Connect with us

Latest

News

Over 100,000 people petition White House to declare ANTIFA a terrorist organization

The Soros-funed extreme-left group ANTIFA has already established a record of mayhem across Europe and America.

Ricky Twisdale

Published

on

2,667 Views

A petition currently active on the White House website is asking President Trump to officially designate “Anti-Fascist Action” or ANTIFA, as a terror group.

ANTIFA is a extreme left militant movement which started in Germany and has been active in Europe for a number of years. They are known to receive funding from billionaire regime change and social engineering sponsor George Soros.

Their modus operandi is using loud noise, physical obstruction and outright violence to disrupt peaceful, lawful assemblies by any group or person they oppose. Since the inauguration of President Trump, ANTIFA has seen a membership boom and already have a list of violent riots to their credit across the United States.

The petition, which was started on August 17th, has already easily soared past the 100,000 signatures required for an official response from the White House.

The text of the petition reads:

Terrorism is defined as “the use of violence and intimidation in pursuit of political aims”. This definition is the same definition used to declare ISIS and other groups, as terrorist organizations. AntiFa has earned this title due to its violent actions in multiple cities and their influence in the killings of multiple police officers throughout the United States. It is time for the pentagon to be consistent in its actions – and just as they rightfully declared ISIS a terror group, they must declare AntiFa a terror group – on the grounds of principle, integrity, morality, and safety.

The White House petition page was started by Barack Obama in 2011, but was criticized already at the time as a PR stunt. Donald Trump’s administration is reportedly considering abolishing the site. No petitions during Trump’s tenure have received responses so far.

ANTIFA has hit headlines again in recent days, after Donald Trump came under an avalanche of media attacks for laying blame on the “alt-left” as well as the “alt-right” following recent violent clashes in Charlottesville.

The normally peaceful Virginia college town played host to the “Unite the Right” rally which brought together alt-right and far-right groups to protest the planned removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee.

Chaos ensued when the right-wing protestors clashed with counter-protestors including ANTIFA and Black Lives Matter (BLM). There were scores of injuries, as well as one fatality when a car allegedly driven by a white nationalist protestor apparently ran over 32-year-old counter-protestor Heather Heyer.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
1 Comment

1
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
51 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
18 Comment authors
cascadian12PenroseAM HantsJolly RogerPopart 2015 Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

This is juicy. How does that definition of terrorism not make war nationally-sanctioned terrorism???? The military industrial complex is not going to like that logic…

Michellefescobar
Guest
Michellefescobar

Planet94e

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!au64d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobs354CashMarketPlanet/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!au64l..,..

Haneul Na'avi
Member

Well, AntiFa has already been declared an extremist organisation by the Department of Homeland Security, so that shouldn’t be too difficult to manage.

https://www.njhomelandsecurity.gov/analysis/anarchist-extremists-antifa

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

Of course! We have nearly always had a fascist right-wing government, but especially since Bush 43 and the loss of habeas corpus. They call animal-rights activists “terrorists” too.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

The page photos:
They look like a bunch of terrorists. Honest people don’t hide their face.

cortisol
Guest
cortisol

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”

So by definition of the US constitution, Antifa is already a terrorist group.

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

I must’ve missed where the KKK, Neo-Nazis and hundreds of militias snd hate groups around the country have been declared terrorists.

Melotte 22
Guest
Melotte 22

Happy to sign any petition declaring White House and Pentagon terrorist organisations.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

Because they have a Green Card for that, it’s like carrying Guns, intimidates others but is not Terrorism because it’s in the constitution (Green Card)…

Fransbowers
Guest
Fransbowers

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a Smart new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
:!ai36:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobs326CashHomeIdea/Easy/Work GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG::::!ai36l..,……

hestroy
Guest
hestroy

Lol! You fucking retard. Just die.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Weird how Antifa, Ukraine Nazis and ISIS supporters all look the same, act the same and don’t they all wear similar uniforms?

comment image

comment image

ISIS/DAESH
comment image

comment image

Ukraine Nazis

comment image

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

White Supremacy is more like it, or are you intentionally missing that?

