Dream Tiny Home Extends 18 foot Tow a Long in Washington For Sale
-------------------------------------------
THIRD EYE Visions that Changed History: Washington, Nostradamus, Patton and More! - Duration: 12:59.
- [Ben] The celestial eye in ancient Egypt,
just hiding in plain sight?
- [Rob] People and historical figures,
seeing with their third eye to avoid catastrophes?
- [Ben] Examples of psychic abilities
through your celestial eye?
- [Rob] Why no one talks about the celestial eye anymore.
- [Ben] The history of the celestial eye,
you just don't wanna miss.
- All this and more on today's episode of,
- [Both] The Edge of Wonder.
(lightning crackles)
- Welcome to today's episode of
The Edge of Wonder, I'm Ben.
- And I'm Rob.
In our previous video, we talked about
what the third eye is, and how it's used.
- So in this episode, we're gonna show you guys
historical examples that not only prove
the celestial eye exists.
- But you'll be wondering why in the world
scientists think this is a vestigial eye.
We're gonna get into the third eye being used
for psychic abilities next, so stay tuned
and remember to click that subscribe button
if you haven't already.
- Do you guys wanna know what cultures
of ancient past was the celestial eye prevalent in?
- There are carvings of Sumerian gods
which some say are the Annunaki,
an ancient race that are extraterrestrial in origin
which depict a pine cone being given to humans.
It is said that they had the ability to access
their pineal gland for its conscious-expanding abilities.
- Yeah, and it just so happens that
the pineal gland is shaped like a pine cone.
Ancient Mayan art, and architecture
also depicts many images of priests and shamans
seated in a lotus position, which bear
a close resemblance to Buddhism,
with also a dot on their forehead
similar to what is found in most cultures in Asia.
- But nothing is more shocking than the Egyptian
knowledge of the celestial eye.
- That's true.
That's right, one of the more popular depictions
of the celestial eye is from ancient Egyptian iconography
with the eye of Ra and the eye of Horus.
- So the really interesting thing about
why they use this as the symbol
is because when you look at the lateral view
of the pineal gland within the Brian
it is exactly in the shape of this symbol.
Pretty cool right?
- Ancient Egyptians also broke down
the celestial eye into mathematical parts
all related to the human body's health.
Even though the most common understanding
is that the Rx symbol came from the word recipe,
many people believe its origin was the eye of Horus.
- So next time you're at your local pharmacy
make sure to school your pharmacist.
We're about to get into some amazing stories
of people using their celestial eye.
(ethereal instrumental music)
- In many cultures in Asia, there is a lot
of paintings and other artwork showing scenes
inside people's foreheads, or having a dot
in the middle of the forehead
representing the celestial eye, or third eye.
- Do you guys know that in China,
the name for the celestial eye,
or the third eye is (speaks foreign language),
which literally means heaven's eye.
- There's a story in The Three Kingdoms of series
about a famous doctor named Hua Tuo
who saw a tumor in this chancellor
of the eastern Han dynasty Cao Cao.
He saw it in his brain, and wanted
to operate on it to remove it.
- [Rob] Cao Cao thought that Hua Tuo wanted
to actually kill him, so he imprisoned Hua Tuo,
and soon his head started to hurt,
and his own doctor said that he had a tumor.
- So he had his servant go out, try to find Hua Tuo,
but it turns out he had died in prison.
- So since none of his own doctors were as skilled enough
as Huo Tuo, there was basically nothing they could do,
and eventually Cao Cao died of the tumor.
Great job, just died from pride.
- There's another story about
a famous monk in China named Ji Gong
who was known as a very eccentric kinda monk,
almost like a crazy guy.
There's a famous story about how he came upon a village
that was located at the base of a mountain.
And what he saw was a giant landslide,
about ready to happen to destroy the village.
Like he saw this in a vision.
- Right, so he ran to the village trying
to warn everyone of the coming danger.
So what did the villagers do?
Well there was a wedding taking place,
and of course no one believe him,
'cause why would you want to if you set all that stuff up.
So some thought he was there to actually
just disturb the peace, right?
- Right.
After realizing that no one was believing him,
he decided to kidnap the bride
in the middle of their wedding,
which angered the entire town,
and they all started to go after him.
- Yeah, soon after, the giant landslide happened,
which destroyed the entire village.
It's said a giant boulder was actually
about to fall on a little girl, like she was underneath it.
- Right, and so monk Ji Gong was said
to use a supernormal ability called Iron Palm
which pushed the boulder back and saved the girl.
- So to this day, visitors can see the imprint
of a hand sunken into the base of a rock
in Hangzhou's Flying Peak, in which this story took place.
- [Ben] Right, yeah.
- Next, we're gonna talk about psychic abilities
through the celestial eye, so keep watching.
(intense instrumental music)
- And without further ado, we're gonna talk
about the most famous man related
to psychic abilities on the planet, Nostradamus.
(ethereal instrumental music)
- Now depending on what you're reading,
and how you translate what Nostradamus said,
most of you are thinking of two things
he used to have his visions.
One is a copper bowl filled with water,
and the other is a black mirror.
- These black mirrors are often
referred to as scrying mirrors.
And people usually emphasize these things
having a load of mystical powers, et cetera.
- Okay, we're not saying that these mirrors,
or the bowl filled with water and a divining rod
can't have a certain amount of power,
but these tools were used mostly as assistance.
The real abilities were coming from Nostradamus himself.
