Welcome to Google 2017, where far-Left ideologues who manage the company’s media operations are set to decide what their readers can and cannot see, based solely on political ideology.

As reported by The Guardian, Google – which is following Facebook’s lead – has tweaked its news-gathering algorithm to weed out so-called “fake news” that it claims is spreading “misinformation” via the Internet:

Google is to start displaying fact-checking labels in its search results to highlight news and information that has been vetted and show whether it is considered to be true or false, as part of its efforts to help combat the spread of misinformation and fake news. 

The fact-checking feature, which was first introduced to Google News in the UK and US in October, will now be displayed as an information box in general search results as well as news search results globally.

How will this work? According to the report, there will be small segments of information displayed regarding claims made in certain news reports on particular sites, in addition to so-called fact-checking of the highlighted claims. (RELATED: Google, YouTube waging “demonetization” WAR on alternative media to bankrupt independent journalism)

In other words, if a Google (or Facebook) editor believes the claims to be false – such as, say, a claim by us that there is no evidence to support the Democratic and establishment media narrative that “Russia hacked the election to help Donald Trump,” even if we offer proof in our reporting – that story will be accompanied with a “fake news” label.

The next step, mind you, will be out-and-out censorship, along the lines of what CNN host Don Lemon did last week after the bombshell story broke outing former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice as the one who unmasked Trump campaign and transition team members, for political purposes.

Because he is an Obama sycophant and because he believes the story to be false and a “diversion” from the real story (Trump-Putin “collusion” – which didn’t happen), he made the decision to purposefully ignore it.

Nevertheless, Google and Facebook are defending their decisions to arbitrarily assign ‘fake news’ labels to any stories they don’t like or don’t agree with.

“With thousands of new articles published online every minute of every day, the amount of content confronting people can be overwhelming,” said Cong Yu of Google and Justin Kosslyn from fact-check partner Jigsaw, in a statement. “And unfortunately, not all of it is factual or true, making it hard for people to distinguish fact from fiction. (RELATED: Google To Start Flagging Content Found To Be “Offensive” By Crybully Snowflakes Who Are Triggered By Reality)

“As we make fact checks more visible in search results, we believe people will have an easier time reviewing and assessing these fact checks, and making their own informed opinions.”

Let’s be clear about one thing: There certainly is a fair amount of fake news being published online, but much of it is coming from the Marxist media establishment that includes networks like CNN, as well as legacy newspapers like The New York Times and the Washington Post.

Time and again, in the lead-up to the Nov. 8 election with fake polls showing a massive Hillary Clinton win, to fake news reports claiming Russia used hundreds of websites to spread anti-Clinton propaganda, to the wholly discredited “Russia hacked the election to help Trump” narrative, it’s been the so-called “mainstream media” that has been discredited. But because it shares a far-Left Marxist ideology with the founders of Google and Facebook, the fact-filled alternative media – which regularly publishes reports that diminish Alt-Left Democrats – are the ones regularly punished.

If you seriously want to avoid being duped by the social media giants who now actively censoring real media on their news feeds, bypass them and monitor Censored.news throughout the day, where truth is always available.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

TheGuardian.com

NewsFakes.com

Trump.news

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus,” Obama said on August 20 of that year. “That would change my equation. . . . We’re monitoring that situation very carefully. We have put together a range of contingency plans.”

Three days later, a U.S. State Department official confirmed that Damascus did indeed possess a stockpile of chemical weapons – “nerve agents and mustard gas” – and that Washington was monitoring them “very carefully.”

In December, the first reports of Syrian government use of chemical weapons surfaced; by January, a secret State Department cable that was sent by the U.S. consul general in Istanbul, Turkey, said the evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons the previous month was compelling. (RELATED: Trump’s strike against Syrian air base panned by some of his staunchest supporters)

That reported use was “a game changer,” Obama told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in March. More reports of chemical weapons use by Syrian forces continued throughout the year.

