The US Navy has confirmed that a mysterious plane spotted circling over Denver for at least an hour on Wednesday was one of its fleet – but says details of its mission are classified.
The presence of the military plane in the Denver skies caught the attention of many planespotters curious to find out why the large aircraft was hanging over the city in a holding pattern.
Local news outlet Denver7 tracked flight IRON99 as it traveled from the west coast to Oklahoma. The plane eventually landed at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma city after an hour loitering above Denver.
The news station’s initial attempts to find where the plane originated proved fruitless as officials from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM), North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and a dozen Air Force Bases could not confirm the flight.
The next day, however, the Navy confirmed that the mysterious aircraft was in fact one of its E-6B Mercury planes, known as the ‘Doomsday plane’, and was simply returning to its homebase.
These planes, created by Boeing at a cost of $141.7 million per unit, have the capability to launch nuclear missiles and communicate with nuclear submarines.
The overall mission of the E-6B is to provide “command, control and communications abilities between the National Command Authority (NCA) and U.S. strategic and non-strategic forces.”
The US Navy has a total of 16 of these powerful military aircraft in its fleet.
No further details of this particular mission were disclosed, however Denver7 reported that a high-ranking federal official, who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter, said the plane was involved in a classified training mission organized by the Department of Defense.
The officer claimed this was a multi-agency operation regarding electronic surveillance and that these training missions were not unusual, nor were they typically made known to the public.
A video of the incident shows the white four-engine plane glide across the Denver sky leaving lengthy contrails in its wake.
US President Barack Obama and EU leaders have agreed to keep anti-Russian sanctions in place for a further year over the situation in Ukraine.
President Obama, who is on his final official visit to Europe, met with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy, Spain and the UK on Friday.
Among the main topics on the agenda were extending sanctions against Russia, cooperation within the framework of NATO, the rise of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in Iraq and Syria, and possible new anti-Russian sanctions over Moscow’s actions in Syria.
￼Obama in Berlin: Russia is military superpower
“The leaders agreed on the necessity of working collectively to move the transatlantic agenda forward, particularly on bringing stabilization to the Middle East and North Africa, as well as securing diplomatic resolution to the conflicts in Syria and eastern Ukraine,” the White House said in the statement.
READ MORE: Russian sanctions cost Italy €7bn and up to 200,000 jobs – Italian MP
“The leaders also affirmed the importance of continued cooperation through multilateral institutions, including NATO,” the White House added.
Sanctions won’t stop Russia from improving its dialogue and ties with other countries, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.
“We [Russia] have never initiated sanctions. These [sanctions] don’t prevent us from building dialogue and continuing the dialogue on matters that are of interest to us, to Russia,” Peskov said.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and outgoing US President Obama are likely to talk informally on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific summit in the Peruvian capital of Lima, Peskov said on Friday.
“The two administrations have not agreed on any separate meetings, but we can assume that President Putin and President Obama will cross paths on the sidelines of the forum and will talk,” Peskov said.
READ MORE: EU’s dialogue with Russia should be ‘correct and pragmatic’ – Italian FM
Also on Friday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg gave a speech at an event hosted by the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), where he said that Europe and the United States “are close economic and trade partners” and mentioned potential threats for the alliance.
“Russia, breaking international law. Turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East. The refugee and migration crisis. International terrorism. Hybrid warfare. And cyber-attacks,” said Stoltenberg, listing the perceived dangers.
In an interview with RT, France’s French National Front party leader, Marine Le Pen, warned the world of the dangers ahead should Hillary be elected US President.
National Front party leader and 2017 French presidential frontrunner, Marine Le Pen, has not endorsed Donald Trump, but in an interview with RT her opinion regarding a Hillary Clinton Presidency, is as good as an endorsement for The Don.
For Le Pen, a Clinton Presidency would “not benefit” France, be “destructive” for Europe, and ultimately be a “danger to world peace.”
What could have Le Pen thinking such thoughts?
Maybe its Hillary’s diehard support for Bush’s Iraq war, or her husband’s dismantling of Yugoslavia and 72 day illegal bombing of Serbia.
Perhaps it’s Hillary’s mentor Madeleine Albright, who finds it necessary to kill 500,000 Iraqi children in the name of neo-liberal values. Maybe it’s gal pal Vitoria Nuland, and her neocon family ties, who oversaw the illegal coup in Ukraine and funded the civil war in East Ukraine.
