Posts Tagged ‘Clinton foundation’

Trump, Jr. Meets With a Russian Lawyer/ Hillary Sells Political Favors in Foreign Policy Through the Clinton Foundation. Which Was ACTUALLY Treason?

July 12, 2017

President-Trump-And-Melania-Trump-Host-White-House-Easter-Egg-Roll_2.jpeg.CROP.promo-xlarge2

Having failed for the last 7 months in their Quixotic Quest to somehow remove United States President Donald J. Trump from office, the Democratic Party and their Propaganda Arm, the Main Stream Media, have decided to go after Donald Trump, Jr.

Foxnews.com reported yesterday that

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) said this afternoon that he now sees Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation as a probe into possible “treason.” 

Kaine and others on Capitol Hill reacted this afternoon to the latest revelations about a meeting last June between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer. 

Earlier today, Trump Jr. released what he said was the “entire email chain” of conversations setting up the meeting with attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya.

In the email chain, Trump Jr. expresses interest in obtaining damaging information on Hillary Clinton.

Kaine, who was Clinton’s running mate last year, said the new reports take the probe to another level. 

“To meet with an adversary to try to get information to hijack democracy, the investigation is now more than just an obstruction of justice investigation, more than just a perjury investigation, it’s a treason investigation,” he said. 

But Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) questioned why the Russian government would send a lawyer who didn’t know anything to the Trump campaign. 

“It’s kind of an odd way to suggest the Russian government wants to help,” he said.

Fox News Anchor Gregg Jarrett, himself a layer, wrote the following response to the Democratic and MSM outcry over this supposed “Treasonous Collusion”…

Erasmus, the noted classical scholar, described lawyers this way:  A most learned species of profoundly ignorant men. 

He had a point.  How else do you explain the wild pronouncements of lawyers like Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe, former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter and Senator Tim Kaine, D-Virginia?  Each have suggested Donald Trump Jr. committed treason by meeting with a Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. 

All three lawyers earned their degrees at Harvard or Yale.  Yet, they appear to have slept through their class on constitutional law. 

Treason?  Preposterous

Treason is defined in Article 3 of the Constitution and codified in 18 USC 2381:  “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, either levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort with the U.S. or elsewhere.”

Meeting with a Russian lawyer is not treason.  The U.S. is not at war with Russia.  Even if the president’s son received information from the Russian government or otherwise collaborated with foreign officials, it constitutes neither waging war against the U.S. nor aiding the enemy. 

 If it were otherwise, a myriad of Republican and Democratic Senators who admit meeting with the Russian Ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, might be somehow guilty of treason.  In these meetings, information is surely exchanged.  No one has ever suggested it rises to the level of criminality.  Indeed, it is what diplomats and foreign officials do.  It is what our own officials do in foreign lands. 

Collusion has nothing to do with elections and political campaigns. Which renders special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation meaningless. He is tasked with finding a crime that does not exist in the law. It is a legal impossibility.

Even if the Trump campaign had acted on information provided by the Russian lawyer, it would still not constitute treason.  Even conspiring to subvert the government does not rise to the level of treason.  Under our Constitution, Americans are permitted to speak against the government, undermine political opponents, support harmful policies or even place the interests of another nation ahead of those of the U.S.

You would think these lawyers, however misguided by their political prejudices, would nevertheless comprehend such a fundamental principle of constitutional and statutory law.  Clearly, they do not. 

So, boys and girls, you want to talk about “Treasonous Collusion”?

It’s funny how none of the Democrats seem to remember the nice, little money-laundering operation that Hillary Clinton had going as Secretary of State.

Just how corrupt was the pipeline between the Clinton Foundation and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

By the time Clinton left office in February 2013, the charity had received millions of dollars in new or increased payments from at least seven foreign governments. Five of the governments came on board during her tenure as secretary of state while two doubled or tripled their support in that time, according to data provided by CHAI spokeswoman Daley…CHAI should have told the State Department before accepting donations totaling $340,000 from Switzerland’s Agency for Development and Cooperation in 2011 and 2012. However, it did not believe U.S. authorities needed to review the other six governments, including Britain and Australia, she said, citing various reasons.” [Reuters, 3/19/15]

However, it was not just governments who sent money to the Clintons through their Foundation. Again, according to discoverthenetworks.org…

* “The Clinton Foundation swore off donations from foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That didn’t stop the foundation from raising millions of dollars from foreigners with connections to their home governments, a review of foundation disclosures shows. Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities. Their professed policy interests range from human rights to U.S.-Cuba relations.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

* During Secretary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, “More than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation… collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million…. Some donors also provided funding directly to charitable projects sponsored by the foundation, valued by the organization at $60 million.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

Whether the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians or the formation of an Iranian Connection, as a result of money given to the Clinton Foundation,  as was previously  reported in 2015, or the revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, this was not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of a Conflict of Interest involving possible Treason.

The raw, unmitigated corruption involving Hillary Clinton and her Foundation, revealed during the months leading up to the 2016 Presidential Election, along with the revelations which involved the DOJ refusing to investigate the Clinton Foundation and Cheryl Mill’s involvement in Hillary Clinton’s influence peddling as Secretary of State under President Barack Hussein Obama, via means of the Clinton Foundation, turned out to be breath-taking in its size and scope, as more and more unscrupulous details were being revealed.

And yet, not a mumbling word was said by these “upstanding Public Servants”, who want both Donald Trump Sr. and Jr.’s heads on a platter, and who just happen to belong to the same political party as Hillary Clinton. The American Public never heard a sanctimonious peep out of the DNC’s Propaganda Arm, the Main Stream Media, when Clinton’s Treasonous Activities were going on, either.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Advertisements

The Ultimate “Deflection”: From The Clinton Foundation and Obama Administration Wiretapping to “Trump-Russia”.

