Thursday, November 16, 2017

USA news on Youtube Nov 16 2017

Back by popular demand is another military comparison.

This time we are featuring two fairly new countries, nations that at one point in time

were colonies of the United Kingdom.

The USA gained its independence on July 4, 1776.

Australia gained its independence on January 1, 1901, when the Brits passed legislation

to give the six Australian colonies the right to govern themselves under the Commonwealth

of Australia.

Unlike the USA, the country sometimes called "Down-under" has not vied for world dominance,

although it has enjoyed a fairly good standard of living and economic prosperity.

The countries are certainly not enemies, unless you play Grand Theft Auto which pits them

head-to-head in a fictional conflict.

How would they fare against each other if that were a reality?

That's what we are going to find out today, in this episode of the Infographics Show,

Australia vs the United States.

Don't forget to subscribe and click the bell button so that you can be part of our

Notification Squad.

Let's start with Australia.

At around 2,969,907 sq. miles (7.69 million square kilometers), the country is the 6th

largest in the world.

Much of it is uninhabited, as many of Australia's population live close to the coast on different

sides of the country.

If you look at population density maps, you will see just how much of Australia's 24,659,200

people are huddled into small chunks of the country.

Australia's indigenous, Aboriginal people may have lived in the harsh environment of

central Oz, but for most Australians, much of their huge country is a no man's land.

Australia's nominal GDP for 2016 was $1.257 trillion, making it the 13th largest GDP in

the world just above Spain and just below Russia.

GDP per capita is $49,927.

Now let's turn to some USA basics.

The USA is also a very large country at 3,797,000 sq. miles (9.63 million square kilometers),

although it's way more crowded than Australia.

This makes it the third largest country behind Canada and Russia, although it is also very

similar in size to China.

It has a population of 325,365,000.

The US GDP is 19.417 trillion dollars, and $57,466 per capita.

We could say the US has the world's biggest economy, but many experts now say this is

China.

The International Monetary Fund, CIA Factbook, and World Bank all say China is number one.

An interesting article recently published by Pew Global explains that various countries

around the world have a different opinion on who has the biggest GDP, with slightly

more countries believing the USA is still the larger economy.

One thing we know for sure is that the USA spends a lot more on its military than any

other country in the world, and by a country mile, too.

Its military is regarded as the strongest in the world, and it probably should be with

a 611 billion dollar defense budget, which is about 3.3 percent of the GDP.

That was for 2016, and sometimes the figure is stated as slightly less.

For 2017, Donald Trump's budget for defense is around 587 billion dollars, which is by

far the biggest chunk of the USA's discretionary budget.

More than a third of that goes to operations and maintenance, with just less than a quarter

on military personnel.

The most expensive program at the moment are those rather pricey F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

The budget for those alone was 11.6 billion dollars in 2016 and will be 10.5 billion in

2017.

To put that into perspective, the Environmental Protection Agency is allocated $7.65 billion

for 2017.

Australia doesn't spend much by comparison, but is still 12th on the list of the biggest

defense spenders in the world.

Some sources put Brazil ahead and some behind.

For 2017 it will spend 24.1 billion US dollars.

According to the Australian government, it's going to spend big over the next decade, with

some military media stating that the country intends to become a "lethal military force".

The ministry of defense said recently that it has a "commitment to security and stability

around the globe" as relations between various countries seem tenuous at the moment.

Much of the money spent will go to the navy, which is not surprising given the country's

geographical location.

It has also joined in the spending frenzy on the aforementioned F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

What do these two countries get for their money?

In terms of feet on the ground, out of the USA's 325 million people, 1.3 million are

active military personnel, and a further 811,000 act as reserve personnel.

This is much larger than Australia's 61,000 active personnel and 21,000 reserves.

Not surprisingly the USA also has a lot more land equipment.

In total, it has 5,884 tanks, 41,000 armored fighting vehicles, 1,934 self-propelled guns,

1,299 towed artillery, and 1,331 multiple-launch rocket systems.

Only China, and easily Russia, outgun the USA when it comes to tank strength.

This also includes some of the most fierce land equipment ever, consisting of the mighty

M-1 Abrams tank – the world's best according to some pundits – the M-109A6 Paladin self-propelled

gun, and the tried and tested TOW Anti-Tank Missile.

Australia has just 59 tanks, 2,040 armored fighting vehicles, 0 self-propelled artillery,

75 towed artillery, and 0 multiple-launch rocket systems.

It does have some good tanks, though, which in the past were the highly rated Leopard

1s, but they have been replaced with M-1 Abrams, just in much smaller quality than that of

the USA.

Where the United States exceeds every country on the planet is with its air force.

As you know, the US is not shy on spending big here, and it is almost spoiled for choice.

It has around 13,444 aircrafts in total, many of which are the best ever made.

This includes scores of F-22A Raptors, F-16 Fighting Falcons, F-15E Strike Eagles and

the expensive F-35A Lightning II.

The U.S. also has a large fleet of the McDonnell Douglas CF-18 Hornets, some of which have

been converted to F/A-18E Super Hornets.

We already know Australia has spent on the F-35, but a rather startling piece of news

emerged in September, and that was that it's two brand new F-35's have a major problem.

They don't work, according to Australian media.

The USA has also had its fair share of problems trying to get these things combat ready.

Australian news reported that the planes "will likely require many millions being sunk into

reconstruction and upgrade before they are fully capable of fighting on the front line."

The country has a total of 465 aircraft, just over 150 of which are fighter and attack aircraft.

It also has a small fleet of F/A-18F Super Hornets and F/A-18A and B Hornets as well

as EA-18G Growlers.

As for the navy, Global Firepower puts the USA as the third strongest behind China and

North Korea.

This is only in size, though.

It puts Australia down in 54th place.

In total, the USA has 415 ships and Australia has 47 ships.

The U.S. has a total of 11 aircraft carriers, 22 cruisers, 67 destroyers, 8 frigates, 75

submarines, 0 corvettes, 9 amphibious assault ships, 11 mine warfare ships, and 55 patrol

ships.

We also have to take into account what all wealthy countries want, and that's a huge

super carrier.

America may have the best in the Gerald R. Ford class super-carrier.

Australia is also one of few nations to own aircraft carriers.

While they might not be the behemoths of the US navy, the almost new HMAS Canberra and

the HMAS Adelaide are impressive beasts.

The ozzies also own 11 frigates, 0 destroyers, 0 corvettes, 6 submarines, 13 patrol craft,

and 6 mine warfare ships.

Another thing, as you well know, the USA owns just less than half of all the world's 15,000

nuclear weapons.

Australia doesn't have any and doesn't seem interested in developing them.

It does, however, have aircraft that could deliver them.

In conclusion, these two countries have been strong allies for a very long time.

If anything did happen to break that bond, America is far too powerful for Australia.

The only chance Australia would have is that harsh environment its people are used to living

in.

Maybe all those dangerous creatures that inhabit the country would get onside.

So, what do you think of this theoretical matchup?

Does Australia possibly stand a chance?

Let us know in the comments!

Also, be sure to check out our other video called N Korea vs S Korea?!

Thanks for watching, and, as always, don't forget to like, share, and subscribe.

See you next time!

For more infomation >> Australia vs United States (USA) 2017 - Who Would Win? Military Comparison - Duration: 8:37.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:32 PM (93 S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:32 PM (93 S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

BREAKING NEWS ALERT ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP 11/16/2017 - Duration: 15:50.

For more infomation >> BREAKING NEWS ALERT ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP 11/16/2017 - Duration: 15:50.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:30 PM (S River St & PA-309 & S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:30 PM (S River St & PA-309 & S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

Breaking New ,President Trump Latest News Today 11/16/17 , FBI Dir James Comey - Duration: 16:09.

