Trump Confirms "All JFK Files Are Released" After Latest Clash With Spy Agencies

Update: Following Friday"s disappointing release of some, but not all, remaining files related to the death of President John F. Kennedy, President Trump just confirmed, via tweet, that the rest of the files are released, well ahead of schedule...

JFK Files are released, long ahead of schedule!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 28, 2017

Of course, given that this is the government - and the government does not work weekends - the files are unlikely to be released on to the official National Archives site until Monday.

This appears to be a victory for Trump in his never-ending battle with the intelligence agencies.

*  *  *

As we detailed earlier, The Deep States" "war" with President Trump may sink from the headlines every so often, but there is little doubt that it continues to bubble away, battle after battle. This week"s delayed, reduced... and now soon-to-be-complete release of the rest of the previously classified JKF files is yet another clash with the spy agencies... and this time President Trump may have won...

As AP"s Zeke Miller writes, it was a showdown 25 years in the making: With the world itching to finally get a look at classified Kennedy assassination files, and the deadline for their release just hours away, intelligence officials were still angling for a way to keep their secrets. President Donald Trump, the one man able to block the release, did not appreciate their persistence. He did not intend to make this easy.

Like much else surrounding investigations of the 1963 killing of President John F. Kennedy, this week’s release of 2,800 records from the JFK files was anything but smooth. It came together only at the last minute, with White House lawyers still fielding late-arriving requests for additional redactions in the morning and an irritated Trump continuing to resist signing off on the request, according to an account by two White House officials. They spoke only on condition of anonymity to discuss internal discussions.

The tale of the final hours before the congressionally mandated 25-year release deadline on Thursday adds a new chapter to the story of Trump’s troubled relationship with his spy agencies. He again flashed his skepticism and unpredictability in dealing with agencies long accustomed to a level of deference. Intelligence officials, meanwhile, were again left scratching their heads about a president whose impulses they cannot predict.

And those officials had their own story tell, some rejecting the notion they were slow to act on Trump’s expectations for the documents. The CIA began work months ago to get its remaining assassination-related documents ready for release on Thursday, according to a person familiar with the process. The person, who was not authorized to publicly to discuss the process and spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the goal was to have all the agency’s documents ready to be released in full or with national security redactions before the deadline.

Since taking office, Trump has challenged the integrity of intelligence leaders, moved to exert more control over U.S. spying agencies and accused his predecessor of using government spycraft to monitor his campaign. In the JFK files matter, one White House official said, Trump wanted to make clear he wouldn’t be bullied by the agencies.

Whatever occurred in the lead-up to deadline day, Trump was irritated Thursday that agencies still were arguing for more redactions. The president earlier in the week had tweeted to tease the release of the documents, heightening the sense of drama on a subject that has sparked the imaginations of conspiracy theorists for decades. Under a 1992 law, all of the records related to the assassination were to be made public unless explicitly withheld by the president.

Just before the release Thursday, Trump wrote in a memorandum that he had “no choice” but to agree to requests from the CIA and FBI to keep thousands of documents secret because of the possibility that releasing the information could still harm national security. Two aides said Trump was upset by what he perceived to be overly broad secrecy requests, adding that the agencies had been explicitly warned about his expectation that redactions be kept to a minimum.

“The president and White House have been very clear with all agencies for weeks: They must be transparent and disclose all information possible,” White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah said Friday.

Late last week, Trump received his first official briefing on the release in an Oval Office meeting that included Chief of Staff John Kelly, White House Counsel Don McGahn and National Security Council legal adviser John Eisenberg. Trump made it clear he was unsatisfied with the pace of declassification.

Trump’s tweets, an official said, were meant as a signal to the intelligence community to take seriously his threats to release the documents in their entirety.

According to White House officials, Trump accepted that some of the records contained references to sensitive sources and methods used by the intelligence community and law enforcement and that declassification could harm American foreign policy interests. But after having the scope of the redactions presented to him, Trump told aides he did not believe them to be in the spirit of the law.

On Thursday, Trump’s top aides presented him with an alternative to simply acquiescing to the agency requests: He could temporarily allow the redactions while ordering the agencies to launch a new comprehensive examination of the records still withheld or redacted in part.

Trump accepted the suggestion, ordering that agencies be “extremely circumspect” about keeping the remaining documents secret at the end of the 180-day assessment.

“After strict consultation with General Kelly, the CIA and other agencies, I will be releasing ALL JFK files other than the names and addresses of any mentioned person who is still living,” Trump wrote in a Friday tweet.

 

“I am doing this for reasons of full disclosure, transparency and in order to put any and all conspiracy theories to rest.”

#JFKFiles pic.twitter.com/AnPBSJFh3J

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 28, 2017

Erdogan Tells US "We Don't Need You"

Amid the escalating visa and arrest crisis between Ankara and Washington, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan decided to pour some more gasoline on the fire, and said on Thursday that if the U.S. does not accept Turkey the way it is "then we do not need you", and blamed the ongoing diplomatic dispute on a US ambassador "who doesn"t know his place."

"We are not a tribal state. We are the state of the Republic of Turkey and you will accept it. If you don’t, then sorry but we do not need you,” Erdogan said quoted by Hurriyet, addressing a meeting of provincial governors in the capital Ankara.

Calling on Washington to “return to reason,” Erdogan repeated his claim that it was U.S. Ambassador to Ankara John Bass who prompted the current crisis. "Let me be very clear, the person who caused this is the ambassador here. It is unacceptable for the United States to sacrifice a strategic partner to an ambassador who doesn"t know his place," Erdogan said as quoted by Reuters.

“What a shame if the great United States of America is being governed by an ambassador in Ankara. Because this is the position they are holding. They should have said, ‘You cannot treat my strategic ally this way, you cannot act this way.’ But they couldn"t say this," he said, as quoted by Anadolu Agency.

