U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has urged Mexico to be on the lookout for Russian meddling in its elections, citing reports of Moscow's interference in the electoral process of countries around the world.

"We hear [reports of election meddling] from our European counterparts. My advice would be...pay attention to what's happening," he said on February 2 in Mexico City on the first stop of a Latin American tour.

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Moscow interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election to benefit Donald Trump and hurt the chances of Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Democrats and the media have spent the entire week shrieking desperately that releasing the memo will reveal classified information and get people killed.

They lied.

The memo has been released. And the only thing it kills is reputations as it documents how partisan figures in the FBI and the DOJ blatantly abused their authority and legitimized the Steele dossier.

Here are the 4 most devastating revelations from the memo release.

1. The FISA eavesdropping application for a Trump associate relied on the Steele dossier but never mentioned that it came from the Clinton campaign... even "though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials."

The application to the FISA court failed to mention that the Steele dossier was opposition research from a man being paid by a political campaign. The application, which was signed by Comey (who is still posturing on Twitter), Sally Yates (who is playing the martyr from afar), Andrew McCabe (who was forced to leave for allegedly sitting on the Weiner laptop emails) and Rod Rosenstein, (who is still around,) misled the FISA court in this very fundamental matter.

...but then the FISA application gets even worse

The FISA Abuse Memo is out and now we know why the Democrats were desperate to keep its contents hidden from the public: it confirms the worst fears not just of President Trump's supporters but of everyone concerned about the abuse of police power, government corruption, and the sanctity of our elections.

The memo shows interference in the 2016 presidential election by hostile elements within a United States intelligence agency. It wasn't the Russians we had to worry about-it was rogue actors at the highest levels of the FBI and Department of Justice. Left unanswered is to what extent the West Wing knew about or was complicit in this gross abuse of power.

What we now know:

One has to ask why there is a crisis in US-Russia relations since Washington and Moscow have much more in common than not, to include confronting international terrorism, stabilizing Syria and other parts of the world that are in turmoil, and preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. In spite of all that, the US and Russia are currently locked in a tit-for-tat unfriendly relationship somewhat reminiscent of the Cold War.

Apart from search for a scapegoat to explain the Hillary Clinton defeat, how did it happen? Israel Shamir, a keen observer of the American-Russian relationship, and celebrated American journalist Robert Parry both think that one man deserves much of the credit for the new Cold War and that man is William Browder, a hedge fund operator who made his fortune in the corrupt 1990s world of Russian commodities trading.

Browder is also symptomatic of why the United States government is so poorly informed about international developments as he is the source of much of the Congressional "expert testimony" contributing to the current impasse. He has somehow emerged as a trusted source in spite of the fact that he has self-interest in cultivating a certain outcome. Also ignored is his renunciation of American citizenship in 1998, reportedly to avoid taxes. He is now a British citizen.

"As Fewer Companies Control Our Media, Why Documentaries Matter More Than Ever". This was the title of a Huffington Post article, written in 2014, by Morgan Spurlock, documentary filmaker, producer and screenwriter. Spurlock informs us, "Films are incredible things. Magical things. Windows into worlds that we may never get to see and connecting with us on such deep emotional levels that we are forever affected by them and their messages. Films cannot only entertain but can shift public perception in ways we never thought possible."

As if on cue, a vast number of documentaries have flooded the media market. The huge majority have conveyed a very one-sided perspective of the conflict in Syria and have, almost invariably, supported the US Coalition regime change narrative, which has prolonged the destabilization project in the region for the last seven years. Are these documentaries any more accurate than the corporate media they might replace?

For example, on April 5, 2017, National Geographic released a preview of its film, Hell on Earth: The Fall Of Syria And The Rise of ISIS, by filmmaker Sebastian Junger and producing partner Nick Quested. This film was prematurely released to coincide with the alleged and controversial Khan Sheikhoun chemical weapon attacks in Syria, on April 4th. However, as Paul Larudee revealed, the film preview was a fraudulent misrepresentation of the war in Syria:

"The [opening] scene shows a missile destroying a residential building with a thunderous explosion. Imposed over the footage are the words, ALEPPO, SYRIA...[...] The original source footage comes from 2014, and is from the Israeli operation that took more than 2,200 Palestinian lives that summer"

It's beginning to look a little like The Day the Earth Stood Still out there, with Devin Nunes in the Klaatu role, roiling the Earthlings into a frothy hysteria as they attempt to defend their puny empire of errand boys, grocery clerks, and elected buffoons. At dawn's early light, we await The Memo.