For more infomation >> Breaking New ,President Trump Latest News Today 11/16/17 , FBI Dir James Comey - Duration: 16:09.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 11:28 AM (Unnamed Road, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:24.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 11:28 AM (Unnamed Road, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:24.

-------------------------------------------

Wieder mal ist Russland Schuld - Lawrow zu neuen Vorwürfen aus Spanien, England und den USA - Duration: 1:20.

For more infomation >> Wieder mal ist Russland Schuld - Lawrow zu neuen Vorwürfen aus Spanien, England und den USA - Duration: 1:20.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:25 PM (100-110 Mineral St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:25 PM (100-110 Mineral St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

Sean Hannity 11/15/17 - Hannity November 15, 2017 , PRES TRUMP LATEST News - President Trump NEWS - Duration: 44:34.

For more infomation >> Sean Hannity 11/15/17 - Hannity November 15, 2017 , PRES TRUMP LATEST News - President Trump NEWS - Duration: 44:34.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:31 PM (321 S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:31 PM (321 S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

How I've Changed my German Husband (by accident!!) - Duration: 10:02.

So, he's changed! - Have I? - Yeah. Well in some ways.

Hey everyone! Dana here. - And Stefan.

And today we're going to be talking about some of the ways that I think you have changed.

We've been together now for almost 9 years. And I'm American. And you?

I'm German. - Yeah. I've just noticed some little things that, yeah, you've kind of changed in the last 9 years.

And I think some of those things are because of my influence on you. Maybe.

These are not things that I've changed on purpose about him or anything like that.

But yeah, I've made a little list.

And I'm going to read them to you and I'm excited to see what you think about these

things that I've noticed.

So one way that I've noticed that you've changed is I think now you dress more casually.

So right now you're wearing sweat pants. I don't know. When we met...I don't, okay.

Not chilling around this house.

You always dressed casually at home. But like, you now go out in sweat pants.

You go shopping, you go grocery shopping in sweat pants.

And 9 years ago...well, I don't remember you going out grocery shopping in sweat pants.

First of all, I didn't have comfy sweat pants. - Yeah. - And yeah, maybe. Maybe, maybe I give you that. - Okay.

You mean more Americanized, more comfortable with sweat pants. - Yeah.

Um, yeah, maybe. I don't know. - Okay. - I was always comfortable. - Okay. So you're not sure.

Nah, I'm not, I'm giving you half a point. - Okay, half a point. - You're not totally sold on it. - No.

Okay. - No, not sold on it. - Alright.

So would you say your clothing has changed at all in the last 9 years. - No. - No. - No. - Not at all.

Yeah, with time it changes.

I'm older now. - But not because of me. - Totally not because of you. - Okay.

Alright. Anything to do with your wardrobe?

Socks or shoes or pants or shirts or any bit of your style has changed because of me?

Yeah, I wear longer shorts. - Yes, that's true!

Because the European shorts, they're short. - They're short. Yeah.

And when we go to America, when we fly to America, I can't wear the European shorts.

I have to wear longer shorts that at least go up to my knee or cover my knee.

It's hard to find shorts here, though, that cover the knee. - Yeah.

I've become more aware of it that there's a difference between clothing.

So you have changed me in the way that I've become more aware of it.

You put on shorts and you realize, like, oh these are short for American standards.

Yeah. - Also I think that I have changed, not on purpose again, but just sort of happened, the foods

that you eat. Peanut butter. - Yes. - You eat more peanut butter because of me.

Hot sauce. - I eat peanut butter... You eat peanut butter because of me. - Yes.

Hot sauce. - Yes. - When we met you didn't eat hot sauce. - No.

Now he goes through more hot sauce than me. - I do. - Um, things like burritos. - Yeah.

I don't think you would've made at home burritos. - Yeah, you get the point, um, sticky barbecue.

Okay. - Like when we grill, the meat is more - Moist. - the sauce, moist, sticky.

I was never a real fan of the hardcore German cuisine.

Especially here in Bavaria.

I don't like all the innards and everything. - Okay.

But at home growing up we pretty much had standard German cuisine.

Lots of potatoes.

Now we are cooking more internationally.

And then also the American stuff that you brought over.

Peanut butter, hot sauce for sure. - Yeah, for sure. Breakfast burrito. Like, no.

Never would have crossed my mind to even try that.

Also I know without a doubt that this one is true.

That because of me, um, your English has improved.

My English has improved? - Yes, your English has improved. - I don't think so.

It has. That's not even a German accent. I don't know what that was. - I don't know, I cannot do...

I'm pretty bad in accents.

Even in German I cannot put on accents. - Okay. - But yes, I give you that.

Hello, my English teacher.

I was pretty bad in English.

Horrible in English.

And she told me, like, you can do everything, Stefan, but just don't get a job where you

have to speak English. And now... - I'm not a job, but he married someone where he speaks English 24/7.

Exactly. So you have made my English better.

I'm not actively learning English. - Right. - So...

I didn't purposefully try to make his English better. - No.

At the beginning I thought it was really cute.

And I still, I still love your accent and everything like that, but it just has gotten better.

In small talk and, like, all our movies and TV shows we mostly watch English ones.

And also now when I go to the movie theater, I enjoy the original version more than the

German version.

Another one I would say that since we've been together -- in the U.S. definitely, although

that happened right away, but also in Germany -- you are a higher tipper.

You tip more at restaurants. - That's true.

Yeah, I see what you tip sometimes and I know that in Germany you tip more than I would say necessarily

always expected.

Yeah - I think you, and I think that has changed since we started dating and kind of the American

influence of tipping, I think you have become a higher tipper in Germany. - Yeah, I think so.

The German standard seems to be kind of around 10% is what I've learned.

And I think you regularly tip higher than 10% in Germany. - Yeah.

I would say you've also become more out-going. - Yeah. - Yeah.

I think this video is proof of it. - Yeah!

And I'm also aware that Germans are pretty bad at small talk. - Okay.

Like, when we go, when I go from my work to an event, and there are mostly Germans there,

I'm now more aware that Germans are pretty, yeah, shy in small talk.

And I try to start the conversation, most of the time.

I would never have done that before.

Like and also with the videos.

Yeah, - Yeah. - I did not want to be in the videos when she started it. - At the beginning it was really

"I'm not in the videos, Dana." - Exactly. - Yeah. - I will never be in the videos. - Yeah.

Ever. - Ever, ever, ever, ever. - Ever, ever.

And then, yeah, you convinced me for 50,000. - I don't know, I didn't convince you.

You can up with... - Yeah, I came up with it.

Yeah, I wasn't like please be in it, please be in it.

You came to me and you were like, maybe I could be in it. - Yeah. So...

Yeah, definitely you get that point. You brought out... - I brought you out of your shell.

Yes. Not as out-going as you.

I will never be because you are just

the most out-going person that I have ever known. - Uh-uh, Daniel.

Okay, Daniel. Shout-out to Daniel. - Yeah.

If you haven't seen our, my video with Daniel, again, we'll link it somewhere here. - Yeah.

Yeah, he is even more out-going than me. - Yeah. But, yeah, you pretty much changed that.

And kind of, I would say, my last one going along, I think, with that is that I've also,

I think, made you a little bit more comfortable just in general with getting out of your comfort zone.

Doing things - Yes. - like filming out in public.

Or maybe going on vacation at the last minute. - Yeah.

Or changing plans at the last minute. - Yeah. - At first it really freaked you out and...

Definitely. I'm a person that doesn't want any attention in public.

You know, I'm the one - Good thing you're hanging out with me! - on the Underground

and S-bahn.

But not to people you don't know.