April 1, 2017

Open-Season-NRD-600

Hanging out on Facebook Political Pages, one witnesses a unique phenomenon known as “deflection”.

Mostly used by Liberals and Internet Trolls (but, I repeat myself), it is a simple and ineffective strategy consisting of changing the subject when you have no logical counterpoint in a “discussion”.

It occurs in “real life” all the time. Especially in politics…

Foxnews.com reported yesterday that

The U.S. intelligence official who “unmasked,” or exposed, the names of multiple private citizens affiliated with the Trump team is someone “very well known, very high up, very senior in the intelligence world,” a source told Fox News on Friday. 

Intelligence and House sources with direct knowledge of the disclosure of classified names told Fox News that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., now knows who is responsible — and that person is not in the FBI.

For a private citizen to be “unmasked,” or named, in an intelligence report is extremely rare. Typically, the American is a suspect in a crime, is in danger or has to be named to explain the context of the report.

“The main issue in this case, is not only the unmasking of these names of private citizens, but the spreading of these names for political purposes that have nothing to do with national security or an investigation into Russia’s interference in the U.S. election,” a congressional source close to the investigation told Fox News. 

The unmasking of Americans whose communications apparently were caught up in surveillance under the Obama administration is a key part of an investigation being led by Nunes, who has come under fire from Democrats for focusing on that aspect. 

Nunes has known about the unmasking controversy since January, when two sources in the intelligence community approached him. The sources told Nunes who was responsible and at least one of the Trump team names that was unmasked. They also gave him serial numbers of reports that documented the activity.

This was long before Trump sent out his now-infamous March 4 tweets claiming then-President Barack Obama “wiretapped” Trump Tower during the 2016 election.

Nunes had asked intelligence agencies to see the reports in question, but was stonewalled.

He eventually was able to view them, but there was only one safe place to see the documents without compromising the sources’ identities — the old executive office building on White House grounds, which has a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) required to view classified or top secret reports. The White House did not tell Nunes about the existence of the intelligence reports, but did help him gain access to the documents at his request, the source said.

The White House, meanwhile, is urging Nunes and his colleagues to keep pursuing what improper surveillance and leaks may have occurred before Trump took office. They’ve been emboldened in the wake of March 2 comments from former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas, who on MSNBC suggested her former colleagues tried to gather material on Trump team contacts with Russia.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Friday her comments and other reports raise “serious” concerns about whether there was an “organized and widespread effort by the Obama administration to use and leak highly sensitive intelligence information for political purposes.”

“Dr. Farkas’ admissions alone are devastating,” he said.

Farkas parted ways with the White House in 2015 and defended herself on Twitter, saying she didn’t personally “give anybody anything except advice” on Russia information and wanted Congress to ask for facts. 

The communications collected from Trump team associates apparently were picked up during surveillance of foreign targets. But an intelligence source familiar with those targets said they were spied on long before Trump became the GOP presidential nominee in mid-July.

In addition, citizens affiliated with Trump’s team who were unmasked were not associated with any intelligence about Russia or other foreign intelligence, sources confirmed. The initial unmasking led to other surveillance, which led to other private citizens being wrongly unmasked, sources said.

“Unmasking is not unprecedented, but unmasking for political purposes … specifically of Trump transition team members … is highly suspect and questionable,” an intelligence source told Fox News. “Opposition by some in the intelligence agencies who were very connected to the Obama and Clinton teams was strong. After Trump was elected, they decided they were going to ruin his presidency by picking them off one by one.”

Nunes first revealed on March 22 in a press conference that the U.S. intelligence community “incidentally collected” information on Trump’s transition team, putting the information and names into various intelligence reports. His committee had been investigating whether Russia interfered in the U.S. election as well as how names of private citizens from these reports were leaked. 

House Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., criticized Nunes for his handling of the investigation, claiming he should never have briefed Trump. Nunes apologized the following day, but said he briefed the president because the information he found was not related to Russia.

The minority members on the House Intelligence Committee were expected to visit a National Security Agency facility on Friday to view the same reports Nunes has seen, an intelligence source told Fox News.

Meanwhile, the Democrats and their minions in the Main Stream Media are deflecting from this story by continuing the baseless accusations that members of the Trump Administration, including Trump himself, “colluded” with the Russians.

The problem is…they still have no evidence for their claims, whatsoever. It remains a WITCH HUNT designed to hamstring Trump from fulfilling his Campaign Promises, driven by the impossible dream that they might succeed in driving him out of office.

However, boys and girls, the Dems keep forgetting that when you toss a rock from the front doorway of a glass house, you had better be ready for the catapulted boulder that will be coming back at you.

And, a glass house cannot deflect a boulder.

Four months ago, Breitbart.com, ran the following story…

President-elect Donald Trump’s administration will encourage foreign governments to investigate the Clinton Foundation’s finances, according to a source close to the transition team.

The new administration will pressure its new ambassadors to urge governments in Haiti and Colombia to investigate the foundation’s financial dealings, the New York Post reported.

Trump said he will not investigate or pursue charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server or role in the Clinton Foundation while at the State Department. But Trump’s statement did not say anything about encouraging foreign governments to look into the foundation’s work in various countries.

“Haiti and Colombia will be key diplomatic posts for this ­because of all the money ­involved,” said the source.

Senior foundation officials coordinated with the State Department to give “Friends of Bill” Clinton preferential treatment during earthquake recovery efforts in Haiti in 2010, according to emails obtained by the Republican National Committee through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.

Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra pledged $100 million to the foundation in 2005 and later benefited from the foundation’s work in Colombia, where he used the land he acquired in the country to set up an oil business, according to the Post.

