more than a little consternation the current firestorm being inaccurately portrayed in the media, by Facebook pundits, and around water cooler circles about the angst over the Turkish military move into Syria and the "abandonment" of the Kurds by the current Administration.

Allow me to offer some insight you are more than welcome to take in to your classrooms for C500 (Strategic and Operational Planning)discussion of "understanding" to the OE (Operational Environment). From the viewpoint of someone who has watched this region almost as long as the Kurdish PKK has been a terrorist organization, it is apparent that many do not really understand this region...so here are some OE thoughts:

1. 'Abandonment of the Kurds" is a fallacy (appeal to emotion, false dilemma), and resonates because the West in general sees the "Kurds" from an emotional viewpoint. They are billed as the "largest ethnic group in the world without a homeland." Yes and no. There is a fallacy introduced when we start lumping all Kurds together into one group, rather like lumping all America Indians in the same manner. Journalists who report on international affairs (and should know better) go as far as to accord "the Kurds" with the apparent trappings of sovereignty consistent with a recognized Westphalian nation-state. This is not the cogent issue. The question in this discussion is more importantly: which Kurds, exactly, are we discussing? There are multiple factions, they speak three distinct languages/dialects, and aren't monolithic in the least. When "Kurds" aren't fighting the local non-Kurdish authorities (read: Turk, Iraqi, Iranian, Syrian governments), they squabble among themselves. The Syrian YPG is allied, for better or worse, with the PKK, and this has brought them squarely into the Turkish sights. The US decision to train and arm them had consequences. What seemed an expedient solution at the time now presents the Turks with a conundrum. As all politics are ultimately "local" the US withdrawal in a way is forcing the Turkish hand. The PKK is a recognized terror group and has been for decades, and has as a historical goal claims on Turkish sovereign soil (the Southeast). Turkey - a recognized country - has been fighting to maintain their territory and defeat PKK threats since the early '80s. The YPG is seen by Turkey as an extension of the PKK. This is a problem for Turkey. More to follow in para 2.d. below.

2. Not all PKK are Kurds. To continue the discussion of the PKK, they have been a pawn used and supported by others regional actors to destabilize the sovereign nation of Turkey. The Greek government has supported this group. So did the Syrian, Iranian, Russian governments, and other regional actors as well... For this reason consider the associated facts below from the TU perspective,

a. 40k +/- dead over the decades.

b. Instability that has led to wholesale reweaving of the fabric of Turkish society.

c. Challenges to planned economic growth in the SE thwarted by the PKK - negatively affecting local Kurds who did not support the organization's goals.

d. Instability in N Iraq as the PKK carved out a niche in the Qandil Mountains, displacing N. Iraqi Kurds in the process while establishing a safehaven there. No Iraqi Government capacity has existed since 1991 to counter them or patrol the TU-Iraq border. This is extremely important to understand. It plays directly into the current Turkish actions regarding Syria. Turkey does not desire a repeat to this whereby a lack of Syrian ability to exercise sovereign control sets the stage for another PKK safehaven.

3. This entire affair is an extension of ill-conceived US foreign policy to oust Saddam and all the fallout inherited by multiple administrations since 2003. The Turks are not exactly happy about having been put in the position of securing their own national interests because of feckless policy by others. They have borne the brunt of fallout from refugees and attendant instability since Provide Comfort in 1991. Now they have a lingering problem on their southern border with Syria - who knows what characters are moving back and forth more freely as a result of all this. The idea of a cordon sanitaire has been a consistent component of Turkish ideas to solve these border problems in Iraq, and now Syria, since 1991. It appears that the Turkish push into Syria entails the establishment of this cordon concept. Will it involve more? We'll see.

4. ISIS: Is the handwringing over the potential for 15,000 ISIS prisoners to escape a sideshow? Quite possibly. First of all, the high number is suspect. Second, Turkey certainly does not want this as a second or third order effect as a result of their actions. ISIS is also a threat for them. Finally, the concern over ISIS remains viable because of the very conditions that are precipitating the planned Turkish foray into Syria - that of an authority vacuum - served to allow operating space for the group to flourish in the first place.

5. Whatever happened to Assad? Does anyone find it remotely curious that any discussion of Syrian President Assad is missing in this entire discourse? The uprising started March, 2011. US and Turkish policy subsequent to this was essentially "Assad must go". 8.5 years later Assad is still in power. Also - and importantly - Russian and Iran are now in the mix propping him up. I can argue that the departure of 50 US soldiers from N. Syria is not the problem... The inability - or unwillingness of the International community and previously US administration - to deal with this power vacuum with anything other than stopgap measures is the larger problem. Now Iran, Russian, and Turkey are left to sort it out...on Syrian soil.

