Trump, Congressional Leadership Agree VA Expansion Will Be Paid For

Donald Trump holds up the Veterans Affairs Mission Act he signed

Donald Trump holds up the Veterans Affairs Mission Act he signed / Getty Images

BY:

The Trump administration is seeking to pay for recent expansion of Veterans Affairs to private health care through recently increased budgetary caps, according to an administration official.

The VA Mission Act, signed into law by the president on Wednesday, creates a new program that allows veterans to seek private care. The law calls for billions for new programs to provide private care, but does not outline how they will be funded.

The Washington Post reported the White House is working against funding the new law. However, the White House and the Republican congressional leadership both support securing funding for the VA expansion.

“The committee will continue to work with the White House in finding the path forward to secure and fund the best care for our veterans,” said David Popp, a spokesman for Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.). “It’s not a question of whether this important priority will get funded. It will be resolved during the upcoming appropriations process.”

An administration official told the Washington Free Beacon the White House is committed to funding health care for current and future heroes and said the expansion can be paid for under existing spending caps.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s office confirmed Ryan (R., Wis.) agrees with the White House that the new veterans programs should be paid for with existing funds, rather than increasing spending.

A proposal introduced by Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.) and Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) would create $50 billion in new spending to address the health care expansion.

However, the administration says the creation of new funding is unnecessary and can be taken elsewhere from existing appropriations, after Congress recently approved a $67 billion increase in spending for nondefense programs in fiscal year 2019.

The official added that the White House strongly supports creating a new, consolidated community care program for veterans’ health care. President Trump’s budget for FY 2019 funded the program under the nondefense discretionary cap, while providing $83.1 billion for the VA, an 11.7 percent increase from 2017. Of that, $73.1 billion would go toward health care services for veterans.

The Community Care Program, which was created by the Mission Act, accounts for $14.2 billion of the president’s VA budget.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

U.S. Rebukes Nicaragua Over Killings of Protesters 

Demonstrators protest during a march from Catarina City to Niquinohomo City to demand justice for the deaths in recent protests / Getty Images

BY:

Human rights organizations in Washington and Nicaragua are documenting allegations of human rights violations following the deaths of at least 113 people protesting the Daniel Ortega regime in the political uprising that began two months ago, according to sources familiar with the investigations.

A group of Nicaraguan college students traveled to Washington this week to ask for assistance from President Trump and Congress in toppling the regime. The students, who have emerged as the most effective opposition to Ortega, are sharing alarming new details about the deaths of fellow students killed in protests by national police.

The students also are expressing concern that foreign actors from Cuba and Venezuela are helping the Nicaraguan government provoke violence among students attempting to hold peaceful protests against the Ortega regime, according to an attorney who met with the students.

The lethal attacks against the students have become such a threat that the Catholic church issued a warning to priests and bishops who have sheltered the young people that their lives too are now in danger, the sources told the Washington Free Beacon.

The Vatican News service also reported that the Episcopal Conference of Managua has denounced the death threats against bishops and priests, specifically bishops in the Archdiocese of Managua.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (D., Fla.), an outspoken critic of the Ortega regime, has been a vocal advocate for the students.

Ros-Lehtinen has been pressing the Senate to pass its version of the Nicaraguan Investment Conditionality Act, an effort to shut down Nicaragua’s access to international loans from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

She authored a similar bill in the House, but the Senate legislation, coauthored by Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), has been stuck in the upper chamber.

Secretary of State Pompeo responded on Thursday to the outcry from the Nicaraguan students and several members of Congress over allegations of intentional killings of student protesters by Nicaraguan national police and others supporting the Ortega regime.

The State Department restricted the visas of several Nicaraguan officials, including those in the National Police, the Ministry of Health, and other municipal officials, for “directing or overseeing violence against others exercising their rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression, thereby undermining Nicaragua’s democracy.”

“The political violence by police and pro-government thugs against the people of Nicaragua, particularly university students, shows blatant disregard for human rights and is unacceptable,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said in a release.

The action prevents those involved with directing the violence from traveling to the United States.