The foundation has received millions of dollars from foreign governments such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Ireland.

But donations to the foundation have dropped by 37 percent to $108 million last year after allegations that Hillary Clinton used the charity to solicit million-dollar donations from foreign governments and corporations in exchange for favorable treatment from the State Department while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton left the Clinton Foundation in April 2015 to run for president. After the election loss to Trump, it is unclear whether or not she will resume her duties on the board of directors with Bill and Chelsea Clinton.

The price of “paying tribute” in order to gain an audience with someone in power goes all the way back to Biblical Times, continuing to the American and French Revolutions.

Our government was never meant to be a Monarchy. America remains a Constitutional Republic.

American Politicians were never meant to be Lords, who would remain in power in perpetuity, amassing unlimited wealth by accepting “tribute” from those seeking “favors”.

What Hillary Clinton tried to get away with is a prime example of why our Founders set up the System of Checks and Balances that they did when they were constructing our system of government.

Obama, the Department of Justice, and the Clintons circumvented that system with a series of maneuvers carried out between the White House, the campaign Trail, and a private jet idling on a Tarmac at an airport.

Our Founding Fathers envisioned Citizen Statesman, who after serving their country and their communities for a short period of time, would return to their homes, to their families, and to their trades.

Donald J. Trump is a prime example of this.

What Obama, Clinton, Schumer, and all of the Liberals out there still crying in their Pepsi Product of choice over watching the machinations of a Constitutional Republic in action do not want to admit, is that the Electoral Collage was put in place to prevent what they are still trying to accomplish by any means necessary: overthrowing an election in which Americans who living in the Heartland of our nation defeated a Presidential Candidate running on the favored Political Ideology of isolated Metropolitan Areas with dense populations.

The American People overthrew the “Tyranny of the Minority”, which we have suffered under for the last 8 years on November 8th.

All these displaced tyrants are accomplishing with their unsubstantiated claims against President Trump, their outlandish political machinations, and their overwhelming hypocrisy is to make average Americans, who rejected their political ideology en masse on November 8th, even madder at them, if that is possible.

The lesson which they should have learned through their defeat on November 8th is that you can not buy average Americans voters nor our respect.

They are not for sale.

It is time for the Leaders and MSM Minions of the Democratic Party to suck it up and move on.

Americans have had enough of their National Temper Tantrum and boundless hypocrisy.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

“The Art of the Deal”: While Clinton and Stein Demand a Recount, Trump Announces that Foreign Countries Can Investigate the Clinton Foundation

November 28, 2016

hillary-clinton-foundation-money-pile

One of the problems when you become successful is that jealousy and envy inevitably follow. There are people—I categorize them as life’s losers—who get their sense of accomplishment and achievement from trying to stop others. As far as I’m concerned, if they had any real ability they wouldn’t be fighting me, they’d be doing something constructive themselves.” ― Donald J. Trump, “Trump: The Art of the Deal ”    

Foxnews.com reports that

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s truce and efforts to “come together” after their bitter White House race appeared to fray this weekend when Clinton joined in a vote recount effort that the President-elect assailed in a series of Tweets Sunday.

In the posts, Trump claimed that “millions” of people cast illegal votes in this month’s presidential election, and claimed that the press was covering the matter unfairly. 

Trump further contended that if the popular vote determined the presidency, “It would have been much easier for me to win” it because he would have altered his campaign to pile up overall vote totals, not Electoral College votes.

 The real estate mogul also tweeted part of Clinton’s concession speech, when she told supporters they must accept that “Donald Trump is going to be our president,” and snippets from her debate remarks, when she denounced the Republican nominee for refusing to say in advance that he would accept the Election Day verdict.

There’s been no indication of widespread vote manipulation, illegal voting or hacking that materially affected the outcome one way or the other. It’s that very lack of evidence that suggests Trump is likely to prevail in recounts.

Trump’s social media storm came one day after a Hillary for America lawyer said that Clinton would join in a vote-recall effort by Green Party Candidate Jill Stein.

The attorney, Marc Elias, said Clinton was taking the step “to ensure the process proceeds in a manner that is fair to all sides.”

Stein has already raised at least $5.4 million in her effort to recount votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — states that were the key to Trump’s upset victory. She began the process Friday by officially requesting a review in Wisconsin.

Stein has argued the recount is intended to test the integrity of the U.S. voting system, amid so-far unfounded speculation that Russia tampered with the process.

However, the effort also could undo the 70-plus electoral votes by which Trump beat Clinton.

Trump won Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and, as of Wednesday, held a lead of almost 11,000 votes in Michigan, with the results awaiting state certification Monday.

Stein received only about 1 percent of the national vote, which has prompted Trump to call her effort a fundraising “scam.”

“I would say (Trump) has been incredibly gracious and magnanimous to Secretary Clinton at a time when for whatever reason her folks are saying they will join in a recount,” senior Trump transition team adviser Kellyanne Conway said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“She congratulated him and conceded to him on election night. … The idea that we are going to drag this out now where the president-elect has been incredibly magnanimous to the Clintons and to the Obamas is incredible.”

Meanwhile, Conway refused to rule out the possibility of further investigating Clinton over her use of a private email server while secretary of state between 2009 and 2013. 

Conway made clear that Trump said only that he wouldn’t rule out another possible email probe because new evidence could emerge and he wouldn’t want to undercut the authority of federal and congressional investigators.

The FBI this summer concluded its one-year investigation into Clinton using the private server by saying she was “extremely careless” and that some of the emails included classified information.

However, the investigation was effectively closed without criminal charges being recommended to the Justice Department.

