Want Your Feedback

Here's your opportunity to provide us with ideas about which products you want and need from our advertising sponsors.  I have been on hiatus recently but have decided to possibly restart my contributions to this website.  We have been looking for feedback about what you want and need from our advertisers.  In the interest of transparency, I have the opportunity to receive stipends from sales of some of the products advertised.  Send your suggestions to RedneckFriend@mail.com.  I look forward to hearing from you!

Kushner Scandal May Be "Tempest In Teapot"

Another so-called Trump Administration "scandal" may not be as it appears.
So the story goes, Presidential advisor Jared Kushner talked with the Russian Ambassador to the United States about setting up a direct line of communication between the two of the world's three superpowers.  According to one source, however, the conversation was about a "simple one-off" communication with the Russians over Syria, and was not initially suggested by Kushner.  According to Fox News, this was suggested by Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergei Kislyak.  However, according to Fox, Kushner suggested that Russian equipment be used to thwart attempts to surveil the incoming administration.
So, let's get the facts straight:  the Russian ambassador suggested the conversation.  Kushner did not suggest it.  However, when spoken with about this, he suggested that the conversation take place over Russian-designed equipment so as to thwart any attempt by U.S. intelligence personnel to listen in on the call.  It concerns me that the Trump Administration would want to talk with the Russians without the intelligence community listening in.  However, such direct communication has been very important at times.  Consider the fact that during the Kennedy years there was the "red phone", which was a permanent link.  Consider also the fact that during the Cuban missile crisis that direct line probably prevented World War III.  However, considering the way intelligence officials and others seem to be interested in scuttling the Trump presidency, the suggestion that there be a private communication link does not surprise me.  In fact, it may be a very intelligent move.  So, the intelligence apparatus of this country may have made it easier for the Trump Administration to conduct back-room deals and still have the support of the public.  Confusing world, isn't it?  In effect, they may have discredited themselves.

Trump Has Right To Tell Comey To Back Off Flynn Investigation, Says Top Legal Expert

Famed attorney and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has confirmed what I suspected:  that President Trump has the Constitutional right to tell the FBI's Director to back off an investigation.  Here's more from CNN:  http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/20/trump-impeachment-dershowitz-cabrera-segment.cnn

Welcome To the Brave New World . .

http://www.zdnet.com/article/neurala-partners-with-lindbergh-foundation-to-use-drones-to-combat-poaching/?loc=newsletter_small_thumb&ftag=TRE6a12a91&bhid=20337076602077087305307734676428

I wonder how long it'll be before the "powers-that-be" use this technology to watch US?  Or, perhaps they already are . .

Is Google Taking Sides In The War Between Mainstream and Alternative Media?

=20170411_Newsletter:%20Daily&utm_term=Daily

It seems to me that this could be, as Google states, a method of helping viewers to discern which stories are true, which are false and which are misleading.  But, who checks the checkers?  I have a far better suggestion:  DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH if you have the time!  And, in any event, employ your own common sense and life experience, allowing for the fact that some events aren't going to correlate with anything in your experience but are nonetheless true.

Swedish Workers Willingly Getting Microchipped

Big Brother continues his march forward, this time in Scandinavia.  Here's the scoop, from Constitution:  http://constitution.com/swedish-workers-getting-routine-microchip-implants/.

House Intelligence Committee Trips To White House Normal, Sources Say

The House Intelligence Committee head routinely travels to the White House to receive extremely sensitive data.  This, from the Constitution:

constitution.com/report-nunes-nothing-ordinary-viewing-classified-intel-white-house/

A Note On My Links

This question has come up:  why are my links in code, instead of plain English?  The reason is simple:  I think that you deserve to KNOW the sources of the materiel to which you are linking.  You can check to see who owns the domains of the sites to which you are linking by contacting http://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup (WhatIsMyAddress) or https://whois.icann.org/en (The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers).  Be assured that I care about you.

Is Trump "Crazy Like A Fox"?

So, it's Sunday night.  The big health bill is supposedly dead, having been 'withdrawn' in the House.  President Trump says he's "moving on" to tax reform.  All the pundits are either bemoaning or cheering the supposed 'death' of the health insurance bill, H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act of 2017.  But here's another scenario.  I heard someone, I do not know whom, express this on patriot radio yesterday evening (I think that it was on The Liberty Net (http://3950.net/live/)).  He brought up the possibility that Trump, by announcing that he is "moving on" to something else, puts huge pressure on the House to come up with a health bill that they can agree on and that the Senate will pass.  If the House doesn't pass anything Trump can claim, rightly, that the House didn't pass anything.  This could put huge pressure on the Speakership of Paul Ryan.  Thus, it is possible that Trump, figuring Ryan to have been an enemy on health care, is "giving (him) enough rope to hang himself".  It's a possibility.