“These officials have operated with impunity across the country, including in Managua, Leon, Esteli and Matagalpa,” Nauert said, declining to name the individuals impacted because of U.S. visa confidentiality laws.

“We are sending a clear message: human rights abusers and those who undermine democracy are not welcome in the United States,” she added.

During a general assembly meeting of the Organization of American States on Monday, Pompeo used part of his speech to demand that the Ortega government respond to the Nicaraguan people’s demands for democratic reform and “hold accountable those responsible for violence.”

A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers, led by Ros-Lehtinen and Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) earlier this week, wrote a letter to Trump urging him to sanction key Nicaraguan officials, including Francisco Diaz, the deputy commissioner of the National Police and “de facto director,” for allegations of personal corruption under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act.

Last month, Ortega sought to make unilateral changes to the country’s social security program that, “because of corruption and mismanagement has been running a deficit,” the lawmakers wrote.

Massive protests erupted after news broke that Ortega would require employers to contribute a higher portion of workers’ salaries toward making up the gap, the lawmakers wrote.

“In response, Ortega unleashed the government’s National Police on these protesters,” the lawmakers wrote.

The lawmakers, citing media reports, also noted an incident on May 9, 2018 when a group of police officers attacked the residents of a small community in Managua.

“Journalists who were covering the incident were threatened by 30 armed National Police officers,” they said. “Francisco Diaz made a statement saying the police were only monitoring traffic and that four members of the patrol were hurt by bullets. Eyewitnesses denied his version of the story.”

“Elsewhere at least three students were allegedly killed for taking part in protests around the Polytechnic University and National University,” they added. “The Associated Press confirmed the mobilization of police against the protestors. Francisco Diaz denied any policy presence in the area, according to the Washington Post.”

Besides Ros-Lehtinen and Rubio, lawmakers singing the letter to Trump included: Sens. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Bill Nelson (D., Fla.), along with Reps. Elliot Engel (D., N.Y.), Albio Sires (D., N.J.), Paul Cook (R., Calif.), Debbie Wasserman Shultz (D., Fla.), Norma Torres (D., Calif.), Michael Conway (R., Texas), Mario Diaz-Balart (R., Fla.), and Carlos Curbelo (R., Fla.).

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

VICIOUS: Trump Just BLASTED Clinton And Obama So Hard They Wish They’d Never Entered Politics

That’s what I call a 187. ………………………………… ……………………………………………………. ………………………………………………….. …………………… ………………………………… ……………………………………………………. ………………………………………………….. …………………… In one of his most ruthless […]

via Downtrend.com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://downtrend.com

Mata Hari journalism? Veteran Senate Intelligence Committee staffer, in romantic relationship with NYT reporter, arrested in probe of leaks

James A. Wolfe, former Director of Security for the Senate Intelligence Committee, lost everything when he was arrested by the FBI last night.  A review of media reports on the background of the arrest suggests that the lure of romance with a nubile female journalism school student may have been his undoing. This is a story with at least two compelling themes: the apparent betrayal of national security by a veteran Senate staffer, and the rise in a mere 4 years of a comely female reporter in a romantic relationship with Wolfe from unpaid undergraduate intern at McClatchy to the lofty post of New York Times national security correspondent.



Ali Watkins picture used on her Twitter account


The indictment of Wolfe indicates that lying to the  FBI about his relationship with Ms. Watkins [REPORTER #2 in the indictment] is the basis for the arrest. It outlines the genesis of the relationship and the meteoric rise of Ms. Watkins from journalism major to a prestigious beat at the New York Times:



13. During in or around 2013 and in or around 2014, REPORTER #2 was an undergraduate student serving as an intern with a news service ]McClatchy] in Washington, D.C.


14. In approximately December 2013, WOLFE and REPORTER #2began a personal relationship that continued until in or around December 2017.


15. From in or around mid-2014 through in or around December 2017, REPORTER #2 was employed in Washington, D.C. by several different news organizations covering national security matters, including matters relating to the SSCI. During this period, REPORTER #2 published dozens of news articles about SSCI and its activities.