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

White supremecy – ISIS????? Good friends of John McCain and didn’t Obama admit to fully funding, supporting and training his ISIS buddies?
White Supremecy – Nazi and fully funded, trained and equipped by the US and EU nations. Soros boys and girls, and very loyal to Uncle John McCain.
White Supremecy Antifa???? However, again funded by Soros and no doubt fully backed by McCain and his Clinton friends. Also, isn’t Obama involved with the Antifa Crowd. Typical Democratic Movement.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

You sound like Democracy is an Evil… I wonder why!

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

National Socialism – was that a democracy when Adolf was in charge of the German version? ISIS – wearing the same uniform, carrying out the same script and is that democracy in action? Ukraine Nazi’s – which is the Ukraine version of the National Socialist Party, that was active in Germany, back in the 40s, is that Democracy? Antifa – funded by Soros and they must be so proud to mimic the actions of the Ukraine Nazis, National Socialist (German) Worker’s Party and of course the Middle East version, fully funded, trained and supported by McCain, Obama and their friends,… Read more »

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

How Soros being a Jew mixes with Nazis? Are you saying that Nazis are Far-Left like some nuts out there?

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Why did he say that the best time of his life was when he was a Nazi Collaborator? Why was he more than happy to fund the Ukraine coup d’etat, which led to the Nazis back on the streets of Ukraine? Funnily enough, his good mate, the Head of the European Jewish Community, Igor Kolomoisky, who just happens to be the boss of Joe Biden’s son and John Kerry’s step-son, was the oligarch that funded the Azov Battalion, with their swastika ensign. HACKED | Hacking Group Cyber Berkut Reveals Ukraine Used Millions In IMF Loans To Fund Clinton Foundation… ‘…New… Read more »

schmenz
Guest
schmenz

I have sympathy for you, trying to talk common sense to ignoramuses like popart2015. It is impossible to get through to people like that who prefer snarky comebacks to any kind of serious discussion. If I were you I’d ignore him.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

I will be and have posted the links I wanted to share. It is crazy and wish you all the best in the US.

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

And no one is paying any attention. Isn’t free speech great?

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

That is so the sad part and the ones that think they know it all, because the MSM is always right.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

What was it Adolf said, on the 1 May 1927? Hitler to Rauschning Adolf Hitler (Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland… “I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have timidly begun…. I had only to develop logically what Social Democracy repeatedly failed in because of its attempt to realize its evolution within the framework of democracy. National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd… Read more »

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

All kisses and hugs! LOL Read history before you talk…

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

I have. Believe what MSM happily feed you and ask no questions as you suck it all in.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

Say that Nazis are the same as Communists to Russian people and they will laugh at you, try to give your silly explanation and they will laugh even more at best!

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Fabian Society. Russian people or do you mistake them for the old Communist Soviet Union tribe? Yes, Russia has every reason to hate fascism and hence the fact that they celebrate 9 May each year, in memory of the defeat of Fascism. Now why did the US and Ukraine, vote against Russia in the UN, when they wanted to outlaw the Nazi Party? Why did the US and Ukraine vote to support the Nazi Party? However, the people of Russia also remember the times of the old Communist Soviet Union, which fell in 1991 and 15 independent nations emerged. Now… Read more »

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

“Although, with Russia, taking back control of her natural resources, keeping them out of the reach of the oligarchs, was a seriously good move.”

You mean to tell me that the oligarchs that NOW control Russia’s natural resources, including President Putin, if one is to believe the Panama Papers, don’t exist???

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Panama Papers, how many of Clinton’s mates were included? How many of Ukraine’s mates were included and then ask how few Russians that were connected to Putin were included? It backfired, that is why it did not hang around the MSM for long.

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

So, you’re saying there are no oligarchs in Russia?

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Have I ever said that? Are you saying that the rest of the world has no oligarchs? ‘Back when President Putin first took over a bankrupt Russia, one of the first things he did was to sort out the oligarchs. Those that stayed, paid 13% tax, just like the rest of the people of Russia, earning over a certain amount, and with no loopholes, to get around. They promised to stay out of politics and become good Russian citizens. The garbage, left for a life in exile, many flocking to support the Clinton Foundation and popping up here, there and… Read more »

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Oh, by the way, you may believe that you are laughing at me, however, thanks for giving me a platform to post the links. Those that have minds of their own, might go away, find out more and come to their own conclusion. It does not bother me, if people laugh at me or not. However, I do like independent minded people, who have not come across the facts, to want to go away and discover more. Make up their own independent minds and not clone my beliefs. Whether they agree or disagree, they, have used independent thought, critical thinking,… Read more »

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

You like to live in a Bubble then!