6. What are Turkey's interests in all of this? Turkey has tepidly supported US over the last few decades largely because they experience very tangible and negative second/third order effects from our actions. Iran's power has risen. Russian influence has been reintroduced on their Southern border. The PKK continues to thrive due to instability in Iraq. TU interests have remained remarkably consistent since 1991:

a. Protect Turkish sovereignty and territorial integrity.

b. Defeat the PKK
​
c. Continue their economic expansion.

d. Regional stability and security

So, some things to consider and perhaps knock around with your students. Forget the fantastical headlines and discuss the perceptions and realities of the actors on the ground...great grist for the intellectual mill heading into the next block of instruction.

Have we really abandoned the Kurds? On what grounds can the Turks consider an offensive into another country? Is President Trump's decision really all that bad?”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, kids have gotten sick from the use of flavored vaping products. This story and many like it were immediately followed by demands that the government 'do something' about this 'epidemic'.

This series of events leading to calls for government intervention are not unique. But if we take a look at these events below the surface, we find the narrative is quite different.

These kids got sick and some even died because they used cartridges obtained from the black market.

It’s clear now that these people who were sick and in this wave of vape-related incidents were using THC cartridges in which an adulterant had been illegally added. So the government's response to this has been "We should move a whole lot of other vaping products into the black market"?

Where do YOU want to buy drugs from? The guy on the corner in a trench coat? Or CVS and Walmart where that product will be insured to be safe (or it’s not on their shelves)?

I want to buy all my products from companies, because if it’s wrong they make it right. I want to buy nothing from the government where there is no responsibility.

ESPECIALLY DRUGS. I’d prefer to buy them from companies where, when the slightest inference arises that they may not be safe, they are OFF the shelves. This is not applicable with the FDA.

The idea that we’re going to push into the black market (or gray market) products that prevent people who don’t want to smoke cigarettes (lung darts) is asinine.

The Michigan executive order that has latched onto this hysteria, amongst others, has made it punishable by 6 months in prison the possession of “4 or more flavored vape products”.
It’s absurd.

This is a classic Regulatory Bait and Switch. The FDA increasingly becomes outspoken and concerned about the use of youth vaping but it's not specifically because of its ill effects. Instead, teachers and adults are inconvenienced about the ease to which students vape. It can be done and hid more easily than actual smoking due to lack of smell.

So what they have done is use the excuse of adulterated black market marijuana vapes to ban the flavored products that they believe appeal to minors. So their solution doesn’t even match up to the harm they are selling you. They do this all of the time.

This is, in fact, a solution that they came up with previously, but didn’t have the political willpower or public outcry to pass easily. Whip up a crisis and grease the skids for your prepackaged solution.

It’s instructive and revealing that regulators and public health officials will go after something that isn’t the problem and, once banned, will actually become a problem because it is now only sold on the black market where it isn’t regulated.

Let's not even discuss that the FDA gave a monopoly, ahem, I mean permission, to sell new vaping devices this summer to Philip Morris...

Check out I Vape, I Vote or the LP's Vape page to get active and tell legislator's to get out of the crony business.

UPDATE: Tests show bootleg marijuana capes were tainted with hydrogen cyanamide.
​
“History folks. This is why it is IMPORTANT!

I have spoken many times on the parallels with alcohol prohibition and how it shows the dangers of black markets

The government itself poisoned alcohol during prohibition. Not to mention the many contaminates in bootleg booze that poisoned and blinded people.

Nor is this even the first time THC products have been contaminated.

How much are big alcohol/tobacco bribing the government to poison you and your kids?”

Taxed from John Phillips Jr.

Nicholas Sarwark appeared on Dave Smith's Part of the Problem podcast this week following the debate between them on Gene Epstein's Soho Forum.  The podcast is embedded below.

The exchange begins respectfully between the two and it only really breaks down when they begin discussing what each describes as the #1 issue facing America and the Libertarian Party. 

Sarwark believes this to be "Racism" while Dave Smith believes it's "Foreign Policy / The War State". 

This is when things get heated.  

Sarwark argues that President Trump's Wall on the southern border is racist because it disproportionately affects Mexicans, who have brown skin, and not Canadians who are white.  For simplicity, we'll ignore the other implications of the southern wall for now (ie., open borders, the movement of drugs that exist in the south which isn't a problem on the northern border).