No, no. - Just to me. - Just to her. Not to people...I'm not one of these people. - Right.

But just to me. - But just to her. He doesn't want to draw attention. - I just, yeah.

I don't want to draw attention.

And we have now visited lots of areas in the world where, if I hadn't known you, no I would

never have gone there.

I am okay with it if like, I just decide: oh!

Next week let's go to this place or something.

And now I'd say you're more comfortable with that.

I'm definitely more comfortable with that. - Yeah. - We just booked tickets for Thanksgiving.

We're going to the U.S. - Yeah.

And this is like three weeks before Thanksgiving.

And we're filming this on Halloween. Wwwhaaaa! - Ooooh! Spooky, spooky.

So yeah, it's three weeks before Thanksgiving and we're flying to the U.S.

I think 9 years ago to just decide to fly to the U.S. three weeks in advance would have

made you really nervous. - Exactly.

Whereas now you were like, okay, yeah, let's do it. Let's do it. - Yeah.

So our question for you is: How have you changed because of the influence of a partner or a

close friend?

Please let us know in the comments below.

Thanks so much for watching. - Thank you! We really hope that you enjoyed this video.

If you did, leave a like. - Yes! - And subscribe. - Yes, please subscribe to the channel.

And also a really, really, really big thank you so much to our patrons on Patreon, who

help make these videos possible.

Thank you so much for your support. - Thank you.

If you would like to check out our Patreon page, you can find a link to that down in

the description box below.

Until next time, auf Wiedersehen!

Okay. Don't make funny faces.

I've been doing pretty good about not just cracking up laughing.

I see you peeking. Don't peek on my list. I'm going to tell you then, I promise.

For more infomation >> How I've Changed my German Husband (by accident!!) - Duration: 10:02.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:29 PM (S River St & PA-309 & S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:29 PM (S River St & PA-309 & S River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

Could an Earthquake Destroy USA - Biggest Earthquakes Ever - Duration: 7:53.

Earthquakes occur when two blocks of rock below the Earth's surface rub against each

other.

Where that tension happens underground is called the hypocenter, and up above we call

that the epicenter.

A little rumble could be the start of bigger things to come.

They are called foreshocks.

The bigger shocks that come after are called the main-shocks, which might be followed by

after-shocks that could come a day after or many years after.

We measure the power of an Earthquake from 1-10, judging its vibrations, or magnitude,

on what we call a seismograph.

Hundreds of small Earthquakes happen every day, but thankfully the huge ones are rare.

A 9.5 magnitude earthquake in Chile was the most powerful ever recorded, but scientists

say a 10 is possible.

Today we'll focus mostly on one country, in this episode of the Infographics Show,

Biggest Earthquakes Ever - What Would It Take To Destroy The USA?

Don't forget to subscribe and click the bell button so that you can be part of our

Notification Squad.

We will first put into perspective Earthquakes in the USA when measured against quite recent

earthquakes that were some of the largest in recorded history.

Number three on the list of worst ever recorded earthquakes is one many of us old enough to

remember could never forget: The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, sometimes called the Christmas

tsunami due to when it took place and the ensuing tidal destruction.

This undersea megathrust earthquake measured 9.1 – 9.3, creating tsunamis up to 100 ft

high (30 meters), that quickly and devastatingly encroached coastal areas in 14 countries.

230,000–280,000 people were killed in all, from fishing villages on the western coast

of Sri Lanka to touristy hotspots in Thailand's beach towns.

Number four on the list of worst ever recorded earthquakes is Japan's 2011 Great East Japan

Earthquake.

This too triggered a massive tsunami reaching up to 133 feet in height (40.5 meters).

It measured 9-9.1.

Casualties were fewer in number than the aforementioned disaster – 15,894 deaths – much in part

due to Japan's infrastructure and the fact that Japan had superior warning systems.

Many of the countries hit by the Asian tsunami had no idea what was coming their way, as

can be seen in videos of tourists in Thailand still hanging out on the beach as the tsunami

approaches.

The USA is up there as having experienced one of the worst Earthquakes ever, second

on the list of worst ever regarding magnitude.

It was the 1964 Alaskan earthquake.

It too caused great damage to structures, and generated its own tsunami, but the death

toll at 139 was relatively small.

Some of those deaths were as far away as California and Oregon, with loss of life not accorded

to the Earthquake itself but the resultant tsunamis.

While fatalities were low, the Earthquake caused wide fissures in roads and forests,

destroyed many buildings, brought down bridges, and wrecked rail tracks.

Had that happened in a densely populated metropolis, it could have been devastating.

Well, one of the USA's most populated places are the cities and surrounding areas of Los

Angeles and San Francisco.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the US is destined to meet with a large Earthquake

in the not too distant future, and it could well be those areas where it happens.

The worst Earthquake on record in the USA did indeed happen in San Francisco, in the

year 1906.

The 7.9 magnitude beast occurred along 300 miles of what's called the San Andreas Fault.

This is a 750 mile long (1,200 kilometers) tectonic boundary that separates the Pacific

Plate and the North American Plate.

The earthquake brought the city to ruins, collapsing structures and causing widespread

fires.

It's thought that about 3,000 people died and of course many more were injured.

28,000 buildings were destroyed in total, and 250,000 San Franciscans lost their homes.

This was without doubt the worst Californian earthquake in terms of causalities and destruction

to buildings, but it wasn't the most powerful.

That was the Fort Tejon quake of 1857, that measured 7.9 in magnitude.

Apparently only one person died when his house collapsed on him.

Lesser quakes in the area have had a much more devastating effect.

In fact, outside of Alaska, Hawaii, South Carolina and Idaho, all of the USA's worst

earthquakes in terms of damage done have been in California.

Some of them happened not that long ago.

Shortly after the San Francisco disaster came the Long Beach earthquake in 1933.

It only had a magnitude of 6.4 but still claimed around 120 lives as people ran from collapsing

buildings.

The state was criticized for not having strong enough buildings to ensure safety, and as

a result the state revised building codes.

Some say it was a lucky escape since over 230 school buildings were destroyed, but as

it happened close to 6pm, kids had already left the buildings.

Building codes were once again revised after the 1971 San Fernando earthquake.

It measured 6.7 in magnitude, and caused damage to many buildings in districts of Los Angeles

and beyond.

It's thought that around 58–65 people lost their lives.

49 of them were in one building alone: the Olive View Hospital in Sylmar.

One of the survivors recalled some years after the incident, "There was relief when the

shaking stopped, but there were still sounds of crunching…And groans."

The worrying thing is the hospital was built with earthquake resistance in mind.

Following this in 1989 and 1994, California experienced two more earthquakes resulting

in loss of life.

The 1989 Loma Prieta 6.9 earthquake was the first deadly earthquake to hit San Francisco

Bay since the 1906 disaster, and it took 63 lives.

Most of those people succumbed to a collapsed highway in Oakland.

The '94 quake hit Northridge in Southern California and measured 6.7.

60 people died, this time because their houses were structurally weak.

When scientists are asked which large cities are the mostly likely to be hit by a big earthquake

in the next 20 or 30 years, one that measures over 6.7, places in California are high on

the list.

The world's largest most populated city, Tokyo, is also up there.

As we write this, just recently a 7.1 magnitude earthquake hit central Mexico, causing buildings

to collapse in the densely populated capital of Mexico City.

The full death toll is expected to be more than the 216 that has already been reported.

But the question we ask today, is what would it take to destroy entire cities in the USA

or even destroy the country?

First of all, scientists say what we already know from this show so far, that the worst

earthquakes that could hit the USA would very likely be in Alaska or in California.

The scientists say one of the worse places is the Cascadia Subduction Zone – the coast

from California all the way up to Canada.