Get Ready For More Idiot Protests

This summer promises to be long and hot in the U.S.  Our nation's left political wing is planning to make it that way.  Corporate America is even joining in the act: 

https://www.mail.com/news/us/5048398-meetup-takes-risky-leap-trump-resistance.html#.7518-stage-hero1-1

Here's one interesting question:  can a corporation which plans or assists in planning these things be sued due to damages?  Does that require violence to have broken out or can a corporation be sued over damages caused by a peaceful protest?

Trump 1; Dems, Liberals and Other Psychopaths 0

Alright, let's get this straight.  This is how I have it between President Donald Trump and the various Dems, RINO's, liberals and other malcontents.  The President says that the Obama Administration bugged Trump Tower.  The Dems and other malcontents (including, yes, YOU, Senator John McCain) seem to think that the Trump transition team colluded with the Russians and that the Russians somehow influenced the 2016 presidential election.  President Trump HAS STATED that he got news of the bugging of Trump Tower from two New York Times articles.  So, so much of the talking heads and Congress crowing about how he has to come up with "proof" and mentioning some kind of idiot "deadline" to which the President is not beholden anyway.  The research has been done; the Times did articles on FISA court warrant applications which were submitted by the Obama Administration for permission to conduct surveillance at Trump Tower.  The first application was rejected (which is rare with the FISA court.  Usually they pretty much rubber-stamp these things.)  So, that first application must have been a real humdinger.  The second was accepted.  Would an administration have gone to the trouble to apply for a FISA court warrant without intending to use it?  I doubt that.  So, in all likelihood, there was really surveillance.  By the way, the Times is what we ordinarily refer to in the news biz as an "authoritative source" (Whether it should be considered such is a discussion worthy of much time on another day.)  Secondly, the Obama Administration has a well-documented history of using federal agencies to persecute opponents.  Remember the IRS scandal?  So, in all likelihood, yes, surveillance of some type went on.  Whether Trump used the precisely correct word for the method of surveillance is unimportant.  The aforementioned malcontents claim that the Trump transition team was in communication with Russians.  So what?  It would be understandable and so I hear, routine, for the Russians to speak with someone representing a potential new administration.  Was the Trump team aware of any Russian involvement in the purloining of carelessly-guarded emails from the Clinton campaign?  There's no proof of it.  Were the Russians involved in any theft of said emails?  Our security organs say that there are indications of that but offer no proof of it.  Did the Russians try to hack either campaign?  They've admitted that they tried to hack both of them but claim that they had no success.  Did they try to influence American public opinion?  There's no proof of it but I'll go ahead and say "yes" because this is something that modern advanced nations routinely do, including our own!  Anyone remember President Obama's trip to Israel?  How about the fact that he sent an entire team there, I'm sure at our expense, to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu?  The pot is calling the kettle black!  While I remain open to further developments, it seems to me that right now, the score is "Trump 1, Malcontents 0".  Right now, this is taking an inordinate amount of the time, attention and resources (that means "money", as in "taxpayer money", as in your and my money) of the United States government.  If this proves to be a red herring, as I suspect, those responsible for this should be held accountable. 

CNN Loses Feed When Congressman Tells An "Inconvenient Truth"

Do you think that your mainstream media is free and unbiased?  You may want to have a look at this, from Constitution:

http://constitution.com/cnn-cuts-feed-congressman-says-refugees-account-30-terrorism-investigations/

I admit that there's no proof that CNN cut the feed.  Still, I think it's curious that the signal 'went dead' while the alleged connection between immigration and terrorism was being discussed, don't you?

Should There Be A "Bloody Monday" In the Trump Administration?