John R. Nolan
Guest
John R. Nolan

Welcome to the Fourth Reich!

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

Lessons in socialism from HItler is like lessons in democracy from the Democratic Republic of North Korea (their actual name).

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

More like the Democrats in the US and come to that most other PC driven nations.

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

Of course, you need to attack Democrats, rather than provide a rational explanation for your BS.

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

There actions speak louder than words. They can speak for themselves as the world laughs on. What was it President Putin said, ‘Is America a great nation? Yes. Is America a banana republic’? That appears where the Dems wish to take it as they cannot handle Hilary lost.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

Let me guess, they killed too many statues…!

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

Let me guess. You think that Antifa is peaceful, benign, and engages in no violent activity against other people.

You should apply for a job with the MSM. You would do well there.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

You don’t like them… Is that it!

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

On the contrary, I just love those like Antifa and the Ukrainian Nazis who commit gratuitous violence against anyone they disagree with.

What’s not to like about that?

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

I can’t speak for Antifa and neither can you. What I know about them is from reading reports by researchers, such as the Anti-Defamation League. They don’t carry guns, they’re dis-organized, except they show up for protests. They’ve never advocated the exterimination of a group of people, UNLIKE RIGHT-WNG EXTREMISTS. If you can’t admit the truth to yourself, you’re a sorry POS.

What’s with The Duran anyway? This doesn’t appear to be a news site, more like propaganda.

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

RE: What I know about them is from reading reports by researchers, such as the Anti-Defamation League. LOL. Do you depend on AIPAC for your political viewpoints, too? RE: If you can’t admit the truth to yourself, you’re a sorry POS. Oh my. Moved into the name calling phase, have you? I’m surprised it took you this long. If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, then name calling is the last (and often the first) resort of those who don’t have a legitimate argument. But remember, when Antifa bashes people with blunt objects or shoots pepper spray into… Read more »

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

I don’t depend on AIPAC ever. That doesn’t meant that the Anti-defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center don’t know what they’re talking about. Do you always engage in false equivalence? Second, I only called you a name IF you can’t admit the truth. So, the ball is in your court. And name-calling is certainly not unknown to your side, whatever the hell that is: White Supremacist? Neo-Nazi? KKK? just Right-Wing nuts? Trump supporters, because who doesn’t like a lunatic despotic klepocrat? At least you recognize that Antifa only uses pepper spray and blunt objects, which is a lot better… Read more »

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

RE: “At least you recognize that Antifa only uses pepper spray and blunt objects, which is a lot better than guns, knives, and vehicles.”

Sorry to disappoint you, but I’m not that naive. I suppose their weapons of choice for the job below will be wet noodles and cotton candy.

“Antifa Has A New Cell In Philly, And They’re Calling For Property Seizures, Violence On Police, And All-Out Revolution”

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

If your last sentence is true, then I’m confident that the “Left” will completely denounce them, as the Left (without anarchists – who are not the Left) have generally been a non-violent movement. Since the 1960s, violence only erupts at Leftist protests because of Anarchists. Violence is completely counter-productive because the media will always focus on the violence and not the reasons for the protest. If this is what Antifa stands for, then I will be the first to reject them and to urge that they be prevented from joining any Leftist protest. I’ve given them the benefit of the… Read more »

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

I don’t know if you’re naive, ignorant or just delusional, but right-wing extremists commit 20x more violent acts than “left-wing extremists,” and, again, RW violence is more lethal. Just a fact, Jack. You can google it.

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

Aww, trying to cast aspersions on my intellectual status again? Keep that up and I’m going to tell my mommy on you.

It is true that I find left-wing and right-wing political characterizations as rather simplistic. So one dimensional. Seems to me the world we live in is far more complex than that.

Let me guess. Do we assign the war crimes of the Clintons and Obama to left-wing violence and the war crimes of George Bush Jr. to right-wing violence? Is that how it works?

