Todd Starnes: LGBT Activists 'Want to Shut Down Every Church in America' and Burn the Bible

 

 Article by Tyler O'Neil in "PJMedia":

In an exclusive interview with PJ Media at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Friday, bestselling author, radio host, and conservative commentator Todd Starnes warned against the nefarious impact of radical LGBT groups like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), GLAAD, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). He condemned them and their allies in the legacy media and the Democrat Party for fomenting a "demonization of people of faith," warning that if these activists take control, they would shut down every church in America and host Bible burnings in major cities.

"GLAAD and the Human Rights campaign want to shut down every church in America," Starnes, formerly with Fox News, told PJM in the interview. "If they had the right to do so, I know that’s exactly what they would do. And I would not be surprised, if they were in charge, that people like the Human Rights Campaign would actually have Bible burnings in cities across the country."

Starnes admitted that this may seem like a ridiculous fear, but he insisted it is far more likely than it appears. "You might say that’s absurd, that’s outrageous. But where do we get our teachings on marriage and human sexuality? We get those teachings from the Holy Bible. That’s what they want to destroy."

He warned that so many Americans — even in conservative media — are "terrified of these folks" and unwilling to speak out. "I’m just one of these guys that says, 'You know what, they’ve said everything they can say about me and they’re not gonna bully me, they’re not gonna badger me, and we’re just gonna tell it like it is.'"

"I think one of the most dangerous things that’s happening in the country right now is this demonization of people of faith, of people who hold to traditional Christian religious beliefs," Starnes said. "We have seen the mainstream media and we have seen the Democrats be really complicit in this effort to smear and to really slander Christian conservatives." He warned that "in doing so, they have literally put a target on the backs of every single Christian in America who adheres to traditional biblical beliefs on issues like sex and marriage and that’s a big problem."

When it comes to putting a target on someone's back, Starnes mentioned the attempted terrorist attack against the Family Research Council (FRC), which the SPLC accuses of being an "anti-LGBT hate group."

"The Family Research Council, I have very dear friends who work for that organization. A domestic terrorist used information obtained from the Southern Poverty Law Center to go and commit what would have been a massacre at FRC headquarters in Washington, D.C. Had it not been for a brave security guard who stopped the gunman and himself was shot in the process, it would have been a very different story," Starnes said.

"That’s how dangerous the Southern Poverty Law Center is. It’s a sham organization. Shame on them, shame on them... for going out there and smearing good and decent and honorable people in this country," the radio host added. "It’s absolutely appalling what these groups are doing, trying to stifle free speech every freedom-loving patriot ought to be standing up against the Human Rights Campaign and the SPLC." (For more on the SPLC's corruption, check out my book, Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center.)

"It really is a very dangerous time in America right now if you are a Jew or if you are an evangelical Christian who again holds to traditional beliefs on marriage," Starnes warned. He suggested the SPLC is "the hate group. They’re out there accusing people like the Family Research Council or American Family Association, they’ve even come after me, gone after me, and accused me of being a hateful person. They’re the ones that are spewing and fomenting hate and dissension in America."

The radio host warned that HRC, GLAAD, and the SPLC "want to shut down specific viewpoints" by branding any dissent from their opinions as "hate speech."

"All of a sudden, your opinion is hate speech. And if it’s hate speech, you’re not allowed to share your opinion anymore," Starnes explained. "I just don’t buy into that argument. I’m a First Amendment purist. I believe that everybody — I don’t care if you’re gay, straight, you’re a martian, or you’re from Venus, I don’t care! — you have a right in this country to live your life the way you want to live your life, you have a right to say what you want to say."

"I don’t have a right to tell you how to live your life," he continued, "but again, the Human Rights Campaign, they need to get this fundamental American truth down pat: you don’t have a right to tell us how to live our lives, either."

Starnes briefly touched on a few threats that LGBT activists and the Democrat Party pose to religious freedom in America.

He referenced Russel Vought, now acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, whom Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-USSR) — the current frontrunner in the Democratic presidential race — targeted for his religious beliefs.

Vought was "expressing his belief that salvation comes through a relationship with Jesus Christ. That may have unqualified him for public service in the eyes of Bernie Sanders," Starnes explained, referencing Sanders's remarks at a Senate confirmation hearing. "That ought to tell you all you need to know about the Democrats. Every single one of them believes the same thing Bernie Sanders does. And if they say otherwise they’re just lying."

"Just a few days ago, you had [former Mayor] Pete Buttigieg at a town hall meeting with Don Lemon suggesting that Christian universities should lose federal funding if they discriminate against gay people by not hiring them for positions. It’s appalling. If you are a Christian college, you should have the right to hire people who ascribe to the tenets of your religious beliefs, " the radio host added.

Finally, he brought up the religious battle over Business Leaders in Christ (BLinC), which insisted on restricting its leadership to Christians. The University of Iowa claimed this constituted "discrimination" and went after BLinC and other student groups.

"Some of these Christian clubs on public university campuses have literally been told, 'You are the Christian Journalist Society, you’re not allowed to have a Christian or mandate that a Christian be the leader of your organization.' That’s a load of hooie. That would be like going to the Gay-Straight Alliance and saying, 'You have to have someone who is anti-gay in charge of your organization.' That’s a load of hooie," Starnes said.