In July 2014, as the Syrian civil war was reaching its peak, then-Secretary of State John Kerry assured Americans and the world that there would be no more uses of poisonous gases by the Syrian army, because the Obama administration and the Russian government had struck a deal with the Assad regime to remove all chemical weapons from the country.

“We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” then-Secretary of State John Kerry said on NBC‘s “Meet the Press” in July 2014, in reference to an alleged arrangement made the previous September, the Washington Free Beacon reported. The Russians reportedly agreed to help confiscate and destroy the entire Syrian chemical weapons arsenal.

In January of this year, outgoing Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice touted that ‘deal,’ telling National Public Radio in an interview that the administration had “success” in ensuring that, with Russian assistance, it could then drop the threat of military intervention in the war-torn country.

“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished,” she bragged. “We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”

Fast forward to this past week, when – once again – Syrian government forces were suspected of using chemical weapons on rebel forces, in the process killing 70-100 noncombatants, dozens of whom were children.

And now Rice, Kerry and other Obama administration officials including the former president are under fire for making those demonstrably false claims – or, at a minimum, for once again botching a foreign policy initiative in a manner that is on par with the botched Benghazi incident.

“There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council,” said President Donald J. Trump, who on Friday ordered a massive cruise missile strike against the government-held airbase in the which the latest chemical attack was believed to have been launched. The destruction was near-total, according to reports.

Frankly, we should have known the Obama administration wasn’t being honest. An August 2016 U.N. report found that Assad had used chlorine gas on two separate occasions against civilians in 2013, but despite the findings in that report, the Obama White House continued to claim it was successful in disarming the Assad regime.

As for Russia, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson slammed Moscow for failing to do its part in the 2013 agreement.

“Either Russia has been complicit or Russia has been simply incompetent,” he said.

So much for the Trump-Russia love-in collusion narrative, eh Democrats?

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

FreeBeacon.com

FoxNews.com

Trump.news

At Rollins College in Florida, twenty-year-old sophomore Marshall Polston was suspended after standing up to his Middle Eastern Humanities professor, who told students that Jesus’ crucifixion never took place. Professor Areej Zufari, who happens to be a Muslim, also claimed that Jesus’ disciples did not believe he was God.

Polston, a self-described Christian, told the Central Florida Post about his professor’s remarks. “Honestly, it reminded me of some of the more radical groups I researched when abroad,” he said, referring to a tour he once went on in the Middle East. “Whether religious or not, I believe even those with limited knowledge of Christianity can agree that according to the text, Jesus was crucified and his followers did believe he was divine… that he was God.” He went on to say, “Regardless, to assert the contrary as academic fact is not supported by the evidence.”

In a message to The College Fix, the college sophomore commented further on the controversy. “Our university should be a place where free-speech flashes and ideas can be spoken of without punishment or fear of retribution,” he explained. “In my case it was the total opposite. I came forward with the story because I know so many other students like me suffer under today’s liberal academic elite.”

Allegedly, the entire controversy began when Professor Zufari wrote an email to the dean, explaining how she felt “unsafe” after Polston challenged her views. But what started out as a simple complaint quickly escalated into an all-out attack on the college sophomore. Polston subsequently received a 52 percent on a major essay and was attacked on social media, though not by name. On the ACLU of Florida’s Facebook page, Professor Zufari wrote about a student who was “making my life hell this semester.”

When Polston finally received the official suspension letter, he was told that his actions were a threat of disruption to the school and that he put the safety of the college community members in jeopardy. Polston has since hired an attorney and plans on taking the school to court.

Though perhaps not as extreme, situations like the one Marshall Polston found himself in happen frequently in colleges across the country. Conservative students often find themselves not only having to challenge their professors in the classroom, but also having to expose them on the national stage. Indeed, liberal bias and indoctrination is an issue that is not yet mainstream, but should be. The more Americans who understand the battle that conservatives students constantly fight on college campuses, the more resistance there will be and the more of a chance that the one-sidedness will eventually come to an end. (RELATED: Canadian schools are indoctrinating students to believe that GMOs are safe.)

Colleges should be a place where students can feel comfortable expressing their ideas, so long as it is done in a thoughtful and respectful manner. Furthermore, professors should not only allow, but encourage students to debate and challenge the ideas of others. It is in this kind of learning environment that students can grow intellectually and learn how to become rational, open-minded adults. Unfortunately, what happens in most colleges and universities is the exact opposite. The expression of ideas is encouraged only if those ideas adhere to a progressive ideology. Students are encouraged to debate, but only if the points being made in said debate are approved by the liberal academic elite.

And so it goes.

Sources

TheCollegeFix.com

Breitbart.com

We could also warn you that today’s inoculations contain mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and monosodium glutamate, but you might still believe that the scientists know what they’re doing and need those ingredients to preserve, carry, emulsify and “inactivate” the deadly combinations of genetically modified viruses, even though they don’t.

So instead of mentioning all that, we’ll just share with you the top 5 most insane ingredients in today’s vaccines, that serve no purpose, except to endanger the lives of those foolish enough to get injected.

Here they are:

#1. Infected African green monkey kidney “vero” cells

Yes, a “continuous line of monkey kidney cells” are currently listed by the CDC on their own website as an ingredient in several vaccines injected into babies, children, pregnant women, and any other “sheeple” who don’t bother to read the ingredients on the vaccine insert sheet that comes with every vaccine – the one the doctors and nurses are supposed to show you.

For some ungodly reason, vaccine manufacturers, who have complete immunity against lawsuits, are harvesting infected kidney cells from African Green Monkeys to produce childhood vaccines.

Be sure to ask your pediatrician if injecting infected monkey kidney cells is right for you and your children. That’s right, in addition to heavy metal toxins, chemical preservatives, and dangerous oil-based emulsifiers like polysorbate 80, doctors and nurses are blindly injecting anything scientists claim is useful, even when it means using infected monkey kidney cells to grow diseases in the lab cultures.

Would you like to know exactly which CDC-approved and FDA-approved vaccines currently contain infected monkey kidney cells? Here you go:

• Rotavirus vaccines (Rotarix by GlaxoSmithKline and RotaTeq by Merck & Co.)
• Polio vaccine (IPOL by Sanofi Pasteur)
• DTaP-IPV (Kinrix)
• DTaP-HepB-IPV (Pediarix)
• Smallpox vaccine (ACAM2000 by Sanofi Pasteur)
• Japanese encephalitis vaccine (Ixiaro by Intercell)

#2. Deadly pig (porcine) circo-virus types 1 and 2

Oh yes, the United States of America promotes deadly vaccines that contain deadly ingredients while warning everyone about the deadly side effects of injecting those ingredients. They tell you outright, but who reads the vaccine insert sheets?

It’s a cold, hard, and hard-to-accept fact that the rotavirus, a.k.a. RotaTeq vaccine, contains types 1 and 2 of the deadly porcine circovirus that kills wild baby pigs by the thousands in the Far East. Why bring the virus to the United States, put it in a vaccine and give it to babies? Great question. Supposedly, RotaTeq is an oral vaccine used to help prevent rotavirus infection in children, but the vaccine itself has insane side effects to which you may never want to expose your child. Let’s take a look.

One dangerous side effect reported after taking RotaTeq is a serious problem called intussusception. That’s when a baby’s intestines become tangled, and the baby can die as a result. According to reports, babies have died from this after receiving the RotaTeq vaccine. Could it possibly have to do with the fact that the vaccine contains a deadly pig virus? Some infants require hospitalization after the RotaTeq vaccine, including surgery on their intestines.

