The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration

 Political  Comments Off on The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration
Feb 212017
 
Keeping It In The Family: The media’s incestuous relationships with the Obama Administration

 
A glimpse of the revolving door that existed between Mainstream Media network executives and the Obama White House. The map below gives us a glance at the media’s incestuous relationships with the administration.

It is a tangled web, in the Sir Walter Scott sense of the term… “Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.”

Keeping It In The Family: The Mainstream Media’s Incestuous Relationships With The Obama Administration

↑Click image to enlarge↑

 
via

Feb 062017
 
Recent “protests” against conservative speakers on college campuses have been marred by violence, yet excused and legitimized by mainstream media.

The Berkeley Riots And The Weaponization Of The Mainstream Media

University of California’s Berkeley campus, once the sight of iconic protests in favor of free speech in the 1960s, became embroiled in controversy last week after violent protests last Wednesday night shut down an event where controversial Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopolous was set to speak. A few hours before the event was set to start, groups of those in opposition to Milo began destroying property and their acts became increasingly more destructive over time. Numerous videos, posted on social media and captured by local news stations, also showed incidents where some of the protestors, apparently belonging to the anti-fascists or antifa movement, were beating people with flag poles and other objects. At least one man was beaten unconscious. As the violence began to spiral out of control, the event was ultimately canceled but not before over $100,000 in damages were done to UC Berkeley’s campus. Following the event, antifa groups took to social media to declare “war” on those with opposing views along with promises to “dismantle the state.”

Though this “protest” was undoubtedly disturbing, the aftermath has arguably been more so. Emboldened by the events at UC Berkeley, antifa groups elsewhere gathered at NYU to disrupt the scheduled talk of another conservative figure, Gavin McInnes – co-founder of Vice News and host and commentator at the Rebel Media. While police were able to prevent the same destruction of property and violence that had taken place at Berkeley, protestors infiltrated the event and McInnes himself ended up being pepper sprayed and attacked. Antifa members have also taken to making threats against alternative media reporters in the days since the riots at Berkeley. In one case, Cassandra Fairbanks of We Are Change – a media outlet that is neither liberal nor conservative in the traditional sense – as well as her young daughter were threatened on Twitter by the Arizona Antifa Front.

Berkeley Riots

Despite the chilling effect this is likely to have on the expression of conservative viewpoints on college campuses – and potentially elsewhere – the media as well as many politicians and public figures have either condoned the violence or publicly supported it. Major publications such as the New York Times hardly even mentioned the violence, only choosing to reference “self-described anarchists clad in face masks and spoiling for a fight.” The LA Times adopted the same strategy, focusing on free speech issues and Yiannopolous’ political views and most controversial statements while avoiding any discussion of the violence. Liberal-leaning outlets, such as the Daily Kos, took it a step further, characterizing the incident as one where one of Trump’s “little Breitbart friends had a bad night.” In addition to “mainstream” media, some politicians even expressly praised the riots such as Florida Congresswoman Val Demings who called the events at Berkeley “a beautiful sight.”

In addition to praising or condoning the violence, some mainstream outlets used the opportunity to blame conservatives and the right wing for the protests. For instance, CNN ran the headline “Milo Yiannopolous is trying to convince colleges that hate speech is cool” following the riots even though Milo did not even speak that evening save for a response to the rioting posted on his YouTube channel.

CNN argued that Milo was promoting “hate speech” for the following past statements:

In his campus talks, Yiannopoulos spares few targets. He’s gone after Black Lives Matter activists and has argued rape culture on campuses doesn’t exist. He portrays white males as victims and views social justice as a form of cancer. He has said people become feminists because they are “deeply physically unattractive.”

Though these opinions may be unpopular (especially on college campuses), they don’t necessarily constitute expressly racist, anti-semitic, or fascist ideas – though they do largely consist of critiques (albeit often crude ones) of left-leaning movements. The accusations of Nazism or white supremacy regarding Milo also seem out of place considering that he is Jewish, an immigrant, homosexual, and strongly prefers the romantic company of African-American men.