The radio host was right to warn about the threats to religious freedom and the animus that many LGBT activists harbor toward conservative Christians. However, it is extremely unlikely HRC, GLAAD, and the SPLC would try to shut down every church or engage in Bible burnings. Instead, LGBT activists work overtime to twist the Bible to support same-sex marriage and transgender identity, attempting to infiltrate the church with these teachings. (I have responded to one such HRC document here.) These activists are far too cunning to engage in such activity, but they will shut down organizations that promise freedom from unwanted same-sex attraction — and advocate for the removal of books expressing that hope. Perhaps they would burn those books, which express biblical truth.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/watch-todd-starnes-lgbt-activists-want-to-shut-down-every-church-in-america-and-burn-the-bible/ 

Leftist Games; 9 Times The Media Weaponized Coronavirus Coverage To Attack Trump

Madeline Osburn reporting for The Federalist

Mainstream media outlets, from the New York Times to CNN, wasted no time placing the blame for coronavirus at the feet of President Trump.

With the first U.S. coronavirus fatalities confirmed in Washington state this weekend, one would expect media coverage to provide American people crucial, but measured information about the oncoming pandemic. Yet many members of our corporate press only see the public health crisis as another opportunity to attack the president.

Last week, The Federalist’s Political Editor John Davidson pointed out how the deadly global epidemic became a political talking point overnight, and predicted “we should expect the media to start stoking hysteria, the politicians to pile on the recriminations, and for everything—the disease itself and its aftereffects on public life—to get much worse.”

Indeed, it has gotten worse, but the media is not stoking hysteria in a way that would push Americans to take sensible precautions. Mainstream outlets have instead responded with coronavirus stories that lie about and misrepresent President Trump and his administration’s response to the virus. Journalists have cheered on the spread of the virus and its potentially devastating effects as a way of validating the horrors of a Trump presidency, not to mention a Trump re-election. Here are just nine examples:

1. Washington Post Columnist Lies About Trump ‘Hoax’ Quote

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank tweeted eight times this weekend about a now-debunked claim that President Trump deemed the coronavirus threat a “hoax” at his campaign rally in South Carolina. As is often the case with media reactions to Trump quotes, an examination of the president’s remarks in context not only proves the reporting inaccurate, but also usually reveals Trump to be right about whatever controversial subject is in play.

“Trump, in South Carolina, just called the coronavirus a ‘hoax,'” Milbank tweeted.

If you are pushing the narrative that Trump called coronavirus a “hoax,” you’re lying.

It’s pretty obvious what he’s saying here. pic.twitter.com/RlSoJ8ZSb8

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) February 29, 2020

In context, Trump was complaining about Democrats politicizing the pandemic, just like they did with Russia and Ukraine hysteria for the sake of impeachment. “They tried the impeachment hoax that was on a perfect conversation. They tried anything. They tried it over and over. They’ve been doing it since you got in. It’s all turning, they lost, it’s all turning. Think of it. Think of it. And this is their new hoax,” he said.

As if right on cue, the very Democrat who organized the Russian, Ukrainian, and impeachment hoaxes against the president, Rep. Adam Schiff, sounded off about his “profound concerns” about Trump’s response to the coronavirus. “The president and vice president don’t inspire confidence,” Schiff told Fox News.

As demonstrated in this very article, Democrats and their media allies are indeed using cornoavirus misinformation and hysteria to falsely charge Trump. It’s clear he was not calling the virus itself a hoax, but its abuse as a political talking point.

Despite its inaccuracy, Milbank’s tweet is still up, along with seven others about the “hoax” quote. It must be too painful to delete a misleading tweet if it has 162,000 likes.

2. Politico Reports Trump Calls Coronavirus Liberal Conspiracy

Politico Reporters Nancy Cook and Matthew Choi also mislead readers with the headline, “Trump rallies his base to treat coronavirus as a ‘hoax.'”

“He sought to deflect blame at a time when many Americans sought leadership and scientific facts,” the story reads, ignoring the multiple press conferences Trump held with Centers for Disease Control officials to explain new travel restrictions and other precautions.

3. New York Times Calls It ‘Trumpvirus’

In a not so subtle headline, New York Times Columnist Gail Collins suggests who is to blame for the coronavirus. Hint: It’s not China, where the outbreak all started.

4. ‘Trump Makes Us Ill’

Another New York Times headline directly blamed it on Trump: “Trump Makes Us Ill.”

5. Paul Krugman Celebrates Plummeting Markets

Concerns about global supply lines have disrupted the previously skyrocketing stock market. The Dow droped down to 25,000 last week, and to New York Times Columnist Paul Krugman, it was an opportunity to celebrate.

6. WaPo Columnist Says Media Isn’t Doing Enough to Combat Trump On Virus Info

The Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan took the “blame Trump” storyline a step further when she charged the media with “helping him spread” his lies.

In her op-ed, Sullivan lamented Trump’s “disdain for scientists, medical experts, intelligence officials, journalists and others who deal in fact-based reality.” Nevermind the White House’s coronavirus task force, and Vice President Mike Pence’s appointment of Ambassador Debbie Birx as the new response coordinator.

As noted in The Federalist Monday, Birx is a “physician, researcher, and former HIV/AIDS program chief at the Department of Defense and then at the CDC,” where she is respected for her “unparalleled leadership of the lifesaving global AIDS program first established by President Bush in 2003″ and under both the Obama and Trump administrations. Birx’s appointment more than defies this alleged “disdain for scientists” or “medical experts.”

Sullivan concludes with this jaw-dropping statement: “I’m convinced that we in the media, with all our obvious faults, have learned some things about covering Trump over the past four years. Now would be an excellent time to put it into practice.”

7. Media Lies About Trump ‘Muzzling’ Infectious Disease Experts

The New York Times reported last week that Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, “has told associates that the White House had instructed him not to say anything else without clearance.”

On ABC’s “This Week,” former Vice President Joe Biden repeated the claim. “This president hasn’t allowed his scientists to speak…he has the vice president speaking, not the scientists who know what they’re talking about, like Fauci,” he said.

Dr. Anthony Fauci disputed these claims at a White House briefing on Saturday, saying he has never been “muzzled” by the White House.