- Yeah, sometimes celestial eye visions
aren't all that clear, and using a bowl of water,
or a black mirror, or even sometimes a crystal ball
can help concentrate, helps you see these visions
more clearly as you calm down and focus.
- So let's just say it plainly.
Nostradamus was seeing this visions
through his celestial eye, and this
is one of the abilities your celestial eye contains,
depending on how great your abilities are.
- But we really can't emphasize this enough.
It's really not up to you how great your abilities are,
and you shouldn't worry about
whether you can or can't see anything.
The next example, and arguably the best example,
of someone prophesizing the future is a Cumaean sibyl.
(ethereal instrumental music)
- The Cumaean sibyl is said to
have written her prophesies on leaves.
People would come to her cave to collect them,
and they were sometimes bound into books.
They're even called the sibylline leaves.
- So there's a story of the sibyl bringing
nine volumes of these prophesies
to Tarquin the Second of Rome.
She offered them at a ridiculous price,
so when the king refused to pay,
she burned three volumes, and offered
the remaining at the original price.
When there were only three books left,
the king just couldn't stand it any longer
and finally just bought the remaining
books at the full price. (laughs)
- I mean, remind me to use this
tactic next time I'm selling something.
Crazy thing is that these books
were actually used for hundreds of years,
and only during the gravest of times,
to avoid oncoming catastrophes.
But sadly the final volumes all
perished in a fire in about 405 A.D.
- So how did the Cumaean sibyl see all these prophesies?
Well the celestial eye showed her visions of the future
and she just wrote them down.
Now on a side note, there's a lot of people out there
that are all saying, oh I'm psychic and I can
see all these visions and whatever, you know.
But, I mean, if you're paying money in general,
I would just say, you know, okay,
some people have this as a job,
they may be pretty good, but in the end it's like...
- Yeah, be, be careful.
- Just be careful.
If you haven't watched our video on portals
to the underworld yet, you really need to go and watch that.
Next, did George Washington really have a vision
of an angel that told him the future of America?
- And did General Patton have visions
through his celestial eye?
(grand instrumental music)
- So in the winter of 1777, George Washington
had a vision at Valley Forge about the future of America.
The account was told by a gentleman named Anthony Sherman
and is in the Library of Congress.
There's even a painting about the vision.
- Washington was alone at Valley Forge
and asked not to be disturbed when he looked up
and saw a beautiful female standing across the room.
He told her he asked not to be disturbed
but she didn't say anything back to him
aside from basically just raising her eyes.
- Soon he felt a strange sensation
as he starts to address her again, and he becomes paralyzed.
He then sees the room around him
just becoming luminous with this light.
- Yeah, so she says to him,
"Son of the Republic, look and learn."
And he saw a dark shadowy being
basically behind, which he describes like
an angel floating in mid-air between Europe and America.
He sees lightning and hears cries of Americans.
- Right, so basically what he's seeing
is like the peril of the coming
of the Revolutionary War for the first vision.
- Right, right, and then the next scene,
he sees Africa, and what he describes as
an ill-omened specter approaching the US.
He then sees the people of America fighting each other.
He then sees a bright angel wearing a crown
with the word union on it and bearing an American flag,
which he placed between the divided nation, and said,
"Remember, ye are brethren."
Instantly they ceased fighting,
and became friends once again.
- So this one is about the Civil War
which was a little less than 100 years
after he had the vision.
- Right, right.
So the final one is when he was shown a huge army
coming to the US, and they were burning cities,
millions were in combat fighting each other,
and then all of a sudden he saw a bright light
which he described as a thousand suns
that broke into fragments and enveloped all of America.
- Man, like yeah, and then after that
he sees an angel with the national flag in one hand
and a sword in the other descending from the heavens.
He was told, "While the stars remain, and the heavens
"send down dew up on the earth,
"so long shall the union last."
That's crazy.
- That's crazy.
- And the stars, I assume, refer to the states, right?
- [Ben] That's what I'm thinking, too.
- [Rob] So union of the states.
- Yeah, union of the states.
But she warns him that the most fearful is the third one
and to tell everyone about what he saw.
So he realizes that he's seeing the birth,
progress, and destiny of the United States.
- Wanna hear one of the more modern stories
about celestial eye visions?
(intense instrumental music)
- General George S. Patton,
who is known as the Great General
during World War Two, but also fought in World War One,
said he could see a lot of his previous lives.
He wrote Through a Glass Darkly,
where he describes how he saw many of his past lives,
which he fought in all of them.
- (laughs) Yeah.
So during both World Wars, Patton even claimed
to know his way around all the towns
on the battle fields, even though he's
never been there before.
Patton believed that this came from the time
as a French knight fighting the English
under Edward the Third, most notably at Crecy.
- That's crazy man.
Patton describes another incarnation
where he slayed Parthians with his gladius,
an awesome sword approximately 25 to 32 inches long.
He even said in his vision that he had,
he was wounded, and that he was killed
by an array of arrows in his neck.
- [Ben] Yeah, yeah, they shot him in his neck.
- What a way to die, imagine that.
- In one of his last visions he had
he was Joachim Murat, who was one of Napoleon's marshals
and one of the most capable cavalry officers
and leaders in service to the French emperor.
- Before the 1943 invasion of Sicily,
British general Harold Alexander told Patton,
"You know George, you would have made a great marshal
"for Napoleon if you had lived in the 19th century."
- To which Patton said, "But I did!" (laughs)
Patton also believed that after he died,
he would return once again to lead the armies into battle.
