MSNBC terrorism analyst Malcolm Nance has deleted a tweet that appeared to call for a terrorist attack against Trump Towers in Istanbul.
“This is my nominee for the first ISIS suicide bombing of a Trump property,” the former intelligence officer tweeted Tuesday afternoon, according to a screenshot circulated online and highlighted by the Washington Free Beacon.
Mr. Nance was responding to a tweet by writer Dustin Giebel, claiming that Mr. Trump’s congratulatory call to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for winning Sunday’s referendum was motivated by reasons tied to the property.
Mr. Nance has since deleted the tweet but has yet to apologize.
The author and counterterrorism expert has made inflammatory remarks about Mr. Trump and the Islamic State terrorist group in the past. Last July, Mr. Nance referred to the then-Republican nominee as the “ISIS candidate.”
“He inflames the passions of people in the West to perform Islamophobia, to draw recruits to them, to make them say, ‘This is what America is,’” he said at the time.
Mr. Nance also suggested that the San Bernardino terrorist attack may have been “a hybrid act of terrorism/workplace violence,” and that the Pulse nightclub terrorist, Omar Mateen, was motivated by a “psycho sexual problem” rather than ISIS, Newsbusters reported.
By Aaron Klein
Evelyn Farkas, a former top Obama administration official, has denied that she had access to inside information when she made remarks as a contributor to MSNBC last month that seemed to acknowledge efforts by members of the Obama administration to collect intelligence on Donald Trump and members of his 2016 presidential campaign.
However, the news media has largely failed to note that on February 16, about two weeks prior to her statements on MSNBC, Farkas revealed in an interview that she was “getting winks and hints from inside that there was something really wrong here” – referring to Trump officials’ alleged ties to Russia. She stated that she was “first made aware of all this stuff” during the summer.
On March 2, Farkas stated on MSNBC that she told former Obama administration colleagues to collect intelligence on Trump and campaign officials.
“I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill, it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can, get as much intelligence as you can, before President Obama leaves the administration,” stated Farkas.
Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left, so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy … that the Trump folks – if they found out how we knew what we knew about their … the Trump staff dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods, meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.
After her remarks resurfaced and were subsequently used by the White House to bolster the charge that Trump was under illicit surveillance during the campaign, Farkas gave interviews denying that she had any inside information when she made those comments to MSNBC.
She told the Daily Caller last week that she had no access to any intelligence. “I had no intelligence whatsoever, I wasn’t in government anymore and didn’t have access to any,” she said.
Speaking to the Washington Post, Farkas denied being a source of any leaks.
The Post reported:
Farkas, in an interview with The Post, said she “didn’t give anybody anything except advice,” was not a source for any stories and had nothing to leak. Noting that she left government in October 2015, she said, “I was just watching like anybody else, like a regular spectator” as initial reports of Russia contacts began to surface after the election.
Farkas was asked by Klein about her “level of alarm after the resignation of Michael Flynn,” who stepped down in February as Trump’s national security adviser.
Regarding her “level of alarm,” Farkas replied:
It’s lower than it’s been since the summer, when I was first made aware of all this stuff. I’m like, finally, everybody else sees it! Seriously.
The reason I was so upset last summer was that I was getting winks and hints from inside that there was something really wrong here. I was agitated because I knew the Clinton campaign and the world didn’t know. But I didn’t think it would happen this fast. I didn’t think Flynn would survive a year, but I thought it would be most of the year.
The fact that Flynn is gone is constructive from the perspective of US foreign policy. He was getting it wrong on combating terrorism and Russia. So I feel relieved that he will not be whispering his policy prescriptions in the president’s ear.
On the bigger issue, the intelligence community, the bureaucracy, patriotic Americans, and some members of Congress are making it impossible for the White House to sweep whatever they are trying to hide under the rug. And the White House is clearly trying to hide something, or the president would have said, on day one, that he would support the investigations that began under his predecessor.
