TRUMP WINS ELECTORAL COLLEGE AGAIN. ELECTORS TURN AGAINST CLINTON.

VOTERS IN ONLY 17 STATES CHOSE CLINTON IN ELECTION 2016.
VOTERS IN 33 STATES CHOSE TRUMP.

WINNING ALMOST TWICE AS MANY STATES AS CLINTON DID NOT GET TRUMP TWICE THE ELECTORAL VOTES.

HE BEAT CLINTON BY A MERE 74 ELECTORAL VOTES... TRUMP-306, CLINTON-232.

THAT MEANS HALF AS MANY STATES ALMOST GOT CLINTON ELECTED...ALMOST.

SHE DID WIN THE "POPULAR VOTE", OR SO IT SEEMS.

IT WAS WHAT HILLARY LOST ... COMPARED TO WHAT OBAMA WON (AS SEEN ABOVE IN THE 2012 RESULTS) THAT COST HER THE ELECTORAL WIN.

OBAMA WON THE "RUST BELT" STATES (WISCONSIN, IOWA, OHIO, MICHIGAN, PENNSYLVANIA) AND FLORIDA IN 2012...CLINTON LOST THEM IN 2016.

WHILE CELEBRITIES AND POLITICIANS AND AVERAGE CITIZENS PUSHED THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE, BOMBARDED THE ELECTORS TO "DO THE RIGHT THING" AND ELECT CLINTON, NOT TRUMP, THE ELECTORS VOTED AS THEY WERE EXPECTED TO...MOSTLY.

THERE WAS A BIG SURPRISE FOR CLINTON, THOUGH...

More electors tried to defect from Hillary Clinton Monday than from Trump, by a count of seven to two, as of Monday afternoon.

Of 306 electors pledged to vote for Donald J. Trump, 304 voted for him.

BUT...

Of 232 electors pledged to vote for Hillary Clinton, 227 voted for her, PLUS three Democratic electors, in Colorado, Maine and Minnesota, initially declined to vote for Mrs. Clinton. Two were replaced by an alternate, and one ended up changing his vote back to Clinton.

A TOTAL OF EIGHT (8) ELECTORS ACTUALLY TURNED ON CLINTON, BUT ONE WAS ORDERED TO SWITCH BACK TO CLINTON AND DID SO.

OF THE 1 STATES CLINTON WON, JUST ONE HANDED HER THE WIN BY POPULAR VOTE...THE BIG ONE...CALIFORNIA.

 WHEN ONE REMOVES THE 4 MILLION-PLUS POPULAR VOTES FROM JUST THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT CLINTON LED TRUMP BY, WHERE SOME HAVE CALLED AS MANY AS 3 MILLION VOTES INTO QUESTION, CLINTON WOULD NOT HAVE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.

SHE WAS 4.3 MILLION VOTES IN THE LEAD IN JUST CALIFORNIA! "Hillary Clinton garnered 4.3 million more votes than Donald Trump in California, the nation's most populous state.

In 2012, 13,038,547 people voted in California.

JUST FIVE STATES contributed to more than 35% of Clinton’s popular vote totals."

THE 'BIG STATES' DOMINATE ELECTIONS, IN EVERY CONCEIVABLE WAY.

IT REALLY DOES TURN OUT THAT A VOTE IN WYOMING IS NOT AS "VALUABLE" AS A VOTE IN CALIFORNIA.

LEST WE FORGET...AMERICANS WERE NOT HAPPY WITH EITHER CANDIDATE!

Poll: Clinton, Trump most unfavorable candidates ever - USA Today

[MY NOTE: FROM THIS POINT DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE...I HAVE NO CLUE WHY IT APPEARS AS IT DOES. I GIVE UP ON REMOVING WHATEVER FORMATTING THAT IS AND LET IT STAND...I HAVE NO INTENTION OF WRITING ANOTHER THING ABOUT THIS ELECTION ANYWAY.]