Erdogan’s comments came a day after Ambassador Bass stated that the decision for visa suspension was taken by the U.S. government, which also confirmed that the decision was taken in coordination with the State Department, the White House and the National Security Council. “Our ambassadors tend not to do things unilaterally,” State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert said on Oct. 10. Nevertheless, the Turkish president again claimed that it was Bass who prompted the current visa suspension crisis.

Erdogan continued his angry tirade, stating that "the decision taken by the U.S. Consulate and the statements made after it are not related to the truth or reality. A junta within the American bureaucracy that is related to the previous administration aims to sabotage relations between the new administration and Turkey."

In what has become a recurring event, Ankara and Washington are drifting ever deeper into their worst bilateral crisis in years after U.S. Istanbul Consulate official Metin Topuz was arrested last week, prompting the U.S. to announce on Oct. 8 that it has stopped issuing non-immigrant visas in Turkey. In return, Ankara imposed tit-for-tat measures implementing the same measures.

Separately, Erdogan once again criticized Washington’s hesitation to sell arms to Turkey, while instead providing arms to the “terrorist organization”, referring to the Kurds, for free. He also said Ankara will stand behind its decision to mutually suspend visa services with Washington “if the U.S. secretary of state and the president defend the ambassador’s step.”

“Turkey has acted based on the principle of reciprocity, following unjust and non-proportional steps taken against our citizens with the suspension of visa applications. Turkey is never a party that extends a problem,” Erdo?an added.

“Our wish for our interlocutors to return to reason and calm, abandoning steps that would harm our friendship and alliance,” he said.

Erdogan also stated that the detention process of the U.S. consulate officer Topuz “is ongoing within the constitutional framework.”

“The legal process on the individual working at the U.S. Istanbul mission as a local personnel, who is the citizen of our country and does not hold any diplomatic immunity, is ongoing within legal practices, agreements and the Vienna Convention,” he said.

The first US consulate employee arrest took place last week, when Turkish citizen Metin Topuz was detained. The pro-government newspaper Daily Sabah reported that he was accused of “facilitating the escape” of “known Gulenists” from Turkey. Topuz"s arrest prompted the US embassy in Turkey to announce it was suspending “all non-immigrant visa services at all US diplomatic facilities,” stating that “recent events” had “forced the United States government to reassess the commitment of the government of Turkey to the security of US mission facilities and personnel...”

There is yet some hope that relations between the two nations will improve. Overnight Bloomberg reported that representatives from U.S. and Turkey will meet in coming days to try and reach a solution to the mutual suspension of visas, Turkey’s state-run Anadolu Agency says, citing Deputy Prime Minister Bekir Bozdag. The deputy PM also said that there is no obstacle to detained U.S. consulate worker’s access to lawyer, and added that Turkey-U.S. ties strong enough to overcome visa crisis.

That said, a few more similar outbursts by Erdogan, and ties between the two nations will be irreperably destroyed.

To Find Leakers, Jeff Sessions Wants To Put Entire National Security Council Through Lie Detector Test: Axios

Having warned previously that the DOJ would crack down brutally on any current and future leakers, Attorney General Jeff Sessions appears ready to follow through with this threat, and according to Axios, he has told co-workers he is seeking to put the entire National Security Council staff through a lie detector test "to root out leakers."

While it is unclear if Sessions will follow through, the AG reportedly floated the idea to multiple people, as recently as last month.

As Axios details the upcoming crackdown, Sessions" idea is to do a one-time, one-issue, polygraph test of everyone on the NSC staff. Interrogators would sit down with every single NSC staffer (there"s more than 100 of them), and ask them, individually, what they know about the leaks of transcripts of the president"s phone calls with foreign leaders. Sessions suspects those leaks came from within the NSC, and thinks that a polygraph test — at the very least — would scare them out of leaking again.

Sessions has told associates he likes the idea of targeting the foreign leader phone calls because there"s a small enough universe of people who would have had access to these transcripts. Also, the idea that the President of the United States can"t have private conversations with foreign leaders was a bridge too far, even for Democrats.

Perhaps more than anything, such a dramatic turn of events by the DOJ, would demonstrate how frustrated he"s become about the rampant leaking of classified information. Then again, as Axios observes, Sessions seems to understand that it"s extremely tough to successfully prosecute leakers, especially when they are career intelligence professionals who are skilled at covering their digital tracks.

House Intel. Chair Accuses Obama Staffers of "Hundreds Of Unmasking Requests"

After being forced to recuse himself from his committee"s investigation of the "Russian meddling" controversy earlier this year (see: House Intel Committee Chair Nunes Recuses Himself From Russia Probe), Devin Nunes has thrust himself back into the national spotlight by drafting a letter to the Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, saying he has evidence that several of Obama"s top political aides made hundreds of unmasking requests in the waning days of Obama"s administration even though they offered no legitimate reason to do so and some of them didn"t even serve in an intelligence position.

In Thursday’s letter, Nunes said the total requests for Americans’ names by Obama political aides numbered in the hundreds during Obama’s last year in office and often lacked a specific intelligence community justification. He called the lack of proper justifications a “serious deficiency.”

His letter noted requests from senior government officials, unlike career intelligence analysts, “made remarkably few individualized justifications for access” to the U.S. names.

“The committee has learned that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama administration,” Nunes wrote. “Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was not boilerplate.”

“We have found evidence that current and former government officials had easy access to U.S. person information and that it is possible that they used this information to achieve partisan political purposes, including the selective, anonymous leaking of such information."

Of course, we pointed out last week (see: New Scapegoat Emerges In Unmasking Scandal: Meet Obama"s Former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power) that the official "whose position had no apparent intelligence related function" was likely Obama"s U.N. ambassador, Samantha Power.

Power appears to be central to efforts by top Obama administration officials to identify individuals named in classified intelligence community reports related to Trump and his presidential transition team.  If true, Power"s role in the unmasking efforts would be particularly questionable since it"s nearly inconceivable that her position as the U.N. ambassador would require such sensitive unmasking activities.

