Feds charge “sleazy porn star” lawyer Michael Avenatti with allegedly stealing from client Stormy Daniels

When it came to allegations against POTUS Donald Trump by porn queen Stormy Daniels, a.k.a. Stephanie Clifford, attorney Michael Avenatti saw his golden opportunity to make a name for himself on the national stage.

But in the end, it looks like he’s the one who was trying to screw her over, figuratively speaking.

As ABC News reported Wednesday, federal prosecutors in New York City charged Avenatti with more financial crimes “including allegedly forging the signature of his former client…and diverting nearly $300,000 owed to her for a book advance into his own account,” according to court records.

Federal prosecutors are alleging that Avenatti then used the money he pilfered to make monthly payments on a Ferrari he owned, along with paying for dry cleaning, restaurant and hotel bills, and insurance for the employees of his defunct law firm.

ABC News notes further: 

The new charges accuse Avenatti of misappropriating money that was supposed to be paid to Daniels when Avenatti was representing the adult film actress in her public battle against President Trump and his former attorney Michael Cohen.

“Avenatti used misrepresentations and a fraudulent document purporting to bear his client’s name and signature to convince his client’s literary agent to divert money owed to Avenatti’s client to an account controlled by Avenatti,” Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman said in a statement. “Avenatti then spent the money principally for his own personal and business purposes.”

Mind you, Avenatti has already been charged with attempting to extort Nike. In addition to charges related to Daniels, prosecutors also filed new allegations against Avanatti in that case on Wednesday as well.

As expected, Avenatti is denying everything. “No monies relating to Ms. Daniels were ever misappropriated or mishandled,” he told the news network in a statement. “She received millions of dollars worth of legal expenses and we expended huge sums in expenses. She directly poked only $100.00 (not a typo) for all that she received.”

But Berman said in a statement that wasn’t even close to being true. Prosecutors say they believe Avenatti forged Daniels’ signature on a document so he could divert money she was owed into his own account, leaving her with the view that the publishing house she contracted with for a book did not pay promised advances. (Related: Porn lawyer Michael Avenatti indicted by Feds on multiple counts of fraud, could serve 300-plus years in prison.)

Avenatti is going down

“A month after diverting one payment of $148,750 into his own account, Avenatti allegedly used funds received from another source to pay” Daniels, prosecutors noted in the Justice Department statement. A week later, he diverted a second payment for the same amount into his own account.

Daniels fired Avenatti as her attorney late last year after a series of events:

— He flirted with a 2020 Democratic presidential bid (and spent a lot of time on TV) until poor polling led him to ‘reconsider;’

— He was hit with an allegation of domestic abuse (that was credible, though Los Angeles prosecutors choose not to follow through);

— As he considered his White House bid, he told Time magazine the Democratic Party’s nominee “better be a white male,” thus earning him allegations of being a racist;

— He represented a client during the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearings named Julie Swetnick whose testimony was so bad it earned both of them a criminal referral to the Justice Department.

Not only did Daniels and Avanatti not win a defamation case against POTUS Trump, the president’s legal team filed a six-figure lawsuit against her to recover legal fees in November.

The Trump court documents say Daniels “filed this action, not because it had any merit, but instead for the ulterior purposes of raising her media profile, engaging in political attacks against the president by herself and her attorney, who has appeared on more than 150 national television news interviews attacking the President and now is exploring a run for the presidency himself in 2020.”

Share this post!

Go to Source
Author: J.D. Heyes

Advertisements

Banks give Trump-related financials to Congress

trump and melania
The White House/Flickr

(INTELLIHUB) At least two banks have already given Trump-related financial documents to the House Financial Committee and others may follow after an Obama-appointed Judge ruled on Wednesday that both Deutsche Bank and Capital One need to comply to a federal subpoena as well.

NBC News reports: “Wells Fargo provided the committee with a few thousand documents and TD Bank handed the committee a handful of documents, according to a source who has seen them. The committee, led by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., is especially interested in the president’s business relationship with Russia and other foreign entities.”

