Jihad Report Jul 30, 2016 -Aug 05, 2016

Attacks 45

Killed 207

Injured 219

Suicide Blasts 8

Countries 14

Armageddon Asteroid

In 2135, Bennu will fly between the moon and Earth — a hair’s breadth in space terms, the Sunday Times of London reported. That’s so close that gravity from the Earth could effect Bennu’s orbit, “potentially putting it on course for the Earth later that century,” said Dante Lauretta, a professor of planetary science at Arizona University.

Bennu is about 487 metres in diameter and travels around the sun at an average of 101,000 km per hour. The chance of an impact is small but significant, and if it happens, would be equivalent to triggering three billion tonnes of high explosive, 200 times the strength of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

“Bennu falls on the boundary, in terms of size, for an object capable of causing a global catastrophe,” Professor Mark Bailey of Northern Ireland’s Armagh Observatory told the Sunday Times.

NASA will launch the Osiris-Rex probe mission to Bennu in September. The probe’s journey will involve a year of orbiting the sun to build up speed before it slingshots back around Earth, using the planet’s gravity to align its orbit with the asteroid’s, the Sunday Times reports. They will rendezvous in August 2018.

Osiris-Rex will then spend a year mapping the asteroid and then hover above its surface to pick up some rubble, before flying back to Earth.

For scientists, the chance of obtaining chunks of a carbonaceous asteroid is exciting. “Bennu is a carbonaceous asteroid, an ancient relic from the early solar system that is filled with organic molecules,” Lauretta said. “Asteroids like Bennu may have seeded the early Earth with this material, contributing to the primordial soup from which life emerged.”

Plasma Rockets: The Mars Solution

Nearly 50 years after landing on the moon, mankind has now set its sights on sending the first humans to Mars. The moon trip took three days; a Mars trip will likely take most of a year. The difference is in more than just time.

We'll need many more supplies for the trip itself, and when we get to the Red Planet, we're going to need to set up camp and stay for a while. Carrying all this material will require a revolutionary rocket technology.

The Saturn V was the largest rocket ever built. It consumed an enormous amount of fuel in explosive chemical reactions that propelled the Apollo spacecraft into orbit. After reaching orbit, Apollo ejected the empty fuel tanks and turned on its own chemical rockets that used even more fuel to get to the moon. It took nearly a million gallons of various fuels just to send a few people on a day trip to our nearest extraterrestrial body.

So how could we send a settlement to Mars, which is more than 100 times farther away than the moon? The Saturn-Apollo combination could deliver only the mass equivalent of one railroad boxcar to the moon; it would take dozens of those rockets just to build a small house on Mars. Sadly, there are no alternatives for the "chemical" launch rocket; only powerful chemical explosions can provide enough force to overcome Earth’s gravity. But once in space, a new fuel-efficient rocket technology can take over: plasma rockets.

Scientists with NASA's Eagleworks Laboratories in Houston, Texas, presented a paper indicating they had achieved a small amount of thrust from a container that had no traditional fuels, only microwaves, bouncing around inside it. If the results can be replicated reliably and scaled up — and that's a big "if," since NASA only produced them on a very small scale over a two-day period — they could ultimately result in ultra-light weight, ultra fast spacecraft that could carry humans to Mars in weeks instead of months, and to the nearest star system outside our own (Proxima Centurai) in just about 30 years.

NASA had tested a score of other technologies, many of which were submitted after the Cannae Drive . It was named after Mr. Scot of Star Trek often saying the line, “I’m giving you all she’s got, captain, and I cannae do any more.” Well, finally, after a long barrage of emails, phone calls, and letters from the inventors, NASA finally agreed to test the motor that won’t work. There’s just one problem. It did work. They hooked up the prototype wrong, didn’t operate it in a vacuum, and still it produced 50 micronewtons of thrust, from …well, from absolutely nothing but electricity.

The idea that microwaves bouncing from end-to-end of a specially designed, unevenly-shaped container can create a difference in radiation pressure, causing thrust to be exerted toward the larger end of the container violates all known laws of physics. A similar type of technology called an EmDrive has been demonstrated to work in small scale trials by Chinese and Argentine scientists.

While the amount of thrust generated in these NASA's tests was lower than previous trials — between 30 and 50 micronewtons, way less than even the weight of an iPhone, as Nova points out — the fact that any thrust whatsoever is generated without an onboard source of fuel seems to violate the conservation of momentum, a bedrock in the laws of physics.

"not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon."

Most impressively, the NASA team specifically built two Cannae Drives, including one that was designed to fail, and instead it worked. As the scientists write in their paper abstract: "thrust was observed on both test articles, even though one of the test articles was designed with the expectation that it would not produce thrust." That suggests the drive is "producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon," the scientists write. It may instead be interacting with the quantum vacuum — the lowest energetic state possible — but the scientists don't have much evidence to support this idea yet.

By my calculations, any successful transport vehicle in space would have to have four Cannae drives at least 20 meters in diameter. The amount of power that would have to be drawn from the Sun would require 10-12 acres of solar panels, making the ship many times larger than the international space station, at only 27,000 square feet. An acre is 44,500 square feet. I estimate it would take about 2.5 megawatts to make a plasma blast powerful enough to power nearly 400 square feet of thrust area. Still, the ISS weighs nearly a million pounds. A craft of that mass could only accelerate at about five feet per second squared.

My calculations say that if a 1 million pound ship could be pushed for 7 days at full power, it could reach a speed of 200,000 miles an hour. It would take about one week at that speed, turn the ship around and decelerate for one week to ten days, due to reduced sunlight, and the ship could go into orbit around Mars. The modules could then be glided to the surface, leaving the main ship the power to return to a lunar orbit in about two weeks. It would produce about half a “G” of gravity for most of the trip.

There are many reasons to be skeptical: the inventor of the Cannae Drive, Guido Fetta, has only a   Bachelor’s Degree in Chemical Engineering and is operating his company Cannae as a for-profit venture. The future of this technology must involve the participation of many nations in order to build a space station sized craft to make this trip.

The 'electric vehicles' of spacePlasma rockets are a modern technology that transforms fuel into a hot soup of electrically charged particles, known as plasma, and ejects it to push a spacecraft. Using plasma rockets instead of the traditional chemical rockets can reduce total in-space fuel usage by 90 percent. That means we could deliver 10 times the amount of

cargo using the same fuel mass. NASA mission planners are already looking into using plasma rocket transport vehicles for ferrying cargo between Earth and Mars.

6 kW Hall Thruster.

Credit: NASA JPL

The main downside to plasma rockets is their low thrust. Thrust is a measure of how strong a "push" the rocket can supply to the spacecraft. The most powerful plasma rocket flown in space, called a Hall thruster, would produce only enough thrust to lift a piece of paper against Earth's gravity. Believe it or not, a Hall thruster would take many years of continuous pushing to reach Mars.

But don't worry, weak thrust is not a deal breaker. Thanks to its revolutionary fuel efficiency, plasma rockets have enabled NASA to perform missions that would otherwise not be possible with chemical rockets. Just recently, the Dawn mission demonstrated the potential of plasma rockets by becoming the first spacecraft to orbit two different extraterrestrial bodies.

While the future of plasma rockets is bright, the technology still has unsolved problems. For example, what's going to happen to a thruster that runs for the many years it takes to perform round-trip cargo missions to Mars? Most likely, it'll break.

That's where my research comes in. I need to find out how to make plasma rockets immortal.

