In this video Sasha Daygame of https://www.youtube.com/user/Sashathepua does a special guest appearance on the WeAreChange channel to bring you the real truth of why Pepe the frog was labeled a hate symbol by the ADL.
WARNING: Graphic content. A police department in Ohio posted unsettling photos of a couple who had overdosed on heroin in their vehicle, as a four-year-old child sat in the back seat.
The shocking photos of the incident were posted by the East Liverpool Police Department Thursday. The young child’s face was not blurred or otherwise obscured. We have opted to only share the photos with the innocent child’s face censored.
The department acknowledged the offensive nature of the post, but stated that it was important to share, as a means to encourage drug users to think twice about their actions.
“We feel it necessary to show the other side of this horrible drug. We feel we need to be a voice for the children caught up in this horrible mess. This child can’t speak for himself but we are hopeful his story can convince another user to think twice about injecting this poison while having a child in their custody,” the Facebook post stated.
They also hoped that the “non drug using public” would see the photos and see what the police “are dealing with on a daily basis.”
“We are well aware that some may be offended by these images and for that we are truly sorry, but it is time that the non drug using public sees what we are now dealing with on a daily basis. The poison known as heroin has taken a strong grip on many communities not just ours, the difference is we are willing to fight this problem until it’s gone and if that means we offend a few people along the way we are prepared to deal with that,” the post read.
The incident took place Wednesday, after a police officer spotted a vehicle driving erratically. The cop watched as the car slammed on its brakes while approaching a stopped school bus dropping children off.
As the bus pulled away, the vehicle, driven by James Lee Acord, remained in the roadway and began to coast at an angle before coming to a stop.
When the officer approached the vehicle, Acord’s head was bobbing back and forth and his speech was unintelligible, but he was able to communicate that he was taking his passenger, Rhonda Pasek, to the emergency room. He then began to attempt to drive away, but the officer quickly reached in, turned the vehicle off and removed the keys. The officer then noticed a small child in the back seat, later identified as Pasek’s son. Acord then passed out as well.
Pasek is charged with endangering children, public intoxication, and not wearing a seat belt. Acord is charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated, endangering children, and slowing or stopping in a roadway.
The post has garnered a mixture of reactions, with many expressing outrage over the shaming of the child.
“Educate the child in the backseat, who is more likely to be an addict like his parents,” a user commented, identifying themselves as a heroin addict that has been clean for three and a half years.
“Don’t embarrass and shame them. How is that helping?”
A lawyer representing Wikileaks has filed a formal complaint against the Associated Press over “breached ethical standards,” in publishing what many have called a “hit piece” against Julian Assange.
The complaint comes in response to an article titled “Private lives are exposed as Wikileaks spills its secrets,” by Raphael Satter. The article has been widely used by proponents of Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton to smear Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange.
In the story, Satter makes the stunning claim that the publisher’s mass-disclosures have included the personal information of sick children, rape victims and mental health patients.
The complaint letter, written by human rights and international criminal lawyer Melinda Taylor, asserts that the article “contained falsehoods and distortions, including the disingenuous claim that Wikileaks had been contacted and given the opportunity to address the substance of the article’s claims.”
Taylor asserts that Satter did not attempt to contact Assange, and instead contacted her late in the evening — only seven hours before the story went to press. She explains speaking briefly with Satter in an email exchange, where he informed her that the story would be published “soon,” urging a quick response.
During the conversation, Satter explained that he had found emails that appeared to contain private details. When asked by Taylor if he could provide specific details so that she could forward them on to Assange, the journalist declined claiming it would be a violation of the individual’s privacy. The article Satter published the next day however, contained the details he claimed to be trying to protect.
“I responded that if this was the case, then publishing an article on such matters would only serve to draw increased attention to the matter. This would in fact intentionally publicise information on individual cases that AP considered to be private,” Taylor wrote.
“I further informed Mr. Satter that I have worked in the area of war crimes, genocide and rape for over 17 years at international criminal courts, and that one of the fundamental rules of victim protection is that if there has been a disclosure of information that could be private or protected, the parties are absolutely forbidden from referring to, or drawing attention to such a disclosure in public. Indeed, such secondary disclosure can be more damaging than inadvertent disclosures, which are often overlooked or ignored by the public.”