They believe a 9.0 magnitude quake is very much possible, and if one happened of this

size in this coastal region, it would generate huge tsunamis that would envelop the American

west coast.

The last one happened in 1700, and they believe we are due for another anytime in the next

400 years.

According to Live Science, even though the San Andreas Fault is seen as a more dangerous

area, it is thought a quake of more than 8.0 is unlikely.

Former US Geological Survey scientist, Jim Berkland, who once had a book written about

him called 'The Man Who Predicts Earthquakes', has gone on record stating the one of these

regions is due for a "Big One" soon.

He has been right a few times in the past.

While California has taken the headlines for a long time regarding mass destruction by

earthquakes, more recent reports suggest that the Mid-West could also be an accident waiting

to happen.

In 1811 and 1812, a quake of 7.5 magnitude occured along the New Madrid Seismic Zone

in New Madrid, Missouri.

That was once thought to be a one off, but now science tells us it could happen again.

This could potentially wreak havoc in Missouri, Mississippi, Illinois, Indiana, Arkansas,

Kentucky, and Tennessee.

A large city such as New York has suffered minor earthquakes in the past, but as it doesn't

sit on any major fault line, it's unlikely to experience a big quake.

Its biggest ever was in 1884 and measured 5.3, and some media suggest another is on

its way.

In fact, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, 42 of the 50 states will likely experience

a damaging Earthquake in the next 50 years, but none so threatening as the one expected

in the Sunshine State.

Less reputable media have reported on a mega-quake that could rip apart the US and kill millions,

but so far science is not backing that up.

According to The Smithsonian, the all-out destruction depicted in the movie San Andreas

is way more fiction than fact.

If something big goes down, the magazine says that "even the largest of California's quakes

won't be felt by anything but seismometers on the East Coast."

A scientist did say, though, that when the big one comes, and it will, it will likely

unleash destruction on many levels.

It's thought that roughly 2,000 people will die, and a lot of the damage will come from

fires.

Be prepared said another scientist.

"Everyone should live every day like it could be the day of the Big One," he said.

"Because any day, even today, could be that day."

So, where do you think the next big earthquake will hit?

Have you ever experienced an earthquake?

Let us know in the comments!

Also, be sure to check out our other video called American Behaviors Considered Rude

in Other Countries?!

Thanks for watching, and, as always, don't forget to like, share, and subscribe.

See you next time!

For more infomation >> Could an Earthquake Destroy USA - Biggest Earthquakes Ever - Duration: 7:53.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:34 PM (101-1329 N River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:34 PM (101-1329 N River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

BREAKFAST: Differences in Germany & USA - Duration: 6:08.

Let's have some breakfast!

Hey everyone! I'm Dana and you're watching Wanted Adventure Living Abroad.

During the week breakfast is pretty much something that I eat because I have to, but on the weekend

it is a meal of the day that I truly enjoy in both Germany and the U.S., but the weekend breakfasts

in these two countries are quite different.

In both countries, nowadays weekday breakfasts are often pretty quick events.

Maybe some muesli or a roll and cheese in Germany or something picked up from a bakery

on the go.

In the U.S. maybe some cereal, a bagel, or a breakfast burrito, for example, picked up

to eat on the go.

But on the weekend in Germany a typical breakfast might look something like this:

So here on the table for our "typical" German breakfast, we have some rolls and slices of bread.

And then you've got to have some stuff to put on those rolls and bread.

We've got, ah, cream cheese.

I almost said the German "fresh cheese" -- Frischkäse.

Cream cheese. Two different kinds of cheese. Butter. Some strawberry jam.

And some jam that our friend made us, actually.

And we've also got Nutella back there. - Milk. - Milk because Stefan said

that you've got to have milk sitting on the table at a German breakfast.

And, oh! We have hard-boiled eggs. - Hard-boiled eggs. - Yeah.

And we're drinking orange juice. - Orange juice. - Cheers. - And mine has ice in it because

I'm still an American even at a German breakfast. - Yeah. And I'm drinking green tea

out of my lovely mug. - And...- Do you remember? - Yeah.

The video is probably somewhere here or in the description.

I got him the mug last year for Christmas.

So let's dig in, right?

Whereas in the U.S. a typical weekend breakfast might look a little something like this:

So what do we have here? - Yeah.

So here...can you see me?

We've got pancakes with maple syrup, and bacon, and a fried egg.

Besides having different foods, a big difference between breakfast in the U.S. and breakfast

in Germany is that, as I showed, in Germany there's often a lot of different options

on the table, and each person can sort of put together their own meal on their plate.

The German breakfast is kind of like a mini buffet spread.

Whereas in the U.S. there's often one set meal that people have agreed upon to have

for breakfast.

It's often put together in the kitchen and then brought to the table to eat like that,

and everyone has the same set of things on their plate.

Another breakfast difference is that in the U.S. once you finish what's on your plate,

you might go back for seconds, but then after that breakfast is pretty much over and it's

time to get on with the day.

Whereas in Germany breakfast can last for a long time.

Even after you've finished doing most of your breakfast eating in Germany, it's often

the case that everyone stays at the table for a while, chatting and sort of still picking

at the food.

You might go thirty minutes without eating anything, and then decide to have another

piece of bread and butter.

So yeah, breakfast is often not over for a while in Germany.

And then also in both countries, what I showed is, of course, not the only kind of "typical"

breakfast that exists there.

As for Germany I know, for example, of the Weisswurst breakfast here in Bavaria, which

is Weisswurst sausages, often served with wheat beer and pretzels.

And in the U.S. there are lots of different breakfast meals that I know and love.

Including: pancakes, like what we had, but also waffles and French toast.

In the South you've got biscuits and gravy and grits, which I also talked about in this

video here.

So my question for you is: how do you do breakfast where you live, and what's your favorite

thing to have for breakfast on a weekday and on the weekend?

Please let me know in the comments below.

Thanks so much for watching.

I really hope that you enjoyed this video.

If you enjoy these videos, please don't forget to subscribe to the channel and hit that like button.

And also a really, really, really big thank you so much to our patrons on Patreon, who

help make these videos possible.

Thank you so much for your support.

If you would like to check out our Patreon page, you can find a link to that down in

the description box below.

Until next time, auf Wiedersehen!

Brötchen, not Semmeln. Brötchen. - Okay. - I'm from Cologne. Is there an actual difference?

Or is it just the, the word?

I think there are, how they are made, how they are cut. - Okay.

Yeah, leave us in the comments below:

how many different words of rolls there are in German. - Okay.

I know Stullen, Brötchen and Semmeln.

Isn't there something like in Berlin Krippe? Krippe? - Probably. Leave us in the comments below. - Yeah.

Schrippe! Schrippe! That's it. Not with a K. Schrippe is in Berlin. I think.

So here at the table...at the table? On the table. Prepositions!

Hungry. - Hungry!

Maybe some muesli or a roll in cheese....a roll in cheese.

But the weekend breakfast in both of these two...what?

For more infomation >> BREAKFAST: Differences in Germany & USA - Duration: 6:08.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:13 PM (58 Sedgwick St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 0:48.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:13 PM (58 Sedgwick St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18705, USA) - Duration: 0:48.

-------------------------------------------

LEAKED: Donald Trump Jr.'s Communications With Wikileaks - Duration: 23:56.

THE ATLANTIC HAS UNEARTHED SOME EVIDENCE INDICATING THAT

DONALD TRUMP, JR.

WAS IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH WIKILEAKS DURING

THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

NOW, THERE ARE DIFFERENT

ELEMENTS THAT MAKE THIS STORY RELEVANT ESPECIALLY PERTAINING

TO SOME OF THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE ONGOING IN REGARD TO

RUSSIA AND POTENTIAL RUSSIAN MEDDLING IN THIS PAST ELECTION.

BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THE DIRECT MESSAGES THEY

SHARED WITH ONE ANOTHER, THERE IS SOME REASON TO BELIEVE THAT

SOME OF THE LEAKED INFORMATION OBTAINED BY WIKILEAKS WAS GIVEN

TO THEM BY THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.

NOW, THAT IS BASED

ON ANALYSIS BY U.S. INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS, BUT

THERE ARE SKEPTICS WHEN IT COMES TO THAT PORTION OF THE STORY.

WITH THAT SAID I WANT TO GIVE YOU GUYS WHAT THEIR

COMMUNICATION WAS, AND WHAT KIND OF ACTIONS THEY TOOK, MEANING

MEMBERS OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, AFTER THEY WERE GIVEN CERTAIN

LINKS AND CERTAIN INFORMATION FROM WIKILEAKS.

BEFORE YOU GET STARTED LET ME JUST CLARIFY THAT I'M AMONG THE

SKEPTICS.

INCLUDING THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS STORY.

ALL

OVER TV AND ALL OVER THE MEDIA, ANA WILL GIVE YOU THE DETAILS,

LET'S GIVE YOU THE FACTS FIRST, AND DISCUSS WHETHER IT IS

GROUNDBREAKING COLLUSION OR NOT.

FIRST, HOW DO WE HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THIS

CORRESPONDENCE?

WELL --

THEY WERE TURNED OVER TO CONGRESS BY DONALD TRUMP, JR.

AND HIS LAWYER, THEY ARE COOPERATING WITH THE

INVESTIGATION, SO CREDIT WHERE IT IS DUE, BUT THAT'S WHERE THIS

INFORMATION IS FROM, AND THE ATLANTIC OBTAINED THIS

INFORMATION AND REPORTED ON IT LATE YESTERDAY.

HERE IS WHERE IT

ALL BEGAN -- THE FIRST MESSAGE SENT TO DONALD TRUMP, JR.

WAS

SEPTEMBER 20 OF 2016, AND IN THAT MESSAGE SOMEONE FROM

WIKILEAKS, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHO, ESSENTIALLY LET DONALD

TRUMP, JR.

KNOW ABOUT AN ANTI-TRUMP WEBSITE, AND SOMEHOW

THEY MANAGED TO GET THE PASSWORD TO THAT WEBSITE AND TOLD DONALD

TRUMP, JR., YOU SHOULD LOOK INTO WHO IS BEHIND THIS WEBSITE.

DONALD TRUMP, JR.

RESPONDED TO THAT AND SAID I WILL ASK AROUND,

AND HE DID ASK AROUND.

SO HE NOTIFIED A NUMBER OF PEOPLE

AFFILIATED WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, INCLUDING THE

SON-IN-LAW, JARED KUSHNER, A NUMBER OF CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS,

AND THROUGH THAT THEY FORWARDED THE INFORMATION TO ONE ANOTHER,

KELLYANNE CONWAY, STEVE BANNON, AND ALSO JARED KUSHNER, AS

I MENTIONED.

I THINK THERE IS ONE RELEVANT REVELATION, THIS ONE I THINK IS

COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

THERE WAS A WEBSITE, WE TOLD YOU ABOUT IT

AND YOU LOOKED INTO IT.

WHOOPDIE DOO.

HE COULD HAVE FOUND OUT

ABOUT THE WEBSITE IN 1000 DIFFERENT WAYS.

THE NEW YORK

TIMES COULD HAVE TOLD HIM THERE WAS A WEBSITE, AND I LOOKED INTO

IT. AND?

SINCE CENK PREFACED EVERYTHING WITH HIS OVERALL TAKE, I WILL

GIVE YOU MINE, I DISAGREE WITH CENK IN REGARD TO THIS NOT BEING

A BIG DEAL.

THAT PORTION OF WHAT WE KNOW I DON'T THINK IS A BIG

DEAL, BUT AS WE GET DEEPER INTO THE COMMUNICATION THEY HAD I

THINK IT BECOMES MORE SIGNIFICANT AND RELEVANT, NOT

NECESSARILY IN REGARD TO POTENTIAL RUSSIAN MEDDLING, BUT

FOR ME IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO DO AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER OR NOT

WIKILEAKS HAS A POLITICAL MOTIVE, AND I THINK THESE

COMMUNICATIONS MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THERE WAS A POLITICAL

MOTIVE TO HELP THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN.

SO LET ME GO ON --

THAT'S FINE, THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE REPORT --

SO THEY ARE SETTING THE STAGE TO SHOW THAT ALREADY IT SEEMED

AS THOUGH THERE WAS A POLITICAL MOTIVE, AND THEN WHEN YOU LOOK

AT THE PRIVATE MESSAGES THAT DONALD TRUMP, JR. AND WIKILEAKS

HAD WITH ONE ANOTHER IT FURTHER REINFORCES THAT NOTION.

GO AHEAD --

I WANT TO BE CLEAR, I THINK WIKILEAKS WAS ON TRUMP'S SIDE,

AND I THINK THE FACT THAT THEY PUBLISHED SOME OF THE EMAILS

RIGHT AFTER THE ACCESS HOLLYWOOD TAPES IS DECENT EVIDENCE OF

THAT, AND THERE IS A LOT OF EVIDENCE OF IT, INCLUDING ONE

DAMNING PART WE WILL GET TO IN A SECOND.

SO I'M NOT DISPUTING

THAT.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WHO IS TALKING ABOUT THE STOLEN

HOLLYWOOD EXCESS TAPES?

AND WHERE THE WASHINGTON POST GOT

THEM?

AND WHO WANTED TO INTERFERE WITH OUR ELECTIONS,

AND GAVE THOSE STOLEN TAPES TO THE WASHINGTON POST?

I DON'T THINK THERE WAS EVER A QUESTION THAT A FOREIGN

GOVERNMENT OBTAINED THOSE TAPES AND LEAKS THEM IN AN EFFORT TO

MEDDLE IN THE ELECTIONS, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE THERE.

LOOK AT THE FRAMING, THE EMAILS ARE ALWAYS REFERRED TO AS

STOLEN, THE PENTAGON PAPERS AREN'T BUT YOU CAN MAKE AN

ARGUMENT, THE ACCESS HOLLYWOOD TAPES ARE NEVER REFERRED TO AS

STOLEN BY THE MEDIA, BUT WHERE DID THEY GET THEM?

AND WHO GOT

THEM?

DID THEY HAVE PERMISSION FROM WHOEVER THE OWNER OF ACCESS

HOLLYWOOD IS?

NO, THEY TOOK THEM WITHOUT PERMISSION, THERE'S

ANOTHER WORD FOR THAT, STOLEN.

IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW YOU WANT

TO FRAME IT.

IF YOU GIVE IT TO THE WASHINGTON POST, THAT'S AWESOME, THEY

ARE A MEDIA ORGANIZATION, IF YOU GIVE IT TO WIKILEAKS WE

DON'T LIKE THEM, THEY ARE MEAN, THEY ARE THE BAD GUYS.

THERE IS OBVIOUSLY MAINSTREAM MEDIA BIAS AGAINST WIKILEAKS, I

THINK THAT'S WELL KNOWN.

BUT I WANT YOU TO FOCUS ON WHAT

WIKILEAKS IS TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHEN THEY ARE MESSAGING DONALD

TRUMP, JR., BECAUSE THEY ARE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THEIR

INTENTIONS ARE.

SO REGARDLESS OF MEDIA BIAS, MEDIA BIAS DOES NOT

PLAY A ROLE IN THESE DIRECT MEDICATIONS, KEEP THAT IN MIND.