This past week, Breitbart News first reported that at a conference last October, held two weeks before the presidential election, Farkas predicted that if Trump won the presidency he would “be impeached pretty quickly or somebody else would have to take over government.”
Breitbart News also first reported that at the same conference, Farkas warned that more must be done to counter the forces of nationalism and populism that have been entering the mainstream with the rise of Trump and nationalist movements across Europe.
Farkas currently serves as a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, which takes a hawkish approach toward Russia and has released numerous reports and briefs about Russian aggression.
The Council is funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc., the U.S. State Department and NATO ACT. Another Council funder is the Ploughshares Fund, which in turn has received financing from billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.
Farkas serves on the Atlantic Council alongside Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder of CrowdStrike, the third-party company utilized by the FBI to make its assessment about alleged Russian hacking into the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Alperovitch is a nonresident senior fellow of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council.
Last month, FBI Director James Comey confirmed that his agency never had direct access to the DNC’s servers to confirm the hacking. “Well, we never got direct access to the machines themselves,” he stated. “The DNC in the spring of 2016 hired a firm that ultimately shared with us their forensics from their review of the system.”
National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers also stated the NSA never asked for access to the DNC hardware: “The NSA didn’t ask for access. That’s not in our job.”
“if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for.”
April 8, 2017
On Friday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “The Last Word,” anchor Lawrence O’Donnell stated that “if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for.” O’Donnell then floated a theory that Putin told Syria’s Bashar al-Assad to launch a small chemical attack that was big enough to attract media attention and prompt President Trump into launching a missile strike, which would then change the subject from Russian influence.
O’Donnell said, “[W]ouldn’t it be nice if it was just completely, totally, absolutely impossible to suspect that Vladimir Putin orchestrated what happened in Syria this week so that his friend in the White House could have a big night, with missiles, and all of the praise he’s picked up over the last 24 hours? Wouldn’t it be so nice if you couldn’t even in your wildest dreams imagine a scenario like that?”
He added, “I don’t know what it is. Is it a 2% chance? Is it a 50% chance? Is — I don’t know. But what — I don’t think it’s a 0% chance, and it used to be, with every other president prior to Donald Trump.”
O’Donnell further stated, “Well, when Bill Clinton fired missiles during his presidency, Republicans questioned that. They questioned whether that was to distract attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and that was a legitimate question.”
O’Donnell later added, “It’s perfect, just perfect. I wish it wasn’t. If Vladimir Putin, if, if, if Vladimir Putin masterminded the last week in Syria, he has gotten everything he could have asked for. Vladimir Putin was essentially the man in charge of making sure that Syria got rid of all of its chemical weapons under a deal with the Obama administration.
And so it makes perfect sense to question whether President Bashar al-Assad would have checked with his most important patron, Vladimir Putin, before using chemical weapons that Vladimir Putin was supposed to have helped get rid of. It would be terribly embarrassing to Vladimir Putin if President Assad had exposed Vladimir Putin as having completely failed to get rid of those chemical weapons. You wouldn’t want to be Bashar al-Assad in a conversation with Vladimir Putin after that, unless you had a conversation with him before that. Unless Vladimir Putin said, ‘I have an idea. go ahead, do a small chemical attack, nothing like the big ones you’ve done in the past, just big enough to attract media attention. So that my friend in the White House will see it on TV. And then, Donald Trump can fire some missiles at Syria, that’ll do no real damage, and then the American news media will change the subject from Russian influence in the Trump campaign and the Trump transition and the Trump White House.’ It’s perfect.”
He continued, “For most of the news media, it changes the conventional wisdom about the dynamic between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. President Trump has finally dared to do something that Vladimir Putin doesn’t like. It changes everything. As long as you never, never question whether Vladimir Putin wanted all of this to happen this week. And when you question that and you look at what has happened, it’s always worth remembering that if Vladimir Putin really does have ways, known or unknown to Donald Trump, to influence Donald Trump, then every day that is a good day for President Trump is a good day for President Putin. Now not one word that I’ve just said could possibly have been said about any president prior to Donald Trump.”
O’Donnell further said, “you will hear opinion in this hour that is counter to the possible scenario that I have just outlined, but what you won’t hear is proof that that scenario that I’ve just outlined is impossible.”
O’Donnell did say that he raised this scenario “without assigning a statistical probability to it. I don’t know what it is. I just know that it’s not zero, and it should be zero. It has been zero with every previous president. But when you look at the way the events have unfolded this week, Donald Trump could not have asked for a better end of the week, for his presidency as he sees it.”
During the panel discussion that took place after O’Donnell’s monologue, he did concede that it did make sense to notify Russia in advance of the strike to avoid further escalation.
By Jeff Poor
Wednesday for his show’s “Opening Monologue,” Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity took aim at NBC News a day after Rachel Maddow, host of MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show,” released President Donald Trump’s 2005 taxes.
Hannity categorized Maddow’s effort as being part of what he called “the alt-left propaganda media” and offered other examples in addition to Maddow of attacks on Trump.
Partial transcript as follows:
NBC’s corporate jihad against President Donald Trump continues. Plus, a new report from Circa News shows the investigation into a server connected to Donald Trump was, in fact, a politically motivated hit job pushed by a big-time Hillary Clinton donor. By the way, that’s tonight’s “Opening Monologue.”
All right, NBC has now hit a new low by releasing the president’s tax returns, or a small portion of them, last night. But what we’re seeing from the alt left propaganda destroy Donald Trump media — it’s not new.
Now that Donald Trump occupies the Oval Office, the opposition party press is going to new extremes and lows to try and take down his presidency, and they won’t stop until he’s out of office. Now, I’ve been saying since 2008 right here on this program journalism is dead. Now it’s in the ground, buried, flowers on top. And last night’s political hit job by NBC is just the latest example in the media’s long list of attacks against the president. Here’s just a small sampling.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Here you have a deranged president, or a pathologically lying president, lying about the operations of the American government and lying about the previous president of the United States. That’s enough to invoke the 25th Amendment, but Mike Pence and the cabinet are not there yet.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When he said today “America first,” it was not just a racial — I mean, I shouldn’t say racial, the Hitlerian background to it…
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I understand why so many people voted for him. I understand where you were coming from. I understand why you liked him. But this man is lying to you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Trump’s critics, those who are worried about this president and this White House, saw a live special television event brought to you by narcissism, thin skin, chaos and deeply personal grievances.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This was a whitelash. This was a whitelash against a changing country. It was a whitelash against a black president in part. And that’s the part where the pain comes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a really sad night. I’m just going to say it. This is a very sad night for the country. You can’t polish this turd.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don’t know — are you using the word lie or falsehood? What are you — what are you…
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, I think you have use — the word — the word — you have to call it what it is.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was interesting because I saw Sean Spicer on FOX News, and he said that you were rude. And I thought…
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What if you had called him a fake president?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HANNITY: Beyond awful. And when the alt left propaganda media isn’t doing what you just saw and attacking the integrity and mental health of the president, well, they’re running wild all kinds of bizarre conspiracy theories about the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians. Now, what the biased press refuses to tell you — there is zero — no evidence whatsoever that shows any kind of collusion.
Well, that didn’t stop the leader of the alt-left propaganda media, Rachel Maddow herself, from going off the deep end last night, claiming that in 2005, a Russian oligarch knew that Donald Trump was going to be president, so he bought a property from him in Florida and Trump made a huge profit, more than two times what he paid for it!
And as I said last night, Maddow thinks that somehow, maybe Russia knew in 2005 that Donald Trump would be elected president in 2016. Unfortunately, NBC News didn’t think that was possible even on election night. Now, that’s pretty pathetic, and the media should know better, but they’d rather put their radical left-wing agenda than telling the truth to the American people. That’s why they never vetted Obama. That’s why they colluded with Hillary.