Part 200, some of Russian meddling, and related, material from F6 big ones. These from Friday, 05/11/18, covering April 2, 2018, and headed, President Donald J. Trump Proclaims April 2, 2018, World Autism Awareness Day https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=140728940
Jones tells a caller his experience (the caller's) under DMT with what looked like an Egyptian goddess was actually an angel. The caller talks about the need to kill globalists. Jones demurred on that one. Nice to know we are "living in an artificially induced state of consciousness that resembles sleep."
Number nineteen - as swimming in fearmongering, hate-forced, bullshit rhetoric as one can get
RWW News: After Getting Booted From YouTube, Rick Wiles Warns That Leftists Will Soon Start Executing Christians
Trump Suggested Putin Visit the White House, Officials Say - tie https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=139705353 MOSCOW - When President Trump called President Vladimir V. Putin last month, he not only ignored advisers’ pleas that he not congratulate the Russian leader on his lopsided election victory but also suggested that Mr. Putin visit the White House. That was the account of the leaders’ March 20 conversation given on Monday by a Kremlin foreign policy adviser, Yuri Ushakov. He told reporters in Moscow that Mr. Trump had suggested a meeting at the White House, saying, “This is a rather positive idea.” The White House spokeswoman, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said Monday that the White House was among “a number of potential venues” discussed during the March 20 phone call. She said the administration had no further comment. Mr. Trump had told reporters in the Oval Office shortly after his call with the Russian leader that “probably we’ll be seeing President Putin in the not-too-distant future,” but officials said at the time that there were no plans for the two men to meet before November, when they are both expected to attend a Group of 20 gathering in Argentina. In the two weeks since the call, relations have spiraled downward, with the United States and numerous nations in Europe and elsewhere agreeing to the simultaneous expulsion of scores of Russian diplomats in retaliation for the March 4 nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy in Salisbury, England. Mr. Ushakov said that the two countries had not started any preparatory talks for a White House meeting, because of the tailspin in relations. He nonetheless voiced hope that Mr. Trump would not drop the idea. “I hope the Americans won’t abandon their proposal to discuss the possibility of holding the summit,” he said. Mr. Putin’s spokesman, Dimitri Peskov, however, was quickly quoted as dismissing Mr. Ushakov’s account as incorrect. Just as Mr. Trump has shown a curious reluctance to criticize Mr. Putin, even when the two countries are ejecting each other’s diplomats, the Kremlin and the Russian news outlets it controls have often avoided criticizing Mr. Trump directly. Many Russian officials and commentators have embraced the idea that, no matter how much the two countries shout at each other over the former spy’s poisoning, election meddling, Ukraine, Syria and various other points of friction, Mr. Trump wants a rapprochement but is being held back by “Russophobic” forces in Congress and the “Deep State.” Mr. Trump’s telephone call to Mr. Putin took place six days after Britain expelled 23 Russian diplomats over the Salisbury attack. It angered many in Washington, including some of Mr. Trump’s advisers, who wanted the president to address Moscow’s role in the nerve agent assault and to not congratulate the Russian leader for his victory in an election in which his best-known opponent was barred from competing. Mr. Trump followed neither recommendation, nor did he raise the issue of Russian meddling in the 2016 election. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/world/europe/trump-putin-white-house-meeting.html
Congressional Democrats raise ethics questions about Trump defense fund - AP WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats raised ethics questions on Monday about the framework of a defense fund set up to help pay legal costs for White House, Trump campaign and transition officials caught up in investigations into Russian meddling in the election. Eighteen House Democrats claim the new defense fund appears to be structured more loosely than ones in earlier administrations. Because of the way it's set up, the fund could receive donations from lobbyists or others with interests before the Trump administration — and also could be used to influence witnesses, the Democrats warned in a letter to David Apol, the acting director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. The Democrats asked the ethics office to provide records documenting communications between Wiley Rein LLP, the Washington law firm that set up the fund, and White House, Trump campaign and transition representatives. In late