Watkins went from an intern at McClatchy to Buzzfeed, where she made a big name for herself with this story of April 3, 2017. The tone is apparent from the lead paragraphs:


 A former campaign adviser for Donald Trump met with and passed documents to a Russian intelligence operative in New York City in 2013.


The adviser, Carter Page, met with a Russian intelligence operative named Victor Podobnyy, who was later charged by the US government alongside two others for acting as unregistered agents of a foreign government. The charges, filed in January 2015, came after federal investigators busted a Russian spy ring that was seeking information on US sanctions as well as efforts to develop alternative energy. Page is an energy consultant.


She went from Buzzfeed to Politico, and then, in December 2017, to national security correspondent of the New York Times.


The indictment continues:


16. From in or around mid-2014 through in or around December 2017, WOLFE and REPORTER #2 exchanged tens of thousands of electronic communications, often including daily texts and phone calls, and they frequently met in person at a variety of locations including Hart Senate Office Building stairwells, restaurants, and REPORTER #2’s apartment. WOLFE and REPORTER #2 also communicated with each other through encrypted ceIl phone applications


The account in today’s New York Times describes the dramatic events that unfolded as the FBI moved in and contacted Ms. Watkins. It was in December 2017 that the FBI first contacted Ms. Watkins:


Shortly before she began working at The Times, Ms. Watkins was approached by the F.B.I. agents, who asserted that Mr. Wolfe had helped her with articles while they were dating. She did not answer their questions. Mr. Wolfe was not a source of classified information for Ms. Watkins during their relationship, she said [to the NYT, apparently]. That same month, F.B.I. agents asked Mr. Wolfe about an article written by Ms. Watkins. He denied knowing the reporter’s sources.


Wolfe abruptly ended his 30 years of service with the  Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in December 2017, as the investigation moved into gear.


A prosecutor notified Ms. Watkins on Feb. 13 that the Justice Department had years of customer records and subscriber information from telecommunications companies, including Google and Verizon, for two email accounts and a phone number of hers. Investigators did not obtain the content of the messages themselves.


The records covered years’ worth of Ms. Watkins’s communications before she joined The Times in December 2017 to cover federal law enforcement. During a seven-month period last year for which prosecutors sought additional phone records, she worked for BuzzFeed News and then Politico reporting on national security.


There is much indignation today on the part of journalists over the FBI monitoring the communications of a reporter.  Recall that James Rosen of Fox News was subjected to similar monitoring during the Obama years, resulting in no charges against him. The Times complains:


News media advocates consider the idea of mining a journalist’s records for sources to be an intrusion on First Amendment freedoms, and prosecutors acknowledge it is one of the most delicate steps the Justice Department can take. “Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of democracy, and communications between journalists and their sources demand protection,” said Eileen Murphy, a Times spokeswoman.


Ms. Watkins’s personal lawyer, Mark J. MacDougall, said: “It’s always disconcerting when a journalist’s telephone records are obtained by the Justice Department — through a grand jury subpoena or other legal process. Whether it was really necessary here will depend on the nature of the investigation and the scope of any charges.”


The Times account continues, apparently indicating that her previous employers, like the New York Times, knew that she was in a personal relationship with a source leaking confidential information, which sounds to me like Mata Hari strategy of journalism:


Ms. Watkins said she told editors at BuzzFeed News and Politico about it and continued to cover national security, including the committee’s work. Ben Smith, the editor in chief of BuzzFeed News, said in a statement, “We’re deeply troubled by what looks like a case of law enforcement interfering with a reporter’s constitutional right to gather information about her own government.”