Trump, in his presidential debates with Clinton, also suggested that if elected he would appoint a special prosecutor for the matter.

Trump planned to return to New York on Sunday after spending Thanksgiving weekend at his West Palm Beach estate. His transition team said the president-elect had scheduled a series of meetings Monday with prospective administration hires.

With all due deference to the two losers who have decided to attempt to pee in the punch bowl of America’s Celebration over Trump winning the White House, please allow me to issue a word of warning:

You two power-hungry imbeciles have no clue as to whom you are dealing with.

You see, boys and girls, when you toss a rock from the front doorway of a glass house, you had better be ready for the catapulted boulder that will be coming back at you.

Case in point, courtesy of Breitbart.com,

President-elect Donald Trump’s administration will encourage foreign governments to investigate the Clinton Foundation’s finances, according to a source close to the transition team.

The new administration will pressure its new ambassadors to urge governments in Haiti and Colombia to investigate the foundation’s financial dealings, the New York Post reported.

Trump said he will not investigate or pursue charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server or role in the Clinton Foundation while at the State Department. But Trump’s statement did not say anything about encouraging foreign governments to look into the foundation’s work in various countries.

“Haiti and Colombia will be key diplomatic posts for this ­because of all the money ­involved,” said the source.

Senior foundation officials coordinated with the State Department to give “Friends of Bill” Clinton preferential treatment during earthquake recovery efforts in Haiti in 2010, according to emails obtained by the Republican National Committee through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.

Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra pledged $100 million to the foundation in 2005 and later benefited from the foundation’s work in Colombia, where he used the land he acquired in the country to set up an oil business, according to the Post.

The foundation has received millions of dollars from foreign governments such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Ireland.

But donations to the foundation have dropped by 37 percent to $108 million last year after allegations that Hillary Clinton used the charity to solicit million-dollar donations from foreign governments and corporations in exchange for favorable treatment from the State Department while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton left the Clinton Foundation in April 2015 to run for president. After the election loss to Trump, it is unclear whether or not she will resume her duties on the board of directors with Bill and Chelsea Clinton.

The price of “paying tribute” in order to gain an audience with someone in power goes all the way back to Biblical Times, continuing to the American and French Revolutions.

Our government was never meant to be a Monarchy. America remains a Constitutional Republic.

American Politicians were never meant to be Lords, who would remain in power in perpetuity, amassing unlimited wealth by accepting “tribute” from those seeking “favors”.

What Hillary Clinton tried to get away with is a prime example of why our Founders set up the System of Checks and Balances that they did when they were constructing our system of government.

Obama, the Department of Justice, and the Clintons circumvented that system with a series of maneuvers carried out between the White House, the campaign Trail, and a private jet idling on a Tarmac at an airport.

Our Founding Fathers envisioned Citizen Statesman, who after serving their country and their communities for a short period of time, would return to their homes, to their families, and to their trades.

Donald J. Trump is a prime example of this.

What Clinton , Stein, and all of the Liberals out there still crying in their Pepsi Product of choice over watching the machinations of a Constitutional Republic in action do not want to admit, is that the Electoral Collage was put in place to prevent what they are now trying to accomplish. Which is choosing a President based on the favored Political Ideology of isolated Metropolitan Areas with dense populations.

The American People overthrew the “Tyranny of the Minority”, which we have suffered under for the last 8 years on November 8th.

And, Mrs. Clinton, unlike those Foreign Countries whom you tried to sell our Sovereignty, , you can not buy our votes nor our respect.

They are not for sale.

But don’t worry, I hear the weather in Haiti and Columbia is lovely this time of year.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

It Takes a Radical: The Very Political Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton-2016 Presidential Election Edition (An Unauthorized KJ Biographical Analysis)

October 30, 2016

corruptopus-600-liPROLOGUE:  I researched the follow­ing infor­ma­tion and record­ed it as a 4 part series about the 2016 presump­tive Democ­ra­t­ic Presi­den­tial Candi­date, Hillary Rodham Clinton. I am offer­ing it today, because, as her dream of becoming the President is hopefully coming to an end, I feel that it is imper­a­tive to share this infor­ma­tion in a form where it will be easy for you , gentle readers, to share with your friends and family. 

Buoyed by the complicity of the Main Stream Media and bought and paid for Democratic Operatives, over the years she has constantly presented herself as a “Moder­ate” Democ­rat, and “Woman of the People”, as a  linch­pin of her Campaign Strat­e­gy. However, the story of her life reveals someone quite differ­ent.


Hillary Clinton 1On October 26, 1947, Hillary Diane Rodham entered this world in Chicago, Illinois.Hillary Rodham, the oldest daugh­ter of Hugh Rodham, a prosper­ous fabric store owner, and Dorothy Emma Howell Rodham, was raised in Park Ridge, Illinois, a quaint little suburb locat­ed 15 miles north­west of downtown Chicago. Hillary has two younger broth­ers, Hugh Jr. (born 1950) and Antho­ny (born 1954).In her youth, the future Democ­rat was active in young Repub­li­can groups, even campaign­ing for the 1964 Repub­li­can Presi­den­tial Nominee, Barry Goldwater.According to Hil, she was inspired to work in some form of public service after hearing the Reverend Martin Luther King speak in Chicago. She became a Democ­rat in 1968.The young ingénue attend­ed Welles­ley College, where she was active in student politics, being elect­ed Senior Class Presi­dent before she gradu­at­ed in 1969.After that, Hilary enrolled in Yale Law School, where she met Bill “Bubba” Clinton.  Afer gradu­at­ing with honors in 1973, she then enrolled at Yale Child Study Center, where she took cours­es on children and medicine and complet­ed one post-graduate year of study, which explains her whole “It takes a village” philosophy.While a college student, Hillary worked sever­al summer jobs. In 1971, she arrived in Washing­ton, D.C. to work on U.S. Senator Walter Mondale’s sub-committee on migrant workers. The next summer found her out west, working for the campaign of Democ­ra­t­ic presi­den­tial nominee George McGovern.Then, in the spring of 1974, Rodham became a member of the presi­den­tial impeach­ment inquiry staff, advis­ing the Judicia­ry Commit­tee of the House of Repre­sen­ta­tives during the Water­gate Scandal.Her boss back then, Jerry Zeifman, now-retired gener­al counsel and chief of staff of the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee, tells a very reveal­ing story concern­ing her work there.According to Zeifman, a lifelong Democ­rat, Hillary got a job working on the inves­ti­ga­tion at the behest of her former Yale Law Profes­sor, Burke Marshall, also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquid­dick affair.When the Water­gate Inves­ti­ga­tion was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the commit­tee staff and refused to give her a letter of recom­men­da­tion. That made the Future First Lady and Secre­tary of State one of only three people who earned that badge of dishon­or in Zeifman’s 17-year career.Why?Accord­ing to Zeifman,

Because she was a liar. She was an uneth­i­cal, dishon­est lawyer. She conspired to violate the Consti­tu­tion, the rules of the House, the rules of the commit­tee and the rules of confi­den­tial­i­ty.

Zeifman claims that she was one of sever­al individ­u­als includ­ing Marshall, Special Counsel John Doar, and Senior Associate Special Counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum, who plotted to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the inves­ti­ga­tion.

Zeifman believes  that they were death­ly afraid of putting the break-in’s master­mind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by Counsel to the Presi­dent.  The reason being, Hunt had the goods regard­ing some dirty dealings  in the Kennedy Admin­is­tra­tion that would have made Water­gate look like a kid busting open his Piggy Bank…dealings which purport­ed­ly includ­ed Kennedy’s complic­i­ty in the attempt­ed assas­si­na­tion of Fidel Castro.

Hillary and her associates were acting direct­ly again­st the decision of top Democ­rats, up to and includ­ing then-House Major­i­ty Leader Tip O’Neill, who all believed that Nixon clear­ly had the right to counsel.

The reason that Hillary and the rest came up with the scheme is because they believed that they could gain enough votes on the Judicia­ry Commit­tee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.

In order to pull off this scheme, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraud­u­lent legal brief, and confis­cat­ed public documents to hide her decep­tion.

Hillary wanted to present in her brief that there was no right to repre­sen­ta­tion by counsel during an impeach­ment proceed­ing. Zeifman told Hillary about the case of Supre­me Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeach­ment attempt in 1970….

As soon as the impeach­ment resolu­tions were intro­duced by (then-House Minor­i­ty Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer.

Douglas was allowed to keep counsel by the Judicial Commit­tee in place at the time, which clear­ly estab­lished a prece­dent. Zeifman told Hillary that all the documents estab­lish­ing this fact were in the Judicia­ry Committee’s public files.

That was  a mistake, per Zeifman…

Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was locat­ed, which at that time was secured and inacces­si­ble to the public.

Hillary then wrote a legal brief which argued that there was no prece­dent for the right to repre­sen­ta­tion by counsel during an impeach­ment proceeding…ignoring the Douglas case complete­ly.

The brief was so laugh­ing­ly fraud­u­lent, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had ever actual­ly submit­ted it to a judge.

Zeifman says that if Hillary and her associates had succeed­ed, members of the House Judicia­ry Commit­tee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witness­es, and denied the oppor­tu­ni­ty to even be a part of the draft­ing of articles of impeach­ment again­st Nixon.

After Presi­dent Richard M. Nixon resigned in August, render­ing the matter of her decep­tion moot, Hillary became a facul­ty member of the Univer­si­ty of Arkansas Law School in Fayet­teville, where her Yale Law School class­mate and boyfriend Bill Clinton was also teach­ing.

Hillary Rodham married Bill Clinton on October 11, 1975, at their home in Fayet­teville. Before he proposed, Bubba had secret­ly purchased a small house that Hillary had previ­ous­ly said that she liked. When she accept­ed his marriage propos­al, he revealed that they owned the house.

Hillary Clinton #2After she married Bill in 1975, Hillary Rodham Clinton worked on Jimmy Carter’s success­ful campaign for presi­den­ti in1976, while Bill got elect­ed Attor­ney Gener­al of the state of Arkansas.

Hillary joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock after Bill became Attor­ney Gener­al, and made partner only after he was elect­ed gover­nor, accord­ing to Former Clinton Confi­dan­te Dick Morris.

That event occurred in 1978.

Presi­dent Carter appoint­ed Mrs. Clinton to the board of the Legal Services Corpo­ra­tion (LSC) in 1978. This was a feder­al­ly funded nonprof­it organi­za­tion which was designed as a way to expand the social welfare state and grow social welfare spend­ing. Accord­ing to Dick Morris, the appoint­ment was in exchange for Bill’s support for Carter in his 1980 prima­ry again­st Ted Kennedy. Hillary went on to become board chair­man in a coup in which she won a major­i­ty away from Carter’s choice to be chair­man.

Hillary more than tripled LSC’s annual budget, from $90 million to $321 million, in taxpay­er funds (OUR money). LSC used these funds in sever­al differ­ent ways, most notable among them, the print­ing of polit­i­cal train­ing manuals showing “how commu­ni­ty organi­za­tions and public inter­est groups can win polit­i­cal power and resources,” and the financ­ing of train­ing programs that taught polit­i­cal activists how to harass their opposi­tion.