- General Patton actually died in Germany
on December 21st, 1945 after heart failure
from a car crash, however, there seems
to be evidence to support that he was murdered
because he wanted the United States
to basically take care of Russia
right after the end of World War Two.
- To get even crazier, because I mean,
we love to get super weird and crazy on this show.
- Speak for yourself man, I don't like that.
(Ben laughs)
Just kidding.
- There are many people who believe
that President Trump is actually
the reincarnation of General Patton.
- Don't believe us?
Check out this picture.
They do look a lot alike, and also
Trump really looks up to Patton actually, it's pretty funny.
- Yeah he does, yeah.
- So of course, we're not saying this is true,
it's kind of up to you to decide.
So speaking of reincarnation, do you guys want us
to do an episode on reincarnation?
'Cause we have a lot of info on it, and if you do,
- Yeah we could definitely do it.
- please comment below and you guys,
we'll hit you with some reincarnation stories.
So you guys might be asking why no one
really talks about the celestial eye anymore.
Basically, our understanding is that
science criticizes things it can't understand
and calls it superstition.
But anyway, this has been our episode
on the history of the celestial eye.
What did you guys think?
Please comment below and let us know.
- Also guys, don't forget to hit like and subscribe
we can definitely use all the support we can get.
We're new an we wanna keep making great videos for you guys.
Until then we'll see you guys out.
- On the edge.
(ethereal, spacey music)
-------------------------------------------
A massive snag in the pursuit of peace on the Korean peninsula - Duration: 24:08.
ROBERT COSTA: Is the meeting off or on? I'm Robert Costa. Inside the brinksmanship between
President Trump and North Korea, plus the latest on the Russia probe, tonight on Washington Week.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) I believe that this is a tremendous setback for
North Korea, and indeed a setback for the world.
ROBERT COSTA: President Trump calls off a face-to-face meeting with Kim Jong-un, but
both sides say they are ready for diplomacy.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) If and when Kim Jong-un chooses to engage in
constructive dialogue and actions, I am waiting.
ROBERT COSTA: North Korea responds and say they will talk at any time. They call Mr.
Trump's decision to back out of the June 12th summit "extremely regrettable" and insist
they are ready to talk peace after claiming to dismantle a nuclear test site.
Is the president's high-stakes gamble still on the table?
And what role is China playing in the negotiations? Plus -
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) If they had spies in my campaign during my
campaign for political purposes, that would be unprecedented in the history of our country.
ROBERT COSTA: The president steps up his efforts to discredit the Russia investigation,
claiming the FBI spied on his 2016 campaign. Then he sends his newest White House
attorney to a classified briefing about a secret informant.
REPRESENTATIVE ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): (From video.) But there is no evidence to support any
allegation that the FBI or any intelligence agency placed a spy in the Trump campaign.
ROBERT COSTA: We discuss it all with Mark Landler of The New York Times, Andrea Mitchell
of NBC News, Karoun Demirjian of The Washington Post, and Anita Kumar of McClatchy Newspapers.
ANNOUNCER: This is Washington Week. Once again, from Washington, moderator Robert Costa.
ROBERT COSTA: Good evening. President Trump was optimistic on Friday that the U.S.-Korea
summit he called off just one day earlier may now happen as once planned on June 12th in Singapore.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: (From video.) We're talking to them now. It was a very nice
statement they put out. It could even be the 12th. We're talking to them now.
They very much want to do it. We'd like to do it. We're going to see what happens.
ROBERT COSTA: It was a dramatic shift from the letter he sent Kim Jong-un on Thursday,
where he blamed the tremendous anger and open hostility of the North toward the United
States for his decision to cancel the meeting. The letter also contained a threat
about U.S. nuclear capabilities.
The president wrote, quote, "Ours are so massive and powerful that I pray to God that
they will never have to be used." North Korea issued a diplomatic and encouraging
response, quote: "Talking about the historic summit, we highly appreciated the fact that
President Trump made a brave decision to seek a meeting." Mark, as you evaluate this back
and forth - the meeting's off, now it's maybe on - what do you see from this president?
Is this the president who wrote The Art of the Deal in the 1980s saying you have to be
able to walk away from a meeting or a deal in order to really have leverage?
Or is this the negotiations actually falling apart?
MARK LANDER: I think it's probably the former, from his perspective.
I think probably in his own mind he thinks he's being very adroit and putting Kim Jong-un
on the hind foot, and he'll get a lot of advantage from it. I think the difference is,
of course, he's not doing a real estate deal. He's not buying a piece of property.
He's dealing with an opaque, erratic, unpredictable country that happens to have nuclear
weapons. So I think there's a higher risk factor that's obvious.
I think it is a fact that both of these men really want to have a meeting.
I think President Trump by now has left no doubt that whatever his advisors have to say
about it, whatever the experts have to say about it, he wants to go to Singapore.
He wants to have that encounter. And I think Kim Jong-un does too, for the simple
reason that he gains so much prestige by sharing a stage with President Trump. But I
think one thing we can probably all agree on is there will be many more twists and turns.
If it happens on June 12th, I'm a bit skeptical on the timing, but even so I think
between now and June 12th there'll be time for two or three more of these flips.
ROBERT COSTA: And the flips could be caused by people around President Trump.
Andrea, when you're at the State Department, when you're covering the White House, how
much are the people around the president influencing him to maybe walk away from the
negotiations at this point? National Security Advisor John Bolton, the new
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, what's their influence?
ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, John Bolton seems to have the most influence right now in
persuading him precipitously, really, to cancel it on Thursday morning, without first
warning his closest ally President Moon - the closest ally in the region - nor Japan.