However, some went even further – accusing conservatives and Breitbart News of actually orchestrating the riots despite the clear evidence that the violent protestors identified as part of the far-left “antifa” movement. For instance, Political commentator, UC Berkeley professor, and former Secretary of Labor under Clinton Robert Reich postulated that “Yiannopolous and Breitbart were in cahoots with the agitators, in order to lay the groundwork for a Trump crackdown on universities and their federal funding.” The “crackdown” to which Reich refers is based off of a tweet from President Trump that essentially warned Berkeley to protect free speech following the riots or face the possibility of a loss of federal funding. In an interview with CNN, Reich reiterated this scenario, saying that he “wouldn’t bet against it.”

Clearly, this disproportionate, and frankly dishonest, characterization of the events is ultimately creating a consensus among the viewers of these media outlets that violent “protests” are acceptable – that is, at least, as long as those being attacked are conservative. Whether this is intentional or not is up for debate, but its ultimate effect is not. Violence in lieu of responsible political discourse is never favorable and condoning it for one group but not the other is the most dangerous type of partisanship the media and public figures can practice. All evidence seems to suggest that the mainstream media is quickly becoming weaponized.


The divide made bare during the most recent presidential election is becoming more and more glaring. Yet, regardless of one’s political sympathies, there is clearly something amiss with the violence now targeting conservative speakers at college campuses. Though many college students are liberal-leaning, it is important that students have the opportunity to be exposed to variety of opinions. While Yiannopolous and McInnes are indeed controversial and consistently breach the conventions of “political correctness”, there is insufficient evidence to condemn them as Nazis and white supremacists (remember – Yiannopolous is a homosexual Jew and McInnes co-founded “liberal” and “hipster” Vice). Labeling speeches they have yet to give as “hate speech” based largely on mainstream media-driven consensus does a disservice to free speech.

If conservatives were the ones violently “protesting” liberal-leaning speakers, there is no denying that the media and political response would be immediate and devastating. Yet now, the media and political establishment seem content to let some elements of the political left in the United States transform into the very thing they are claiming to fight against – fascists – with complete impunity. Indeed, Winston Churchill predicted this decades ago, saying that “The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists.” Will Americans be able to see past these attempts to divide us and pit us against one another? We can only hope, but turning off the television news seems like a logical first step.

The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists

 
By Whitney Webb

Donald Trump And Pope Francis

 Jokes, Political  Comments Off on Donald Trump And Pope Francis
Feb 062017
 

Donald Trump And Pope Francis

President Trump invited Pope Francis for lunch on his mega yacht, the Pope accepted and during lunch, a puff of wind blew the Pontiff’s hat off, right into the water.

It floated off about 50 feet, then the wind died down and it just floated in place.

The crew and the secret service were scrambling to launch a boat to go get it, when Trump waved them off, saying “Never mind, boys, I’ll get it.”

The Donald climbed over the side of the yacht, walked on the water to the hat, picked it up, walked back on the water, climbed into the yacht, and handed the Pope his hat.

The crew was speechless. The security team and the Pope’s entourage were speechless.

No one knew what to say, not even the Pope. But that afternoon, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post all reported:

“TRUMP CAN’T SWIM!”

 

Jan 172017
 
After The WaPost’s Latest Shot, It’s Time To Call “Fake News” By Its Real Name “Weaponized Journalism”

It's Time To Call ‘Fake News’ By Its Real Name ‘Weaponized Journalism’

A Washington Post fake news article misrepresenting the “firing” of the head of the DC National Guard makes clear mainstream media has now weaponized the news.

Defying any sense of journalistic integrity and loyalty to the truth, the Washington Post did it again — publishing Fake News for clicks — which had the desired effect of worldwide outrage to suit a tightly-defined political agenda.

This latest astounding deviation from the facts, however, makes indisputably clear the weaponization of news. Journalists and media outlets make mistakes from time to time, but a pattern and practice of publishing unfounded, unverified, and fraudulent articles cannot be characterized simply as irresponsible.

