Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

After Bashing Trump For Not Shaming Putin, Chuck & Nancy Humiliated With Obama’s Untimely Leak

Obama admitted it!

Published

on

Barack Obama is the gift that just keeps on giving and giving and giving. His words are coming back to haunt him once again. This happens on the left all the time. They seem to forget that what they say is recorded for posterity and then when their flaming hypocrisy comes back to bite them in the rear, they act all shocked as if they couldn’t have possibly said such a thing. After President Trump met with Russia’s Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland yesterday, the left went into a hysterical feeding frenzy, accusing Trump of collusion and treason. It was the meltdown heard around the world… literally.

Meanwhile, President Trump is declaring the summit a wild success. He tweeted on NATO, “I had a great meeting with NATO. They have paid $33 Billion more and will pay hundreds of Billions of Dollars more in the future, only because of me. NATO was weak, but now it is strong again (bad for Russia). The media only says I was rude to leaders, never mentions the money!” Then he tweeted on Russia, “While I had a great meeting with NATO, raising vast amounts of money, I had an even better meeting with Vladimir Putin of Russia. Sadly, it is not being reported that way – the Fake News is going Crazy!” And the left lost their minds.

Chuck Schumer went off the deep end and said that Americans are wondering if the “only explanation” for President Donald Trump’s performance alongside Vladimir Putin is that the Russian president “holds damaging information over President Trump.” Give it a rest already. If he did, that would have come out long ago. Sheesh. In a statement, Schumer went on about Trump “putting himself over our country” for declining to criticize Putin during a joint news conference and dismissing intelligence reports on Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Calling Trump’s performance “shameful,” Schumer said Trump “strengthened our adversaries while weakening our defenses and those of our allies.” “What the president has done is an insult to all Americans,” Schumer said.

Trending: In Historic 9-0 Decision, Supreme Court Just Shredded Democrats – YUGE!!!!

Wow… and he just would not shut it either. “A single, ominous question now hangs over the White House: what could possibly cause President Trump to put the interests of Russia over those of the United States? Millions of Americans will continue to wonder if the only possible explanation for this dangerous behavior is the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump,” Schumer said in the statement. What a disingenuous lie.

Then The Hill gave Pelosi her turn:

“House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) blasted President Trump on Monday following his press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin, calling for Americans to “vote out the sell-outs” in the GOP and asserting that “the Russians have something on the president.”

“The California Democrat said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) aren’t doing enough to push back against the president’s stance on Moscow after he supported Putin’s denial of interfering in the 2016 election.

““If Donald Trump failed to stand up to Putin in front of the press, what makes you think Kevin McCarthy, Mitch McConnell and Republicans in Washington will defend us from a foreign adversary’s attack?” she tweeted. “They’ve done nothing. It’s on us to vote out the sell-outs.””

Just freaking wow. Are you serious? Let’s take a look, shall we, at what Barack Obama had to say all the way back in time to 2016 about Putin:

“He denies it. So the idea that somehow public shaming is gonna be effective, I think doesn’t read the thought process in Russia very well.”

Between Obama’s flexibility with Putin and Hillary’s reset button, America has far more to fear from the left than they ever will the right concerning Russia. Obama’s statement is humiliating for Chuck and Nancy.

The full quote from the Washington Post from Obama went like this, “And I know that there have been folks out there who suggest somehow that if we went out there and made big announcements and thumped our chests about a bunch of stuff, that somehow that would potentially spook the Russians,” he said. “And I should point out by the way, part of why the Russians have been effective on this is because they don’t go around announcing what they’re doing. It’s not like Putin’s gone around the world publicly saying, ‘Look what we did. Wasn’t that clever?’ He denies it. So the idea that somehow public shaming is gonna be effective, I think doesn’t read the — the thought process in Russia very well.”

Uh yeah. WaPo claims that Obama did not denounce Russia more forcefully leading up to the 2016 election because he thought it would not have any effect. But somehow Trump doing it will? Get real. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said Trump’s remarks were “nothing short of treason,” echoing comments from Obama CIA boss John Brennan. That charge borders on treasonous itself and it’s laughable.

Trump clarified his comments on Twitter, “As I said today and many times before, “I have GREAT confidence in MY intelligence people.” However, I also recognize that in order to build a brighter future, we cannot exclusively focus on the past – as the world’s two largest nuclear powers, we must get along!” You can’t argue with that, but the Dems will.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

News

Man Found Contracts Showing Obama Was Paying Trump Spy – Obama Tried To Shut Him Up By Stripping Security Clearance

Obama-appointed officials cleaned house

Published

on

A man named Adam Lovinger lost his security clearances after complaining about the questionable government contract that was awarded to Stefan Halper, who is being touted as an FBI informant whose job was to keep an eye on President Trump’s campaign. Who stripped the clearances, you might ask? It’s being reported that it was Obama-appointed officials who cleaned house and ripped Lovinger’s clearances away, presenting to us quite a concern that involves contracts and clashing forces within the government who either supported Obama then or support Trump now. Either way, it’s a mess.

Lovinger was reportedly complaining about Halper’s contracts back in 2016. He then lost his clearances on May 1, 2017. Lovinger’s lawyer, Sean M. Bigley, then complained to the Pentagon’s senior ethics official, mad that Lovinger’s “higher ups” were basically punishing him with the whole security clearance thing – punishing him for complaining about the deals that were given to Mr. Halper and apparently a “best friend” of Chelsea Clinton, as per the Washington Times.

The Washington Times called this out, as well as numerous other sites who wanted the public to be notified about what was going on behind closed doors. Since John Brennan just lost his security clearances, it was probably just another relative topic to bring up someone else who lost their clearances as well. However the big problem is why they lost their clearances and how it ties back to Obama’s administration, and perhaps even Hillary Clinton on a long stretch. Rather than point fingers at two particular names, it might just be the entire Democratic Party. However it goes, it’s up to the public to absorb the information and make their own decisions.

Anytime these news stories are breaking the headlines, it’s always important to take in all the information and figure out what’s going on. Then share the story with people who would enjoy it. If you’re up for a good bit of government drama, then this is right up your political alley!

Here’s a brief summary that details most of what happened:

“As it turns out, one of the two contractors Mr. Lovinger explicitly warned his ONA superiors about misusing in 2016 was none other than Mr. Halper,” Mr. Bigley wrote in his ethics complaint, which called the contracts “cronyism and corruption.”

Mr. Lovinger filed a whistleblower reprisal complaint in May with the Defense Department inspector general against James Baker, director of the Office of Net Assessment. The complaint also singles out Washington Headquarters Services, a Pentagon support agency that awarded the Halper contracts totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In an internal October 2016 email to higher-ups, Mr. Lovinger wrote of “the moral hazard associated with the Washington Headquarters Services contracting with Stefan Halper,” the complaint said. It said Mr. Baker hired Mr. Halper to “conduct foreign relations,” a job that should be confined to government officials.

“It was a topic of conversation within the office,” Mr. Bigley told The Times. “What is Halper doing, and why is he being paid astronomically more than others similarly situated?”

The Office of Net Assessment conducts analyses of future threats and ways to defeat them.

“Nobody in the office seemed to know what Halper was doing for his money,” Mr. Bigley said. “Adam said Jim Baker, the director, kept Halper’s contracts very close to the vest. And nobody seemed to have any idea what he was doing at the time. He subcontracted out a good chunk of it to other academics. He would compile them all and then collect the balance as his fee as a middleman. That was very unusual.”

Mr. Bigley told The Times that the inspector general’s criminal investigative division has interviewed Mr. Lovinger about Office of Net Assessment contracting.

In all, Mr. Lovinger has four cases pending: whistleblower reprisal, criminal division, an ethics complaint and an appeal on his security clearance revocation.

A spokesman told The Times that the Pentagon would not comment on the case’s merits.

The spokesman said the Department of Defense Consolidated Adjudicaitons Facility reviewed Mr. Lovinger’s clearance.

It then “issued a statement of reasons stating why, under [federal guidelines] it would not be clearly consistent with the national interest to continue Mr. Lovinger’s security clearance, and he was provided with the opportunity to respond to the security concerns,” the spokesman said. “After considering all available information, the CAF issued an unfavorable clearance determination and Mr. Lovinger’s clearance was revoked.”

Mr. Bigley said the conflict is that the consolidated authority resides within the Washington Headquarters Services, which is the target of Mr. Lovinger’s complaint.

“The CAF’s entire ‘adjudication’ of this case was orchestrated by corrupt officials at WHS, which was demonstrated numerous times throughout the process,” he said.

To conservatives, Mr. Lovinger is a victim of the “deep state” — Obama loyalists out to harm the Trump administration.

Press reports identified Mr. Halper as a paid FBI confidential human source, whose mission was to make contacts with Trump campaign workers. The FBI was investigating any Trump ties to Moscow at a time when its intelligence officers were hacking Democratic Party computers.”

After lodging his complaints about the Office of Net Assessment’s outside research in general and Mr. Halper specifically, Mr. Lovinger sought an assignment to the Trump White House national security staff in January 2017. He was soon confronted with allegations from Mr. Baker that he failed to follow security rules. Mr. Lovinger denies any wrongdoing.

Mr. Baker was appointed chief of the Office of Net Assessment in 2015 by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Mr. Obama’s appointee.

The Washington Headquarters Services, which revoked Mr. Lovinger’s clearance, is headed by Barbara Westgate, who was appointed in 2016.

Perhaps the most intriguing narrative in the Lovinger story is the appearance of Mr. Halper, a national security consultant in the U.S. and Britain who is tied to that country’s MI6 spy agency through his business partner.”

Continue Reading

News

First Trans Dem Nominee Has Jaw-Dropping Message For ‘Radicalized Christians’

I thought the LGBT crowd was supposed to be tolerant?

Published

on

One of the fresh new faces of the Democratic Party is also the first transgender nominee for governor in Vermont. Her name is Christine Hallquist and she’s got a message for Christians! Based on observations of Hallquist’s previous Tweets, it appears as though she is evidently disgusted by the Christian religion and has utilized Twitter as a means by which to attack those who follow the faith. Hallquist has several Tweets that call out “radicalized Christians” and she even uses the Islamic Sharia Law in comparison.

The website, Daily Caller, had located several of the Tweets in question, each resorting to inflammatory or intolerant attacks on the Christian beliefs.

The first tweet stated “And we worry about sharia law!! Radicalized Christians are a part of the American landscape, and we tolerate it.” This was in reference to a young girl being too good at soccer and having short hair, so the league thought she was a boy. They made a huge mistake, but Hallquist used this as an example to compare Sharia Law and radicalized Christianity. The young girl may have been targeted because maybe there was a jealous parent on another team, but it’s not directly certain that the decisions regarding the soccer league had anything to do with religion. Many may perceive Sharia Law to be much worse than removing someone or a team from a soccer league.

Hallquist’s next Tweet stated “Some of these Christian evangelist’s are just downright crazy” and she posted a link to the Babylon Bee, which is a well-known satire site. This site posts articles that are clearly fake and made as a joke for entertainment purposes only. Hallquist might have thought the website was real and used it as her method of attacking Christians again.

Another Tweet involved a message from PinkNews who talked about anti-LGBT trolls “sending horrific abuse to a 9-year-old girl” and right away Hallquist targeted Christians once again. She stated “Of course! Probably most of them call themselves Christians.”

Another attack on Christians involved a Tweet by LGBTQ Nation. They posted about a mother who killed her son because he was gay. Christine Hallquist attacked Christians and said “I’ll bet she called herself a “Christian.”

Another Tweet found Hallquist targeting Christians once again. This one referred to another Tweet by LGBTQ Nation who reported about a transgender woman be denied food at a soup kitchen. Hallquist then stated, “I am guessing that this so-called Christian hypocrites would’ve not allowed Mary, the mother of Jesus, because she wore a Hijab” and many of the replies to Hallquist were quite indifferent.

The Daily Caller stated this about Hallquist: “Christine Hallquist, the country’s first major party transgender candidate as the newly minted Democratic nominee for the governorship of Vermont, once tweeted an insinuation that “radicalized Christians” are a problem that Americans currently “tolerate.”

“And we worry about sharia law!!” Hallquist tweeted in June 2017 along with a link to an article from “LGBTQ Nation” about a girl disqualified from a soccer team because she looked like a boy. “Radicalized Christians are a part of the American landscape, and we tolerate it.”

Hallquist’s tweets about Christians didn’t stop there. In January 2018, the Vermont candidate for governor tweeted a link to a Christian satire site jokingly claiming that a Christian evangelist said President Trump “was merely sharing the gospel” with Stormy Daniels along with the caption (and an obvious punctuation error) “Some of these Christian evangelist’s are just downright crazy.”

Several other tweets seemed to show a disdain for conservative Christians, including an assertion that people who allow children to be harassed for being gay probably “call themselves Christians.”

Hallquist won Tuesday’s Democratic primary for the Vermont governor’s race and is set to challenge incumbent GOP Gov. Phil Scott in November.”

It’s very clear to see that Hallquist is using Twitter to display her intolerance for the Christian beliefs. She has taken numerous news articles and referenced them in alignment with Christianity, thus using various news sources as a way to scrutinize the Christian faith.

She is displaying an act of intolerance towards the religion and it appears as though she is encompassing all believers of Christianity in her messages that speak out against the religion.

What would you say to someone who challenges your religion?

Continue Reading

Thanks for sharing!

We'd like to invite you to become a RWN insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to a friend