And the fact is - nor members of Congress. It was done so quickly Secretary of State
Pompeo was brought into it, but it was really Bolton who was in the president's ear.
Proximity is everything with the national security advisor, one that he trusts.
And it's not the first time that John Bolton - he did this to George W. Bush -
has blown up a potential discussion or negotiation with North Korea. He's been against
it from the beginning. Pompeo has the most invested in it, since he - just days after
he became secretary of state - was delegated to go to North Korea and have that meeting
with Kim Jong-un and had one previously as CIA director. So he's got a lot more at stake.
And then Pompeo had to - at his first Senate Foreign Relations Committee testimony, read
the president's rather unusually crafted letter - personally written letter, which sounded
more like a breakup of a high school romance at times - (laughter) - rather than a nuclear negotiation.
ROBERT COSTA: The president wrote: Call or write anytime. Anita, but thinking about U.S.
allies, you were in the room with President Trump and President Moon of South Korea when
he was at the White House. How rattled are the South Koreans about this development?
ANITA KUMAR: It is not good for them. I mean, if you hear what they have to say,
they did not get a heads-up that this was going to happen at all. And President Moon
has staked his reputation on this meeting. He's tried to broker this meeting, bring
these two leaders together. And it just is a humiliating sort of defeat for him.
But he does see a silver lining because they're talking again. You know, I was in
the room on Tuesday. You mentioned President Moon was here. And it was just - it
was an extraordinary day because, you know, usually we go in for about a minute or
two and then we're quickly ushered out. But everybody kind of knew that we were in
for the long haul when we went in. I mean, President Trump clearly had something
that he wanted to say. He wanted to talk about the meeting.
He wanted to say that he wanted to do this, he wanted to send that message.
And that was the first time he had also blamed China for - President Xi - for this - for
maybe changing President - for blaming - Chairman Kim's mind.
So, you know, it was - he had a lot of things he wanted to say.
And it was really interesting because they weren't relaxed. They were sitting sort
of at the edge of their chairs, ready sort of for all the questions from us.
ROBERT COSTA: The comments about China you made are so important, because I'm really
wondering as I look back at my notebook this week, what caused this breakup?
At least, the momentary breakup? (Laughter.)
Was it President Xi of China whispering in the ear of Kim Jong-un?
Or was it the hawkish comments made by John Bolton and Vice President Pence?
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: I mean, you could see elements of both. But, look, when
you're talking about North Korea, you cannot take China out of that equation.
China has been the economic lifeblood of that country, basically keeping them afloat.
If China doesn't put pressure on Pyongyang it doesn't matter what anybody else is doing,
John Bolton or otherwise, because it's so important. So there was that meeting.
There's been two meetings in close proximity between the North Korean leader and the
Chinese president. The fact that one happened really just a few days before we
started seeing a total shift in tone I don't think you can discount, even if we
weren't in the room to actually hear that conversation. And so what you've got is
this weird game of - you know, it's the United States talking to North Korea, but
China's really the person on the outside that matters. And they have interests, right?
The North - the Korean Peninsula's right there. China does not really want to see
the rise of a unified Korea, which is one of the things the South Koreans certainly want.
And yet, they also don't need to see complete instability and war on their border,
because that's bad too. Meanwhile, we're talking to China about all kinds of
different trade deals, ZTE, trying to win them back over to kind of play ball with
us a little bit better. And this is all kind of the other part of this negotiation
that's behind the scenes that is vital if you're actually going to get the negotiation
that everybody was saying, June 12th or no, to actually happen and mean anything.
ROBERT COSTA: And, Andrea, you wrote this week you spoke with retired U.S.
Navy Admiral James Stavridis, who said the way this summit was moving we were going to
end up, as Karoun was saying, with the U.S.-North Korea summit, South Korea playing a bit
part, and China not even on the stage. This is unacceptable to President Xi.
ANDREA MITCHELL: President Xi wants in. He wants to be the influencer that he is.
What he does not want is a reconciled, unified Korea on his border, which will begin
moving towards a capitalist, democratic society, with all of these offers and incentives
coming from President Trump. So he wants to be part of the equation. As we said -
as you say, he wants stability. He doesn't want nuclear war, certainly, on his border
and refugees coming over. But he doesn't want to be excluded.
And in this matter, he is excluded. And I think if the summit does get back on,
down the road I think both South Korea and China have to play a part.
MARK LANDLER: You know, Karoun mentioned the trade talks that are also going on in
parallel with the North Korea drama. And I think that's really important because,
after all, it was President Trump himself that linked trade with security last year
when he said to President Xi: If you help me on North Korea, I'll go easy on you on trade.
I think in a way the coin has turned, and President Xi is now saying to President Trump,
two can play that game. We're in the middle of this difficult trade negotiation and
suddenly Kim Jong-un's getting a lot more challenging.
And so I think that's part of what's going on here.
ANDREA MITCHELL: And in fact, if you look at that very confusing photo opportunity in
the Oval Office that Anita was at, the president was pivoting from trade and China into
the Kim summit and China. I mean, it was a very strange conversation and it was, as
you point out, the first time that he had said that - or hinted that President Xi
might have toughened the negotiating stance of Kim. The other thing is there is a
growing military escalation in the South China Seas between the U.S.
and China, the Pentagon disinviting China from participating in exercises and China very
prominently landing a bomber on one of their manufactured islands.
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: Yeah, and the think you've got to keep in mind is that, you know,
China is better versed into pulling all of these strings at various moments at which it's
advantageous to them than the Trump administration is too. This is a tricky game.
