Podcast: Download | Embed

Subscribe: Spotify | Email | TuneIn | RSS

Harley Schlanger, LaRouchePAC.com, [email protected] for Info, LaRouchePUB.com, China Hong Kong Trump, Soros, Firing Bolton Neocon PNAC, Multiple Track China Russia, Russian Nukes N Korea Iran Venezuela, Trump Need Tougher Negotiations, NOT Military Action First, Dr Bill Deagle MD AAEM ACAM A4M, NutriMedical Report Show, www.NutriMedical.com, www.ClayandIRON.com, www.Deagle-Network.com,

 

 

 

 

Families of 9/11 victims suing Saudi Arabia

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6085492335001/?playlist_id=5198073478001#sp=show-clips

 

 

#TheReal911Report
#WhatBroughtDownWTCTowers

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1121175503954747392.html

 

 

Influence Power: How China Covertly Operates in the U.S.

 

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/influence-power-how-china-covertly-operates-in-the-u-s/

 

WAB World Affairs Brief > Sept 13th 2019 >>

EVERY YEAR WE MUST ENDURE A REVIEW OF THE 9/11 ATTACK

This week, as at every September since 2001, we are feted with the establishment version of Muslim terrorists hijacking airliners and crashing them into the WTC twin towers. Not a single mainstream media source, even the claimed conservative Fox News, will countenance the conspiracy facts proving that the official story is impossible. Consider this summary of contradictions in the official story:

The Hijackers: Several of the named hijackers couldn’t have died in the crashes because they are still alive. Most could not successfully fly a Cessna trainer, let alone take over controls of sophisticated airliner. They wouldn’t even know how to disconnect the autopilot, let alone navigate by dead reckoning to the Twin Towers from hundreds of miles away.

An intact, unblemished passport of one of the hijackers was claimed to have been found by the FBI in the rubble—obviously planted. Real hijackers don’t take a van full of incriminating evidence to the airport, nor do they carry their passports, nor buy tickets with credit cards. The actual hijackers were not the ones the FBI presented to the public, but hired by the Deep State, must have had sophisticated training on real aircraft. That is why the FBI won’t let anyone see any of the airport gate videos of the real hijackers in Boston Logan airport. The one video showing one of the hijackers at a gate is not at Boston Logan.

The WTC Towers: The Twin Towers were specifically designed to withstand the impact of an airliner full of fuel and no steel framed skyscraper has ever collapsed from fire alone. The weekend before the attack, the towers were put off limits to all tenants and were dark. That’s when the final explosives were rigged. Terrorists could not have done this.

All the steel used in the towers was certified by UL labs that it would withstand fires at any possible range within a building. When the government agency NIST came up with the false theory that the fires softened the steel trusses which then sagged and broke free from their supports, creating a pancake collapse of one floor upon another, Kevin Ryan of the UL subsidiary in Indiana which tested and certified the steel, protested up the chain of command about the government’s story. He said the theory about softening and sagging steel couldn’t be true, because they tested it before construction to even higher temperatures and the steel didn’t sag. He was upset with the UL hierarchy for accepting the government claim even while reaffirming that all the steel had been certified for fire by UL. When UL rebuffed him, he went public with his concerns and was fired. Here’s his story via the excellent Corbett Report.

Evidence of Explosives: Explosions in the basement were documented by the janitor before the planes hit. As a result, windows of the lobby (as recorded in videos by firefighters) were blown out in the south tower even before it started to collapse.

Video of the television antennas on top of the roof showed the center of the roof where the 47 central columns of massive steel resided starts to descend slightly before the outside structure—that could only have been done by cutting charges or Thermite charges on these columns, not an airplane impacting one side of the building.

Video of the south tower collapse shows the top portion tilting over about 20 degrees as the collapse starts and then stops tilting and comes straight down—which could only happen if all resistance to the tilting moment was removed by explosives. A pancaking collapse of one floor after another (the official version) would always show resistance, and the top of the tower would have kept tilting over.

Molten steel was seen pouring out of the building before collapse, yet none of the fuel or material fires ever approached a temperature close to softening, let alone melting steel. Experts suspect Thermite powder was used to melt the central columns, and chemical analysis of the dust from the collapse proves the presence of Thermite. Moreover, there were pools of molten metal under the rubble that burned for over a month after the collapse. Only Thermite could have produced this kind of extreme heat.