Understanding plasma rockets

Model plasma rocket diagram. Most similar to an ion thruster design.

Credit: Author provided, CC BY-ND

To do this, we need to understand how a plasma rocket works. The rocket creates a plasma by injecting electrical energy into a gaseous fuel, stripping negatively charged electrons from the positively charged ions. The ions are then shot out the back of the rocket, pushing the spacecraft forward.

Unfortunately, all that energy in plasma does more than propel spaceships – it wants to destroy any material it comes into contact with. Electric forces from the negatively charged walls cause the ions to slam into the wall at very high speeds. These collisions break atoms off the wall, slowly weakening it over time. Eventually, enough ions hit the wall that the entire wall breaks, the thruster stops functioning and your spacecraft is now stuck in space.

It's not enough to use tougher materials to withstand the bombardment: There will always be some amount of damage regardless of how strong the material is. We need a clever way of manipulating the plasma, and the wall material, to avoid damage.

A self-healing wallWouldn't it be great if the chamber wall could repair itself? It turns out there are two physical effects that can allow this to happen.

Illustration of three possible scenarios for a wall atom that comes off: 1) it’s lost forever, 2) it intercepts a wall and deposits or 3) it becomes ionized and is accelerated by electric forces to deposit on the wall.

Credit: CC BY-ND

The first is known as ballistic deposition and is present in materials with microscopic surface variations, like spikes or columns. When an ion hits the wall, a piece of these microfeatures that breaks off can fly in any direction. Some of these pieces will hit nearby protruding parts of the surface and stick, leaving the wall effectively undamaged. However, there will always be atoms that fly away from the wall and are lost forever, so over time, it may degrade and wear out like a tire rolling down the highway.

Microstructures on a material sample viewed under a Scanning Electron Microscope.

Credit: Chris Matthes (UCLA), CC BY-ND

The second phenomenon is less intuitive and depends on the plasma conditions. Imagine the same scenario where the wall particle breaks off and flies into the plasma. However, instead of being lost forever, the particle suddenly turns around and goes straight back to the wall.

This is similar to how a baseball tossed straight up into the air turns around and drops back to your hand. With the baseball, gravity stops the ball from going up any higher and pulls it back down to the ground. In a thruster, it's the electric force between the

negatively charged wall and the wall particle itself. It comes off neutrally charged, but can lose its electron in the plasma, becoming positively charged. The result is that the particle is pulled back toward the wall, in a phenomenon known as plasma redeposition. This process can be controlled by changing the density and temperature of the plasma. This, in effect, make the wall self-healing. That is to say, the electrons are lost, but the protons are not. They become positively charged and stick right back to the negatively charged wall surface.

Testing different materials

Sample materials being assessed in the UCLA Plasma-interactions test facility.

Credit: CC BY-ND

Different wall materials are being tested, not unlike the years of testing Edison went through until he found that Tungsten filaments would survive glowing white hot in a vacuum to make incandescent light bulbs. Remember, ballistic deposition depends on the wall’s surface structures, while plasma redeposition depends on the plasma. For my initial study, I adjusted the plasma conditions so there was no plasma redeposition, and only ballistic deposition occurred.

The first microfeatured sample tested had its damage reduced by 20 percent. This would mean the tires would wear out in space long before the real mission of the ship was finished. By improving the design of the microfeatures, the damage can be reduced even further, potentially as much as 50 percent. Such a material on a thruster could make the difference between getting to Mars and getting stuck halfway. The next step is to include the effects of plasma redeposition and to determine whether a truly immortal wall can be achieved.

As plasma thrusters become ever more powerful, they become more able to damage their own walls, too. That increases the importance of a self-healing wall. My ultimate goal is to design a thruster using advanced materials that can last 10 times as long as any Mars mission requirement, making it effectively immortal. An immortal wall would solve this problem of thruster failure, and allow us to ferry the cargo we need to begin building mankind's first outpost on Mars.

Add to this technology, my idea of laser thrusters to lift ships into orbit, and we really have a possibility. You see, it takes millions of pounds of fuel to get a large rocket to lift a payload into orbit. But, if you take away the fuel, the ship only has to work 25% as hard to get the same payload into space. How do we do that? Well, in the year 2027, a new lift engine is tested with a payload of a quarter of a million pounds using the reusable Agnew Laser Lift Module. Maybe, I can bring it to reality sooner, since I have been back here in the past telling people about it.

Here is how it works. Three lasers are built into a ground-based launch platform. Each one is aimed into the input port of the vehicle’s Ablation Thrust Module. I know, it really replaces the acronym for those obsolete tellers you see everywhere now. The ATM has three input ports where the 100 megajoule lasers enter the module. The beam’s power transfer is modulated in each input port to steer the vehicle along the laser beam. The mirrors on the ground based platform can also redirect the beam so the ALLM can optimize the orbit insertion angle.

The beams ablate solid material, causing the nucleus to completely disintegrate into almost pure energy. The escaping pressure exits through nozzles, thrusting the vehicle away from the beam and forming a vacuum to keep the input ports clear of any foreign material that might dissipate the laser. It’s quite simple, actually. The instant the laser is turned off, the thrust stops, and the ALLM jettisons and floats back to Earth for reuse. The exit velocity of hydrogen peroxide lift motors is about 2,500 meters per second. The exit velocity of the ALLM is nearly 5,500 meters per second, creating twice the lift capacity for the same sized nozzle. The first time it was launched in 2027, the onlookers had to wear protective glasses to protect against germicidal UV energy coming off the nozzles. After that launch at Canaveral, they were all done from French New Guinea to avoid possible blindness issues with onlookers.

Now, if there is anyone out there listening, telling you this has altered that future timeline. I hope so. The last time I reported from the future, it was 2007 and I reported back from the year 2015. I told you we didn’t make it. The presidency collapsed, and there was widespread panic and civil unrest. That timeline was changed, because w few thousand of you woke up and added your consciousness to the future.

We are not out of this yet. You must stay focused and remember that the election of an outsider is vital to the survival of the Republic. You see, in all of the ancient writings, including those collected in the Bible, there is no mention of America. We’re not supposed to be here. We were not foreseen by the prophets. This land of freedom and liberty, where god-given rights are actually protected by its founding document, does not exist. Someone went back to the 1770’s and established a new timeline.

Lucifer and his seed have been desperately trying to correct that shift and return us to a path of darkness and ignorance. They are almost there. This week, the presidency that was supposed to collapse in 2015 looked into the cameras and laughed at our laws, sending $400 million to the seed of Lucifer. The fear and corruption will now require a

suicidal commitment of the men who wish to receive redemption from their crimes against the American people.

They must confess and perform restitution, or they will be betrayed by Lucifer and forever be plunged into outer darkness, away from the glory of God. I tell you now, that the agencies, departments, bureaus, and administrations that have taken over our government are swollen with evil and greed and lust for power. They fear no judge, no attorney general, and certainly no FBI Director. They don’t even fear you anymore.

And remember, that is why the second amendment was put in place and made second in line behind Free Speech. It was so that government would fear you the people and not seek to take away all the other rights. Well, they have lost that fear, and Hillary has openly said that all the amendments to the Constitution are subject to regulation. And she did it to a standing ovation on national television. Now, it is time to fear. Now it is time to look up from your grindstone. Now it is time to slip your hands out of those chains and pull your feet out of those shackles. And, yes, you can do it. Now, it is time to focus on your right to vote. It is time to remove the seed of Lucifer from office and elect one of us, the people, to leadership. It is time for the bloodline of King John to end, once and for all time. Do not let me down, Earth explorers, or this whole effort for the past 12 years has been for naught.