Certain Demoncrats are now calling for the head of Attorney General Jeff Sessions.  Isn't it funny how they easily they turn on a man who was so recently one of their own (a member of the Senate).  But wait!  Let's take a closer look at this:  certain of this party "investigate" a couple of conversations that Sessions admittedly had with the Russian Ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak.  The reason I put the word "investigate" in quotes is because I believe that this is totally political and that if there was no political benefit to it, the Dems would drop it like a hot rock.  So, Sessions talked with the Russians?  So what?  The last time I checked that wasn't a crime, and in fact the Dems have done it too: 

https://unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com/democrat-hypocrisy-sessions-talked-to-the-russians-so-did-they/

Meanwhile, the Left continues to behave like spoiled children:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/02/right-cue-soros-financed-moveon-org-holds-protest-demanding-sessions-resignation/

And a trial lawyer says Attorney General Sessions certainly didn't commit perjury:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/03/02/trial-lawyer-jeff-sessions-absolutely-not-perjure/

Meanwhile, libs still seem to live in an alternate universe, and the Dems still can't seem to prove any conversations between the Trump campaign or representatives of it and the Russian government:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0302/The-Trump-administration-s-deepening-Russia-problem

Meanwhile, WE'VE been messing with other nations' elections:

https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/#Press%20Release%20(English)

Here's a link to the specific espionage orders:

https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/#release

 

Meanwhile, has it occurred to you that this may be planned?

http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/civil-war-ii/

Look, here's the bottom line:  it's pretty obvious that this has been planned.  The left is being directed by a very cynical cabal the aim of which is to destabilize this President and to destabilize our nation.  It is very well funded.  I can't prove that now but I look for the opportunity.  When and if it presents itself to me I will present the proof of my assertion to you.  The progressive left has attempted to get its' agenda passed for over 100 years.  This started with passage of the 16th and 17th Amendments.  The 16th Amendment made it legal for Congress to tax Americans individually.  Before this, to tax legally, Congress had to charge the States and states in turn could tax their citizens to recover the money.  In fact, it put the boot of the federal government, a most powerful and at times cruel taskmaster, directly on the shoulders of the citizens.  Then the 17th Amendment was passed.  This changed the Constitution to mandate the direct election of U.S. Senators.  This took a huge amount of power out of the hands of the States.  I've heard that this was promoted as increasing democracy.  It did anything but.  It cut out of the loop (the role of electing Senators) state legislators, politicians, people many of whom I'm sure thought like politicians and could figure out what these people were up to.  It also assured the sending to Washington of representatives who eventually would begin to feel separated from and likely superior to the people back home and who could be persuaded to follow a progressive agenda.  The Left almost had this accomplished; the socialistic, top-down, ruled-by-a-global-elite if possible leftists' paradise (hell to the rest of us).  Then we came along!  That is, the rest of us, average Americans who just go to work every day, try our best to be a decent spouse (in some cases) and to raise our children to be moral, happy, productive human beings.  They thought they had it in their grasp and then . . gone!!

This much is apparent.  Barack Obama, while remarking continually about a "smooth transition", has assured anything but.  He has done what he usually does.  I've believed for many years that when the former President is attempting to draw attention to what he's doing with his right hand, you need to watch the left!  It's that hand with which he is usually performing his most nefarious deeds.  While Democrats in the Senate, oddly enough with little power to do so, have managed to slow approval of President Trump's nominations to almost a standstill, Republicans have at least put up with this nonsense and may be tacitly going along.  This keeps Obama appointees in their jobs all over the Executive Branch.  This includes the national security apparatus.  The Trump Administration continues to be beset with leaks, damaging to it even if inconsequential.  For the most part, these leaks seem to be coming from our national security organs.  We need to make sure that a couple of things happen.  First, President Trump absolutely needs Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.  He needs McConnell's help in being willing to bounce the Dems on their pointy little heads, repeatedly if necessary (and it will be).  Remind them that there is a price to be paid for losing and that unless they're willing to go along with the program or at least compromise, that price will be paid by them.  Individually.  Now, McConnell is a spaghetti-spined weasel, so he will probably also need convincing.  I suggest phone calls.  His office phone number is (202) 224-2541.  While we're at it, the web address for the U.S. Senate is https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm.  That's just in case you might want to contact your senators.  Secondly, there needs to be a "Bloody Monday".  Trump has to be careful about this because these people are in many different places in government.  Obama made sure he had his own people all over the place.  Others are G.W. Bush appointees who may or may not be empathetic with Trump's views and plans.  Firing too many of these people at once could be very dangerous to national security.  In fact, having as many positions vacant as we have is dangerous to national security.  I think Trump has been doing an amazing job of operating the Executive Branch at about half-staff but he needs a full staff nonetheless.  You can thank the Dems in the Senate for the fact that he doesn't have that and for any danger which this poses to the country.   