SO --

DONALD TRUMP, JR.

DID RESPOND TO THAT, HE SAID --

LOOK, I CAN'T STAND THE TRUMPS, I WORKED SUPER HARD TO

MAKE SURE THEY DIDN'T WIN.

I AM VERY CLEAR WITH MY PERSPECTIVE.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT DONALD TRUMP, JR.

SAID THERE.

IN

FACT, IT'S ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS THAT THE REST OF THE PRESS GAVE

HILLARY CLINTON A PASS FOR WANTING TO MURDER WHAT COULD BE

CONSIDERED, I THINK SOMEWHAT CORRECTLY AN ACCURATELY SO BY

ANA AS SHE POINTED OUT EARLIER, A POLITICAL OPPONENT.

EVEN IF

YOU GRANT WIKILEAKS IS AN OPPONENT OF HERS, SHE WANTED TO

MURDER A POLITICAL OPPONENT.

IF TRUMP HAD SET AT THE WORLD WOULD

HAVE EXPLODED AND YOU KNOW IT.

SHE SAID IT, I DON'T KNOW, WAS

SHE JOKING?

IT DIDN'T SOUND LIKE SHE WAS. AND EVEN IF TRUMP WAS

JOKING IF HE SAID THAT, IT WOULD'VE BEEN NEWS 24/7, AND IT

SHOULD BE, BECAUSE TRUMP IS ABHORRENT AND YOU SHOULDN'T SAY

THINGS LIKE THAT.

WHAT I'M ANNOYED WITH IS WHENEVER

ESTABLISHMENT PUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS SAY THINGS LIKE THAT

THEY GET A PASS.

HERE IS MY ISSUE WITH THIS, THE CONNECTION WITH RUSSIA ISN'T

CLEAR ENOUGH FOR ME, MEANING THAT OKAY, OR INTELLIGENCE

ORGANIZATIONS SAY RUSSIA STOLE OR HACKED INTO THESE EMAILS, I'M

NOT PERSONALLY CONVINCED BY THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T REALLY

SHARED THAT EVIDENCE WITH US YET, JUST SAYING THAT THEY

BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

BUT THAT BEING

SAID, FOR ME WHAT THIS STORY COMMUNICATED WAS WIKILEAKS IS

NOT SOME JOURNALISTIC ORGANIZATION, AND BY THE WAY I

WAS SUPPORTIVE OF WIKILEAKS EVEN AFTER ALL OF THIS HILLARY

CLINTON STUFF CAME OUT, BECAUSE MY VIEW OF THEM WAS THEY OBTAIN

DAMNING EVIDENCE THAT SPEAKS TRUTH TO POWER AND THEY LEAK IT.

TO SAY THAT THERE ARE NEVER ANY POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS OR BIASES

IS NAœVE, BUT I DID NOT HAVE PROOF OF HOW DEEP THE BIAS WAS

DURING THIS PAST ELECTION, AND I THINK THAT IS RELEVANT FOR

PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING AT AN ORGANIZATION LIKE WIKILEAKS

THINKING THIS IS A CREDIBLE ORGANIZATION WITH NO POLITICAL

BIAS.

CLEARLY THEY DID, AND THERE'S A LOT OF EVIDENCE TO

PROVE IT, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN TO YET.

HOLD ON, I AGREE AND DISAGREE IN PARTS.

THE PART I AGREE WITH,

EVEN MIKE POMPEO, TRUMP'S CIA DIRECTOR, SAYS HE THINK THERE'S

A CONNECTION BETWEEN THE KEY LEAKS AND RUSSIA.

TAKE THAT FOR

WHATEVER IT'S WORTH, IT'S A DATA POINT AND I DO TAKE THAT

SERIOUSLY.

AT THE SAME TIME, ALMOST EVERYBODY THAT WORKS IN

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, BOTH ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS AND

DEMOCRATS, HATE WIKILEAKS WITH A PASSION, SO I WILL TAKE IT WITH

A GRAIN OF SALT.

ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THEY ARE CREDIBLE

JOURNALISTS, THAT'S WHERE I DISAGREE WITH YOU.

YES, I THINK

THIS STORY DOES PROVE THAT THEY WERE CLEARLY ON TRUMP'S SIDE.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T BE CREDIBLE, IT DOESN'T MEAN THE

STUFF THEY LEAKED ISN'T TRUE.

IT WAS TRUE.

AND THEY ARE STILL A MEDIA ORGANIZATION.

BUT THERE IS ALSO THE QUESTION OF WHAT THEY REFUSED TO LEAK OR

TALK ABOUT, LIKE THE RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS THAT WERE IMPLICATED

IN THE PANAMA PAPERS AND HOW WIKILEAKS REFUSED TO DO ANY TYPE

OF WORK ON THAT ISSUE.

SO I THINK THAT THIS COMMUNICATION,

THEIR CLEAR SUPPORT OF THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN COUPLED WITH THE FACT

THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN THINGS THEY REFUSED TO LEAK, DRAWS A

PICTURE THAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT THEIR CREDIBILITY.

SO I'M

PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.

I UNDERSTAND, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT

THAT'S FINE, I WILL GO EVEN FURTHER AND SAY THEY HURT THEIR

CREDIBILITY MORE WHEN THEY AREN'T HONEST ABOUT THEIR

PERSPECTIVE.

FOX NEWS, THAT'S FINE, THEY ARE CONSERVATIVES, WE

DON'T LIKE THEM AND I THINK THEY ARE WRONG ON EACH ISSUE AND WE

DEBATE THEM, THE PROBLEM ISN'T THAT, THE PROBLEM IS THEY CALL

THEMSELVES FAIR AND BALANCED, AND THEY AREN'T, THAT'S A JOKE

AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

SO I WOULD HOPE WIKILEAKS WON'T

CONTINUE TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE.

WHATEVER YOUR

PERSPECTIVE IS YOU SHOULD BE OPEN AND HONEST ABOUT IT, WE ARE

HONEST ABOUT OUR PERSPECTIVE, AND I DON'T THINK GIVEN THIS

STORY AMONG OTHERS, I AGREE WITH ANA THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN OPEN

ABOUT WHAT THERE PERSPECTIVE IS.

LET'S GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THEIR COMMUNICATION, AND

ONE-POINT WIKILEAKS SENT TO DONALD TRUMP, JR.

--

THEN --

IN

THAT CASE, DOES IT SHOW THAT THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN IS

COMMUNICATING WITH WIKILEAKS?

YES, OF COURSE, HE DIDN'T

RANDOMLY DO IT 15 MINUTES LATER.

BUT THIS STUFF WAS PUBLIC

ANYWAY, AND HAVE JOURNALISTS SENT OUT THEIR ARTICLES TO THE

PEOPLE THEY WROTE ABOUT IN HOPES THAT IT WOULD BE SHARED ON

SOCIAL MEDIA?

ALMOST EVERY TIME, EVERY DAY.

SO IF ANY OTHER

JOURNALISTS SAID HEY, HERE IS AN ARTICLE I WROTE ABOUT YOU OR

ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE AND SENT IT TO YOU, IT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST

NO BIG DEAL OF ALL TIME.

WHEN IT HAPPENS WITH WIKILEAKS, OH MY

GOD, THEY WANTED THEIR LINK PUBLICIZED.

OF COURSE THEY DID,

SO DOES EVERYONE.

I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE SURFACE.

IF IT IS PROVEN THAT

THEY DID NOT OBTAIN THEIR INFORMATION FROM RUSSIA, THEN

YOU ARE RIGHT, WIKILEAKS SHOULDN'T BE TREATED ANY

DIFFERENTLY THAN ANY OTHER MEDIA ORGANIZATION.