“I’ve never been muzzled and I’ve been doing this since Reagan,” Fauci responded. “That was a real misrepresentation of what happened.”

8. On ABC, Biden Makes False Claims About Scientists and Test Kits

ABC Anchor George Stephanopoulos let Biden make multiple false claims about Trump’s coronavirus response without any pushback. In addition to his claim about the muzzling of Dr. Fauci, Biden claimed the government has not “prepared a test kit to determine if anyone has the virus.”

“They haven’t set up a pattern for how to proceed. They cut the funding for the CDC…they tried to cut the funding for NIH,” Biden claimed. “They eliminated the office that we [the Obama administration] set up in the president’s office to deal with pandemic diseases.”

To give some media credit where it’s due, the Associated Press fact-checked both Biden and Mike Bloomberg for false claims, finding that “The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aren’t suffering from budget cuts that never took effect.”

Additionally, there is a pandemic preparation plan in our public health system. The CDC already has a 52-page plan in place, and the Food and Drug Administration announced Saturday they would be allowing more labs to immediately begin testing for coronavirus.

9. Majority of CNN’s Coronavirus Coverage Focused on Trump

An analysis of CNN’s coronavirus coverage by the Media Research Center found most of it, at least 60 percent, was spent inviting guests to criticize the president, with questions like, “Do you think the administration, the White House, would be better served, though if they had someone – I don’t know – like a Dr. Luciana Borio in the position that you had held?” or “Is [Pence] the best-equipped to lead this effort at the White House?”

With Afghanistan Deal, Trump Has A Foreign Policy Record He Can Take To Re-Election

Sumantra Maitra writing for The Federalist

No new wars or interventions in Iran or Venezuela, a partial drawdown from Iraq and Syria, and an Afghanistan withdrawal deal is a foreign policy record to be proud of.

The United States and the Taliban signed a peace deal this weekend after 19 years of war, to ease the way towards American full withdrawal from a semi-feudal hell. After a grueling marathon negotiation process, American Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad signed the papers, agreeing that the United States and North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies will withdraw all troops within 14 months if the militants uphold the deal.

Words do not convey how phenomenal this is. For a start, all U.S. “military forces” and “non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel” are promised be withdrawn by April 23, 2021. That’s just after the election, or re-election of President Trump.

There was immediate support from the conservative and realist spectrum of foreign policy. Will Ruger of the Charles Koch Institute tweeted that while this is only a first step, it is nevertheless a major achievement for the United States to finally chart a course for leaving its longest law and order policing mission in a region where there is no U.S. strategic interest.

Defense Priorities Senior Fellow Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis said the United States had been in Afghanistan to destroy al-Qaeda and punish the Taliban, which was over by 2003, and it was a mistake to stay after the swift victory to nation-build. “Nearly two decades later, the U.S. remains mired in training and policing missions related to Kabul’s security, not America’s.”

Concerned Veterans for America, a conservative group, released a statement supporting this move as well. “President Trump deserves a great deal of credit for pursuing this agreement and laying the groundwork to end the longest war in American history,” the statement said, adding, that “…this agreement is in no way a substitute for a full withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan – an action the president has promised and closure the American people want.”

Predictable detractors of the deal ranged from President Obama’s former Ambassador Susan Rice, who argued that Trump had betrayed “Afghan women” by not requiring Afghanistan to adopt western ideals as part of the agreement, to former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton and neoconservatives like Stephen Hayes and Max Boot.

Consider for a moment that Trump never had a strong backing from even conservative realists, who would otherwise support this kind of deal. When Trump first won the presidency, a majority of academics, even those who are realists in foreign policy, decided to stay away from the administration. It was understandable then.

When Trump won, the media went on overdrive to insist he is a Russian agent and that everything this White House does is more toxic than Richard Nixon. Academics are mostly liberal interventionists or neoconservatives, but even those who prefer a more restrained and prudential approach to foreign policy wanted to wait and watch, and were predictably worried about their reputational cost and ostracism within the academy if they attached their names to Trump.

Only one IR theorist was open about Trump’s foreign policy in his early days. Professor Randall Schweller wrote of his qualified support for Trump in 2018. Thus, Trump had no institutional support for his foreign policy vision of minimal intervention, and was unable to man his team with aligned personnel. There was no Federalist Society making a list of judges in the field of foreign policy, so to speak.

But even with that drawback, and barring major changes, Trump is on his way to be the first president in 25 years not to have started a new land war in the Middle East. With the Islamic State decimated, a staunch refusal to engage further in Iraq and Syria, a refusal against his own team to intervene in Venezuela and Iran, and with this new deal with Afghanistan, Trump is managing to focus on an adversarial China, although far less than I’d have wanted him to.

For example, the coronavirus should show why decoupling supply chains with China remains an urgent necessity. As for Afghanistan, there will never be perfect academic realism translated into administrative policy, as policy is inherently messy. But as long as it follows broadly a realist grand strategy of narrowly defined interest, and prioritized regions of engagement and regions of retrenchment, realists should be more welcoming of that.

The peace deal in Afghanistan is only a start. It is not done, and there will be an immense push in the coming days to portray this as appeasement and foolishness.

The bottom line is this. Afghan internal politics and dynamics are not an American, or indeed British, concern, as these have no direct security bearing on the United States or the West. This isn’t 2002. Technology has advanced, with modern platforms allowing for greater long-distance vigilance and punitive measures. Research suggests the West should have let the strongest pro-Western warlord take over Afghanistan and impose a brutal peace, instead of attempting to impose a 1960s-style sexual revolution on a feudal society funded and guarded by Western blood and treasures.

President Trump now needs to remember, as repeated surveys show, that the majority of Americans and of veterans want a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan. This is a winning foreign policy, and one for the history books.