While Hillary was running the LSC board, the Corpo­ra­tion also

1. Worked to defeat a Califor­nia refer­en­dum that would have cut state income taxes in half

2. Called for the U.S. govern­ment to give two-thirds of the state of Maine to Ameri­can Indians

3.  Paid Marxist orators and folk singers to wage a campaign again­st the Louisiana Wildlife Commis­sion

4.  Joined a Michi­gan initia­tive to recog­nize “Black English” as an official language;

5.  Sought to force the New York City Transit Author­i­ty to hire former heroin addicts so as to avoid “discriminat[ing]” again­st “minori­ties” who were “handi­capped.”

When it became clear that Ronald Reagan was on the verge of beating Democ­rat Presi­dent Jimmy Carter in 1980, LSC redirect­ed massive amounts of its public funding into an anti-Reagan letter-writing campaign by indigent clients. After Reagan was elect­ed in Novem­ber 1980, LSC immedi­ate­ly laundered its assets — some $260 million — into state-level agencies and private groups so as to keep the funds away from the board that Reagan would eventu­al­ly appoint. Hillary Clinton left LSC in 1981.

While Bubba was  Gover­nor of Arkansas from 1978 to 1980, and again from 1982 to 1992, Hillary was very active “behind the scenes”.

During these years, she contin­ued her legal practice as a partner in the Rose Law Firm. In 1978 she also became a board member of the Children’s Defense Fund (CDF), and from 1986 to 1992 she served as chair of the CDF Board.

From 1982 to 1988, Hillary also chaired the New World Founda­tion (NWF), which had helped to launch CDF in 1973. While running the NWF, the Founda­tion made grants to such organi­za­tions as the Nation­al Lawyers Guild, the Insti­tute for Policy Studies, the Chris­tic Insti­tute, Grass­roots Inter­na­tion­al, the Commit­tees in Solidar­i­ty with the People of El Salvador (which sought to foment a Commu­nist revolu­tion in Central Ameri­ca), and groups with ties to the most extreme elements of the African Nation­al Congress.

Accord­ing to Dick Morris, when Clinton was consid­er­ing not running for anoth­er term as Gover­nor of Arkansas in 1990, Hillary said she would run if he didn’t. She and Bill even had Morris take two surveys to assess her chances of winning. The conclu­sion was that she couldn’t win because people would just see her as a seat warmer for when Bill came back licking his wounds after losing for presi­dent. So she didn’t run. Bill did and won. But there is no question she had her eye on public office, as opposed to service, long ago.

So, while Bill was the Front Man, Hil worked “the Back of the House”, in prepa­ra­tion for her “moment in the spotlight”.

During the Clintons’ time in Arkansas, they also both became involved in a little matter which later became known as “The White­wa­ter Scandal”.

In 1978, while Bubba was Attor­ney Gener­al of Arkansas, Hil and he partnered with James and Susan McDougal in a purchase 220 acres of land that would evolve into the White­wa­ter Devel­op­ment Corpo­ra­tion. The real estate venture tanked, costing the Clintons a report­ed $40,000 in losses. After that James McDougal went into the banking indus­try, forming Madis­on Guaran­ty Savings and Loan.

In 1986, feder­al regula­tors inves­ti­gat­ed anoth­er real estate invest­ment backed by James McDougal. The inves­ti­ga­tion led to McDougal’s resig­na­tion from Madis­on Guaran­ty and the eventu­al collapse of the bank. Questions surround­ing the Clintons’ involve­ment in the White­wa­ter deal grew during Presi­dent Clinton’s first term in office and an inves­ti­ga­tion into the legal­i­ty of the White­wa­ter trans­ac­tions was launched.

All subse­quent inquiries into the White­wa­ter land deal yield­ed insuf­fi­cient evidence to charge the Clintons with crimi­nal conduct. Howev­er, sever­al of their associates were convict­ed as a result the inves­ti­ga­tions.

In July 1992, William Jeffer­son Clinton was nominat­ed by the Democ­ra­t­ic Party as their Candi­date for the Presi­den­cy of the United States.

In August of that year, Daniel Watten­berg wrote the follow­ing prophet­ic state­ment in the opening of an article for “The Ameri­can Specta­tor” titled, “The Lady Macbeth of Little Rock”…

Hillary Clinton has been likened to Eva Peron, but it’s a bad analo­gy. Evita was worshipped by the “shirt­less ones,” the working class, while Hillary’s charms elude most outside of an élite cohort of left-liberal, baby–boom feminists-the type who thought Anita Hill should be canon­ized and Thelma and Louise was the best movie since Easy Rider. Hillary reckons herself the next Eleanor Roosevelt. But, stand­ing well to the left of her husband and enjoy­ing an indepen­dent power base within his coali­tion, Hillary is best thought of as the Winnie Mande­la of Ameri­can politics. She has likened the Ameri­can family to slavery, thinks kids should be able to sue their parents to resolve family arguments, and during her tenure as a founda­tion officer gave away millions (much of it in no-strings-attached grants) to the left-including sizable sums to hard-left organiz­ers. She is going to cause her husband no end of polit­i­cal embar­rass­ment between now and November-and who knows how long after­ward.

Mr. Watten­berg nailed that one, huh?

Hillary Clinton #3Bill Clinton was inaugu­rat­ed as the 42nd Presi­dent of the United States of Ameri­ca on January 20, 1993.  Stand­ing right behind him…and pushing hard was Hillary Rodham Clinton, by now widely known as the more-driven, and polit­i­cal­ly ambitious one of the couple.

Billed as “the New Camelot” by the Main Stream Media, the Clintons strode arm-in-arm into their castle to preside over their new kingdom, where Progres­sivism in the name of “Moder­a­tion” would be the Law of the Land.