American National Election Polls May be Rigged

On Sunday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Alex Marlow, political strategist Pat Caddell outlined his charge that Reuters tampered with its own daily tracking poll to manufacture a sudden surge for Hillary Clinton.

“They not only changed their formula, to put Hillary ahead. They went back and changed the results, for a week of results where Trump was ahead, and then they turned those into Hillary leads,” said Caddell. “They also erased all the former polling off the site. They didn’t tweak their procedure – they cooked it.”

“Never in my life have I seen a news organization, and a supposedly reputable poll, do something so dishonest,” Caddell continued. “What they have done is, they decided the people who said, ‘oh, I’m never for someone’ – oh, those must be Hillary votes. They used to be Trump voters.”

“They made a switch, as much as nine points, in their results from the beginning of last week, the 25th and 26th. It is, beyond doubt, the most outrageous thing,” he declared, noting that results in three- and four-way polls that include independent candidates Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were also skewed.

“This is what the media is willing to do, to try to elect her,” Caddell said. “This poll is nothing but a part of a media offensive. In the 45 years since I was a child, in top-level presidential campaigns, I have never seen the media on such a jihad, and so involved in hiding facts, and not following up. This is a crisis of democracy, what the press is now doing.”

He noted that Hillary Clinton made “big news” on Fox News Sunday when she claimed the FBI found her responses to questions about her secret email server to be honest and consistent, when in fact FBI Director James Comey said the opposite, when he declined to refer charges against her to prosecutors.

“That is language from another planet,” Caddell declared. “This woman, to make that assertion after all the proven lies, should be a big story, but it will not be.” He also noted the contrast between how Donald Trump’s appearance on ABC News over the weekend was immediately followed by a round-table of commentators attacking him, but Fox News staged no such ambush of Clinton.

Caddell furthermore dismissed Trump’s ABC News interviewer George Stephanopoulos as “a former Democratic operative, a Clinton contributor, and an absolute fraud as a newsperson.”

“It is unbelievable what he did. He interviewed Trump, and basically then had the Khan family – the Muslim mother and father of the soldier who was killed – and General Allen on to attack Trump after the interview. He showed them the interview and then let attack him, and then loaded a panel with people who are so negative,” Caddell complained.

He found the media far less willing to say anything about the “pall of corruption” hanging over the Democratic convention, or the Democrats’ reluctance to say a word about the issue, knowing how much it hurts Clinton.

“Not once, not once, was there a mention of the Clinton Foundation by Hillary, or Bill, or anybody, about what great work they do, because they dare not even raise it,” he observed. “Nobody said anything. The press, which have universally assaulted Trump, who got a big boost out of his speech – who won the speech by the way, of best speeches, beats her, and the press praises her, and they’re laying down, and this is ‘Reaganesque’ – this is about as Reaganesque as John Kerry in 2004, going up to the podium after all the admirals and generals surrounding him, and saying ‘I’m reporting for duty,’” he said. “I mean, that went over like a lead balloon.”

“My party never learns that you cannot just hoodwink the people,” said Caddell, a lifelong Democrat.

“Patty Smith, the mother of Sean Smith that was killed, who gave a very emotional speech at the Republican Convention – notice that she wasn’t interviewed by any of the Sunday shows. She wasn’t put on any of the networks. And she wasn’t on the front page of the New York Times,” he pointed out. “And that was about her son being killed because Hillary Clinton had directly lied about it.”

“The Trump campaign, and your listeners, and this election, understand – this democracy is under assault by a press, who I, in 45 years, have never seen so biased, and so on a jihad against one candidate,” Caddell declared. 

He castigated Hillary Clinton’s rival Bernie Sanders for “taking a dive” in the Democratic primary.

“He deserted his movement,” said Caddell. “Could you imagine if he, on Monday, had said, ‘I told you this system was rigged. Deborah Wasserman Schultz, the DNC, it’s all there, the facts?’”

While Sanders backed away from making such an explosive charge on the first night of the Democratic National Convention, Caddell said the media was busy trying to reframe the issue as a story about Russian hacking, to distract voters from what the exposed DNC emails actually said about a rigged primary.

“The point is that Bernie Sanders could have gone out to his people – let me just give you this scenario. If he had gone out, and said to his supporters and delegates, ‘I’m withdrawing my endorsement of Hillary Clinton for now, I’m asking every delegate at this convention now to vote their conscience,’ he would have blown the convention up. He’d have blown politics in the country up. And there would have been 50,000 Sanders people surrounding that arena,” Caddell said.

“But that is one sold-out man, by the way,” he said of Sanders. “And at 74, you would think he didn’t have to do that.”

Caddell asserted that too many leading figures in the Democratic Party were more concerned with securing their positions, even in the twilight of their political careers, than standing on principle. He thought it should have been a big story that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and other Democrat leaders pressured Sanders into taking it easy on Clinton, furious that he would run against her at all.

“His supporters knew nothing about being sold out by Bernie Sanders, which is what they were,” said a furious Caddell. “They’re not going to get anything done with super-delegates. It is the same bait-and-switch the party has had to maintain power.”

“It’s not just the Democrats – remember what’s happening in Washington, the coalition against Trump, who stands almost alone, is also filled with these Bush-type Republicans, and establishment Republicans, who view him as a real threat to their ability to hold on to their party, and their own niche in this corrupt system,” he added.

Caddell charged that if the media had treated the DNC leaks as more than a two-day story, and done a bit more digging, they would have found “Bernie Sanders won Iowa, and they’re hiding the results.” He noted he was among the first, and most forceful, analysts to allege that the Iowa caucus results were rigged to make Hillary Clinton look like the winner by a hair, because even a razor-thin Sanders victory would have thrown the Democratic primary into chaos.

“You let yourself get raped like this,” Caddell said to Sanders. “Don’t tell me when you could fight back, and you don’t, that it’s okay.”

Looking ahead, he predicted that Trump would win over voters by continuing to attack media bias and a rigged political system. Caddell actually deployed some harsher language than Trump has to date, which is not an easy bar to clear.

“Reporters are like cockroaches,” he said. “I hate to say this to reporters, but anyway, you flip on a light in a New York apartment, and cockroaches run everywhere. That’s what happens when you start shining a light on the media for what they refuse to tell people. And the greatest crime is not that they’re saying you must vote against Donald Trump, that he’s evil. The greatest crime is that they are hiding facts from the American people, to fit their narrative. They are making themselves, as I’ve said before, the enemies of the American people.”

“The American people don’t think much of them now, and won’t think much of them,” he predicted. “But you cannot let them get away with this, the way people like Romney and others roll over and take a beating, because their consultants want to make sure they preserve their relationships in Washington with the political media.”

Caddell found encouraging signs that “the American people are clued in” about media corruption, citing research conducted by his colleague, Democratic pollster Doug Schoen, that the momentum of the 2016 race favors Trump, in part because of deep alienation against the existing political system, across the political spectrum.

“This election, right now, it’s hanging in the balance. Trump is the independent variable. If he can learn to hit big ground, and understand they’re going to go after him on everything, and discipline himself, he is the man to beat in this election,” Caddell declared, adding that Clinton “doesn’t have anywhere to go in this election, unless Trump blows himself up.”

Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the board of a small energy company alongside Russian officials that received $35 million from a Putin-connected Russian government fund, a relationship Podesta failed to fully disclose on his federal financial disclosures as required by law.

That’s one of the many revelations from a 56-page report released late Sunday titled “From Russia with Money: Hillary Clinton, the Russian Reset, and Cronyism” by the non-partisan government watchdog group, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). Breitbart Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon holds the same title in GAI and Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer serves as GAI’s president.

Both the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal ran stories on the newly released report late Sunday evening.

As part of her duties during the so-called Russian reset, then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton led the way on U.S. involvement in a Russian government technology initiative that was intended to be the Russian equivalent of America’s Silicon Valley known as Skolkovo. The “innovation city,” located outside Moscow, has some 30,000 workers in state-of-the-art facilities under strict government control. As Slate described it in 2013, “In some ways, Skolkovo is eerily reminiscent of Soviet utopian city-building projects.”

According to the GAI report, Clinton’s State Dept. recruited U.S. tech giants like Google, Cisco, Intel. Indeed, out of 28 U.S., European, and Russian companies that participated in Skolkovo, 17 of them were Clinton Foundation donors or paid for speeches by Bill Clinton.

However, as involvement in Skolkovo by Clinton cronies increased, so, too, did the danger for the technology coming out of the Russian tech mecca to be used for Russian military purposes.

In 2014, the FBI issued what it called “an extraordinary warning” to several technology companies involved with Skolkovo. “The [Skolkovo] foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application,” warned Lucia Ziobro, the assistant special agent at the FBI’s Boston office. She added: “The FBI believes the true motives of the Russian partners, who are often funded by the government, is to gain access to classified, sensitive, and emerging technology from the companies.”

Still, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta sat on the executive board of a small energy company called Joule Unlimited. Joule, too, received the FBI letter warning about Skolkovo. Other Joule board members included senior Russian officials. According to the GAI report: “Two months after Podesta joined the board, Vladimir Putin’s Rusnano announced that it would invest up to one billion rubles into Joule Unlimited, which amounts to $35 million. That represents one-fifth of the entire amount of investment dollars Joule collected from 2007 to 2013.”

Rusnano, which former Russian education and science minister and current science advisor to Vladmir Putin Andrei Fursenko describes as “Putin’s child,” was founded by Putin in 2007.

The GAI investigative report says it’s unclear how much, if any, money Podesta made. The reason: Podesta was on the board of three Joule entities, but only listed two on his disclosure; the most important entity, Joule Stichting, he did not list. “Podesta’s compensation by Joule cannot be fully determined,” reads the report. “In his 2014 federal government disclosure filing, Podesta lists that he divested stock options from Joule. However, the disclosure does not cover the years 2011-2012.”

Why Podesta failed to reveal, as required by law on his federal financial disclosures, his membership on the board of this offshore company is presently unknown.

“But the flows of funds from Russia during the ‘reset’ to Podesta-connected entities apparently didn’t end with Joule Energy,” the report states. According to the GAI report, Podesta’s far-left think tank, Center for American Progress (CAP), took in $5.25 million from the Sea Change Foundation between 2010-2013.

Who was funding Sea Change Foundation? According to tax records, Sea Change Foundation at the time was receiving a large infusion of funds from a mysterious Bermuda-based entity called ‘Klein, Ltd.’…Who owns Klein? It is impossible to say exactly, given corporate secrecy laws in Bermuda. But the registered agent and lawyers who set up the offshore entity are tied to a handful of Russian business entities including Troika Dialog, Ltd. Leadership includes Ruben Vardanyan, an ethnic Armenian who is a mega oligarch in Putin’s Russia. Vardanyan also served on the board of Joule Energy with John Podesta.

The FBI and U.S. Army sounded the alarm bells about Skolkovo being a threatening pathway for Russia to accelerate its military technological capabilities. Why Hillary Clinton’s State Dept and her campaign manager were tied up in this raises serious questions that demand answers and transparency.

The Strong Cities Network

Back in October, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe. At the time, immediately following Lynch’s announcement, Pam Geller wrote in Brietbart that the Strong Cities Network is nothing more than euphemism for a “global police force.” Furthermore, it’s a global police force that Geller says:

“Amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.”

At this point, let’s clear up some facts: 1) The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and sharia law is 100% incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Period. There is no debate; 2) The U.S. already has law enforcement. We have the FBI (the ones not on the Clinton payroll anyway), the CIA, Federal Marshals, State, City, and local law enforcement, and countless other alphabet soup agencies; 3) Obama’s assertion that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam is patently FALSE!

According to a Department of Defense Training Manual obtained in a lawsuit by Judicial Watch, Obama’s Defense Department claims the most serious threats to the U.S. come from extreme right-wing’ terrorists, defined as “Americans who are ‘reverent of individual liberty,’ those who are ‘suspicious of centralized federal authority,’ and those who honor “states’ rights.”

Loretta Lynch and Sasha Havlicek explain how the new Strong Cities Network will be “unlike anything else we’ve ever seen before,” in their own words. Do you know what it will be “unlike anything we’ve ever seen before?” Because the whole program originated in the United Nations, not the United States, and the United States is a sovereign constitutional republic, not a puppet of Obama, the New World Order, or the United Nations.

Loretta Lynch said:

“Through the Strong Cities Network, being unveiled today, we’re making the first systematic effort in history, to bring together cities around the world, to share experiences, to pool all of our resources and to forge partnerships in order to form local cohesion and resilience on a global scale.”

Sasha Havlicek said:

“The Strong Cities Network is a network focused on supporting cities, and to prevent all forms of violent extremism. It is important to remember, while attention is currently focused on ISIS and the threat from foreign fighters, threats of other forms of extremism, not the least of which are extreme right-wing groups…

To anyone who has studied the history of the global elite, what we’ve seen in recent months with the uptick in violence is straight out of the globalist playbook with their use of the Hegelian Dialectic. The process they follow is simple: 1) Create a problem large enough to get massive attention (make sure the problem is a “global problem,” because “global problems” will require “global solutions”); 2) Use the problem to force a knee jerk reaction from the masses; and 3) Never letting a crisis go to waste, and while emotions are high, move quickly for a “global solution.”

The following breaks down how recent events fit together, followed by a video that further explains the Hegelian Dialectic so often used by the global elite to manipulate the masses. After the video, Michael Snyder from the Economic Collapse Blog goes through multiple examples happening all around us that signal a total collapse is coming on a social, moral, and economic level.

1. CREATING PROBLEM: 

Overseas: In recent months Soros created a global problem (which he admitted to), when he chose to help finance the refugee migration into Western Europe. His rationale for destabilizing Europe was the hope of eliminating national borders. Why? That would be one step closer to one world government.

Domestically: Soros has continued to fund radical far-left groups fueled by anti-law enforcement rhetoric (just like his movement in Ukraine was), and according to a recent Rasmussen poll, U.S. race relations are at an all time low. That is evidenced by the shootings in Baton Rouge of both multiple police officers and civilians, a radical far-left sniper that shot and killed 5 police officers in Dallas, 2 officers shot and killed outside a courthouse in Michigan, shootings in Minneapolis, Kansas City, and still more…

2. KNEE-JERK REACTION:

Operation Gladio, explains how George Soros has been funding various radical groups like Democracy Spring and Black Lives Matter around the U.S. that are being used as pawns for the purpose of destabilizing the United States. It has been well established in recent weeks that the United Nations has a strong presence here in the U.S. right now, and they’re here for a reason. Whether it’s election chaos caused by Soros funded groups, racial tensions that eventually boil over, or perhaps economic collapse, it’s clear the U.N. is ready to react if called upon.