And if they don't do it right, they lose leverage to China.
And if you lose leverage to Beijing, then they can kind of call the shots on this a
little bit more, and then that's when you see, you know, North Korea potentially making
fast moves that have to be, you know, trumped - I should use a better word - but, you
know, shown up by what the United States has to do.
ANITA KUMAR: Look at what President Trump has said over the last week - even just since
Tuesday. He's gone back and forth. He's blamed China. And then he said what a
wonderful trip he had there last year, and that no one has been given as much of a
warm welcome as he was. And it was - I was there. It was quite a - quite a thing.
But he's gone back and forth. It's been good. It's been bad.
And it's kind of like he doesn't really know where he wants to leave that.
ROBERT COSTA: When we think about what's good and bad, I mean, the facts matter because
there's this war of words and we're all covering the war of words.
But this week, we also saw North Korea, though it hasn't been verified by the U.S.,
demolish a nuclear testing site, coming weeks after they released U.S. prisoners.
As much as there's a breakdown, Mark - and I want to hear, Anita, your take on this too -
as much as there's a breakdown, how much has actually happened in terms of progress as
this talk approached?
MARK LANDLER: Well, look, I mean, if you remember back to where we were a year ago, you
had a hostile adversary testing long-range missiles, testing nuclear bombs.
All that's been halted. These three Korean-American detainees have been released.
Kim Jong-un has said in principle he doesn't have a problem with a continued U.S.
troop presence on the Korean Peninsula.
There was a statement he made, which he seems to have reneged on a bit, that he wouldn't
object to joint military exercises between South Korea and the United States.
So a lot of progress has been made. And President Trump is not wrong to say that.
This is a young leader who's undertaken many steps to show he's serious. I think the big
unanswered question - and most people are skeptical of it - is will he then go the next
step and be willing to really surrender any significant portion of his nuclear program.
ANITA KUMAR: Yeah, here's the problem. I totally agree.
There has been so much progress from six months ago, or 12 months ago.
But the problem is that President Trump raised the expectations so incredibly high.
It was going to be in one fell swoop denuclearization, so it was just everything was
going to be done in one time. There wasn't even going to be, you know, tears or
anything like that. It was - it was all going to happen at once. And so he raised
the expectations so high, higher than - you know, it just wasn't going to happen.
And all the North Korea experts you talk to say it's not going to happen. They haven't
done it in decades. They're not going to do it now. And so then it looks like he fails.
ROBERT COSTA: Talking to some of my sources in the White House this week, they say by
this meeting being called off we're lowering the expectations if this meeting ever
happens. But we're going to have - we're going to have to turn to the showdown.
I'm coming to you, Karoun, because there was another showdown here at home between the
Justice Department and Republicans, continuing this ongoing standoff over the handling of
the federal probe into Russian interference during the 2016 campaign, especially during
its early days. President Trump rallied with his Capitol Hill allies this week, claiming
without presenting evidence that the FBI implanted a spy - his words - into his ranks.
Leaders from the Justice Department and the intelligence community met twice in recent
days with top Republicans and Democrats, hoping to calm the tensions in all of this
partisan fighting over the FBI's use of a confidential source to aid the investigation
into Russian activity. White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and White House lawyer
Emmet Flood showed up at the start of those sessions, angering Democrats and raising
concerns among some Republicans. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who represents
the president, defended the attendance of both men at the classified meeting.
The FBI source whose efforts are under scrutiny is Stefan Halper, a retired University of
Cambridge professor and veteran of past Republican administrations. Multiple news
outlets reported on his name over the past week, including The Washington Post.
And in full disclosure, Halper was my professor a decade ago while I was a graduate
student at Cambridge. As Karoun noted in a story this week, it is common practice for
the FBI to use confidential sources to help advance investigations and they are not
considered spies. But the fight, Karoun, is about the context of this confidential
source - who is he, and his conduct, and was it appropriate at the time in 2016?
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: Right. And so even if - you know, informants are fairly standard
practice for these types of investigations. The president has kind of taken this into
his own hands. He's been saying spies were implanted into the campaign, even though as
we've reported there's really no evidence that went to that extent or that happened.
But they've been driving this campaign. They've had help from Capitol Hill.
Devin Nunes has been asking for this information.
That's kind of what tripped off the entire thing. And we've gotten to this point
where, yet again, there is a faceoff between leading House Republicans against DOJ.
And it resulted in the back-to-back meetings that we saw on Thursday where first Devin
Nunes and Trey Gowdy went to the Department of Justice to have that meeting there, and
then two hours later the officials from - the DNI and the DOJ officials came to Capitol
Hill to talk with the whole Gang of Eight. There was - and Adam Schiff ended up being
in that first meeting as well. There's been a push and pull about whether this is a
partisan thing or not. It was a strange kind of setting once they got to Capitol Hill
to talk to the whole group because Devin Nunes apparently didn't say a single word during
the meeting. Apparently some of the officials had documents, but nobody asked to see them.
And so it's this - it's this strange thing of there being a lot of people, Democrats
especially, who don't think this ever should have happened in the first place, think that
the Trump team is trying to weasel their way into these classified briefings to get
information they can then use to try to undercut the Mueller probe, and yet everybody
kind of trying to say we're going to do this as much on the up and up as we can.
I think a lot of Republicans felt like they were caught in the middle, especially from
the Senate side, and had to kind of go along with this even though they weren't that comfortable.