Dozens of firefighters heard progressive explosions going off inside the tower after the plane strikes, all below where the airplane struck. A pancaking collapse of successive floors would only make loud, non-explosive noises at the point of each collapse, not at other lower areas of the tower.

The Airliners: Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained the radar tapes from ATC showing the hijacked aircraft rendezvousing with other aircraft coming from the West Coast and trading places. This may explain why the plane that hit the South Tower had a large bulging modification on its belly that is clearly visible as it turns to hit the tower. I called Boeing and they did not deny the bulge, only that “we didn’t do the modification.” Terrorists couldn’t have done this. Besides, a pilot always does a walkaround the plane prior to accepting it. He would have noticed this huge bulge had this been the plane that took off from Boston. It wasn’t. The switch meant that both planes were probably remote controlled. Terrorists couldn’t have done that either.

Flight 77 which flew into the Pentagon did a “magic turn” that would have torn the wings off a normal airliner and far exceeded the speed limits of a Boeing 757. Experts say it had to have been a specially modified plane under remote control. Terrorists couldn’t have done that. No experienced pilot could have flown that profile, let alone an amateur with a private license for small planes.

One key witness said he saw the plane crash into the Pentagon but “the wall held up like a champ” —meaning that it did NOT penetrate. But then, he said, the entire plane exploded, explaining why only confetti sized pieces were scattered around the parking lot. A bomb in the baggage compartment would have left major pieces of wreckage. A total destruction of the plane, including main wing spars could only have happened if the plane was pre-loaded with explosives everywhere, including the wings, which hijackers couldn’t have done.

All surveillance camera videos in surrounding businesses that could pick up the crash were picked up by FBI agents minutes after the crash. How did they know where to confiscate videos unless the government had prior knowledge and didn’t want these videos to show what really happened?

The one video from the Pentagon parking lot does show what looks like a missile launch plume of smoke from under the wing (which terrorist couldn’t have done), and the resulting explosion visible on the video shows a huge white flash followed by the more common red and black smoke of burning jet fuel. Only high explosives make a white flash—never jet fuel. Military people at the Pentagon said when they exited the building they distinctly smelled cordite—a type of explosive used in bombs and some missiles.

Another proof that a missile put a hole into the Pentagon wall prior to the crash is not only that the missile made four consecutive 12 ft. round holes in the reinforced walls of the Pentagon rings (which a crashing airliner couldn’t do), but that half the airliner’s fiberglass radar dome was found intact inside the pentagon. That could only have happened if there was a hole in the wall before the airplane hit. Had the radome hit a solid intact wall, the dome would have been obliterated.

As for Flight 93, ATC recordings show controllers asking other airliners in the area if they can get a radio response to Flight 93 since it had stopped answering ATC calls. One United Pilot said he had it in sight, and heard over his radio a hijacker warning the passengers that this was a hijacking and that a bomb was on board (confusing the transmit button with the intercom). He then saw an explosion on board, but the plane did not go down. That explains why luggage was found miles away from Shanksville. At least one witness claims to have seen the damaged airliner land at Cleveland, Ohio and saw it being put into the NASA hangar there.

The Passengers: Nobody knows what happened to the passengers or where the hijacked airliners were taken, except for Flight 93, which never actually crashed in Shanksville. The coroner sent there could find no bodies and pictures show almost no wreckage, no engines, no seats, and no discernable airline parts.

We probably will never know how the passengers were taken away but they must be dead because it would be too difficult to keep them in hiding for 20 years, and to what purpose? A Deep State that would kill over 3000 in the Twin Towers has no regard for human life.

One clue is the faked call from one of the flight attendants describing the hijacking of flight 93, with no airplane noise in the background. At the end of her call you can hear someone whisper to her “good job, good job,” as if she is being coached into reading a script.

The Faked Telephone Calls: As for the famous “let’s roll” cellphone call that formed the basis of the story that people stormed the cockpit, that also had to be faked. No cellphones work at altitudes above 8-10,000 feet as cellphone antennas are horizontally oriented. They may under rare conditions connect for a few seconds, but not for a steady 30 minutes as claimed. That’s why the government wouldn’t let the public have access to the tape for analysis.

The supposed call from Barbara Olson, the solicitor general’s wife, on Flight 77 also was impossible. According to Ted Olson, she didn’t have a cell phone or a credit card and yet he claimed she called collect from a passenger seat back phone. You can’t call collect from these phones. They only activate via a credit card.

Building 7: For most people, the collapse of Building 7 is the most obvious lie in the official story—that it came down uniformly just like in a controlled demolition because of a minor fire in one corner of the building. One piece of evidence of government foreknowledge is that the BBC reported on the collapse at 5pm, well before the actual demolition at 5:21 PM. The woman reporting the news did so live and with a view of building 7 still standing behind her. —An incredible slip up.

Architects and Engineers for 9/11Truth found hundreds of engineers that agree that minor fires could not bring down such a building. The NIST falsified their computer models to meet the official story.

Some of these professionals subsequently joined forces with the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) in releasing the draft report of “a four-year computer modeling study of WTC 7’s collapse conducted by researchers in the university’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. The UAF WTC 7 report concludes that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was caused not by fire but rather by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” –In other words, controlled demolition.

First responders around and in the building testified that they were told to get out because the building was going to be “pulled”—common language used in a controlled demolition. Muslim terrorists could not have set such charges.

Mayor Rudy Giuliani had his emergency command center in building 7 and was told it was going to be pulled, so he evacuated all his people. Many NY firefighters hate him to this day because he didn’t warn first responders in the twin towers to evacuate when he knew about the explosive charges placed in all 3 buildings. One NY employee was called to go to the command center in building 7 but found it empty with warm coffee cups still on desks. As he was exiting, explosions started going off, and he barely made it out before the collapse.

Robert Mueller as FBI director at the time was deeply involved in the coverup of 9/11. A new lawsuit alleges that Mueller played a key role. Tea Party 247 has the story:

One of the biggest lies the left has pushed during the Trump era is that former FBI Director and special counsel Robert Mueller is some kind of paragon of justice and decency. Far from it. It turns out, however, that he’s been covering up for crooked deep state plots for a long, long time.

According to a new report from the New York Post’s Paul Sperry, Mueller participated in a coverup of Saudi Arabia’s role in the 9/11 terror attacks, which has been revealed in a new lawsuit by 9/11 victims.

Sperry claims that Mueller stonewalled after FBI agents uncovered evidence of “multiple, systemic efforts by the Saudi government to assist the hijackers in the lead-up to the 9/11 attacks,” while the former FBI director allegedly “covered up evidence pointing back to the Saudi Embassy and Riyadh — and may have even misled Congress about what he knew.”

“He was the master when it came to covering up the kingdom’s role in 9/11,” said Sharon Premoli, a survivor of September 11th who was pulled out of the rubble at the World Trade Center and is now suing Saudi Arabia.

“In October of 2001, Mueller shut down the government’s investigation after only three weeks, and then took part in the Bush [administration’s] campaign to block, obfuscate and generally stop anything about Saudi Arabia from being released,” she added.

“Any letting the Saudis off the hook came from the White House,” said former Agent Mark Rossini, adding “I can still see that photo of Bandar and Bush enjoying cigars on the balcony of the White House two days after 9/11.”

Sperry, who spoke with multiple FBI case agents, lists a series of incidents which describe Mueller as “throwing up roadblocks” in front of his own investigators – “making it easier for Saudi suspects to escape questioning.” And, according to the lawsuit, Mueller “deep-sixed what evidence his agents did manage to uncover.”

From the New York Post:

1. Time and again, agents were called off from pursuing leads back to the kingdom’s embassy in Washington, as well as its consulate in Los Angeles, where former FBI Agent Stephen Moore headed a 9/11 task force looking into local contacts made by two of the 15 Saudi hijackers, Moore testified in an affidavit for the 9/11 lawsuit.

He concluded that “diplomatic and intelligence personnel of Saudi Arabia knowingly provided material support to the two hijackers and facilitated the 9/11 plot.” Yet he and his team were not allowed to interview them, according to the suit.

