BREAKING: DEEP STATE OPERATIVE Tells ISIS To BOMB TRUMP TOWER … YES, SERIOUSLY [VIDEO]

Malcom Nance, an ex-intelligence official and frequent guest on MSNBC, made a controversial tweet on Tuesday that he since deleted. His tweet called for the Islamic State group to bomb one of President Donald Trump’s buildings in Istanbul, and it has rightfully put him in extremely hot water.

The Washington Free Beacon was one of the first to break the story in which Nance, a former intelligence officer who worked in Iraq and Afghanistan, responded to a tweet about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s win over the weekend.


The author of that first tweet, Dustin Giebel, lamented the fact that President Donald Trump reportedly called Erdoğan to congratulate him on his win and opined that the win was motivated by personal, not national, interest.

“Trump Tower Instanbul,” the tweet read, featuring an image of the building in Turkey’s capitol. “After seeing Trump’s congrats to Erdoğan for winning his RIGGED election I’m worried our FP is directed by property.”

Nance couldn’t resist the opportunity to jump on the tweet and responded, “This is my nominee for the first ISIS suicide bombing of a Trump property.”

The tweet quickly spread, prompting Nance to delete it, but not to offer an apology. His future as a commentator is in serious trouble, as many are wondering just how serious Nance’s comment was.

Well, after a look back at Nance’s history with all things Trump and the Islamic State group, one could suspect that Nance meant every word he tweeted.

During the campaign, Nance stated that Trump was the “ISIS candidate,” accusing the then-Republican nominee of aiding the Islamic State group through his campaign rhetoric.

“I will go so far as to say Donald Trump is the ISIS candidate. He inflames the passions of people in the West to perform Islamophobia, to draw recruits to them, to make them say, ‘This is what America is,’” Nance said.

He also said in March that Trump was a threat to American democracy.

“I mean we have got a very serious problem here. This man may be in a position where he will start causing true harm to American democracy,” he stated on AM Joy.

 

One might even argue that when Nance wrote that tweet, he would have wanted to see Trump inside the building when an Islamic State group suicide bomber made Trump Tower Istanbul his target. He does feel Trump is a threat to American democracy, after all. SOURCE

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. . . Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. . . Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” . . Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. . . Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. . . “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” . . Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. . . The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” . . But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? . . At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. . . “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: . . For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. . . However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. . . A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” . . However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . . -Obama’s Iran nuke deal -Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server -Obama IRS targets conservatives -Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters -Obamacare & Obama’s false promises -Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order -Benghazi-gate -Operation Fast & Furious -5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl -Extortion 17 -‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session -Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval -Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law -Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act -Illegally conducting war against Libya -NSA: Spying on Americans -Muslim Brotherhood ties -Miriam Carey -Birth certificate -Executive orders -Solyndra and the lost $535 million -Egypt -Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress -Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers -Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’