The predicate for the arrest was Wolfe’s response to an investigative questionnaire from the FBI:


d. Question 9 of the investigative Questionnaire asked “Have you had any contact with” any of those three reporters. As to each reporter, WOLFE stated and checked “No.”


e. Question 10 of the Investigative Questionnaire asked, “Besides [the three named reporters], do you currently have or had any contact with any other reporters (professional, official, personal)?” Before answering this question, WOLFE stated orally to the FBI agents that although he had no official or professional contact with reporters, he saw reporters every day, and so to “feel comfortable” he would check “Yes.” He did so, and initialed this answer.


f. Question 10 of the Investigative Questionnaire further asked, “If yes, who and describe the relationship (professional, official, personal).” In the space provided, WOLFE hand wrote “Official – No” and “Professional – No.” WOLFE then orally volunteered that he certainly did not talk to reporters about anything SSCl-related. FBI agents orally asked WOLFE if he had traveled intonationally with any reporter, gone to a baseball game or to the movies with a reporter, or had weekly or regular electronic 3 4 communication with a reporter. To each question WOLFE verbally responded ‘No.” WOLFE then wrote “Personal – No” on the investigative Questionnaire.


g. Question 11 of the investigative Questionnaire asked, “If yes to question ten, did you discuss or disclose any official U.S. government information or documents whether classified or unclassified which is the property of the U.S. government without express authorization from the owner of the information?” WOLFE stated and checked “No” and initialed this answer.


h. WOLFE signed and dated the Investigative Questionnaire next to the following warning: “I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.”


And here is the trap that the FBI sprang on him last December:


8. On or about December 15, 2017, after WOLFE signed the Investigative Questionnaire, the FBI agents asked WOLFE about an article written by REPORTER #2 that contained information that had been provided to the SSCi by the Executive Branch for official purposes. WOLFE denied knowing about the reporter’s sources for the article. After WOLFE stated that he did not know about REPORTER #2’s sources, FBI agents confronted WOLFE with pictures showing WOLFE together with REPORTER #2. After being confronted, WOLFE admitted to the FBI agents that he had lied to them, and that he had engaged in a personal relationship with REPORTER #2 since 2014, but maintained that he (WOLFE) had never disclosed to REPORTER #2 classified information or information that he learned as Director of Security for the SSCI that was not otherwise publicly available. WOLFE also stated that he never provided REPORTER #2 with news leads. intelligence, or information about non-public SSCI matters. 9.


In addition to Ms. Watkins, 3 other reporters are alleged by the indictment to have received leaks from Wolfe.


This story has all the elements of a compelling drama, one that does not appear congenial to the major media. Watching the way this plays out will be one thread in what promises to be a summer of major revelations, including the release next week of the DOJ Inspector General’s report.


Today, as NPR reports:


Wolfe, who is from Ellicott City, Md., was expected to appear in court on Friday, prosecutors said, but the AP says it was not immediately clear if he has retained a lawyer. He faces five years on each count of lying to the FBI, but if convicted, is reportedly likely to serve only a small portion of that time.


Especially if he agrees to testify and incriminate others


James A. Wolfe, former Director of Security for the Senate Intelligence Committee, lost everything when he was arrested by the FBI last night.  A review of media reports on the background of the arrest suggests that the lure of romance with a nubile female journalism school student may have been his undoing. This is a story with at least two compelling themes: the apparent betrayal of national security by a veteran Senate staffer, and the rise in a mere 4 years of a comely female reporter in a romantic relationship with Wolfe from unpaid undergraduate intern at McClatchy to the lofty post of New York Times national security correspondent.



Ali Watkins picture used on her Twitter account


The indictment of Wolfe indicates that lying to the  FBI about his relationship with Ms. Watkins [REPORTER #2 in the indictment] is the basis for the arrest. It outlines the genesis of the relationship and the meteoric rise of Ms. Watkins from journalism major to a prestigious beat at the New York Times:


13. During in or around 2013 and in or around 2014, REPORTER #2 was an undergraduate student serving as an intern with a news service ]McClatchy] in Washington, D.C.


14. In approximately December 2013, WOLFE and REPORTER #2began a personal relationship that continued until in or around December 2017.


15. From in or around mid-2014 through in or around December 2017, REPORTER #2 was employed in Washington, D.C. by several different news organizations covering national security matters, including matters relating to the SSCI. During this period, REPORTER #2 published dozens of news articles about SSCI and its activities.