There is nothing conservative about trying to shape feudal societies, and nothing realist about thinking every adversary and theater is reminiscent of Germany and Munich circa 1938. The signing of the deal marks a record to go to an election with, with no war with Iran, a partial drawdown from Iraq and Syria, the peace deal signed with Afghanistan, no new war started anywhere, an no intervention in Venezuela. It’s not perfect, as no administration ever is, but it’s better than the last 20 years.​

Trump Donates Quarter 4 Salary To HHS To Help Fight Coronavirus

 
Article by Anders Hagstrom, White House Correspondent:


President Donald Trump donated his quarter four salary to the Department of Health and Human Services Tuesday to help fight the Coronavirus.

The donation amounts to $100,000, and comes as part of Trumps vow to donate his entire salary throughout his presidency, according to White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham. He has in the past donated parts of his salary to border enforcement, the Surgeon General’s office and Veterans’ Affairs, among others.

Stephanie Grisham ✔ @PressSec

President @realDonaldTrump made a commitment to donate his salary while in office. Honoring that promise and to further protect the American people, he is donating his 2019 Q4 salary to @HHSGov to support the efforts being undertaken to confront, contain, and combat #Coronavirus.

Trump has made a point of using his personal funds throughout his campaign and into his presidency. Trump relied heavily on personal funds in the 2016 Republican Primary. He also famously bought fast food for the Clemson University football team with his own money during a government shutdown. 

“If it’s American, I like it. It’s all American stuff. … But it’s good stuff and we have the national champion team, as you know, Clemson Tigers. And they had a fantastic game against Alabama and they’re all here. They’re right outside the room and I think we’re going to let you see them,” Trump said to reporters at the time.

The annual presidential salary is $400,000.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/03/trump-salary-coronavirus-hhs/ 

Leak Of Crossfire Hurricane Agent’s Identity To The NYT Suggests More To Come

Margot Cleveland reporting for The Federalist

The leak of Stephen Somma’s identity to the pair of favored New York Times journalists looks like an attempt to preempt, and thereby soften, damaging information soon to come.

Last week, The New York Times outed Crossfire Hurricane Case Agent #1 as Stephen Somma. Crossfire Hurricane is the Obama administration’s secret surveillance of the Trump campaign on the pretext of collusion with Russia that was later disproven by a two-year special counsel probe.

In a story headlined “National Security Wiretap System Was Long Plagued by Risk of Errors,” SpyGate denier Charlie Savage and his co-author, Adam Goldman, portrayed the egregious Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse targeting former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page as typical of the missteps made in other, less politically sensitive FISA court cases.

Of course, as Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s 400-plus page report detailed, the FISA abuse in the Trump campaign was very unusual and very excessive—and the formerly unnamed Case Agent #1 played a large part in the plot to target the Trump campaign.

As such, the leak of Somma’s identity to the pair of favored New York Times journalists looks like an attempt to preempt, and thereby soften, damaging information soon to come. We saw a very similar tactic when the Times ran an article shortly before Horowitz’s report dropped that revealed government lawyer “Kevin Clinesmith, altered an email that officials used to prepare to seek court approval to renew the wiretap.”

The Times’ reveal of Case Agent #1’s identity will likely prove to be a tell that the spotlight will soon shine on Somma. With this in mind, a re-read of the IG report unearths several details now carry new significance.

Somma Immediately Suggested FISA Spying

“Almost immediately after opening the Page, Papadopoulos, and Manafort investigations on August 10, the case agent assigned to the Carter Page investigation, Case Agent 1, contacted [the Office of General Counsel] about the possibility of seeking FISA authority for Carter Page,” the IG report revealed.

The first question raised by a review of the IG report was a big one: What prompted Somma to push for a FISA warrant against Carter Page “almost immediately after opening” the Page investigation on August 10?

Recall, the FBI maintained that it launched Crossfire Hurricane because Trump campaign member George Papadopoulos had bragged to an Australian diplomat that the Russians had dirt on Hillary. The FBI surmised this tip was somehow connected to the WikiLeaks release of the Democratic National Committee emails.

Why, then, “was the first potential use of FISA authority considered by the Crossfire Hurricane team” focused on Page and not on Papadopoulos—the individual who supposedly received the tip from Joseph Mifsud?

Somma claimed his concern was obtaining “valuable information about what Page did while in Moscow the previous month and the Russian officials with whom he may have spoken.” But again, why Page and not Papadopoulos as the first focus?

We don’t have an answer, but we do know that the Office of General Counsel concluded the FBI did not have enough evidence to obtain a FISA surveillance order until the next month, when the Crossfire Hurricane team received reporting from Christopher Steele “concerning Page’s alleged activities with Russian officials in the summer of 2016.” According to the IG report, “That ‘pushed it over’ the line in terms of establishing probable cause that Page was acting in concert with Russian officials.”

Did Somma Know of Steele’s Reporting?

But now that we know Somma’s identity, there’s a surrealness to this entire scene. Case Agent #1 was instantaneously interested in surveilling Page (but not Papadopoulos—that would come later). Yet such surveillance would only be approved the following month when Steele’s reporting finally made its way to the FBI’s D.C. headquarters.

Recall that the IG report maintained “the FBI first received reporting from Christopher Steele regarding alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections in early July 2016,” but the Crossfire Hurricane team “did not become aware of the Steele reporting until September 19, 2016.” But before then, only Steele’s handler and select agents in the New York Field Office knew of Steele’s reporting.

You know where Somma worked before joining the Crossfire Hurricane team in D.C. in August 2016? The FBI New York Field Office, where he served as a special agent for counter-intelligence with a focus on Russia.