President Donald J. Trump has been receiving a shellacking from the mainstream media and Congress as of late, apparently aided by our country's national security apparatus (And don't feed me this malarkey about Trump making an enemy of the national security apparatus.  These people are supposed to be professionals.  They are not supposed to let their personal feelings get in the way of how they do their jobs.) 

And Just When You Thought You Were Rid Of the Obama Administration

The Obama Administration has left a number of stumbling blocks in the way of any successor but the following information should make the blood of any real, patriotic American run cold.  From The Great American Daily: 

http://greatamericandaily.com/2017/02/09/loretta-lynch-frightening-move-office/.

Let's take this apart a little at a time.  "America’s 60,000-person-strong domestic spying apparatus — to make available raw spying data to all other federal intelligence agencies, which then can pass it on to their counterparts in foreign countries and in the 50 states upon request. She did so, she claimed, for administrative convenience. Yet in doing this, she violated basic constitutional principles that were erected centuries ago to prevent just what she did…"  First, let's take on the potential domestic effect of this.  This reduces what standards of proof may be imposed if a warrant would otherwise be necessary.  That standard may be encased in law but let's face it, it is also in certain situations at least up to an individual judge.  The standard is reduced to "governmental need".  Aren't you glad that your privacy will no longer serve as a bulwark against "governmental need"?  Now here's the really frightening news:  according to the article, this will also make your information (which should be private but isn't because of NSA spying) available to Lord-knows-whom worldwide.  To my mind, this opens at least a couple of possibilities:  that your information will be for sale, perhaps from our own government employees to any of a wide variety of characters worldwide with a wide variety of interests.  The other possibility is truly terrifying.  That is that domestic or foreign interests will be able to use your information to find and subjugate you.  Do you think that's impossible?  Consider what's happening on the streets of the U.S. right now.  What do successful revolutionaries do to overthrow a government?  They get the systems set up!  After you destroy or render ineffective the current system you must have something with which to replace it!  Communications, lines of authority, etc., all have to be constructed.  Funding must be acquired.  If necessary or advantageous, the appropriate government officials must/should be bribed/corrupted/subverted.  You have to find out just how far the people within the current system will let you push.  I believe that's what's happening right now.         

Are Illegals And Other Immigrants Voting In U.S. Elections? Here's Some Information On That:

President Donald Trump has claimed that three-to-five-million illegals voted in the last U.S. Presidential election.  "Impossible!", you say?  Here's some information on that from the Federation For American Immigration Reform:

http://www.fairus.org/issue/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-u-s-election

I'll grant you that the Federation is an immigration reform advocacy group.  Yet I still believe that this article is worth consideration.  If you wish to do so, research the facts in this article more thoroughly and get back to me on the issue at RedneckFriend@mail.com.  I look forward to hearing from you!

How Unusual Is President Trump's Use Of Executive Orders?

There's considerable controversy concerning President Trump's use of executive orders.  Here's a report from the Christian Science Monitor comparing his record to that of his predecessor:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0201/How-unusual-is-Trump-s-use-of-executive-orders?cmpid=ema:nws:Daily%2520Newsletter%2520%2802-01-2017%29&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20170201_Newsletter:%20Daily&utm_term=Daily

President Donald Trump issued six executive orders in his first week in office.  That would average out to 312 executive orders in his first year in office if he keeps up this pace.  To contrast, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued 573 executive orders in 1933.

Trump Claims Millions Of Illegals Voted In Last Election. He Couldn't Be Right, Could He?

President Donald Trump says that"three-to-five million" illegals voted in last November's election.  His opponents are claiming that this didn't happen, with some so-called "experts" even saying that the scenario is"impossible".  However, former President Barack Obama, before the election, actually noted that the status of illegals would not be questioned if they went to polling places.  This, from WND:

http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-encourages-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

So, former President Obama wasn't urging illegals to vote?  No, he was not actually encouraging illegals to vote, but he not only put the idea in front of them, he told them how to do it!