Satter simply responded by saying that the same holds true for national security issues.
By this time it was getting quite late, but Satter had promised to email Taylor the details within 10 minutes. He did not send the email until over an hour later, however, and by then Taylor, the mother of two young children who works full time, was asleep.
Satter had also not made it clear that when he said the article would be published “soon” he meant in just hours.
“It is thus clear that Mr. Satter provided WikiLeaks with no effective opportunity whatsoever to respond to claims, because no claims were put to Wikileaks itself before publication,” Taylor wrote.
AP has a strong guidebook for their “values and principles,” that states in no uncertain terms that journalists should never “publish a story that contains inaccuracies or distortions, or which portrays someone in a negative light without giving them a fair opportunity to respond.”
“We must make significant efforts to reach anyone who may be portrayed in a negative way in our stories, and we must give them a reasonable amount of time to get back to us before we move the story. What is ‘reasonable’ may depend on the urgency and competitiveness of the story. If we don’t reach the parties involved, we must explain in the story what efforts were made to do so,” the AP principles state.
Taylor further noted that since Satter had published a similar article in 2015, there was no urgency or competitiveness justifying publishing without giving Wikileaks the opportunity to respond.
The biggest issue with all of this, is that Wikileaks could have responded in an appropriate manner, possibly correcting the issue by removing the cables — if Satter had given them time to respond. Now that the story has been printed, removal of the cables would have a far more damaging Streisand Effect.
“Mr. Satter’s conduct plainly breaches AP standards for journalistic conduct, and appears to have been a reckless attempt to exploit privacy concerns for the purpose of launching an unfair attack on Mr. Assange and Wikileaks. Indeed, the partial nature of the article is evidenced by Mr. Satter’s use of offensive epithets – such as ‘exhacker’ to describe Mr. Assange. Such a description is both petty, and irresponsible, since it undermines Wikileaks’ First Amendment protections in the United States and its sources all over the world, including in Saudi Arabia, which is attempting to prosecute Mr. Assange for the publication,” Taylor asserts.
The letter concludes with a request for an investigation into Satter’s conduct — including his statements on Twitter which reveal “personal animus” against Assange, that the journalist is removed from covering stories relating to Wikileaks, and that AP publishes a response from Wikileaks.
The recent release shows that Huma Abdein served as a conduit between the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s State Department. In more than a dozen email exchanges between Abedin and Clinton Foundation top executive Doug Band, Abedin expedited direct access to Clinton for donors who contributed between $25,000 and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. This system of bribery forced the Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain to go through the Clinton Foundation for an appointment with Hillary Clinton.
Abedin also advised Band that when she went through the “normal channels” at the State department, Clinton declined to meet. After Band intervened, however, the meeting was set up within forty-eight hours.
From: Doug Band
To: Huma Abedin
Sent: Tue Jun 23 1:29:42 2009
Cp of Bahrain in tomorrow to Friday
Asking to see her
Good friend of ours
From: Huma Abedin
To: Doug Band
Sent: Tue Jun 23 4:12:46 2009
He asked to see hrc thurs and fri thru normal channels. I asked and she said she doesn’t want to commit to anything for thurs or fri until she knows how she will feel. Also she says that she may want to go to ny and doesn’t want to be committed to stuff in ny…
From: Huma Abedin [Huma@clintonemail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 10:35:15 AM
To: Doug Band
Offering Bahrain cp 10 tomorrow for meeting woith [sic] hrc
If u see him, let him know
We have reached out thru official channels
Additional email exchanges where the Clinton Foundation intervened with the state department include the following:
On Friday, June 26, 2009, Clinton confidant Kevin O’Keefe wrote to Clinton saying that “Kevin Conlon is trying to set up a meeting with you and a major client.” Clinton wrote to Abedin, “Can you help deliver these for Kevin?” Abedin responded, “I’ll look into it asap” Kevin O’Keefe donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Kevin Conlon is a Clinton presidential campaign “Hillblazer” who has raised more than $100,000 for the candidate.