The New York Field Office received Steele’s reporting in July when Steele’s handler, FBI Agent Michael Gaeta, on July 28, 2016, sent Steele’s first two memos to the assistant special agent in charge of the New York field office. While the assistant special agent in charge assured Gaeta the reports would be “walled off” from agents in New York field office, might Somma nonetheless have known of Steele’s reporting? Was that why he was so anxious to obtain a FISA warrant on Page?

Back to Cambridge

Here, we have to remember the incestuous relationships at play. Somma worked in counterintelligence at the New York Field Office and served as Stefan Halper’s long-time handler.

Besides being a “confidential human source” (CHS) for the FBI (and possibly other agencies), Halper maintained an academic position at Cambridge University, where he ran an Intelligence Seminar with Sir Richard Dearlove, Steele’s former MI6 boss. Somma, along with two other FBI agents, spoke at that seminar about the FBI and “Russian illegals.”

Additionally, Steele’s handler Gaeta had worked out of the New York field office, and according to the IG report, Steele had worked with the New York office to “support several ongoing criminal investigations involving transnational organized crime organizations.” So did Somma know, either from his work at the New York field office, or from his relationship with Halper, of Steele’s reporting?

Shame on Somma

Whether Somma knew of Steele’s reporting before it made its way to the rest of the Crossfire Hurricane team is unclear. What is clear, though, is that Somma was desperate to surveil Page—and in turn the Trump campaign. Beyond pushing for the FISA surveillance to start immediately, Somma bore responsibility for many of the substantial omissions and misstatements in the FISA warrant, as the IG report detailed:

As noted throughout this report, Case Agent 1 was primarily responsible for some of the most significant errors and omissions in the FISA applications, including (1) the mischaracterization of Steele’s prior reporting resulting from his failure to seek review and approval of the statement from the handling agent, as the Woods Procedures required, (2) the failure to advise 01 of Papadopoulos’s statements to FBI CHSs that were inconsistent with the Steele reporting relied upon in the FISA applications that there was a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russia, (3) the failure to advise 01 of Page’s statements to an FBI CHS regarding him having no communications with Manafort and denying the alleged meetings with Sechin and Divyekin, ( 4) providing inaccurate and incomplete information to 01 about information provided by another U.S. government agency regarding its past relationship with Page that was highly relevant to the applications, (5) the failure to advise 01 of the information from Bruce Ohr about Steele and his election reporting, and (6) the failure to advise 01 of the inconsistences between Steele and his Primary Sub-source. The explanations that Case Agent 1 provided for these errors and omissions are summarized in Chapter Five and Chapter Eight of this report. While we found no documentary or testimonial evidence that this pattern of errors by Case Agent 1 was intentional, we also did not find his explanations for so many significant and repeated failures to be satisfactory.

Spygate Spins Round to Halper Again

Somma’s supersized role in the FISA abuse seems eerily similar to the tentacle-wide reach of CHS Halper, whom Somma just so happened to handle. The day after the Crossfire Hurricane team opened an investigation into Page, Somma and his fellow team members met with Halper.

Somma claimed that since he “had never previously dealt with the ‘realm’ of political campaigns,” and thus “lacked a basic understanding of simple issues, for example what the role of a ‘foreign policy advisor’ entails, and how that person interacts with the rest of the campaign,” he proposed meeting with Halper, whom he knew “had been affiliated with national political campaigns since the early 1970s.” Significantly, the IG report then noted that Somma “also believed [Halper] might have information about, and potentially may have met, one or more of the Crossfire Hurricane subjects.”

Somma believed Halper may have met one or more of the Crossfire Hurricane subjects? But who?

This latter point proves suggestive: Somma believed Halper may have met one or more of the Crossfire Hurricane subjects? But who?

The four Crossfire Hurricane subjects were Papadopoulos, Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn. Halper had never heard of Papadopoulos, and had first met Page only a few weeks prior, when Page attended a private dinner with Halper during a three-day conference at Cambridge University.

While the IG “investigated whether the FBI tasked any CHSs to meet with Carter Page prior to the opening of Crossfire Hurricane,” they “found no evidence that the FBI had,” and Somma and the other agents “each told the OIG that the FBI did not have anything to do with any operational activities against Carter Page prior to the start of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation on July 31, 2016.”

But the evidence strongly suggests someone charged Halper with contacting Page in mid-July, raising several questions: Was Halper a source for the CIA, or another intelligence agency? Or was Halper a source for Steele? And did Somma know of Halper’s­­ meeting with Page before arranging for him to talk with the Crossfire Hurricane team?

If not Page, that would leave Manafort and Flynn. Halper “had known Trump’s then campaign manager, Manafort, for a number of years” and he “had been previously acquainted with Michael Flynn.”

It’s possible that Somma knew of Halper’s connection to Manafort, although other facts caution against that conclusion: While Manafort was on the FBI’s radar before Crossfire Hurricane, it was the D.C. Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section operating out of the D.C. headquarters, that was charged with investigating Manafort, as opposed to the New York Field Office counterintelligence branch where Somma worked.

On the other hand, evidence continues to mount suggesting that Halper started spying on Flynn even before his “chance” meeting with Page in mid-July 2016, re-upping questions about Halper’s interest in Flynn and what Somma may have known about their “acquaintance.”

Somma seemed to deny any special knowledge about Halper’s connections, however, telling “the OIG that ‘quite honestly … we kind of stumbled upon [Halper] knowing these folks.’” It was “serendipitous” Somma said, that Halper “had contacts with three of their four subjects, including Carter Page.” And “the Crossfire Hurricane team ‘couldn’t believe [their] luck.’”

The IG report, however, never reconciled this reaction with Somma’s earlier statements that he believed Halper “may have met, one or more of the Crossfire Hurricane subjects.”

Who’s Handling Who?