Trump Wastes No Time Undoing Obama Legacy

President Donald J. Trump today and yesterday signed one executive order and several memorandae reversing policies of the Obama Administration (you'll have to go one or two pages deep into the White House site to get to information about the orders):

https://www.whitehouse.gov/transitionsplash/

An Honest Check On Trump Education Nominee

Since the left has gone so thoroughly off-the-chain about President (God, I love the sound of that if for no other reason than that it bothers the left so) Donald Trump's Education pick, Betsy DeVos, I thought I'd check into her background.  Here's what I found on Wikipedia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betsy_DeVos.

Trump "Revolution" Spreads Across Europe

Calls to exit the European Union and for leadership which will present a united front against radical Islamic expansionism are echoing across Europe, the result of the United Kingdom's "brexit" vote and the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States.  This, from Bloomberg: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-20/europe-s-nationalists-rally-in-show-of-force-as-trump-sets-tone

Meanwhile, crowds in the United States and across the western world protested Trump's election:

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-21/women-s-march-draws-thousands-to-washington-to-protest-trump

I note that although the headline in Bloomberg's story claims that marches occurred around the world the article only mentions marches in the U.S.

Meanwhile, not everyone was welcome at Washington's march.  From Breitbart: 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/21/pro-life-youth-crash-pro-abortion-womens-march/

And, the left was busy showing its' collective backside in other ways.  Again, from Breitbart:  

http://www.breitbart.com/live/womens-march-washington-live-updates/madonna-drops-f-bombs-anti-trump-rally-ive-thought-lot-blowing-white-house/

http://www.breitbart.com/live/womens-march-washington-live-updates/anti-trump-women-marchers-threaten-never-leave-washington-dc/

And Breitbart reports this particular gem: 

http://www.breitbart.com/live/inauguration-2017-swearing-president-donald-trump/saturday-night-live-writer-tweets-barron-trump-will-americas-first-homeschool-shooter/

I thought the kids were supposed to be left out of this.  After this cheap shot Saturday Night Live should lose both of its' viewers!

"Spontaneous" Washington "Women's March" Has Ties To George Soros

Billionaire investor and financier George Soros funds or has ties to over 50 organizations which sponsored the "Women's March" in Washington.  That's according to an article in Women In the World:  http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/.

Is CNN Predicting The Unthinkable?

CNN has just committed possibly the most bizarre act in an election season filled with strangeness.  The network yesterday aired a report pondering what would happen in the event an attack on the inaugural dais killed both President-elect Donald Trump and Vice-President-elect Mike Pence.  This, from Breitbart:  http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/18/cnn-airs-segment-saying-obama-admin-keep-power-trump-pence-blown-inauguration-day/.

The irresponsibility of airing something such as this after a very hard-fought and bitter election season, with the number of crazies in our nation and over a million people in the nation's capital, many if not most of them unhappy over the election's outcome, defies belief.  Add to that the number of death threats against President-elect Trump and his family, which the Secret Service has already stated is in record numbers, along with the behavior of many leftists both during and after the election, and you have a powder keg waiting for one nut to light the fuse.  As previously stated in this blog, there already have been reports of leftist organizations planning violence.  If there is any attack for which this program can be proven to be inspiration, CNN and all personnel connected with the production and airing of this program should be held directly civilly and if possible, criminally responsible.

Leftists Plan Massive Disruption Of Trump Inauguration

Various leftist groups are planning to disrupt the inauguration of President-elect Donald J. Trump.  Some of the groups in question are planning violence, according to TalkNetwork.com:  http://talknetwork.com/2017-01-16-anti-trump-leftists-caught-on-video-plotting-inauguration-terrorist-acts-chemical-attacks-and-mass-violence-weapons-cache-discovered-with-guns-and-ammo.html.

Do you ever wonder where these protests are coming from; who is fomenting them and perhaps even more importantly, who is paying for them?  Here are some clues:  http://www.wnd.com/2016/12/michael-moore-soros-vogue-mag-fueling-mass-anti-trump-protests/.  Thanks to WorldNet Daily for that report.