Howev­er, just as the reign of Arthur and Guinev­ere ended badly, into the Clintons’ story­book “Co-Presidency”, “a little rain” fell in the form of scandals and quite a few “Bimbo Eruptions” which brought about an inglo­ri­ous end to all of their “peace and harmony”.

Rose Law Firm Billing – As I wrote previ­ous­ly, in 1978, while Bubba was Attor­ney Gener­al of Arkansas, Hil and he partnered with James and Susan McDougal in a purchase 220 acres of land that would evolve into the White­wa­ter Devel­op­ment Corpo­ra­tion. The real estate venture tanked, costing the Clintons a report­ed $40,000 in losses. After that James McDougal went into the banking indus­try, forming Madis­on Guaran­ty Savings and Loan.

In 1986, feder­al regula­tors inves­ti­gat­ed anoth­er real estate invest­ment backed by James McDougal. The inves­ti­ga­tion led to McDougal’s resig­na­tion from Madis­on Guaran­ty and the eventu­al collapse of the bank. Questions surround­ing the Clintons’ involve­ment in the White­wa­ter deal grew during Presi­dent Clinton’s first term in office and an inves­ti­ga­tion into the legal­i­ty of the White­wa­ter trans­ac­tions was launched.

After nearly two years of search­es and subpoe­nas, the White House announced on the evening of January 6, 1996, that it had unexpect­ed­lydiscov­ered copies of missing documents from the Rose Law Firm that describe Hillary Rodham Clinton’s work for a failing savings and loan associ­a­tion in the 1980′s.

Feder­al and Congres­sion­al inves­ti­ga­tors had issued subpoe­nas for the documents since 1994, and the White House claimed not have them. The origi­nals disap­peared from the Rose Law Firm, short­ly before Bill Clinton was inaugu­rat­ed as Presi­dent.

The newly discov­ered documents were copies of billing records from the Rose firm. The origi­nals were found under the Clintons’ bed in the White House, short­ly after the statute of limita­tions ran out.

All subse­quent inquiries into the White­wa­ter land deal yield­ed insuf­fi­cient evidence to charge the Clintons with crimi­nal conduct. Howev­er, sever­al of their associates were convict­ed as a result of the inves­ti­ga­tions.

Death of Vince Foster – On July 20, 1993, Vincent W. Foster Jr., the deputy counsel to the presi­dent of the United States, and former partner with Hillary, in The Rose Law Firm, was found lying neatly face-up on a steep embank­ment in Marcy Park with his feet point­ing down, dressed in expen­sive trousers and a white dress shirt, less than eight miles from the White House, with a single gun-shot wound to the head. Dead. Some of the blood on Foster’s face was still wet, but start­ing to dry. A trail of blood flowed upwards from his nose to above his ear. The man who found his body said there was no gun, but after he left to notify police, a gun appeared in Foster’s hand. Presi­dent William Jeffer­son Clinton’s Arkansas child­hood friend, First Lady Hillary Clinton’s Rose Law Firm partner, and White House confidante’s death was to become the subject of contro­ver­sy.

Due to Foster’s involve­ment in White­wa­ter, both at Rose and in the White House, the Senate White­wa­ter Commit­tee investigation’s conclu­sion revealed that there was “a concert­ed effort by senior White House officials to block career law enforce­ment inves­ti­ga­tors from conduct­ing a thorough inves­ti­ga­tion” into Foster’s death, and recom­mend­ed “that steps be taken to insure that such misuse of the White House counsel’s office does not recur in this, or any future, admin­is­tra­tion.”

So, was Vince Foster murdered? And, why?

In 1999, a book titled, “Bill and Hillary: The Marriage”, caused a lot of conster­na­tion among the Clintons and their support­ers.

The author, Christo­pher Ander­sen, claimed that in 1977 she began an intense­ly passion­ate affair with Vince Foster.

The affair suppos­ed­ly took place when the two were lawyers at The Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, while Bubba was gover­nor.

Rumors of an affair first start­ed buzzing around after Foster was found in Marcy Park. The book did not say when the relation­ship ended.

To this day, the circum­stances surround­ing the death of Vince Foster, remain a topic for conjec­ture.

 Travel­gate – In early summer of 1993, 6 employ­ees of the White House Travel Office were fired, after Hil and Bubba deter­mined that the Travel Office workers, who served at the pleasure of the presi­dent, could be fired and that the Travel Office business, and the commis­sions that came along with it, Coulée be taken over by a cousin of Presi­dent Clinton’s, Cather­ine Cornelius, who already owned her own travel agency.

Howev­er, they could not just go ahead and hand over a govern­men­tal office to a relative, without a backlash, so the Clintons made up a story, claim­ing that the Travel Office was rife with corrup­tion and the workers there had to be fired. An audit of the Travel Office ensued, and while the record-keeping at the office was found to have been pretty inade­quate, no corrup­tion or embez­zle­ment were found. That did not matter to the Clintons, so they went ahead and pressured the FBI to make arrests, and the local US Attor­ney was given instruc­tions to prose­cute the employ­ees for corrup­tion.

Of course, the Clintons denied being behind any sort of scheme in the matter. Howev­er, leaks by those involved, led to a firestorm of media criti­cism. Most of the Travel Office employ­ees were eventu­al­ly given other govern­ment jobs or retired and the trial for corrup­tion of the head of the Travel Office, Billy Dale, ended in a verdict of “NOT GUILTY”.

Clinton’s cousin was subse­quent­ly removed as new head of the Travel Office.

After­ward, Indepen­dent Counsel Robert Ray wrote a report that conclud­ed that, while she did not make any knowingly-false state­ments under oath, First Lady Hillary Clinton had made a number of inaccu­rate state­ments concern­ing the firings and her role in them.