BUT THE CONCERN

HERE IS THAT A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT IS MEDDLING IN

OUR ELECTION PROCESS AND IF THAT'S PROVEN I THINK THESE

TYPES OF COMMUNICATIONS ARE RELEVANT.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR, I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH DISTINCTION BUT I

THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT ONE -- IF RUSSIA SAYS I STOLE THESE

EMAILS, TRUMP, WOULD YOU LIKE THEM?

I THINK THAT'S A GIANT

PROBLEM AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE PAST, THAT IS A REAL

ISSUE, IT HAS LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS AND IT SHOULD BE

THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED AND I'M THRILLED THEY ARE INVESTIGATING

IT.

BUT RUSSIA OR ANYONE ELSE GETS ACCESS TO INFORMATION,

PASSES IT ON TO SOMEONE IN THE MEDIA --

RUSSIA DIDN'T GET ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION, THEY

HACKED AND STOLE THE INFORMATION.

WHATEVER, DANIEL ELLSBERG STOLE THE PENTAGON PAPERS, HE

GOT THEM WITHOUT PERMISSION AND GAVE THEM TO THE NEW YORK TIMES.

ALMOST EVERY SINGLE WEEK IS WITHOUT PERMISSION GIVEN TO A

MEMBER OF THE MEDIA AND WE NEVER COMPLAIN ABOUT THAT, YOU WOULD

HAVE TO ARREST THREE QUARTERS OF WASHINGTON IF THEY WERE ALL

STOLEN.

YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AMERICAN WHISTLEBLOWERS OR

AMERICAN LEAKERS, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE INFLUENCE OF A FOREIGN

GOVERNMENT POSSIBLY HAVING AN IMPACT ON OUR ELECTION.

THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT.

IF CANADA SOMEHOW GOT SOME INFORMATION, AND IT WAS SUPER

RELEVANT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, SHOULD THE NEW YORK TIMES PRINT

IT?

MY ANSWER IS ABSOLUTELY.

IF YOU DON'T AGREE AND YOU SAY

CANADA, RUSSIA -- NEW YORK TIMES SHOULD SUPPRESS THE INFORMATION

BECAUSE IT CAME FROM A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, EITHER ONE THAT IS

FRIENDLY TO US LIKE CANADA OR ONE THAT ISN'T, LIKE RUSSIA --

OKAY, THOSE ARE FINE POINTS OF DISAGREEMENT, I SAY THEY SHOULD

PUBLISH IT BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW, I

THINK THERE WAS VALUABLE INFORMATION IN THOSE EMAILS, I

DON'T THINK THE RUSSIANS SHOULD HAVE STOLEN IT OR THE TRUMP

PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE WORKED WITH THE RUSSIANS, THOSE ARE LEGAL

ISSUES, BUT WHEN YOU GIVE IT TO A MEDIA ORGANIZATION, THE MEDIA

ORGANIZATION HAS EVERY RIGHT TO PRINT IT.

LET'S MOVE ON TO, BY THE WAY, TWO DAYS AFTER THEY SHARED THAT

LINK WITH DONALD TRUMP, JR.

HE ALSO TWEETED IT OUT, AGAIN THE

LINK PROVIDED TO HIM BY WIKILEAKS.

MOVING FORWARD, LET'S

GO TO GRAPHIC 23, THIS IS WHEN THINGS GET INTERESTING --

SO THAT IS HONESTLY -- IT RILED ME UP MORE THAN I EXPECTED

IT TO, BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO LEAD TO COMPLETE CHAOS AND

TURMOIL IN THE UNITED STATES, AND YOU ARE NOW PUSHING FOR

THAT.

AND YOU ARE NOW UNDERMINING AND QUESTIONING THE

ELECTION PROCESS.

AND BY THE WAY, RIGGING IS AN INTERESTING

WORD IN THIS CONTEXT.

THE DNC WAS DIRTY AS HELL, THERE'S NO

DENYING THAT WHATSOEVER, WHAT THEY DID TO UNDERMINE BERNIE IN

THE PRIMARIES WAS CLEAR AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE

AMERICAN PUBLIC WAS AWARE OF THAT SO I WAS FINE WITH THOSE

LEAKS 100%.

HOWEVER THERE'S NO EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT VOTES

WERE CHANGED OR THAT VOTING MACHINES WERE HACKED INTO OR

THAT VOTES WERE TAMPERED WITH IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM -- TO ME

THAT IS RIGGING.

MANIPULATING AND RIGGING ARE TWO DIFFERENT

THINGS, AND JUST THIS CONSTANT NARRATIVE COMING OUT DURING THE

ELECTION ABOUT RIGGING -- THERE WAS NO RIGGING, THERE'S NO PROOF

OF RIGGING.

MANIPULATION BY THE DNC IN ORDER TO UNDERMINE BERNIE

SANDERS, ABSOLUTELY THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF THAT, BUT RIGGING?

LET'S NOT GET SIDETRACKED BECAUSE NOW YOU WILL GET ME ON A

WARPATH ON THAT.

EVERYBODY HAS A DIFFERENT DEFINITION OF RIGGING,

PEOPLE KEEP ASSUMING THE OTHER PERSON HAS THE OTHER DEFINITION.

FOR SOME PEOPLE IT MEANS THE DNC PICKED ONE SIDE AND HELP THAT

SIDE.

THAT DEFINITELY HAPPENED, DEFINITELY.

THE DNC CHAIR

ADMITTED IT.

OTHER PEOPLE LEGITIMATELY THINK RIGGING, THAT

WORD, MEANS ACTUALLY CHANGING VOTES.

THERE, THERE IS NOT

NEARLY ENOUGH EVIDENCE, PEOPLE WILL SAY I GOT THIS SNAPSHOT --

NOBODY HAS EVER PROVEN THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO GET SIDETRACKED ON

THAT, AND IT DRIVES ME CRAZY WHEN PEOPLE MAKE DECLARATIVE

STATEMENTS ABOUT WHAT THE WORD RIGGING MEANS.

ANYWAY, ON THIS

ISSUE, THAT PARTICULAR COMMUNICATION WITH DONALD TRUMP,

JR., IT IS DAMNING.

WIKILEAKS, BY SAYING YOU SHOULDN'T CONCEDE

THE ELECTION IF YOU LOSE AND YOU SHOULD CHALLENGE IT, NUMBER ONE

IT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THEY HAVE A PERSPECTIVE, AND IT MIGHT BE

FINE TO HAVE A PERSPECTIVE, BUT THEY WERE PRO TRUMP.

NOW IT'S

ABSOLUTELY CLEAR.

AND BY THE WAY, YOU COULD SAY HEY, IF THE

DEMOCRATS WANTED TO IMPRISON YOU, DO GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE TO

YOU, AND IN THE CASE OF HILLARY CLINTON MAYBE MURDER YOU, YOU

MIGHT BE PRO TRUMP TOO.

OKAY, BUT THEY WERE PRO TRUMP.

THAT

COMMUNICATION PROVES IT. AND BY THE WAY, IT'S OKAY TO HAVE A

PERSPECTIVE, SO THEY WERE PRO TRUMP.

BUT THEY SHOULD BE HONEST

ABOUT IT, AND THEY ARE NOT.

THE SECOND REASON THAT IS DAMNING

IS, WAIT, WHY DO YOU CARE, THE ELECTION IS ALREADY OVER, THAT

HE NOT CONCEDE?

THAT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANT A MESS AND YOU DON'T

CARE IF HE WON THE ELECTION OR NOT.

THEY DIDN'T SAY IF YOU

THINK YOU WON YOU SHOULDN'T CONCEDE, THEY SAID YOU SHOULDN'T

CONCEDE TO MATTER WHAT.