3. CONVENIENT SOLUTION:

Finally, regardless of what the final catalyst turns out to be, once the situation in America finally devolves into chaos, expect the mainstream media to assist the globalists by bombarding citizens with non-stop talk about how a “socially just” and politically correct “global solution” is required. Count on the “solution” having two distinct characteristics:

1. Whatever it is will NOT have prevented the initial “problem”; AND

2. Whatever “solution” is implemented will strip constitutional rights from U.S. citizens, and transfer that power to the political elite, further transforming a once free country into a militarized police state.

Furthermore, expect the “solution” to connect Loretta Lynch’s Safe Cities Network with the United Nations Troops already stationed here.

Crop Circles

Patty Greer is a fearless film maker who took her cameras into the UK Crop Circles from 2006 to 2014. In August of 2007 she had a “Contact” experience in an English Crop Circle that altered the course of her life dramatically. I speak from experience when I say that changes like this are powerful and permanent. She awakened from the experience with a relentless passion to understand the Crop Circle phenomena further & to film them, day and night. She produced 8 UFO films in record time. Like others who are genuine, she got strong messages in the form of downloads sometimes at 3AM. She wrote down what she was told and was always in the right place at the right time with cameras.

What is it that she has discovered? Are there real crop circles that are not man made? If so, what are they trying to say to us? What happens if we make no effort to listen? Patty believes that the Earth, human consciousness and ETs have been co-communicating Crop Circle messages for centuries. Her movies & talks are like a backstage pass to unraveling these multidimensional communications that have been left like sticky notes in farm fields around the world for at least 200 years that we know of.

Deutsch Bank Profits Drop by 98%

The biggest and most important bank in the biggest and most important country in Europe continues to implode right in front of our eyes.  If you follow my work regularly, you probably already know that I issued a major alarm about Deutsche Bank last September.  Subsequently, Deutsche Bank stock hit an all-time low.  Then I sounded the alarm about Deutsche Bank again back in May, and once again that was followed by another all-time low for Deutsche Bank.  And then I warned about Deutsche Bank again in early June, and you can probably imagine what happened after that.  Over the past year, this German banking giant has literally been coming apart at the seams, and in so many ways it is paralleling exactly what happened to Lehman Brothers back in 2008.

Today, we got some more bad news from Deutsche Bank.  Compared to the exact same period last year, profits were down 98 percent.  A nearly 100 percent drop in net income spooked a lot

of investors, and Deutsche Bank shares got hit hard on Wednesday.  Of course Deutsche Bank shares are already down by more than half over the past 12 months, and the financial sharks can smell blood in the water.

Just like Lehman Brothers in 2008, Deutsche Bank is essentially in panic mode at this point.   They recently announced that they will be closing 188 branches and that 3,000 workers will be losing their jobs.  But this could just be the beginning of the layoffs at the bank.  According to some reports, the bank could cut up to   35,000 jobs by the year 2020, and CEO John Cryan recently admitted that they “may have to accelerate cost-cutting measures“.

What makes all of this even more alarming is that Deutsche Bank is widely considered to be “the most dangerous bank” on the entire planet.  The following comes from a CNN article posted just today entitled “The world’s riskiest bank is in trouble“…

What is going on with Deutsche Bank?

Germany’s biggest lender was dubbed the world’s riskiest bank by the International Monetary Fund last month, just as one of its U.S. businesses failed a Federal Reserve stress test.

Its shares are down 45% this year, and on Wednesday it said second quarter profits were wiped out by a 98% slump in earnings. The stock fell 2.5% in Frankfurt.

The primary reason why Deutsche Bank is “the world’s riskiest bank” is because of the mammoth derivatives portfolio that is possesses.  It currently has 42 trillion euros of exposure to derivatives, which is an amount of money about 13 times the size of the entire German economy.

When Deutsche Bank finally goes down for good, it is going to be “the shot heard around the financial world”, and it will be a disaster many times greater than the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.  Just consider what Jeff Gundlach had to say about the bank earlier this year…

“Banks are dying and policymakers don’t know what to do,” Gundlach said. “Watch Deutsche Bank shares go to single digits and people will start to panic… you’ll see someone say, ‘Someone is going to have to do something.’”

As I write this, shares of Deutsche Bank are sitting at just $13.63, and many experts are having a very difficult time finding any reason for optimism.  In fact, Edward Misrahi has stated that the bank is his number one short trade, and Jim Collins says that “it is just impossible” to recommend buying shares of Deutsche Bank even at this depressed level…

As an equity analyst, it is just impossible to recommend shares of a bank that is not growing revenue. So really, Deutsche is an untouchable, and the stock market is trying — to the tune of a 58% decline in DB’s market value in 12 months — to recalibrate Deutsche’s market capitalization to the true value of its assets net of liabilities. That’s a painful journey.

I don’t mean to just pick on Deutsche Bank.  Certainly there are a lot of other major banks around the globe that are also teetering on the brink right now.  Just take a look at Italy.  Basically their entire banking system is in the process of melting down.

But the utter collapse of Italy’s banking system won’t have the same kind of worldwide impact that the collapse of Deutsche Bank will.

Unlike some of his predecessors, CEO John Cryan is being honest about some of the struggles that Deutsche Bank is going through right now, and he admits that they may need to be “more ambitious in our restructuring”.  The following comes from Business Insider…

Cryan said in a statement (emphasis ours):

“We have continued to de-risk our balance sheet, to invest in our processes and to modernize our infrastructure. However, if the current weak economic environment persists, we will need to be yet more ambitious in the timing and intensity of our restructuring.”

He said something similar in a note to employees (emphasis again ours):

“Here I would like to speak plainly. If this weak economic environment persists, we will need to be still more ambitious in our restructuring. We will do everything in our power to accelerate the measures we have already planned.”

Yes, I know that the stock market in the United States has been setting all sorts of all-time record highs lately.

But that doesn’t change what is going on in the rest of the world one bit.

The financial crisis that has been gripping Europe, Asia, South America and most of the rest of the planet since the second half of last year is accelerating.

And it is inevitable that the U.S. is going to be experiencing some very real pain in the not too distant future as well.

So even though things may seem a bit quiet this summer in the financial world, the truth is that there is a whole lot going on under the surface.

Deutsche Bank is one glaringly obvious example of this, but there are many others all over the globe.  And not too long from now, the dominoes will begin to fall very rapidly.

High Crimes

Seemingly violating the claim that America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists and hostage takers, reports have revealed that the Obama administration organized an airlift to transport $400 million in cash to Tehran which coincided with the January release of four Americans taken prisoner by Iran.

This is what part of the main stream media is trying to sell us. Reports say wooden pallets stacked and shrink-wrapped with a variety of currencies were loaded onto an unmarked cargo plane and flown to Iran. The Wall Street Journal reports that American officials procured the money from banks in Switzerland and the Netherlands. Actually, no bank would allow cash in such quantities to be deposited. International laws prohibit the movement of quantities of cash, specifically because it is not traceable to its source. So, unprocessed cash sits in these secure warehouses, waiting for the right “off-the-books” project to come along.

No one can make car payments in cash. You can’t make mortgage payments at the bank in cash. If you are caught with cash, law enforcement is authorized to confiscate it as though the cash itself committed a crime under civil forfeiture laws.