"Unmasking is not a regular occurrence—absolutely not a weekly habit. It is rare, even at the National Security Council, and ought to be rarer still for a U.N. ambassador," according to one former senior U.S. official who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.

"It might be defended when the communication in question relates directly to U.N. business, for example an important Security Council vote," explained the former official, who would only discuss the matter on background. "Sometimes it might be done out of other motives than national security, such as sheer curiosity or to defend a bureaucratic position. Or just plain politics."

The Intelligence Committee"s focus of Power and other key Obama officials is a prime example of the Obama administration"s efforts to spy on those close to Trump, according to sources familiar with the ongoing investigation.

"The subpoena for Power suggests just how pervasive the Obama administration"s spying on Americans actually was," said one veteran GOP political operative who has been briefed on the matter by senior Congressional intelligence officials. "The U.N. ambassador has absolutely no business calling for the quantity and quality of the intelligence that Power seems to have been asking for."

"That"s just not the sort of thing that she should have been concerned about, unless she was playing the role of political operative with the help of the intelligence community," the source said. "It gives away what was actually going on: the Obama administration was operating in a pervasive culture of impunity and using the intelligence community against their political opponents."

So, you"re saying that while Americans were being distracted with a barrage of "Russian meddling" stories, that Obama was working behind the scenes to transform our various intelligence agencies in this country into his very own political weapons of mass destruction? 

That sounds like a very serious 4th Amendment issue...we"re starting to see what the FISA courts were getting at:

"Since 2011, NSA"s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collection under Section 702.  The October 26, 2016 Notice informed the Court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries in violation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had previously been disclosed to the Court."

"At the October 26, 2016 hearing, the Court ascribed the government"s failure to disclose those IG and OCO reviews at the October 4, 2016 hearing to an institutional "lack of candor" on NSA"s part and emphasized that "this is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.""

Furious Qatar Balks At Saudi Ultimatum As UAE Warns Of "Parting Of Ways"

One day after Saudi Arabia and its Gulf ally states finally released a long-awaited, 10-day ultimatum containing 13 demands from Qatar as a precondition for the resumption of diplomatic ties and an end of Qatar"s economic and naval blockade, the small Gulf nation balked and said the ultimatum is neither "reasonable" nor "realistic", and infringes on its sovereignty and foreign policy. 

“This list of demands confirms what Qatar has said from the beginning – the illegal blockade has nothing to do with combating terrorism, it is about limiting Qatar’s sovereignty, and outsourcing our foreign policy” said  Sheikh Saif Al Thani, director of Qatar’s government communications office, in a statement to Bloomberg.

As a reminder, the full list contained such demands as reducing diplomatic representation with Iran, shutting down the Turkish military base that is being established (Turkey has already balked at the threat), severing ties with terrorist organization, shutting down Al Jazeera and all affiliated channels, and so on. The demands are explicitly aimed at dismantling Qatar"s two-decade-old interventionist foreign policy, which has reflected the clout generated by its vast natural gas and oil wealth but incensed conservative Arab peers over its alleged support for Islamists they regard as mortal threats to their dynastic rule.

Al Thani dismissed the demands and said that while the list is "currently under review", it is only “out of respect for our brothers in Kuwait” whose emissary delivered the Saudi-led demands Friday. Al Thani said that the demands do not meet the US and UK criteria for “reasonable and realistic measures.”

Meanwhile Qatar’s Foreign Ministry said it will soon issue an official response, one which we doubt Saudi Arabia will like as the bid/ask in the early stage of the negotiations is being established. 

“The State of Qatar is currently studying this paper, the demands contained therein and the foundations on which they were based, in order to prepare an appropriate response,” the ministry told Channel News Asia.

On Friday, Qatar"s news outlet Al Jazeera responded to Saudi demands that it be shut down as part of the "renormalization" process. “We in the network believe that any call for closing down Al Jazeera is nothing but an attempt to silence the freedom of expression in the region and to suppress people"s right to information,” Al Jazeera said in a statement.

“By accepting those demands and conditions Qatar will be subject to international accountability and violating its commitments regarding human rights conventions,” Qatar"s National Human Rights Committee said in a statement cited by Reuters.

Meanwhile, a senior United Arab Emirates official told Reuters what would happen if Qatar refused to comply with the Arab ultimatum, saying there would be a "parting of ways."

"The alternative is not escalation, the alternative is parting of ways, because it is very difficult for us to maintain a collective grouping," UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash told reporters.

Gargash urged Qatar to meet the demands. “It would be wiser that [Qatar] deal seriously with the demands and concerns of the neighbors or a divorce will take place,” Anwar Gargash said on Twitter in Arabic, adding, that “the crisis is profound.”

?????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ???????? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??????? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ????.

— ?. ???? ????? (@AnwarGargash) June 23, 2017

He added that while diplomacy with Qatar remained a priority, that mediation efforts to resolve the dispute had been undermined by the public disclosure of the demands. "The mediators" ability to shuttle between the parties and try and reach a common ground has been compromised by this leak," he said. "Their success is very dependent on their ability to move but not in the public space."

UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash

In other words, another attempt at a backdoor deal orchestrated by Saudi Arabia failed because someone leaked something, only this time it didn"t involve Trump being a KGB secret agent.

Gargash said that if Qatar fails to comply within the 10-day timeline set out in the ultimatum, it will be isolated. But he did not make clear what more could be done since the four Arab nations have already cut diplomatic relations with Doha and severed most commercial ties.

Despite the verbal assurance that there will be no further escalation, Qatar is preparing for the worst, as two contingents of Turkish troops with columns of armored vehicles have arrived in Doha since the worst crisis among Gulf Arab states for years erupted on June 5. Gargash said the Turkish deployment was a "meaningless escalation" and he hoped Ankara would act in a "reasonable way" adding that "we hope that Turkey prioritizes the interest of the Turkish state and not partisan ideology," Gargash said.

The uncompromising positions adopted by both sides leave little prospect for a quick end to the crisis. The sanctions have disrupted Qatar"s main import routes by land from Saudi Arabia and by sea from big container ships docked in the United Arab Emirates. But Qatar so far has avoided economic collapse by quickly finding alternative channels and says its huge financial reserves will meet any challenges.

* * *

Finally, the last wildcard in this diplomatic spat remains the US, whose often conflicting flipflopping on Qatar is a topic all in itself: last week Rex Tillerson asked that a list of Saudi demands be produced and sure enough, he got what he wanted which however, may not be what the former Exxon CEO had in mind.

After Tillerson pressed all sides to resolve the dispute, the president praised Saudi Arabia’s move on Twitter, citing Qatar’s history of “funding Radical Ideology.” On June 9, Tillerson called on Saudi Arabia to ease what he called its “blockade,” only to have Trump, at a White House news conference hours later, say the move had been the right one. At the same time, the Defense Department made clear the importance of its base in Qatar, from which the U.S. conducts its air operations against Islamic State.

“The Saudis and the Emiratis certainly look like they feel empowered by Trump, and the Qataris look like they also felt empowered by the Defense Department,” said Lori Plotkin Boghardt, a fellow who specializes in U.S.-Gulf relations at the Washington Institute. She said that only increased “the chance that both sides of the conflict will continue to dig in their heels.”

Now Tillerson is taking the lead. As Bloomberg reports, on Tuesday, his spokeswoman said the U.S. was “mystified” about why the coalition hadn’t listed its demands of the tiny nation, saying the U.S. suspected that the dispute was more about long-simmering tensions between them and not focused on Qatar’s funding of terrorism.  Tillerson’s efforts to encourage a resolution has been helped in recent days by President Donald Trump staying quiet after earlier comments undercut his secretary of state.

The Saudi demands were “a halfhearted response to U.S. pressure,” said Rob Malley, who coordinated Middle East policy for President Barack Obama’s National Security Council. “The real question is if whether it’s an opening gambit starting from a maximalist position or whether from Saudi Arabia’s and the Emirates’ point of view, it’s not time to negotiate.” Qatar’s foreign minister said on June 19 that his country wouldn’t bargain away what it sees as its sovereign rights and called on the Saudi alliance to conduct negotiations in a “civilized way,” after first lifting the blockade. He said Qataris were united behind their emir.

* * *

But wait, there"s more, and as we reported last week, the already convoluted situation became even more complex when the U.S. and Qatar signed a deal last week to sell as many as 36 F-15 fighter jets to Qatar. And on Thursday, Qatar’s state-backed airline, Qatar Airways Ltd., announced it would seek to buy a stake of as much 10 percent in American Airlines Group Ltd. American’s CEO scoffed at the move as “puzzling at best and concerning at worst.”

Finally, all of this takes place just days after the shocking Saudi shake up in which the Saudi King unexpectedly announced he was stripping the current Crown Prince, his nephew Mohamed bin Nayef (MBF), of all titles and obligations, and replacing him with his belligerent son, and advocate of more military intervention in the region, Mohamed bin Salman (MBS), a move which according to Petromatrix means that "with MBS now having greater control of Saudi Arabia and with Jared Kushner having a large control of the White House it is not really a question of if but rather of when a new escalation with Iran starts."

With so many moving pieces in the Qatar crisis, anyone who is confident they have it "all figured out" will be wrong.

Paul Craig Roberts Asks "If This Is Freedom And Democracy, What Is Tyranny?"

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

“Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience… Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world, in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That’s our problem… people are obedient, all these herdlike people.” — Howard Zinn

If truth be known, Americans are no more free than were Germans under Gestapo Germany. “Freedom and Democracy America” is the greatest lie in the world.

Countries sink into tyranny easily. Those born today don’t know the freedom of the past and are unaware of what has been taken away. Some American blacks might think that finally after a long civil rights struggle they have gained freedom. But the civil rights that they gained have been taken away from all of us by the “war on terror.” Today black Americans are gratuitously shot down in the streets by police in ways that are worse than in Jim Crow days.

American women might think that finally they have gained equality, and they have—the equality to be abused by police just like men. As John Whitehead reports, women are forced by police to strip naked, often in public, and have their viginas explored as part of a “drug search.” When I was a young man, society would not have tolerated any such intrusion on a woman. The officer and police chief would have been fired and if not prosecuted for rape, would have been beat into bloody pulps by the enraged men.

Tryanny was brought to Americans intentionally by their government. Perhaps it began in 1992 with the unaccountable use of police power against an American family at Ruby Ridge. Randy Weaver’s 12 or 13 year old son was shot in the back and murdered by federal marshalls. Then his wife was murdered with a shot through her throat while she stood at the door of her home holding a baby in her arms. There was no justification for this gratuitous violence against a peaceful American family, and the federal marshalls who murdered were not held accountable. The Congress, “the people’s representatives” held a hearing, and those responsible for murdering a family told the representatives that they had “to trust the police”.

A year later, 1993, the Clinton regime murdered, using poison gas as well as gun fire, more than 100 members of the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas.

Women and children comprised most of the victims of “freedom and democracy America.” The Branch Davidians had done nothing except be different. They were a threat to no one. But the Clinton criminal government knew that it could portray the Branch Davidians, as they were different, in unfavorable lights. They were said to be in possession of, and perhaps manufacturing, illegal machine guns. They were said to be having sex with underage girls in their collective.

When the Branch Davidian compound was attacked by a tank spewing chemical warfare and then burnt to the ground, insouciant Americans were told that justice had been done to child abusers. No one objected that the same “justice” had also been done to the allegedly abused children.

Again the “representatives of the people” held a hearing. The result was that the Clinton criminal regime and Janet Reno got approval for dealing effectively with those who violate gun laws.

Ruby Ridge and Waco established the precedents that the US government could murder large numbers of Americans, and at Waco some foreigners, without consequence. The “representatives of the people” accepted the executive branch’s lies in order to avoid having to hold the executive branch accountable for what were clearly without any doubt capital crimes against American citizens for which the federal perpetrators of these crimes should have been tried and executed.

These two instances established the precedent that the US government could murder US citizens at will.

The next step was to take away the constitutional and legal protections of citizens that are in the Bill of Rights, the amendments to the US Constitution, and are, or were, institutionalized in legal practices.

The false flag attack of September 11, 2001, was the instrument for deep-sixing the bill of rights. The George W. Bush regime made us “safe” by taking away our civil liberties. Habeas corpus, the foundation of liberty, was destroyed by the executive branch’s assertion that the President on his sole authority, the US Constitution notwithstanding, can detain US citizens indefinitely without evidence, without going before a court, without any accountability to law whatsoever.

The Obama regime not only endorsed this murder of the US Constitution, “American’s First Black President” even went further. Obama declared that he had the power to sit in his office and write down names of US citizens whom he could murder at his will without acountability.

Congress did not object. The Supreme Court did not object. The American media did not object. The law schools and bar associations did not object. The Republican Party did not object. The Democratic Party did not object. The American people did not object. Washington’s allies in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada did not object. The Christian churches did not object.

I objected, and a few others like me, such as John Whitehead.

9/11 clearly, without any doubt, destroyed American liberty. Even if you are so brainwashed as to believe an obviously false story of the event, even if you believe that a few Saudi Arabians without government or intelligence service support outwitted all 16 US intelligence agencies, the National Security Council, all intelligence agencies of Washington’s vassals abroad, outwitted Israel’s Mossad, US Air Traffic Control, caused US Airport Security to fail four times in one hour on the same day, and prevented for the first time in history the US Air Force from sending fighters to intercept off course airliners, the fact remains the same: the US government used 9/11 to destroy the constitutional protections of US liberty.

The raw, ugly, but true fact that “our” government has destroyed American liberty is the reason that everyone of us is subject to experiencing the abuses that John Whitehead describes below.

Who will be next? You? Me? Your Wife? Your Son? Your daughter? Your aged and infirm parents?

When it happens, it was the American people who permitted it.

Trump Considering "Kinetic Military Action" On North Korea Including "Sudden Strike"

Following Sunday"s failed medium-range missile test by Kim Jong-Un, President Donald Trump has been evaluating his response options and according to Bloomberg, which cited a "person familiar with his thinking", is willing to consider ordering "kinetic" military action, including a sudden strike, to "counteract North Korea’s destabilizing actions in the region"

However, before launching another offensive campaign - or war as some would call it - Trump’s preference is for China to take the lead on dealing with North Korea, according to the source.

While still afforded the luxury of time, Trump may be forced to decide soon how to respond: on its take on the ongoing North Korea crisis, the New York Times said in a front-page article that "what is playing out, said Robert Litwak of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, ... is "the Cuban missile crisis in slow motion," but the slow-motion part appears to be speeding up."

That said, Trump’s reported strategy isn’t a radical departure from long-standing U.S. policy. As Bloomberg writes, "he isn’t particularly interested in toppling the regime of leader Kim Jong Un and isn’t looking to force a reunification of the two Koreas, the person said. He instead wants to push for their long-term cooperation."

Furthermore, Trump’s national security team had already thought through various scenarios that North Korea might take, and how the U.S. would react. So when the medium-range missile test failed right after launch early Sunday morning local time, Trump was informed immediately and decided to downplay it, according to the person. It was Trump’s decision that the administration’s initial response would come from Defense Secretary James Mattis, who issued a 22-word statement Saturday night.

This was followed by National Security Adviser General H.R. McMaster, who used familiar language Sunday to describe North Korea’s “provocative and destabilizing and threatening behavior,” while leaving all options on the table as his team helps develop plans of action for the region. In a previously reported interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” McMaster said Trump had directed the National Security Council to collaborate with the Defense and State Departments, and intelligence agencies to “provide options and have them ready for him if this pattern of destabilizing behavior continues.”

Hours after the failed test, McMaster emphasized Trump’s preference, as with this month’s airstrikes in Syria, for unannounced military action. He added that the North Korean leader’s unpredictability complicated U.S. strategy.

McMaster’s use of “provocative” and “destabilizing” to describe North Korea echoes administrations of both parties that have attempted to rally others on the global stage, including China, to help prevent fresh war on the peninsula. Trump used the language in his February visit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

Meanwhile, China has refused to commit to any specific course of action and as discussed earlier, Beijing made a plea for a return to negotiations. Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Monday that tensions need to be eased on the Korean Peninsula to bring the escalating dispute there to a peaceful resolution. Lu said Beijing wants to resume the multi-party negotiations that ended in stalemate in 2009 and suggested that U.S. plans to deploy a missile defense system in South Korea were damaging its relations with China.

Ultimately, Trump may be in wait and see mode for the next week until all the available options are on the table: on April 25, the USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier is expected to reach the South Korea east coast on April 25. If Trump is indeed pressed to make a swift decision, he will surely do so once air support is available next weekend, just as the first round of the French presidential election takes place.

Japan Prepares For North Korea "Emergency"

Judging by the precautionary actions of North Korea"s neighbors, the next 48 hours on the Korean peninsula could see substantial volatility, because at the same time as China"s largest carrier was said to suspend flights to Pyongyang, the Japanese government has asked the U.S. to provide advance consultation if it is about to launch military action against North Korea, and "has ramped up preparations for emergency situations" according to Japan"s Yomiuri Shimbun, including the potential evacuation of some 57,000 Japanese citizens currently in South Korea.

According to the Japanese publication, PM Shinzo Abe stressed that the region is becoming increasingly tense. “[U.S. President Donald Trump] has stated that all options are on the table. It’s a fact tensions are rising,” he said at the Prime Minister’s Office after receiving a written proposal calling for tougher sanctions on North Korea from the Liberal Democratic Party’s Eriko Yamatani, chief of the headquarters for the abduction issue. 

He added that "if an unexpected situation occurs, we’ll ask the United States to cooperate in rescuing the abduction victims."

The Japanese government, like its South Korean peer, has asked for advance consultation regarding any U.S. military action against North Korea during a series of meetings between Japanese and U.S. officials. The U.S. side is said to have responded positively to the request. This is because Japan would need to take appropriate precautions given that, as an ally of Washington, it could be a target for retaliation should the U.S. military attack North Korea, although in order to preserve the "element of surprise" it would not be at all
surprising if Trump proceeded to launching a strike unannounced.

As the infographic below shows, the Japanese government is contemplating five potential emergency responses should a military clash break out between the US and North Korea:

• Logistical support by Japan"s Self-Defense Forces (SDF) in the event of a local conflict


• Use of force by the SDF in the event of a full scale war


• Protection of Japanese citizens in South Korea


• Preparation for armed attacks against Japan


• Civil protection and response to evacuees

There are three main threats Japan would face if Trump launches an attack: in addition to a potential ballistic missile retaliation; the mass evacuation of thousands of Japanese citizens, and what would likely be a massive refugee onslaught by North Koreans.

Furthermore, recall that under its post-war constitution, Japan is not allowed to have offensive military forces. Its Article 9 declares "the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes." That may copmlicate logistics should war indeed break out in North Korea.

As the Japan Times notes, a North Korean attack on Japan would involve ballistic missiles. The Japanese government has been bolstering defensive measures against ballistic missiles, including making permanent in August 2016 an order to the Self-Defense Forces to intercept and destroy incoming missiles.

There is also the concern of an imminent evacuation:

A difficult issue that would emerge in a contingency on the Korean Peninsula is the rescue and protection of an estimated 57,000 Japanese, including tourists, in South Korea. The government started compiling an evacuation plan in the 1990s and has updated and changed it several times. The government plans to convene a meeting of the four ministers who form the National Security Council to review the strategy for dealing with this issue at an early date.

Security legislation that came into force in March 2016 newly allows the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to take steps to protect, rescue and transport Japanese overseas. The Japanese government plans to use government-chartered aircraft and SDF transport vessels for such evacuations, which would be conducted in cooperation with the U.S. military.

A potential complication here is that the governments of Japan and South Korea don"t really have the best diplomatic relations, a tension that goes as far back as treatment of Koreans by the Japanese during World War II.  “South Korea’s allergy toward the SDF is still strong, so there has not been much progress regarding concrete talks between the Japanese and South Korean governments,” a senior Defense Ministry official told The Yomiuri Shimbun.

The Japanese government must also figure out how to cope with the huge number of refugees expected to descend on Japan from the Korean Peninsula. They would need to be temporarily accommodated, but it also is possible that North Korean agents would slip into Japan with the intention of striking nuclear power plants, heavily populated areas and other targets. As the Shimbun adds, implementing immigration control procedures for those refugees would not be easy.

* * *

So in case airstrikes do begin, will Japan get involved on the offensive, in breach of its constitution, and a development that would in turn put both China and Russia on edge? 

While in theory, the SDF is supposed to jointly respond with U.S. forces according to how a contingency on the Korean Peninsula would develop, however in practice a Japanese response would likely be limited: senior Defense Ministry official emphasized the difference made by the security legislation, which permit the limited exercise of the right of collective self-defense: “There has been progress regarding Japan-U.S. coordination for role sharing.”

The most realistic SDF activity would be logistics support for the U.S. military. The SDF is permitted to supply ammunition to U.S. forces and refuel ready-to-fly fighter jets, among other measures, in situations that do not constitute an armed attack but are recognized as having an important influence on Japan’s security and safety.

Still, as Shimbun notes, "in a situation that could result in Japan sustaining damage equal in seriousness to a direct attack, the government would recognize that the nation’s survival is under threat and permit the use of force by the SDF. Using the right of collective self-defense, it would become possible for the SDF to defend U.S. ships by counterattacking enemies that attacked them, based on the SDF mobilization order. The SDF could also conduct other operations, including minesweeping in the open sea to remove mines laid by North Korea.

Under such a situation, the government would simultaneously recognize that Japan is at imminent risk of coming under attack while likely starting preparations based on the Civil Protection Law, such as evacuating residents.

Ideally all of the above contingency scenarios never have to be implemented, and the threat of a US attack on North Korea remains just that, eventaully resulting in de-escalation instead of potentially unleashing another regional conflict and what some would saw "world war" in addition to the similar development in the middle-east. Unfortunately, considering how long the neo-con warhawks had been "caged" and prevented from profiting from an all out war, we doubt this optimistic scenario deserves much merit.

Pence: "Bannon Was Not Demoted"

In the aftermath of today"s main political event, the removal of Steve Bannon from Trump"s National Security Council, the punditry and the public have been eager to find out if this was a voluntary transition - in Bannon"s own words "I was put on to ensure that [Susan Rice"s NSC] was de-operationalized. General McMaster has returned the NSC to its proper function” - or whether there was a behind the scenes conflict between Bannon and Trump or others in the administration - Reuters reported that Bannon"s removal from the NSC was seen as a boost to H.R. McMaster, who officials said has struggled to work together with Bannon.

And while it will hardly provide a definitive answer, especially to skeptics, moments ago Fox News" Martha MacCallum sat down with Vice President Mike Pence for a wide-ranging interview. Pence also addressed the major news stories of the day, where of particular interest was the discussion on the removal of Steve Bannon.

Asked if the NSC move was a demotion for Bannon, Pence said "not for Steve, not for Ton. These are very highly valued members of our administration. They"re going to continue to play important policy roles. But I think with H.R. McMaster’s addition as our National Security Advisor – a man of extraordinary background in the military – this is just a natural evolution to ensure the National Security Council is organized in a way that best serves the president in resolving and making those difficult decisions," Pence said.

TONIGHT - @marthamaccallum interviews @VP Pence on #First100 - Tune in at 7p ET on Fox News Channel! pic.twitter.com/opQMZ17RBt

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 5, 2017

Pence also said that Americans “have a right to know” details about allegations that President Obama"s National Security Adviser Susan Rice asked for the identity of Trump transition team members to be unmasked in intelligence reports.

“Well I think the American people have a right to know what was going on. And we have every confidence that intelligence committees in the House and the Senate will get to the bottom of all of these allegations,” Pence told Fox News. Rice became the subject of ire from Trump allies earlier this week after media reports said the former Obama official requested the identities of transition team members be unmasked in reports about surveillance of foreign targets. Rice on Tuesday did not deny that she requested the unmasking of identities, but said she would not have done so for political reasons.

Pence, when asked if Rice should testify in front of Congress, said such a decision is up to lawmakers. “But I would say the American people have a right to know if there was surveillance of any private citizen in this country,” he added in the Fox News interview.

“And the identity of those citizens was revealed, people ought to have the right to know why. And the fact that it involved out campaign and our transition should be deeply troubling to anyone cherishes civil liberties in this country.”

Trump, in an interview with the New York Times  earlier on Wednesday, said he thought Rice committed a crime.  “Do I think? Yes, I think.” Trump told the newspaper when asked.

.@VP reacts to Susan Rice "unmasking" story: "I think the American people have a right to know what was going on." #First100 pic.twitter.com/4G8KK1G897

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 5, 2017

Another pertinent topic touched upon by Pence was the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria, which he said appears to be the work of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad"s regime, and which prompted Trump this afternoon to suggest that his Syria policy may change as a result.

"No American can look at those images and not be heartsick," Pence said. "It is a reflection of the failure of the past administration to both confront the mindless violence of the Assad regime and also hold Russia and Syria to account for the promises that they made to destroy chemical weapons."

Finally, when discussing Trump"s upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Pence said he"s expecting a "productive discussion" about the U.S.-China economic relationship. He added that he expects North Korea and its burgeoning hopes of developing nuclear weapons will also be discussed.

"As the president said this weekend, if China won’t deal with North Korea, we will," Pence said.

Bannon Goes Bust

(ZHE) In what may be the most dramatic shake-up at the White House since Mike Flynn resigned in February, moments ago Bloomberg reported that President Trump has reorganized his National Security Council on Wednesday, removing his chief strategist, Stephen Bannon and stripping him of his security clearance as well as downgrading the role of his Homeland Security Adviser, Tom Bossert, while elevating national intelligence director, Dan Coats, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford, who will again be “regular attendees” of the NSC’s principals committee.

The WSJ adds that “the decision to boot Bannon was made by Trump’s new national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster.”

Bannon said in a statement: “Susan Rice operationalized the NSC during the last administration. I was put on to ensure that it was de-operationalized. General McMaster has returned the NSC to its proper function.”

We"re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

Additionally, the Joint Chiefs chairman and intelligence director are having their roles on the principals committee restored, the report said.

Bloomberg adds that Susan Rice’s successor, National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, was given responsibility for setting the agenda for meetings of the NSC or the Homeland Security Council, and was authorized to delegate that authority to Bossert, at his discretion, according to the filing.

A White House official said that Bannon was placed on the committee in part to monitor Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, and never attended a meeting. He’s no longer needed with McMaster in charge of the council, the official said.

The memorandum also makes the director of the Central Intelligence Agency a permanent member of the principals committee and restores the chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence as permanent members after they were initially downgraded from that status.

As a reminder, back in January, in the first of many unexpected shakeups, Bannon was elevated to a position on the NSC principals committee. The move drew criticism from some members of Congress and Washington’s foreign policy establishment.

It was not immediately clear if the shake up is indicative of a major split between Trump and his right hand man and chief ideological advisor, or if Bannon was simply seen as irrelevant in his current post.

The filing showing Bannon’s demotion is below:

By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge / Report a typo

US Military Officials Expect North Korean Missile Launch Within Days

On the same day as Kim Jong Un threatens the US with "first-strike" nuclear ICBM and unveils propaganda showing the destruction of American forces, AP reports U.S. military officials expect another North Korean missile launch in the next several days.

Earlier today a Pyongyang envoy stated that North Korea will pursue "acceleration" of its nuclear and missile programs. This includes developing a "pre-emptive first strike capability" and an inter-continental ballistic missile, according to Choe Myong Nam, deputy ambassador at the DPRK (North Korean) mission to the United Nations in Geneva.

The latest development follows a previous report also from Reuters, in which it said the Trump administration is considering sweeping sanctions as part of a broad review of measures to counter North Korea"s nuclear and missile threat. "I think this is stemming from the visit by the Secretary of State (Rex Tillerson) to Japan, South Korea and China...We of course are not afraid of any act like that," Choe told Reuters.

"Even prohibition of the international transactions system, the global financial system, this kind of thing is part of their system that will not frighten us or make any difference." He called existing sanctions "heinous and inhumane".

Choe said his country wants a forum set up to examine the "legality and legitimacy of the sanctions regime" and denounced joint annual military exercises currently being carried out by the United States and South Korea on the divided peninsula and criticized remarks by Tillerson during his talks with regional allies last week.

"All he was talking about is for the United States to take military actions on DPRK (the Democratic People"s Republic of Korea," Choe said.

Additionally, North Korea rejects claims by Washington and Seoul that the military drills taking place at this moment are defensive. They involve strategic nuclear bombers and a nuclear submarine Columbus that recently entered South Korean ports, he said.

And then, just days after Kim threatened to reduce the US “to ashes” as tensions with North Korea continue to increase, which in turn followed a warning by Tillerson that the US is preparing for a "first strike" against the irrational dictator, while US special forces conduct drills in South Korea to "eliminate" the country"s ruler, the Supreme Leader released his latest materpiece of propaganda, showing the USS Carl Vinson nuclear-powered aircraft carrier up in flames.

And now, AP reports that the U.S. military expects another North Korean missile launch in the next several days, American defense officials said Tuesday.

The officials said the U.S. has increased its surveillance over the isolated, communist country and has seen a North Korean missile launcher moving around, as well as construction of VIP seating in the eastern coastal city Wonsan.

The officials, who weren"t authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said the new surveillance includes satellites, drones and other aircraft.

The U.S. officials on Tuesday said it"s unclear what type of missile launch may be coming. North Korea previously has conducted tests in Wonsan of its medium-range ballistic Musudan missile.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer on Tuesday described the North Korean threat as "grave and escalating," and a National Security Council official told a nuclear conference that the administration is conducting a high-priority review of North Korea policy.

Christopher Ford, senior director for weapons of mass destruction and nonproliferation on the NSC staff, said reviewers are considering a "full spectrum of possibilities."

"There"s this enormously broad continuum, and we are looking at that entire conceptual space," Ford told the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference. He gave no concrete examples, but in an attempt to illustrate his point that the choices run the gamut, he said they range from "warm hamburger" to "war hammers."

Is Steve Bannon "The Great Manipulator" Or Is It All Just More "Fake News"

Various mainstream media outlets would like for you to believe there is discord in the White House between President Trump and Steve Bannon.  The typical narrative goes something like this:  Steve Bannon is "The Great Manipulator" (as Time Magazine described him) pulling all the strings from behind the scenes and Trump, the perpetual narcissist, is growing weary of competing for the spotlight.   

The question is whether any of it is true or if this is just more "fake news" from a mainstream media intent upon doing anything possible to sow the White House discord they so desperately seek?

Of course, if the media were actively looking to leverage a "character flaw" of a President they see as intent upon always capturing the spotlight, putting staff members on the cover of prominent national magazine covers would be a great way to execute that plan.  Per The Hill:

“I assume President Trump was not pleased with the Time cover, because that is reserved for Donald Trump,” said one White House source granted anonymity to speak candidly.

“At the same time, Steve Bannon cannot necessarily control whether he is on that cover.”

Bannon declined to be interviewed by Time for the story, and the photograph had been shot on an earlier occasion. But it raised eyebrows among Trump supporters nonetheless.

“Any time you have staff members on the cover of Time magazine, that’s a problem,” said John Feehery, a Trump-supporting GOP strategist and longtime Capitol Hill aide.

“It’s fine for family to be on the cover. It’s fine even for political opponents to be on the cover. Staff members shouldn’t be on the cover,” Feehery, who is also a columnist for The Hill, said.

All that said, the problem with the media conspiracy theory hypothesis is that President Trump himself lends credibility to their narrative by specifically responding to it.  Here is a tweet sent just yesterday by President Trump after a weekend of various media outlets and Saturday Night Live spinning the narrative that Steve Bannon "calls the shots" in the White House.

I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it. Some FAKE NEWS media, in order to marginalize, lies!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2017

Making matters worse, according to The ill and NBC News Editor Bradd Jaffy, Trump’s tweet was sent about one hour after MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” played a clip of the “Saturday Night Live” skit, showed an image of the Time cover and posed the question of whether Bannon was “calling all the shots.”

And here is the SNL skit that allegedly provoked Trump"s Monday morning tweet storm.

Not wanting to be left out of the party, the New York Times also added its two cents to the Bannon narrative over the weekend, saying “Mr. Bannon remains the president’s dominant adviser despite Mr. Trump’s anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council.”

And, once again, Trump took to Twitter to blast the media outlet:

The failing @nytimes writes total fiction concerning me. They have gotten it wrong for two years, and now are making up stories & sources!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 6, 2017

The failing @nytimes was forced to apologize to its subscribers for the poor reporting it did on my election win. Now they are worse!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 7, 2017

While we have the "utmost confidence" in the anonymous sources of the New York Times and Time Magazine, two extremely credible media outlets that would never undermine their own journalistic integrity to advance a misleading political narrative, we"ll reserve judgement for now.  But, what say you, dear reader, is Steve Bannon flying too close to the sun or is the media just spinning more "fake news?"

Trump Drives A Wedge In The EU

Submitted by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Trump has made it clear he does not like the EU. He prefers bilateral negotiations. And like it or not, Trump is succeeding in his efforts to split the EU.

How Trump is Dividing the EU

It took Donald Trump less than a week to drive a wedge between the constitutionally weak Europeans. His travel ban applies to people with dual passports – except to those with dual British citizenship. It was a concession Britain’s foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, managed to negotiate directly with the White House.

Angela Merkel assures Germans with dual citizens her full support, and promised to co-ordinate the position with other European member states. She said yesterday that Trump’s policy did not reflect her idea of the international co-operation and how to deal with refugees, but there was not even a hint of any action, or counter-action. We noted a comment by Italy’s new foreign minister, Angelino Alfano, that we should stop hyperventilating about Trump. What else can the EU do, having made itself totally dependent on the US for its defence?

The Conservative Party yesterday strongly rallied behind Theresa May and her pro-US position. It is becoming very clear that the combination of Brexit and the election of Donald Trump will simultaneously reposition the UK geo-strategically and economically, and weaken the EU. This is why we think the EU would be best served by agreeing a friendly Brexit as quickly as possible.

There is a growing number of signs that what is happening in the US constitutes a national and global regime change. The elevation of Steven Bannon to a full seat of the National Security Council tells us that more outrages are now very likely. We noted this Bannon quote, as relayed by the New Yorker.

“I’m a Leninist…Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”

Four years of Trump should mercilessly expose the weaknesses of the EU.

The above viewpoint by Email from Eurointelligence. I believe they are correct.

However, Eurointelligence views the euro and the EU as good things. I view the euro as a failed project and the EU as a collection of massively overpaid statists best gotten rid of.