WHICH TO ME SAYS GOD DAMMIT, DID YOU WORK

WITH THE RUSSIANS?

IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU GOT ACCESS TO EMAILS

EITHER THROUGH THE RUSSIANS OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, IT'S THAT YOU

ACTUALLY WORKED WITH THEM, BECAUSE THE RUSSIANS WANT TO

CAUSE A MESS HERE.

THAT IS NOW ABSOLUTELY PROVEN.

THEY HAD THE

TROLL FARMS, NOT ONLY DID THEY DO ALL THE STUFF DURING THE

ELECTION, BUT THEY WOULD SET UP FACEBOOK ACCOUNTS THAT WERE

SEEMINGLY LIBERAL AND SEEMINGLY CONSERVATIVE, THEY WOULD TRY TO

GET US TO FIGHT AND RIP US APART.

WHAT IS A GOOD WAY TO RIP

US APART?

DON'T CONCEDE THE ELECTION, SAY NO MATTER WHAT

HAPPENED ON WHEN TO FIGHT ANYWAY.

WHY IS WIKILEAKS SAYING

THAT?

IF YOU THINK DONALD TRUMP IS WONDERFUL AND YOU WANT HIM TO

WIN THAT'S ONE THING, YOU WANT TO RIP THE COUNTRY APART?

FOR

WHAT REASON?

I KNOW THE RUSSIANS WANT TO RIP US APART BECAUSE

THAT'S ALREADY ON THE RECORD, AND ALL DIFFERENT WAYS HAVE BEEN

PROVEN THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO THAT.

SO TO ME THAT

PARTICULAR MESSAGE IS REALLY DAMNING FOR WIKILEAKS, AND IT'S

A SHAME.

BECAUSE THEY PUBLISH REALLY VALUABLE INFORMATION, AND

I WISH THEY WOULD JUST DO THAT, AND AGAIN, I DON'T EVEN MIND IF

THEY WENT AN EXTRA STEP AND HAD A PERSPECTIVE.

BUT TO NOT BE

HONEST ABOUT IT AND TO POTENTIALLY WORK WITH THE

RUSSIANS TO TRY TO SPLIT US APART, DAMMIT, WHY DID YOU DO

THAT?

BY THE WAY THAT'S NOT CONCLUSIVE, BUT IT IS AN

IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE, AND DENYING THAT IT IS IMPORTANT IS

RIDICULOUS.

IT IS IMPORTANT.

I ALSO WANT TO QUICKLY NOTE THAT THEY KEPT URGING TRUMP TO

GIVE HIS TAX RETURNS TO WIKILEAKS SO THEY COULD

ESSENTIALLY, I'M PARAPHRASING WHAT THEY SAID, BUT CONTROL THE

MESSAGING AROUND HIS TAX RETURNS.

BECAUSE WIKILEAKS WAS

UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT IT WOULD EVENTUALLY GET LEAKED

ANYWAY AND IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WIKILEAKS HANDLED IT AS OPPOSED

TO A MEDIA ORGANIZATION LIKE MSNBC OR THE NEW YORK TIMES.

90% OF THAT I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH.

THEY ARE SAYING, GIVE US

HER TAX RETURNS AND WE WILL PUBLISH THEM.

EVERY MEDIA

ORGANIZATION WOULD HAVE DONE LIKEWISE.

MAYBE THEY WERE EVEN

TRICKING TRUMP.

JULIAN ASSANGE IS NOW ARGUING AFTER THE FACT, I

WAS TRYING TO TRICK HIM INTO GIVING ME THE TAX RETURNS.

TWO

OTHER JOURNALISTS DO THAT?

YES.

THE ONLY ISSUE THERE IS THEY

SAID SO WE CAN IMPROVE THE PERCEPTION OF OUR IMPARTIALITY

AND WE WOULDN'T BE PERCEIVED AS COMING FROM A PRO TRUMP OR

PRO-RUSSIA SOURCE.

IF YOU ARE SAYING WE ARE ON YOUR SIDE BUT

WE WANT TO APPEAR NOT TO BE ON YOUR SIDE, THAT'S A DISHONEST

ACTOR.

THAT'S A SHAME.

THERE IS A LOT OF OTHER STUFF, BUT LET'S SHORTEN THIS A LITTLE

BIT -- ONE OF THE FINAL MESSAGES THAT WAS SENT TO DONALD TRUMP,

JR.

-- BY THE WAY AT SOME POINT HE JUST STOPPED RESPONDING, AND

AT THIS POINT HE HAD STOPPED --

THIS

WAS -- LOOK, MY READ OF IT WAS IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO KIND

OF LET ASSANGE OFF ON SOME OF THE SEXUAL ASSAULT OR RAPE

ALLEGATIONS THAT WERE LODGED AGAINST HIM, MAYBE THIS WAS A

WAY TO GET OUT OF IT, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT IT WAS INTERESTING

BECAUSE IT SEEMED AS THOUGH THEY WANTED SOMETHING IN RETURN

FOR WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

ASSANGE WANTS TO GET THE HELL OUT OF THE PRISON HE'S BEEN PUT

INTO BY THE WESTERN GOVERNMENTS, I DON'T BLAME HIM FOR THAT.

IS

THIS A WACKY SCHEME TO DO THAT?

YES, IT'S PARTICULARLY WACKY.

AND THEY KNOW IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK, BUT IT'S ABOUT FRAMING.

OKAY, YOU WORK WITH THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES,

AND I GET IT, BUT I WISH YOU HAD BEEN WAY MORE TRANSPARENT ABOUT

THAT.

THE WHOLE POINT OF WIKILEAKS IS TRANSPARENCY, AND I

HAVE A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM WITH THEM NOT BEING TRANSPARENT ABOUT

THEIR MOTIVES AND WHO THEY SUPPORTED IN THE CAMPAIGN.

HAVING SAID THAT, AS I'VE BEEN SAYING THROUGHOUT THIS PIECE,

8 OUT OF 10 OF THESE ALLEGATIONS THAT EVERYONE IS TREATING

AS BOMBSHELLS, THE REST OF THE PRESS DOES ON A DAILY BASIS.

For more infomation >> LEAKED: Donald Trump Jr.'s Communications With Wikileaks - Duration: 23:56.

-------------------------------------------

11/16/17 12:33 PM (204 N River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

For more infomation >> 11/16/17 12:33 PM (204 N River St, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18702, USA) - Duration: 1:00.

-------------------------------------------

Honeywell True HEPA Air Purifiers - Duration: 1:22.

(acoustic guitar music)

- [Narrator] Honeywell True HEPA air purifiers

are designed to capture pollutants from the air,

making your indoor air cleaner and fresher.

In fact, when placed in the recommended room size,

they can help clean and circulate the air in your room

up to 5 times an hour.

Certified to capture up to 99.97% of microscopic allergens,

True HEPA filters are so fine they can capture particles

that are 0.3 microns and larger.

That's 250 times smaller than the average human hair.

Honeywell air purifiers help remove dust, smoke,

pet dander, mold spores and certain viruses and bacteria.

Easy Tap controls make it simple to choose

one of four cleaning levels to meet your specific needs.

Germ or Allergen settings maximize performance

during cold and flu or peak allergy seasons.

Choose General Cleaning for everyday air cleaning

and freshening, or Turbo setting

for fast particle and odor reduction.

Plus, they're ENERGY STAR® qualified

for efficient performance and AHAM Verifide®

for a certified clean air delivery rate.

For cleaner, fresher air in your home,

try a Honeywell True HEPA Air Purifier.

From the #1 allergist-recommended brand of air purifiers.

For more information or to purchase accessories,

visit honeywellpluggedin.com

No comments:

Post a Comment