The truth is that the Obama Administration has accumulated billions in unlaundered cash from the sale of, or permitting the sale of, illegal drugs. This cash sits in warehouses and is used to fund criminal activities and terrorism. It is used to buy influence. It is used to trade for arms, political favors, or for lives. One thing is universally well known. Cash is the currency of crime. It cannot be traced. It cannot be accounted for. Boxes or thick envelopes of cash shipped to government officials have purchased more elections than anything else.

The money was purportedly only the first installment of a $1.7 billion deal the Obama administration reached with Iran over an arms deal brokered with the Shah of Iran just before the Mullah’s took over in 1979. It makes sense that Iran would not accept US dollars, as they are notably the largest counterfeiter of US dollars on the planet. No one would trust Iran shipping stacks of dollars to pay for anything.

This settlement is so old and so far down the priority list that no one ever expected any administration to pay it, and yet the Obama administration turned it into the perfect excuse, should they get caught for smuggling pallets of unmarked cash to the terrorist regime of Iran. Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama have been funding ISIS for years using this cash. Valerie Jarrett is serving as the US Co-president and has been feeding favors and preferential treatment to Iran since she has been in the White House.

The planned excuse of old settlement payments was queued up in case the public pointed out that Iran was releasing Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian, former U.S. Marine Amir Hekmati, Christian pastor Saeed Abedini, and Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari the same exact day that the cash arrived.

Iranian official news sources reported at the time that the prisoners were released in a “prisoner for cash” brokered by the Obama administration.

The administration also returned seven Iranian prisoners in exchange for the release of the Americans. Obama also dropped extradition proceedings against another 14 Iranians as part of the deal. Not only did the administration return seven Iranians but it was said Obama also agreed to drop U.S. sanctions against Iran as the nuclear deal was being crafted. It was felt that the prisoner release was meant to keep Republicans from criticizing Obama’s nuclear deal.

The timing of these two actions precisely coincided with the release of the US prisoners. In fact, the plane with the prisoners was not allowed to taxi and leave Iran until the plane with the cash landed and was validated. No mention by the press was made of the January 2016 secret transfer of $400 million in cash to Iran until now.

The Obama administration has now denied that the pallets of shrink-wrapped cash had anything to do with the hostage release agreement. He is actually laughing at law enforcement, because he knows their network of corruption is tight and has been tested in public with the recent decision by the FBI not to prosecute Hillary Clinton, although the Director spent 14 minutes describing a litany of statutory violations. He clearly and publicly stated the facts of perjury before Congress. Still, because she is the Democrat nominee, no charges have been filed. It remains to be seen if the electorate decides to judge her in the court of public opinion.

“As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim … were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told the Journal. “Not only were the two negotiations separate, they were conducted by different teams on each side, including, in the case of The Hague claims, by technical experts involved in these negotiations for many years.”

Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton criticized the revelations accusing Obama of paying a “ransom to the ayatollahs for U.S. hostages.” A claim, it would seem, for which the main stream media has absolutely no interest whatsoever.

“This break with long-standing U.S. policy put a price on the head of Americans, and has led Iran to continue its illegal seizures” of Americans, Cotton said.

At a press conference Thursday, Obama remarkably explained, “The reason that we had to give them cash is precisely because we are so strict in maintaining sanctions and we do not have a banking relationship with Iran.” Really Mr. President? The whole point of sanctions is to prohibit and punish certain behavior. If you — especially you, Mr. President — do the precise thing that the sanctions prohibit, that is a strange way of being “so strict in maintaining” them. Now, the sanctions at issue exclude Iran from the U.S. financial system by, among other things, prohibiting Americans and financial institutions from engaging in currency transactions that involve Iran’s government. Contrary to the nuclear sanctions that Obama’s Iran deal (the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” or JCPOA) attempts to undo, the sanctions pertinent here were imposed primarily as a result of Iran’s support for terrorism. That is significant. In pleading with Congress not to disapprove the JCPOA, Obama promised lawmakers that the terrorism sanctions would remain in force. RELATED: The Ransom that Dare Not Speak Its Name Terrorism-related sanctions against Iran trace back to the early 1980s, shortly after the jihadist regime overthrew the shah, stormed the American embassy, took hostages, and triggered Hezbollah’s

killing sprees. But the sanctions most relevant for present purposes stem from President Clinton’s 1995 invocation of federal laws that deal with national emergencies caused by foreign aggression. Clinton concluded that Iran had caused such an emergency by, among other things, “its support for international terrorism.” Note that this was even before Iran killed 19 members of the U.S. Air Force in the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.

To this day, Iran remains on our government’s list of state sponsors of terrorism. Clinton’s state-of-emergency declaration has been annually renewed ever since. Let that sink in: Notwithstanding Obama’s often shocking appeasement of Tehran, he has been renewing the state of emergency since 2009 — most recently, just five months ago. Indeed, it is worth noting what the Obama State Department’s latest report on “State Sponsors of Terrorism” has to say about Iran. This is from the first paragraph: Designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984, Iran continued its terrorist-related activity in 2015, including support for [Hezbollah], Palestinian terrorist groups in Gaza, and various groups in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. In 2015,

Iran increased its assistance to Iraqi Shia terrorist groups[.] . . . Iran used the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to implement foreign policy goals, provide cover for intelligence operations, and create instability in the Middle East. The IRGC-QF is Iran’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists abroad. It is due to this atrocious record that Congress pressed Obama to maintain and enforce anti-terrorism sanctions, which the administration repeatedly committed to do. This commitment was reaffirmed by Obama’s Treasury Department on January 16, 2016, the “Implementation Day” of the JCPOA. Treasury’s published guidance regarding Iran states that, in general, “the clearing of U.S. dollar- or other currency-denominated transactions through the U.S. financial system or involving a U.S. person remain prohibited[.]” (See here, p.17, sec. C.14.)

It is not just U.S. dollar transactions that are prohibited; foreign currency is also barred. Obama’s cash payment, of course, involved both — a fact we’ll be revisiting shortly. Treasury’s guidance cites to what’s known as the ITSR (Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations), the part of the Code of Federal Regulations that implements anti-terrorism sanctions initiated by President Clinton under federal law.

The specific provision cited is Section 560.204, which states: The exportation, reexportation, sale, or supply, directly or indirectly, from the United States, or by a United States person, wherever located, of any goods, technology, or services to Iran or the Government of Iran is prohibited. [Emphasis added.] The regulation goes on to stress that this prohibition may not be circumvented by exporting things of value “to a person in a third country” when one has “knowledge or reason to know that” such things are “intended specifically for supply, transshipment, or reexportation, directly or indirectly, to Iran or the Government of Iran.” Share article on Facebook share Tweet article tweet To summarize, the anti-terrorism sanctions are still in effect, a fact the administration has touted many times.

Obama conceded at his press conference both that these sanctions are still in effect and that they applied directly to his $400 million pay-out to our terrorist enemies. But here’s the president’s problem: While he is correct that the sanctions barred him from sending Iran a check or wire transfer, that is not all they forbid — not by a long shot. They also make it illegal to do what he

did. As noted above, the sanctions prohibit transactions with Iran that touch the U.S. financial system, whether they are carried out in dollars or foreign currencies. The claim by administration officials, widely repeated in the press, that Iran had to be paid in euros and francs because dollar-transactions are forbidden is nonsense; Americans are also forbidden to engage in foreign currency transactions with Iran. RELATED: When Is a Ransom Not a Ransom?