Meanwhile, a third report (from Breitbart) notes that J20 protesters are being told that this is their final chance to "fight Trump under the laws and police procedures of the Obama era" (the implication being that they will be allowed to loot, burn and attack innocent people): cry
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/17/inaugural-rioters-urged-go-hard-chance-rove-city-protocol-obama-era/

Libs Continue "New Revelations" With Same Ol' Same 'Ol

Look, folks, here's the deal:  the Dems keep coming at President-elect Donald Trump with what hasn't been proven but is U.S. intelligence agencies' 'best guess':  that Russia hacked into the Hillary Clinton campaign's and the Democratic National Committee's emails.  Before you get on my butt about use of the term 'best guess', keep in mind that they've said that themselves in other words.  Also please keep in mind that this is the same "intelligence establishment" which told George W. Bush in 2003 that there were "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq (actually, I have it from a separate source that there was evidence found of the previous presence of nerve gas.  My guess is it had been moved, probably to Syria).  According to some of those same intelligence officials, the Russians also attempted to hack the Republican National Committee but were unsuccessful.  But this isn't just about emails.  The Dems are also claiming that the Russians planted "fake news stories" to influence U.S. public opinion.  Note that the Dems are carefully avoiding claiming that the actual vote was tampered with.

Most of us nowadays get our news either from t.v. or from the web.  I firmly believe that most of the people who get their news on the web know that much if not most of it is plainly slanted but factual and some of it is to varying degrees outright false.  We know that you have to be able to separate the fact from the fiction.  No one tells you this, but I will:  the newspaper media have the same thing in their history!  It was called "yellow journalism" and it was prominent if not prevalent in the late 19th century.  Writers would "hype" a story into something it wasn't.  Sometimes they would be told by their editors to concoct a story "out of whole cloth" (or they'd do it on their own).  Yes, once in a while we're going to have a nut case who's going to kill a bunch of people because he believes the pizza parlor they were in is the front for a child trafficking operation {Considering some of what we see in America today and the recurrent rumors of just such a thing existing among our nation's elite (at least since the 1980's) isn't it worth at least an investigation before we consider the person nuts?}.  Nonetheless, most of us are smart enough to know that especially if we're reading one of the many news or commentary blogs or one of the lesser-known web news sources that we really don't know where our news is coming from.  It's not like the old days when I could go to the dock at the local newspaper at 1:30 a.m. and get that day's paper, sometimes even warm to the touch from the printing presses.  Our news comes in a stream of electrons.  Chances are we don't know the name of the company or individual which or who produces our news source.  Even if the name of the publisher is mentioned, we don't know if it's correct.  A website can easily be faked.  About the best that a person can do is look up the ownership of the website's domain and investigate from there.  So, we have to ask ourselves, "Has this been corroborated by other sources?  Does it seem likely or even plausible, considering what I know of the situation?"  We also know fully that even if a story is true, it may be slanted.  Its' source, in terms of authorship, publishing and/or nation, may not be what we think or what we would like.  As for Vladimir Putin, he's an important world leader.  If he has something to say, I want to hear it.  Whether I believe it will probably depend on how well it stacks up against what I know of the situation.             

Trump Allegations Fly . . Still No Proof!

The claims surrounding the Trump campaign's alleged business ties to the Russian government continue.  A widely-circulated and widely-disparaged Buzzfeed report claims that Trump has had extensive dealings with the Kremlin. The report also claims that the Kremlin has compromising information on Trump including some which is sexual in nature and graphic and which might subject him to Russian blackmail: 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/kenbensinger/these-reports-allege-trump-has-deep-ties-to-russia?utm_term=.bkWq40v51#.euLB9gnMz.

Questions also continue based on what is being presented as a declassified version of a report given to both President-elect Trump and President Obama:  

http://elections.ap.org/content/us-designates-election-infrastructure-critical.  

I read all of the first report and about two-thirds (so far) of the second.  Several factors are noteworthy:  

1.  No direct source is mentioned in anything I've read.  It's all "according to so-and-so" or even third-generation garbage (the original source, whoever that is, telling you that someone told them that so-and-so did such-and-such).  I understand that this may be the language of spycraft but after the many times we've been lied to by our own government I'm not inclined to believe much of anything we're told by them without a verifiable source.

2.  The "company" was referred to several times in both documents.  Inside the CIA, this is slang for that agency.  No, I can't imagine how anyone would be stupid enough to leave that in there if the CIA was the actual source, but as strange as this whole transition of power has been . . .

Here's the bottom line:  there are a bunch of serious, yet unproven allegations here.  There is the possibility that the reports are accurate.  Yet there are numerous parties with potential motives to hobble a Donald Trump presidency from the start or to try to take the presidency from Mr. Trump and thus disenfranchise almost half of the American electorate and make the Electoral College, and our Constitution, a laughing stock.  There is no identified source.  There is no physical evidence.  There is no 'smoking gun'.  I leave it at that.