It was like a decomposed corpse washing up on the river bank during a massive flood. It came in the form of a brief, cryptic tweet in the whoosh of running online commentary on FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee: “After my sister visited Paul Manafort's hometown as part of her investigation: attempted home break-in, her phone/comp. Hacked, car trashed 2x.”

You had to be at least a part-time detective on the Trump-Russia beat to get the clues. The name of the tweeter, Andrea Chalupa, rang a bell. I looked her up. The sister she referenced was Alexandra, an operative for the Democratic National Committee who in 2015 had begun digging into the affairs of Donald Trump’s campaign chairman at the time, Paul Manafort. Since the bigtime D.C. lobbyist for developing world kleptocracies was close to pro-Russia elements in Ukraine, Chalupa began to suspect Moscow would have some sort of connection to the Trump campaign. She didn’t pay much attention at first, because Trump’s campaign was just a clown show. But then he got traction and she looked again. And then came the suspected Russian hacks of the DNC, including her own email account. Even stranger things began to happen, as her sister’s tweeted shorthand reminded everyone on Monday afternoon.

Yes, there had been an “attempted home break-in” last year, in her leafy, virtually crime-free neighborhood of northwest Washington, D.C., as Politico’s Kenneth P. Vogel and David Stern reported in January. Her iPhone was hacked, too, and a death-metal track popular in Russia appeared on her playlist. Her car was broken into and trashed twice, with nothing stolen. The second time, the burglar left a red, traditional Ukrainian blouse draped across the back seat. She reported the incidents to the D.C. police and FBI, which by then had opened a counterintelligence investigation into Russian subversion. No arrests have been made.

Related: FBI Director Comey confirms probe into possible Trump-Russia ties

More strange things have happened since, to her and some of her friends, that she’s not ready to go public about. But she did say that, like virtually everyone else in official Washington, she was glued to the TV Monday for the House Intelligence Committee hearing on Moscow’s campaign to destroy Hillary Clinton, put Donald Trump in the White House and rattle Americans’ faith in their core institutions. Over five and a half hours, the star witness of the astonishing event, FBI Director James Comey, absolutely obliterated the credibility of the increasingly unhinged president of the United States.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/03/i-think-hes-going-to-get-himself-out-feinstein-hints-that-trump-may-resign-at-qa-session/#.WMyHLJ2F2K4.facebook

Stone has made headlines in recent weeks because of his connections to the hacker who reportedly broke into the Democratic National Committee’s servers, Guccifer2.0. He was recently temporarily suspended from Twitter after a misogynist meltdown in which he repeatedly called a female critic a “stupid b*tch.”

This is not his first claim that someone is trying to assassinate him. Stone claimed in January that someone had poisoned him with the radioactive chemical polonium 210, which was used to murder Russian journalist and Putin Critic Alexander Litvinenko.

Not only did Monsanto knowingly expose Americans to Glyphosate, a cancer-linked chemical, for which they are already paying, but they did so by purposely suppressing research on the chemical and composing their own research on the safety of their product which was later attributed.

According to court documents which include emails sent internally as well as email correspondences between the company and federal officials, Monsanto’s concerted effort to keep the truth about Glyphosate was more darkly orchestrated than previously believed.

In one email unsealed Tuesday, William F. Heydens, a Monsanto executive, told other company officials that they could ghostwrite research on glyphosate by hiring academics to put their names on papers that were actually written by Monsanto. “We would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” Mr. Heydens wrote, citing a previous instance in which he said the company had done this.

Whenever Palmer Report breaks a story, skeptics like to say "If this were legitimate, wouldn't it be all over the news?" Days ago we reported that Preet Bharara was investigating Fox News at the time Hannity urged Trump to fire him; the major corporate news outlets are just now reporting that same story today. A month ago Palmer Report reported that Dmitry Robyolovlev had been flying in to meet with Trump; MSNBC finally reported the same thing last week. A month ago Palmer Report reported that Betsy DeVos was connected to the Trump Tower Russian email server; CNN finally reported the same thing the other day. I could provide dozens of similar examples.

Now Palmer Report is reporting that Michael Flynn paid Turkish money to the former FBI agent who smeared Hillary Clinton during the election. This story actually required little investigative effort, as Flynn is admitting to the payments in his new government filings, which our article links to. Anyone who reads our article can see for themselves that it 100% verifiable. And yet skeptics, despite being on our side of the political spectrum, are still falling back on "If this were real, everyone would be reporting it." If only those skeptics realized how foolish this makes them look. They'll look even more foolish a week or a month from now, when CNN finally decides to report the same thing. But that's not required for our reporting to vindicated, because any of you can look at Flynn's filings right now.

If you're legitimately skeptical about an article and you want to find out how solid it is, follow its supporting source links to see if they verify the facts being laid out in the story. And if you don't want to do that kind of legwork, then rest assured that lazily shouting generic skepticism in the comments section won't help our cause and won't make you look judicious.

If you truly want to ask skeptical questions of the media, go ask cable news and the corporate news outlets why they're typically days, weeks, or even months behind a nobody like me. They have the resources to dig up most of these stories far quicker than Palmer Report can. Stop skeptically asking me why my (fully source-linked and easily verified) reporting isn't simultaneously being reported by the big news outlets. Start asking them that question

On Feb. 9, the same day current Attorney General Jeff Sessions was sworn into office, Donald Trump quietly signed an executive order that effectively changed the line of succession within the Department of Justice, laying out who will succeed Sessions in the event he dies, resigns or otherwise becomes incapacitated.

Trump’s order was a reversal of one signed a month prior by then-president Barack Obama. A week before leaving office, Obama authorized Executive Order 13762, “Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Justice.” That order inexplicably removed Obama appointee Dana Boente, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, from the DOJ line of succession. As USA Today reports, at the time Obama offered no justification for why he removed an attorney he appointed from the order of succession within the DOJ.

Fast-forward to Jan. 30, less than two weeks after Trump took office, when the president dramatically fired Obama holdover Sally Yates as Acting Attorney General after she refused to defend Trump’s controversial (and ultimately futile) immigration ban. As Sessions had yet to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Trump was able to elevate whomever he pleased to take Yates’ place.

If Boente’s name sounds familiar, that’s not surprising. In the wake of Yates’ ouster, Trump asked Boente to serve as Acting AG. The Virginia attorney was officially named Acting Attorney General on Feb. 9, the same day Sessions was sworn into office—and the same day Trump signed the executive order reversing Obama’s line of succession.

Now that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has turned out to be the dam that broke in Donald Trump’s Russia scandal, new details are arising by the hour. Sessions now admits he met with with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the Republican National Convention and again on September 8th. But now turns out both Trump and Sessions met the Russian Ambassador at Trump’s first ever foreign policy speech back in April of 2016 – because they invited him there.

Russian Ambassador Kislyak was an invited special guest at Donald Trump’s initial foreign policy speech nearly eleven months ago. During that speech, Trump made a point of spelling out his foreign policy of going soft on Russia for no particular reason. Before the speech, Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions are known to have met with Kislyak backstage for a reception, though it’s not known what might have been discussed between them. This establishes two key new aspects of the Trump-Russia scandal.