When It’s Inconvenient to Call It That Obama had our financial system issue U.S. assets that were then converted to foreign currencies for delivery to Iran. Both steps flouted the regulations, which prohibit the clearing of currency of any kind if Iran is even minimally involved in the deal; here, Iran is the beneficiary of the deal. The regs further prohibit supplying things of value to Iran, regardless of whether it is done “directly or indirectly.” Expressly included in the “indirect” category are transfers of assets to another country with knowledge that the other country will then forward the assets, in some form, to Iran. That’s exactly what happened here, with Obama pressing the Swiss and Dutch into service as intermediaries. Although these regulations leave no room for doubt that their point is to prevent and criminalize things like sending $400 million in cash to the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism, the ITSR adds another reg for good measure. Section 560.203 states: Evasions; attempts; causing violations; conspiracies: . . . Any transaction . . . that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited. . . . Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this part is prohibited.

By his own account, President Obama engaged in the complex cash transfer in order to end-run sanctions that prohibit the U.S. from having “a banking relationship with Iran.” The point of the sanctions is not to prevent banking with Iran; it is to prevent Iran from getting value from or through our financial system — the banking prohibition is a corollary. And the point of sanctions, if you happen to be the president of the United States sworn to execute the laws faithfully, is to follow them — not pat yourself on the back for keeping them in place while you willfully evade them.

The president’s press conference is better understood as a confession than an explanation. Oh, and there is also Section 560.701, which makes clear that willful violations of the regulations constitute serious felony offenses under federal criminal law — punishable by up to 20 years’ imprisonment. RELATED: Secret Ransom Payment Is More Evidence of the Enormous Fraud of the Iran Deal I hope you’re not lawed out, because there are a couple of other criminal statutes to consider.

The first is the law against providing material support to terrorists, Section 2339A of the federal penal code. It says that anyone who provides resources — including “currency or monetary instruments” — to a person or entity with knowledge that they are to be used in the preparation or carrying out of terrorism offenses is guilty of a serious felony. As we note above, the Obama administration has just reaffirmed that Iran remains a state sponsor of terrorism. Moreover, as our editors recounted in Friday’s National Review editorial: [Secretary of State] John Kerry even admitted in January that funds channeled to Iran as part of the nuclear deal would “end up in the

hands of the IRGC [Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps] or other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists.” No doubt: The IRGC’s Quds Force is a formally designated terrorist organization, as, of course, is Hezbollah, Iran’s forward jihadist militia with which the IRGC colludes. And as Tom Joscelyn recently pointed out, Iran continues to harbor members of al-Qaeda (three of whom were just formally designated as terrorists). In sum, the Obama administration has provided Iran with $400 million under circumstances in which it well knows that at least some of this cash will be used for terrorism. Indeed, as the editors point out, by providing the money in cash, Obama makes it more likely that it will be used for terrorism: Iran likes to deny its complicity in jihadist acts; so now, flush with cash, it can fund atrocities without leaving a paper trail.

The second law involves money laundering, criminalized by Congress in Section 1956 of the penal code. There are several prohibited varieties of money laundering. It can be a crime, for example, to conduct a financial transaction involving money used to facilitate unlawful activity. And if money is transferred outside the United States, it can be illegal to use it to promote criminal activity. More Iran Nuclear Deal Iran’s $400 Million Payoff When Is a Ransom Not a Ransom? When It’s Inconvenient to Call It That Secret Ransom Payment Is More Evidence of the Enormous Fraud of the Iran Deal As we’ve seen, both currency transmissions to Iran and the provision of material support to terrorism are unlawful activities.

The administration has conducted a financial transaction which facilitated both currency transfers to Iran and Iran’s certain use of the money to support terrorism. Plus, the money was shipped outside the United States before being transferred to Iran and before Iran will use it to promote terrorism. Money-laundering cases often boil down to proof of intent; but there clearly are multiple grounds on which to investigate whether the laws have been transgressed.

The circumstances of Obama’s enormous cash transfer to our terrorist enemies raise serious questions about whether American policy against paying ransoms to terrorists has been flouted. But that should not obscure a more fundamental issue: The president has deliberately violated the law with malice and forethought and must therefore be impeached and removed from office. Immediately.

Obama’s Federal Police Force

“The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has provided oversight and recommendations for improvement of police services in a number of cities with consent decrees. This is one of the most effective ways to reduce discrimination in law enforcement and it needs to be beefed up and increased to cover as many of the 18,000-plus local law enforcement jurisdictions.”

That was United Nations Rapporteur Maina Kai on July 27, a representative of the U.N. Human Rights Council, who on the tail-end of touring the U.S., endorsed a little-known and yet highly controversial practice by the Justice Department to effect a federal takeover of local police and corrections departments.

The Obama administration has been pursuing the federal takeover of local police right under Congress' nose — and Republicans in Congress were apparently unaware it was happening.

The consent decrees are already being implemented in Newark, New Jersey; Miami, Florida; Los Angeles, California; Ferguson, Missouri; Chicago, Illinois; and other municipalities.

Here's how it works: the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice files a lawsuit in federal court against a city, county, or state, alleging constitutional and civil rights violations by the police or at a corrections facility. It is done under 42 U.S.C. § 14141, a section of the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, granting the attorney general the power to prosecute law enforcement misconduct. The municipality then simply agrees to the judicial finding — without contest — and the result is a wide-reaching federal court order that imposes onerous regulations on local police.

The federal court orders are designed to undo Rudy Giuliani-style policing tactics that were effective at reducing crime in big cities in the 1990s and 2000s.

In short, the much-feared nationalization of local police departments is already being initiated by the Obama administration's Justice Department. And somehow nobody noticed.

Federal requirements include how searches are conducted, what constitutes legitimate use of force, the mandatory use of on-body cameras by the police, and so forth. The agreements impose years-long compliance review regimes, implementation deadlines, and regular reviews by federal bureaucrats. This makes local police directly answerable to the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.

One example includes a 77-page March 30 consent decree between the department and the City of Newark, New Jersey, that resulted from a 2011 investigation, a 2014 series of findings by the Civil Rights Division, and then finally a federal lawsuit alleging police misconduct in the U.S. District Court in the District of New Jersey.

The original complaint alleged that the Newark Police Department (NPD) "has engaged in a pattern or practice of constitutional violations in its stop and arrest practices, responses to individuals' exercise of their rights under the First Amendment, uses of force, and theft by officers. The investigation also revealed that the pattern or practice of constitutional violations stems in part from deficiencies in NPD's systems that are designed to prevent and detect misconduct, including its systems for reviewing force and investigating complaints regarding officer conduct."

The city of Newark, via the consent decree, agreed to the allegations and to implement a "comprehensive and agency-wide policies and procedures that are consistent with and incorporate all substantive requirements of this agreement," including rules on stops, searches, use of force, etc. The city has two years to implement, with the full agreement lasting five years. Meaning — even if the political parties change power in the city of Newark, the new mayor and city council would still be required to implement the court order.

U.S. Cities with Active DOJ Consent DecreesCity State Police Force

Chicago IL 11944

City State Police ForceLos Angeles CA 10000Miami FL 1259Ferguson MO 54Source: Americans for Limited Government

These consent decrees are in essence regulations. That, is, without the niceties of administrative procedures requirements, public comments, or even any congressional oversight.