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

You make a good point. For the record, I’ve always considered “anarchists” (the kind that destroy property at protests and who supposedly gave rise to “Antifa”) to be idiots and to give leftist protests a bad name, which they do not deserve (the last effective protests I’m referring to are the ones against free-trade agreements, such as the protest against the WTO in Seattle (1999). The latter was very successful in terms of turnout and clear focus, but once again, the anarchists marred what had been a peaceful protest. What I find disturbing is that The Duran promotes a petition… Read more »

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

Well, they don’t carry guns, like the Right-Wing hate groups you support. And they’ve never espoused the extermination of any group of people based on race or religion, like the hate groups you support, so I would say there’s a world of difference between them!

Penrose
Guest
Penrose

Oh, Antifa is a hate group alright. They hate anyone who disagrees with them.

Popart 2015
Guest
Popart 2015

People is starting to wake up so the regime needs to call them terrorists!

Curtis Bok
Guest
Curtis Bok

Please change the font that you use for quotations. It is very difficult to read.

ignasi
Guest
ignasi

It was to sign the petition

Jolly Roger
Guest
Jolly Roger

It’s the Jewish mafia Zionists that fund, organize, and train organizations such as antifa to divide and conquer America, that’s the protocols of zion, and the US mirrors perfectly the protocols of zion..

So, the real terrorists are the Jewish mafia Zionist bankers trying to divided and conquer the US by funding,organizing, and training terrorist groups used to topple the US.

This article is just more BS propaganda from the Jewish mafia owned media.

John R. Nolan
Guest
John R. Nolan

Curious to note that America, the Fat-I-Can, the Kazarian hierarchy, are using the original Babylonian means of warfare, Divide and Conquer. It has been the Jesuit program since their inception, is key to global success of Soros and his supposedly Illuminated cohorts, and has now completed their goals, conquered all nations, including Russia. Infiltrate and erode your enemies, using their politicians, etc., to destroy themselves, from the inside out. Fifth column media controlled programming, indoctrination, propaganda is the means used to turn a nation against itself, unions vs. workers, youth against the elders, men against women, black against white etc.… Read more »

Jolly Roger
Guest
Jolly Roger

There is nothing new under the sun. It’s the same old dog and pony show, but we ended all that on 11/8/16, it’s time to make the US useless to the Jewish mafia, boycott their usury banks and oil and cheap foreign junk and false flag foreign and civil wars, it’s time for them to suck wind.

John R. Nolan
Guest
John R. Nolan

Maybe they should check the Amnesian history books, learn that is was Abraham Lincoln’s decision to take control of the economy, ditch the English pound as their currency, and started printing Greenbacks.
Sadly it lead to his assassination.
Yes, that is why any one who tries to escape the bankers’ control, by starting their own currency, must rapidly be eliminated.
Once Amnezia got free of the English bankers controls they shot ahead, but now we see that same plot being repeated against any who strive to break free of the banker’s controls.
Nationalize all banks, then we will have freedom.

Jolly Roger
Guest
Jolly Roger

It’s real simple, boycott the usury bankers and their loans and credit cards and corporate malls, make the US useless to them.

cascadian12
Guest
cascadian12

Nearly all commerce is electronic now, except for a few holdouts. So it’s going to be difficult to do what you suggest. I do favor nationalizing the banks in principle, but now that our government has been taken over by kleptocrats, nothing would change.

Jolly Roger
Guest
Jolly Roger

We’re just not consenting to the theft and corruption involved in the fed tax and debt slavery war dollar. So, I guess it’s up to us holdouts to get things started.

Do you have anything of value you’d trade or barter? lol.

Cranford Ducain
Guest
Cranford Ducain

The best move Trump, or the rest of us, could make to eliminate antifa would be for him to come out in favor of them and for the rest of us to suddenly make them a mainstream group. There is nothing which is more discouraging or demoralizing to a group such as this than to be accepted into the rest of a social order. This makes them become a part of the very things which they wish to distroy.

Latest

Parliament Seizes Control Of Brexit From Theresa May

Zerohedge

Published

on

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Schaeuble, Greece and the lessons learned from a failed GREXIT (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 117.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris examine a recent interview with the Financial Times given by Wolfgang Schäuble, where the former German Finance Minister, who was charged with finding a workable and sustainable solution to the Greek debt crisis, reveals that his plan for Greece to take a 10-year “timeout” from the eurozone (in order to devalue its currency and save its economy) was met with fierce resistance from Brussels hard liners, and Angela Merkel herself.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via FT

“Look where we’re sitting!” says Wolfgang Schäuble, gesturing at the Berlin panorama stretching out beneath us. It is his crisp retort to those who say that Europe is a failure, condemned to a slow demise by its own internal contradictions. “Walk through the Reichstag, the graffiti left by the Red Army soldiers, the images of a destroyed Berlin. Until 1990 the Berlin Wall ran just below where we are now!”