And I think the end result is that we've had a lot of weird silence from the people who
were actually pushing for this in the first place and just people like Mitch McConnell
coming out and saying, yeah, look, I still support Bob Mueller in that probe, which means
where did the 8-ball go? I think everybody's wondering what's going to be next from
Devin Nunes at this point because it doesn't seem like anything really happened.
ANDREA MITCHELL: And the concern from former intelligence officials who served both
Democratic and Republican White Houses is that this is a terrible precedent, that this is
an intrusion into a classified process that should not be partisan.
The Gang of Eight are the bipartisan oversight leaders of intelligence and the - you
know, the speaker and the - and the majority and minority leaders, and it never should
have been put in this context, and initially of course was not even going to include
Democrat Adam Schiff. So for the president, the White House to order this to take
place - to demand it, really, through Devin Nunes, on his behalf - when he is a
subject, if not a target, but a subject of a criminal investigation of which this
is a material part is just so inappropriate that lawyers who've worked in the
Justice Department in the past, as well as intelligence officials, are very, very
uncomfortable with that and think it is a terrible reversal of decades of precedent.
ROBERT COSTA: But it's not deescalating; it's escalating.
You had - right before we went to air the AP reported Mayor Giuliani said he's now going
to request more documents, that he is urging the president to push on this issue, and
that they may use this whole fight over the origin of the Russia probe as a way to think
about ending the Mueller special counsel investigation.
MARK LANDLER: Yeah, that - I think what Mayor Giuliani said was that if we can show that
this spy was used inappropriately or that the agencies behaved inappropriately, then it
turns the entire - it casts the entire Mueller investigation into doubt and removes all
credibility from Mueller's effort. And, you know, it's obvious that President Trump
views this as perhaps his most appealing target yet in terms of a long-term effort to
discredit Mueller. I just was struck this past week.
It was a very busy week for Trump's tweeting, but if you were to count up the number of
tweets that were about Spygate, which I really think by now the president should
trademark - he really wants to get this notion of Spygate into the bloodstream.
And, you know, as I've said before, these things do register. They do damage over
time. They register particularly with Republicans, and it has an impact.
ANITA KUMAR: I think there was a real shift. I mean, we've seen for a year now that
President Trump has been undermining the investigation, right? He's called James Comey
names and Robert Muller names, and he's talked about it on Twitter.
I mean, definitely he's said all these different things. But what really shifted was
that he was getting the federal government - Congress and DOJ - to actually act, to
actually undermine the investigation, and that's the first time we've really seen that.
So now he's getting some House Republicans, he's getting - he's forcing the Department of
Justice to meet with them. He brokered that agreement, or his chief of staff did.
Now he's asking for information. I mean, this is a real shift in this investigation.
ROBERT COSTA: We still haven't seen the documents that Nunes, the House Intelligence
Committee chairman from California, keeps requesting. Are we going to ever learn more
about what this confidential source was doing? The White House keeps casting
attention on it. What do we expect, if not the classified documents?
And what are we ever going to learn more about why someone was maybe put in motion to
learn more about Russian activity at that time?
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: Right, I think this is going to be one of those things that we're
going to see several more rounds of fights over before we actually get the substantive
information behind it because it still requires declassification that not everybody in
Congress wants. I mean, remember, Richard Burr and Mark Warner had the chance to be
briefed on this previously; they said no because they were worried about leaks coming
out, right? And so you're definitely going to have Republicans continue to push.
I mean, this is the most arched that this kind of standoff has become.
But we've seen this in various rounds, right, where first they were asking for the
documents that went into the dossier, that led to the memo and the whole Memogate that
occupied the first two months of this year, and that was the back and forth between the
Hill and DOJ then. Now we're at this point. Now there probably will be something
else, too, down the line. This is kind of the play that just keeps getting -
ANDREA MITCHELL: Before that you had the unmasking.
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: Exactly, exactly.
ANDREA MITCHELL: And they've all been fake claims and unsupported claims from - both
Democratic and Republican sources say that the Devin Nunes approach has all been attempts
to undermine the investigation, but with no credible fact.
And I think that the branding of this, as you were referring to, the president has
managed to, I think, really question the credibility of the investigation in an effective
way with "witch hunt," with these other names. He's a great marketer.
And by using Spygate over and over again in social media and on Fox and other of the
shows that he - that his surrogates appear on, he has managed, I think, to plant the idea
that there was a spy when an informant is a regular practice.
KAROUN DEMIRJIAN: And that's the thing that matters, right, because you're playing to
two different audiences here. One is the federal government, right, which is, you
know, are you going to get the information you want.
There's always something there that's real and part of the investigation that you blow
out of proportion to try to pull DOJ in and create this really, you know, conflict that's
just very intense. But the other is the American public, and right now sometimes it
kind of looks like this is working to Trump's benefit heading into the 2018 elections.
ANITA KUMAR: He did something really - he did something interesting in just a couple
days here. It was maybe there was a spy; I'm not sure. If there was, this would be a
horrible, unprecedented thing. And two days later, I mean, just over time, it was a
definite spy, right? It's Spygate now. Now we're calling it Spygate.
ANDREA MITCHELL: He's saying - and all of you are talking about it as Spygate.
MARK LANDLER: Well, I think we have to acknowledge that the mainstream media is put in
an exceedingly awkward position here because some news organizations have decided to name
this person, other news organizations have decided not to. Even those who have decided
to name him are being extremely careful with how they characterize him. So the normal
aggressive search for truth that people like us do, I think we're somewhat hamstrung in this.