2. In Washington, former FBI Agent John Guandolo, who worked terror cases out of the bureau’s DC office, said then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar “should have been treated as a terrorist suspect” for giving money to a woman who funded two of the 9/11 hijackers. But he was never questioned either, Guandolo said.

3. Instead, Mueller obliged what Guandolo called an “outrageous request” from Bandar within days of the attacks to help evacuate from the country dozens of Saudi officials, including at least one Osama bin Laden relative on the terror watch list.

Mueller assured their safe passage to planes, using agents as personal escorts, according to FBI documents obtained by Judicial Watch. Agents who should have been interrogating the Saudis instead acted as their bodyguards.

4. In 2002, Mueller prevented agents from arresting the Saudi-sponsored al Qaeda cleric who privately counseled the Saudi hijackers, said Raymond Fournier, an agent with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in San Diego at the time. “He was responsible for vacating the arrest warrant for Anwar al-Awlaki for passport fraud,” Fournier said.

He even ordered agents who detained the fiend at JFK to release him into the custody of a “Saudi representative,” Fournier said. The FBI closed their investigation of Awlaki, who was allowed to leave the US on a Saudi plane. “Shortly thereafter, the Fort Hood shooting occurred and Awlaki’s fingerprints were all over that incident,” said former FBI Agent Michael Biasello, who helped work the Texas terror case.

5. At the same time, Mueller removed a veteran agent from investigating a tip that an adviser to the Saudi royal family had met with some of the Saudi hijackers at his home in Sarasota, Fla., effectively killing the case, according to the lawsuit. The home was suddenly abandoned two weeks before 9/11.

6. Mueller even tried to shut down a congressional investigation into the Saudi hijackers and their contacts in LA and San Diego, said Bob Graham, who led the joint inquiry as Senate Intelligence Committee chair. “The strongest objections” to his staff investigators visiting FBI offices there came from the FBI director himself, said Graham, in a 2017 interview with Harper’s magazine.

Among other things, Mueller refused their demands to question a paid FBI informant who roomed with the hijackers and even moved him to a safe house where they couldn’t find him, Graham said. Mueller, with the White House, redacted 28 pages detailing Saudi-9/11 ties from the congressional report.

7. He also gave testimony to Congress that was, at the very least, misleading. In an October 2002 closed-door hearing, Mueller claimed he found out about Saudi-9/11 connections only as a result of the joint inquiry’s investigative work: “[S]ome facts came to light here and to me, frankly, that had not come to light before.” Only, Moore said he gave Mueller “daily” briefings on such connections in 2001.

Mueller also testified the hijackers “contacted no known terrorist sympathizers in the United States,” even though the FBI’s own case files showed they had contact with at least 14 terrorist suspects and sympathizers in the US prior to 9/11, including some working for the Saudi government. (In later testimony, he tried to walk this back, insisting he “had no intent to mislead.”)

“He’s a villain, and an arrogant one to boot,” said former FBI agent Mark Wauck, who called Mueller a “servant of the deep state.”

Mueller did many other things to obstruct justice for 9/11 victims, but the coverup of the Saudi’s role demands close scrutiny. I believe the reason the government shielded the Saudis from prosecution is that the Saudis were more deeply involved than just supporting a few of the patsy hijackers while in San Diego. I call them patsies because they weren’t the real hijackers. They were the ones to take the blame.

The real hijackers had to have been trained on real airliners, and that probably happened in Saudi Arabia. The sending of false hijackers to flight schools was just a cover to divert the public from looking for the real hijacker and their training partners.

Conclusions: I can come to no other conclusion than that this was a Deep State black operation to create a phony war on terror used to justify the erosion of our civil rights and trigger the numerous overthrow of other nations we have witnessed.

I also believe VP Dick Cheney was a knowing collaborator in all this, having been President George W. Bush’s “handler” behind the scenes. Bush was sent out of town to an elementary school in Florida so that Cheney could take over the Situation Room in the White House and control this attack. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta was present in the room and heard Cheney tell a young panicky Air Force aid several times as flight 77 was approaching the Pentagon that “the orders (to NOT shoot it down) still stand.” Mineta’s testimony was expunged from the 9/11 Commission so the public wouldn’t know of Cheney’s role in prohibiting the shoot down of flight 77.

From my abbreviated list above, you can see how many times I noted that “terrorists couldn’t have done this.” They had no way to plant sophisticated explosives throughout the 3 WTC buildings, nor modify a major airliner, nor load one with explosives or hang a missile on its wing. Only the Deep State could have done technical things like this or gain access to airliners and buildings under tight security.

The entire 9/11 commission was as controlled as the several JFK investigations by government, desperate to deny government involvement. They hid evidence, failed to follow up on whistleblower testimony, and later admitted that their hands were tied. By whom? The terrorists? -hardly. Once again, only government had reason to coverup all that happened because this was a government black operation.

SPIES IN THE WHITE HOUSE

While Special FBI investigator John Durham pretends to be investigating FBI spying in the Trump White House, others already know who they were. The Gateway Pundit reports that,

This week the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) filed a FOIA lawsuit against the FBI on Wednesday seeking documents about two ‘spies’ former Director James Comey sent into the White House to gather information on Trump.

The ACLJ, which is run by Trump’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow is seeking all of Comey’s emails from April 1, 2016 to May 31, 2017… The ACLJ filed the FOIA lawsuit after Real Clear Investigations reporter Paul Sperry released a report about Comey’s covert agent inside of the White House.

According to investigative reporter Paul Sperry, James Comey was running a “counterintelligence assessment” on Trump on the sly. Comey didn’t even need to keep files or get surveillance warrants on Trump, he may just have covertly made Trump the subject of investigation by spying on him incidentally.

Comey’s agent inside the White House, Anthony Ferrante, was reporting back to the FBI about Trump and his aides, sources tell Paul Sperry… Sekulow on Monday reported on the second FBI operative Jordan Rae Kelly who replaced Comey spy Anthony Ferrante.

FBI operative Jordan Rae Kelly (a woman) took over for Ferrante and gave him access inside the Trump White House after he left government to work for BuzzFeed. She had worked with Mueller at the FBI prior. She is signing security logs so that Ferrante can come back into the White house while working on contract for Buzzfeed to try and verify the false Steele dossier. Jordan Rae Kelly eventually joined Ferrante’s consulting firm.

 

Anthony Ferrante left the WH about the same time Comey was fired. (April 2017). He was hired from the FBI as an expert in cyber security for the NSC, but Comey created a special “reserve status” at the FBI for Ferrante so he could come back and forth to headquarters, retaining all security clearances.

Sekulow speculates that there’s yet another spy, Tachina Gohar Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Intelligence. I have no doubt that there will always be Deep State spies reporting on everything Trump does.

 

TRUMP FIRES NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR JOHN BOLTON

After months of wrangling and debating with everyone in the White House, including the President, John Bolton was summarily fired this week by president Trump. He was at odds with the president on three or four current issues which clashed with Trump’s slow morph into a peacemaker. The president wanted to invite the Taliban to Camp David for talks, which everyone in the White House, including Bolton, thought inappropriate. Trump did not want US military intervention in Venezuela which Bolton pushed for. Trump was open to reducing sanctions on Iran in order to get a meeting with President Rouhani, which sent Bolton into a tizzy. And then there was Bolton’s strong opposition to Trump’s rosy eyed view of Kim Jong-un who continues to fool Trump into believing he is sincere about denuclearization. In short, Bolton has a one-sided opinion of using American military dominance that is hostile toward any nation which has differences with the US. Sometimes Bolton was right and sometimes wrong. And Trump, being under fire constantly by the media, has a powerful desire to make peace everywhere thinking somehow the establishment will begin to praise him. But that will never happen. The problem is that neither Trump nor Bolton has a consistent set of principles or criteria in which to justify their one sided policies either for or against war, and that is why they are sometimes both right and wrong. They were bound to clash.

In studying Bolton’s background I became convinced that he really is not a neocon, even though he seems obsessed with going to war. True neo-conservatives like Irving Kristol or Jean Kirkpatrick came from the Left (big government, pro-abortion, etc.) and suddenly turn “conservative” on military intervention—as if following the appearance of being “strong on defense.”

In reality, they all favor some form of democratic socialism and globalist control as per the UN. They only switch to the political “right” in order to take advantage of conservative pro-military and patriotic fervor so they can channel that toward globalist intervention. These foreign wars need a strong justification, hence the “New Pearl Harbor” events of 9/11 all engineered by the Deep State. This horrific event has been used to demonize any Muslim country in their sights and justified the military intervention against them.

But Bolton has never been on the Left. In college he chaired a Students For Goldwater campaign in 1964. He went to work for, and became a protégé of, conservative North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms. Bolton has never liked the UN because it infringed upon US sovereignty—unlike a globalist, who actively works to undermine national sovereignty. He always had a disdain for international organizations like the International Criminal Court, which is also at odds with any other globalist. Bolton said the decision to pull out of the ICC was the “happiest moment” of his political life.

But somewhere during his tenure in government he picked up an aggressive attitude about America setting everything right in the world through military power. It is like he became imbued with the notion that he could use American military power to take down any regime he didn’t like—not because he had bought into the secret conspiracy of either the neocons or globalists, but out of some personal desire to wield a big stick vicariously through government.

This may explain why he could fit in with the gang of conspiracy neocons who drafted the Project for the New American Century (PNAC Report) that called for a “new pearl harbor” to justify a romp through the world. He was a director of the Project, but has always insisted, with great disdain, that he is not a neocon.

The following statement he made about the UN also hints at his allegiance to the big stick of US power: In 1994, he stated, “There is no United Nations. There is an international community that occasionally can be led by the only real power left in the world, and that’s the United States, when it suits our interests and when we can get others to go along.”

That is a pretty arrogant statement, and shows a rather casual disdain for others’ views. Let’s look at Bolton’s views as a foreign policy hawk to see how they align or are at odds with globalist policies to antagonize the world and set the US up as the “bully of the world” (to help justify eventual Russian and Chinese attacks).

Bolton has advocated for the overthrow of various regimes around the world—not only radical communist regimes like Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea, but much less dangerous regimes like Iran, Syria, Lybia and Yemen.

The globalists have long advocated detente with communist regimes, which their predecessors in WWI and II actually brought to power for future conflict creation purposes. So Bolton’s attempts to go after Venezuela and NK militarily do not match the current globalist agenda.

But his push for attacking Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Iran do coincide with current globalist objectives. Libya was attacked not because Muammar Gaddafi was an evil leader (he used most of his oil wealth to aid his people) but because the globalists wanted to turn the nation into chaos and ship thousands of the resultant rebels into Syria as terrorists—the same reason for the color revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia.

They want Syria out of the way so Israel can attack Iran without fear of reprisals. Although Syria has been very much weakened through the US importation of foreign terrorists, the Russians have kept the US from overthrowing Assad or his military. The globalists want rebel Yemen destroyed because the Iranian backed Houthi rebels overthrew the globalist puppet president Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi that was helping the US arm and supply terrorists in Syria.

The globalists want Iran destroyed because it is the only Muslim nation that is nearly self-sufficient in weapons production and is using that military power to counter US backed terrorism. As I have long written, Iran is NOT the largest sponsor of terror in the world—it is the largest counter force to US backed terror—an evil alliance of the US Deep State with the Israeli Mossad and the corrupt royal family of Saudi Arabia.

This is one of those cases where Trump’s peace overtures could avoid a war the globalists are desperate to start. This week, the White House began making preparations for a Trump meeting with Iranian president Rouhani this month in New York coinciding with the annual United Nations General Assembly beginning the week of Sept. 23. Iran wants Trump to make a gesture of sincerity by reducing some sanctions, and Trump is mulling it over. Bolton was angered at the possibility but oil prices declined over the possibilities of reduced hostilities with Iran.

Bolton and his “America first in military power” ideas would probably still be around today if not for his abrasive and argumentative personality. Trump likes yes-men, and even though all his other globalist advisors work to oppose Trump’s good ideas, they do so respectfully. Bolton came on too strong and wouldn’t let go. Trump could only handle so much of that.

Trump was particularly angered by Bolton’s push back on North Korea. Rightly convinced that Kim Jong-un was playing Trump for a fool and lying about his intent to disarm, Bolton kept embarrassing the president in staff meetings where it was obvious Bolton didn’t share any of Trump’s naive beliefs about Kim’s promises.

Even though Bolton was absolutely correct to bring up the Libyan criteria to Trump regarding NK (Bolton said, he “hopes Trump will follow the Libya model in demanding that North Korea give up its nuclear weapons,” and that it could be a “very short meeting” if Kim refuses), it was a stupid remark given that the US invaded Libya anyway, showing that the US wasn’t really making a legitimate offer, but had ulterior motives in attacking.

Trump acknowledged to the press that Bolton was a “tough guy,” and noted that he was a supporter of the United States invasion of Iraq in the Bush administration. That’s the wrong kind of “tough” when you invade a country on false pretenses. Trump said, “That’s not a question of being tough, that’s a question of being not smart saying something like that” –referring to the Libya comment.

Trump also objected to Bolton’s insistence on overthrowing Venezuela with covert and even overt tactics. The president said, “I disagreed with John Bolton on his attitudes on Venezuela. I thought he was way out of line and I think I’ve proven to be right,” he said.

I don’t know what Bolton was suggesting for Venezuela, but I personally think the Maduro government did cheat to get reelected and deserved to be undermined in some way—short of a shooting war that may harm innocent civilians. An arms embargo would be appropriate as would a covert program to arm the opposition. Venezuela, like Cuba, has banned the private ownership of weapons and engaged in confiscation.

Trump also criticized Bolton for failing to get along with other members of his administration. The president claimed, “He’s somebody that I actually had a very good relationship with, but he wasn’t getting along with people in the administration who I consider very important.” I don’t believe the part about getting along with Trump. Saying so, is a form of bragging, but Bolton had to have challenged Trump many times, which Trump doesn’t like.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson celebrated John Bolton’s firing as “great news for America.” But Carlson was wrong for saying Bolton was a ‘man of the left’ because he believed in the “brute force of government.” Bolton was a conservative who loved the use of military power.

Bolton was against Trump’s pullout in Afghanistan, but Trump insisted in holding talks with the Taliban anyway. He had secretly invited Taliban representatives to Camp David in the US but canceled after a Taliban suicide bombing in Kabul that killed 14 and wounded 145. An agreement had been reached this week for a partial pullout of 5,000 US troops in exchange for a stand down in hostilities but the deal fell apart after the attack.

Here is what you must know about the Taliban. It is NOT a top down military organization which follows orders from the top. In fact, it is a loosely organized military force that supplies dozens of smaller independent groups that carry out their own attacks. Even though the bomber was a Taliban member, it is doubtful that the high leadership of the Taliban would have authorized an attack that scuttled the peace talks. It was done by a small faction, that may well have been infiltrated by US Deep State terrorists, opposed to the pullout of US troops. Remember that the US Deep State runs several ISIS cells within Afghanistan, and all of ISIS is a US Deep State creation.

Personally, I’m pleased that Bolton is out. While perhaps not a globalist, he certainly had to buy into all the false intelligence being given Trump about Iran’s intentions and Syria’s use of chemical weapons on its own people—done, in fact, by US backed terrorists. His excessive desire to see the US military forces used against so many nations played into the hands of the globalists even if he wasn’t one of them.

The big question now is, will Trump have the sense to replace Bolton with a real patriot who isn’t Deep State. I’m certain he will fail in this, just as he failed in all his other nominations. Trump, having never run in conservative circles doesn’t know who to pick and thus relies on his professional staff, who always recommends people who have been in the intelligence establishment—the Deep State.

I have never trusted Fox News commentator and frequent guest Sebastian Gorka—I think he is a plant within the movement. This week he suggested that Trump follow Richard Nixon’s example (who named Henry Kissinger to fill both the NSA slot and the Secretary of State position) and name Mike Pompeo to both positions. I hope Trump doesn’t do that. Gorka worked briefly for Trump but was fired for being too argumentative, like Bolton.

Pompeo has been nothing but a yesman to the globalists and would do twice as much damage in both major roles. But Pompeo is considering a run for the US Senate in his home state of Kansas, so we will see which job he wants more.

Trump is also considering current Ambassador to Germany Ric Grenell, who will have dinner with him at the White House on Saturday. That is not a good move either as Grenell is openly gay and the longest serving spokesman for the UN, so he has to be a globalist too. There are, apparently, five candidates Trump is considering.