We are in Käfer, a restaurant on the rooftop of the Reichstag. The views are indeed stupendous: Berlin Cathedral and the TV Tower on Alexanderplatz loom through the mist. Both were once in communist East Berlin, cut off from where we are now by the wall. Now they’re landmarks of a single, undivided city. “Without European integration, without this incredible story, we wouldn’t have come close to this point,” he says. “That’s the crazy thing.”

As Angela Merkel’s finance minister from 2009 to 2017, Schäuble was at the heart of efforts to steer the eurozone through a period of unprecedented turbulence. But at home he is most associated with Germany’s postwar political journey, having not only negotiated the 1990 treaty unifying East and West Germany but also campaigned successfully for the capital to move from Bonn.

For a man who has done so much to put Berlin — and the Reichstag — back on the world-historical map, it is hard to imagine a more fitting lunch venue. With its open-plan kitchen and grey formica tables edged in chrome, Käfer has a cool, functional aesthetic that is typical of the city. On the wall hangs a sketch by artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, who famously wrapped the Reichstag in silver fabric in 1995.

The restaurant has one other big advantage: it is easy to reach from Schäuble’s office. Now 76, he has been confined to a wheelchair since he was shot in an assassination attempt in 1990, and mobility is an issue. Aides say he tends to avoid restaurants if he can, especially at lunchtime.

As we take our places, we talk about Schäuble’s old dream — that German reunification would be a harbinger of European unity, a step on the road to a United States of Europe. That seems hopelessly out of reach in these days of Brexit, the gilets jaunes in France, Lega and the Five Star Movement in Italy.

Some blame Schäuble himself for that. He was, after all, the architect of austerity, a fiscal hawk whose policy prescriptions during the euro crisis caused untold hardship for millions of ordinary people, or so his critics say. He became a hate figure, especially in Greece. Posters in Athens in 2015 depicted him with a Hitler moustache below the words: “Wanted — for mass poverty and devastation”.

Schäuble rejects the criticism that austerity caused the rise of populism. “Higher spending doesn’t lead to greater contentment,” he says. The root cause lies in mass immigration, and the insecurities it has unleashed. “What European country doesn’t have this problem?” he asks. “Even Sweden. The poster child of openness and the willingness to help.”

But what of the accusation that he didn’t care enough about the suffering of the southern Europeans? Austerity divided the EU and spawned a real animus against Schäuble. I ask him how that makes him feel now. “Well I’m sad, because I played a part in all of that,” he says, wistfully. “And I think about how we could have done it differently.”

I glance at the menu — simple German classics with a contemporary twist. I’m drawn to the starters, such as Oldenburg duck pâté and the Müritz smoked trout. But true to his somewhat abstemious reputation, Schäuble has no interest in these and zeroes in on the entrées. He chooses Käfer’s signature veal meatballs, a Berlin classic. I go for the Arctic char and pumpkin.

Schäuble switches seamlessly back to the eurozone crisis. The original mistake was in trying to create a common currency without a “common economic, employment and social policy” for all eurozone member states. The fathers of the euro had decided that if they waited for political union to happen first they’d wait forever, he says.

Yet the prospects for greater political union are now worse than they have been in years. “The construction of the EU has proven to be questionable,” he says. “We should have taken the bigger steps towards integration earlier on, and now, because we can’t convince the member states to take them, they are unachievable.”

Greece was a particularly thorny problem. It should never have been admitted to the euro club in the first place, Schäuble says. But when its debt crisis first blew up, it should have taken a 10-year “timeout” from the eurozone — an idea he first floated with Giorgos Papakonstantinou, his Greek counterpart between 2009 and 2011. “I told him you need to be able to devalue your currency, you’re not competitive,” he says. The reforms required to repair the Greek economy were going to be “hard to achieve in a democracy”. “That’s why you need to leave the euro for a certain period. But everyone said there was no chance of that.”