Watkins went from an intern at McClatchy to Buzzfeed, where she made a big name for herself with this story of April 3, 2017. The tone is apparent from the lead paragraphs:


 A former campaign adviser for Donald Trump met with and passed documents to a Russian intelligence operative in New York City in 2013.


The adviser, Carter Page, met with a Russian intelligence operative named Victor Podobnyy, who was later charged by the US government alongside two others for acting as unregistered agents of a foreign government. The charges, filed in January 2015, came after federal investigators busted a Russian spy ring that was seeking information on US sanctions as well as efforts to develop alternative energy. Page is an energy consultant.


She went from Buzzfeed to Politico, and then, in December 2017, to national security correspondent of the New York Times.


The indictment continues:


16. From in or around mid-2014 through in or around December 2017, WOLFE and REPORTER #2 exchanged tens of thousands of electronic communications, often including daily texts and phone calls, and they frequently met in person at a variety of locations including Hart Senate Office Building stairwells, restaurants, and REPORTER #2’s apartment. WOLFE and REPORTER #2 also communicated with each other through encrypted ceIl phone applications


The account in today’s New York Times describes the dramatic events that unfolded as the FBI moved in and contacted Ms. Watkins. It was in December 2017 that the FBI first contacted Ms. Watkins:


Shortly before she began working at The Times, Ms. Watkins was approached by the F.B.I. agents, who asserted that Mr. Wolfe had helped her with articles while they were dating. She did not answer their questions. Mr. Wolfe was not a source of classified information for Ms. Watkins during their relationship, she said [to the NYT, apparently]. That same month, F.B.I. agents asked Mr. Wolfe about an article written by Ms. Watkins. He denied knowing the reporter’s sources.


Wolfe abruptly ended his 30 years of service with the  Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in December 2017, as the investigation moved into gear.


A prosecutor notified Ms. Watkins on Feb. 13 that the Justice Department had years of customer records and subscriber information from telecommunications companies, including Google and Verizon, for two email accounts and a phone number of hers. Investigators did not obtain the content of the messages themselves.


The records covered years’ worth of Ms. Watkins’s communications before she joined The Times in December 2017 to cover federal law enforcement. During a seven-month period last year for which prosecutors sought additional phone records, she worked for BuzzFeed News and then Politico reporting on national security.


There is much indignation today on the part of journalists over the FBI monitoring the communications of a reporter.  Recall that James Rosen of Fox News was subjected to similar monitoring during the Obama years, resulting in no charges against him. The Times complains:


News media advocates consider the idea of mining a journalist’s records for sources to be an intrusion on First Amendment freedoms, and prosecutors acknowledge it is one of the most delicate steps the Justice Department can take. “Freedom of the press is a cornerstone of democracy, and communications between journalists and their sources demand protection,” said Eileen Murphy, a Times spokeswoman.


Ms. Watkins’s personal lawyer, Mark J. MacDougall, said: “It’s always disconcerting when a journalist’s telephone records are obtained by the Justice Department — through a grand jury subpoena or other legal process. Whether it was really necessary here will depend on the nature of the investigation and the scope of any charges.”


The Times account continues, apparently indicating that her previous employers, like the New York Times, knew that she was in a personal relationship with a source leaking confidential information, which sounds to me like Mata Hari strategy of journalism:


Ms. Watkins said she told editors at BuzzFeed News and Politico about it and continued to cover national security, including the committee’s work. Ben Smith, the editor in chief of BuzzFeed News, said in a statement, “We’re deeply troubled by what looks like a case of law enforcement interfering with a reporter’s constitutional right to gather information about her own government.”


The predicate for the arrest was Wolfe’s response to an investigative questionnaire from the FBI:


d. Question 9 of the investigative Questionnaire asked “Have you had any contact with” any of those three reporters. As to each reporter, WOLFE stated and checked “No.”


e. Question 10 of the Investigative Questionnaire asked, “Besides [the three named reporters], do you currently have or had any contact with any other reporters (professional, official, personal)?” Before answering this question, WOLFE stated orally to the FBI agents that although he had no official or professional contact with reporters, he saw reporters every day, and so to “feel comfortable” he would check “Yes.” He did so, and initialed this answer.


f. Question 10 of the Investigative Questionnaire further asked, “If yes, who and describe the relationship (professional, official, personal).” In the space provided, WOLFE hand wrote “Official – No” and “Professional – No.” WOLFE then orally volunteered that he certainly did not talk to reporters about anything SSCl-related. FBI agents orally asked WOLFE if he had traveled intonationally with any reporter, gone to a baseball game or to the movies with a reporter, or had weekly or regular electronic 3 4 communication with a reporter. To each question WOLFE verbally responded ‘No.” WOLFE then wrote “Personal – No” on the investigative Questionnaire.


g. Question 11 of the investigative Questionnaire asked, “If yes to question ten, did you discuss or disclose any official U.S. government information or documents whether classified or unclassified which is the property of the U.S. government without express authorization from the owner of the information?” WOLFE stated and checked “No” and initialed this answer.


h. WOLFE signed and dated the Investigative Questionnaire next to the following warning: “I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.”


And here is the trap that the FBI sprang on him last December:


8. On or about December 15, 2017, after WOLFE signed the Investigative Questionnaire, the FBI agents asked WOLFE about an article written by REPORTER #2 that contained information that had been provided to the SSCi by the Executive Branch for official purposes. WOLFE denied knowing about the reporter’s sources for the article. After WOLFE stated that he did not know about REPORTER #2’s sources, FBI agents confronted WOLFE with pictures showing WOLFE together with REPORTER #2. After being confronted, WOLFE admitted to the FBI agents that he had lied to them, and that he had engaged in a personal relationship with REPORTER #2 since 2014, but maintained that he (WOLFE) had never disclosed to REPORTER #2 classified information or information that he learned as Director of Security for the SSCI that was not otherwise publicly available. WOLFE also stated that he never provided REPORTER #2 with news leads. intelligence, or information about non-public SSCI matters. 9.


In addition to Ms. Watkins, 3 other reporters are alleged by the indictment to have received leaks from Wolfe.


This story has all the elements of a compelling drama, one that does not appear congenial to the major media. Watching the way this plays out will be one thread in what promises to be a summer of major revelations, including the release next week of the DOJ Inspector General’s report.


Today, as NPR reports:


Wolfe, who is from Ellicott City, Md., was expected to appear in court on Friday, prosecutors said, but the AP says it was not immediately clear if he has retained a lawyer. He faces five years on each count of lying to the FBI, but if convicted, is reportedly likely to serve only a small portion of that time.


Especially if he agrees to testify and incriminate others




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Actor’s plea to God while in a pit of failure changed everything: ‘Jesus, you’ve got to save me’

Bruce Marchiano, star of PureFlix.com’s “The Encounter” series, is known for his many on-screen portrayals of Jesus — an iconic role that has come to define his career. But Marchiano wasn’t always a Christian. In fact, his path to faith came after he found success in Hollywood and was soon faced with an essential question: who — or what — would be his “God”?

“My career was everything,” Marchiano said on a recent episode of “Pure Talk.”

(Read also: Columbine victim’s prophetic words will shock & inspire you)

His success, though eventually eroded during the 1988 writers’ strike and, with a lack of Hollywood projects to audition for, Marchiano suddenly found himself “with no career.”

Not long after, in 1989, the actor recognized that he was at a life-altering crossroads. Friends had told him about the love of Jesus, but, until that point, he hadn’t truly taken the gospel into consideration — but that all changed one fateful day atop a Hollywood hill.

“I realized in the pit of that failure that I needed Jesus … on a hill, overlooking Universal Studios,” he said. “It was like I looked up and I looked down and I had to make a decision — who my God was going to be? And I literally got down on the dirt by myself on that hill and said, ‘Jesus, you’ve got to save me.’”

Watch Marchiano describe finding God below:

The rest, of course, is history. In 1992, Marchiano was asked for the first time to portray Jesus — an opportunity that blew his mind. He had been a Christian for only a few years at the time but was suddenly tasked with taking on one of the most profound roles imaginable.

Over the years, Marchiano has repeatedly played Jesus in various projects, including “The Encounter” series, with the actor telling “Pure Talk” that he prepares for the role by relying on God’s guidance. Considering that portraying Christ is such a massive responsibility — one that can lead audiences to make decisions about God — his intentional preparation is admirable.

“You just pray your knees raw,” he said. “I don’t have the goods as a person or an actor to represent Him accurately. … What’s needed is Him working through me.”

Marchiano said that he’s hopeful Hollywood is waking up to the faith-based film audience that appears to be craving more well-made features with plotlines that matter.

“We just need to keep making great and better films and the audience needs to keep supporting these films,” he said.

You can watch Marchiano portray Jesus in his latest project, “The Encounter” series, an original PureFlix.com production.

This article was originally published on Pure Flix Insider. Visit Pure Flix for access to thousands of faith and family friendly movies and TV shows. You can get a free, one-month trial here.

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

French Socialist Party Says 250 Million “Climate Refugees” Should Be Imported

French Socialist Party Says 250 Million “Climate Refugees” Should Be Imported

Looking exactly like what you would picture a French socialist party official to look like, Antoine Léaument, “communications director” of La France Insoumise, advocates for importing 250 Million “climate change” refugees from third world sh*tholes.

Voice Of Europe reports:

Léaument, member of the socialist party “La France Insoumise”, was debating with Sébastien Chenu of Marine Le Pen’s Front National, on France’s CNEWS.

When Léaument spoke of the 250 million refugees, Chenu seemingly joked about European countries accepting them into their societies, but the far left party’s bigwig appeared to take the suggestion more seriously.

“This is the only solution (…) Else what are you going to do? Throw them into the sea? Build walls? Be serious,” he said.

Within La France Insoumise, Léaument’s views are shared by the party’s leader, Jean-Luc Mélenchon. In the first round of France’s latest presidential election, Melenchon, a well-known advocate of open borders, won 19.6% of votes.

I wonder if soy boy will be inviting some of the refuge seekers to stay in his personal home.

This comes at a time when Giuseppe Conte and Matteo Salvini are getting to work Making Italy Great Again by giving “migrants” the boot.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Just in time for Trump-Kim summit: DoJ inspector general to release Clinton email report

Department of Justice inspector general Michael Horowitz said in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley that his long awaited report on the way that DoJ and the FBI handled the Clinton email investigation will be released on June 14.  Horowitz agreed to testify on the report before Grassley’s committee on June 18.


The summit between Donald Trump and Kim Kong-un is scheduled to take place June 12.



Coincidence?


CNBC:


The DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General first announced its investigation of matters related to Clinton’s use of a private email server in January 2017, days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration.


The watchdog is specifically investigating former FBI Director James Comey’s disclosure of public information about the email probe before the November 2016 election, and “whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.”


The full report will be nearly 500 pages long, sources familiar with the matter told The Washington Post. Comey’s public comments – such as when he said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Clinton for handling classified information on a private server – are expected to be the subject of harsh criticism in the report, according to the Post.


The report is already past due in the eyes of some Republicans.


In a letter sent on April 13 to Grassley, Horowitz said he expected “that we will issue our report in May, absent any additional new developments.”


Grassley responded accordingly, scheduling a hearing for Horowitz to testify about the report before the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 5.


But May came and went without Horowitz’s report seeing the light of day, and Grassley rescheduled the meeting for June 11 – which has now been pushed back again, apparently for the last time.


For a year and a half, Horowitz has played this one close to his vest.  There have been a few leaks – most recently, that former FBI director Comey will come in for some harsh criticism – but otherwise, no one knows what’s in the report regarding the actions of several principals.


No doubt, Horowitz has been passing the report around to make sure no sensitive information is published.  But by holding on to it for so long, Horowitz has to know that questions are being raised about whether there has been selective scrubbing going on.


And how about the timing of the report’s release?  The media will be full of news about the summit (if it goes off as planned), raising further questions about whether Horowitz is trying to bury it. 


Republicans should demand access to the unsanitized version that Horowitz was apparently ready to release a month ago.  At least, the GOP could determine if the changes made were for valid security reasons or whether someone is trying to cover his rear.


Department of Justice inspector general Michael Horowitz said in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley that his long awaited report on the way that DoJ and the FBI handled the Clinton email investigation will be released on June 14.  Horowitz agreed to testify on the report before Grassley’s committee on June 18.


The summit between Donald Trump and Kim Kong-un is scheduled to take place June 12.


Coincidence?


CNBC:


The DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General first announced its investigation of matters related to Clinton’s use of a private email server in January 2017, days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration.


The watchdog is specifically investigating former FBI Director James Comey’s disclosure of public information about the email probe before the November 2016 election, and “whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.”


The full report will be nearly 500 pages long, sources familiar with the matter told The Washington Post. Comey’s public comments – such as when he said “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Clinton for handling classified information on a private server – are expected to be the subject of harsh criticism in the report, according to the Post.


The report is already past due in the eyes of some Republicans.


In a letter sent on April 13 to Grassley, Horowitz said he expected “that we will issue our report in May, absent any additional new developments.”


Grassley responded accordingly, scheduling a hearing for Horowitz to testify about the report before the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 5.


But May came and went without Horowitz’s report seeing the light of day, and Grassley rescheduled the meeting for June 11 – which has now been pushed back again, apparently for the last time.


For a year and a half, Horowitz has played this one close to his vest.  There have been a few leaks – most recently, that former FBI director Comey will come in for some harsh criticism – but otherwise, no one knows what’s in the report regarding the actions of several principals.


No doubt, Horowitz has been passing the report around to make sure no sensitive information is published.  But by holding on to it for so long, Horowitz has to know that questions are being raised about whether there has been selective scrubbing going on.


And how about the timing of the report’s release?  The media will be full of news about the summit (if it goes off as planned), raising further questions about whether Horowitz is trying to bury it. 


Republicans should demand access to the unsanitized version that Horowitz was apparently ready to release a month ago.  At least, the GOP could determine if the changes made were for valid security reasons or whether someone is trying to cover his rear.




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

450 Radical Islamic Extremists Will Be Released from French Prisons by End of 2019

France will release some 450 radical Islamic extremists from prison by the end of next year including 50 considered terror threats.

“We have about 500 detainees who are radicalised as Islamist terrorists, out of those 500 there will be about 20 of them coming out this year, and then about 30 next year,” France’s Minister of Justice Nicole Belloubet confirmed.

The minister added that around 30 per cent of the current radicalised prison population, some 450 people, were also set to be put back on the streets by the end of next year, Le Figaro reports.

“The government is bent on monitoring these people,” Ms. Belloubet said. “It starts in detention, these people are evaluated, they are then placed in places of detention that correspond to their level of dangerousness,” she said and added that security agencies aided by intelligence already gathered in prison will monitor the radicalised Islamic extremists once they are set free.

“We are following them step by step,” she said.

In 2016, a report estimated there to be at least 8,250 radical Islamic extremists across the country, a number that had doubled from the number of radicals in 2015.

A study, conducted by the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri) and released in March of this year profiled the average radicalised Muslim claiming them to be most likely a young man in his 20s from a migrant background and having grown up in one of the country’s migrant-populated suburbs and involved in petty crime.

Radicalisation in prisons has become a major issue in France with some labelling them “terrorist universities”.

Prison has also not stopped some Islamists from communicating with terror groups like the Islamic State or plotting terror attacks to be carried out upon their release.

Last October, two inmates of Fresnes prison were caught using smuggled mobile phones to communicate with Islamic State and were plotting terror attacks from their cells.

Follow Chris Tomlinson on Twitter at @TomlinsonCJ or email at ctomlinson(at)breitbart.com 

 

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.breitbart.com