January, Apol told a group of Washington lawyers who set up the fund that a draft agreement of its structure appeared to be "in compliance" with federal ethics law. The ethics office, however, has not officially approved or disapproved of the structure of the fund — Patriot Legal Expense Fund Trust LLC — which has been in operation since late February. In their letter to Apol, the Democrats, including Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking member of the House Oversight committee, said that while previous defense funds earmarked money for individual officials, the new defense fund "has the authority to pay money to an unlimited number of individuals, with limited disclosure requirements." The fund was established in Delaware as a nonprofit organized under Section 527 of the U.S. tax code. That designation requires the fund to tell the Internal Revenue Service the names of all donors who donate more than $200. The Democrats claim the Patriot fund appears to allow donations by lobbyists or others with interests before the government — and could perhaps evade disclosure altogether. Despite the IRS requirement, the Patriot fund does not appear to prohibit donors giving money "on behalf of other undisclosed donors," the Democrats said. And while Office of Government Ethics guidelines prohibit donations from lobbyists or others with governmental interests, the Patriot fund says donations for legal expenses would be banned only if the donor "indicates in writing that the contribution is being given because of an eligible recipient's position or performance of duties." It's not clear from the fund's draft how donors would be compelled to provide that information. Democrats also raised concern about the fund's role in the possible influence of witnesses. Ethics rules ban contacts between the manager of a legal defense fund and those aided by the fund. But Democrats warned that a loophole would still let the fund manager contact Trump campaign representatives, who could, at the same time, remain in touch with fund recipients. "The agreement does not address the potential for pressure to be placed on potential recipients before they testify," the Democrats said. "The agreement also does not prohibit communications between the manager of the fund and campaign representatives who are themselves under investigation." A group of Wiley Rein lawyers sent a draft agreement of the Patriot defense fund to the ethics office on Jan. 29 after discussions with agency officials. The fund was officially unveiled in late February. Wiley Rein has deep expertise in election law and several partners have a history of ties to Republican administrations and the GOP. A spokesman for the law firm was not immediately available to respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press about the House Democrats' letter. According to the draft, the fund would "be operated as a political organization," with its donations listed in total in annual filings with the IRS. Previous defense funds, such as two 1990s-era funds for former President Bill Clinton and former first lady Hillary Clinton, had voluntary caps on the size of donations. The Patriot fund does not appear to have any limits on the size of donations. The draft explicitly says the fund was "formed to provide assistance paying legal expenses for persons involved in the investigations by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III," House and Senate inquiries into Russia meddling and any other congressional probes. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/congressional-democrats-raise-ethics-questions-about-trump-defense-fund/ original https://www.apnews.com/f033dd3b21e7466e8c24709d906ca889/Democrats-raise-ethics-questions-about-Trump-defense-fund
At Chicago nightclub, George Papadopoulos allegedly makes explosive new claim about Jeff Sessions A chance encounter with a man at the center of the Russia investigation. At a London bar in May 2016, after numerous drinks, Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos bragged to an Australian diplomat the Russians had obtained damaging information on Hillary Clinton. The diplomat reported the conversation to American officials, which prompted the FBI to launch their investigation of the Trump campaign and its connections to Russia. On Thursday at a Chicago nightclub, Papadopoulos had some drinks and, in a conversation with a new acquaintance, allegedly made new and explosive claims about Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Papadopoulos, according to this new acquaintance, said that Sessions was well aware of the contact between Papadopoulos and Joseph Mifsud, an academic from Malta with high-level connections in Russia. Papadopoulos’ indictment revealed that Mifsud had told Papadopoulos that the Russians had “‘dirt’ on then-candidate Hillary Clinton in the form of ‘thousands of emails.'” [...] https://thinkprogress.org/george-papadopoulos-new-claim-jeff-sessions-chicago-nightclub-da653988529c/