	BUT  LET'S FACE THE FACTS: ~ CLINTON ONLY WON THE POPULAR VOTE BY A GRAND TOTAL OF ABOUT 2.5 MILLION. HOWEVER, THIS WAS THE FIRST YEAR THAT LATE BALLOTS WERE ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED IN CALIFORNIA, AND WHERE ARE THE STATS ON THOSE MYSTERIOUSLY MISSING PROVISIONAL BALLOTS? "That change (in California's laws), promised as a way to reform state politics, tore down election rules that had been built by political parties to give a leg up to their preferred candidates. What’s left is a system that’s far from settled, for either voters or candidates. "This is the first year in which ballots that arrive up to three days late -- Friday would be the deadline -- can be counted. The uncounted tally would push total voter turnout to about 8.5 million, or around 47% of all registered voters. A portion of the unprocessed total are provisional ballots -- designated for voters whose registration status can't be immediately verified on election day. If a provisional ballot is later found to have been cast mistakenly, it may not be counted. ~ CLINTON WON ONLY 17 STATES OUT OF 50, YET JUST THOSE 17 STATES GAVE HER 232 ELECTORAL VOTES. SHE COULD HAVE WON WITH LESS THAN A DOZEN STATES, BUT SHE DIDN'T. HAD SHE WON JUST THE TEN LARGEST STATES (STATES WITH THE MOST ELECTORAL VOTES), SHE WOULD HAVE HAD 248 ELECTORAL VOTES. HAD SHE THEN WON TENNESSEE (11 VOTES) AND MISSOURI  (ALSO 11 VOTES) SHE'D HAVE HAD THE 270 VOTES FOR THE WIN. IS THAT "FAIR"? ~ COUNTIES AND STATES THAT HAD VOTED FOR OBAMA REJECTED CLINTON. CLINTON LOST 217 COUNTIES AND SIX ENTIRE STATES THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY VOTED FOR OBAMA. WISCONSIN, OHIO, MICHIGAN, IOWA, PENNSYLVANIA AND FLORIDA ALL CHOSE TRUMP.   WHY? FOR MY MANY FOREIGN READERS, YOU JUST HAD TO BE HERE TO APPRECIATE THE INSANITY WE'VE SEEN THIS ELECTION. BE GLAD YOU WEREN'T HERE. WHEN THE LOSING PARTY TOOK TO OUR STREETS IN RIOTS AND PROTESTS, DOING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PROPERTY DAMAGE, ONE COULD NOT HELP BUT HEARKEN BACK TO THEIR CRIES THAT TRUMP WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT HIS LOSS WHEN HE LOST TO CLINTON. BUT HE DIDN'T LOSE. ONE ALSO HAD TO WONDER WHAT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED HAD CLINTON'S TEAM AND HER PAL, JILL STEIN'S TEAM, FORCED A RECOUNT IN CALIFORNIA. IN CASE YOUR NEWS SERVICES HAVE NOT INFORMED YOU, IN EVERY PRECINCT WHERE THOSE RECOUNTS WERE DONE, DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND THAT HIGHLY FAVORED...CLINTON. YES, THERE WERE MORE DEMOCRAT VOTES CAST THAN THERE WERE VOTERS REGISTERED TO CAST THEM, THERE WAS "VOTE FLIPPING", AND IT ALL FAVORED THE DEMOCRATS. IMAGINE THAT! . IN WISCONSIN: Hillary Clinton won Ward 34 by a margin of 100 to 1 in the original count but the recount now has it 2 to 1. Despite only a 2 to 1 win margin county wide, some Milwaukee wards have anomalous win margins for Hillary Clinton in the original vote count. As the the votes are recounted, some of these margins are drastically lowered. Trump added 844 votes to his total for the Nov. 8 election. Wisconsin Elections Commission spokesman Reid Magney tells The Associated Press that "addition errors" on election night are the reason for the difference. Pennsylvania Voters Report a Few Cases of Vote Flipping - NBC News Michigan Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit's precincts - Detroit News BUT WHERE THE BIGGEST DISCREPANCY MAY YET BE FOUND (SOMEDAY) IS IN CALIFORNIA. NO MATTER WHO AND NO MATTER HOW MANY DEMANDED A CALIFORNIA RECOUNT, OR AT LEAST A LONG, HARD LOOK AT CALIFORNIA, NO ONE TOOK A LOOK. IN FACT, CALIFORNIANS WERE QUITE THREATENING ABOUT A RECOUNT OR INVESTIGATION OF ANY KIND INTO THOSE VOTER ROLLS VERSUS VOTES CAST THERE. DID CALIFORNIA WANT TO ASSURE THE NATION THAT ALL WAS ABOVE-BOARD AND 100% LEGAL AT THE POLLS? NOPE. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. “Independent voters (in California) may have been disenfranchised during the June 7th primary because of unusual rules that don’t apply to voters who register under a party,” wrote Judy Frankel for Huffington Post. “Independents, falling under the category of No Party Preference (NPP), needed to use special ‘crossover’ ballots in certain California counties – Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego being among them – to vote for president.” A grassroots organization, Watch The Vote, is collecting complaints to show a civil grand jury the various ways voters were disenfranchised during the California primary. HALF A MILLION VOTERS DISENFRANCHISED . A Los Angeles Times investigation found three out of four people registered with the party did so by mistake—totaling almost half a million voters. THE DEAD VOTING? NO, BUT MANY DECEASED PEOPLE ARE TILL ON THE VOTER ROLLS IN MOST STATES. THAT ISN'T ANYTHING NEW.  CBS SEEMED SHOCKED.  Even worse, a CBS News investigation found hundreds of deceased voters in Los Angeles County were still on voter rolls and voting. This discrepancy should have been corrected by the 2002 Help America Vote Act, but California is the only state yet to comply. “The problem is California has been the most derelict state in the country in implementing statewide databases that are required under federal law. They just blew it off for over a decade,” J. Christian Adams of the Public Interest Legal Foundation told CBS News. Leading up to the primaries, state election officials were investigating why and how the voter data of millions of Californians was posted online by a third party, despite public disclosure laws. Voter tampering has been frequently cited in California, with many alleging their party registration was changed without their consent. In Riverside County, district attorney Mike Hestrin confirmed voters’ party affiliations were changed without their knowledge, and the San Francisco Examiner reported 1,400 voters in San Francisco were mailed the wrong party ballots before the primaries. NOT JUST CALIFORNIA. Voter fraud and suppression wasn’t limited to California—well-documented cases littered the primaries, with no solution rendered to those who were barred from exercising their right to vote. In Arizona, voters waited hours in line because 85 percent of polling locations were cut to save money. In New York, over 120,000 voters were inexplicably purged from voter rolls in a closed primary state where independent voters had to switch their affiliation six months before the primaries. Across the board, the DNC failed to ensure a fair and balanced democratic process throughout the primaries. ONE LAST QUESTION HAS BEEN RAISED BY THIS INSANE ELECTION, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY HAVE MISSED THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE ABOUT THE MURDER OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (DNC) DATA EXPERT SETH RICH RICH WAS MURDERED FOR NO OBVIOUS REASON (HE WASN'T ROBBED) ON JULY 10, 2016, JUST A FEW DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST BIG DUMP OF DNC INTERNAL EMAILS WERE HANDED OVER TO THE PUBLIC BY WIKILEAKS. THE WASHINGTON POST DIVED ON THE EMAILS AND WROTE: "The leaks come from the accounts of seven key figures in the DNC," including Communications Director Luis Miranda (10770 emails), National Finance Director Jordon Kaplan (3797 emails), Finance Chief of Staff Scott Comer and others. The newly released emails cover the period from January 2015 through May 25, 2016." RICH WAS, FOR MANY, A LIKELY SOURCE OF THAT LEAK. ODDLY, THE POST WAS THE FIRST TO INSINUATE THE MONTH BEFORE THE LEAKS THAT THE RUSSIANS HAD HACKED INTO THE DNC. THE CIA HADN'T EVEN MADE THAT CLAIM THEN. Seth Rich, a normally upbeat and much-loved 27-year-old computer-voting specialist at the DNC, was murdered in July near Bloomingdale, a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood in a once-blighted area of Washington, D.C. Police have declined to say whether he was able to describe his assailants. Julian Assange hurled a thunderbolt into the affair a few weeks later. The WikiLeaks impresario announced he was offering a $20,000 reward for information leading to a conviction in the Rich case. He hinted darkly that the slain man had been a source in his organization's recent publication of 30,000 internal DNC emails. “What are you suggesting?” a startled interviewer from Dutch television asked him. “I am suggesting,” Assange said, “that our sources, ah, take risks, and they, they become concerned to see things occurring like that.” Police Chief Cathy Lanier, normally cautious, may have inadvertently aided the [speculation that rich was the wikileaks source] during a crime-scene press conference on August 5, when she said, “Right now, we have more questions than answers No suspects have been arrested, despite the MPD’s $25,000 reward for information. Meanwhile, sources involved with the DNC’s investigation of a foreign hack of its files last year rule out the notion that Seth Rich had any role in the affair. The fallout from that embarrassment led to the firing of several top Democratic Party officials. DEATH CANNOT BE EXPLAINED...NO OBVIOUS MOTIVE; “Police have found little information to explain his death,” said The New York Daily News. Rich’s father told The Washington Post that Seth’s watch, wallet and credit cards were not taken. The New York Daily News quoted police as saying, “There is no immediate indication that robbery was a motive in the attack…but it has not been ruled out as a possibility.” ALL A MOOT POINT? ALMOST. BUT A MURDERER IS STILL UNDISCOVERED, AND HIS/HER MOTIVE. NOW THAT THE ELECTORS HAVE MET, HAVE CAST THOSE ELECTORAL BALLOTS, HERE'S ANOTHER ODD THING... THE FBI, WHICH STRONGLY DISAGREED WITH THE CIA ASSESSMENT OF RUSSIAN HACKERS AND ELECTION INTERFERENCE, CHANGED ITS SONG OVERNIGHT, LITERALLY OVERNIGHT! REMEMBER MY POST OF FOUR DAYS AGO IN WHICH THE FBI AND CLAPPER, TWO FORMER AMBASSADORS AND SOME WITHIN THE NSA AS WELL AS EX-NSA WHISTLEBLOWER SNOWDEN WERE ADAMANT THAT THE SOURCE OF THE LEAKS MAY HAVE BEEN FROM "INSIDE" THE USA? AT FIRST, EVEN THE CIA DIDN'T STATE THAT "THE RUSSIANS DID IT". IT LOOKED LIKE CHINA...AGAIN, OR MAYBE NORTH KOREA. "Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) on Thursday (DEC. 15) disputed reports that the CIA has concluded Russia meddled in the presidential election to help elect Donald Trump. “Whatever conclusion they want to come up with is one thing,” he told reporters at Trump Tower in New York City. "There is no CIA conclusion. The CIA has repeatedly told us that they have no idea what [Russia’s] intent was." “To suddenly have it appear in The Washington Post and The New York Times that the intelligence community has concluded this. Who? Who in the CIA? Is it [CIA Director] John Brennan? Is it some rogue person behind a desk somewhere?” THEN, AS I SAID, OVERNIGHT, THE FBI CAVED IN AND JOINED THE CIA IN RENOUNCING RUSSIA... AND TONIGHT'S NBC NEWS HANDED US THE "REVELATION" THAT, CONTRARY TO WHAT MOST AMERICANS THINK, OBAMA HAD MADE A "RED PHONE" EMERGENCY CALL TO PUTIN TWO DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTIONS WARNING HIM NOT TO INTERFERE. AND THIS, AS WELL AS BRAND NEW 'REPORTS' THAT RUSSIA EVEN TRIED TO HACK OUT POWER GRID TO INTERFERE WITH VOTING? ALL THIS COMES OUT ONLY NOW, THE DAY AFTER OBAMA WHINED ON TV THAT "HILLARY WAS ROBBED"? WHAT'S GOING ON? WHAT COMES NEXT? TRUMP IS NOT PRESIDENT YET. NEVER BEFORE IN AMERICAN HISTORY HAVE SO MANY TRIED TO PREVENT A MAN FROM TAKING OFFICE AS PRESIDENT. AFTER THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE FAILED TO UPSET TRUMP'SWIN TODAY, THOUSANDS ONCE AGAIN TOOK TO THE STREETS ACROSS AMERICA, SOME BEGAN POSTING THOSE "I AM GOING TO COMMIT SUICIDE" VIDEOS, OR "I AM LEAVING AMERICA" VIDEO THREATS. AND WE MAY BE IN FOR WORSE HERE. IS IT JUST TOO MUCH TO SIMPLY BELIEVE THAT CLINTON LOST BECAUSE PEOPLE IN 33 STATES VOTED SOLIDLY AGAINST HER, THAT THE VOTES IN THE OTHER 49 OF OUR 50 STATES COMBINED WOULD NOT HAVE GIVEN HER THE POPULAR VOTE, THAT CALIFORNIA ALONE DID THAT? HAD SHE LOST CALIFORNIA, SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST LOSERS IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS' HISTORY. GOING INTO THIS ELECTION, ALMOST 60% OF BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS WHO WERE POLLED STATED THAT THEY HATED THE CHOICE THEIR PARTY MADE. AMERICANS DIDN'T WANT TRUMP OR CLINTON. Poll: Clinton, Trump most unfavorable candidates ever - USA Today DARE WE ASSUME THE VOTERS SIMPLY PICKED THE "LESS OF THE TWO EVILS"...AGAIN? WHAT'S DONE IS DONE AND WE GO ON, BUT, HOPEFULLY WISER, MORE DEMANDING, MORE AWARE THAT "WE'VE BEEN HAD" AND MORE INSISTENT ON NEVER BEING 'HAD' AGAIN... I HOPE. "LESSER OF TWO EVILS"... THAT MEANS WE STILL CHOSE EVIL, YES?

FBI CONTRADICTS CIA ON RUSSIAN ROLE IN ELECTION

From the Wall Street Journal...Oct. 16, 2016.
"PRESS BURIES HILLARY CLINTON'S SINS"

FBI agents pressed Justice unsuccessfully for probe of Clinton

WSJ: FBI Agents Allege DOJ Ordered 'Stand Down' on Clinton

Leaks suggest FBI agents felt DOJ blocked their Clinton investigations

Report: FBI never closed its Clinton Foundation investigation

WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR CONGRESS TO STOP WASTING TAXPAYER MONEY ON STUPID INVESTIGATIONS?

TWO FORMER AMBASSADORS, ONE FROM THE U.K., ONE AMERICAN WHO WAS AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N., THE OUTGOING FBI CHIEF, "ANONYMOUS" AND NOTED NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERTS, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS, ALL WHO HAVE EITHER TESTIFIED BEFORE CONGRESS IN RECENT DAYS AND/OR PUBLICLY STATED THAT IT WAS AN INSIDER, NOT RUSSIA WHO HANDED OVER INTERNAL DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE EMAILS TO WIKILEAKS, DON'T SEEM TO BE ENOUGH TO STOP CONGRESS AND OUR MAINSTREAM MEDIA FROM CONDUCTING YET ANOTHER LONG, WASTEFUL, FRUITLESS WITCH HUNT.

THE FBI DOES NOT, REPEAT, DOES NOT CONCUR WITH THE CIA THAT RUSSIA IS TO BLAME FOR THE LEAKS OF DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE INTERNAL EMAILS PRIOR TO THE ELECTION OR THAT THERE WAS ANY INTENT BY RUSSIA TO INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME.

EVEN ONE OF THE REAL 'FAKE NEWS SITE' (MAINSTREAM MEDIA) , WASHINGTON POST, STATED THIS:

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-and-cia-give-differing-accounts-to-lawmakers-on-russias-motives-in-2016-hacks/2016/12/10/c6dfadfa-bef0-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.79949023dda0]

"The competing messages, according to officials in attendance, also reflect cultural differences between the FBI and the CIA. The bureau, true to its law enforcement roots, wants facts and tangible evidence to prove something beyond all reasonable doubt. The CIA is more comfortable drawing inferences from behavior.

FBI WANTS PROOF, CIA USES CONJECTURE....REMEMBER THE IRAQ WMD REPORTS BY CIA?
REMEMBER BENGHAZI?
THE CIA WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR BENGHAZI, ACCORDING TO THE MILITARY AND THOSE ON THE GROUND THERE THAT NIGHT.

“The FBI briefers think in terms of criminal standards — can we prove this in court,” one of the officials said. “The CIA briefers weigh the preponderance of intelligence and then make judgment calls to help policymakers make informed decisions. High confidence for them means ‘we’re pretty damn sure.’ It doesn’t mean they can prove it in court.”

The FBI is not sold on the idea that Russia had a particular aim in its meddling. “There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way, but it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals,” said one U.S. official.

The murky nature of the assessments is maddening many lawmakers who are demanding answers about the Kremlin’s role in the presidential race.
The FBI, under Director James B. Comey, is already under fire for dropping a bombshell letter days before the election on the discovery of new emails potentially related to the Clinton private server investigation. The emails proved irrelevant to the case.

On Saturday, outgoing Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called on Comey to resign, saying the FBI director deliberately kept quiet evidence about Russia’s motives before the election."

SHUT UP AND JUST GO HOME, REID!