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, Ben Ringel wrote to Abedin, “I’m on shuttle w Avigdor Liberman. I called u back yesterday. I want to stop by to see hrc tonite for 10 mins.” Ringel donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
On Monday, July 6, 2009, Maureen White wrote to Abedin, “I am going to be in DC on Thursday. Would she have any time to spare?” Abedin responded, “Yes I’ll make it work.” White donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
In June 2009, prominent St. Louis political power broker Joyce Aboussie exchanged a series of insistent emails with Abedin concerning Aboussie’s efforts to set up a meeting between Clinton and Peabody Energy VP Cartan Sumner. Aboussie wrote, “Huma, I need your help now to intervene please. We need this meeting with Secretary Clinton, who has been there now for nearly six months. This is, by the way, my first request. I really would appreciate your help on this. It should go without saying that the Peabody folks came to Dick [Gephardt] and I because of our relationship with the Clinton’s.” After further notes from Aboussie, Abedin responded, “We are working on it and I hope we can make something work… we have to work through the beauracracy [sic] here.” Aboussie donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
On Saturday, May 16, 2009, mobile communications executive and political activist Jill Iscol wrote to Clinton, “Please advise to whom I should forward Jacqueline Novogratz’s request [for a meeting with the secretary of state]. I know you know her, but honestly, she is so far ahead of the curve and brilliant I believe she could be enormously helpful to your work.” Clinton subsequently sent an email to Abedin saying, “Pls print.” Jill and husband Ken Iscol donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton subsequently appointed Novogratz to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board.
This release shows that Hillary Clinton only met with foreign leaders once there was money in her pocket. This is bribery, this is unethical and this is criminal beyond a shadow of a doubt.
In addition to the email exchanges between Abedin and Douglas Band, newly released emails show a memorandum sent to Cheryl Mills from State Department White House liaison Laura Pena revealing that Rajiv Fernando, who donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation and was appointed to the International Security Advisory Board without any experience, was fingered for the appointment as far back as June 2009.
“These new emails confirm that Hillary Clinton abused her office by selling favors to Clinton Foundation donors There needs to be a serious, independent investigation to determine whether Clinton and others broke the law.” ~Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Melania Trump has filed a legal action against the Daily Mail and other outlets over a defamatory story accusing her of previously being an escort, and has hired Hulk Hogan’s lawyer who famously took down Gawker.
The article in question was originally published by the Daily Mail and contained allegations that Trump was an escort in the 1990’s and questions the legitimacy of her entire modeling career. The problem for the Daily Mail – the story was based entirely on speculation and heresay without any actual evidence.
The outlets that received the notice include The Daily Mail, The Week, Politico, Inquisitr, Tarpley, Bipartisan Report and Before It’s News. Democratic Party support blogs Liberal America and Winning Democrats were also among the recipients.
Until a lawsuit is filed, the notices serve as warnings to the recipients to remove, retract, or correct their stories.
“Aside from the facts not being 100 percent accurate, we deeply regret reporting on a story of such a ‘low brow’ nature. Melania Trump is a private citizen and deserves the privacy and respect that any one of us would want and expect. We sincerely apologize to her for stooping to such a level and will not do so again in the future,” Bipartisan Report wrote in an apology post.
Trump is now being represented by Charles Harder, the attorney who represented Hogan in his successful lawsuit against Gawker over publication of a sex tape featuring the wrestler. In an email to Politico, Harder informed them that the action is not limited to the Daily Mail, or even the United Kingdom where the newspaper is based.
“Mrs. Trump has placed several news organizations on notice of her legal claims against them, including Daily Mail among others, for making false and defamatory statements about her supposedly having been an “escort” in the 1990s,” Harder said in the email. “All such statements are 100% false, highly damaging to her reputation, and personally hurtful. She understands that news media have certain leeway in a presidential campaign, but outright lying about her in this way exceeds all bounds of appropriate news reporting and human decency.”
Out of all the outlets that were put on notice, the Daily Mail — who happen to be the originators of the rumors — will have the biggest legal burden due to being located in the United Kingdom. In the U.S., libel laws put the burden on Trump to prove that the allegations are false, whereas in the U.K. the burden will be on the Daily Mail to prove that they are true.
Neither Politico or the Daily Mail have commented on the notices.
Two Years, 11 months, two weeks, six days, three hours, 53 minutes and 19 seconds ago, George W. Bush joined Instagram. Now trolls are spamming George Bush’s posts with comments such as “Bush did 9/11” and other less opaque statements with some surprising amount of factual information. It’s the epic troll of George W. Bush that never gets old.