He also notes that President Trumps “Muslim Ban“ was racist because the people in those countries are brown skinned, even if, admittedly, not all countries on the list were Muslim, nor were all Muslim countries added. 

He even claims that the death of Heather Heyer in Charlottesville during the "Unite the Right" protest is proof that racism exists and that it is more important than the death of thousands overseas.  

Dave Smith pushes back against this well moral inequivalence, but my focus is on something different.

At this point, Nick Sarwark doesn’t understand his own contradiction. Who are we at war with? The bombs that we drop, who dies when they explode?

If, very overwhelmingly, we are only killing brown people isn’t our foreign policy just as racist as the Wall?  Isn't it just as racist as the Muslim ban?  Is our foreign policy only killing Norwegians? Or is it killing brown people in the Middle East?

Nick, if you want to stay consistent please keep beating the drum against these policies that overwhelmingly affect minorities. Your conversation regarding our failed justice system because it inordinately affects minorities is ON POINT. 

Take that point to its logical conclusion though.  Our foreign policy also disproportionately affects minorities.  And by “affect“ I mean it kills them, ruins families, eliminates entire family trees, destroys cities, introduces famine, and also just happens to executed with OUR tax money.

The episode ended well with a dual call from Nicholas Sarwark and Dave Smith for people to join the Libertarian Party.

The Libertarian Party isn’t just made up of people who talk about liberty on the Internet, quite the opposite. Libertarian party is made up of those who actually show up.

Show up. Oust Nicholas Sarwark.  Principles over Party.

To say Occupy Democrats used the New Zealand tragedy to attack Trump would be an understatement. But with context, it’s an extremely weak link that actually ends up furthering the shooter’s objective.

-The shooter wrote an 87 page, rambling manifesto, which I won’t link to. He mentions Trump just once in those 87 pages, on page 21.

-In a section where he lamely interviews himself, he asks a bunch of questions including “are you a supporter of Donald Trump?” He responds, “as a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear God no.” A mixed assessment to be sure, and throughout the manifesto he never mentions or gives a thought to Trump again.

-His primary concern and inspiration came from Europe, not America. From the terrorist attacks there, Muslim immigration and his experiences traveling throughout Western Europe, particularly France. Above all, he was quite preoccupied with France and their recent elections. His primary interest in the US was to inflame tensions over the 2nd amendment and ultimately cause a civil war over racial lines.

-The only politician specifically mentioned as an inspiration was Sir Oswald Mosley, a British politician from the early to mid 1900s who was in the Labour Party before later embracing fascism.

-Throughout the manifesto, he expressed agreement with views from across the political spectrum, enough so that those looking to malign their political enemies could claim that he embraced their views. For example, he expresses sympathy with socialism, claimed his favorite government was China, was an environmentalist “eco-fascist”, played Fortnight, etc. These were also taken out of context by some on the right, in an attempt to pin him as a sort of leftist.

-But, in context he had little in common with the left, and expressly hated communist/antifa types. Just as he despised conservatism and capitalism. His actual views align with no major political group in existence today, yet some are trying to pin his views on their political enemies. Which, incidentally, furthers his actual goal and purpose of the attacks.

-His primary motivation was to sow political division, in order to bring about a broader future conflict among racial and cultural lines. His hope is to facilitate the breakdown in dialogue and foment hatred, to the point where people start gravitating to their basest instincts to align with their ethnic group, and bring about violent conflict. In this respect, Occupy is furthering his mission.

Follow Meme Policeman on Facebook for more.

A pet peeve of mine.
​
Yes, "Socialism" is bad, yes it's failed, yes it's caused millions to perish in mass starvation. Yes anyone can look at its report card and with intellectual honesty report its demerits.
But what people are calling socialism today on your Facebook timeline is actually just Big State Welfarism. 

It's another example of words being taken over and misrepresented to mean something they don't.

Socialism means the workers control the means of production (more Venezuela-ish than Nordic model) not just Big-State-steal-from-everyone-to-give-to-those-less-fortunate-than-yourself-you-bigot!

What people are actually pushing for today is more big government running charity vice private non-profit operations. Who do you think is more efficient?

As a resident expert (self-appointed, of course) with a first-hand view in how the government spends money... YOUR money, let's just say that 'wanting government primacy in any entity whose mission is to increase the public good' is shortsighted.

What are your thoughts?