Needless to say, in response the outspoken founder and editor-in-chief at Intellihub Shepard Ambellas Tweeted out a message to President Trump which must be addressed.

“@realDonaldTrump needs to use executive orders to acquire and publish all @TheDemocrats financial records. Then we can really see who is fucking who here. :),” Ambellas Tweeted.

Share this post!

Go to Source
Author: Staff Writer

The lies about World War II

In the aftermath of a war, history cannot be written. The losing side has no one to speak for it.  Historians on the winning side are constrained by years of war propaganda that demonized the enemy while obscuring the crimes of the righteous victors.  People want to enjoy and feel good about their victory, not learn that their side was responsible for the war or that the war could have been avoided except for the hidden agendas of their own leaders. Historians are also constrained by the unavailability of information. To hide mistakes, corruption, and crimes, governments lock up documents for decades.  Memoirs of participants are not yet written.  Diaries are lost or withheld from fear of retribution.  It is expensive and time consuming to locate witnesses, especially those on the losing side, and to convince them to answer questions.  Any account that challenges the “happy account” requires a great deal of confirmation from official documents, interviews, letters, diaries, and memoirs, and even that won’t be enough.  

For the history of World War II in Europe, these documents can be spread from New Zealand and Australia across Canada and the US through Great Britain and Europe and into Russia.  A historian on the track of the truth faces long years of strenuous investigation and development of the acumen to judge and assimilate the evidence he uncovers into a truthful picture of what transpired. The truth is always immensely different from the victor’s war propaganda.

As I reported recently, Harry Elmer Barnes was the first American historian to provide a history of the first world war that was based on primary sources.  His truthful account differed so substantially from the war propaganda that he was called every name in the book.  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/05/09/the-lies-that-form-our-consciousness-and-false-historical-awareness/ 

Truth is seldom welcomed.  David Irving, without any doubt the best historian of the European part of World War II, learned at his great expense that challenging myths does not go unpunished.  Nevertheless, Irving persevered. If you want to escape from the lies about World War II that still direct our disastrous course, you only need to study two books by David Irving: Hitler’s War and the first volume of his Churchill biography, Churchill’s War: The Struggle for Power .

Irving is the historian who spent decades tracking down diaries, survivors, and demanding release of official documents. He is the historian who found the Rommel diary and Goebbles’ diaries, the historian who gained entry into the Soviet archives, and so on.  He is familiar with more actual facts about the second world war than the rest of the historians combined. The famous British military historian, Sir John Keegan, wrote in the Times Literary Supplement: “Two books stand out from the vast literature of the Second World War: Chester Wilmot’s The Struggle for Europe, published in 1952, and David Irving’s Hitler’s War.

Despite many such accolades, today Irving is demonized and has to publish his own books.

I will avoid the story of how this came to be, but, yes, you guessed it, it was the Zionists.  You simply cannot say anything that alters their propagandistic picture of history.

In what follows, I am going to present what is my impression from reading these two magisterial works.  Irving himself is very scant on opinions.  He only provides the facts from official documents, recorded intercepts, diaries, letters and interviews. 

World War II was Churchill’s War, not Hitler’s war.  Irving provides documented facts from which the reader cannot avoid this conclusion. Churchill got his war, for which he longed, because of the Versailles Treaty that stripped Germany of German territory and unjustly and irresponsibly imposed humiliation on Germany. 

Hitler and Nationalist Socialist Germany (Nazi stands for National Socialist German Workers’ Party) are the most demonized entities in history. Any person who finds any good in Hitler or Germany is instantly demonized.  The person becomes an outcast regardless of the facts. Irving is very much aware of this. Every time his factual account of Hitler starts to display a person too much different from the demonized image, Irving throws in some negative language about Hitler.

Similarly for Winston Churchill.  Every time Irving’s factual account displays a person quite different from the worshiped icon, Irving throws in some appreciative language.

This is what a historian has to do to survive telling the truth.

To be clear, in what follows, I am merely reporting what seems to me to be the conclusion from the documented facts presented in these two works of scholarship.  I am merely reporting what I understand Irving’s research to have established.  You read the books and arrive at your own conclusion.

World War II was initiated by the British and French declaration of war on Germany, not by a surprise blitzkrieg from Germany. The utter rout and collapse of the British and French armies was the result of Britain declaring a war for which Britain was unprepared to fight and of the foolish French trapped by a treaty with the British, who quickly deserted their French ally, leaving France at Germany’s mercy.

Germany’s mercy was substantial. Hitler left a large part of France and the French colonies unoccupied and secure from war under a semi-independent government under Petain.  For his service in protecting a semblance of French independence, Petain was sentenced to death by Charles de Gaulle after the war for collaboration with Germany, an unjust charge.  

In Britain, Churchill was out of power.  He figured a war would put him back in power.  No Britisher could match Churchill’s rhetoric and orations.  Or determination. Churchill desired power, and he wanted to reproduce the amazing military feats of his distinguished ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, whose biography Churchill was writing and who defeated after years of military struggle France’s powerful Sun King, Louis XIV, the ruler of Europe.

In contrast to the British aristocrat, Hitler was a man of the people.  He acted for the German people.  The Versailles Treaty had dismembered Germany. Parts of Germany were confiscated and given to France, Belgium, Denmark, Poland, and Czechoslovakia. As Germany had not actually lost the war, being the occupiers of foreign territory when Germany agreed to a deceptive armistice, the loss of approximately 7 million German people to Poland and Czechoslovakia, where Germans were abused, was not considered a fair outcome.

Hitler’s program was to put Germany back together again.  He succeeded without war until it came to Poland. Hitler’s demands were fair and realistic, but Churchill, financed by the Focus Group with Jewish money, put such pressure on British prime minister Chamberlain that Chamberlain intervened in the Polish-German negotiations and issued a British guarantee to the Polish military dictatorship should Poland refuse to release German territory and populations.  

The British had no way of making good on the guarantee, but the Polish military dictatorship lacked the intelligence to realize that.  Consequently, the Polish Dictatorship refused Germany’s request.

From this mistake of Chamberlain and the stupid Polish dictatorship, came the Ribbentrop/Molotov agreement that Germany and the Soviet Union would split Poland between themselves.  When Hitler attacked Poland, Britain and the hapless French declared war on Germany because of the unenforceable British guarantee.  But the British and French were careful not to declare war on the Soviet Union for occupying the eastern half of Poland.

Thus Britain was responsible for World War II, first by stupidly interfering in German/Polish negotiations, and second by declaring war on Germany.

Churchill was focused on war with Germany, which he intended for years preceding the war.  But Hitler didn’t want any war with Britain or with France, and never intended to invade Britain. The invasion threat was a chimera conjured up by Churchill to unite England behind him. Hitler expressed his view that the British Empire was essential for order in the world, and that in its absence Europeans would lose their world supremacy.  After Germany’s rout of the French and British armies, Hitler offered an extraordinarily generous peace to Britain.  He said he wanted nothing from Britain but the return of Germany’s colonies.  He committed the German military to the defense of the British Empire, and said he would reconstitute both Polish and Czech states and leave them to their own discretion.  He told his associates that defeat of the British Empire would do nothing for Germany and everything for Bolshevik Russia and Japan.

Winston Churchill kept Hitler’s peace offers as secret as he could and succeeded in his efforts to block any peace.  Churchill wanted war, largely it appears, for his own glory.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt slyly encouraged Churchill in his war but without making any commitment in Britain’s behalf. Roosevelt knew that the war would achieve his own aim of bankrupting Britain and destroying the British Empire, and that the US dollar would inherit the powerful position from the British pound of being the world’s reserve currency. Once Churchill had trapped Britain in a war she could not win on her own, FDR began doling out bits of aid in exchange for extremely high prices—for example, 60 outdated and largely useless US destroyers for British naval bases in the Atlantic.  FDR delayed Lend-Lease until desperate Britain had turned over $22,000 million of British gold plus $42 million in gold Britain had in South Africa.  Then began the forced sell-off of British overseas investments.  For example, the British-owned Viscose Company, which was worth $125 million in 1940 dollars, had no debts and held $40 million in government bonds, was sold to the House of Morgan for $37 million. It was such an act of thievery that the British eventually got about two-thirds of the company’s value to hand over to Washington in payment for war munitions. American aid was also “conditional on Britain dismantling the system of Imperial preference anchored in the Ottawa agreement of 1932.”  For Cordell Hull, American aid was “a knife to open that oyster shell, the Empire.”  Churchill saw it coming, but he was too far in to do anything but plead with FDR: It would be wrong, Churchill wrote to Roosevelt, if “Great  Britain were to be divested of all saleable assets so that after the victory was won with our  blood, civilization saved, and the time gained for the United States to be fully armed against all eventualities, we should stand stripped to the bone.”

A long essay could be written about how Roosevelt stripped Britain of her assets and world power. Irving writes that in an era of gangster statesmen, Churchill was not in Roosevelt’s league. The survival of the British Empire was not a priority for FDR. He regarded Churchill as a pushover—unreliable and drunk most of the time. Irving reports that FDR’s policy was to pay out just enough to give Churchill “the kind of support a rope gives a hanging man.”  Roosevelt pursued “his subversion of the Empire throughout the war.”  Eventually Churchill realized that Washington was at war with Britain more fiercely than was Hitler.  The great irony was that Hitler had offered Churchill peace and the survival of the Empire. When it was too late, Churchill came to Hitler’s conclusion that the conflict with Germany was a “most unnecessary” war. Pat Buchanan sees it that way also. https://www.amazon.com/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecessary-War-Britain/dp/0307405168/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=Pat+Buchanan&qid=1557709100&s=books&sr=1-3 

Hitler forbade the bombing of civilian areas of British cities.  It was Churchill who initiated this war crime, later emulated by the Americans.  Churchill kept the British bombing of German civilians secret from the British people and worked to prevent Red Cross monitoring of air raids so no one would learn he was bombing civilian residential areas, not war production. The purpose of Churchill’s bombing—first incendiary bombs to set everything afire and then high explosives to prevent firefighters from controlling the blazes—was to provoke a German attack on London, which Churchill reckoned would bind the British people to him and create sympathy in the US for Britain that would help Churchill pull America into the war.  One British raid murdered 50,000 people in Hamburg, and a subsequent attack on Hamburg netted 40,000 civilian deaths.  Churchill also ordered that poison gas be added to the firebombing of German civilian residential areas and that Rome be bombed into ashes. The British Air Force refused both orders. At the very end of the war the British and Americans destroyed the beautiful baroque city of Dresden, burning and suffocating 100,000 people in the attack. After months of firebombing attacks on Germany, including Berlin, Hitler gave in to his generals and replied in kind. Churchill succeeded.  The story became “the London Blitz,” not the British blitz of Germany.

Like Hitler in Germany, Churchill took over the direction of the war.  He functioned more as a dictator who ignored the armed services than as a prime minister advised by the country’s military leaders.  Both leaders might have been correct in their assessment of their commanding officers, but Hitler was a much better war strategist than Churchill, for whom nothing ever worked.  To Churchill’s WW I Gallipoli misadventure was now added the introduction of British troops into Norway, Greece, Crete, Syria—all ridiculous decisions and failures—and the Dakar fiasco.  Churchill also turned on the French, destroying the French fleet and lives of 1,600 French sailors because of his personal fear, unfounded, that Hitler would violate his treaty with the French and seize the fleet. Any one of these Churchillian mishaps could have resulted in a no confidence vote, but with Chamberlain and Halifax out of the way there was no alternative leadership.  Indeed, the lack of leadership is the reason neither the cabinet nor the military could stand up to Churchill, a person of iron determination.

Hitler also was a person of iron determination, and he wore out both himself and Germany with his determination. He never wanted war with England and France.  This was Churchill’s doing, not Hitler’s.  Like Churchill, who had the British people behind him, Hitler had the German people behind him, because he stood for Germany and had reconstructed Germany from the rape and ruin of the Versailles Treaty.  But Hitler, not an aristocrat like Churchill, but of low and ordinary origins, never had the loyalty of many of the aristocratic Prussian military officers, those with “von” before their name.  He was afflicted with traitors in the Abwehr, his military intelligence, including its director, Adm. Canaris.  On the Russian front in the final year, Hitler was betrayed by generals who opened avenues for the Russians into undefended Berlin.  

Hitler’s worst mistakes were his alliance with Italy and his decision to invade Russia.  He was also mistaken to let the British go at Dunkirk. He let them go because he did not want to ruin the chance for ending the war by humiliating the British by the loss of their entire army.  But with Churchill there was no chance for peace. By not destroying the British army, Hitler boosted Churchill who turned the evacuation into British heroics that sustained the willingness to fight on.  

It is unclear why Hitler invaded Russia.  One possible reason is poor or intentionally deceptive information from the Abwehr on Russian military capability. Hitler later said to his associates that he never would have invaded if he had known of the enormous size of the Russian army and the extraordinary capability of the Soviets to produce tanks and aircraft.  Some historians have concluded that the reason Hitler invaded Russia was that he concluded that the British would not agree to end the war because they expected Russia to enter the war on Britain’s side.  Therefore, Hitler decided to foreclose that possibility by conquering Russia.  A Russian has written that Hitler attacked because Stalin was preparing to attack Germany. Stalin did have considerable forces far forward, but It would make more sense for Stalin to wait until the West devoured itself in mutual bloodletting, step in afterwards and scoop it all up if he wanted. Or perhaps Stalin was positioning to occupy part of Eastern Europe in order to put more buffer between the Soviet Union and Germany.

Whatever the reason for the invasion, what defeated Hitler was the earliest Russian winter in 30 years. It stopped everything in its tracks before the well planned and succeeding encirclement could be completed.  The harsh winter that immobilized the Germans gave Stalin time to recover.  

Because of Hitler’s alliance with Mussolini, who lacked an effective fighting force, resources needed on the Russian front were twice drained off in order to rescue Italy.  Because of Mussolini’s misadventures, Hitler had to drain troops, tanks, and air planes from the Russian invasion to rescue Italy in Greece and North Africa and to occupy Crete. Hitler made this mistake out of loyalty to Mussolini.  Later in the war when Russian counterattacks were pushing the Germans out of Russia, Hitler had to divert precious military resources to rescue Mussolini from arrest and to occupy Italy to prevent her surrender.  Germany simply lacked the manpower and military resources to fight on a 1,000 mile front in Russia, and also in Greece and North Africa, occupy part of France, and man defenses against a US/British invasion of Normandy and Italy. 

The German Army was a magnificent fighting force, but it was overwhelmed by too many fronts, too little equipment, and careless communications.  The Germans never caught on despite much evidence that the British could read their encryption.  Thus, efforts to supply Rommel in North Africa were prevented by the British navy. 

Irving never directly addresses in either book the Holocaust.  He does document the massacre of many Jews, but the picture that emerges from the factual evidence is that the holocaust of Jewish people was different from the official Zionist story. 

No German plans, or orders from Hitler, or from Himmler or anyone else have ever been found for an organized holocaust by gas and cremation of Jews.  This is extraordinary as such a massive use of resources and transportation would have required massive organization, budgets and resources. What documents do show is Hitler’s plan to relocate European Jews to Madagascar after the war’s end.  With the early success of the Russian invasion, this plan was changed to sending the European Jews to the Jewish Bolsheviks in the eastern part of Russia that Hitler was going to leave to Stalin.  There are documented orders given by Hitler preventing massacres of Jews.  Hitler said over and over that “the Jewish problem” would be settled after the war.

It seems that most of the massacres of Jews were committed by German political administrators of occupied territories in the east to whom Jews from Germany and France were sent for relocation. Instead of dealing with the inconvenience, some of the administrators lined them up and shot them into open trenches.  Other Jews fell victim to the anger of Russian villagers who had long suffered under Jewish Bolshevik administrators.