Perhaps it's self-imposed, and some people would criticize us for that, but that's one thing
that if we weren't dealing with a spy we might be able to drive to the answer more quickly.
ROBERT COSTA: Complicated stories, that's what we cover here every week. (Laughter.)
Thanks, everybody. We're going to have to leave it there. Coming up next on many PBS
stations, In Principle. Former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson discusses the #MeToo movement.
AMY HOLMES (co-host, In Principle): (From video.) A lot of people are also seeing that
maybe #MeToo is going too far and accusing people that don't deserve it. What do you say to that?
GRETCHEN CARLSON (former Fox News anchor): (From video.) I say that that's a cop-out.
ROBERT COSTA: Stay tuned and check your local listings.
Let us also pause for a moment ahead of Memorial Day - pause to remember the women and
men who served and gave their lives for this country. We remember them and their
families. I'm Robert Costa. Thank you for joining us.
-------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON DC USA 🇺🇸 🇲🇦 جولة مغربي في ضواحي العاصمة الأمريكية واشنطن دي سي - Duration: 6:37.
For more infomation >> WASHINGTON DC USA 🇺🇸 🇲🇦 جولة مغربي في ضواحي العاصمة الأمريكية واشنطن دي سي - Duration: 6:37. -------------------------------------------
Montana Rail Link, Washington Foundation commit $60K to Governor's Cup - Duration: 0:59.
A MAJOR SPONSORSHIP WILL HELP SUPPORT THE GOVERNOR'S CUP IN HELENA, AND ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE ACROSS MONTANA.
TAKE VO MONTANA RAIL LINK AND THE DENNIS AND PHYLLIS WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ANNOUNCED TODAY THEY WILL COMMIT 20- THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR TO THE
GOVERNOR'S CUP, FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
STARTING THIS YEAR, THE
GOVERNOR'S CUP WILL BE THE MAIN FUNDRAISER FOR THE CARING FOUNDATION OF MONTANA. THE FOUNDATION WILL FUND BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MONTANA'S CARE VAN.
A PARTNERSHIP TO PROVIDE VACCINATIONS AND IMPORTANT HEALTH SCREENINGS IN UNDERSERVED AREAS.
TAKE SOT: XX:17 OC:..THE
CARING FOUNDATION. "ALL REGISTRATION FEES AND SPONSORSHIP DOLLARS WILL GO 100 PERCENT TO SUPPORT THE WORK OF THE CARING FOUNDATION, TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
PREVENTIVE CARE TO MONTANANS ACROSS THE STATE. WE'RE EXTREMELY GRATEFUL TO HAVE SUCH A PROMINENT EVENT BE ENTITLED TO THE CARING FOUNDATION." CONT.
VO LEADERS MADE THE ANNOUNCEMENT AT SMITH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WHERE 85 PERCENT OF STUDENTS ARE TAKING PART IN THE GOVERNOR'S
CUP KIDS' MARATHON PRO
-------------------------------------------
Tucker: Washington's unprecedented hysteria over Russia - Duration: 10:33.
or coming to you this Thursday unfortunately from a very sick city a
place where many of the people in charge aren't just wrong but increasingly are
irrational Washington is in the grip of unprecedented mass hysteria over Russia
yes Russia take three steps back it's a freezing poor country on the other side
of the globe where the average life expectancy is lower than that in
Bangladesh Russia is a place whose economy is smaller than the economy of
Texas it's a country that can barely produce a working escalator or
non-poisonous vodka and yet that country which was guarded by sober people as sad
and increasingly irrelevant is according to Democrats in Washington in virtually
complete control of the workings of the US government they tell us that every
day and they're starting to seem like they believe it that's demented the most
striking of example comes from former Director of National Intelligence Jim
clapper in an interview just yesterday clapper claimed that Russia flipped the
results of the 2016 election got trump elected over hillary asked for evidence
of that clip clapper admitted he didn't have any because of course he doesn't
have any nobody else has any either there is no evidence that any foreign
country changed a single American vote in 2016 and by the way that was clappers
position just two years ago when it was the position of the Obama administration
that vote tampering by a foreign power was completely irresponsible and
impossible to contemplate now that trump is an office of course clapper and other
Democrats are warning that Russia will try to subvert this year's midterms as
well they have no evidence for that either now keep in mind that Jim clapper
is not some fringe radio show host or backbencher in Congress for years he
held one of the top intelligence posts in the country yet he's delusional
that's terrifying and he's not the only delusional one the CIA operatives spying
on the Trump campaign also sounds like he's unbalanced reports today from the
Daily Caller finds that that man once falsely accused a Russian academic at
Cambridge University of being a Russian infiltrator and said an entire
intelligence seminar was compromised by Russian agents like Kim Philby were
still alive this afternoon congressional leaders received a classified briefing
from DOJ and Intel officials about all spying that took place in 2016 not
spying from spooky Russian agents and from the Kremlin but from the Obama FBI
and that might put some of this in perspective tom Fitton is the president
of judicial watch Molly Hemingway is an editor at The Federalist they join us
now thank you to both miles start with you and I hate to start out a media
question but it determines how people understand the story what they read and
what they see on television they're still news outlets as of tonight that
are pretending like there was no spying on the Trump campaign so can you just
say definitively do we know as a factual matter that the Obama FBI spied in the
Trump campaign or don't we well everyone knows that there was a spy and in fact
people who were involved in the spying are admitting that there's a spy they're
saying though that because the government term is human intelligence
informant or something like that that therefore it's not a spy whereas normal
Americans understand that when you are gathering information on someone
surreptitiously that's the common definition of spying and more than that
that's just a stunning revelation that this was happening under the previous
administration that there would be this kind of surveillance not just at least
one human intelligence informant but also wiretaps National Security Letters
which are how you can secretly get a subpoena and who knows who knows what
else is going on so actually like widespread spying involving multiple
people in the Trump campaign and we still don't really know what's going on
because they're trying to fight I think that's the point and by the way I should
point out in the interest of honesty that these are agencies controlled by
the the Trump White House so it's not clear to me at all why we don't know