#3. Aborted “human diploid” fetal cells (from abortions)

Yes, you may be getting infections from other people’s blood. You could get hepatitis, AIDS, or maybe just that problem where your immune system attacks itself and the doctors just can’t seem to figure out what went wrong. They’ll probably tell you it’s genetic and you inherited the problem, because no doctor in the history of America has ever blamed the insane ingredients in vaccines for health problems, even though the secretive vaccine court has paid out billions for vaccine damages to children.

#4. E. coli

The second you hear about an infection or recall in meats for E. coli or salmonella poisoning, you avoid that meat like the plague, but what if you found out certain U.S. vaccines purposely contained E. coli strains? Check it yourself–the Meningococcal vaccine (MenB – Bexsero) contains aluminum hydroxide and E. coli.

#5. Army worm ovary cells

Can any human alive explain why the flu shot called Flucelvax contains cells taken from the ovaries of fall armyworms in the “pupal” stage. Sure, the explanation is that, rather than using eggs to brew the virus, the flu virus’s outer coat is “cranked” out this way in worm ovaries. This helps the vaccine manufacturers speed up their process, while the method helps the virus, as a shape-shifting protein, get inside human cells. Ready to be the next guinea pig and get that highly experimental and insane “shot in the dark?”

Learn more at Vaccines.news.

Sources include:

CDC.gov

CDC.news

FDA.gov

NaturalNews.com

TruthWiki.org

NPR.org

The war – so far just a war of competing ideologies – is being waged by the political Left, which today has found a home in the Democratic Party. Once the party of the “little guy” and the American worker, today’s Democrats are hard-Left socialists, fascists and ideologues who use whatever means possible – legal or illegal, right or wrong, proper or improper – to win.

To the Left, losing elections, which the Democrats have lost repeatedly in the age of Barack Obama, doesn’t matter. They don’t see losses as losses, they see them as mere inconveniences that give them a reason to change strategies and tactics in order to still get what they want. (RELATED: Former U.S. Lawmaker: “Deep State” Putting Republic At Risk In Bid To End Trump Presidency)

It means packing the federal courts with far-Left ideologues who use campaign rhetoric to rule against a president’s lawful right and responsibility to protect the country from terrorism.

It means taking over academia, the media, the sciences and education so they can subvert the Constitution and teach generations of young Americans that Left-wing ideology trumps governing institutions.

It means choosing which laws they want to obey and which laws they want to ignore, depending upon what helps achieve the objective: Rule by Leftists.

We’re seeing this play out with the Susan Rice scandal. No tactic is too outrageous or out-of-bounds if it means the Left wins. For Democrats, that means weaponizing federal intelligence agencies – or the IRS, the EPA, or the FCC – as simply a means to an end: Rule by Leftists.

In a recent column for Frontpage Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, writes that we are currently engaged in a “civil war” – between “a totalitarian system” on the Left and “a democratic system” supported by constitutional conservatives whose “outcome will determine whether we will be a free nation or a nation of slaves.”

Describing Left-wing Democrats as engaged in acts that can only be described as “treason,” he writes:

There is no form of legal authority that the left accepts as a permanent institution. It only utilizes forms of authority selectively when it controls them. But when government officials refuse the orders of the duly elected government because their allegiance is to an ideology whose agenda is in conflict with the President and Congress, that’s not activism, protest, politics or civil disobedience; it’s treason.

Perhaps as a nod toward the “Calexit” movement, Greenfield noted further that the Left doesn’t really want to secede, as states did during the first Civil War, “it wants to rule,” and it will do so by any means necessary: By circumventing the duly elected Trump government; ignoring the rule of law and statutes they disagree with; rejecting the constitutional constructs so painstakingly created and approved by the founders and the first 13 states.

“After losing Congress, the left consolidated its authority in the White House. After losing the White House, the left shifted its center of authority to Federal judges and unelected government officials. Each defeat led the radicalized Democrats to relocate from more democratic to less democratic institutions,” Greenfield writes. (RELATED: Get Ready For Violence And War In The Streets As Leftists Pledge ‘People Must Die’ Following Trump Victory)

“This isn’t just hypocrisy. That’s a common political sin. Hypocrites maneuver within the system. The left has no allegiance to the system. It accepts no laws other than those dictated by its ideology.”

Civil wars only end when one side is able to force the other side to accept its authority. At present, we have irresolvable political and cultural differences, and the last time that happened, nearly 700,000 Americans were killed.

The Left has hijacked the Democratic Party, and that is evident by the behavior and actions of Rice and the entire Obama administration.

At some point, all of our national turmoil will end. But be advised, the Left is ensuring that it won’t end well.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

FrontpageMag.com

NaturalNews.com

In a research article published by Jessica Farnsworth in May of 2011, Farnsworth addresses the link between aborted fetuses and vaccine production, a relationship that leads one to conclude that the vaccine industry may in fact be largely reliant on Planned Parenthood. (RELATED: You’ll be in shock when you read this article about food corporations using fetal tissue).

As the study points out, past investigations reveal that abortion facilities that supply aborted fetuses to researchers are offered a fee by the research facilities so that the baby’s organs can be harvested immediately and on-site.

RELATED: A new, upcoming docu-series called The Truth About Vaccines launches in one week and features 60 speakers and health experts who reveal little-known truths about vaccines.

Farnsworth begins her study by giving a detailed history of the use of aborted babies in vaccine research. “In the 1960s, Dr. Leonard Hayflick at the Wistar Institute located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania began working with aborted babies in an attempt to obtain human cell strains that would provide a culture medium for the growth of viruses,” her study explains.

Farnsworth continues, “Cell strains from fetal organs can multiply many times and provide a cell source for many decades, serving as an ideal culture medium due to their longevity. One aborted baby can be the source of a cell strain with a potential yield of about 20 million metric tons of cells, which can be stored frozen for many years.” (RELATED: You won’t believe what else aborted human fetuses are used for).

For decades, doctors and researchers have been developing cell lines from aborted fetuses. In 1964, for example, Dr. Leonard Hayflick successfully created a cell line from the lungs of an aborted 3-month old fetus. The cell line, which was named WI-38, is frequently used by pharmaceutical companies for vaccine production to this day.

Later in her study, Farnsworth lists the vaccines that use aborted fetal cells. Among them are vaccines for chickenpox, rubella, hepatitis A, rabies, smallpox and shingles.

In conclusion, Farnsworth gives her own personal opinion as to how people should respond to the use of fetal tissue in vaccines. She argues that people, especially Christians, should boycott the products in order to force pharmaceutical companies to produce vaccines in an ethical manner instead of using cells from aborted babies.

Most people who have seen the disturbing images of dismembered fetuses resting on blood-covered Petri dishes are able to reach the conclusion that the sale of tiny lungs, brains and limbs of babies for profit is a sick practice. The act of abortion is gruesome enough, given all of the twisted and unethical methods that are used, but to go ahead and sell the cut up remains of what once was a living and breathing form of life is borderline sociopathic.

There will come a day when Americans look back on the practice of abortion and the sale of fetal body parts and cringe. Future generations will question our sanity, and wonder what could have possibly compelled us to destroy innocent life.

The Declaration of Independence makes it clear in its Preamble that the federal government has the responsibility to defend Americans’ rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But the truth is, without the right to life, there would be no liberty and happiness to defend in the first place.

The basis of any decent and civil society has to do with how that society treats the most innocent forms of life; that is, the elderly, newborns and the unborn. Perhaps it’s time for our society to take a look in the mirror and reform our practices before we lose ourselves altogether.

Sources:

COGForLife.org^[PDF]

LifeNews.com

(Article by Aaron Klen from breitbart.com)

Farkas served as deputy assistant secretary of defense under the Obama administration. She has been in the spotlight since the news media last week highlighted comments she made on television that seemed to acknowledge efforts by members of the Obama administration to collect intelligence on Trump and members of his campaign. Now it has emerged that at on October 26, 2016, Farkas made remarks as a panelist at the annual Warsaw Security Forum predicting Trump’s removal from office “pretty quickly.”

Asked at the event to address the priorities of a future Hillary Clinton administration, Farkas stated:

It’s not a done deal, as you said. And so, to the Americans in the audience please vote. And not only vote but get everybody to vote. Because I really believe we need a landslide. We need an absolute repudiation of everything. All of the policies that Donald Trump has put out there. I am not afraid to be political. I am not hiding who I am rooting for. And I think it’s very important that we continue to press forward until election day and through election day to make sure that we have the right results.

I do agree however with General Breedlove that even if we have the wrong results from my perspective America is resilient. We have a lot of presidential historians who have put forward very coherent the argument – they have given us examples of all of our horrible presidents in the past and the fact that we have endured. And we do have a strong system of checks and balances. And actually, if Donald Trump were elected I believe he would be impeached pretty quickly or somebody else would have to take over government. And I am not even joking.

Farkas was referring to General Philip Mark Breedlove, another panelist at the conference who served as Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) of NATO Allied Command Operations. The panel discussion was about what to expect following the Nov. 8 presidential election.

Read more at: breitbart.com

The #SurveillanceGate story is blowing up all over the Democrats today as it is now revealed that Susan Rice, Obama’s former national security advisor, was part of a massive criminal conspiracy to surveil and “unmask” President Trump campaign officials in an effort destroy Trump’s chances of either winning the election or governing after achieving office.

The Daily Caller is now reporting that Susan Rice ordered spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” with unmasked names and identities of Trump Team officials. This is a felony crime and a gross abuse of power at the highest levels, dwarfing the Nixon-era Watergate scandal.

Here’s a summary of the revelations so far (source links below):

• Obama and other high-ranking Democrats (such as Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes) deliberately “weaponized” the intelligence apparatus of the nation to undermine or destroy political opponents. This is a serious crime and a gross abuse of power.
• To accomplish this, Obama officials deliberately targeted a long list of foreign officials for surveillance, knowing that Trump Team members were likely to be engaged in international diplomacy conversations with them, allowing Trump’s people to be “incidentally” swept up in the surveillance.
• This “weaponization” of surveillance for political purposes was put into place a full year before the 2016 election. It very likely included surveillance of other Republican candidates as well.
• Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes then conspired with the Obama White House to illegally “unmask” the identities of the U.S. persons who were swept up in the surveillance.
• Susan Rice maintained a “detailed spreadsheet” of all the calls, names, conversations and other details which were shared with the White House (President Obama).
• Obama then signed an order allowing 16 intelligence agencies to share these “unmasked” surveillance recordings, guaranteeing that an Obama-friendly mole inside the deep state would leak details to the anti-Trump media (NYT, WashPost).
• Obama Deputy Defense Secretary Evelyn Farkas openly admitted to urging Obama’s “deep state” operatives to wage a massive “surveillance sweep” program to target Trump Team members.
• The surveillance conspiracy marks the largest and most criminal abuse of power ever witnessed in the history of the White House.
• Many Obama-era officials are likely to face serious criminal indictments over this activity, and the “web of deceit” is likely to rapidly expand to include other officials who are not yet named.
• CNN and most of the mainstream media are pretending none of this happened, hoping they can sweep the story under the rug.

Here’s the key reporting now coming out on this bombshell story:

From The Daily Caller:

Former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice ordered U.S. spy agencies to produce “detailed spreadsheets” of legal phone calls involving Donald Trump and his aides when he was running for president, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova.

“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals,” diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group Monday.

Critics of the atmosphere prevailing throughout the Obama administration’s last year in office point to former Obama Deputy Defense Secretary Evelyn Farkas who admitted in a March 2 television interview on MSNBC that she “was urging my former colleagues,” to “get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration.”

Michael Doran, former NSC senior director, told TheDCNF Monday that “somebody blew a hole in the wall between national security secrets and partisan politics.” This “was a stream of information that was supposed to be hermetically sealed from politics and the Obama administration found a way to blow a hole in that wall,” he said.