The New York Times was running veritable Chinese fire drills on its front page this morning denouncing The Memo in advance, shrieking about the end of the Republic, with the laughable caveat that... "None of this is to say the F.B.I. and the rest of the federal law enforcement apparatus should be immune from criticism or reform." The Times editorial did not go into any detail about what exactly might invite that reform - like perhaps one top-rank agent telling another one that the "loathsome" president had to be gotten rid of at all costs.

The casual observer - say, one who is immune to the charms of Donald J. Trump - can't fail to notice that there is a bit more smoke emanating from the upper echelons of the FBI than has yet been seen in the sludgy narrative called "Russian Meddling in the 2016 Election." Going into two years of that yarn, not one concrete detail has emerged. Meddled how? For all the "we now know" talking points uttered by Grand Inquisitor Rachel Maddow, it seems to me that we now know next to nothing about "collusion" between Russians and Trump, while we know a great deal about the indelicate behavior of FBI officers in important positions with grave responsibilities - government agents with the power to wreck lives - who cooked up an enormous hysteria in the body politic.

POTUS Trump has blasted the leadership of the FBI and the Justice Department, saying that they politicized "the sacred investigative process" in favor of Democrats and against Republicans.

Trump went on the attack this morning with two tweets referencing the imminent release of the FISA memo, saying that their political bias is "something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago."

Trump tweeted this morning...

The top Leadership and Investigators of the FBI and the Justice Department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of Democrats and against Republicans - something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago. Rank & File are great people!

The White House is expected to release a secret memo alleging FBI bias against the US president Donald Trump in the probe into alleged collusion between Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and Russia.

On Monday night, the House Intelligence Committee approved the public release of the memo.

When the Soviet Union broke up, Gorbachev was promised that NATO would not extend any further East. History has shown this to be empty words. In the following clip taken from Russian news (with transcript below) Russia's top anchor tears into the lies and deceit of NATO.

TRANSCRIPT:
On Tuesday, the US Senate received a law bill about new sanctions against Russia, for supposed interference into the future US Election. The interference is actually a myth, but it's needed to justify the forthcoming sanctions. This is yet another example of how America handles its international relations in general, and with Russia specifically. Unfairly and even treacherously.

That's how it was from the very beginning of Moscow's seemingly renewed relationship with the West that was offered to Washington, as the USSR was crumbling, by the first and last President of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev. He then agreed to the unification of the two Germanies, the East and the West. Moreover, he agreed on the new state to enter the North Atlantic Alliance with just the one condition of not spreading NATO eastwards. "Not by a single inch," as Secretary of State Baker said to Gorbachev.

I caught my breath when I heard FBI Director Christopher Wray testify to Congress that there's been no abuse of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the law under which our intelligence communities electronically spy on possible terrorists and sometimes capture private communications of innocent U.S. citizens. Section 702 and related components expire Dec. 31, and Congress must decide whether to renew them.

To see if I'd heard Wray correctly, I searched for a transcript of his testimony. I found that he'd delivered the same line during an Oct. 13 Heritage Foundation speech. Wray claimed, "There's been no evidence of any kind of abuse of power under Section 702 despite the oversight ... with the three branches of government and quite a few years of experience now."

As a backdrop, recall that spying on U.S. citizens by our Intel agencies is considered so contrary to our basic constitutional protections, that it's generally prohibited, and is only permitted under strict limits set forth under the law.

White House chief of staff John Kelly told President Trump on Wednesday that he believed a classified memo written by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes was being overhyped and did not have the damning details Republicans claim to know about the FBI and Justice Department, according to a report published late Thursday.

Kelly hand-delivered the memo to Trump in the Oval Office Wednesday afternoon. They both talked about it then Kelly left Trump to read the full document by himself.

Hours later, Kelly returned to speak with his boss and told him he did not think releasing the redacted document would endanger national security, but said the document did not make as compelling of a case against federal investigators who allegedly used false information from the Fusion GPS dossier to obtain a search warrant, according to the Washington Post. The warrant allowed FBI and DOJ officials to spy on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.