The hilarious comments can be seen all throughout Bush’s Instagram feed. Below you will see some of our favorites. You got to love the trolls, but trolling or not, there are some serious questions left unanswered regarding 9/11….. like why did George W. Bush and Dick Cheney testify in secrecy off the record?
The 9/11 Commission report (that was just now released) proved Saudi’s funded the hijackers. Why have we made a government that perpetrated 9/11 into our greatest ally of all the Arab nations? Why do we keep such close ties with a government that has the most extreme doctrine of the Arab world in regards to Sharia law and other oppressive laws.
The plot of 9/11 mirrors a proposed “false-flag” plot by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of staff which was stopped by John F. Kennedy, called “Operation Northwoods”. Documents prove that they wanted to bomb U.S. cities, fly planes into buildings, make the terrorist attacks out to be the Cubans, and then address all of which in a justification to go to war with Cuba. They also proposed a plan similar to Hitler’s “Operation Himmler”, when Hitler had German soldiers dress up as Poles to orchestrate the war against Poland. He then blamed Poland for starting the war with Germany. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed in Operation Northwoods a similar plot to dress U.S. soldiers up as Cubans, then have them shoot at each other and blame Cuba for the provocation. Literal treason. So while reading these mostly senseless and uninformative messages about how Bush did 911…just remember that Operation Northwoods existed and was derived by and highly advocated to the president by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Here are the full documents that were handed to James Bamford, who also broke the rumor about how large the surveillance apparatus was prior to when NSA whistle-blower, Edward Snowden, had proven the claims to be factually true.
There was even comments about the phrase echoed by George W. Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, a concept the former Bush had termed “The New World Order” during a speech. Before that though, he lied about his whereabouts during the JFK assassination, and lied about being a CIA agent which is now proven with an old photo of John. F. Kennedy and Bush Sr. outside the funeral of Philip Graham who blew the whistle on Operation Mockingbird. Bush Sr. also laughed on the podium at President Gerald Ford’s funeral when talking about the “deluded gunman” that killed Kennedy while reading from a teleprompter. What’s so funny about the murder of what many consider the greatest president this country has ever had ? One who who stopped a treasonous plot to attack the government’s own citizens. Huh George?
Speaking of 911..On September 11th, 1991 George Bush’s father made this speech where he calls for a New World Order.
Other fun facts about 9/11: in 2001, a board member of the security firm Securacom (Stratesec) was responsible for security upgrades leading up to the attack, that board member was George Bush’s own brother, Marvin P. Bush. He was contracted up until 9/11, 2001 when the contact expired. Although, Stratsec wasn’t the lead company responsible for the World Trade Center security, that job was given to a company called Kroll Associates, who had put the FBI’s John O’Neil in charge of security at the WTC and who died on 9/11.
Speaking of Bush family genealogy, Prescott Bush funded the Nazis rise, and Wall Street banks were implicated in Nazi ties. Prescott Bush was also one of several people who were behind the attempted “business fascist coup” that was warned by General Smedley Butler during FDR’s presidency when they attempted to use Butler to overthrow the government and lead 5,000 men to overthrow Franklin Delanor Roosevelt.
Well leave you with Bush’s Instagram getting trolled with some hilarious jokes, some cute cats and Bush Sr. issuing a cut throat to Donald Trump. Yes, George Bush issued a cut throat hand gesture to Donald Trump. Bush Jr.’s mother Barbara Bush and wife of George Bush Sr. had previously threatened anyone who criticizes her children or husband in an interview with Larry King.
P.S. If found DEAD… It Wasn’t a “Suicide” I am quite happy with my job at We Are Change challenging the corrupt and holding them accountable, and saying what the paid corporate media will never think to investigate while stuck on the CIA’s pushed word “Conspiracy Theorist” which was formulated during the Warren Commission to attack anyone who challenges the “Official” Narrative, based on tactics from Operation Mockingbird. On that note… have some free candy! This comes from someone in intelligence, they compiled all this data on 911.
“But the same would be true if something happened that was difficult for Jeb or for Doro or Neil or Marvin. And you can criticize me, but don’t criticize my children and don’t criticize my daughters-in-law and don’t criticize my husband, or you’re dead.” ~Barbara Bush, in an interview with Larry King.