A FALSE FLAG BY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION...WE SAW IT COMING MONTHS AGO.
GOT TO WONDER...DID OBAMA HIMSELF TURN OVER THE EMAILS TO WIKILEAKS TO MAKE THE GULLIBLE MASSES BELIEVE THAT RUSSIA HELPED TRUMP?

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/12/12/bolton-suggests-russian-election-hacks-were-false-flag-by-obama-administration/?utm_term=.8266acd9ec9e]

John Bolton, a former U.N. ambassador , said Sunday that reports of Russian interference in the presidential election may be a “false flag” conjured up by the Obama administration.

“We would want to know who else might want to influence the election and why they would leave fingerprints that point to the Russians. That’s why I say, until we know more about how the intelligence community came to this conclusion, we don’t know whether it’s Russian inspired or a false flag.”

DID SCHULTZ TELL ONE OF THE BIGGEST LIES OF ALL TIME?

“This is not an effort to challenge the outcome of the election,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said.

GIVE THE MAN A "PANTS-ON-FIRE" RATING FOR THAT LIE!

The Washington Post reported that US intelligence agencies were skeptical about the possibility that hackers would have been able to systematically manipulate the results of the election.
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.8d3363040da6]
"...intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees.

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said in a television interview that the “Russian government is not the source.”

The White House and CIA officials declined to comment.

EVERY STATE IN AMERICA REPORTS NO HACKING OF THEIR SYSTEMS!
A CIA spokeswoman told Reuters that the agency had no comment on the matter.

REUTERS, DEC. 13, 2016:

Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking - sources...
"The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as "ridiculous" in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

"ODNI is not arguing that the agency (CIA) is wrong, only that they can't prove intent," said one of the three U.S. officials. "Of course they can't, absent agents in on the decision-making in Moscow."

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose evidentiary standards require it to make cases that can stand up in court, declined to accept the CIA's analysis - a deductive assessment of the available intelligence - for the same reason, the three officials said.

The ODNI, headed by James Clapper, was established after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the recommendation of the commission that investigated the attacks. The commission, which identified major intelligence failures, recommended the office's creation to improve coordination among U.S. intelligence agencies.

Republican Senator John McCain said on Monday there was "no information" that Russian hacking of American political organizations was aimed at swaying the outcome of the election.

"It's obvious that the Russians hacked into our campaigns," McCain said. "But there is no information that they were intending to affect the outcome of our election and that's why we need a congressional investigation," he told Reuters.

In an angry letter sent to ODNI chief Clapper on Monday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes said he was “dismayed” that the top U.S. intelligence official had not informed the panel of the CIA’s analysis and the difference between its judgment and the FBI’s assessment.
Noting that Clapper in November testified that intelligence agencies lacked strong evidence linking Russian cyber attacks to the WikiLeaks disclosures, Nunes asked that Clapper, together with CIA and FBI counterparts, brief the panel by Friday on the latest intelligence assessment of Russian hacking during the election campaign.

THERE'S MUCH MORE TO IT THAN THIS!

http://theduran.com/uk-ambassador-craig-murray-ive-met-the-person-who-leaked-them-podesta-emails-not-russian-and-its-an-insider/

Craig Murray, Britain’s former ambassador to Russia, has stated in an interview given to the UK's Guardian Newspaper that he has met the "insider" who passed the DNC emails to Wikileaks, that it was not Russians.

“It is extremely amusing for the CIA to be accusing another country of interfering in domestic elections, when interfering in other country’s domestic elections on scores of occasions is what the CIA has done to effect regime change for the last 70 years so really; this is almost beyond satire.”

As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks – there is a major difference between the two. And it should be said again and again, that if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, if she had not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened.

The continued ability of the mainstream media to claim the leaks lost Clinton the election because of “Russia”, while still never acknowledging the truths the leaks reveal, is Kafkaesque.A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was “directing” the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government.

Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims “bullshit”, adding: “They are absolutely making it up.”While the article was not taken down, the home page links to it vanished and it was replaced by a ludicrous one repeating the mad CIA allegations against Russia and now claiming – incredibly – that the CIA believe the FBI is deliberately blocking the information on Russian collusion. Presumably this totally nutty theory, that Putin is somehow now controlling the FBI, is meant to answer my obvious objection that, if the CIA know who it is, why haven’t they arrested somebody. That bit of course would be the job of the FBI, who those desperate to annul the election now wish us to believe are the KGB.

Very, very few people can be said to definitely have access to the source of the leak. The people saying it is not Russia are those who do have access. After access, you consider truthfulness. Do Julian Assange and I have a reputation for truthfulness? Well in 10 years not one of the tens of thousands of documents WikiLeaks has released has had its authenticity successfully challenged. As for me, I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling.

Contrast this to the “credible sources” Freedland relies on. What access do they have to the whistleblower? Zero. They have not the faintest idea who the whistleblower is. Otherwise they would have arrested them. What reputation do they have for truthfulness? It’s the Clinton gang and the US government, for goodness sake.

In fact, the sources any serious journalist would view as “credible” give the opposite answer to the one Freedland wants. But in what passes for Freedland’s mind, “credible” is 100% synonymous with “establishment”. When he says “credible sources” he means “establishment sources”. That is the truth of the “fake news” meme. You are not to read anything unless it is officially approved by the elite and their disgusting, crawling whores of stenographers like Freedland.

The worst thing about all this is that it is aimed at promoting further conflict with Russia. This puts everyone in danger for the sake of more profits for the arms and security industries – including of course bigger budgets for the CIA. As thankfully the four year agony of Aleppo comes swiftly to a close today, the Saudi and US armed and trained ISIS forces counter by moving to retake Palmyra. This game kills people, on a massive scale, and goes on and on.

AGAIN, CLAPPER  DOES NOT CONCUR WITH CIA

[http://theduran.com/james-clappers-office-cia-wrong-russia-clinton-leaks/]

James Clapper's Office says CIA claim Russia behind DNC and Podesta leaks to swing election to Donald Trump unproven. FBI concurs.

James Clapper’s Office of the Director of National Intelligence (“ODNI”) – which supervises the work of all of the US’s 17 intelligence agencies.

REUTERS INTERVIEWED THREE ODNI OFFICIALS

Speaking anonymously to Reuters, three ODNI officials have trashed the CIA claim that Russia provided Wikileaks with the DNC and Podesta leaks in order to help Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton in the US election.

This whole hysteria of Russia being behind the DNC and Podesta leaks is now exposed as the work of a faction within the CIA who are cooking up a case against Russia that goes far beyond what even ODNI and the FBI say is the evidence in order to deny Donald Trump the Presidency and to hand it over to Hillary Clinton.

As it is looking increasingly likely that this coup will fail, it is no wonder these people are starting to fear “reprisals”. On the strength of what they have done, at the very least they deserve the sack.

IS RUSSIA ON THE LIST OF THOSE WHO WOULD DO ANYTHING TO BRING DOWN HILLARY CLINTON?
HARDLY!

WHAT THIS HAS DONE IS THE OPPOSITE OF THAT.
HILLARY ISN'T GOING TO JAIL, BUT TRUMP MAY NOW LOSE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE.
THAT SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN THE AIM OF THE "LEAKER" ALL ALONG...DENY TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE!

Cracks appear in CIA Russian-hack scenario 

THE CIA MOVES TO INVALIDATE U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ...

JULIAN ASSANGE HAS STATED (AND WHAT GOOD WOULD IT DO HIM AT THIS POINT IN TIME TO LIE?) THAT HE DID NOT GET THOSE EMAILS FROM RUSSIAN SOURCES.

EVEN SOME WHO HAVE TRIED TO BLAME RUSSIA HAVE ADMITTED THEY DON'T HAVE PROOF, THAT IT COULD BE SOMEONE ELSE.

THE FORMER U.K. AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA HAS EVEN SAID IN INTERVIEWS THAT HE MET THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EMAIL LEAKS AND THAT IT IS A "WASHINGTON INSIDER".

WHAT NO ONE SEEMS TO ADDRESS IN THIS MOST RECENT MADNESS IS HOW, HOW ON EARTH COULD RUSSIA HAVE KNOWN HOW AMERICAN VOTERS WOULD REACT IF THEY WERE THE ONES WHO HANDED ASSANGE THOSE EMAILS?
GIVEN ALL THE OTHER "DIRT" REVEALED ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON OVER THE PAST TWO DECADES, GIVEN 'REVELATION' AFTER REVELATION AS TO HER CHARACTER AND BUSINESS DEALINGS, HER 'FOUNDATION', THE WAY SHE MISHANDLED THE BENGHAZI AFFAIR, THE WAY SHE COVERED UP HER PRIVATE EMAIL SYSTEM, HER CONTEMPT FOR THE "WORKING CLASS" (AS REVEALED IN THOSE EMAILS!), WHY WOULD ANY HUMAN WITH A FUNCTIONAL BRAIN IMAGINE SHE LOST BECAUSE RUSSIA LIKES TRUMP?

I SERIOUSLY DOUBT THAT THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE SEE HIM AS ANYTHING BUT A CLOWN, A LIAR AND NOT SOMEONE TO BE CONCERNED WITH AT ALL.

OF COURSE, I COULD BE WRONG.
SOME MIGHT FIND HIM, AT LEAST, ENTERTAINING?
NAAAAAH...NOPE...


CNN, OCT. 30, 2016:

"FBI Director James Comey told members of Congress in a letter that “in connection with an unrelated case, the FBI learned of the existence of e-mails that appear to be pertinent’’ to his probe.

A law-enforcement source told The New York Post the e-mails came from an electronic device seized from Weiner and his wife, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, as part of the federal investigation of Weiner’s ­sext messages to a 15-year-old girl.

The feds confiscated four devices from the two, including a laptop Weiner used to send sleazy messages to the teenager.

[ACTUALLY, THE NYPD INITIALLY CONFISCATED THOSE DEVICES AND, APPARENTLY, HAS COPIES OF WHAT THEY FOUND ON THEM. AND HAVE THREATENED TO RELEASE THEM IF SOMEONE ELSE DIDN'T.]

They also found e-mails that Abedin either sent or received on the laptop they shared. The lead investigator in that case reported them to Comey.

A senior law-enforcement official told NBC that the FBI director’s letter was sent to lawmakers “out of an abundance of caution.”

Trump and many GOP lawmakers had earlier bashed Comey, ­accusing the FBI chief of letting Clinton off the hook.

The director was also taking heat from his own agents who disagreed with his decision not to prosecute Clinton, sources said."

From the Wall Street Journal...Oct. 16, 2016.
"PRESS BURIES HILLARY CLINTON'S SINS"

Start with a June 2015 email to Clinton staffers from Erika Rottenberg, the former general counsel of LinkedIn. Ms. Rottenberg wrote that none of the attorneys in her circle of friends “can understand how it was viewed as ok/secure/appropriate to use a private server for secure documents AND why further Hillary took it upon herself to review them and delete documents.” She added: “It smacks of acting above the law and it smacks of the type of thing I’ve either gotten discovery sanctions for, fired people for, etc.”

WHAT THEY FOUND DISGUSTED HARDENED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS:
"Becauseremember, this laptop was in the possession of Weiner, who did nothave a security clearance. And many, many of those emails were from her Yahoo account, which had State Department emails forwarded to them, so she could easier print these messages, scan them, and send them on to Hillary. That's the carelessness that Hillary and her staff had for the classified information that the intelligence community risks life and limb to collect in challenged, opposed areas around the world."

"That's not who you want in the White House," Prince declared.

Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn’t know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner.

Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals.

Perhaps more alarming, according to the FBI’s 302 Report detailing its interview with Abedin, none of the multiple FBI agents and Justice Department officials who conducted the interview pressed Abedin to further detail the email address linked to Weiner. There was never a follow up, according to the 302 report.


According to Prince, as quoted by Breitbart:

"They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times," he said.

"The amount of garbage that they found in these emails, of criminal activity by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress was so disgusting they gave it to the FBI, and they said, 'We're going to go public with this if you don't reopen the investigation and you don't do the right thing with timely indictments,'" Prince explained.

Note that word disgusting and consider that those who are disgusted are members of NYPD, some of the most hardened dicks in the world, investigators who have seen every form of human perversion and criminality the mind can imagine. And they were disgusted by what that computer contains about the Clintons and their cronies.

Breitbart goes on:

"There is all kinds of criminal culpability through all the emails they've seen of that 650,000, including money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs," he stated.

"So the plot thickens. NYPD was pushing because, as an article quoted one of the chiefs – that's the level just below commissioner – he said as a parent, as a father with daughters, he could not let that level of evil continue," Prince said.

"That level of evil"? That a chief of the NYPD uses the descriptive evil rather than criminal should speak worlds as to just what the Clinton's really are – lawless and immoral predators, as so many of us have been insisting for years. But according to Prince, his NYPD sources say they have faced nothing but obstruction from the federal Justice Department, which is easy to believe when you consider that sources within the FBI have been saying the same thing.

And that, folks, is reason enough to vote against this evil criminal enterprise the Clintons have constructed. If Hillary gains control of the Justice Department, all her evildoing and criminality will be swept under the rug of history. We must follow the example of the NYPD and not let that happen.


STATE DEPARTMENT PANIC, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE INTERFERENCE WITH THE INVESTIGATION
"McCabe apparently denied agents' September request to seek non-government laptops seized from Clinton aides during the (then dormant) email scandal investigation. Relevant FBI/DOJ-granted immunity deals, described by ex-federal officials as highly irregular, stipulated that the evidence in question could only be used by officials looking into the mishandling of classified data -- not other potential crimes related to the Clinton Foundation. Hmmm.

Layer all of this new information atop the facts that Attorney General Loretta Lynch improperly huddled with Bill Clinton while the email probe was still active and then broke her word by inserting herself into the case, pressuring Comey not to update Congress on new developments that impact his previous testimony. Asking tough pointed questions about whether some top officials at DOJ are abusing their roles to protect their partisan allies is justified. I'll leave you with this bottom-line assessment, amid all the finger-pointing and acrimony:


So, according to @WallStreetJour1, FBI investigating 1) Clinton Foundation 2) Anthony Weiner 3) Terry McAuliffe. https://t.co/Y3qhhjj06Y

— Matthew Continetti (@continetti) October 31, 2016

Correct, on all three counts. But Continetti neglects to add Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin to his list, now that the FBI has reopened the email matter, too.


UPDATE - Here's Clinton categorically denying that there was any FBI investigation into her family's 'slush fund' foundation earlier this year. Those reports had "no basis" and were "irresponsible," she claimed.

Wrong again:

THE WHOLE THING, ON THE PART OF DEMOCRATIC SORE LOSERS AND ON THE PART OF CONGRESSMEN IN THE GOP WHO WANTED TO "DUMP TRUMP" IS ALL ABOUT THE STARK FEAR THAT THOSE EMAILS RELEASED ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT WILL BE RELEASED.

OBAMA KNEW ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF RUSSIA AND CHINA AND ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTED TO HACKING INTO U.S. SYSTEMS.
IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS AND CHINA HAS BEEN CAUGHT RED-HANDED MORE THAN ONCE.

IT'S A FLAW IN OUR SECURITY, A FAILURE TO PROTECT OUR DATA AND YET OBAMA KEPT IT QUIET FOR MONTHS...CERTAIN CLINTON WOULD WIN.

ONLY AFTER SHE LOST DID THE RUSSIANS BECOME A POINT OF CONCERN BECAUSE IT'S A WAY TO STOP TRUMP AT THE LAST POSSIBLE MOMENT BEFORE OBAMA LEAVES OFFICE.

Why the Obama administration didn't respond earlier to Russian hacks

Obama administration officials dispute that the internal debate was slowed by anything other than the deliberate work of law enforcement and intelligence agencies. They say that the administration had to let the investigation take its course before making a policy response.
CNN discussions with multiple administration, law enforcement and intelligence officials tell a different story.

By July, law enforcement and intelligence agencies were sure that Russian intelligence hackers had breached the Democratic National Committee.

Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" that the Obama administration didn't act soon enough.
"I do think it was a mistake," he said. "I think it was a mistake earlier frankly not to react more forcefully when North Korea hacked us. I think those kind of -- that lack of deterrence invited the Russians to meddle and consider they could do this with impunity."

IT WAS NO "MISTAKE". IT WAS A CHESS MOVE...HELD IN RESERVE IN CASE, JUST IN CASE, TRUMP WON.

IT'S AN ATTEMPT AT "CHECKMATE" IN A LONG, UGLY, CROOKED GAME OF CHESS.

WE, THE PEOPLE, HAVE NO MOVES IN THIS HATEFUL GAME.

WE CAN NEVER AGAIN HOPE FOR A SANE OR LEGAL ELECTION IN AMERICA.

EVERY BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN COMPLICIT IN THIS TWISTED TALE.

WE ARE FIGHTING AGAINST ALL THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT TO MAKE OUR VOTES COUNT. 

OUR VOTES DON'T COUNT.

NOW WHAT?

NOW WHAT, AMERICA?

USING RUSSIA TO GET RID OF TRUMP

.
I THOUGHT I'D SEEN IT ALL IN MY 7 DECADES ON THIS PLANET BUT I HAVE NEVER SEEN THE LIKES OF THE LATEST FROM THE 'RED LIGHT DISTRICT' WE CALL WASHINGTON, D.C.

EVEN THOUGH "EXPERTS" AT STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS AND AT LEAST ONE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) 'WHISTLEBLOWER' HAVE STATED THAT THE HACK OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (DNC) PROBABLY CAME FROM INSIDE THE NSA, OBAMA'S RECENT DEMAND FOR A 'DEEP-DIVING INVESTIGATION' HAS CAUSED SOME OF THE ELECTORS TO DEMAND A BRIEFING TO PROVE HOW MUCH THE VOTE WAS AFFECTED BY THE DNC'S OWN SHAMEFUL INTERNAL EMAILS.

IF THE ELECTORS SEE THAT THE LEAKS "UNDULY INFLUENCED AMERICAN VOTERS" THEN SEVERAL HAVE VOWED TO "DO THE RIGHT THING" AND REFUSE TO CAST THEIR VOTES FOR TRUMP.
A TEXAS ELECTOR HAS ALREADY RESIGNED, SIX HAVE PUBLICLY STATED THEY WILL NOT VOTE AS THEIR STATE MANDATES, AND OTHERS ARE TEETERING ON BECOMING "FAITHLESS ELECTORS".

IT WOULD TAKE ONLY 38 ELECTORS BAILING OUT ON TRUMP TO POSSIBLY MAKE CLINTON THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THIS ASYLUM WE CALL AMERICA.

BUT WHY WOULD THE NSA HAND WIKILEAKS THOSE EMAILS?
BECAUSE THE DEMS, AND HILLARY IN PARTICULAR, PISSED SOMEONE OFF THERE?
REVENGE?

BECAUSE 'SOMEBODY' STOPPED THE FBI INVESTIGATION INTO HILLARY'S EMAILS AGAIN, AFTER THE SEX SCANDAL THING BY HER CLOSEST FRIEND'S HUSBAND, AND MAYBE SOMEBODY IN OUR OWN GOVERNMENT WAS PISSED OFF OR SCARED ABOUT THAT?
WE CAN HOPE SO.

TAKING A BREAK FROM ISRAEL-BASHING, EVEN THE NEW YORK TIMES WROTE,
"...the leaked cache also included thousands of emails exchanged by Democratic officials and party fund-raisers, revealing in rarely seen detail the elaborate, ingratiating and often bluntly transactional exchanges necessary to harvest hundreds of millions of dollars from the party’s wealthy donor class.

The emails capture a world where seating charts are arranged with dollar totals in mind, where a White House celebration of gay pride is a thinly disguised occasion for rewarding wealthy donors and where physical proximity to the president is the most precious of currencies.

Some messages suggest efforts by donors to gain access to prominent Democratic officials on behalf of clients. In May, Lester Coney, an executive at a Chicago-based financial services firm, emailed a party finance staff member seeking a contact with “clout within the administration.” Mr. Coney appeared to be referring to Gov. Mark Dayton, the governor of Minnesota.

“I have a very importance client/friend needed access with someone within the administration,” Mr. Coney wrote. “So I promise him I would investigate.”

YES, IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY...

As is common in national politics, Democratic staff members kept detailed track of every dollar contributed by targeted donors, aiming to get each of the wealthiest givers to “max out,” or contribute the maximum legal amount to each party account. The biggest national donors were the subject of entire dossiers, as fund-raisers tried to gauge their interests, annoyances and passions.

“Jon has an off and on again relationship with the DNC. He does not like DWS and feels we don’t invite him to enough things,” read one memo, about Jon Stryker, a prominent gay donor and heir to a medical supply fortune, referring to the committee’s chairwoman, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

DON'T ALL AMERICANS CARE ABOUT WHAT WAS REVEALED IN THOSE EMAILS?
SHOULDN'T WE BE DELIGHTED THAT SOMEONE, ANYONE WAS WILLING TO EXPOSE THINGS LIKE THIS FOR US?
SHOULD IT MATTER WHICH PARTY WAS HACKED, OR SHOULD IT MATTER MORE THAT WE AMERICANS CAN NOW SEE WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH WHEN WE SIGN UP TO SUPPORT EITHER PARTY?

WHY ISN'T MAINSTREAM MEDIA INTERVIEWING THE MAN WHO HELPED CREATE THE NSA EMAIL "SURVEILLANCE" DATABASE?
HE SAYS THE HACKING AND SUBSEQUENT LEAKS WAS AN INSIDE JOB.

"Former NSA official William Binney, an architect of the agency's surveillance program, says that it is more likely that a disgruntled member of the U.S. intelligence community leaked the emails.

Binney also revealed some information related to the Clinton's highly controversial private email server: the NSA has a database that likely has all of Clinton’s deleted emails, and the FBI could access them if it wanted to.

He explained that the agency has access to "sophisticated, searchable databases" to track down terrorists, which essentially means that they can track everyone's emails.

That means that not only do they have access to Clinton's emails - deleted or not - but they could find out who hacked and leaked the DNC emails, if they actually wanted to.

"All of that is available in the network log," Binney said. "All they'd have to do is go in the network log and see who was accessing it. The IP addresses and all the MAC numbers coming in tell you the devices and where they are in the world."


DO YOU BELIEVE IN UNICORNS?

"You have to believe in unicorns," former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee said of the possibility that Russians or other entities directly changed election results.

He said he was "ashamed" for the Democratic Party and the mainstream press:

"Eight weeks ago it was terrible that [President-elect] Donald Trump was saying something [about rigged elections]," he said, "Exposure of the DNC [showed] that [the primary] was rigged toward Hillary Clinton and against Bernie Sanders."

[THE LEAKED DNC EMAILS PROVE TRUMP WAS RIGHT!]

Huckabee said Clinton lost the election because of her exposed "contempt" for the working class.

[AND CONTEMPT FOR PEOPLE OF COLOR, FOR THE SECRET SERVICE AND THE MILITARY, EVERYBODY SHE DOESN'T CONSIDER IN HER "CLASS"?
THEN AGAIN, IS TRUMP ANY BETTER? WAS ROMNEY? NOPE.]

From a man I consider to be the author of two of the best exposés on how our government really operates
[See: 'The Constitution in Exile' and 'Suicide Pact'] :

"Judge Andrew Napolitano reacted to former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's support for 2016 Electoral College electors to receive an intelligence briefing prior to casting their official vote for president on December 19.

Napolitano said he shares Trump's view that Podesta's and select electors' concerns about Russian hacking of the election are not based in fact, but in an "emotional unwillingness to accept the outcome of the election."

"The law does not guarantee a perfect election, [it] guarantees a fair election," he said.

He noted that Russia's alleged hacking and leaking of Podesta's emails-- many of which involved Clinton allies and aides-- would not be an example of the Kremlin hacking the actual vote totals in each state.
Instead, such actions might have swayed voter's support for or against a certain candidate, he said."

REPEAT: NOBODY HACKED INTO VOTER MACHINES THIS PAST ELECTION.

AS EDWARD SNOWDEN HAS REPEATEDLY STATED, THE NSA CAN TELL EXACTLY WHERE 'HACKS' COME FROM, SO WHERE'S THE PROOF THIS WAS PULLED OFF BY RUSSIA?

Alex McGeorge, head of threat intelligence at the Miami-based cybersecurity firm Immunity Inc.,
"It is actually very reasonable to conclude that the NSA does know the answer to this question without any real ambiguity."

SO, PUBLISH THE PROOF FOR AMERICA TO SEE!

WHY WOULDN'T THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDE THE ABSOLUTE PROOF AND ALSO ADMIT THAT VOTERS THEMSELVES DECIDED WHOM TO VOTE FOR?

THAT DNC EMAILS WERE LEAKED IS A GIVEN, BUT THERE WAS NO TAMPERING WITH VOTER MACHINES AS ALL STATES HAVE NOW PROVEN.

AMERICANS VOTED, THE END.

YES, CLINTON TOOK THE POPULAR VOTE, BUT SO DID AL GORE AND OTHERS WHO LOST BY ELECTORAL VOTES.

WE HAVE FOUR LONG YEARS TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM IF WE AGREE THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.
WE'VE HAD OVER 200 YEARS TO FIX IT, ACTUALLY, AND HAVE LET IT STAND, ALLOWED A SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS, WHOSE NAMES MOST OF US DON'T KNOW, TO DECIDE WHO WILL BE PRESIDENT.

IF WE DIDN'T AGREE WITH THAT, WE, THE PEOPLE, WOULD HAVE CHANGED IT, YES?

BE HONEST, AMERICA... WE DESERVED MUCH BETTER THAN THE TWO MAJOR CANDIDATES WE HAD RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT THIS YEAR.

WHILE TRUMP IS A TWO-BIT CROOK, CLINTON (BOTH CLINTONS) ARE CROOKS ON A GRAND SCALE, IN MY OPINION.
A CURSORY LOOK AT THEIR HISTORY PROVES THEIR 'TENDENCIES'.

I DON'T WANT EITHER TRUMP OR CLINTON IN THE OVAL OFFICE.
NEITHER OF THEM ARE FIT TO FEED SWINE, AS ONE FRIEND SAID.
BUT THE ELECTION WAS HELD, THE VOTES ARE IN AND WE NEED TO STOP THIS LUNACY AND CONCENTRATE ON THE HIGHER ISSUES...

WILL EITHER TRUMP OR CLINTON EVEN WANT TO ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUES?
EACH MADE A THOUSAND EMPTY CAMPAIGN PROMISES THAT BOTH KNOW THEY COULD NEVER KEEP AND WOULDN'T IF THEY HAD THE REAL POWER TO.


AMERICA IS IN REAL TROUBLE, IN ALMOST EVERY WAY THAT A NATION CAN BE IN TROUBLE.

IT TOOK ALL THREE BRANCHES OF OUR GOVERNMENT TO CREATE THIS MESS, WITH OUR AIDING AND ABETTING THEM TO MAKE A MESS OF IT ALL.

IT MAY BOIL DOWN TO A FIGHT IN CONGRESS AND IN THE SUPREME COURT.

"On January 6, senators and representatives will gather in joint session in the House chamber to receive the votes of the states, with the vice president presiding (that’s why Richard Nixon, Hubert Humphrey, and Al Gore all presided over the ceremony that declared them the losers).

They meet to decide whether the votes of each state were “regularly given.”

If one senator and one House member objects in writing to the announced vote, the two houses retire to their respective chambers to debate the issue.

Is there any basis to believe that a GOP-controlled House and Senate would accept the vote of a defecting elector as “regularly given”?

If this process somehow left Trump short of 270 votes, the decision would then move to the House of Representatives. In that body, each state—not each representative—would have one vote (to be determined by a majority of the delegation). In a remarkably undemocratic process, Wyoming’s one member would have the same power as the 53 from California. To become president, a candidate would need a majority of state delegations, or 26. In the new House, Republicans will hold a majority in 30-plus delegations.

Do the math."

WE HAVE FOUR MORE YEARS TO CONSIDER HOW BADLY WE SCREWED-UP THIS TIME.

WE HAVE FOUR MORE YEARS TO EITHER WATCH IN SILENCE AS OUR NATION SINKS LOWER AND LOWER, OR WE CAN STAND UP AND BE THE "BOSS" AND DEMAND THAT CONGRESS VOTES THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, NOT THE WILL OF THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, THEIR BENEFACTORS.

WE HAVE ONE MORE CHANCE TO RAISE OUR VOICES AND MAKE THE TOP DOGS TAKE NOTICE.
WILL WE?

YOU SEE, WHEN YOU FACE THE FACTS, IT IS US, IT''S "COMMON MAN" WHO CONTROLS THE RUDDER ON THIS OLD SHIP OF STATE, AND WE CAN STEER ONCE MORE TOWARD THE ROCKS OR WE CAN HEAD HER OUT TO A FINE, OPEN SEA AND SAVE HER.

IT'S UP TO US.

IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

STOP THE LUNACY...SAVE OUR NATION!

FUKUSHIMA RADIATION ENTERS AMERICAN FOOD CHAIN. NO WORRIES SAYS WOODS HOLE. THE LIES CONTINUE.

THE VIDEOS ABOVE AND BELOW DEMONSTRATE THE CURRENTS THAT BRING RADIATION FROM JAPAN TO THE U.S. AND ARE EXPLANATORY OF THE TEXT THAT BEGINS AT *** BELOW.

[THE TEA ROOM GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGES THE EFFORTS AND DOCUMENTATIONS FROM 'WASHINGTON'S BLOG' FOR MUCH OF THE FOLLOWING DATA. SEE THEIR INCREDIBLE ARTICLES <HERE> AND  <HERE>.]
OFFERED AS "RESULTS OF A RECENT STUDY" IN YESTERDAY'S "NEWS" WAS ANOTHER HELPING OF GARBAGE FROM WOODS HOLE SCIENTISTS.

FUKUSHIMA RADIATION, THEY STATED,  WAS DETECTED AT INCREASED LEVELS OFF OUR WEST COAST AND INLAND SALMON WAS CONTAMINATED BY THE CESIUM-134 THAT COMES ONLY FROM THE FUKUSHIMA MELT-DOWNS, BUT WOODS HOLE "SCIENTISTS" SAY IT'S NOTHING TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT?

FIRST, THIS "NEWS" ISN'T NEWS AS THIS "RECENT REPORT" IS ABOUT SAMPLES GATHERED LAST WINTER BY THE PUPPETS AT WOODS HOLE.

LAST WINTER!

"The Oregon samples, marking the first time cesium-134 has been detected on U.S. shores, were taken in January and February of 2016 and later analyzed. They each measured 0.3 becquerels per cubic meter of cesium-134.

THAT ONE SALMON THEY "REPORTED" AS CONTAMINATED WAS FROM 2015!
2015!

"Last month, the group reported that a single sockeye salmon, sampled from Okanagan Lake in the summer of 2015, had tested positive for cesium-134."

ARE WE TO THINK THAT THAT WAS THE ONLY SALMON IN THAT LAKE THAT WAS CONTAMINATED, OR THAT THE READING ON THAT SALMON WAS AS HIGH AS PERHAPS OTHER SALMON IN THAT SAME LAKE?

WHAT ABOUT OTHER FISH IN OTHER LAKES, RIVERS, STREAMS IN THAT REGION?


The OUTDATED, LAST YEAR'S findings were published in the Statesman Journal.

WHAT ARE THE LEVELS TODAY?

MAYBE WE'LL FIND OUT NEXT YEAR?

IT DOESN'T TAKE A SOLID YEAR TO ANALYZE RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION IN A LIVING ORGANISM!


WHAT NO ONE AT OLD WOODS HOLE HAS ADDRESSED IS THAT THEIR "LOW LEVELS", THEIR CALMING STATEMENTS THAT WE HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT NEVER, NEVER INCLUDE WHAT HAPPENS TO ANY LIFE FORM THAT HAS TO BE SUBMERGED IN THAT "LOW LEVEL" RADIOACTIVE CESSPOOL 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR, WITH NO WAY OUT.

LOW LEVELS ARE LETHAL WHEN ONE IS EXPOSED TO 'LOW LEVELS' AGAIN AND AGAIN.

OUR MILITARY IS WARNED OF THOSE MULTIPLE "LOW-LEVEL" RISKS!


"A military briefing written by the U.S. Army for commanders in Iraq states:
Hazards from low level radiation are long-term, not acute effects… Every exposure increases risk of cancer."

EVERY EXPOSURE...WHAT ABOUT EXPOSURE ALL DAY, EVERY DAY?

AND THE SAME WARNING CAN BE FOUND IN OTHER MILITARY DOCUMENTS:

The briefing states that doses are cumulative, citing the following military studies and reports:

ACE Directive 80-63, ACE Policy for Defensive Measures against Low Level Radiological Hazards during Military Operations, 2 AUG 96

AR 11-9, The Army Radiation Program, 28 MAY 99

FM 4-02.283, Treatment of Nuclear and Radiological Casualties, 20 DEC 01

JP 3-11, Joint Doctrine for Operations in NBC Environments, 11 JUL 00

NATO STANAG 2473, Command Guidance on Low Level Radiation Exposure in Military Operations, 3 MAY 00

Many studies have shown that repeated exposures to low levels of ionizing radiation from CT scans and x-rays can cause cancer. See this, this, this, this and this....just for starters, with some of those being peer-reviewed studies, BTW.

SO, DAMN YOU TO A RADIOACTIVE BLAZING HOT HELL, WOODS HOLE!
IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE SOLD OUT!

YOU APPEAR TO HAVE PUT THE BIG NUKE INDUSTRY ABOVE HUMAN LIVES AND YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T GIVE TWO CENTS ABOUT MARINE LIFE OR ANY LIFE ON THIS PLANET WHEN YOU DON'T WARN ABOUT THE VERY REAL DANGER OF LOW LEVEL RADIATION AND BIOACCUMULATION!

YOU ISSUE "RESULTS" AFTER OVER A YEAR, SHOWING US THAT FOR OVER A YEAR NOW WE'VE HAD FUKUSHIMA RADIATION FOR BREAKFAST, LUNCH AND DINNER OFF OUR WEST COAST, AND ELSEWHERE BY NOW, BUT YOU WON'T RAISE ONE BIT OF ALARM AND YOU DENY US THE RIGHT TO BE INFORMED?

MAYBE A "DON'T EAT FROM THE PACIFIC OCEAN, WEST COAST LAKES OR RIVERS"?
MAYBE A "FUKUSHIMA RADIATION HAS ENTERED THE AMERICAN FOOD CHAIN"?

DAMN YOU!

IT'S LIKE THE DIME A DOZEN "SCIENTISTS" AT WOODS HOLE DON'T KNOW ABOUT BIOACCUMULATION, ABOUT HOW RADIATION BUILDS AS IT GOES THROUGH THE FOOD CHAIN, AND IT IS IN OUR FOOD CHAIN, BUT NOT JUST IN RIVER SALMON.

WHAT WOODS HOLE ALSO DOES NOT EVER ADDRESS IS WHAT IT MEANS FOR AN ORGANISM, LIKE THAT ONE LONE SALMON THEY "TESTED", TO HAVE SUCH A "LOW LEVEL" OF RADIATION INSIDE, YES, INSIDE ITS BODY.

WHAT DOES RADIATION DO INSIDE THE BODY OF A LIVING THING?

REMEMBER THIS?

"Ionizing radiation—the kind that minerals, atom bombs and nuclear reactors emit—does one main thing to the human body: it weakens and breaks up DNA, either damaging cells enough to kill them or causing them to mutate in ways that may eventually lead to cancer."

In a typical year, a person might receive a total dose of two or three millisieverts from things like ambient radioactivity, plane flights and medical procedures. In the U.S. the annual exposure limit for nuclear plant workers is 0.05 sieverts per year.

At or below these levels, the enzymes that repair DNA keep up with damage enough to keep the risk of cancer low.
Above them, the body's systems of repair can't keep pace. 100 millisieverts a year is the threshold above which cancer risk starts to increase, according to the World Nuclear Association.

According to reports, radiation levels have fluctuated at Fukushima, rising at one reading to 400 millisieverts per hour.
At that level, Dedon says, seven minutes would bring you to the U.S. yearly limit.
Over an hour could be a lethal dose."

THAT WAS WRITTEN MARCH 16, 2011, BY POPULAR SCIENCE.

SUCH A WARNING WAS REPEATED IN MAJOR MEDIA BACK THEN, WHEN WE HAD SOME HONESTY IN REPORTING THOSE FIRST FEW DAYS AS THE HORROR OF WHAT HAD JUST HAPPENED SUNK IN.

"Long-term exposure to ionizing radiation, even at doses too low to produce any symptoms of radiation sickness, can induce genetic mutations and cancer.

Normally, cells are controlled by the chemical structure of DNA molecules. But when radiation deposits enough energy to disrupt molecular bonds, strands of DNA are broken. While most repair properly, around a quarter don't—and so begins a long, slow process which results in an increased rate of mutations in future generations of cells. The probability of cancer increases with effective radiation dose—but, cruelly, the severity of the cancer is independent of the dose. Exposure is what counts, and it doesn't matter if the radiation level was high or low.

Radiation can be concentrated many times in the food chain and any consumption adds to the cumulative risk of cancer and other diseases.

The National Council on Radiation Protection says, “… every increment of radiation exposure produces an incremen­tal increase in the risk of cancer.” The Environmental Protection Agency says, “… any exposure to radiation poses some risk, i.e. there is no level below which we can say an exposure poses no risk.”

The Department of Energy says about “low levels of radiation” that “… the major effect is a very slight increase in cancer risk.”

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says, “any amount of radiation may pose some risk for causing cancer … any increase in dose, no matter how small, results in an incremental increase in risk.”

The National Academy of Sciences, in its “Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII,” says, “… it is unlikely that a threshold exists for the induction of cancers ….” 

We've known about bioaccumulation and biomagnification for a long time.

IN 1957, DR. ALBERT SCHWEITZER SPOKE TO THE WORLD ABOUT THE DANGERS OF NUCLEAR POWER. 

BELOW IS PART OF WHAT HE SAID AND ARE FACTS THAT WE ARE SELDOM TOLD BY THE LIKES OF WOODS HOLE'S "SCIENTISTS":

"Since radioactive rays of sufficient amount and strength have harmful effects on the human body, it must be considered whether the radiation resulting from the hydrogen explosions that have already taken place represents a danger which would increase with new explosions.

Wherever radioactive rainwater is found the soil is also radioactive – and in a higher degree. The soil is made radioactive not only by the downpour, but also from radioactive dust falling on it. And with the soil the vegetation will also have become radioactive.

The radioactive elements deposited in the soil pass into the plants, where they are stored. This is of importance, for as a result of this process it may be the case that we are threatened by a considerable amount of radioactive elements.

The radioactive elements in grass, when eaten by animals whose meat is used for food, will be absorbed and stored in our bodies.

In the case of cows grazing on contaminated soil, the absorption is affected when we drink their milk. In that way, small children run an especially dangerous risk of absorbing radioactive elements.


When we eat contaminated cheese and fruits the radioactive elements stored in them are transferred to us.

What this storing of radioactive material implies is clearly demonstrated by the observations made when, on one occasion, the radioactivity of the Columbia River in North America was analyzed.

The radioactivity was caused by the atomic plants at Hanford, which produce plutonium for atomic bombs and which empty their waste water into the river.

The radioactivity of the river water was insignificant. But the radioactivity of the river plankton was 2,000 times higher, that of the ducks eating plankton 40,000 times higher, that of the fish 15,000 times higher.

In young swallows fed on insects caught by their parents in the river the radioactivity was 500,000 times higher, and in the egg yolks of water birds more than 1,000,000 times higher.

From official and unofficial sources we have been assured, time and time again, that the increase in radioactivity of the air does not exceed the amount which the human body can tolerate without any harmful effects.

This is just evading the issue.

Even if we are not directly affected by the radioactive material in the air, we are indirectly affected through that which has fallen down, is falling down, and will fall down.

We are absorbing this through radioactive drinking water and through animal and vegetable foodstuffs, to the same extent as radioactive elements are stored in the vegetation of the region in which we live. Unfortunately for us, nature hoards what is falling down from the air."

[PLEASE, PLEASE DO READ ALL OF THAT AMAZING SPEECH AT https://www.wagingpeace.org/a-declaration-of-conscience/  BECAUSE IT IS THE TRUTH AND IT IS MOST IMPORTANT.]


In an experiment in the early 1980s, Scott Fowler, who helped pioneer marine radioecology for more than 30 years at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Marine Environment Laboratories, demonstrated vast differences in how much plutonium was absorbed from seawater by marine life across a spectrum of taxonomic groups.

Phytoplankton accumulated roughly 10 times as much plutonium as microzooplankton, which took up 100 times more than clams.

Octopi and crabs took up about half as much plutonium as clams, but about 100 times more than bottom-dwelling fish.

In one experiment measuring uptake of americium, worms exposed to contaminated sediments took up significantly more of the radioisotope than clams did. But both worms and clams took up much more of the radioisotopes from Pacific sediments, which contain relatively high amounts of silica minerals, than they did from Atlantic sediments, which contain more carbon minerals. "

TRANSLATING FOR WOODS HOLE: THE LOWEST OF THE LOW LEVELS OF RADIATION CAN KILL AND HAS KILLED PEOPLE, ANIMALS AND PLANTS,  HAS DESTROYED LIFE.
IT HAS ENTERED OUR FOOD CHAIN.

Japan Times reported:
"Protracted exposure to low-level radiation is associated with a significant increase in the risk of leukemia, according to a long-term study published Thursday in a U.S. research journal.

The study released in the monthly Environmental Health Perspectives was based on a 20-year survey of around 110,000 workers who engaged in cleanup work related to the Chernobyl nuclear plant disaster in 1986.

Scientists from the University of California, San Francisco, the U.S. National Cancer Institute and the National Research Center for Radiation Medicine in Ukraine were among those who participated in the research."

EVEN THE CURSED W.H.O. ISSUED WARNING!

World Health Organization (WHO): Prolonged Exposure to Even LOW Level Radiation Increases the Risk of Cancer

October 28, 2015

"A major new study coordinated by World Health Organization’s cancer division – the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) – finds that even low-level radiation increases the risk of cancer, if exposure occurs over time.

The IARC announced last week:

New results from a study coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization, show that protracted exposure to low doses of ionizing radiation increases the risk of death from solid cancers. The results, published today in The BMJ [the prestigious British Medical Journal], are based on the most powerful study to date and provide direct evidence about cancer risks after protracted exposures to low-dose ionizing radiation.

“The present study demonstrates a significant association between increasing radiation dose and risk of all solid cancers,” says IARC researcher Dr Ausrele Kesminiene, a study co-author.

“No matter whether people are exposed to protracted low doses or to high and acute doses, the observed association between dose and solid cancer risk is similar per unit of radiation dose.”

PER UNIT, WOODS HOLE!

HOW MANY OF THOSE OREGON RIVER SALMON WILL YOU FEED YOUR KIDS?
HOW MANY WILL YOU EAT?
WILL THE GUY IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND HIS FAMILY BE DINING ON "WILD CAUGHT PACIFIC SALMON"?
As the head of a Tokyo-area medical clinic – Dr. Junro Fuse, Internist and head of Kosugi Medical Clinic – said:

"Risk from internal exposure is 200-600 times greater than risk from external exposure."

The Asia Pacific Journal recently noted that the studies used to assess radiation risk fail to account for internal exposure: “These studies are [only] concerned with external exposure.”

HOW IS YOUR READING COMPREHENSION, WOODS HOLE?
DO YOU NEED TRANSLATION OR HELP WITH THE BIG WORDS?

TALK TO US ABOUT INTERNAL EXPOSURE!
NEED SOME PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES TO SHOW YOU WHAT INTERNAL EXPOSURE DOES?

See this, this, this and this.

"Even the very lowest levels of radiation are harmful to life, scientists have concluded in the Cambridge Philosophical Society’s journal Biological Reviews.
Reporting the results of a wide-ranging analysis of 46 peer-reviewed studies published over the past 40 years, researchers from the University of South Carolina and the University of Paris-Sud found that variation in low-level, natural background radiation was found to have small, but highly statistically significant, negative effects on DNA as well as several measures of health.

The review is a meta-analysis of studies of locations around the globe …. “Pooling across multiple studies, in multiple areas, and in a rigorous statistical manner provides a tool to really get at these questions about low-level radiation.”

Their results, which are consistent with the “linear-no-threshold” model for radiation effects, will better inform the debate about exposure risks. “With the levels of contamination that we have seen as a result of nuclear power plants, especially in the past, and even as a result of Chernobyl and Fukushima and related accidents, there’s an attempt in the industry to downplay the doses that the populations are getting, because maybe it’s only one or two times beyond what is thought to be the natural background level,” he said. “But they’re assuming the natural background levels are fine.”

“Consuming food containing radionuclides is particularly dangerous.
If an individual ingests or inhales a radioactive particle, it continues to irradiate the body as long as it remains radioactive and stays in the body,”said Alan H. Lockwood, MD, a member of the Board of Physicians for Social Responsibility.

IN THAT LUDICROUS, MEANINGLESS WOODS HOLE "REPORT" THE BOY SCIENTISTS "OBSERVED":

"The plume is moving toward the coast at roughly twice the speed of a garden snail. Radiation levels have not yet peaked."

LET'S LOOK AT HOW FAST THAT PACIFIC GYRE REALLY MOVES, SHALL WE?

There are five major ocean-wide gyres—the North Atlantic, South Atlantic, North Pacific, South Pacific, and Indian Ocean gyres.

The Kuroshio Current in the North Pacific is 50-75 km across and can flow at speeds of up to 3-4 km per hour (1 METER PER SECOND OR 1 m/s), but can be as fast as 7 km per hour ( 2 m/s).

"The relatively narrow, jet-like currents of the Gulf Stream system and the Kuroshio off Japan are the largest currents in the ocean. They have speeds between 40 and 120 km/day (25 to 75 mi/day or 0.4–1.3 m/s)."
[SOURCE: Gross, M G. Oceanography. 6th ed. Columbus: Merrill, 1990: 74-75.]

COMPARE THAT TO THE SPEED OF A GARDEN SNAIL:
Garden snail, 0.03 mph or 0.013 m/s
[SOURCE: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/AngieYee.shtml]


SO THAT CURRENT IS FLOWING AT ABOUT 100 TIMES THE SPEED OF YOUR SNAIL, WOODS HOLE.
(SNAIL = 0.013 M/S VERSUS CURRENT AT 1.3 M/S)
DID YOU FLUNK MATH?

BUT TAKING THAT LOWEST NUMBER, 25 mph PER DAY, IT WOULD TAKE SURFACE WATER JUST 205 DAYS TO ARRIVE IN SAN FRANCISCO FROM JAPAN.
(5,136 MILES)
HOW FAR WOULD YOUR SNAIL HAVE TRAVELED IN 24 HOURS/ONE DAY?
0.72 MILES PER DAY, BOYS.
IT WOULD TAKE THE SNAIL 7,133 DAYS TO ARRIVE FROM JAPAN.
(5,136 MILES AT LESS THAN 3/4 MILE PER DAY.)  

AND WHAT BLOODY DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE HOW LONG IT TAKES IT TO GET HERE WHEN IT WILL BE INCOMING FOR DECADES AND WILL ARRIVE EVERY DAY UNTIL AFTER THE LEAKS ARE ALL STOPPED...WHICH MAY BE NEVER!


THE FIRST RELEASED "STUDY" ON HOW QUICKLY FUKU RADIATION ARRIVED OFF OUR WEST COAST CLEARLY STATED THAT CESIUM-134 WAS 'OUT THERE' IN 2012...BUT IN "LOW LEVELS".

LOW LEVELS?
COMPARED TO NO LEVEL OF CESIUM-134 IN 2009, AREN'T LOW LEVELS ACTUALLY HIGH?


*** Flowing easterly from the island of Honshu, Japan, the North Pacific Current (Drift) covers over 20° of longitude.
[SEE VIDEOS AT TOP OF THIS BLOG ENTRY.]

As the NPC approaches the Northwestern coast of North America it divides into two currents the Alaska and the California currents.

The Gulf of Alaska and the California Current receive different volumes and flows of WARM water from the North Pacific Current. This division of water flow is known as bifurcation The Gulf of Alaska receives about 60% of the water from the NPC and the California Current receives approximately the other 40% of the NPC water. These volumes do fluctuate."

AS WE CAN SEE, TOP SPEED OF THE NORTH PACIFIC GYRE CAN BE THREE TIMES THE LOWEST SPEED. IT DEPENDS ON WINDS, WATER TEMPERATURES, SALINITY, ETC.
WHEN DID WE START SEEING THOSE MASS DIE-OFFS OF EVERYTHING FROM KELP TO WHALES?
2011, YES?
YES! 2011, ESPECIALLY IN THE ARCTIC.

BUT THE WOODS HOLE "REPORT" ALSO LEFT OUT THREE OTHER WAYS WE'RE GETTING THAT FUKU RADIATION: RAIN, WIND, INGESTION.

FUKUSHIMA RADIATION REACHED HAWAII IN A WEEK.
IT DID NOT ARRIVE BY SEA!

June 10, 2016  
"It took only one week for radionuclides to infiltrate the atmosphere above the Hawaiian Islands after they were released from damaged reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant following the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami March 11, 2011.

By early April of that year, researchers from the University of Hawaii at Manoa began collecting ocean water and sediments to provide a baseline for cesium levels.

Establishing a baseline was critical, as data from government-monitored cesium tests from the 1960s through the early 1980s were the most recent available.

“The Department of Health monitored precipitation and the atmosphere and also milk,” Henrietta Dulai, associate professor in the Marine and Environmental Geology Division of the UH-Manoa Department of Geology and Geophysics said. “They found positive (cesium) hits in all of these.”

A correlation was established between areas of higher rainfall and higher cesium levels in the soil. At higher elevations, more rainfall occurred and more cesium was absorbed by the soil. This is what led to elevated cesium levels detected in milk from grazing cattle.

It turned out that the topography of the islands captured the clouds and to a large extent spared the oceans from excess radioactivity, as cesium deposits from rainfall tended to accumulate on land. "

WHAT SORT OF ACCUMULATION HAS AMERICA HAD "ON LAND" ON OUR WEST COAST?

OH, WOODS HOLE HASN'T BEEN MEASURING THAT, NOR HAS ANY GOVERNMENT AGENCY SEEN FIT TO MOUNT A STUDY TO DETERMINE THAT!

WHY DIDN'T KENNY B AND HIS PAL MENTION THE JAPANESE STUDY ON EFFECTS OF FUKU RADIATION ON WILDLIFE?

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN RADIATION IS INGESTED?
IT WAS A PEER-REVIEWED STUDY, QUITE VALID.

"Researchers from the University of Rukyus, Okinawa, Japan, chose contaminated leaves from six areas around the power plant, from 36 miles away and from over 1,000 miles away. They fed these leaves to pale blue grass butterflies common in the area.

The researchers found that after the butterflies ate the contaminated leaves, the creatures were negatively impacted by radiation. Those that ate leaves from closer to the Fukushima facility were seriously impacted with health issues that ranged from severe abnormalities, illness and even death. However, butterflies that ate leaves from further away still had radiation doses that caused some issues, such as oddly shaped wings.

More severe abnormalities 6 months after the accident....

"Wildlife has probably been damaged even at relatively low doses of radiation, and our research showed that sensitivity varies among individuals within a species," says Professor Joji Otaki, one of the researchers.

The second part of the study looked at the offspring of the butterflies that ingested contaminated leaves. These consisted of two groups: the ones eating contaminated food and the ones eating uncontaminated food.

The results showed that those eating contaminated leaves suffered from even greater negative effects than did their parents.

However, those eating uncontaminated leaves (FROM THE SAME PARENTS) were healthier, with only smaller wings as a side effect.

"Our study demonstrated that eating contaminated foods could cause serious negative effects on organisms," says Otoki.
"Such negative effects may be passed down the generations.
On the bright side, eating non-contaminated food improves the negative effects, even in the next generation."

In an earlier study scientists also focused on feeding butterflies radiation-contaminated leaves. This recent study, however, used leaves with lower doses of radiation, although the radiation levels still often proved lethal.

Currently, Fukushima's most pressing concern is radioactive water. Officials estimate that it will take decades before the cleanup is complete."

LET'S TALK FISH...

The variability in fish has numerous confounding factors -- the fishes' position in the food chain, where they live in the water column and their migratory patterns, to name a few.

Additionally, there is a hypothesis that sediments have delayed the dispersal of the radioactive substances.
Benthic fish, those at the bottom of the ocean, are more exposed to contaminated sediments and receive higher dose rates than pelagic fish living in the higher levels of the water column.

The long-term fate of the contamination is still unknown, and information about how much radiation is stored in sediments and how much is still leaking from delayed sources, such as groundwater, has yet to be quantified.

[SOURCE: Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. ordi Vives i Batlle. Impact of the Fukushima accident on marine biota, five years later. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2016; 12 (4): 654 DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1825]

AND LET'S TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT FUKU RADIATION REACHED ARCTIC SEA ICE IN UNDER TWO WEEKS AND WHAT WE SAW AFTER THAT...

CANCERS IN SEALS, WALRUSES, POLAR BEARS, WHALES...


EFFECTS OF RADIATION ON THE HUMAN BODY SHOWS US HOW MUCH DAMAGE THE SMALLEST AMOUNT OF RADIATION CAN DO.

BTW, WHEN READING ABOUT RADIATION, BEWARE THE MANY MEASUREMENTS THROWN AT US IN DIFFERENT ARTICLES AND STUDIES.

For equivalent dose, the unit corresponding to rads is the rem (roentgen equivalent man). If the absorbed dose is in grays then the unit for dose equivalent is sievert (Sv). Thus, 1 Sv = 100 rem.
Roughly 1 rem is the average dose received in three years of exposure to "natural/background radiation".

One sievert is at the lower end of a range of doses that are likely to cause radiation sickness.
Members of the public or workers in the nuclear industry may receive exposure to what are commonly referred to as "low" doses of radiation.

This is not precisely defined but it would include doses below 10 mSv (millisieverts) per year.

At doses below 1 Sv (100 rem), there is little likelihood of radiation sickness. However, much lower doses of 0.2 Sv (20 rem) or above increase the risk of cancer.

High radioactive doses are above 3 Gy (300 rad), which are very dangerous.

Doses above 6 Gy (600 rad) are almost always fatal, leading to death within months. Very high doses are expressed in terms of grays. Radiation above 1 Gy causes a complex of symptoms such as nausea and blood changes, known as radiation sickness.

A further weighting factor can be applied depending on the part of the body or type of tissue that is exposed to the radiation."


ALL THAT LIVE IN THE OCEANS HAVE ALL BODY PARTS EXPOSED ALL THE TIME AND ALSO INGEST FOOD THAT HAS BEEN CONTAMINATED AS WELL.

WHY AREN'T THE MONKEYS AT WOODS HOLE TELLING US ANY OF THIS?

IS IT JUST ABOUT THE MONEY?
MAYBE SO.
"Recently released report in the Nikkei Asian Review revealed that the total cost estimate of the compensation (for the Fukushima meltdowns)  is now swelling up to 21.5 trillion yen ($188 billion). This includes decommissioning expenses of 8 trillion yen, along with an additional 4 trillion yen for decontaminating the affected areas."

DECONTAMINATION COULD ONLY TAKE PLACE AFTER A NUCLEAR "ACCIDENT" HAS ENDED!

FUKUSHIMA CONTINUES!

THEY ADMIT THEY CAN'T END IT, SO THEY CAN'T DECONTAMINATE BECAUSE THAT MONSTER SITS THERE AND EMITS RADIATION ALL DAY, EVERY DAY AND TEPCO DUMPS THE CONTAMINATED, GLOW-IN-THE-DARK WATER FROM THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPON, THE DAI'ICHI POWER PLANT, INTO OUR PACIFIC OCEAN EVERY SINGLE DAY!

CONTINUING WITH THE WORTHLESS WOODS HOLE 'REPORT'...

The Statesman Journal reported Mr Cullen saying: "It appears that the plume has spread throughout this vast area from Alaska to California."

NO, THE PLUME EXTENDS FROM JAPAN TO THE ARCTIC CIRCLE AND BELOW THE BAJA PENINSULA, AND ADD HAWAII...

"As the contamination plume progresses towards our coast we expect levels closer to shore to increase over the coming year."

THE COMING YEAR?
TRY FOR THE COMING 40 TO 100 YEARS!
TEPCO HAS STATED IT CAN'T BEGIN TO STOP THE LEAKS FOR AT LEAST 40 YEARS!

ALSO, YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THIS "LATEST REPORT" IS ON SAMPLES TAKEN LAST YEAR.

SINCE LAST YEAR, HOW MUCH HAS THE DAMNED RADIATION INCREASED?
WHY NOT TELL US THAT?

HOW MUCH OF AN INCREASE MIGHT THERE HAVE BEEN ALL THIS PAST YEAR SINCE THAT SHOWED UP LAST YEAR?
THE NECESSARY STUDIES JUST HAVE NOT BEEN DONE.
"One problem in the radiation field is that little of the data on hand addresses the problem of protracted exposure. Most of the health data used to estimate the health effects of radiation exposure comes from survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings of 1945.
That was mostly a one-time exposure.

Three recent epidemiologic studies suggest that the risk from protracted exposure is no lower, and in fact may be higher, than from single exposures."


SOMETHING ELSE WE'RE SELDOM REMINDED OF:

"Most Background Radiation Didn’t Exist Before Nuclear Weapons Testing and Nuclear Reactors"
In fact, there was exactly zero background radioactive cesium or iodine before above-ground nuclear testing and nuclear accidents started.

The EPA notes (PDF) :

"Cesium-133 is the only naturally occurring isotope and is non-radioactive; all other isotopes, including cesium-137, are produced by human activity."

Similarly, iodine-131 is not a naturally occurring isotope. As the Encyclopedia Britannica notes:

The only naturally occurring isotope of iodine is stable iodine-127. An exceptionally useful radioactive isotope is iodine-131…

AND BUESSELER...OLD KENNY B. MADE LIGHT OF THE CESIUM 134 SHOWING UP IN INLAND FISH:
"...the short half-life of cesium-134 makes it harder to detect as time goes on."

NOT WHEN THAT CESIUM IS BEING DUMPED AFRESH EVERY DAY FOR THE PAST 5 1/2 YEARS, MORON!
IT'S CONSTANTLY ENTERING THE FOOD CHAIN OUT THERE
EVERY SINGLE DAY... AND IT ISN'T SLOWING DOWN!

THE LEAKS AND THE INTENTIONAL DUMPING INTO THE PACIFIC ARE NOT GOING TO STOP, KENNY BOY!

WHILE YOU HAD YOUR EQUIPMENT UP AND RUNNING WHY DIDN'T YOU TEST MORE THAN ONE OLD SALMON?

WHY DIDN'T YOU TEST ONE OF THOSE DEAD GEESE OR DUCKS FOUND INLAND OFF THE WEST COAST, OR MAYBE A FEW SAMPLES OF CALIFORNIA PRODUCE?

WHY DIDN'T YOU TEST AND REPORT LAST YEAR'S SAMPLES LAST YEAR, WOODS HOLE WONDER-BOYS?

WHY DON'T YOU STOP WORRYING ABOUT FUNDING AND REPUTATION AND ALL THAT AND JUST REPORT SOME REAL TRUTH?

WE PROMISE NOT TO "PANIC"...WE JUST WANT TO BE INFORMED.
WE JUST WANT A CHANCE TO DECIDE IF WE WANT TO RISK EATING CONTAMINATED FOODS, SWIM IN THAT OCEAN, LIVE NEAR THAT SHORE.


BUESSELER SAID HE'D SWIM IN THE PACIFIC, BUT I DEMAND HE SWIM IN IT FOR A SOLID YEAR...JUST ONE YEAR.

WE'D BURY HIM AFTER JUST A MONTH OR SO IS MY GUESS.

ONE MONTH, 24 HOURS A DAY, EVERY DAY, IN THAT "HARMLESS LOW LEVEL RADIATION"...YEAH, GO FOR IT, KENNY B!

IF YOU MANAGE TO LIVE FOR A MONTH, ENJOY THE 'BURN' AS YOU GO ON TO THE NEXT MONTH, AND THE NEXT, LIKE ALL MARINE LIFE HAS TO DO.

YOU CAN HOPE IT DOESN'T RAIN ON YOUR SWIM BECAUSE WHAT'S COMING ACROSS THE BIG POND FROM JAPAN IN THE FORM OF RAIN IS SOME OF THE MOST DEADLY STUFF WE KNOW OF, LAD.

ANOMALOUSLY HIGH LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVE POLONIUM AND IODINE FELL IN RAIN OVER THE SOUTHEAST UNITED STATES... RECORDED BY NASA AT THEIR STENNIS FACILITY AND IN THE PEARL RIVER NEAR THERE IN 2012.


HOPE THE WOODS HOLE BOYS CAN DODGE ALL THOSE VERY STRANGE "URANIUM BUCKY-BALLS"REPORTED IN THAT STUDY ON  PUB-MED.

THEY TRAVEL VERY FAST ON THE SURFACE OF THE WATER AND WILL PUNCH RIGHT THROUGH YOU.
DUCK!


WHAT WOODS HOLE AND ALL OTHERS WHO DARE OFFER INFORMATION REGARDING THE ONGOING FUKUSHIMA NIGHTMARE NEED TO DO, ABOVE ALL ELSE, IS REPORT ALL THE FACTS, EVEN THOSE THEY IMAGINE WILL INDUCE "PANIC".

WE ALL DESERVE TO KNOW ALL THE TRUTH, NOT BITS AND PIECES AND NOT GLOSSED-OVER HOGWASH.

_____________________________

FURTHER READING:  ~Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear RadiationWORLDWIDE CONTAMINATION.

~ Low-level background radiation is the most hazardous source of radiation.
A PDF.


~ Absorption of Radionuclides from the Fukushima Nuclear Accident .
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0044200


~Oak Ridge National Laboratory measured algae with a radiation count 10,000 times that of the water in which it was growing. The blue- green, algae growing in the thermal waters of the nuclear reactor effluents of the Savannah River Plant were able to concentrate the mixed fission and corrosion products by factors as great as 10,000. (Watts  Harvey, 1963)


~ Accumulation of radioactive strontium by marine brown algae ...
http://triscience.com/General/accumulation-of-radioactive-strontium-by-marine-brown-algae


~Fukushima released up to 100,000 times more cesium-137 in surface ocean waters than Chernobyl or nuclear weapons testing. 
http://www.whoi.edu/cms/files/Radioisotopes_in_the_Ocean_167804.pdf


~ Units converter for radiation doses.


~ Internal structure of cesium-bearing radioactive microparticles released from Fukushima nuclear power plant.


~ Journal: Unprecedented phenomenon from using saltwater in Fukushima reactors -- Forming new uranium compounds able to travel long distances... "like carbon buckyballs"