The other possibility is that Somma wasn’t handling Halper, but that Halper was handling Somma.

It was Halper who asked Somma during the first meeting on Crossfire Hurricane “whether the team had any interest in an individual named Carter Page.” It was Halper who claimed Page had approached him during the mid-July meeting and asked him to be “a foreign policy advisor for the Trump campaign”—a claim Page told The Federalist was not true.

The other possibility is that Somma wasn’t handling Halper, but that Halper was handling Somma.

It was Halper who told Somma and his compatriots that he “had no intention of joining the campaign,” but “was willing to assist with the ongoing investigation and to not notify the Trump campaign about [his] decision not to join.” It was Halper who told the Crossfire Hurricane team he expected “to be contacted in the near future by one of the senior leaders of the Trump campaign about joining the campaign,” and then it was Halper who secretly recorded his conversation with that leader, Sam Clovis.

And it was also the politically experienced Halper who sought to entice the politically green Page to collude with Russia—something he didn’t do—by claiming that in the old days, a campaign would have accepted the Russian DNC dirt “in a heartbeat.”

Halper’s meeting with Clovis also supports the theory that Halper ruled the roost. The IG report explained that Somma had tasked Halper with asking Clovis about “Papadopoulos and Carter Page ‘because they were … unknowns’ and the Crossfire Hurricane team was trying to find out how ‘these two individuals who are not known in political circles … [got] introduced to the campaign,’ including whether the person responsible for those introductions had ties to Russian Intelligence Services (RIS).”

But as I reported in my article on the extensive spying aimed at the Trump campaign, “when Halper spoke with Clovis on September 1, 2016, in a recorded conversation, Halper posed several questions about sensitive campaign strategies.”

For example, Halper asked Clovis “whether the Trump campaign was planning an ‘October Surprise,’” and learned the Trump campaign planned to focus on “giv[ing] people a reason to vote for him, not just vote against Hillary.” Clovis also shared with Halper that Trump did not want to “do a traditional campaign,” and added “additional comments about the internal structure, organization, and functioning of the Trump campaign.”

Halper’s recorded conversation with Clovis delved even deeper into campaign concerns, with Halper discussing with Clovis “an internal campaign debate about Trump’s immigration strategy, efforts to reach out to minority groups and the impact of those efforts, and the campaign’s strategies for responding to questions about Trump’s decision not to release his tax returns.”

The IG report did not detail the content of these conversations, but here, an earlier comment Halper made to Page proves significant: Prior to meeting with Clovis, Halper told Page that he was available whenever Clovis “wants to chat,” then Halper added that he “would like to meet with [Clovis],” because there are “some things that have to be done at this part of … the campaign…. And if you don’t do them you’re going to lose.”

Maybe the FBI didn’t task Halper to spy on the Trump campaign, but Halper’s comments to Page, coupled with the topics he discussed with Clovis, reveal Halper ignored that directive. In other words, Somma wasn’t the handler he thought he was! Unless, of course, Halper did exactly what Somma wanted.

We won’t know the answers to these questions—and many more—until Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham complete their investigation into the targeting of the Trump campaign. In the meantime, the leak of Somma’s identity to The New York Times suggests more revelations will be forthcoming soon.

Here’s How To Prepare If The Coronavirus Comes To A Quarantine

Katy French Talento for The Federalist

The U.S. government is taking wise measures to reduce the spread of the coronavirus. But, as the saying goes, we should pray like it all depends on God and prepare like it all depends on us.

When I was in school studying infectious disease epidemiology, none of the cool kids worked on flu. We all wanted to chase Ebola, HIV/AIDS, drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, and other exotic killer bugs.

Everyday, ho-hum killers like influenza, pneumonia, and other respiratory illnesses were just too mundane for globetrotting adventurers like us. Who wants to spend her life hand-sanitizing and finger-wagging about vaccines when you could be wearing those cool space suits, chasing monkeys, and hoping you don’t start bleeding out of your eyes?

So the flu experts are generally overworked, underfunded, and always in demand. Wouldn’t you know it, they just happen to be who you need in a coronavirus pinch. They’ve spent decades jumping up and down trying to get everyone to plan for The Big One.

I’ll never forget my White House colleague, the inestimable Dr. Lu Borio, always trying to educate everyone about the need to modernize our flu vaccine investments. Her efforts led to President Trump’s important but underreported executive order on the subject. The infrastructure has been built by dozens of unthanked Lu Borios over the past 20 years to combat pandemic flu, and later, coronaviruses such as SARS and its Middle Eastern cousin, MERS.

Political Correctness Doesn’t Stop Pandemics

Infectious disease control, no matter the pathogen, is a time-tested science that resists political correctness. The Obama administration’s rejection of old-fashioned quarantine measures like travel restrictions as un-woke racism may have contributed to the unrestrained spread of Ebola in 2014 more broadly across Africa than might have been necessary, including the couple cases that found their way to the United States (one of which led to two other cases).

It is refreshing to see the Trump administration deploying basic outbreak control measures to interrupt the cycle of transmission in the coronavirus crisis. What some are calling a “travel ban,” public health experts have long referred to as an essential step that communities or nations take to slow the spread of a disease. The word “quarantine,” from the phrase “40 days” in Italian, referred to the 14th-century practice of requiring ships arriving in Venice from ports infected by the plague to sit at anchor for 40 days before landing.

The textbook example of disrupting transmission that we all learn in public health school is the 19th-century London cholera epidemic that was arrested when physician and early epidemiologist John Snow (no, not THAT Jon Snow) removed the handle from a contaminated well, stopping a disease transmission point.

It is true that travel restrictions won’t stop every single coronavirus infection from crossing the border, just as shutting down one water source didn’t eliminate every cholera case in 19th-century London. However, infectious disease control is a mathematical exercise. If you can reduce the number of undetected cases roaming the countryside, you can slow the progression of disease through the population, with quantifiable lifesaving results.