The “death camps” were in fact work camps. Auschwitz, for example, today a Holocaust museum, was the site of Germany’s essential artificial rubber factory. Germany was desperate for a work force.  A significant percentage of German war production labor had been released to the Army to fill the holes in German lines on the Russian front. War production sites, such as Auschwitz, had as a work force refugees displaced from their homes by war, Jews to be deported after war’s end, and anyone else who could be forced into work. Germany desperately needed whatever work force it could get.

Every camp had crematoriums. Their purpose was not to exterminate populations but to dispose of deaths from the scourge of typhus, natural deaths, and other diseases. Refugees were from all over, and they brought diseases and germs with them.  The horrific photos of masses of skeleton-like dead bodies that are said to be evidence of organized extermination of Jews are in fact camp inmates who died from typhus and starvation in the last days of the war when Germany was disorganized and devoid of medicines and food for labor camps. The great noble Western victors themselves bombed the labor camps and contributed to the deaths of inmates.

The two books on which I have reported total 1,663 pages, and there are two more volumes of the Churchill biography.  This massive, documented historical information seemed likely to pass into the Memory Hole as it is inconsistent with both the self-righteousness of the West and the human capital of court historians.  The facts are too costly to be known. But historians have started adding to their own accounts the information uncovered by Irving. It takes a brave historian to praise him, but they can cite him and plagiarize him.

It is amazing how much power Zionists have gotten from the Holocaust. Norman Finkelstein calls it The Holocaust Industry. There is ample evidence that Jews along with many others suffered, but Zionists insist that it was an unique experience limited to Jews.

In his Introduction to Hitler’s War Irving reports that despite the widespread sales of his book, the initial praise from accomplished historians and the fact that the book was required reading at military academies from Sandhurst to West Point, “I have had my home smashed into by thugs, my family terrorized, my name smeared, my printers [publishers] firebombed, and myself arrested and deported by tiny, democratic Austria—an illegal act, their courts decided, for which the ministerial culprits were punished; at the behest of disaffected academics and influential citizens [Zionists], in subsequent years, I was deported from Canada (in 1992), and refused entry to Australia, New Zealand, Italy, South Africa and other civilized countries around he world. Internationally affiliated groups circulated letters to librarians, pleading for this book to be taken off their shelves.”

So much for free thought and truth in the Western world.  Nothing is so little regarded in the West as free thought, free expression, and truth.  In the West explanations are controlled in order to advance the agendas of the ruling interest groups. As David Irving has learned, woe to anyone who gets in the way.

Share this post!

Go to Source
Author: Paul Craig Roberts

Pelosi: We believe that the President of the United States is engaged in a coverup

nacy pelosi sketch
Don Relyea/Flickr

WASHINGTON (INTELLIHUB) — Speaker of the House Nacy Pelosi called a ten o’clock meeting with the Democratic caucus where she will lay out her delusional fantasies to her far left-leaning constituents.

Pelosi and her comrades gathered on Capitol Hill on Wednesday to formulate the latest and greatest talking points for fake news media outlets such as CNN to run with.

“We believe that no one is above the law including the president of the United States,” she explained. “We believe that the President of the United States is engaged in a coverup.”

Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, analyst, political pundit, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a regular contributor to Alex Jones’ Infowars platform. Read more from Shep’s World. Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to Shep’s YouTube channel.

Share this post!

Go to Source
Author: Shepard Ambellas

Hundreds of “black vest” migrants seize part of airport terminal: “France does not belong to the French!”

Yesterday, hundreds of undocumented migrants took control of Terminal 2 of the Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris France. Approximately 500 migrants seized the terminal.

France does not belong to the French! Everyone has a right to be here!” one person can be heard yelling into a loudspeaker.

The protest was organized by the migrant support group “La Chapelle Debout,” which said their members call themselves “Black Vests.”

The group comes amid the country’s months-long “Yellow Vests movement” over tax reforms; French citizens are required to carry yellow vests in their vehicles for emergencies. (source)

A quick-thinking person took video, which has been widely shared across Twitter.

Here’s some follow-up video.

Migrants warn it won’t stop here.

The organized group released an official statement and warned this will not be the last effort such as this.

In an official statement, the group asked to meet with Prime Minister Edouard Philippe over the country’s asylum policy and the leaders of Air France. They demanded that the airline “stop any financial, material, logistical or political participation in deportations.”

Later Sunday, an Air France delegation met with the group, a member told local newspaper Le Parisien.

A migrant who took part in the protest warned it wouldn’t be the last.

“We have targeted Air France, and other actions will follow,” he told the paper. (source)

All of the migrants involved appear to have a common thread.

Read more via The Organic Prepper

Go to Source
Author: The Organic Prepper

Journalist Annie Jacobsen: The Roswell crash was a communist black propaganda campaign

(INTELLIHUB) — Journalist Annie Jacobsen appeared on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast where she told the former Fear Factor host that the Roswell UFO crash was a communist black propaganda campaign.

Jacobsen claims a confidential “source” told her the real meat and potatoes behind the scenes story in which humans were surgically altered to look like aliens.

“It really makes you consider what a hoax means,” she said.

Jacobsen interviewed 79 people, experts, from all fields for a controversial book in which she authored on the subject.

You can watch an excerpt from the interview in the video posted above.

Go to Source
Author: Staff Writer

Dehydration is linked to physical impairment and cognitive decline: Study

It turns out that dehydration does more than just hamper the physical abilities of people exposed to hot conditions. A new Georgia-based study warns that dehydration can also harm the normal functions of the brain.

In the experiment, participants underwent plenty of physical activity in the heat without drinking or eating anything. The dehydrated volunteers were unable to concentrate during tests that were either tedious or oriented on details.

Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) researcher Mindy Millard-Stafford identified attention, coordination, and complex problem solving as the brain functions that were most affected by dehydration. Meanwhile, brain activities associated with fast and simple reaction time tasks didn’t experience anywhere near the same level of disruption, even when dehydration got worse.

One of the co-authors of the study, Millard-Stafford warned that dehydration diminishes attention and other cognitive abilities. Dehydrated people will experience difficulty in accomplishing jobs that require attention, such as paying attention throughout an important but long meeting, driving a car over long distances when it is hot, or working in the overheated conditions of a factory. (Related: Drink more water: This simple and holistic advice is the best way to optimize urological health.)

Dehydration makes it difficult to concentrate on dull and repetitive tasks

Millard-Stafford and her colleagues drew their data from peer-reviewed research papers on dehydration. They evaluated the participants’ scores in attention, executive function, motor coordination, and speed of reaction to tasks.

They found that participants committed an increasing number of mistakes as their dehydration grew worse. In particular, participants performed the worst during boring and repetitive activities.

Next, the Georgia Tech researchers combed through research papers on the dehydration-related loss of body mass. They determined that the worst effects on cognitive functions began to appear once the body lost two percent of its weight in water, a loss that could take place in a surprisingly short amount of time.

The earliest symptoms of dehydration include dizziness, headaches, nausea, and thirst. Another early indicator is the appearance of heat cramps, where the loss of large amounts of salt and water cause muscles to spasm uncontrollably. If dehydration is not halted or treated properly, it can lead to an extended stay in the emergency department of a hospital.

Older people are highly vulnerable to dehydration. They are much less capable of sensing thirst and lose more fluid during urination due to their weaker ability to concentrate urine.

Infants and young children also need to be kept hydrated. They have a lower total body weight, a greater concentration of water, and a more rapid metabolism that uses up electrolytes and water at a faster rate.

Avoid dehydration by drinking the right amount of water and exercising during cooler periods

The best way to beat dehydration is to stay hydrated. Hydration should also be performed with care. A person who drinks excessive amounts of water dilutes the concentration of salt and sodium in his or her blood. This unhealthy state is called hyponatremia, and it can trigger seizures and cause brain tissues to swell.

Taking a proactive approach is important to maintaining hydration and health. Consume the right amounts of food and water, respectively.

Physical exercise and other intense activities should be performed during the cooler and darker periods before sunrise or after sunset to avoid too much exposure to heat. People can limit the loss of heat during those cooler periods by wearing light-colored clothing and a hat.

Health experts reiterate that heatstroke is a medical emergency. If a person begins displaying symptoms of heatstroke, experts advise calling for medical assistance so that the patient can be quickly cooled at an emergency department.

Go to Source
Author: Edsel Cook

Illegal migrants jet set on U.S. taxpayer dollars

san diego airline
Jerome Strauss/Flickr

(INTELLIHUB) — United States Customs and Border Protection announced on Friday that hundreds of migrant families will be flown on jets to their final destination in San Diego and possibly even Miami, Detroit and New York where they will be processed after facilities at the southern Texas border have become immensely overcrowded, according to a new report.

Between 120 and 135 migrants will depart from the Rio Grande Valley three times a week at the cost of $6000 per flight.

Once migrants arrive they will be processed and ordered to appear in immigration court at a later date. However, the reality is that a good number of them will fail to appear.

The bombshell report published by the Globe and Mail also reveals that four busloads full of migrants depart daily from the Rio Grande Valley to their destination in Laredo, Texas along with a daily flight adding to the mess.

Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, analyst, political pundit, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a regular contributor to Alex Jones’ Infowars platform. Read more from Shep’s World. Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to Shep’s YouTube channel.

Go to Source
Author: Shepard Ambellas

MSNBC’s Maddow focused on witch hunt rather than real evidence of actual Russian collusion

(INTELLIHUB) — Liberal talk show host Rachel Maddow hasn’t yet come to terms with the fact that the entire Donald Trump-Russia collusion hoax has turned out to be just that (a hoax) as she continues to spew her garbage on air even claiming the president had lied.

Maddow told former FBI General Counsel James Baker in a one-on-one sitdown conversation on Friday that the Mueller Report describes “factual connections” to the Russians.

However, she refuses to point out that Robert Mueller himself and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton actually were colluding with the Russians and were involved in talks that lead to the covert sale of one-fifth of U.S. uranium reserves in which the Clintons and others profited.

The fact is, Mueller was set to deliver highly enriched uranium to the Russians in 2009, under Hillary Clinton’s orders and Maddow likely doesn’t want you to know this.

If you don’t believe me then please read the following excerpt from my 2017 report.

From Intellihub:

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.

So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians.

The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle. It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conducts the transfer of a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.

Moreover, Maddow’s guest Baker was the guy who signed the illegal FISA warrant which illegally authorized the FBI to spy on Donald Trump and associates during the runup to the 2016 presidential election. Goes to show what kind of people surround the butch drama queen.

How a Jan. 2016 Intellihub article by Shepard Ambellas sparked a Senate investigation into Clinton-Russia uranium dealings

Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, analyst, political pundit, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a regular contributor to Alex Jones’ Infowars platform. Read more from Shep’s World. Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to Shep’s YouTube channel.

Go to Source
Author: Shepard Ambellas

How Barack Obama received $21.6M in illegally funneled foreign campaign contributions and stole the presidency

(INTELLIHUB) — According to reports circulating at the highest levels in Washington, former U.S. President Barack H. Obama’s political campaign received at least $21.6 million in illegal foreign campaign contributions during the runup to the 2012 presidential election.

The U.S. Justice Department announced on Friday that Malaysian businessman Low Taek Jho and former Fugees rapper Prakazrel “Pras” Michel have been charged with conspiracy after allegedly funneling tens of millions of dollars into Obama’s campaign fund.

barack obama campaign trail
Marc Nozell/Flickr

As Reuters reports: “Under federal election law it is a crime for foreign nationals to make political contributions in U.S. federal, state or local elections… Michel and Low were each charged with one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States government and for making foreign and conduit campaign contributions.”

The not so dynamic duo is believed to have conspired to steer foreign money toward the Obama campaign using straw contributors. However, legal representatives for both Low and Michel maintain their clients’ innocence.

Low has not yet been apprehended by authorities and still remains on the loose.

Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist, analyst, political pundit, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Shepard is a regular contributor to Alex Jones’ Infowars platform. Read more from Shep’s World. Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to Shep’s YouTube channel.

Go to Source
Author: Shepard Ambellas