We are in the midst of an information war of epic proportions — led haplessly astray of the truth with the Post leading the way — and it’s a dangerous and frightening portent of things to come, not the least of which will be propagandized truth and heavy-handed censorship.

On Friday, WaPo published an article claiming President-elect Donald Trump fired Washington, D.C., National Guard Major General Errol R. Schwartz — just in time for the inauguration — and that he would be forced to leave his post as soon as the president takes the oath of office.

But that isn’t true.

“My troops will be on the street,” Schwartz told the Post. “I’ll see them off, but I won’t be able to welcome them back to the armory.” He added he would “never plan to leave a mission in the middle of a battle.”

WaPo’s erroneous reporting included a statement from D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, who lamented, “It doesn’t make sense to can the general in the middle of an active deployment.”

“I’m a soldier,” the Post quoted Schwartz. “I’m a presidential appointee, therefore the president has the power to remove me.”

But WaPo left out a number of critical points — and horrendously slanted the rest — about this “firing” of the head of the D.C. National Guard.

That D.C. position — unlike the equivalent for states — is appointed by the president, not by the Pentagon, as the Post suggested, nor by any branch of the military. Also, the article glaringly omitted any statement from the Trump transition team, an inexcusable offense, considering it later emerged Schwartz had been offered to keep his position through the end of Inauguration Day — it was Schwartz who turned down the offer, preferring instead to vacate the role at 12 noon, when Trump will be sworn in.

Of course, the blatant misinformation presented by the Post seemed so juicy, countless corporate outlets parroted the claim. Thus this Fake News rippled around the planet earning the scorn of millions who believed Trump must have lost all sensibility for firing a man who had diligently performed his duties since his appointment to the post by former President George W. Bush — during a potentially dangerous event.

This also spawned a number of rumors — with raucous protests planned for Inauguration Day, and the week before, why would the incoming president fire the man in charge of security? Isn’t this a preposterous decision on Trump’s part? What is Trump thinking?

Like previous viral stories — at this point, one would be hard-pressed to deem them ‘news articles’ — the Washington Post published faulty information and subsequently began backtracking.

Notably, in each case, after erroneous information went viral worldwide, edits after publication go largely unnoticed by most of the populace. While retractions and post-publication editor’s notes sometimes appear on WaPo’s articles they are orders of magnitude less popular than the original story and, in this instance, the firing of Schwartz story has only been appended in content — no editor’s note yet graces the top or bottom of the article. (The original version can be found here.)

Any news organization actually practicing journalism would tell you this is egregiously irresponsible.

Except, it’s beginning to appear the Washington Post publishes misinformation and Fake News intentionally — knowing any subsequent disputation of its claims won’t gather as much steam as the original publication.

A distinct reason exists why this would be the case — Brandolini’s law.

“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it,” Alberto Brandolini, an Italian independent software development consultant, keenly observed in 2013 — the Post knows this, and has been manipulating public perception exactly this way.

It was, after all, the Washington Post who initiated the altogether ironic war on Fake News — first turning from journalistic duty in the publication of several items blaming disinformation for the downfall of, well, nearly everything.

WaPo published an ‘article’ about supposed blacklist of over 200 outlets a nascent and seemingly prepubescent website, PropOrNot, had decided were Russian propagandists — linked either directly to the Russian government or had haplessly joined the effort by reporting Fake News during the election.

Literally nothing in that Post article was true. None of the claims were backed by evidence, no research or investigation had been performed, nothing. WaPo just printed the claims of PropOrNot and inserted plausible deniability by failing to link to the list or site. A subsequent retraction at the top of the page was akin to plugging a crack in a dam that’s already burst — damage to many reputable and award-winning outlets listed had already been done.

Previously:
RED ALERT: Head Of DC National Guard Removed From Command During Inauguration

 

Source… Claire Bernish  at The Free Thought Project

Understanding Media Spin

 Amusing, Funny, Political  Comments Off on Understanding Media Spin
Jan 162017
 

Understanding Media Spin
A Guide


Spin.

We all know it exists. The newsreaders, commentators and pundits all attempt to persuade others to accept their own point of view on events. This is what has become known as “media spin”. Some are obvious in their efforts, some are quite subtle. The knowledgeable listener is ever alert to this spinning so below is offered a humble guide to help you in your watchfulness.

Understanding Media Spin

“according to industry experts” “industry leaders acknowledge” — displaced former executives

“it’s widely thought” “it’s common knowledge” — constant repetition in the media has folks thinking it is the truth

“experts generally agree that” — some previously unknown college professors

“according to official sources” — two gals from the secretarial pool

“some in Congress say” — a couple of volunteer campaign workers

“internationally it is agreed that” — two East African diplomats told me

“you may not believe this but” — I don’t believe it but, I want you to

“it is believed that” — I think

“it is generally believed that” — a couple of others think so, too

“a new idea going around suggests that” — this is our latest disinformation scam

“it’s being said that” “people are saying” — we planted the seed and now it is spreading

“one observer has said” — a self-absorbed elitist said

“pundits claim” — two self-absorbed elitists said

“insiders say” — a disgruntled employee told me

“business gurus are telling us that” — overheard on the golf course

“according to The New York Times — the only paper biased enough to run the story


 

Donald Trump NEVER Mocked A Disabled Reporter

 Political  Comments Off on Donald Trump NEVER Mocked A Disabled Reporter
Jan 112017
 
Mainstream Media Exposed – Donald Trump NEVER Mocked A Disabled Reporter

 
I’ve seen a lot of videos posted debunking the “Trump mocks disabled reporter” narrative, but this one is the best of the bunch. It not only shows HOW the accusation is false, but explains WHY the Mainstream Media was so desperate to push it.

It’s all a matter of how the Mainstream Media frames it…
“Trump mocks disabled reporter” is factually true. He did (by definition) mock a reporter, who is disabled. Though what the Mainstream Media frames and the public hears is “Trump mocked a reporter for his disability” which of course is false.

Trump mocks disabled reporter
 

Jan 022017
 

Leaked John Kerry Audio Reveals Obama Intentionally Allowed The Rise Of ISIS

Absolutely stunning and something we always suspected – A leaked audio of Secretary Kerry reveals Obama intentionally allowed the rise of ISIS!

From Conservative Treehouse:

There are moments within investigative research when your jaw can stand agape as you recognize the scope of what you are reading or hearing.  A brutally down-played audio of Secretary John Kerry is just such an occasion.

♦ In August of 2014 President Obama (wearing a tan business suit) gave a press conference where he stated he “did not have a strategy” against ISIS. –Video Link

♦ Two months later, in October of 2014, Josh Earnest gave a press conference where he stated:  “Our ISIS strategy is dependent on something that does not yet exist” –Video Link

However, on September 30th 2016 the New York Times quietly released a leaked audio recording of Secretary John Kerry meeting with multiple factions associated within Syria.

When you listen to the audio recording it becomes immediately obvious what was going on when both of those 2014 statements were made by the White House.  In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to over 5 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.

This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama.  It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans.  What the recording reveals is substantive:

First, only regime change, the removal of Bashir Assad, in Syria was the goal for President Obama. This is admitted and outlined by Secretary John Kerry.

Secondly, in order to accomplish this primary goal, the White House was willing to watch the rise of ISIS by placing their bet that ISIS’s success would force Syrian President Bashir Assad to acquiesce toward Obama’s terms and step down.

Thirdly, in order to facilitate the two objectives, Obama and Kerry intentionally gave arms to ISIS and even, arguably, attacked a Syrian government military convoy to stop a strategic attack upon the Islamic extremists killing 80 Syrian soldiers.

Pause for a moment and consider those three points carefully before continuing.  Because this audio (below), along with accompanying research now surfacing, not only exposes these three points as truth – but also provides the specific evidence toward them.

The problem in the Obama/Kerry’s secret strategy became clear when ISIS grew in sufficient strength to give the White House optimism for the scheme – however, instead of capitulation Assad then turned to Russia for help.

When Russia came to aid Bashir Assad the Syrian Government began being able to defeat ISIS and the Islamic Extremist elements within Syria.  For the hidden plan of Obama/Kerry (and also McCain, Graham, et al), Russia defeating ISIS, al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, upended their objective.

The revelations within this leaked audio are simply astounding. The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:

[…]  Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.

This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)

Listen to the audio.

Key Kerry moments at 02:00, and again at approximately 18:30 forward.

The discussion from 18:30 through to 29:00 are exceptionally revealing and should be listened to by anyone who has wondered what was going on in Syria.  Kerry even makes mention of the “Responsibility to Protect, or R2P” principle:

Read more…

Audio:

 
This elevates Obama and all those complicit to war criminal status worthy of prosecution.

Could this apply?

18 U.S. Code § 2384 – Seditious conspiracy

    If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

Along with Obama and Kerry, Representative Adam Kinzinger, Senator John McCain, and candidate Evan McMullin could be sent away for this too.

Previously:
What’s Really Going On In Syria? Are We Being Lied To?

 

Syrians in Aleppo Chanting: “Clinton, you cow, leave us alone”

 Political  Comments Off on Syrians in Aleppo Chanting: “Clinton, you cow, leave us alone”
Dec 212016
 

Your government is lying to you.

Streamable mirror.

Previously:
What’s Really Going On In Syria? Are We Being Lied To?

 

Dec 182016
 

What's Really Going On In Syria?

What’s really happening in Syria? Hint: Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and the Mainstream Media have been lying to us.

Eva Bartlett is an independent journalist from Canada. She has traveled to Syria many times to investigate human rights violations and terrorism against Syrians. What she has found out is a truth completely opposite of what the Mainstream Media and governments claim, i.e. “Fake News”.

During a United Nations press conference, Bartlett sharply criticized Western governments, particularly the United States, for their efforts to effect regime change in Syria. Contrary to the Western narrative, she said, the people of Syria do not want a regime change. During her travels to and around the country, she had talked to Syrians, who widely expressed support for President Bashar al-Assad, whose army is battling a number of Western-backed terrorist groups.

Watch the video below to hear the true about what is really going on in Syria.

(NSFW Language)

This is what a real journalist looks like. You forget that living here in the US!

Western mainstream media’s coverage of the Syrian war is “compromised” as their local sources are “not credible” and, in the case of Aleppo, not even there, a Canadian journalist said in an emotional speech at the UN.

“I’ve been many times to Homs, to Maaloula, to Latakia and Tartus [in Syria] and again, Aleppo, four times. And people’s support of their government is absolutely true. Whatever you hear in the corporate media is completely opposite,” Eva Bartlett, a Canadian journalist and rights activist, told a press conference arranged by the Syrian mission to the UN.

“And, on that note, what you hear in the corporate media, and I will name them – BBC, Guardian, the New York Times etc. – on Aleppo is also the opposite of reality,” she added. The mainstream media narrative, she argued, is meant to mislead the public about what is really happening in Syria by demonizing President Bashar Assad’s government and altering the facts on Russia’s support for Damascus.

Bartlett’s statements did not seemingly play well with everyone in the room. A reporter from Aftenposten, Norway’s largest print newspaper, challenged her and demanded Bartlett explain what she thought was the “agenda” of Western mainstream media. “Why should we lie, why the international organizations on the ground should lie? How can you justify calling all of us liars?” he said.

Bartlett, who has been covering Syrian events for several years since the outbreak of the civil war, noted that while there are “certainly honest journalists among the very compromised establishment media,” many respected media agencies simply seem to avoid doing a fact-check.

She then asked her Norwegian colleague to name humanitarian organizations operating in eastern Aleppo. As the Aftenposten reporter stayed silent, Bartlett added that “there are none.”

“These organizations are relying on the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights [SOHR], which is based in Coventry, UK, which is one man. They’re relying on compromised groups like the White Helmets. Let’s talk about the White Helmets,” she went on.

Members of the controversial group “purport to be rescuing civilians in eastern Aleppo and Idlib … no one in eastern Aleppo has heard of them.” Meanwhile, she noted, “their video footage actually contains children that have been ‘recycled’ in different reports; so you can find a girl named Aya who turns up in a report in say August, and she turns up in the next month in two different locations.”