this and that why the committees and the Congress who have oversight over all
this don't know there was a meeting today famously about this Tom do you
think members of Congress again charged with oversight of this stuff know the
answer as of tonight no my understanding is they're still being strung along this
meeting was for show we want to see the documents so why would they be strung
along because these agencies have contempt for congressional oversight you
have this extraordinary situation of a republican-controlled Justice Department
and FBI attacking and undermining the congressional oversight activities of a
republican-controlled House and Senate and they didn't want to turn over the
documents so I said well have a meeting and we'll talk about the secret spy game
we had but it won't be public we won't tell you what we have
in terms of turning over documents which is still the big fight you know Judicial
Watch specializes isn't Freedom of Information Act because we recognize the
government documents really tell you what went on and government official
descriptions of what went on as we're learning from the Obama gang that's
describing this spy as an informant in a dishonest way we need to see the
documents we need to know how much money was this person paid was money was money
transferred as a result of his involvement with the Trump campaign
who else was he working look or there were there others but there's a time
limit there's a timer sand is passing through the hourglass here if Democrats
take the house and take control majority control of these committees then how
will we find out they have no interest in information this is why it would be
nice if everyone on both sides of the aisle had a common understanding that
spying on political opponents is not a good precedent and it's not good for
having Americans having confidence in the Asiana liberals say that III mean
there been a few I think very exceedingly few Mark Penn is someone who
was a Clinton adviser who has been making that argument in addition to the
issue that the Department of Justice thinks that they are accountable to no
one not the president under who's in whose branch they serve or Congress
which funds them and created them I think it also must mean that the
information is really damaging really dangerous that they're willing to
subvert any authority in order to keep that a secret so this is something that
I think they think they can keep this from getting out I don't think they will
actually yeah in the pretexts they used to hide this information from public
view are dishonest so tonight Eric Felten report Washington has a piece
explaining that one of the many facts redacted by the FBI in documents
obtained through FOIA reveals that Annie McCabe spent $70,000 on a piece of
office furniture they held that back on grounds of national security
does that imperil us Tom as a country now that our enemies know that Andy
McCabe spent seventy thousand dollars on a piece of office furniture I mean of
course it doesn't and it shows you that the FBI and Department of Justice can't
be trusted to evaluate fairly whether documents
should be released or not and the president who constitutionally runs the
agencies needs to intervene and stopping at let and and stop himself from being
strung along by the his appoint and tell them to release these records
let's review the weekly never listen to your lawyers if there's one piece of
advice I have for my children it's don't listen to your lawyers because they
don't have the truth of hey take their advice so to account and get the
information out just do the right thing I would say thank you both very much
great to see you well I took a couple of years in a big dip in viewership but the
NFL has realized the public was turned off by the controversy over players
kneeling during the national anthem today Roger Goodell who runs the league
announced new policy banning public anthem protests the players don't want
to stand they have to stay in the locker room or their team will be fined already
the NFL Players Union has protested the rule and New York Jets Chairman
Christopher Johnson says the team will simply pay the fines if his players
decide to protest Jason Whitlock is with Fox Sports 1 a frequent guest in the
show and he joins us now Jason thanks coming up no problem thanks for having
me so I read this Goodell statement which seems fine but this line stuck out
and I'm quoting where condena kated to continuing our collaboration with
players to advance the goals of justice and fairness in all corners of our
society which made me wonder are they going to take positions on tax policy or
NAFTA next I thought this is like a football league no they're not going to
listen I think Roger Goodell and the NFL are trying to please everyone yeah and
I'm not sure if you can accomplish that listen I think some people are heartened
that okay the players that take the field will be called upon to stand and
respect the national anthem and the flag but I think he's opened an opportunity
for a conversation about the players that don't come out on the field and
that will drive a discussion about the NFL that might be a bit uncomfortable
and not what the league wants I really think Tucker they should have done one
of two things they could have said to the players look we're just gonna remove
the national anthem from your involvement everybody stay in the locker
room we'll just do it with our fans yeah that would have been optional one option
- and it might have been the one I would have preferred I wish he would have just
said look if you come out and you disrespect the national anthem you won't
pull you'll still get paid but you won't play
and so that will force NFL owners and coaches to be a bit more vigilant about
who's on their team and whether these players want to hurt their team by you
know I honoring their protest during the game make some real consequences for
that protest and very smart so this would become let me do that I mean
that's such a that's a kind of a brilliant solution why didn't he do that
I think the goal was to please everybody players the left-wing media that hates
football and then also trying to please be excellent the sports fans and the
actual consumers of football who just want the players to respect the flag
respect anthem and put on an entertaining game people go to sporting
events to be distracted from our politics and debates about race courts
and football stadiums have been where people of all kinds of different
backgrounds economically race politics all come together and root for a common
team it hasn't been a place to go to discuss Wars I mean to discuss politics
that's right and I think it's great to have a respite from all this insanity
Jason Whitlock host of speak for yourself on Fox Sports one one of our
favorite guests great to see you thank you
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét