Journalist Who Blew the Whistle on CIA Media Control Drops Dead at 56 |

“I’m going to stand up and say it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia and it is not right what my colleagues do and have done in the past, because they are bribed, to betray the people not only in Germany all over Europe.”

Udo Ulfkotte, a German journalist and whistleblower who spoke out against fake news from government and intelligence sources, has died from a heart attack at the age of 56. He was an assistant editor for German mainstream media newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and he lived in many Middle Eastern countries during his career, including Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Jordan.

As Ulfkotte became increasingly upset at news reports sourced from false government information, he began publishing a magazine called Whistleblower, which reports on topics not covered by the German media. He also wrote multiple books on the subject during the 2000s.

Ulfkotte is best known to international viewers from select appearances on Russia Today, specifically an October 2014 interview about his book ‘Bought Journalists’, in which he discussed the epidemic of propaganda in mainstream media news reports and the increased anti-Russia sentiment being generated. He also discussed the heavy influence on international news from American, Israeli and other western intelligence agencies.

Ulfkotte described his experience saying “I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years and I was educated to lie, to betray and not to tell the truth to the public,” referring to his career in mainstream media. He also noted that he was “fed up” with the propaganda and said he was speaking out, despite admitting having heart trouble on television.

“I’ve had three heart attacks, I have no children, so if they want to bring me to court or to prison, it’s worth for the truth.”

The interview only has 166,000 views on the official RT channel, however it has likely been seen millions of times because it has been uploaded by many other Youtube channels and Facebook pages. The interview is often shared as a detailed example of mainstream media’s disinformation campaigns.

Read More

Eugenics and Population Control to Save the Planet, Says Berkeley Professor |

Overpopulation and resource scarcity are pushed by the people that want to: 1. control everything 2. control everyone

Posted onby Cassius Kamarampi

Malcolm Potts is a Malthusian figure with deep roots in the history of eugenics. He’s not hiding in the shadows, but in the open as a professor at one of the most prestigious academic institutions in America, one that has been espousing eugenic philosophy for almost a century: University of California, Berkeley.

In 1924, another eugenicist was a professor at UC Berkeley: Samuel Jackson Holmes, who published a 1924 paper titled “A bibliography of eugenics,” at Berkeley, in 1937 he writing, “The Negros’ Struggle For Survival.”

Malcolm Potts has been a rabid advocate of population reduction for almost 50 years, and was the first physician to promote the main modern method of abortion today, uterine manual vacuum aspiration, and in 1968 became the first Medical Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, not many years after Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was openly calling for the extermination of black people.

In 1966, Potts wrote articles in the Eugenics Review, one of the original racist, eugenic scientific journals that came from the Galton Institute itself, formerly known as the British Eugenics Society.whose, namesake, Francis Galton, coined the term “eugenics.” To this day, he teaches classes at Berkeley about how badly the population needs to be culled, under the guise of “family planning” and other benign, less-descriptive phrases.

He spreads fear about overpopulation, never focusing on the underlying problem of wealth disparity and hegemony, but claiming the innocent men born at the bottom of the bottom class are a threat because they are inherently going to become terrorists.

Read More

 

 

 

Time to Pay Attention: 8 Men Have as Much Money as Half the Entire World |

The eight richest men on the planet are now worth as much as 3.6 billion people

 Posted on by Claire Bernish

A startling figure has just been released showing the ever-widening gap in wealth between the world’s upper echelons and nearly everyone else — the eight richest men on the planet are now worth as much as 3.6 billion people.

Oxfam plans to release its report at the World Economic Forum — a convention for top business executives, academics, and policy makers — which begins on January 17 in Davos, Switzerland, and this year will focus on “responsive and responsible leadership.”

While it might be tempting to view the statistic of so few people having amassed as much wealth as 3.6 billion as the problem in itself, it should be noted many of the businesses they own or run receive government welfare, incentives, and benefits the rest of us would never be privy to.

 Read More:

Rothschild Family Wealth is Five Times that of World’s Top 8 Billionaires Combined |

A recent report by Oxfam International highlights the dramatic rise in income equality by noting that the combined wealth of the world’s top 8 individual billionaires is more than the lower half of the world’s population, some 3.6 billion people. The intention of the report was to bring awareness to the unfairness and injustice inherent in our global economic system.

“It calls for a fundamental change in the way we manage our economies so that they work for all people, and not just a fortunate few.” [Oxfam]

Listed below are the 8 billionaires along with their estimated wealth, which combined equals $426.2 billion.

Bill Gates – $75 b
Amancio Ortega – $67 b
Warren Buffett – $60.8 b
Carlos Slim Helu – $50 b
Jeff Bezos – $45.2 b
Mark Zuckerberg – $44.6 b
Larry Ellison – $43.6 b
Michael Bllomberg – $40 b

Oxfam’s assertion is that world economies are mismanaged in favor of the wealthy, which is largely true, however, the report failed to hit the mark on this serious issue by not acknowledging the greatest problem with the world’s economy, which is the global central banking model of privately owned debt-based fiat currencies.

The current banking model is the product of hundreds of years of planned development, structuring, manipulation, force and trickery which began in earnest with Mayer Amschel Rothschild, who first established banking and finance houses in Germany in the 18th century.

The careful cultivation of his wealth with the assistance of his five sons allowed Rothschild to profit immensely during the French Revolution by providing financing and war materials to Austria, which in turn allowed the budding family empire to evolve into a multi-national organization, henceforth becoming a major financier of industry and war.

“Around that time, Rothschild sent his five sons to live in the capital cities of various European countries. His goal was to have each of his children establish a banking business in Frankfurt, Naples, Vienna, Paris, and London, and throughout the 1800s, they did. With Mayer Rothschild’s children spread across Europe, the Rothschilds became the first bank to transcend borders. Lending to governments to finance war operations for the past several centuries provided ample opportunity to accumulate bonds and shore up additional wealth in a range of different industries.” [Source]

Fast forward to 2016, the Rothschild family is a dynasty of unimaginable wealth which manages to somehow conceal it for the most part, never quite being publicly credited as the richest and most influential family in the world. By dividing their capital and holdings up amongst the many members of the family, including numerous descendants and heirs, occasionally a single member of the family will appear on a list of the world’s top individuals, however, the family as a whole represents the largest fortune ever known.

“Traditionally, the Rothschild fortune is invested in closely held corporations. Most family members are employed by these corporations directly or invested in operations that generate family wealth. The remarkable success of the family has largely been due to a strong interest in cooperation, being entrepreneurs and the practice of shrewd business principles.” [Source]

Investopedia estimates the family’s total wealth at over $2 trillion in assets and holdings, including some of the world’s oldest living corporations:

“…their holdings span a number of diverse industries, including financial services, real estate, mining, energy and even charitable work.There are a few Rothschild-owned financial institutions still operating in Europe, including N M Rothschild & Sons Ltd in the United Kingdom, and Edmond de Rothschild Group in Switzerland. The family also owns more than a dozen wineries in North America, Europe, South America, South Africa and Australia.” [Source]

At $2 trillion plus, the family’s reported wealth is closing in on five times as much as the combined wealth of the world’s top 8 individual billionaires, meaning that the Rothschild family alone controls more wealth than perhaps three-fourths or more of the world’s total population.

Isaac Davis is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and OffgridOutpost.com Survival Tips blog. He is an outspoken advocate of liberty and of a voluntary society. He is an avid reader of history and passionate about becoming self-sufficient to break free of the control matrix. Follow him on Facebook, here.

This article (Rothschild Family Wealth is Five Times that of World’s Top 8 Billionaires Combined) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Isaac Davis and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

Source: www.dcclothesline.com/2017/01/21/rothschild-family-wealth-is-five-times-that-of-worlds-top-8-billionaires-combined/

How We Got To Here – EPautos

America is in trouble because Americans got lazy. Not so much physically but morally. They began to care more about some passing thing than about the things that truly matter; the things that made America unlike other places. Better than other places. Eric Peters is a Libertarian gearhead, columnist and author.

READ MORE

COMMON SENSE – 2017

COMMON SENSE – 2017 – The Burning Platform

“Without the pen of the author of Common Sense, the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain.” John Adams

Thomas Paine was born in 1737 in Britain. His first thirty seven years of life were pretty much a series of failures and disappointments. Business fiascos, firings, the death of his first wife and child, a failed second marriage, and bankruptcy plagued his early life. He then met Benjamin Franklin in 1774 and was convinced to emigrate to America, arriving in Philadelphia in November 1774. He thus became the Father of the American Revolution with the publication of Common Sense, pamphlets which crystallized opinion for colonial independence in 1776.

The first pamphlet was published in Philadelphia on January 10, 1776, and signed anonymously “by an Englishman.” It became an instantaneous sensation, swiftly disseminating 100,000 copies in three months among the two and a half million residents of the 13 colonies. Over 500,000 copies were sold during the course of the American Revolution. Paine published Common Sense after the battle of Lexington and Concord, making the argument the colonists should seek complete independence from Great Britain, rather than merely fighting against unfair levels of taxation. The pamphlets stirred the masses with a fighting spirit, instilling in them the backbone to resist a powerful empire.

It was read aloud in taverns, churches and town squares, promoting the notion of republicanism, bolstering fervor for complete separation from Britain, and boosting recruitment for the fledgling Continental Army. He rallied public opinion in favor of revolution among layman, farmers, businessmen and lawmakers. It compelled the colonists to make an immediate choice. It made the case against monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny and unfair taxation, offering Americans a solution – liberty and freedom. It was an important precursor to the Declaration of Independence, which was written six months later by Paine’s fellow revolutionaries.

Paine’s contribution to American independence 241 years ago during the first American Fourth Turning cannot be overstated. His clarion call for colonial unity against a tyrannical British monarch played a providential role in convincing farmers, shopkeepers, and tradesmen reconciliation with a hereditary monarchy was impossible, and armed separation was the only common sense option. He made the case breaking away from Britain was inevitable, and the time was now. Armed conflict had already occurred, but support for a full-fledged revolution had not yet coalesced within the thirteen colonies. Paine’s rhetorical style within the pamphlets aroused enough resentment against the British monarchy to rally men to arms, so their children wouldn’t have to fight their battles.

“I prefer peace, but if trouble must come, let it be in my time that my children may know peace.”Thomas Paine

READ MORE

Will NATO’s “Operation Atlantic Resolve” Be The Trigger For WW3 With Russia?

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
BrandonTurbeville.com

As concern over the last week of Obama’s tenure as President continues to mount and as tensions with Russia edge upwards more and more by the day, the United States and NATO are doing everything they can to signal that they are ready and willing for World War Three. After months of falsely accusing the Russian government of “war crimes,” “crimes against humanity,” and empire expansion simply for killing Western-backed terrorists in Syria, the U.S. government and corporate media followed up with months more of claims of “Russian hacking” even insinuating that the Russians “hacked the U.S. elections.” This was, of course, after over a year of claiming Russia shot down civilian air liners, invaded Ukraine, imprisons gays, and has no rights for women.

Over the course of the crisis in Ukraine, the U.S. has repeatedly moved troops into threatening positions close to the Russian border. Now, however, one of the biggest pushes yet has materialized in Eastern Europe, right on Russia’s doorstep in Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Hungary, and Bulgaria. Dubbed, Operation Atlantic Resolve, the massive NATO troop deployment is an obvious act of troop placement in order to prepare for an actual ground assault on Russia itself. At best, it is an incredibly foolish act of bullying and intimidation. At worst, it is preparation for a nuclear holocaust.

As the International Business Times summarizes

US tanks and armoured vehicles along with over 3,000 US soldiers begin arriving in Poland on Thursday, (12 January). The deployment, which falls under Operation Atlantic Resolve, is the largest exercise of US troops in Europe in decades.

Hundreds of armoured vehicles and over 80 main battle tanks have already arrived in Germany and are reportedly being moved by road and rail to Eastern Europe.

Operation Atlantic Resolve is a mission to show Moscow that Washington is committed to protecting its allies in Eastern Europe. It was launched in the aftermath of Russia annexing Crimea, which triggered fears that Moscow could move to make a similar land grab in Eastern Europe.

The US Armoured Brigade will also reportedly conduct military exercises in the Baltics. The exercise is a part of President Barack Obama’s plan to ease tensions among Nato allies who are concerned about Russian aggression. According to reports, the forces will rotate every nine months.

Tanks and other materials will eventually be stationed in Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania and Hungary.

The Duran also describes the massive troop deployments in the following way:

Self-propelled Howitzers and hundreds of other armored fighting vehicles were landing on the shores of northern Germany. To those who had at least one eye on the news, it was like watching the US invasion at Normandy all over again. Over the last few days, some 2,800 pieces of military hardware and 4,000 troops have arrived at the port in Bremerhaven.

The delivery of US Abrams tanks, Paladin artillery, and Bradley fighting vehicles marks a new phase of America’s continuous presence in Europe, which will now be based on a nine-month rotation.

. . . . .

Operation Atlantic Resolve – as it is being called – is the newest phase in adding and keeping a US armored brigade on the European NATO front and will operate on a nine-month rotational basis. With its headquarters based in Germany, the brigade will first enter Poland and then disperse throughout seven countries from Estonia to Bulgaria; a military front much closer to the Kremlin in Moscow than was setup during the Cold War with the former USSR.

Since the announcement, Putin has had no choice but to counter the military move along Russia’s borders.

. . . . .

Great Britain will also be joining the military surge – sending fighter jets to the Black Sea and a battalion of troops, tanks and light armor to Estonia later in the spring. Those troops with be supported by French and Danish troops while Germany will be bolstering troops and sending tanks into Lithuania.

Other counties participating in the “Enhanced Forward Presence” are Canada, Romania, the Netherlands, Albania, Croatia, Belgium, Italy, Slovenia and Luxembourg. The US will also be relocating its Stryker Unit from Germany to Poland to join the vastly expanded military presence.

It should be clear enough by now that the U.S. is by no means acting defensively in Ukraine, Syria, Europe or anywhere else. The U.S. government is playing a very dangerous game that could very well end the lives of the overwhelming majority of the planet. Thankfully, Putin has proven to be a cooler head than any leader in the NATO infrastructure and his calm responses are most likely the only reason the world has not been incinerated by now. The American people had better start paying attention to the aggressive posturing of their government and begin speaking out before it is too late.

Brandon Turbeville – article archive here – is the author of seven books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies, Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 andvolume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, and The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President. Turbeville has published over 850 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is BrandonTurbeville.com He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.

This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.

Obama’s True Legacy

Obama’s true legacy to the world is much different from what the mainstream Western media would focus on.

The Obama Administration Has Brokered More Weapons Sales Than Any Other Administration Since World War II | The Nation

When American firms dominate a global market worth more than $70 billion a year, you’d expect to hear about it. Not so with the global arms trade. It’s good for one or two stories a year in the mainstream media,usually when the annual statistics on the state of the business come out.

Obama’s covert drone war in numbers: ten times more strikes than Bush – The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

 There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Obama embraced the US drone programme, overseeing more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s two terms, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. Between 384 and 807 civilians were killed in those countries, according to reports logged by the Bureau.

 

Obama drone casualty numbers a fraction of those recorded by the Bureau – The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

The US government today claimed it has killed between 64 and 116 “non-combatants” in 473 counter-terrorism strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Libya between January 2009 and the end of 2015.

This is a fraction of the 380 to 801 civilian casualty range recorded by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism from reports by local and international journalists, NGO investigators, leaked government documents, court papers and the result of field investigations.

While the number of civilian casualties recorded by the Bureau is six times higher than the US Government’s figure, the assessments of the minimum total number of people killed were strikingly similar. The White House put this figure at 2,436, whilst the Bureau has recorded 2,753.

Since becoming president in 2009, Barack Obama has significantly extended the use of drones in the War on Terror. Operating outside declared battlefields, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, this air war has been largely fought in Pakistan and Yemen.

Civilian Deaths from US Air and Drone Strikes 2009-2015
Civilian Deaths from US Air and Drone Strikes 2009-2015

 

Obama & The Merchants of Death

On this edition of The Geopolitical Report, we look at Barack Obama’s legacy as a record breaking arms dealer. Obama has enabled Saudi Arabia to wage an illegal war in Yemen and has gifted the merchants of death with billions of dollars in new contracts with Taiwan and Vietnam. We also cover the Nye Commission and its investigation into the munitions industry after the First World War. Finally, we look at how the new Trump administration has promised to radically expand the US military and make the merchants of death billions more in profit from war and death.

Will the CIA assassinate Trump?

They already produced and disseminated fake evidence against him.

The attempted assassination of United States President Ronald Reagan occurred on March 30, 1981, 69 days into his presidency.
Will the CIA Retaliate Against Trump? – The Future of Freedom Foundation

In a truly remarkable bit of honesty and candor regarding the U.S. national-security establishment, new Senate minority leader Charles Schumer has accused President-elect Trump of “being really dumb.”

Was Schumer referring to Trump’s ideology, philosophy, or knowledge about economics or foreign policy?

None of the above. According to an article in The Hill, he told Rachel Maddow on her show that Trump was dumb for taking on the CIA and questioning its conclusions regarding Russia.

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you…. He’s being really dumb to do this.”

Maddow then asked Schumer what he thought the intelligence community might do to Trump to get back at him.

Schumer’s response was fascinating and revealing. He responded, “I don’t know.”

So, Schumer knows that there are six ways from Sunday for the intelligence community to get back at Trump but then, a few seconds later, can’t enumerate even one of those ways? That makes no sense, unless he was a bit scared to go into the details for fear that one of those “six ways from Sunday” might be employed against him.

In any event, Schumer’s point is a good one, even if he is reluctant to clarify it. No president since John F. Kennedy has dared to take on the CIA or the rest of the national security establishment or to operate outside the bounds of permissible parameters within the paradigm of the national-security state.

That might have been because post-JFK presidents just happened to find themselves on the same page as the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA.

But another possibility is that the one mentioned by Schumer: They knew that if they opposed the national-security establishment at a fundamental level, they would be subjected to retaliatory measures.

Kennedy had come into office as a standard Cold Warrior and as a supporter of the national-security state system, the totalitarian-like apparatus that was grafted onto America’s federal governmental system after World War II. But after he was set up and betrayed by the CIA with respect to the Bay of Pigs invasion, he was at loggerheads with that agency for the rest of his presidency. After the Bay of Pigs, he vowed to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter them to the winds. He also fired CIA Director Allen Dulles, who, in a rather unusual twist of fate, would later be appointed to the Warren Commission to investigate Kennedy’s murder.

Kennedy’s antipathy toward the CIA gradually extended to what President Eisenhower had termed the military-industrial complex, especially when it proposed Operation Northwoods, which called for fraudulent terrorist attacks to serve as a pretext for invading Cuba, and when it suggested that Kennedy initiate a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. (The latter suggestion caused Kennedy to indignantly leave the meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when the suggestion was made and remark to an aide, “And we call ourselves the human race.”

The feeling was mutual. The CIA considered Kennedy to be a traitor for refusing to provide U.S. air support for the CIA’s invaders at the Bay of Pigs. One member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff considered the way Kennedy handled the Cuban Missile Crisis to be the biggest defeat in U.S. history and compared the president’s actions to Neville Chamberlain’s capitulation at Munich in 1938.

After the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy’s war with his national-security establishment got even worse. That’s because Kennedy concluded that the Cold War was bunk, that it should be ended, and that the United States could peacefully coexist with the communist world. That’s when he delivered his famous Peace Speech at American University, which was broadcast all across the Soviet Union. He had failed to consult with the Pentagon or the CIA in preparing the speech. He also entered into a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets, over the fierce objections of his national-security establishment. He also ordered a partial withdrawal of troops from Vietnam and told close associates that he would order a complete withdrawal after defeating Barry Goldwater in the 1964 election. Worst of all, from the standpoint of the national-security establishment, he initiated secret personal negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban leader Fidel Castro, both of whom, by this time, were on the same page as Kennedy.

But that wasn’t the page that the CIA and the Pentagon were on. They were convinced that Kennedy was surrendering America to the communists. As far as they were concerned, there could never be peaceful coexistence with the communist world. There was only one way that the Cold War could end — by finishing off the Soviet Union once and for all.

It’s worth pointing out that Kennedy’s actions constituted a direct threat to the trillions of dollars in military and intelligence largess that would end up flowing into the coffers of the “defense” industry if the Cold War and hot wars (e.g., Vietnam) were to continue.

Kennedy was fully aware of the danger he faced by taking on such a formidable enemy. He understood precisely what Schumer just pointed out about the national-security establishment — that they have “six ways from Sunday” to retaliate.

One possibility, of course, was a military coup, the same type that the U.S. national-security establishment would initiate in Chile some ten years later to save the country from a democratically elected president who was deemed to be a threat to national security, especially owing to his desire to establish friendly relations with the Soviet Union and Cuba. Kennedy was so concerned about that possibility that he persuaded a friend in Hollywood to turn the novel Seven Days in May into a movie (I highly recommend it—it stars Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas) to serve as warning to the American people. The movie was an echo of the warning that President Eisenhower had given to the American people in his 1961 Farewell Address, when he pointed out that the military-industrial complex, which was new to the American way of life, posed a grave threat to the freedoms and democratic processes of the American people. Also, at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK’s brother Bobby told the Russians that there was a grave danger of a U.S. military takeover if the matter wasn’t settled soon.

Another possibility, of course, was assassination, thereby elevating to president the vice-president, Lyndon Johnson, who just happened to reject Kennedy’s view on the Cold War and who just happened to embrace the Pentagon’s and CIA’s views on the Cold War. Once he assumed the presidency, Johnson immediately canceled JFK’s plans to withdraw from Vietnam and, working with the Pentagon, came up with the bogus Gulf of Tonkin attack that served as a pretext to expand U.S. involvement in the war. More than 58,000 American men would ultimately die for nothing in Vietnam.

Ever since the Kennedy assassination, no president has dared to tangle with the national-security establishment at a fundamental level. Everyone in Washington knows where the real power of the federal government is centered. (See the excellent book National Security and Double Government by Michael Glennon.) Every president knows that he is expected to operate within the parameters set forth by the national-security establishment and every president since Kennedy has dutifully complied.

Once he assumes the presidency, Donald Trump might be the first president since Kennedy to violate that sacred rule of the national-security establishment. If he does and if he refuses to do what previous presidents have done, it will be interesting to see the outcome. As Sen. Schumer has pointed out, the CIA and other intelligence agencies have “six ways from Sunday” by which to retaliate.

For more information, see:

JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne
The Kennedy Autopsy by Jacob Hornberger
Regime Change: The Kennedy Assassination by Jacob Hornberger
The CIA, Terrorism, and the Cold War: The Evil of the National Security State by Jacob Hornberger
CIA & JFK: The Secret Assassination Files by Jefferson Morley

 

CIA director warns Trump to watch what he says, be careful on Russia | Reuters

CIA Director John Brennan on Sunday offered a stern parting message for Donald Trump days before the Republican U.S. president-elect takes office, cautioning him against loosening sanctions on Russia and warning him to watch what he says.