“So they [the White Helmets] are not credible. The SOHR are not credible. ‘Unnamed activists’ are not credible. Once or twice maybe, but every time? Not credible. So your sources on the ground – you don’t have them,” Bartlett concluded.

A journalist from Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera took a more measured tone and asked Bartlett to explain the difference between the Western and Russian media coverage, saying that Russian television channels report on humanitarian efforts and reconciliation instead of overt naming and blaming.

“You ask why we aren’t seeing this,” Bartlett said. “This relates to the other gentleman’s question about why most of the corporate media are telling lies about Syria. It’s because this is the agenda; if they had told the truth about Syria from the beginning, we wouldn’t be here now. We wouldn’t have seen so many people killed.”

Source…

Unedited video:

Not only has Trump’s victory turned America around (it’s certain, even though he’s not in office yet), but Syrians can finally have their home, neighborhood, city, and country back.

Here are some updates from the Aleppo liberation from the Obama/Hillary/Kerry-backed ISIS terrorists. Residents are overjoyed.

If this is true, it’s is CHILLING! It means that all the Syrian refugees coming here and migrating throughout Europe are being dispersed for a reason. Can you say Trojan Horse?

 

Dec 152016
 

The head of the Department of Justice REJECTS claims the Russians directly hacked our election.

Listen up, Mainstream / State-Run Media… The case is closed!

We didn’t see any Technical Interference from the Russians.

 

Dec 152016
 

Remember when John Podesta threatened to make an example of a suspected leaker in his emails?

Why isn’t the Mainstream Media asking John Podesta what he meant by this statement?

John Podesta Threatened To Make An Example Of Leaker

“I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.” ~ John Podesta Wikileaks email id 36082

I guess if the Mainstream Media reported on this they would have to admit the information leaked is real. So they look the other way and push the “Fake News” handed to them by the DNC.

Related: A ‘Disgusted’ Democrat leaked Clinton campaign emails

 

 

Fake News Example Of The Day: Hillary’s Double-Digit Lead

 Political  Comments Off on Fake News Example Of The Day: Hillary’s Double-Digit Lead
Dec 132016
 

Fake News Example Of The Day: Hillary's Double-Digit Lead

This example of Mainstream Media / Government approved propaganda is from October 23rd 2016.

Fake News link:
Clinton Vaults to a Double-Digit Lead, Boosted by Broad Disapproval of Trump (POLL)

 

Dec 122016
 

Hillary Set Up The 'Russian Hack' Excuse During The Debates

Was Hillary laying the foundation for “Fake News” during the debates?

Remember during the third and final debate when Hillary Clinton unexpectedly pivoted from the domestic immigration question to raise the issue of Russian’s involvement in the hacking of Democrats’ emails in an attempt, she said, to influence the outcome of the U.S. election?

Was this the strategy all along in case she lost? Watch the video below and you decide.

Finally, will Donald Trump admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this and make it clear he will not have the help of Putin in this election. That he rejects Russian espionage of this election which he actually encouraged?” Clinton said.

Putin, Trump said, “has no respect for this person,” pointing at his opponent.

“That’s because he’d rather have a puppet,” Clinton said.

“You’re the puppet,” Trump responded.

Clinton went on the attack: “You encouraged espionage on our people. That you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, you continue to get help from him because he has a very clear favorite in this race. We’ve never had a foreign government trying to interfere with our election.

“Seventeen intelligence agents, military and civilian included, determined this intelligence attacks have come from the highest levels of the Kremlin.”

Wallace intervened and pressed Trump, saying top intelligence officials do believe there is Russian involvement.

“Do you condemn any interference” from Russia? Wallace said.

“By Russia or anybody else,” Trump said. “Of course I condemn. I don’t know Putin. This is not my best friend. But if the United States got along with Russia it wouldn’t be so bad.”

Source…

Hillary was SO concerned, that she put our nations classified documents on her personal private unsecured server, to give the Russians easier access to them!