Or maybe its Libya…who can forget Hillary’s Libya “success”.
“There is a candidate who appears a lot more dangerous for France than the others – that’s Hillary Clinton,” the head of the National Front told RT France in an exclusive interview. “I’m not American so I don’t need to make a choice. But…in the interests of France, Hillary Clinton is probably the worst choice out there.”
Le Pen sees the Democratic frontrunner as being so “dangerous” because of Clinton’s career as US Secretary of State, in which she worked “hand in hand with the full spectrum of American decisions” that eventually “plunged the world objectively into chaos.”
“I think if she was elected she would continue this policy, a destructive policy, a policy of conflict, a policy of imprisonment of Europe in blinded Atlanticism,” Le Pen said. “I think it’s a danger for world peace.”
There will be a total of 50,000 emails released in the lead up to November 8, according to WikiLeaks. So far, 35,594 have been published.
On Thursday, further discussion among the Clinton campaign of Bill Clinton’s controversial past was revealed, while Clinton adviser Neera Tanden branded the private email server debacle as “f**king insane.”
Speaking via telephone to a conference in Argentina on Wednesday, Julian Assange claimed the ongoing releases had “whipped up a crazed hornet’s nest atmosphere in the Hillary Clinton campaign.” Assange also claimed that the campaign had attempted to hack the WikiLeaks servers.
Israel is depressing
Clinton adviser Neera Tanden tells Podesta that “Israel is depressing” in a mail from March 18, 2015 titled ‘Man’.
“It’s a good lesson that the wing nuts are just ruthless in every country,” Tanden adds.
The right-wing Likud Party led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu won a surprise victory in national elections on the same day, handing him his fourth term in office and making him Israel’s longest-serving prime minister.
“Bad,” replies Podesta.
Someone has your password
In March 2016 Podesta is warned to change his email password “immediately” and “ensure that two-factor authentication is turned on” after Charles Delavan, a member of Clinton’s IT team, mails him warning that someone tried to access his account.
“It is absolutely imperative that this is done ASAP,” Delavan tells Podesta’s chief of staff Sara Latham in a second mail stressing the urgency of the issue.
A Google alert on the unauthorized login attempt shows its source as being in Ukraine.
Edward Snowden gang
“That’s your Edward Snowdon [sic] gang,” Podesta claims when advised of leaked emails from the Center for American Progress (CAP).
The mail was sent to Podesta by Herbert Sandler, founder of World Savings Bank, which was sold to Wachovia Bank in 2006.
He’s bad bad bad
In an email chain from February 2016, Clinton’s Jewish Outreach Director Sarah Bard mocks Bernie Sanders for his lack of following in Israel. She sends a link to a New York Times article which claims Sanders sought advice from an expert who accused Israel of having ties to a chemical attack.
Media mogul Haim Saban gives his two-cents on the topic, stating that “Bernie Sanders has a 25 year awful record on Israel,” before adding, “THIS is NOTHING.”
“Get your researchers to come up with some of the awful things these 2 (sic) have said about the US/Israel relationship, and you will have plenty of ammunition on the issue,” Saban goes on. “He’s bad bad bad.”
Bernie the megalomaniac
In a separate email to Podesta, Sanders is described as a “Megalomaniac” by philanthropist Philip Munger, who urges Clinton to turn her “financial connections from liability to asset”.
Just days ahead of the Iowa caucus in January 2016, Munger claims: “Bernie relying on charisma and revolution. Megalomaniac!”
Crap that young people pay attention to
In a February 2016 mail Podesta is given advise on Clinton’s campaign by marketing executive Wendy Bronfein, who tells him that Clinton “may not be the best face” to attract younger voters.
Instead she should utilize trending figures in her favor because “that’s the crap that young people pay attention to,”Bronfein says.
“I hate to generalize a generation but by social media nature, they ‘follow’. So if someone they identify as cool endorses – they will likely fall in line with that candidate.”
Bill Clinton’s “Saxophone moments” are praised by Bronfein as an example of “pop culture play”.
“It’s f**king dumb but being ‘cool’ counts for more than it maybe should,” Bronfein concludes.
Trump should win based on Hillary’s corruption alone
David G. Brown | Return of Kings – OCTOBER 27, 2016
The recent Wikileaks revelations about the Clintons, the Clinton campaign, media collusion, and the various hypocrisies of the Democratic Party are groundbreaking in both their scope and depth. The sheer number of hacked emails covering so many topics, combined with the shadiness of the activities involved, should have already handed Donald Trump the election.
Alas, the media, whose collusion with the Clinton campaign is laid out in many of the emails, will not have a bar of reporting them in a professional, ethical fashion. The following seven email exchanges have either been deliberately suppressed by mainstream outlets or given the slimmest coverage to feebly ward off accusations that they are in the de facto service (or pocket) of Hillary Clinton.
1. “Women’s advocate” Hillary Clinton admits that Saudi Arabia and Qatar fund ISIS, but refuses to rebuke them for it
After rounding on Donald Trump for very tamely calling former Miss Universe Alicia Machado “Miss Piggy,” one might think that Hillary Clinton has the interests of women at heart. Her admission that Saudi Arabia and Qatar fund female-enslaving ISIS tells another story. It is impossible to see that Trump has anything to answer for regarding women as is, not to mention when his record is contrasted with Hillary’s enabling of Saudi and Qatari behavior.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar practice their own intense forms of oppression against women and the Clinton email means that she is only too aware that they are exporting this oppression by financially backing ISIS. As will be explored below, the Clintons are arguably beholden to the Saudis and Qataris, who have given very large donations to the Clinton Foundation.
Meanwhile, what of the massive arms sales and other military support given to the Saudis and Gulf States? Why help arm those states which are funding ISIS?
2. John Podesta owned 75,000 shares in a Putin-linked company, despite he and Clinton criticizing the Trump campaign for its Russian connections
One mantra used by the Clinton campaign ad infinitum so far is that Donald Trump’s campaign is merely a slave movement for advancing the interests of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Democrats and journalists alike (wait, aren’t they the same thing?) have claimed that the Russian business ties of Trump and his associates are a national security risk should the Republican nominee be elected. So why was nothing said publicly of John Podesta’s ownership of 75,000 shares in Joule Unlimited? Joule had received millions in funds from a government-backed Russian fund and Podesta was on its executive board.
After all, remember Paul Manafort Jr., the national chairman of the Trump campaign? He moved on/was moved on after the liberal media continually attacked him for his alleged sympathies towards Russia. Especially due his former role as a lobbyist for the now ousted pro-Russian Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, commentators screamed that Manafort’s history was a liability. Moreover, Trump’s entire presidential campaign was likewise characterized as benefiting Putin more than America. The New York Times, Time and other outlets published a flurry of hit pieces centered on Manafort and his then boss, during the exact same period that the Clinton campaign was ramping up its “Russian collusion” angle against Trump.
And Podesta? Well, he gets a free ride.
3. “Anti-SJW” ex-politician and Heat Street head Louise Mensch wrote ad material for Hillary Clinton—so which other “conservatives” are doing similar things?
Louise Mensch is a former Conservative British MP exposed by Wikileaks for her outright collusion with the Clinton campaign. Though she had outed herself as a “never Trump” hacktivist long before this, her help in writing ad material for Hillary Clinton was surreptitious until more of the Podesta emails went public. Online publication Heat Street, which Mensch heads, has tried to make a name for itself in supposedly outing SJW lunacy and other leftist stupidities.
The question remains, is Mensch a cucked conservative or an outright political double agent? Perhaps, more opportunistically, she is a mere financial opportunist whose political allegiances are amenable to dollar signs. Heat Street pays her bills for now, but should Clinton win in November, could she be wanting a new, safer career? The leftist media milieu is pretty crowded at the moment; the ad material could be Mensch’s entry card to the media big time.
Whatever the case, Louise Mensch’s perverse game of anti-Trump conservatism by day and Hillary stooge by night is one others are undoubtedly resorting to as well. Many traitors to the conservative cause will not have been as reckless as Mensch, who left an easy paper trail in helping the Clinton campaign. Had their budding relationship turned sour, it could have been the DNC or Clinton’s campaign who outed her, not Wikileaks. So how many of the chat-on-the-couch types of conservatives, Glenn Beck among them, are establishing quiet relationships with the Clinton campaign to stop Trump?
Fundamentally, who can we really trust amongst the anti-leftist insurgency?
4. Clinton allies want to create a voting public that does not think or assess politics critically
And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry.
— Bill Ivey, Clinton insider and former Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts under President Bill Clinton
A long-time friend of the Clintons, Bill Ivey, wrote an email to Podesta bemoaning how the American public was still “unaware” but lacked “compliance.” Ivey was very frank in admitting that he and others wanted to “conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry.” The necessary method was to “conflate entertainment with the electoral process.”
The worried tone of the Ivey email published by Wikileaks indicates that Trump’s charismatic style, usually attacked by the Clinton campaign, is one that Democrats well and truly desire for their rather dull candidate. This jealousy aside, we ourselves should be concerned. Clinton supporters have the overwhelmingly clout in both Hollywood and major newsrooms across the United States, plus the newspapers and other media mediums. A series of celebrity and media figures could easily weaponize themselves further in producing a more politically biased entertainment and news industry.
Recent political-entertainment farces, such as Katy Perry’s naked call for Americans to vote, have been performed with the cover of being “comedy” (in case they failed to produce a result), but the underlying intent was to both reach and expand a dumbed-down audience. Skits like the Perry one should actually be read as: “I’m trying to be funny and get you to vote for anyone, but I really mean Hillary Clinton!” Unlike Trump, who actively questions the wisdom of an oligopoly controlling the media, high finance, and other vested interests, celebrities roped in to assist Clinton or any future leftist candidate will merely use their breasts, profanity, or other irrelevant talking points to create propaganda.
5. Tim Kaine was selected as Hillary’s running mate—in July 2015
Lobbyist Erick Mullen wrote an email to Podesta in July 2015 apparently complaining that Bob Glennon, an attorney for billionaire Robert Bass’ Keystone, Inc., was telling two other Senators that Hillary Clinton had already picked Senator Tim Kaine as her running mate. More recent information about a Vice Presidential nominee “shortlist,” which included Bill Gates and Tim Cook, seems to have been a cover. Almost a year to the day after Mullen’s email, Kaine was officially announced as Hillary’s running mate.
The Mullen revelation demonstrates two appalling potential aspects of the Clinton campaign: 1) a very fake process of searching for people to fill positions already decided on takes place and 2) this process heavily depends on/is determined by the scrutiny of donating billionaires and their advisers. Robert Bass is well-known for his financial support of Democrats and it is immediately suspicious that one of his attorneys would have been cited as spreading Kaine’s name as a certainty so early on in the game. What’s going on there?
6. Hillary’s campaign was tipped off about the likelihood of the State Department releasing her Benghazi emails
Heather Samuelson, a lawyer and the former White House liaison for the State Department, leaked a tip to the Clinton campaign that 300 of Hillary’s Benghazi emails were about to be released. Just as the decision not to prosecute Hillary over her private email server has bamboozled many a FBI insider and agent, this new discovery of special assistance to the Clinton campaign will greatly anger those interested in impartial judicial or Congressional investigations.
The substantial cross-over between federal government officials and those working for Democratic political campaigns is alarming. Heather Samuelson is just one of many who have carved careers out of switching from bureaucrat to partisan operative. It is hard to see how such jumping around can lead to good outcomes, especially as Samuelson’s source appears to be from the State Department itself.
7. Repressive Arab states have paid the Clinton Foundation millions for Bill Clinton’s “time”
When Hillary Clinton was serving as Secretary of State, Saudi and Qatari interests were funding the Clinton Foundation to the tune of millions. The fact that Bill Clinton was then the main focus of Arab leaders’ requests for time and phone calls is irrelevant, as Clinton Foundation donors were heavily represented in the individuals and groups Hillary had official meetings with during her time at State.
Two email conversations are particularly troubling. In the first, John Podesta and various Clinton workers, including from the Clinton Foundation, have an exchange about Bill’s phone call with a Saudi sheikh. One staffer says that unless a $6 million check has been written out by the sheikh, the idea is “crazy.” In the second, Qatar desires a “five minute” meeting with Bill to give him a $1 million check for his birthday the previous year.
What exactly are the Saudis and Qataris getting out of these meetings and phone calls? And why, given Hillary’s own acknowledgment that both states fund ISIS, has the money not been returned?
This stuff is much bigger than Watergate
Richard Nixon fell into political oblivion for his alleged involvement in the break-in at Washington D.C.’s Watergate hotel in the early 1970s. Compare this scandal to the Clinton revelations published by Wikileaks and it appears minuscule. Everything from Hillary Clinton acquiescing to the funding of ISIS by the Saudis and Qataris (and keeping money from them) to the preordained selection of Tim Kaine as VP nominee reeks of political and moral corruption.
With Wikileaks promising to release even more emails and other evidence soon, will the media finally stand up and report the truth?