Smart Measures Are Being Taken

One of the bright spots in the otherwise ominous coronavirus conversation is Vice President Mike Pence’s appointment of Ambassador Debbie Birx as the new response coordinator. If everyone had the pleasure of knowing what I know about Dr. Birx, the stock markets would immediately rebound and coronaviruses everywhere would cast their coronas at her feet.

A physician, researcher, and former HIV/AIDS program chief at the Department of Defense and then at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), she is best known, loved, and respected for her unparalleled leadership of the lifesaving global AIDS program first established by President Bush in 2003. She held the job during the Obama administration and now the Trump administration, where she has steered from politics toward simple public health math: find and treat every case so it can’t transmit the virus to new people, rinse and repeat, for less money the next year so you can serve more people over time for the same dollar. And keep scouring the data for the people you’re missing, adjusting your program until you get them, too.

She is shrewd, she is winsome, she knows how to move money fast toward the things that matter, and to hold all recipients of that money, whether or not they’re under her authority, accountable for ambitious results. The White House is to be commended for conscripting her into service, and if they know what’s good for them, they’ll do whatever she says.

Still, Things Are Going to Get Worse

The need for Dr. Birx’s gravitas is dire. The administration’s travel restrictions and robust use of quarantines likely adequately contained or delayed community transmission until recently. But there are now a few “untraced” cases in California and Oregon that aren’t directly linked to a known traveler from an affected area, meaning there is unchecked transmission in the community beyond our knowledge or control. That picture will get worse before it gets better.

If this virus starts spreading unabated the way it is in other countries right now, one of the likely interventions that civil authorities would consider is a regional or even national lockdown. In this scenario, citizens would be “invited” to stay at home long enough to wait out a few incubation periods of the disease—probably between two to six weeks. Governments would likely use curfews and transportation restrictions to starve the virus of new hosts through isolating people in smaller groups, with little contact between the groups.

What does this mean for you? It means that you should prepare to be at home for at least a few weeks. Unlike in most natural disasters, we can expect to have power and water, but non-essential activities and other gathering places will be shut down, including schools, coffee shops, non-emergency health-care facilities, churches, and gyms. That includes shuttering Walmarts, grocery stores, and Amazon deliveries. It’s time to think through how you and your family would get by during those weeks.

Here’s an Outline of What to Do

Obviously, it’s good to have a solid month’s food supply. That should include a number of electrolyte-balancing drinks, canned or frozen fruit and vegetables, and other healthy food mixed in with the Cheetos, in order to maintain strong immune function. Stock up on pet food, cat litter, and for apartment-dwellers, pet soilage pads. Having enough heavy-duty trash bags will be as essential as a plan for how and where you will store trash securely without having to leave your home.

First aid and medical supplies will be important, as health-care facilities could very well be the most dangerous place for the uninfected, not to mention the aggravation and delay you’ll face of needing to explain to law enforcement why you’re on the streets. Best to handle as much medical mayhem as you can on your own.

Speaking of mayhem, businesses and homeowners should double-check their security systems and stock up on their self-defense instruments of choice, including ammo and firearm maintenance supplies. Don’t forget to get some practice time in at the range before a quarantine is enacted, if it’s been a while. There will always be those who try to take advantage of the situation to commit crimes.

People dependent on prescription drugs or other medical supplies, such as diabetes test strips or oxygen tanks, should talk to their physicians about getting extra refills prescribed. Physician offices may be on answering service-only status during a quarantine. Go through the hassle now rather than later with insurers and pharmacies to get those refills in hand, even though such stockpiling may not normally be covered. If you can afford to do so, don’t hesitate to pay out of pocket to get an extra couple months’ supply.

Families should think through who will take care of Aunt Susie’s dog if Aunt Susie is sick, who will cook for Grandpa if Grandma falls ill, or how childcare will be handled if parents are sick or have to live at their essential job for a month. Families with loved ones in hospice care or nursing homes should talk to those care providers now about whether their plans are adequate. Don’t be afraid to pester if you’re not reassured by what you hear at first.

Apartment dwellers might wonder how they can avoid transmission of a respiratory disease when they share a communal ventilation system. For those in temperate climates, close your vents, and seal them off with duct tape and plastic wrap (or trash bags). Open your windows for fresh air instead.

Those who need their HVAC systems, try to seal off as many vents as you can, if you can sacrifice the use of some rooms. You might also consider duct-taping filmy or lightweight fabric over the vent so air can get through but droplets that might be carrying the virus have a greater chance of being captured on the fabric.

Additional Considerations

Parents, don’t forget to stock up on indoor-activity supplies like coloring books, audiobooks, videos, academic, and recreational games. Check out these ideas at your taxpayer-funded public broadcasting site. And get some toys for Fido, too—pent-up canine energy is its own form of natural disaster for your shoes or furniture!

The Trump administration has handled this crisis competently so far, even with some hiccups that happen in every emergency.

Essential personnel such as certain government officials, health-care workers, first responders, and utility workers won’t be able to stay home. Start talking now to your employers about how a month’s worth of staff might be housed on-site at these workplaces during a quarantine. This will minimize the chaos of all these folks commuting each day, requiring a massive permitting operation to allow them on the road, and risking many more contacts among them than would otherwise occur if they slept where they worked.

Despite Democratic presidential candidate demagoguery, the Trump administration has handled this crisis competently so far, even with some hiccups that happen in every emergency. Perhaps the most encouraging sign is their transparency.

Rumor has it that the White House is doing a lot of handwringing about undisciplined messaging, whether it’s over-positivity from the president, or doomsday speculations from CDC and National Institute of Health officials. But we should worry far more when we get official lies about the state of the science, or when political agendas supplant time-tested public health measures.