Remarkably, congressional offices contacted by this author were generally unaware of the regulation of local policing via DOJ consent decrees with cities — even though the agreements have been implemented for years. Not a single hearing or word of protest has occurred on this topic.

The lack of oversight is pathetic enough — but to make matters even worse, this could actually be the first step in a new wide-ranging body of federal rules on local police.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development regulation "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing" (AFFH) actually originated as a consent decree in 2009 against Westchester County, New York, requiring affordable housing units to be built in the county. Afterward, Republican Robert Astorino was elected county executive and yet was still required to implement the court order.

Westchester became the basis for AFFH, where every city and county in the country that accepts any part of $3 billion of annual community development block grants to 1,200 recipient cities and counties now has to comply with HUD's dictates on zoning along racial and income guidelines.

DOJ may very well end up doing the same thing with the local police — that is, if Congress does not wise up to what's really happening and defund implementation of 42 U.S.C. § 14141. This is dangerous. What is most chilling is how far along the Obama Justice Department is in this process. The breadth of regulation here shatters any notion of local governance or federalism. The Obama administration has been pursuing the federal takeover of local police right under Congress' nose — and Republicans  in Congress were apparently unaware it was happening.

No doubt the practice would continue under a Hillary Clinton administration too. Do you want a Clinton Justice Department running your local police force? That is how important the election in November suddenly becomes — with law and order already hanging in the balance and police being targeted by domestic terrorists in the slayings in Dallas and Baton Rouge.

As Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning noted in a statement calling attention to the U.N.'s interest in the DOJ program and urging Congress to act, "The fact that the U.N. Human Rights Council — which includes some of the worst abusers of human rights in the world that hate the U.S. — is cheering for this DOJ national takeover of the police should tell members everything they need to know. It's time to support local police, not render them impotent via federal restrictions against maintaining law and order. No less than the very existence of local government is at stake."

Open Letter to DNC

By Diana West

Dear DNC,

Doubtless, I would reach more people if I wrote the following message in a private, hackable email, but I am concerned Russian cyber-trolls are distracted this week by heaps more breaking scandal about Hillary Clinton’s loyal services to what some people like to call “Mother Russia.” Between that Hillary-approved uranium deal transferring 20 percent of US uranium to Russian control (netting $145 million for the Clinton Foundation) and, now, her success in getting US investors to fund Russian military research in Russia’s very own “Silicon Valley,” I am afraid my little email might languish unread on some cold NSA server. If anyone in Russia is reading, though, do pass along a suggested name change for that Russian R&D hub Hillary has done so much for: “Clinticon Valley” has a wonderful ring to it, don’t you think? Or, maybe better — Clinticonovna Valley.

My subject today, though, is the Constitution-waving Khizr Khan (above), who caused such an uproar at the DNC as the father of a fallen US officer in Iraq, Capt. Humayun Khan, killed in action in 2004, that he now wishes to exit the limelight and has even scrubbed his own website, the one listing his immigration legal services in the (strictly legit!) sale of visas to foreign millionaires.

The question I have is: Don’t you people vet your speakers? Do you even realize now that by inviting Khizr Khan to speak you that put a sharia supremacist on centerstage at the 2016 Democratic National Committee Convention to endorse a candidate for president of the United States? Hello? Is that the message you want to send America — that the Democratic Party is also the Sharia Party?

I do not exaggerate. Young Capt. Khan’s ultimate sacrifice for this country is something all Americans respect and mourn. But his father’s sharia supremacism is something all Americans who defend the Constitution that Khizr Khan was waving around like a prop must learn is the ideological foe of that Constitution, just as much as Communism ever was — I mean, is. Islam, like Communism, is a totalitarian movement targeting, not through “workers’ revolution,” but jihad and the spread of sharia, our liberties that come to us from the God of the Old and New Testament (not the God of the Koran, who behaves quite differently). These God-given liberties are enshrined in our founding documents. They are not props.

The Third Term of Obama

Barack Obama is a president known for unprecedented statements and behavior. He lived up to that reputation this week when he asserted that GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump is “unfit to serve” as his successor. He is the first lame duck president in history to openly campaign against a presidential candidate.

It’s important to listen to the words he uttered and measure their implications carefully.

He said Trump would not abide by “norms and rules and common sense.” He questioned whether he would “observe basic decency” should he reach the Oval

Office.

He said he would have been disappointed to lose the elections of 2008 and 2012, but never doubted whether his rivals in those elections, John McCain and Mitt Romney, could function as president or had the knowledge to make government work. “That’s not the situation here,” he added.

He added Trump “doesn’t have the judgment, the temperament, the understanding, to occupy the most powerful position in the world.”

He said he was “woefully unprepared to do this job.” Obama said Trump lacked knowledge about Europe, the Middle East and other parts of

Asia.

It’s clear Obama has no use for Donald Trump. But that’s not really the point here. Like it or not, and I don’t like it, Obama has expressed his fear that the empire of shadow government rule by law will be hosed off the driveway as soon as the moving vans leave the White house. His legacy will be dark and bloody. It will take decades to undo the damage to the soul of America he has inflicted.

The question this harsh, unprecedented attack by a sitting president on a major-party nominee to succeed him raises should be obvious: What happens if Donald Trump wins the election in November? Or, “What happens if Hillary is indicted and does not make it to the debates?” Trump will then be running unopposed.

Given what Obama has said about Trump, would he not have an obligation to prevent Trump from assuming office? Would he seek emergency powers to amend the Constitution to allow him to run as the Democrat candidate and provide Americans a choice? And what would that mean to the peaceful process America has enjoyed for more than two centuries of transitions of power?

These are questions Americans have never before been confronted with in American history.

America should be concerned about what Obama might do, because he has shown us the ease with which he kills. He has told us he plans to take over the police. He has armed and deployed the largest unconstitutional army since the British occupied the colonies in 1774.

Should he not be asked pointedly about the implications of his stunning statements and his thirst for power?

Should he not express exactly what his intentions are beforehand rather than to leave any doubt in the minds of the people?

If no one else will ask the question, I will: “Mr. President, if Donald Trump wins the election to become the next president of the United States, will you willingly and peacefully leave office and cooperate fully with the transition of power the way all of your predecessors in the White House have done in the past?”

It’s a simple question that needs to be asked and answered – given Obama’s highly inflammatory rhetoric over the last week.

There should be no doubt in the minds of the American people. There should be no veiled threats hanging over the heads of the citizenry as we prepare for the next election. It’s time for Obama to lay his cards on the table.

Will America follow the rule of law and the will of the people after the November election no matter what Obama might think about his successor?

Some may accuse me of being hyperbolic here – of raising questions that have no foundation for being asked. Maybe that’s true.

But never before in American history have we had a situation quite like this, in which a sitting president has used the power and prestige of his office – and, in this case, doing so inappropriately in the context of a joint press conference with a foreign leader – to declare in no uncertain terms that the nominee of one of the two major parties is uniquely unqualified and disqualified for the office of the presidency.

It’s time for clarity. It is time, finally, for a tiny demonstration of the transparency upon which he campaigned in 2008. It’s time for Obama to publicly retract his shocking public practice of indicting Trump. It’s time for Obama to go on record as to whether he will respect the rule of law and the will of the people with regard to the 2016 election, and leave office when it is over. I have often stated my apprehension that given the pathological narcissism of Barack Hussein Obama, there is a real and present danger that he will not go peacefully and allow his legacy to be scrubbed from the American conscience like a bad dream.