The idea didn’t go away, though. Schäuble pushed for a temporary “Grexit” in 2015, during another round of the debt crisis. But Merkel and the other EU heads of government nixed the idea. He now reveals he thought about resigning over the issue. “On the morning the decision was made, [Merkel] said to me: ‘You’ll carry on?’ . . . But that was one of the instances where we were very close [to my stepping down].”

It is an extraordinary revelation, one that highlights just how rocky his relationship with Merkel has been over the years. Schäuble has been at her side from the start, an éminence grise who has helped to resolve many of the periodic crises of her 13 years as chancellor. But it was never plain sailing.

“There were a few really bad conflicts where she knew too that we were on the edge and I would have gone,” he says. “I always had to weigh up whether to go along with things, even though I knew it was the wrong thing to do, as was the case with Greece, or whether I should go.” But his sense of duty prevailed. “We didn’t always agree — but I was always loyal.”

That might have been the case when he was a serving minister, but since becoming speaker of parliament in late 2017 he has increasingly distanced himself from Merkel. Last year, when she announced she would not seek re-election as leader of the Christian Democratic Union, the party that has governed Germany for 50 of the past 70 years, Schäuble openly backed a candidate described by the Berlin press as the “anti-Merkel”. Friedrich Merz, a millionaire corporate lawyer who is the chairman of BlackRock Germany, had once led the CDU’s parliamentary group but lost out to Merkel in a power struggle in 2002, quitting politics a few years later. He has long been seen as one of the chancellor’s fiercest conservative critics — and is a good friend of Schäuble’s.

Ultimately, in a nail-biting election last December, Merkel’s favoured candidate, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, narrowly beat Merz. The woman universally known as “AKK” is in pole position to succeed Merkel as chancellor when her fourth and final term ends in 2021.

I ask Schäuble if it’s true that he had once again waged a battle against Merkel and once again lost. “I never went to war against Ms Merkel,” he says. “Everybody says that if I’m for Merz then I’m against Merkel. Why is that so? That’s nonsense.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

The conclusion of Russiagate, Part I – cold, hard reality

The full text of Attorney General William P Barr’s summary is here offered, with emphases on points for further analysis.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

The conclusion of the Russiagate investigation, led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, was a pivotal media watershed moment. Even at the time of this writing there is a great deal of what might be called “journalistic froth” as opinion makers and analysts jostle to make their takes on this known to the world. Passions are running very high in both the Democrat / anti-Trump camps, where the reactions range from despondency to determined rage to not swallow the gigantic red pill that the “no collusion with Russia” determination offers. In the pro-Trump camp, the mood is deserved relief, but many who support the President are also realists, and they know this conflict is not over.

Where the pivot will go and what all this means is something that will unfold, probably relatively quickly, over the next week or two. But we want to offer a starting point here from which to base further analysis. At this time, of course, there are few hard facts other than the fact that Robert Mueller III submitted his report to the US Attorney General, William Barr, who then wrote and released his own report to the public Sunday evening. We reproduce that report here in full, with some emphases added to points that we think will be relevant to forthcoming pieces on this topic.

The end of the Mueller investigation brings concerns, hopes and fears to many people, on topics such as:

  • Will President Trump now begin to normalize relations with President Putin at full speed?
  • In what direction will the Democrats pivot to continue their attacks against the President?
  • What does this finding to to the 2020 race?
  • What does this finding do to the credibility of the United States’ leadership establishment, both at home and abroad?
  • What can we learn about our nation and culture from this investigation?
  • How does a false narrative get maintained so easily for so long, and
  • What do we do, or what CAN we do to prevent this being repeated?

These questions and more will be addressed in forthcoming pieces. But for now, here is the full text of the letter written by Attorney General William Barr concerning the Russia collusion investigation.

Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:
As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.
The Special Counsel’s Report
On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c). This report is entitled “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.
The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.
The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel’s report.
Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.
The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans including individuals associated with the Trump campaign joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
The Special Counsel’s investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.
The second element involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.
Obstruction of Justice.
The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President most of which have been the subject of public reporting that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.
In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.
Status of the Department’s Review
The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel’s report will be a “confidential report” to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to “matter[s] occurring before grand jury.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B) Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g. 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.
Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.
* * *
As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of” notifications to your respective Committees “would be in the public interest.” 28 C.F.R. § 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.
Sincerely,
William P. Barr
Attorney General

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending