Yes, There Is a Crisis at the Southern Border

American Free Press Issue 19 & 20 extensively covered the situation at America’s southern border with three articles. Together, they make clear that there is, indeed, a crisis at the border. 

Retired Texas Cop Gives AFP Firsthand Tour of the Border

By Mark Anderson

BROWNSVILLE, Texas—A retired Texas policeman recently took AMERICAN FREE PRESS on a guided tour of a key border crossing where, every day, he sees firsthand America’s border dilemma—something he has witnessed unfolding for decades.

“The border is actually a two-way street,” Rusty Monsees told AFP during an April 24 visit to his 21-acre homestead. “The criminal elements enter the U.S. to do their stuff but return to Mexico when the heat gets too hot and go back and forth several times as needed. And when the law gets too close down there, they come back to the United States. A Border Patrol agent once caught a guy with six different IDs. This is not a football game where everybody shakes hands at the end; this is dangerous stuff.”

Think the IRS Never Loses Cases? Think again!

The former San Benito, Texas cop pointed out that some of his acreage is actually south of the approximately 20-year-old border fence that runs past his house, which, oddly enough, is a good 100 yards north of the actual U.S.-Mexico boundary—the winding, murky Rio Grande River. He then started his Ford F-150 truck and led this writer through a gap in the border fence down to the river in order to show up-close what he and the Border Patrol he assists deal with on a regular basis. He keeps a rifle handy for self-defense at all times.

Asked about border differences since Donald Trump became president, Monsees said there are Mexican citizens who want a safer country and improved border security. Their attitude in the age of Trump has changed. They seem to have more resolve, especially in not wanting their own criminal elements crossing the border and “vacationing in the States,” as Monsees put it, so those elements can reorganize and head back to Mexico to continue their illicit activities.

What needs to happen, said Monsees, is a two-fence solution.

The Diversity Delusion, MacDonald
“How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine our Culture,” Brand new at AFP!

“So, let me get this straight. If I’m a cartel member or MS-13 gang member, I should first be encountering a fence before I even get to the Rio Grande River, a fence on the Mexican side?” this writer asked Monsees.

“Yes, that’s right,” he said, pointing to the river that is lined with a dense thicket of trees, especially on the Mexican side. This, he added, provides endless places for border-jumpers to hide.

Monsees contends that both the U.S. and Mexico should have an interest in border security. As a result, a truly effective fencing scheme would include non-rustable, sturdy, tall metal fencing laced with concertina wire and built on both sides of the river in key areas—with less reliance on the existing gap-ridden “tactical infrastructure” fencing, as the U.S. government calls it, which is rusting and too often can be climbed or otherwise circumvented by the more determined among the illegal aliens.

Monsees pointed out another thing often overlooked, which is a border breach of a different sort. Mercury, lead, diazinon, and trace uranium get into the Rio Grande River via the discharges from the maquiladoras, the large factories with reportedly bad working conditions and poor wages built under the soon-to-be-replaced North American Free Trade Agreement.


This writer then visited Matamoros, just across the border in Mexico from Brownsville, where there was a small “tent community” that included three Cubans who hope to enter the United States.

A young man named Pablo, accompanied by a pregnant woman about 20 years old and another young man, said they were hoping she can give birth in the U.S., evidently for welfare assistance.

He claimed they were flown in a plane from Cuba to Brazil. Between October and now, they said they reached the Texas border mainly by bus.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Border Patrol Chief Recounts the Immigration Turmoil, Real Crisis

By Mark Anderson

McALLEN, Texas—Acting Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector Border Patrol Chief Hector Escamilla, speaking at the McAllen Citizens League’s luncheon April 25, outlined the daunting task carried out by the Border Patrol to reduce the overall flow of illegal immigrants and focus on the criminal element that steadily enters the U.S. While his assessment of the border crisis and some recommended solutions corroborated important matters American Free Press has reported on, Escamilla added some clarifying points to illustrate the complexity and severity of the crisis.

A 30-year Border Patrol veteran, Escamilla explained that the Border Patrol, which has 3,100 agents in the four-county RGV sector, needs to press for specific policy changes that will increase deportations and result in a “package deal” where the “wall,” helpful though it may be, is one of several coordinated measures needing to be implemented.

Kingdom Identity

Having 3,100 agents may sound impressive and adequate, but by the time sick leave, vacations, and administrative-desk duties are covered, only half of those 3,100 officers end up being “boots on the ground” at any given time—for a border sector covering “316 river miles, from the mouth of the Rio Grande all the way to the Falcon Dam; that’s a pretty daunting task,” Escamilla said.

He clarified: “A lot of the area we cover is dense brush . . . the lateral mobility is very difficult because a lot of the land that we patrol is owned by personal landowners . . . we can’t just traverse continuously along the river.” In addition, government and private wildlife refuges along the border, heavily regulated in a manner that prevents border agents from “mowing the place down” to find hidden illegal immigrants, further complicate the issue.

What’s more, Border Patrol must help guard the coastal counties. “We’re actually responsible for the entire [Gulf] shoreline, all the way to the Louisiana border,” said Escamilla. “So we do have agents in different places along the coastline.”

He added that, in the RGV sector alone, 165,000 illegal immigrants have been apprehended at the border since the start of the fiscal year (Oct. 1, 2018). During the same period there has been a 150% increase of “OTMs” (other than Mexicans) illegally entering the U.S.

He explained, “The majority of the OTMs are from the Central American countries of El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Honduras.”

Pressing Escamilla to confirm that people from more than 40 nations, including overseas, are illegally entering the U.S, this writer interjected, “We hear about Asia, the Middle East and even Europe.”

Subscribe to AFPHis response: “Yes, we’ve got Middle Eastern folks here. We’ve got Iraqis, Iranians, a lot of Chinese— Chinese are more common than people might think . . . Pakistanis and Cubans, we’re catching Cubans. These people bring in lots of money for the cartels—$15,000 to $20,000 per person. We estimate that the cartels are making as much or more money from human trafficking than they do from the actual smuggling of narcotics.”

Asked by another audience member to explain the asylum situation, Escamilla said: “The majority of those who come here, they come from economic-hardship countries. That’s usually what they tell us as the reason they’re fleeing. . . . There is in most of those Central American countries a lot of poverty, a lot of gangs, violence, including MS-13 and so on. But . . . the reasons for asylum should be specific to the individual. Did the cartels, did the gangs in their country of origin specifically target them for political reasons, and not so much because there’s an economic crisis in the country?”

Stressing a recommended procedural change, Escamilla remarked: “We’d like to see asylum officers actually accessible at the Border Patrol stations. In fact, there’s talk of Border Patrol agents themselves having the authority to listen to asylum claims, so we can expedite the process. But, of course, that’s being met with a lot of resistance. It’s going to be met with a lot of lawsuits.”

Asked by this writer whether the Border Patrol needs another 4,000 agents in addition to the 3,100 in the RGV sector, Escamilla replied that hiring significantly more agents and obtaining the authority to assign more personnel to screen asylum requests are two steps toward developing a solution—along with hiring more immigration judges.

“We really do need a lot of different factors and one of them is policy,” he said. “Until we start returning some of these migrant families and children back to their country of origin quickly . . . to make it more difficult for them to make a second or third trip . . . then, I don’t care how many agents you give us, it’s not going to do us any good. There’s got to be a change in policy. We’ve got to communicate with the heads of these countries and ask, why can’t you take your people back quicker?”

Both Sides of the Border Need to Be Safeguarded

By John Friend

The crisis along the southern border between the United States and Mexico continues to spiral out of control as thousands of migrants attempt to illegally enter the United States on a daily basis, many with entirely fraudulent claims and documentation.

According to a recent report published by The Epoch Times, U.S. Border Patrol officials have identified over 3,000 cases in the past six months alone that involve fraudulent family unit claims made by migrants seeking asylum or permanent resettlement in America, demonstrating the increasingly difficult situation immigration officials find themselves in when screening migrants and asylum seekers.

“It’s very clear that the cartel and smugglers know the weaknesses in our laws,” acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan, said in an April 18 press conference while he was visiting the border near McAllen, Texas. “They know that family units and unaccompanied children will be released with no consequences for their illegal entries.”

McAleenan took over the department following the April 7 resignation of Kirstjen Nielsen, who was often criticized by President Trump.

Migrants seeking entry to the U.S. are often screened, processed, and then released into the country, especially if they have children traveling with them. By law, family units must be released upon entry rather than being turned away or detained, allowing illegal aliens, human traffickers, and cartels to exploit U.S. immigration laws.

Free Expression Foundation

“The same child is brought across the border with an adult multiple times to try and gain that release that family units are required under court order,” McAleenan stated.

According to McAleenan, 4,800 migrants attempted to illegally cross the U.S. border on April 16 alone, underscoring the seriousness of the situation. The 4,800 marked “a new record for the modern era,” he added. “Almost 1,000 of them crossed in just three large groups, 375 people in the largest of those groups.”

Last month, Border Patrol agents encountered 103,000 individuals along the southwest border, with 92,000 of those individuals being apprehended by agents, marking a 35% increase of apprehensions from the previous month. In the Rio Grande Valley region of Texas, Border Patrol agents have already surpassed the total number of apprehensions during the 2018 fiscal year.

“Last fiscal year, Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley (RGV) Sector apprehended 162,000 individuals,” Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Marcelino Medina told reporters in late April. “For the first seven months of this fiscal year, we’ve already surpassed that number.” In the RGV region alone, agents are averaging 1,100 apprehensions every single day.

Sydney Hernandez, a local news reporter for KGBT in the RGV region, interviewed a number of migrants seeking entry to the U.S. recently. Many stated that they are being told in their home countries that they will receive help and assistance from the U.S. government if they enter illegally.

New DVD at AFP Online Store: “An Artificial Reality”

“Immigrants tell me they’re coming to the U.S. because they’re seeing advertisements on their local newspapers and TV stations, about better opportunities and free help from Americans if they enter illegally,” Hernandez reported.

Illegal aliens are not supposed to receive government benefits, but many do. According to a 2017 study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), illegal immigrants consume over $100 billion in taxpayer money every year. With countless migrants now entering the U.S. daily, that amount will only increase.

“We’re talking about billions of dollars in taxpayer benefits over the next few years,” FAIR Director Dan Stein explained to Fox News recently. “The payout for the taxpayer is enormous, and income to the Treasury is miniscule.”

Overall, illegal immigrants receive more government benefits than they contribute via taxes. Many receive free public schooling, medical care, housing assistance, food stamps, and other social services.


In related news, two U.S. soldiers who were conducting surveillance along the border, south of the border fence but north of the Rio Grande River, were confronted by Mexican soldiers armed with assault rifles.

“On April 13, 2019, at approximately 2 p.m. CDT, five to six Mexican military personnel questioned two U.S. Army soldiers who were conducting border support operations in an unmarked (Customs and Border Protection) vehicle near the southwest border in the vicinity of Clint, Texas,” U.S. Northern Command (USNorthCom) explained in a statement to CNN. “The U.S. soldiers were appropriately in U.S. territory.”

During the incident, the Mexican troops pointed their weapons at the soldiers and disarmed one of them, returning the sidearm to the vehicle. According to USNorthCom, an inquiry determined the Mexican troops believed the U.S. soldiers were on the Mexican side of the border. Thus far, President Donald Trump has not commented on this potentially explosive situation.


Meanwhile, the FBI has arrested a leader of a militia group in New Mexico whose organization was attempting to stop illegal immigrants from entering the U.S., it was recently reported.

One World Agenda DVD
“A One World Agenda: The Illuminati – The Men Who Control the World” from AFP Online Store

Larry Hopkins, 69, was arrested on April 26 on a federal complaint charging him with being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition. Hopkins’s group, the United Constitutional Patriots (UCP), has reportedly detained close to 5,600 illegal aliens in recent months in an effort to help Border Patrol agents and immigration officials deal with the increasingly lawless southern border. Hopkins and his group have been denounced and criticized by the governor of New Mexico and other left-wing, open-borders activist groups, including the Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Members of the UCP are convinced Hopkins will be cleared and are proud of their righteous cause.

“We’re not worried about it,” stated Jim Benvie, a spokesperson for the group. “He’s going to be cleared.”

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.

Sheriff Joe Is Back, Still Swinging

Did the FBI spy on Sheriff Joe Arpaio just like they spied on Trump? In this interview, published in the most recent American Free Press the 57-year veteran lawman has choice words for mainstream media, leftists, and the FBI. If you’re an AFP Online subscriber, log in here to read the PDF of Issue 21&22. Not yet a subscriber? Consider a $25/year digital subscription now, or one of the other options here.

On May 8, American Free Press writer Dave Gahary had the opportunity to catch up with former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio to discuss, among other things, his run for Maricopa County sheriff, his support for President Donald Trump, the smear campaign that targeted him, and his belief that the FBI spied on him as he campaigned around the Copper State. Here is Sheriff Joe in his own words.

AFP Podcast

AFP: It’s great to talk to you, Sheriff. Let’s start at the beginning. Can you tell us about yourself, for those who don’t know you already?

Sheriff Joe: I was born on Flag Day, June 14, same day as President Trump. Not the same year, 1932, so you can figure out that I’m a senior citizen [chuckles]. I was born in Springfield, Mass. My mother gave her life for me. She refused an abortion and died in childbirth. So I bounced around from one Italian family to another. My mother and father came from Italy, legally, and I worked in the grocery store. I played all the sports in high school. I joined the U.S. Army when the Korean War broke out and I turned 18 and I graduated from high school, all within one month. I did my three years and came home. I always wanted to be a cop. I went to Vegas for a short time as a police officer. I actually locked up Elvis Presley, since I took him to the police station. But I did let him go.

Then I started my other big career—it was the DEA: federal Drug Enforcement Administration. In 1957, I was sworn in, in Chicago, and was involved in a lot of investigations and a lot of arrests. So they sent me to Turkey, the only agent in that area to stop the French Connection and all the drugs that were being run out of there.

I then went to San Antonio. I held a lot of top positions, especially [related to work in and around] Mexico, South America, Central America, Turkey, the Middle East, and also Texas and Arizona, fighting the drug problem.

So when you add up my 57 years in law enforcement, you’d have to say I have 35 years as a high official or a top official with the DEA in Mexico, on that side of the border, where I lived, and also on this side. I retired in 1982 as head of the DEA in Arizona, joined my wife in the travel business, and then I decided to run for sheriff in 1992. And I guess the rest is history.

AFP: Can you talk a bit about your time as a sheriff in Arizona?

Sheriff Joe: For 24 years I was a sheriff, which is the longest-serving sheriff in the history of Maricopa County, which I’m pretty proud of because I’ve been able to survive 24 years. Sometimes I wonder how I did it. I was re-elected six times. I lost the election in 2016. I just could not win the battles for the contempt of court charges, where the courts went after me. President Donald Trump pardoned me on that charge, which nobody even really knew what it was about. Now I find out it’s not even a crime.

I didn’t survive the smear campaign, because you may recall that [President Barack] Obama’s prosecutors in the contempt of court trial said they were going to get me for contempt of court and [they] wanted me to do six months in prison. They were saying that when the people were voting. Then I had [George] Soros come after me with that law firm Perkins Coie. [Soros] pumped $3 million into the general election, and I’m still wondering—a lot of people are wondering—how I lost to a liberal police sergeant. [Now we know.]

National Coin Investments

AFP: What can you tell us about your time with the president?

Sheriff Joe: I was with President Trump from day one, when I introduced him in July at his first rally, here in Phoenix. I was the only one who would stand next to him. I introduced him and made a few predictions. I said he would be our next president, and I was right. So, I have a lot of respect for our president. I do know that NBC asked me last year if John McCain was my hero. I paused and I said, “No.” I woke up one morning, about four months prior to my declaration, and I said, “I finally found a hero,” after all my [86] years in life, everywhere in the world, and that was President Trump. I’m proud of that.

I don’t back down. I’m not a flip-flopper that will say I am now President Trump’s ally because he was doing good in the polls. I’ve been with him from day one, and I’ll be with him till the end. I don’t care if people like it or not.

I’m 86 years old. I work 14 hours a day. What’s really tough . . . [is that] nobody knows my background. I could never, never get it out. They only know me as the sheriff, but I have a lot of interesting experiences fighting drug trafficking around the world. They called me a racist. I’m suing The New York Times about [that] situation. But I am also suing CNN, The Huffington Post and Rolling Stone, for calling me a convicted criminal. So they’re gonna have a little problem with me. Those are the same people going after President Trump.

AFP: What can you tell us about your work on Barack Obama’s purported birth certificate?

Sheriff Joe: I went after Obama on his birth certificate, and, being in law enforcement all those years, I’m not stupid [about the law]. I agreed to launch that investigation because the tea party came to me in 2011 and said, “You’re an elected sheriff. You’re the only one who will touch it.” And they won’t touch it. Nobody in the universe will even look at my investigation. I’m a law-enforcement guy, and I [discover] probable cause on a fake government document, and all they do is blast me and say that I’m crazy. So that makes me a little frustrated. But I’m not giving up on that. Maybe somebody will look at what we have. I’m convinced, 100% [that the birth certificate in a compiled phony], and I have the evidence of forensic people that I had to go to Italy to find, plus all the rest from our investigation.

Someone has to answer the question: Why doesn’t any law enforcement agency—it really should be federal—look into what we have on a person who has a fake government document that happens to be a birth certificate? So that’s a question that I will never forget. I’ll go to my grave and always wonder why nobody will look at the evidence we have.

When I launched this, I went public and I said I don’t care where Obama was born. I don’t care about anything regarding that. I’m going after a person who has a fake birth certificate. That’s it. And if it was you, you’d be in jail tomorrow. Is that fair?

I just talked to three Republican groups around the country. They all loved the fight against the birth certificate, but politically you’re not supposed to talk about it. Why not? Is Obama someone special?

Just before I left office, we got a lucky hit, and we found a birth certificate [that was issued at the] same time as Obama was born. And it was very simple: They took parts of that birth certificate and transplanted it on this phony one. My Italian forensics experts showed that.

The irony of all this, if I’m still living in 10 years from now—which I probably won’t be—is the fact that I’m the guy with the reputation of being the top guy fighting illegal immigration. We arrested more illegals than anybody. Now, the irony would be if [former President Obama] was here illegally—that’s an immigration issue. I never talked about him being here illegally or from somewhere else. I said I’m investigating a fake Hawaiian government official document. And I can’t get anywhere with this. If it wasn’t him, I’m sure somebody would come to me and investigate it.

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

AFP: Can you talk about how the media has portrayed you in the past few years?

Sheriff Joe: They call me a racist—everybody in the media, every day. [But] even the judge who went after me never said that I racially profiled. He said that I used race as a [criterion]. When I signed the contract with the ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] director, that was one of their criteria, that you could use race. So they got me on that, on the contempt of court, that I didn’t obey the judge.

That’s one reason I don’t get on TV. You notice that Fox, in a whole year, has blocked me out? I’ve been on Fox for 24 years. Why don’t they call me anymore? They put all these other guys on to talk about the border. I have more experience than all of them put together, on fighting drug trafficking and illegal immigration. I think they’re afraid that I might talk about the birth certificate.

I don’t care. I’ve got my Facebook with a million followers. I go through social media. I go through people like [AFP], your paper that has the guts to speak out. So, I have all the means to get my story across.

AFP: Recently you said the FBI was spying on you. Can you talk about that?

Sheriff Joe: Actually, I had this information last year and nobody printed it, and now I see what’s happening here in Washington. This happened [to me] years ago. You talk about the FBI today, infiltrating the president and his campaign, and I’m saying, “Wait a minute. I remember when that happened to me.”

I have information that two or three FBI agents found out that I was going to be mentioned in a candidate’s forum at a police union hall. So two FBI agents go in there posing as journalists, of course, to get information about me. That’s a no-no. First of all, you shouldn’t be posing as reporters, and you should not be going into these forums to gather information on someone who’s involved in politics.

Now, let me say this: American Free Press is the only one to call me about this, and I sent this information to 300 news outlets. In fact, I sent something like this out last year. So why is this is not a story?

I sent a 26-page report to the former attorney general of the United States, asking for an investigation over this contempt of court and everything revolving around it. I heard back from them finally when [former Attorney General Jeff] Sessions left. They had sent it to their Office of Inspector General or somebody. Being an ex-federal guy, I’m a little disappointed that this type of situation is occurring. I do have a lot more sensitive information I’m not ready to talk about, and I think that may scare some people. But I don’t care. I’ve had a lot of threats from [drug] cartels and that doesn’t bother me. I’ve been around a long time. I don’t go around making allegations unless I can back them up. I have the evidence that it happened.

AFP: Can you explain the contempt of court issue?

Sheriff Joe: Here I am, in my waning years, sitting at a criminal defense table . . . for six days, with a stacked deck, on a contempt of court charge, where the judge—they wouldn’t even give me a jury trial—charged me with the wrong charge, over a contempt charge, because I was doing my job. I had the authority to do it under the feds, because I had 100 of my deputies sworn in, trained for six months as immigration officers. They went after me because I was very active. When I do something in my life, maybe I do it one step more than normal, but it’s not illegal.

Conspireality, Victor Thorn
Victor Thorn takes on Obama’s birth certificate, 9/11, and a lot more.

AFP: Can you elaborate on the presidential pardon you received?

Sheriff Joe: You know, another thing about the border—I’m not criticizing the president on his selections. I feel sorry for him, and I think he’ll admit it, too: There’s a lot of garbage out there. A lot of people say they like him. They like him because they’re making money. But where is their heart? There’s a difference, being a bureaucrat.

Another difference is, does it come from your heart? My support of him comes from my heart. It has nothing to do with a big position. I don’t do anything to get a job. Now, if he ever calls me, I would probably have to help him out, because I love the guy, and if he needs me, I’ll have to do it.

He pardoned me before I even went to court to be sentenced. But you know what? He did the right thing. I didn’t ask for it, but he did the right thing. It had nothing to do with politics.

AFP: Would you like to see President Trump elected again?

Sheriff Joe: If we don’t get the current president reelected, we’re gonna be in deep trouble. We’re in a little trouble now, but just think if the Democrats come back in, with all their stupid policies. You wouldn’t mind if you got a really good guy, a patriot, that type of person, to run on the Democratic side, but we don’t have that. We don’t have that now, and if they win the election, this country is going to be in poor shape.

By the way, I love [how the president uses] Twitter. I hope he tweets forever and gets the word out his way. He’s not afraid to speak out. He’s maybe different, but, boy, he’s the one we need today. When he gets reelected, I guarantee you he’ll be a little different. He’ll be tougher, when he’s reelected. So we only have another, what, five-and-a-half years to straighten this country out.

Subscribe to AFP

AFP: You read the newspaper, American Free Press, right?

Sheriff Joe: Yeah, I love your paper.

AFP: And of course, like you, all the things they call us—racist, anti-Semitic—it’s just how the left (and groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center) smears patriotic conservatives these days who have the courage to speak the truth about important topics. Thanks for having the courage to speak with us, Sheriff. We hope we’ve helped you get the word out.

Sheriff Joe: Thank you.

This partial interview transcript was edited to fit into the print paper space allowed. Click the podcast image above to hear the full, unedited version of Dave Gahary’s interview with Sheriff Arpaio.

Dave Gahary, a former submariner in the U.S. Navy, prevailed in a suit brought by the New York Stock Exchange in an attempt to silence him. Dave is the producer of an upcoming film about the attack on the USS Liberty. See the website for more information.

How Obama Colluded With Ukraine to Help Hillary Beat Donald Trump

Now that the Mueller investigation has finally ended, one would expect the mainstream media to be giving the same endless coverage to Obama’s apparent collusion with Ukraine to swing the presidential election in Hillary’s favor. Don’t hold your breath … . 

By Donald Jeffries

While a two-year investigation into President Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russian officials has produced no evidence of any “collusion,” the mainstream media continues to ignore troubling connections between the Obama administration and foreign governments.

The most recent example involves former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig and how he allegedly misled the U.S. Justice Department about his law firm’s work in Ukraine. Craig is charged with providing false and misleading information to the Foreign Agent Registration Act office regarding the trial of Yulia Tymoshenko, a political rival of the country’s then-president, Viktor Yanukovych. Former Trump campaign head Paul Manafort was seemingly held to a different standard under the same act during Robert Mueller’s investigation.

A recent story in The Hill described how the Obama White House attempted to use Ukraine to give an early boost to the whole Russian “collusion” narrative. A January 2016 meeting in the Oval Office between some of the top Ukrainian prosecutors and investigators and representatives of the National Security Council, FBI, State Department, and Department of Justice has been documented by contemporary memos and testimony of multiple participants. Ukrainians who were at the meeting have stated that it quickly became apparent the meeting’s purported agenda of training and cooperation was a front. Instead, U.S. officials were clearly interested in two hot political controversies.

Subscribe to AFP

One of these involved Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s affiliation with Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings. Bank records revealed that more than $3 million went from the Ukraine to an American firm tied to Hunter Biden during 2014-2015. U.S. officials asked the Ukrainians if they would drop the Burisma probe and turn it over to the FBI. The Ukrainians refused, but Biden went on to pressure Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to fire the country’s chief prosecutor in March 2016. This resulted in the Burisma case being transferred and eventually shut down.

According to Andrii Telizhenko, a political official in the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, who organized the meeting, U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united.” The Americans stated that they had no interest in reviving a 2014 investigation into then-GOP lobbyist Manafort and others in the U.S. receiving payments from Ukraine’s Russia-backed Party of Regions. At that time, the FBI had questioned Manafort about any improper foreign lobbying but stopped the investigation without charging him. Telizhenko was unable to recall if Manafort’s name was mentioned at the meeting, but other Ukrainian attendees remembered that Department of Justice representatives had asked investigators from Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau about finding new evidence regarding the Party of Regions’ payments and associations with Americans.

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Story – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

“It was definitely the case that led to the charges against Manafort and the leak to U.S. media during the 2016 election,” Telizhenko declared. Spokespersons in the Department of Justice, National Security Council, and FBI declined to comment on The Hill’s article, and a representative for former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice did not return their emails.

Nazar Kholodnytsky, Ukraine’s chief anti-corruption prosecutor, told The Hill that he attended some of the January 2016 meetings in Washington. He described seeing a ledger showing payments from the Party of Regions to Manafort and said that Ukrainian authorities had known about it since 2014.

Commenting on the sudden release of this evidence by the U.S.-friendly National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) in May 2016, right after Manafort was named Trump’s campaign chairman, Kholodnytsky declared: “Somebody kept this black ledger secret for two years and then showed it to the public and the U.S. media. It was extremely suspicious. . . . I ordered the detectives to give nothing to the mass media considering this case. Instead, they had broken my order and published themselves these one or two pages of this black ledger regarding Paul Manafort. . . . For me it was the first call that something was going wrong and that there is some external influence in this case.”

Hidden History, Jeffries
Exposing modern crimes, conspiracies and political coverups at the AFP Online Store!

Kostiantyn Kulyk, deputy head of the Ukraine prosecutor general’s international affairs office, corroborated this, noting, “Yes, there was a lot of talking about needing help and then the ledger just appeared in public.” Kulyk also said that Ukrainian authorities had evidence that others, like former Obama White House Counsel Gregory Craig, had also received money from Yanukovych’s party. But the Americans weren’t interested in any of that. “They just discussed Manafort. This was all and only what they wanted. Nobody else,” Kulyk said.

A Ukrainian court concluded, in December 2018, that NABU’s release of the ledger was an illegal attempt to influence the U.S. election. A member of Ukraine’s parliament even released a recording of a NABU official commenting that the agency released the ledger to help Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

In an April 25 appearance on Fox News, President Donald Trump chimed in: “It sounds like big stuff. It sounds very interesting with Ukraine. . . . I’m not surprised.”

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Michigan Falls for SPLC Trap: Labels Good Groups ‘Haters’

The hate crimes witch hunt continues throughout the nation. Now, Michigan’s governor has joined the part relying on the utterly discredited SPLC to tell her what “hate groups” she should most fear in her state.

By Mark Anderson

Elected in 2018, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) has put together a “hate crimes unit” that compiles data and mainly targets those accused of committing so-called hate crimes against “the LGBTQ [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer] community.” She’s heavily relying on the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to help her office define which groups are “hate” groups. The intent, according to both government and media sources, is to increase the documentation and prosecution of hate crimes while also targeting “incidents” of hate.

Ms. Nessel is a married lesbian and former Wayne County assistant prosecutor who’s working with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights in this crusade. She is using SPLC data to focus on a particular region of Michigan where, it’s alleged, there’s a stronger-than-usual concentration of “hate” organizations.

Kingdom Identity

“These groups range in the ideological extremes from anti-Muslim, to anti-LGBT, to black nationalist and white nationalists,” Michigan Department of Civil Rights Director Agustin Arbulu said in an official statement, which added that the lower peninsula’s “thumb” area is seen as a hotbed of supposed hate.

“Particularly of concern, over one half of the [31] identified groups are located east of U.S.-23 between Flint and Ann Arbor,” Arbulu specified. Yet, this crusade goes even further. Arbulu’s department, in coordination with the attorney general’s office, is going so far as to create “a process to document hate and bias incidents that don’t rise to the level of a crime or civil infraction,” as noted in The Detroit News.

In other words, something as harmless as philosophically or politically disagreeing with certain “minority” groups deemed worthy of extra protection by the state is being monitored and logged. This means that Michigan is trying to discredit, pathologize, and potentially criminalize certain beliefs, primarily if not solely conservative, constitutionalist, or Christian beliefs. In due course, this could result in a “thought crimes” dragnet.

The SPLC—whose scandal-ridden founder, Morris Dees, was recently fired and whose overall leadership is mired in corruption, as detailed in AFP’s last two editions—claims Michigan is home to 31 hate and extremist organizations—which is “an uptick from the 28 [the SPLC] reported in 2017,” according to The Detroit News.

Ms. Nessel’s office announced that “active hate and extremist groups in Michigan” from 2017 to 2018 had increased “by more than 6%.” Two of the 31 accused Michigan groups are the American Freedom Law Center in Ann Arbor, accused of being anti-Muslim, and the Church Militant/ St. Michael’s Media in Ferndale, labeled as being “hateful” of LGBTQ people.

Hate Crime Hoax
How the Left is selling a FAKE race war, now at AFP’s Online Store

In correspondence with this writer, St. Michael’s Media spokesperson Christine Niles responded: “Church Militant categorically rejects the label of ‘hate group’ imposed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a radical leftist outfit whose aim seems to have morphed into attacking prolife, pro-family organizations. We are deeply concerned that the Michigan attorney general’s office is launching its hate crimes task force using the SPLC’s list to investigate groups like ours.”

In a news release, the American Freedom Law Center announced it has filed a civil rights lawsuit “accusing Michigan of roundabout discrimination” in this matter. The law center is “going after Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and state Department of Civil Rights Director Agustin Arbulu” because they are “waging an unjust crusade against the law center.”

Michigan, adds the complaint, “is unfairly targeting the law center due to its inclusion on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of local hate groups.”

The American Freedom Law Center says its mission “is to fight for faith and freedom through litigation, education, and public policy programs. The strength of our nation lies in its commitment to a Judeo-Christian heritage and moral foundation and to an enduring faith and trust in God and His Providence.”

Other groups among the 31 named by the SPLC are: American Guard (statewide, “general hate”), The Creativity Movement (statewide, “Neo Nazi”), the Daily Stormer (statewide, “Neo-Nazi”), and the Foundation for the Marketplace of Ideas (Clinton Township, “White Nationalist”).

Bill Mohr, chairman of the U.S. Taxpayer’s Party (a.k.a. Constitution Party), remarked that the attorney general’s crusade “is not receiving the kind of news coverage that it deserves.” He added that newly elected Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) “issued an executive order forbidding any discrimination against the LGBTQ crowd.”

Mohr told this writer he has been contacting state Sen. Eric Nesbitt (R), among others, “to try and get even one senator to disavow or counteract the executive order,” but to no avail, as of this writing.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Smeared Kentucky Teen Continues Quest for Justice, Adds NBC to Massive Lawsuit

Smeared Teen’s Legal Team Adds NBC to Massive Lawsuit

By Donald Jeffries

Lawyers for Nicholas Sandmann, the courageous Covington, Ky. teenager who was smeared so unfairly a few months back by mainstream media and reckless celebrities, have filed another lawsuit. In early May, Sandmann’s attorneys sued NBC/Universal and MSNBC for $275 million. “Washington Post, CNN, and now NBC/MSNBC. The journey for justice for Nicholas Sandmann and for media accountability continues,” lead attorney L. Lin Wood tweeted. “More to follow. False accusers should not rest easy.”

In addition to filing earlier lawsuits against The Washington Post and CNN, Sandmann’s legal team has sent out dozens of letters to national media outlets and public figures, requesting that evidence such as internal emails be preserved for their potential value.

“In short, the false and defamatory gist of NBCUniversal’s collective reporting conveyed to its viewers and readers that Nicholas was the face of an unruly hate mob of hundreds of white racist high school students who physically assaulted, harassed, and taunted two different minority groups engaged in peaceful demonstrations, preaching, song, and prayer,” a complaint provided to the press by Sandmann’s attorneys stated. Wood’s associate, attorney Todd McMurtry, tweeted “The facts of the suit show the anti-Trump narrative NBC pushed so hard.”

“NBCUniversal created a false narrative by portraying the ‘confrontation’ as a ‘hate crime’ committed by Nicholas,” the newest lawsuit reads, and refers to Sandmann as “an easy target for NBCUniversal to advance its anti-Trump agenda because he was a 16-year-old white, Catholic student who had attended the Right to Life March that day and was wearing a MAGA cap at the time of the incident, which he had purchased earlier in the day as a souvenir.”

McMurtry has hinted that the Associated Press and HBO could be the next to be sued.

National Coin Investments

Last month, The Washington Post filed to dismiss the Sandmanns’ $250 million lawsuit lodged against them. CNN was hardly contrite in its response to being sued.

Attorney Lin Wood tweeted, “CNN does not apologize to Nicholas Sandmann, does not acknowledge its violations of journalistic standards, does not admit its sources lied, and does not acknowledge its bias. Much more is required to begin to right the wrong.”

In one of its first stories about the incident, The Washington Post quoted native American Nathan Phillips as saying that he felt “threatened by the teens,” that they “swarmed around him,” and one of them “blocked my way and wouldn’t allow me to retreat.” The paper stood by its coverage, and its lawyers stated, “Newspapers are often unable to publish a complete account of events when they first come to light. Stories often develop over time, as more witnesses emerge.” Laughably, they went on to claim, “Indeed, the Post’s overall coverage—including the articles that the complaint fails to mention—was not only accurate; it was ultimately favorable to him. Why … bring this lawsuit accusing the Post of engaging in ‘a modern-day form of McCarthyism,’ and demanding $250 million in damages— a number chosen, the complaint explains, because it is the price Jeff Bezos paid for the Post in 2013? The inflammatory rhetoric of the Complaint . . . suggests one motive: to strike a blow against the Post’s allegedly ‘biased agenda against President Donald J. Trump.’ ”

Hate Crime Hoax
How the Left is selling a FAKE race war, now at AFP’s Online Store

The new lawsuit against NBC continues: “NBCUniversal’s attacks on Nicholas included at least fifteen (15) defamatory television broadcasts, six (6) defamatory online articles, and many tweets falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (‘CovCath’) classmates of racist acts. NBCUniversal continued to promote its false narrative that Nicholas had instigated a racist confrontation with Phillips long after Phillips was exposed as a fraud whose version of events was not entitled to any credibility by responsible members of the media.”

The new lawsuit against NBC continues: “NBCUniversal’s attacks on Nicholas included at least fifteen (15) defamatory television broadcasts, six (6) defamatory online articles, and many tweets falsely accusing Nicholas and his Covington Catholic High School (‘CovCath’) classmates of racist acts. NBCUniversal continued to promote its false narrative that Nicholas had instigated a racist confrontation with Phillips long after Phillips was exposed as a fraud whose version of events was not entitled to any credibility by responsible members of the media.”

The lawsuit adds: “Between Jan. 19 and Jan. 27, NBCUniversal unleashed its vast corporate wealth, influence, and power against Nicholas to falsely attack him despite the fact that, at the time, he was a 16-year-old high-school student. Throughout its coverage, NBCUniversal refused to admit the truth that incontrovertible video evidence established that Nicholas, a minor child, did nothing wrong and was instead the victim of two separate groups of adult political activists before becoming the victim of NBCUniversal and the mainstream media.”

NBC recently promoted this demonstrably false narrative again, on an episode of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit,” casting some Covington-style teens as bad guys, and a politician clearly based on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) in a heroic role.

These lawsuits come at an especially germane moment, given the alarming increase in online censorship, especially on social media. If Sandmann is able to win under our legal system, it would strike a powerful blow against the irresponsible propaganda being issued incessantly by virtually every organ in the mainstream media, as well as its clueless sycophants in the celebrity world.

More on Nicholas Sandmann, from AFP Issue 19 & 20, April May 6 & 13:

Kentucky Teen Continues Quest for Justice

Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann is unafraid to challenge the world’s biggest fake news outlets!

By Donald Jeffries

The impending legal battle between a Catholic teenager from Kentucky and the most powerful mainstream media outlets in the country is about to heat up. Attorneys Lin Wood and Todd McMurtry have already filed lawsuits for $250 million against The Washington Post and for $275 million against CNN. Other establishment press outlets, hateful celebrities, and Native American elder Nathan Phillips will face legal repercussions as well.

The lawyers for Nick Sandmann, the teen who was confronted by Phillips and maligned as a “racist” in the national media, have posted a powerful new two-minute video, “Nick Sandmann vs Media Giants,” under the hashtag #ReformOurMedia. It begins, “The Washington Post, owned by the richest man in the world, led the print media’s false attacks against Nicholas’s reputation. CNN led the broadcast media’s charge. . . . Both recklessly spread lies about a minor to advance their own financial and political agendas.”

The video accuses the Post and CNN of having “doubled down on their reckless lies” in spite of the clear evidence revealed by raw video footage of the incident. In the new video, the state-run media is accused of propagating “lies that will forever haunt and endanger the life of an innocent young man, lies that further divided our nation. How long will we allow these media giants to tear at the fabric of our lives to further their own agendas? Will they ever be held accountable?” The video closes by declaring that the embattled 16- year-old from Covington High School “has taken a stand for himself and for you,” and vows that his attorneys “will not be stopped until these goliath corporations are held accountable for their lack of journalistic integrity. Until then, no one’s reputation is safe.”

Attorney Wood points out that his young client “did absolutely nothing wrong. If they can get away with this against a 16-year-old boy then we’re all at risk.”

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

McMurtry recently told Fox Radio that next to be sued are NBC, the Associated Press, HBO and its obnoxious talk show host Bill Maher, who smarmily declared on a Jan. 27 broadcast, “I don’t blame the kid, the smirking kid. I blame lead poisoning and bad parenting. And, oh yeah, I blame the f**king kid. What a little p**ck. Smirk-face! Like that’s not a d**k move at any age to stick your face in this elderly man’s. . . .”

Wood tweeted out in response, “Bill Maher falsely accused Nick Sandmann of sticking his face in ‘this elderly man’s face.’ He vilified Nick by using obscene profanities to describe a 16-year-old. HBO counsel wrote, ‘Any effort to pursue a claim against HBO or Mr. Maher would be frivolous.’ I disagree. Do you?”

McMurtry continued, “But right now we’re looking very carefully at NBC, AP, HBO. And again, HBO is primarily because they carry Bill Maher’s disgusting comments about Nicholas Sandmann. So those probably are the next three defendants.”

This writer interviewed McMurtry on the March 15 “I Protest” radio program. McMurtry explained how he became involved in the case after watching the outrageously biased and inaccurate mainstream media coverage and horrifying personal attacks on the underage Sandmann.

McMurty said that they chose to sue The Washington Post first because, “They were really the first news organization to go from Twitter into the media realm. They went from social media to media.” Regarding CNN, McMurtry stated, “We sued them second because they are, in our view, the largest media organization that did the most damage . . . there’s up to 450 million households worldwide that have CNN.”

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Store – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

McMurtry stood by Sandmann, explaining that “he was put in a difficult situation and I think he behaved perfectly.”

In terms of the media blasting the teenager for his “smirk,” which evokes comparisons to George Orwell’s “facecrime” from 1984, McMurtry maintained that “he was vilified for that. I think that is the definition of Orwellian.”

To date, those who defamed Sandmann and his fellow classmates at Covington Catholic High School have been reticent to apologize or accept responsibility for their inaccurate reporting. The Washington Post reluctantly acknowledged, in terms of its initial coverage, that “Subsequent reporting, a student’s statement, and additional video allow for a more complete assessment of what occurred, either contradicting or failing to confirm accounts provided in that story.”

Attorneys Wood and McMurtry called the response “arrogant” and said that the newspaper “did not have the integrity to unequivocally admit its negligent and reckless violations of fundamental journalistic standards documented by its complete failure to investigate the incident at the National Mall before publishing lies about a child.”

CNN’s tepid response noted it had “reported on a newsworthy event and public discussion about it, taking care to report on additional facts as they developed. . . .”

President Donald Trump, as always busy on Twitter, tweeted out his support for the lawsuits with “Go get them, Nick. Fake News!”

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Hillary’s Missing Emails Found in Obama Oval Office, Says FBI

Thanks to the perseverance of Judicial Watch, a high-level FBI official has admitted, under oath, that the agency found Hillary Clinton emails hiding in President Barack Obama’s Oval Office. 

By Donald Jeffries

Judicial Watch has reported the bombshell information that an FBI official has admitted under oath that the agency found Hillary Clinton’s notorious emails in the Executive Office of the then-president—Barack Obama.

In court-ordered discovery the same senior FBI official, Assistant Director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division Bill Priestap, also said that the agency had reviewed nearly 49,000 emails from Clinton’s server as a result of the search warrant for her material on the laptop belonging to former Rep. Anthony Weiner (DN. Y.). At the time, Weiner was married to Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered senior State Department officials, lawyers in the Obama administration, aides to Clinton, and Priestap to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. In approving the discovery plan submitted by Judicial Watch, the court referred to the Clinton email system as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

Priestap had testified in a separate lawsuit that Clinton was the subject of a grand jury investigation related to her BlackBerry email accounts.


“This astonishing confirmation, made under oath by the FBI, shows that the Obama FBI had to go to President Obama’s White House office to find emails that Hillary Clinton tried to destroy or hide from the American people,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton stated. “No wonder Hillary Clinton has thus far skated—Barack Obama is implicated in her email scheme.”

Judicial Watch’s discovery is specifically seeking answers to “whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system, whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith, and whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request.”

In an April 25 interview with Newsmax TV, Fitton accused the Department of Justice of conducting a “sham investigation to protect Clinton and Obama and target Trump.” On the same day, Fitton leveled that identical accusation in an appearance on “Lou Dobbs Tonight” on the Fox Business Network. Fitton has also suggested that President Donald Trump should file a criminal complaint with the Department of Justice over being illicitly targeted.

Earlier this year, Judicial Watch examined 186 pages of Justice Department records, which included emails documenting a coverup of potential violations of law by Clinton when she was secretary of state. Judicial Watch obtained the records under a January 2018 FOIA lawsuit, which was filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to their initial December 2017 FOIA request.

The watchdog group is also attempting to obtain all communications between former FBI official Peter Strzok and his ex-lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page. A July 8, 2016 email chain reveals that just three days after then-FBI Director James Comey’s press conference, in which he announced that he would not be recommending prosecution of Clinton, the special counsel to the FBI’s executive assistant director of the National Security Branch, whose name is redacted, wrote to Strzok and others that he was producing a “chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute. . . .” This individual further stated: “I am still working on an additional page for these [talking points] that consist of a chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation, and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute, hopefully in non-lawyer friendly terms. . . .”

It is sobering to compare this secrecy to all that was made of the emails of private citizens like Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone, in a convoluted effort to associate them in some way with Julian Assange, who was just as dubiously tied to Russian officials.

Meanwhile, the admitted destruction of servers containing the former secretary of state’s emails has been forgotten.

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

Deep State Conditions Public for War

News flash: It’s America, not Russia, that is the real danger to world peace.

By Paul Craig Roberts

The Russian embassy in Washington has prepared an accurate 121-page report, “The Russiagate Hysteria: A Case of Severe Russophobia.” Everyone should read this report. It documents the fake news, lies, violations of diplomatic standards and international law, and gratuitous aggressive actions taken against Russia during the period beginning May 18, 2016 and continuing through the issuance of the Mueller report.

Without explicitly saying so, the report shows that neither the U.S. government nor the American media has a nanoparticle of integrity. Both are criminal organizations that are willing to risk war with Russia in their pursuit of narrow politicized agendas.

This is important information for Americans and the rest of the world to have. Every person, every government, and every private organization that supports Washington’s Russophobic policies is contributing to the growing threat of nuclear war.

Kingdom Identity

One hopes also that the entirety of the Russian government, media, and population also read the report, as it has equally powerful messages for Russia. The messages are no doubt unintended, but they nevertheless emerge from the embassy’s report.

The Russian government should marvel at its naivete in trusting Washington, U.S. institutions such as Citibank, and U.S. adherence to international law. For 121 pages the report lists transgression against Russia followed by transgression and lie followed by lie, yet the Russian government continues to send diplomatic notes that are never answered, requests for meetings that are never answered, requests for evidence that are never answered. One would think that month after month of abuse would have caused the Russian government to wonder, where was the intelligence, “cooperative spirit,” reason, and “common interest in global security” that Russia’s responses to Washington assumed were present in Russia’s “partner”?

The Russian government’s naive and gullible response to Washington played into Washington’s hands. By responding to Washington’s orchestrated Russophobia as if it were some kind of mistake based on bad information, the Russian government allowed Washington to keep the process of demonization alive and thereby contributed to the ongoing demonization of Russia. If, instead, the Russian government had denounced the demonization of Russia as Washington’s act of preparing Americans for war with Russia and had taken a belligerent rather than a complaining stance, the realization that Washington’s policy had serious cost would have spread throughout the U.S. and Europe, and voices would have arisen against Washington’s dangerous and reckless policy. Today, in place of the uniformity of voice against Russia, there would be dissent opposing Washington’s irresponsible provocations.

The danger of Russian self-delusion is not over. The embassy’s report expresses the hope that now that special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of President Donald Trump and his campaign has concluded that the much-heralded collusion has no basis in fact, relations between Washington and Russia can be normalized and cooperation achieved.

Is there a plan to confront Russia in Iran? More at the AFP Online Store.

There is no such possibility. The Democrats are screaming “coverup” and demanding the resignation of Attorney General Barr and Trump’s impeachment. The presstitutes are claiming that the Mueller report vindicates their reporting.

In addition, Trump continues to use U.S. foreign policy to commit criminal acts. He has declared that the president of Venezuela is the person he picked, not the one Venezuelans elected. He has given to Israel part of Syria as if Syrian territory is his to give. He threatens Iran with war as Israel requires. In other words, American arrogance rises to ever higher heights.

At some point the Russian government and Russian people are going to have to accept the fact that to reach an understanding with Washington Russia must either surrender her sovereignty or become as belligerent as Washington and replace Russia’s useless refutations of Washington’s accusations with accusations of her own. Otherwise, Washington is going to keep pushing until war is the only possible outcome.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Ronald Reagan and was associate editor and columnist at The Wall Street Journal. He has been a professor of economics in six universities and is the author of numerous books available at AFP’s Online Store.

Globalists Lie Low

The front-page story of AFP Issue 19 & 20 (available here for AFP Online subscribers; click here to review subscription options) asks, has Europe become too hot for the elite Bilderberg meeting? Where will they meet this year?

By Mark Anderson

Europe has become too inhospitable for Bilderberg, at least for the time being, according to Tony Gosling, a former colleague of AFP Bilderberg hound Jim Tucker, who worked with Tucker for several years exposing Bilderberg.

Gosling, an investigative journalist from Bristol, UK, points out that “euroskeptics,” who oppose the eurozone and the European Union itself—the very creation of which was nurtured by Bilderberg—said that candidates and politicians who want the national sovereignty of their nations restored are making headway, getting into political office. This includes Germany.

As a result, news of a Bilderberg meeting in Europe at a time of such strong anti-globalist sentiment and developments could prove damaging for the group, especially in terms of bringing back unwanted, widespread publicity about the secretive gathering—something the group has labored to control and reduce as much as possible in its more than six decades of existence.

National Coin Investments

“They could cause a lot of trouble for themselves meeting in Europe,” Gosling said, as Bilderberg prepares for its 67th meeting in 65 years. “They could end up on a lot of front pages, which they don’t want.”

That kind of publicity was seen last year when Italian populist politicos in the Five Star Movement and other parties made noise against Bilderberg’s meeting in Turin, Italy. While the coverage was not “deafening,” to Bilderberg—a transnational planning and networking outfit that brings together the best, the brightest, and the wealthiest from carefully selected fields in the public and private sectors—any sustained or meaningful coverage that doesn’t dismiss Bilderberg’s opponents is darkly frowned upon.

The UK’s Daily Mail newspaper did manage to briefly infiltrate the 2018 Bilderberg meeting in Italy. While the infiltration was limited and the resulting article was not up to AFP’s or Gosling’s standards, the development was another pushback against Bilderberg’s secrecy in Europe—the cradle of its birth in 1954 via Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and obscure European Movement organizer Josef Retinger. CIA money helped fund the first Bilderberg meeting in the Netherlands at the Hotel de Bilderberg, hence the group’s name.

Since Europe may prove too “hot” for Bilderberg for now, and Bilderberg met too recently (2017) in the U.S. to return to the States, where might they meet this year?

The strong belief is Canada will host the next gathering. The Bilderbergers last met there in 2006 at the Brookstreet Hotel in the national capital of Ottawa. A return there appeared possible at press time, since Bilderberg rather frequently returns to past venues. The group has met at the Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Va., several times, including in 2008, 2012, and 2017.

Subscribe to AFP

Another august hotel in Ottawa where the group could conceivably meet is the Hotel Fairmont Chateau Laurier, where even the cheapest rooms book for more than $600 per night.

“It’s always a guessing game,” said Gosling, who warmly remembers working with Tucker—something this writer did three times in 2010 through 2012. “The group always puts out a lot of bum steers to mislead the Bilderberg watchers.”

Author Daniel Estulin, another longtime Bilderberg watcher who in 2017 released a movie about Bilderberg, told AFP that even he did not know where the group will meet in 2019, indicating perhaps that the Bilderbergers are trying to put the proverbial “publicity genie” back in the bottle and avoid hostile environments whenever possible.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Lack of Pact With Mexico Means Heavy Asylum Requests for U.S.

By shunning its international obligations, Mexico is causing a flood of asylum requests within the United States by Central Americans who legally should be applying for asylum at the first foreign border they reach.

By Mark Anderson

There are unsubstantiated claims that Central Americans, especially those from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, are subjected to persecution, assaults, murder etc. in such a consistent manner that they have no choice but to uproot and flee their home countries in droves. Yet, rather than obtaining sanctuary in Mexico in order to remain close enough to home to return should the need arise, they instead risk their lives and the lives of their children crossing some 1,900 miles of often forbidding Mexican territory to enter the United States.

So why don’t they seek asylum in Mexico if they need immediate relief from persecution? And if they’re seeking asylum in the U.S., what happened to the Hague Convention and Protocol, which has long required that refugees leaving a presumably violence-torn home country must seek asylum in the first non-hostile country that they enter?

Kingdom Identity

Dan Cadman of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based think tank, shared his views on the matter.

“The problems are multiple, but the answer is yes, the International [Hague] Convention and Protocol still requires people seeking safe haven to ask [for asylum] in the first country at which they can reasonably do so,” he informed this writer.

However, legalistic meddling and liberal interpretations of the convention have made the rules pliable.

“The way that convention has been codified into U.S. law by Congress used slightly different wording, which, as lawyers and legalists argue, levies an expectation on the U.S. to entertain the requests for asylum,” he said.

He went on to explain that the key to solving the problem is for the United States to enter into a bilateral agreement with Mexico to require America’s southern neighbor to honor its obligations under the convention in the manner that Canada does.

“Despite the fact that Mexico is also a signatory to the Convention and Protocol, we have no bilateral agreement with Mexico—as we do with Canada—to make them live up to their obligations,” Cadman continued.

Thus, the core problem is the absence of such a pact with Mexico, which is aggravated by liberal courts and activist lawyers gaming the system.

“There are a lot of progressive activists in the country these days—including on the bench—and this is the interpretation that they choose to focus on,” Cadman summarized, referring to the expectation that the U.S., with its overly generous welfare system serving as a beacon, is the place to which asylum seekers must travel.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Un-making Sex-Change Decisions: ‘De-transitioning’ a New Challenge

With some 17% of transgendered young adults now wanting to change back to their original biological gender after changing, “de-transitioning” is a new difficulty being faced by this confused and highly propagandized generation.

By Tilton Adler

Making and un-making decisions is a constant in life. As free-thinking adults, we base our decisions on the information, knowledge, and experience we’ve gained over many years. However, for a growing number of 13- to 24-year-old “transgender” individuals, un-making some decisions is easier said than done. Enter the upside-down world of “de-transitioning.”

De-transitioning is defined as changing back to one’s original biological gender after having become a transgendered person.

Some estimates purport 17% of individuals who identify as transgender during their teenage years will eventually transition back to their biological gender, often doing so only after they have started dangerous hormone blocking therapies and irreversible medical treatments.

Increasingly, psychiatrists and medical doctors are writing prescriptions for testosterone and estrogen, hormone blockers that can have a permanent effect with the first dose, especially for children.

Doctors are taking the “affirmative approach,” which is to say they are blindly accepting a child’s naïve belief that they are “trans,” without any real psychological evaluation or clinical observation. Children are being trusted to make life-altering decisions for themselves regarding the chemistry of their bodies years before they are trusted to vote, join the military, or even buy alcohol.

National Coin Investments

One result of this reckless acceptance is that those same 13-year-old kids are now 22-year-old adults and are deciding they aren’t transgender after all. With their body’s hormones a wreck and their emotional state fragile, we have a generation left in biological limbo. What long-term effects the puberty-blocking hormones will have is yet to be determined. Will reproductive abilities be lost? Will these individuals’ behavioral and emotional development be altered? The question of the role government should or shouldn’t have in preventing doctors from prescribing such drugs to patients under the age of 18 is just beginning to be debated.

Another issue plaguing the parents and families of teens questioning their own gender is known as Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD)—kids who grew up perfectly content with being a boy or a girl until they became obsessed with stories on the Internet of people “fixing their problems” by deciding they are transgender. Psychologist Dr. Lisa Littman defines this developing epidemic as, “A type of late-onset gender dysphoria where the development of gender dysphoria is observed suddenly during or after puberty in a young adult who would not have met criteria for [transgender] in childhood.”

These adolescents convince themselves they are transgender only after watching countless hours of YouTube videos in which their “transgender” peers use phrases like, “I’ve found the real me,” or, “I finally fit in somewhere.”

The teenage years are difficult and full of self-doubt and are the years in which we try on many hats. Are we athletic or poetic? Are we shy or outgoing? Are we comfortable in our own skin, or do we wish we were physically different? It is an essential time in life during which we begin to figure out who we are.

Coddling of the American Mind
New at AFP’s Online Store.

One thing psychologists know about ROGD is that it’s seldom a permanent condition. In many cases, teens are expressing themselves as transgender more as a way to be part of a fad than as a life-long commitment. Acting on this fad or transient condition when young then leads to— you guessed it—de-transitioning as they age.

Many of the choices we make at age 15 are not right for us as we mature, and fortunately, many such teenage choices do not have lifelong impact. Changing our gender is not one of those choices, however.

Many see society’s growing fascination with the tiny portion of our population who identify as transgender as a passing trend. We may know people who are grappling with gender issues but most of us do not. Yet never before has the Internet had such a monstrous hook in our youth, and they are acting on these social pressures in growing numbers. It is difficult but important to realize the difficulty this generation faces now; how much more difficult will it be when, a few years from now, they realize their decision to transition was made as a still-foolish teen based on nothing more than very convincing propaganda? As they come to this realization and choose to de-transition, let this be a time of supporting the un-making of decisions.

Tilton Adler is a freelance writer based in Florida.

Democrats Shamed by Black Conservative

Black conservative commentator Candace Owens says congressional “hate hearings” are really about “fear-mongering, power, and control.”

By John Friend

On April 9, the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a fierce critic of President Trump, held a rather Orwellian hearing focusing on hate crimes and the rise of white nationalism in America. Once again, the mainstream political establishment made perfectly clear its utter disdain and contempt for white Americans who hold positive, pro-white perspectives by deriding and slandering such ideas as “bigoted” and “hateful.”

Unsurprisingly, not a single pro-white advocate was invited to speak to the committee. Instead, a variety of social justice advocates, including a representative from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the president of the Equal Justice Society, made appearances before the committee in order to denounce the alleged “threat” of white nationalist ideology and the spread of “hate” on social media platforms and other sectors of the Internet, which many witnesses before the committee insisted has been facilitated and even encouraged by President Donald Trump.

“White supremacists in the United States have experienced a resurgence in the past three years, driven in large part by the rise of the alt-right,” Eileen Hershenov, the senior vice president of policy for the ADL, proffered in her prepared remarks before the committee. “There is also a clear corollary, as our research shows, to the rise in polarizing and hateful rhetoric on the part of candidates and elected leaders,” Hershenov noted, referring to Trump.

Kingdom Identity

Hershenov went on to hype the alleged threat of rightwing violence, dubiously arguing that so-called white supremacists have been responsible for “more than half of all domestic extremist-related murders in the past 10 years.”

“So, there is a crucial need for this hearing, focusing on white nationalism—not because other types of extremism aren’t dangerous, but because we as a society, our laws, and our elected leaders have not focused sufficiently on the rising threat of white supremacy,” Hershenov declared before moving on to discuss the role social media has played in allowing “hate to spread.”

Facebook and Google, two of the largest Internet companies, which own other large social media platforms including Instagram and YouTube, also had representatives at the hearing and insisted they are doing everything in their power to prevent the spread of “hate” and “white supremacist” ideology on their platforms.

“There is no place for terrorism or hate on Facebook,” Neil Potts, public policy director for Facebook, stated in his testimony before the committee. “We remove any content that incites violence.”

Facebook recently announced a new policy to ban any sort of “praise, support, and representation of white nationalism and white separatism” on its platform, which this newspaper reported on at the time.

Perhaps the most interesting and reality-based testimony came from Candace Owens, a young black conservative who serves as communications director for Turning Points USA, which seeks to advance conservative causes on college campuses across America. In her explosive testimony, which went viral on social media in the aftermath of the hearings, Owens blasted Democrats and their fear-based political strategies, which she powerfully argued have been used so effectively to keep blacks and other minorities down.

“We’re hearing [terms like ‘white nationalism’] sent around today because what they want to say is that brown people want to be scared, which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years ahead of a presidential election,” Owens stated in her testimony.

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

She went on to note some of the real problems facing the black community in America today, including poor education and test scores, rampant criminality and violence, abortion, and single-parent families, problems that, according to Owens, have been fostered by policies promoted by Democrats—not white nationalists.

“The hearing today is not about white nationalism or hate crimes; it’s about fear-mongering, power, and control,” Owens insisted. “The goal here is to scare blacks, Hispanics, gays, and Muslims, helping [Democrats] censor dissenting opinions … helping them regain control.”

Owens went on to argue that the statistics being used to allege an increase in white nationalist violence are being manipulated for political gain by Democrats, while actual instances and threats of violence coming from the radical left and antifa groups are being downplayed and ignored.

“If they actually were concerned about white nationalism they would be holding hearings on antifa, a far-left violent white gang who determined, one day in Philadelphia, that I, a black woman, was not fit to sit in a restaurant,” Owens said. “They threw water at me, they threw eggs at me, and the leftist media were silent on it.”

In a sane world, hearings would be held on the groups and organizations engaging and promoting political violence, which largely emanates from the radical left. Leftwing political violence and hate speech has largely been ignored by the political and media establishment, which constantly focuses on alleged rightwing extremism and violence that is often mischaracterized, distorted, or outright fabricated.

John Friend is a freelance author based in California.

More New ‘AIPACs’ Popping Up

Concern that Israel is losing its grip on U.S. politicians is breeding even more pro-Zionist lobby groups.

By Philip Giraldi

New organizations dedicated to “defending” Israel are proliferating due to concerns that the American people are finally waking up to the fact that they have been getting ripped off by a vast Zionist conspiracy for the past 70-plus years. Ironically, while it has become possible to criticize Israel even in the mainstream media, the United States government itself has become more firmly in the grasp of the Israel lobby, most recently manifested in bills passed by Congress pledging undying love and affection for war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu and all his works. This has been due in large part to the effective lobbying by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which met in Washington in March and drew 18,000 of its supporters to both show up and lobby their congressmen.

The congressional love affair with Israel has been accompanied by billions of dollars in U.S. taxpayer-provided Danegeld per annum plus a de facto commitment to send American soldiers to fight and die for Israel even if Netanyahu starts a war for no reason whatsoever.

National Coin Investments

By one estimate there are 600 groups operating in the United States with the objective of promoting Israel’s interests. They run the gamut, politically speaking, and include leftward leaning organizations, like J Street, that aggressively support a two-state solution for Israel-Palestine while at the same time ignoring the fact that Israel has expanded its settlements in such a fashion as to make a Palestinian state unrealizable. On the extreme right is a group founded in 2010, which calls itself the Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI), headed by none other than Bill Kristol, former editor of the now thankfully defunct Weekly Standard magazine. The ECI board included Rachel Abrams, wife of pardoned felon Elliott Abrams, who is currently seeking to destroy Venezuela.

ECI is largely inactive at the present time, but when it was launched it claimed to be the most pro-Israel of all pro-Israel groups, which would be quite an achievement. It was most active in 2010-14 when it ran full-page ads against liberal advocacy groups, attacked the Occupy Wall Street movement for being anti-Semitic, and criticized individual congressmen for not being sufficiently pro-Israel. In 2013 the group came out against the proposed appointment of Chuck Hagel as secretary of defense because he had once mildly criticized Israel.

The recent controversy over comments critical of Israel and its lobby made by newly elected Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) has sparked a wave of pro-Israel activism in and around Congress. At the end of January a new political group was formed by several prominent veteran Democrats, “alarmed by the party’s drift from its longstanding alignment with Israel.” The new group, which is calling itself the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMI), will support Democratic Party candidates who “stand unwaveringly” with the Jewish state.

The group, which is headed by Mark Mellman, a leading Democratic Party pollster, already has some “substantial” funding from the usual Jewish Democratic Party donors and it is interested in assisting potential candidates who are unambiguously supportive of Israel because of “shared values” and its contribution as “one of America’s strongest allies.” The website promises: “We will work to maintain and strengthen support for Israel among Democratic leaders including presidential and congressional candidates as well as with the grassroots of progressive movements. We are committed to doing so because we recognize that America’s relationship with Israel, the sole democracy in the Middle East, is a mutually beneficial one based on shared values and shared interests.”

Due to the fact that the common values and interests are difficult to identify—as they hardly exist and Israel is neither an ally nor a democracy—it might be tough sledding to convince skeptics of the actual value of the relationship for Americans. Instead, one suspects that the group will rely on the usual appeals to tribal or religious sentiment and citations of the holocaust coupled with threats of anti-Semitism leveled against those who question the formula. In reality, DMI, which will be active in state primaries, will likely create incentives through development of a funding mechanism for potential candidates who are enthusiastic about Israel while withholding funds from those who are not.

Exploding Middle East Myths
On sale now at AFP’s Online Store.

And there will be opposition to the snake oil DMI is selling, not only from Omar. She and Palestinian-American Rashida Tlaib of Michigan both support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, and there are also a number of other new congressmen who will not hesitate to criticize Israel when it uses lethal force against Palestinian demonstrators. There are also reports that Democratic Party-declared presidential candidates Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Kirsten Gillibrand, Jay Inslee, and Julian Castro have all confirmed they didn’t attend the AIPAC conference this year, possibly linked to a call by the leading progressive grassroots organization MoveOn for a boycott. Opinion polls also indicate that Democrats who sympathize more with Israel than with the Palestinians is at an all-time low of 19%.

Another new bipartisan pro-Israel political action committee was also launched in March in Washington. Pro-Israel America is headed by two former senior AIPAC staff members, Jonathan Missner and Jeff Mendelsohn. It is intended to provide political donations to candidates from either major party who adopt pro-Israel positions. On its initial list, it endorsed a total of 27 candidates— 14 Democrats and 13 Republicans—all of whom have demonstrated a willingness to support pro-Israel legislation in Congress.

The list predictably includes Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.); Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the majority leader in the House; Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the Foreign Affairs Committee’s ranking Republican.

A press release from Pro-Israel America composed by Mendelsohn stated its mission: “The best way to strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship is to elect pro-Israel candidates to Congress, and that requires political action from the thousands of Americans who care deeply about this issue.”

The Pro-Israel America website, which is still under construction, will reportedly encourage small donations to political campaigns, unlike the usual practice of bundling to create large contributions. Potential donors will be able to go to the website, evaluate candidates based on their pro-Israel credentials, and then contribute directly to their campaigns.

The inaugural issue of Deep Truth Journal is now at the AFP Store.

Finally, there is a third new online group called Jexodus, headed by a swimsuit model named Elizabeth Pipko, that is trying to convince Jewish voters to leave the Democratic Party and become Republicans because the GOP is now the party of Israel. It is hard to argue with that, as President Donald Trump has now moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has declared that God elected Trump to save the Jews from Iran. There will likely be even more concessions to Netanyahu in the lead-up to America’s own upcoming election in 2020.

All of the pro-Israel groups taken together constitute a veritable political juggernaut that seeks to advantage Israel and benefit it directly without regard for the damage done to American democracy and to actual U.S. interests. They should rightly be seen as organizations that regard their loyalty to the United States as negotiable, but they try to obfuscate the issue by claiming, wrongly, that there exist compelling reasons why Israel and the U.S. should continue to be best friends.

As Americans increasingly begin to appreciate how Israel is in fact a serious liability, that line will not continue to sell very well, no matter how many congressmen and tame journalists are bought and no matter how many new groups pop up like mushrooms funded by Jewish billionaires. Change is coming.

Philip Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer and a columnist and television commentator. He is also the executive director of the Council for the National Interest. Other articles by Giraldi can be found on the website of the Unz Review.

Collusion Hoax Kills TV Ratings

Even left-leaning television viewers have realized the charges against Trump were fake news, and ratings have taken a hit as more and more Americans turn off the mainstream media.

By Donald Jeffries

While the establishment left desperately awaited the release of the full report issued by special counsel Robert Mueller, in the hopes of an imaginary smoking gun being discovered, an increasing number of Americans are turning off mainstream media. Both CNN and MSNBC, the television networks most vociferously pushing the absurd Russian “collusion” theory, experienced their second lowest ratings of the year in early April, according to Nielsen research. CNN has fallen behind the likes of Home and Garden TV and children’s network Nickelodeon in daytime ratings.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, perhaps the loudest voice in the state-run media howling about President Donald Trump conspiring with the Russians, lost half a million viewers just in the first week after the conclusions of the Mueller probe were reported. Her show has fallen an alarming 34% from the same point last year. Fox News, widely considered the television network fairest to Trump, has solidified its dominance in the ratings, and widened its lead on their more “liberal” counterparts throughout the Mueller investigation.

While mainstream television’s ratings are sinking rapidly, and establishment newspapers and magazines continue to go the way of the dinosaur, the public’s confidence in the press is dropping as well. A new poll by the Morning Consult revealed that, even among Democrats, faith in the biggest “liberal” media organs such The New York Times, NPR, CNN, NBC, and ABC dipped from July to December 2018, a time period when Russian “collusion” was front and center for all those outlets. The release of this poll came less than a month after Mueller’s probe concluded there was no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

National Coin Investments

In September 2018, a joint Knight Foundation and Gallup Poll found that public trust in the mainstream media had fallen to an all-time low. A majority of those surveyed said they had lost faith in the media in recent years, with 30% reporting that they expected this loss of faith to be permanent. The Trump effect was obvious; when people were asked why they didn’t trust the media, 45% cited inaccuracy, bias, and “fake news.” In an earlier 2018 poll, it was revealed that among high-profile institutions, public trust in newspapers and television news was lower than for any except Congress. The gap between liberals and conservatives is immense here; recent polls have shown that while 51% of Democrats trust mass media, only 14% of Republicans do.

The mainstream media has certainly done nothing over the years to earn the public trust. In 1990, CNN featured a seemingly terrified reporter Charles Jaco, covering a scud missile attack live from Iraq. What would subsequently be revealed, through video leaked by CNN staffers, was the fact Jaco was on a sound stage, complete with fake palm trees in the background. He could be seen clowning around with staff members before the “attack,” during which he dramatically donned a gas mask. Since CNN never publicly acknowledged or apologized for this serious breach of journalistic ethics, is it any wonder they cavalierly dismiss the potential lawsuit against them by the family of young Nicholas Sandmann?

In a more recent example, longtime smiling pixie “journalist” Katie Couric was caught with her pants down, as producers used extremely deceptive editing in a 2016 documentary she narrated on gun control. Under the Gun featured what appeared to be speechless members of a Virginia gun rights group, who couldn’t provide a coherent response to Couric’s grilling about background checks. In fact, audio was later released that demonstrated these same “speechless” pro-gun advocates had explained their position coherently and thoroughly, but their words had simply been edited out.

Survival of the Richest, Jeffries
“Corruption of the marketplace” at the AFP Online Store.

Documentary producer Stephanie Soechtig issued a familiar justification, stating, “My intention was to provide a pause for the viewer to have a moment to consider this important question before presenting the facts on Americans’ opinions on background checks. I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.” The multi-millionaire talking head Couric backed her up, saying, “I support Stephanie’s statement and am very proud of this film.”

During the media-driven Trayvon Martin case a few years back, MSNBC was caught editing audio tape between George Zimmerman and a police dispatcher, in an overt effort to turn innocuous conversation into something “racist.”

In addition to this kind of outright deception, mainstream media outlets continue to push impossible official narratives to explain every significant event that happens around the world.

The fawning, pro-establishment tilt of our mainstream media became more apparent than ever during the Mueller probe, as “journalists” abandoned all pretenses towards objectivity and openly demanded that “something be done” about Trump. Their crusade to get the full Mueller report released represents a sole exception to their historical support for the suppression of government documents from the public.

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Two of his books are carried by the AFP Online Store.

Measles Hysteria Hits U.S.

Media hysteria over a measles “outbreak” in New York has reached a fever pitch, yet nary a word about frightening police-state measures being used against parents who choose to not have their children vaccinated with the apparently dangerous MMR vaccine. 

By Mark Anderson

Recent commentary on the current reported measles outbreak from healthcare professionals and government officials, blasted across the major media nearly nonstop, amounts to virtual hysteria, with unvaccinated people being singled out on the basis of utterly biased reporting. While public confidence in vaccine safety is decreasing, public debate is being essentially forbidden. Now, police-state measures threatening fines and quarantine of those refusing vaccines are rising, with persecution of the unvaccinated already happening in some places.

In Rockland County, N.Y., where 186 cases of measles in its population of about 329,000 have been logged since Oct. 2018, the health commissioner announced anyone who “is unvaccinated, has a laboratory-confirmed case of measles, has been identified by a health investigation as being exposed to measles, and is under age 18 will be issued an order to essentially stay at home for up to 21 days.” Parents or guardians who fail to comply with this order are threatened with a $2,000 fine per day.

In New York City, where an outbreak among ultra-Orthodox Jews that started in the fall when a child returned from Israel contagious with measles, Mayor Bill de Blasio declared a “public health emergency” and issued an executive order mandating vaccination in the neighborhoods of Brooklyn and Queens affected by the outbreak. Anyone who has not been vaccinated against measles or cannot show evidence of immunity could face a $1,000 fine.

Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe
Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe” available at the AFP Online Store.

“Unvaccinated people are being blamed all over the place and people [in reaction] are actually starting to get the vaccine even if they’re older” out of fear, Joe Martino, host of the YouTube-based news show “Collective Evolution,” recently observed. He points to a USA Today video production titled, “How the anti-vax movement brought the measles back from near extinction.” The video description states: “Outbreaks across the U.S. have forced officials to declare emergencies. Why are we starting to see the rise of these outbreaks? It dates back to the antivax movement.”

The video states, “[I]n some places, parents can be fined $500 or spend 6 months in jail for not vaccinating their kids. In one New York county, unvaccinated kids are banned from appearing in any public place. . . . The World Health Organization reported that people who chose not to vaccinate are a global health threat.”

USA Today blames the decreasing compliance with measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination requirements on research by Dr. Andrew Wakefield published in The Lancet in 1998, which it calls “one of the most serious frauds in medical history.”

Martino and fellow journalist Arjun Walia, however, note that mass media and pro-vaccine institutions have long misrepresented that Wakefield, a gastroenterologist, firmly linked the MMR vaccine to autism in his published, peer-reviewed findings. In fact, they explain, Wakefield simply proposed a connection between gastro-intestinal issues and autism and noted the possibility of an MMR vaccination linkage. Wakefield clearly stated that more research is needed, yet he lost his medical license, and his reputation was, and continues to be, irreparably smeared worldwide.

While USA Today doesn’t note any of the many other developments suggesting the measles vaccine either isn’t effective or actually causes the very illness it’s supposed to prevent, parents choosing not to vaccinate can point to many studies. For instance:

  • An American Journal of Public Health 1991 study cited an early-1988 outbreak of 84 measles cases at a Colorado college where over 98% of students had documentation of “adequate” measles vaccinations—which is above the “herd immunity” threshold.
  • In a 2011 outbreak, during which unvaccinated people were demonized, a study from New York City’s Bureau of Immunization of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene “actually traced the measles outbreak to a vaccinated individual who had been twice vaccinated, and they concluded that the measles may occur in vaccinated individuals and secondary transmissions from such vaccine individuals is documented,” as Walia explained, noting these were just two of dozens of studies that exist.
  • In support of recent legislation (H.B. 1638) in Washington state, biochemical engineer Brian S. Hooker, who has published multiple papers on the issue of ineffective vaccines, addressing a House committee, said: “There’s a problem with measles in Washington . . . but it’s not low vaccination rates. It’s actually high rates with a vaccination product unable to provide lifetime immunity or vigorous maternal protection to infants during their first year of life.”

Corporate Ties That Bind
“An Examination of Corporate Manipulation and Vested Interest in Public Health,” from the AFP Online Store.

Alternative health practitioner Brian David Andersen, of the Tri Vortex Institute in Palm Desert, Calif., recalled that the measles has always been one of those maladies “that you get once in childhood, stay home a few days from school, and then you’re naturally immune.” He added, “All that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other vaccine skeptics really want are impartial, rigorous studies to fully determine vaccine ingredients and find out, once and for all, if the vaccines actually work and are worth all the expense and the risks they create.”

“The whole ‘anti-vax’ movement is really moving up and they’re pushing back with fear,” he told AFP, referring to the medical establishment’s reaction—with multi-billions of dollars at stake. Perhaps this explains the alarming encroachment of the “medical police state” in places like New York City and California, where longstanding exemptions from vaccination requirements are being revoked, and “non-compliant” parents are being threatened with fines and incarceration.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. Email him at [email protected].

Rand Paul Demands Truth About Bogus Steele Dossier

Sen. Rand Paul believes Americans should be allowed to know what prompted the “Russiagate” investigation. He wants to know whether President Obama knew the Hillary Clinton campaign paid for the discredited Steele dossier and what role former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan played.

By S.T. Patrick

It now appears that a move on the part of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to delay the full release of the Mueller report was doomed from the start, but it is worth emphasizing that Paul was never acting out of acute partisanship. Rather, from the start, he has been making the case that a full investigation of the funding behind the dossier created by former UK spy Christopher Steele on Donald Trump be made public so Americans can learn for themselves what prompted the Trump-Russia collusion investigation.

Referring to the discredited dossier that was the basis behind the fervency of Russiagate’s truest believers, Paul stated, “What we don’t know is, was President Obama told that the evidence to get this investigation started was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign?”

Paul is calling for the release of communications between Obama-era officials, including former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan. In pushing for the communications to be released, Paul says he simply wants the “entire story to be told.”

Kingdom Identity

The Steele dossier was the origin of the mainstream media’s single-minded obsession with Russiagate. Now that it has proven to be baseless, its original financing is under wide-scale investigation by the alternative media. Paul is urging a deeper analysis of the document that was Russiagate’s ground zero.

“It was so scandalous and so unverified and has turned out to be untrue, and yet this was the basis for the beginning of the investigation. This was the basis for doing something extraordinary,” Paul said of the massive amount of time, money, and resources spent investigating the accusations of the Steele dossier.

The Steele dossier is named after former MI6 officer Christopher Steele, who was hired by Fusion GPS to use his expertise on Russian matters to investigate then-candidate Donald Trump’s ties to Vladimir Putin’s Russia. Steele was the former Moscow station chief for MI6, the British version of the CIA. The document Steele produced was written in the style of an intelligence report, rife with unnamed sources and consisting of a series of serious, scandalous accusations.

The Steele dossier contained six major claims of collusion: that Trump had cooperated with Russian authorities for years, that Trump was vulnerable to Russian blackmail due to sexual matters that had occurred in Russia, that a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” existed between Trump and Russia, that Trump campaign officials promised the Russians policy concessions in exchange for delivering stolen DNC emails to WikiLeaks, that campaign adviser Carter Page played a major role in the collusion, and that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen managed Trump’s relations with Russian agents.

In April 2016, attorney Marc Elias retained Fusion GPS through his law firm Perkins Coie and on behalf of the Democratic National Convention and the Hillary Clinton campaign. Fusion GPS is a D.C.-based research and intelligence company that specializes in political inquiries such as opposition research. The bills were paid by the campaign and the DNC, though today both the Clinton campaign and the DNC claim they were not aware of the details behind Fusion’s 2016 investigations.

It is now clear that the Steele dossier was a product of Clinton campaign opposition research. The intelligence community should henceforth investigate whether Steele was either purposely duped by Russian agents or knowingly colluding to produce a false document.

Deep State Target, Papadopoulos
Brand new at the AFP Online Story – the inside story from Papadopoulos!

A valid question is being asked about Russian collusion: Did Steele collude with Russian officials to produce a falsified document in order to benefit the Clinton campaign? To prove the answer is yes, it would have to be shown that Steele’s motivation was either directly political or was financial by way of a knowingly political motivation, e.g., Steele was doing it for the money, while knowing the result the Clinton campaign and Fusion GPS wanted. If so, this would absolutely be a real case of campaign collusion with Russian officials.

Matthew Yglesias and Andrew Prokop of the news website “Vox” explained the turn in use that the Steele dossier has taken. “Consequently, congressional Republicans who once supported the idea of investigating the Trump-Russia nexus have basically flipped around and are now primarily investigating the investigators—with the dossier now serving as an exhibit for the defense rather than the prosecution,” Yglesias and Prokop wrote.

Paul is one of the few senators with the ability and foresight to see the inherent precedents that have been set by the Russiagate investigation. Commenting on the long-term dangers of falsely ignited investigations, Paul said, “I think it’s very important that we not turn our country into this back and forth where each successive party tries to use the apparatus of government to investigate the previous president.”

S.T. Patrick holds degrees in both journalism and social studies education. He spent 10 years as an educator and now hosts the “Midnight Writer News Show.” His email is [email protected] He is also an occasional contributor to TBR history magazine and the current managing editor of Deep Truth Journal (DTJ), a new conspiracy-focused publication available from the AFP Online Store.