The frequent press avails, the daily reports on case counts and characteristics, the honesty from officials about both their accomplishments and their fears, the robust use of appropriate quarantine measures, and the appointment of a supremely capable response coordinator—all this bodes as well as we could hope in the face of such an unknown and lethal threat.

In the meantime, as the saying goes, we should pray like it all depends on God and prepare like it all depends on us.

White House Nominates Nation's 1st African American Military Service Chief

The White House has nominated Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown to be the next top general to lead the U.S. Air Force. The nomination, announced by the Defense Department Monday afternoon, would make him the first African American officer to serve as the top uniformed officer for any of the military branches.
The Wall Street Journal first reported Monday that Brown, currently the head of Pacific Air Forces, would be tapped for 22nd Air Force chief of staff, following Gen. David Goldfein, who is set to retire this summer after four years in the position. Brown would also be the first black officer to sit on the Joint Chiefs of Staff since then-Army Gen. Colin Powell served as chairman between 1989 and 1993.
 "The [Air Force] will be well served by the formidable talents of CQ Brown," Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett said in a tweet following the announcement. "He has unmatched strategic vision and operational expertise. His leadership will be instrumental as the service continues to focus on the capabilities and talent we need to implement the [National Defense Strategy]."

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/02/white-house-set-nominate-nations-1st-african-american-military-service-chief-report.html

Taliban Ends ‘Peace Deal’ with U.S. After Afghan President Balks

 

 Article by John Hayward in "Breitbart":

The prospects for the peace deal brokered between the United States and the Taliban looked grim less than 24 hours after it was announced, as Afghan President Ashraf Ghani balked at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners as specified in the agreement, and the Taliban responded by announcing it would resume “operations” against the Afghan government. 

Ghani said on Sunday he has not agreed to release any Taliban prisoners. The peace deal called for 1,000 government security forces held by the Taliban to be released in exchange for 5,000 Taliban fighters imprisoned by the government.

“The release of prisoners is not the United States authority, but it is the authority of the government of Afghanistan,” Ghani declared.

The Taliban responded that it would not engage in talks with the Afghan government scheduled for next week unless the prisoner swap was completed. The Taliban generally refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Ghani’s government, treating it as a puppet of the United States. When officials from Kabul traveled to Qatar over the weekend to discuss the prisoner exchange, Taliban negotiators refused to meet with them.

“We have decided the issue of our 5,000 prisoners with the Americans. They have promised in the agreement that those prisoners will be released before the start of the intra-Afghan negotiations. For us, this issue is settled,” said senior Taliban negotiator Khairullah Khairkhwah.

“We are fully ready for the intra-Afghan talks, but we are waiting for the release of our 5,000 prisoners. If our 5,000 prisoners – 100 or 200 more or less does not matter – do not get released there will be no intra-Afghan talks,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters on Monday.

Zabihullah said the seven-day “reduction in violence” agreement that was a precondition for the peace deal with the United States was now over, and the Taliban could resume attacks against Afghan troops and civilians at any moment.

“As we are receiving reports that people are enjoying the reduction in violence, we don’t want to spoil their happiness, but it does not mean that we will not take our normal military activities back to the level that we were before. It could be any time, it could be after an hour, tonight, tomorrow or the day after,” he said.

An announcement from the Taliban on Monday said that its “operations” would resume shortly. Within an hour, an explosion that killed three people and wounded 11 others was reported in eastern Afghanistan. Local police said a motorcycle loaded with explosives was detonated near a soccer field in the Nadir Shah Kot district.

The full effect of these developments on the U.S.-Taliban peace deal remains to be seen. Technically the Taliban’s hostile rhetoric and actions are directed at the Afghan government, not American forces. There were bombing attacks during the seven-day “truce,” although the Taliban denied involvement and suggested the unknown perpetrators were “trying to create distrust.”

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper on Saturday promised the U.S. would forcefully respond to any Taliban violation of the peace deal. Esper met with Ghani before the U.S. signed the Taliban peace deal and described him as supportive of the arrangement. There was no immediate response from the Trump administration to Monday morning’s developments.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a CBS News interview on Sunday that the peace deal included “a detailed set of commitments that the Taliban have made about the levels of violence that can occur, the nature of what’s got to take place.”

“It’s going to be rocky and bumpy,” Pompeo said. “No one – no one – is under any false illusion that this won’t be a difficult conversation. But that conversation for the first time in almost two decades will be among the Afghan people, and that’s the appropriate place for that conversation to take place.” 

“We’re prepared to do what it takes to ensure that we keep America safe. We’ve asked everyone there to reduce the levels of violence, both the Afghan National Security Forces and the Taliban,” he added.

Pompeo, the first U.S. cabinet official to meet directly with a member of the Taliban, stressed that one of the most important American interests in the deal was getting the Taliban to renounce international terrorism and agree not to harbor groups like al-Qaeda in the future. 

He said the deal would be based on “actions,” not “trust.”

“This deal doesn’t depend upon trusting anyone. It has a deep, complex, well-thought-out, multi-month-negotiated verification complex and mechanism by which we can observe and hold every member of the agreement accountable. We’ll do that. It’s not about trust. It’s about what happens on the ground, not only yesterday which was an important day, but in the days that follow,” he said.

Pompeo was aware of Afghan President Ghani’s reluctance to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners, but he did not see that as an insurmountable obstacle to the “inclusive process” initiated by the peace deal. He mentioned that Ghani’s government made a “commitment” to the deal, but did not specify the details of that commitment.

https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2020/03/02/taliban-ends-peace-deal-with-u-s-after-afghan-president-balks/