Doran charged that potential serious crimes were undertaken because “this is a leaking of signal intelligence.”

“That’s a felony,” he told TheDCNF. “And you can get 10 years for that. It is a tremendous abuse of the system. We’re not supposed to be monitoring American citizens. Bigger than the crime, is the breach of public trust.”

From BloomBerg News:

White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.”

The chairman of the House intelligence committee, Representative Devin Nunes, is also investigating how the Obama White House kept tabs on the Trump transition after the election through unmasking the names of Trump associates incidentally collected in government eavesdropping of foreign officials.

From Fox News:

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.

The unmasked names, of people associated with Donald Trump, were then sent to all those at the National Security Council, some at the Defense Department, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and then-CIA Director John Brennan – essentially, the officials at the top, including former Rice deputy Ben Rhodes.

The names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate and President-elect Trump and people close to him, including family members, for up to a year before he took office.

From Breitbart.com

The alleged spreadsheets add a new dimension to reports on Sunday and Monday by blogger Mike Cernovich and Eli Lake of Bloomberg News that Rice had asked for Trump aides’ names to be “unmasked” in intelligence reports… part of an alleged political intelligence operation to disseminate reports on the Trump campaign widely throughout government with the aim of leaking them to the press.

At the time that radio host Mark Levin and Breitbart News compiled the evidence of surveillance, dissemination, and leaking — all based on mainstream media reports — the mainstream media dismissed the story as a “conspiracy theory.”

Now, however, Democrats are backing away from that allegation, and from broader allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, as additional details of the Obama administration’s alleged surveillance continue to emerge.

Rhodes and Rice were both implicated in a disinformation campaign to describe the Benghazi terror attack in Sep. 2012 as a protest against a YouTube video. Rhodes also boasted of creating an “echo chamber” in the media to promote the Iran deal, feeding stories to contrived networks of “experts” who offered the public a steady stream of pro-agreement propaganda.

CNN decries bombshell, urges viewers to completely ignore the news

What has the corporate-run media done in response to this bombshell news that’s bigger than Watergate? CNN is now urging its viewers to completely ignore the story, essentially claiming it’s all “fake news” while insisting that its own conspiracy theories about Russian interference is the “real news.”

Via Grabien News:

Since news broke Monday that the Obama Administration’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, directed the “unmasking” of NSA intercepts of Trump associates, CNN has raced to shoot down the blockbuster report.

CNN Tonight’s Don Lemon went so far as to announce he would ignore the news at all costs.

While interviewing a Democratic congressman, CNN’s Chris Cuomo claimed it was “demonstrably untrue” Rice sought surveillance of the Trump team, even as that’s exactly what yesterday’s reports prove.

Over the last 24 hours, the network has also repeatedly called on its chief national security correspondent, Jim Sciutto, to dismiss the reports as a non-story; Sciutto has even excused Rice claiming ignorance of the unmasking scandal two weeks ago, arguing Rice “wasn’t aware” what unmasking Rep. Devin Nunes (D-Calif.) was referring to.

So there you have it. It’s the biggest bombshell of (Obama) White House corruption and criminality since Nixon, yet the fact-hating left-wing media has decided in advance that “there’s nothing to see here.”

Can you imagine if all this had been discovered under former President Bush? CNN would be calling for impeachment, prison and charges of treason. But when Obama’s people pulled it off, it’s “not news.”

Stay informed as this story unfolds. Read Trump.news and WhiteHouse.news.

Last week, Starbucks launched a new initiative aimed at bringing conservatives and liberals closer together. The app, created with the help of the Harvard Business School start-up Hi From The Other Side, encourages people from both sides of the political spectrum to engage in rational, civil discussions without any of the name calling or bitterness that is commonly heard in mainstream politics.

The app allows users to connect via the Internet to others nearby who hold political views that differ from their own. In other words, a conservative would be automatically connected with someone who is more liberal in his or her beliefs, and a liberal would be connected with someone who is more conservative. Once the two users are connected, each of them receives “half” of the information, although as of right now it unclear what that means.

The only way both of the users will be able to obtain all of the information is if they meet up and talk to each other one on one. Once they solve this puzzle together, they will each be able to get a free cup of coffee.

Of course, while the intentions of this app are good, the reality of having two people of differing political ideologies sit down and talk could go either way. Either the program will work as intended and Republicans and Democrats will learn how to speak to each other with civility, or tension between the two users could build up to the point where the conversation turns into a screaming match.

Regardless of the potential consequences, you have to give Starbucks credit for trying to accomplish the impossible. Rational and civil debate is simply not something that people seem to be capable of engaging in today, and any individual or company that tries to change that is deserving of some praise and respect.

Sources:

GrubStreet.com

HiFromTheOtherSide.com

Well, if you’re white, that is – which makes this nothing short of hate on steroids, given that whites ceased to be a majority in the state in 2015, having been surpassed by Latinos.

As reported by KABC, there was growing outrage in late March at Walter Reed Middle School in North Hollywood because the school is facing larger class sizes and layoffs of staff and teachers, thanks to a law that limits funding for schools who have more white kids.

The station noted that the school is operated by the Los Angeles Unified School District, which hands out more funding to those with student bodies containing 30 percent or fewer white kids. In a recent letter to parents, district officials announced that they would be cutting funding to Walter Reed in NoHo, which is very highly regarded, because its student body consisted of more than 30 percent white children for the past few years. (RELATED: CLAIM: Berkeley Cops Were Ordered To Stand Down While Violent Left-Wing Terrorists Assaulted Conservatives.)

KABC noted further:

The racial formula was a condition imposed by court decisions dealing with desegregation in the 1970s. Parents, however, remain frustrated with what the cuts might mean for their children.

“When your class sizes are getting larger and you’re taking resources away from students, I mean as parents, you do want your kid to go to college,” parent Rosemary Estrada told KABC.

The district has tried to soften the budget cuts by changing the school’s spending formula to one that is instead based on the overall number of students, but that’s only going to help to an extent.

“Thankfully we’re going to keep our librarian,” said Sheila Edmiston, another parent. “We’re going to keep our nurse, but we may lose a few teachers, but not as many as we once thought.”

Nevertheless, the loss of funding will still result in several lost jobs and larger class sizes. “For many parents,” KABC reported, “the race-based reason of ‘too many white students’ has made the cuts more difficult to swallow.”

Well, that’s certainly putting it mildly. To assume that some parents – especially most white parents – aren’t seething about this is to be about as naïve as it gets.

A quick Google search will bring up a ton of references to past federal court cases ordering schools – especially across the South, decades ago – to de-segregate. The idea, which of course was correct, is that no matter what a child’s skin color, everyone deserves the same educational opportunities.

And while the Constitution acknowledged that we’re all “created equal,” that principle was not universally applied through most of our early history. But then again, that’s what was so genius about the Constitution; as our society evolved, it provided American legislators and courts the tools to change laws and practices to make things right, so to speak.

But how do those court rulings justify racism against whites today, especially when they’re not even a majority of the population in California? Broader question: Why has the Left been permitted to justify any and all racial bigotry as long as it is directed towards anyone with white skin? (RELATED: California Should Be Stripped Of Electoral College Votes Due To High Number Of Illegals In The CA Census.)

If equality means what it implies – and you know, California’s Left-wing Democrats claim they’re all about equality – then neither this school nor any other in the state (or anywhere) should be punished for any reason having anything at all to do with the ethnicity of students.

This is just another reason why sane people, with the means, are fleeing California in droves. High taxes, massive regulations, and racist education policies are not what most Americans find appealing.

J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.

Sources:

ABC7.com

LATimes.com

NaturalNews.com