Bimbo Eruptions – Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presi­den­tial gal pals.

BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” includ­ed, but is not limit­ed to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss Ameri­ca Eliza­beth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewin­sky.

The Lewin­sky scandal was a sensa­tion that enveloped the presi­den­cy of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeach­ment by the U.S. House of Repre­sen­ta­tives and acquit­tal by the Senate.

Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accost­ed her sexual­ly in 1991 when he was gover­nor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harass­ment lawsuit again­st the presi­dent. In order to show a pattern of behav­ior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned sever­al women believed to have been engag­ing in sex  with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becom­ing the first sitting presi­dent to testi­fy as a civil defen­dant.

During this testi­mony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewin­sky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewin­sky had earlier, in a deposi­tion in the same case, also denied having such a relation­ship. Kenneth Starr, the indepen­dent counsel in the White­wa­ter case, had already received tape record­ings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former cowork­er of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conver­sa­tions in which Lewin­sky described her involve­ment with the presi­dent. Assert­ing that there was a “pattern of decep­tion,” Starr obtained from Attor­ney Gener­al Janet Reno permis­sion to inves­ti­gate the matter.

The presi­dent publicly denied having had a relation­ship with Lewin­sky and charges of cover­ing it up. His advis­er, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewin­sky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washing­ton, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspir­a­cy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Repub­li­cans and conser­v­a­tives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.

In March, Jordan and others testi­fied before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers reveal­ing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposi­tion, had admit­ted to a sexual relation­ship in the 1980s with Arkansas enter­tain­er Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, howev­er, Arkansas feder­al judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behav­ior but not sexual harass­ment; Jones appealed.

In July, Starr grant­ed Lewin­sky immuni­ty from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testi­fy before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on televi­sion to admit the affair with Lewin­sky and ask for forgive­ness. In Septem­ber, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Repre­sen­ta­tives, recom­mend­ing four possi­ble grounds for impeach­ment: perjury, obstruc­tion of justice, witness tamper­ing, and abuse of author­i­ty.

On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second presi­dent (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruc­tion of justice. The vote in the House was large­ly along party lines.

In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testi­mony relat­ing to the charges was limit­ed, the Senate reject­ed both counts of impeach­ment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Repub­li­cans joining all 45 Democ­rats in voting again­st it; the obstruc­tion charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subse­quent­ly, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the presi­dent in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testi­mony, when he denied the Lewin­sky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the presi­dent to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, Presi­dent Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testi­mony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspen­sion of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agree­ment by the indepen­dent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s succes­sor), to end the inves­ti­ga­tion and not prose­cute him.

In a later inter­view, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered child­hood abuse which may have caused him to philan­der­er and experi­ence “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philan­der­ing husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.

The Clinton Co-Presidency ended with the Inaugu­ra­tion of Presi­dent George W. Bush on January 20, 2001.

Howev­er, Hillary Clinton’s “time in the Spotlight” was just begin­ning.

Hillary Clinton #4On Novem­ber 6, 2000, Former First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was elect­ed Democ­ra­t­ic Senator for the State of New York, serving unremark­ably until leaving Office on January 21, 2009.

During her undis­tin­guished career in the U.S. Senate, Hillary Clinton voted on a variety of key pieces of legis­la­tion as follows:

  • in favor of a 2003 bill to ban oil explo­ration in the Arctic Nation­al Wildlife Refuge
  • in favor of an October 2002 joint resolu­tion to autho­rize the use of the U.S. Armed Forces again­st Iraq
  • again­st major tax-cut propos­als in 2001 and 2003
  • in favor of a 2007 propos­al to end the use of a point-based immigra­tion system, (i.e., a system that seeks to ensure that people with skills that society needs are given prefer­ence for entry into the United States)
  • again­st a 2007 amend­ment desig­nat­ing English as the language of “sole legal author­i­ty” for the business of the feder­al govern­ment, and declar­ing that no person has a right to require officials of the U.S. govern­ment to use a language other than English
  • again­st a 2008 bill urging an expan­sion of the zero-tolerance prose­cu­tion policy for illegal aliens; calling for the comple­tion of 700 miles of pedes­tri­an fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border; allow­ing for the deploy­ment of up to 6,000 Nation­al Guard members to the U.S. south­ern border; and encour­ag­ing the identi­fi­ca­tion and depor­ta­tion of illegal immigrants current­ly in the Ameri­can prison system
  • in favor of the Campaign Finance Reform Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold Act), which put restric­tions on paid adver­tis­ing during the weeks just prior to polit­i­cal elections, and tight­ly regulat­ed the amount of money which polit­i­cal parties and candi­dates could accept from donors
  • again­st separate propos­als (in 2004 and 2005) to ban lawsuits again­st gun manufac­tur­ers, distrib­u­tors, dealers, and importers for damages result­ing from the misuse of their products by others
  • again­st a 2003 propos­al to ban the late-term proce­dure common­ly known as “partial-birth abortion”
  • again­st a 2004 propos­al to make it an added crimi­nal offense for someone to injure or kill a fetus while carry­ing out a crime again­st a pregnant woman
  • again­st a 2006 bill making it illegal to knowing­ly trans­port a pregnant minor across state lines in order to obtain an abortion, as a way to escape state laws requir­ing parental consent

One week after Barack Hussein Obama was elect­ed Presi­dent of the United States, on Novem­ber 4, 2008, he called Hillary and offered her the job of Secre­tary of State, despite the fact that she had no Foreign Policy experi­ence. It was a suspi­cious choice at best, consid­er­ing that fact that when they were running again­st each other in the Democ­ra­t­ic Primaries,Obama had specif­i­cal­ly criti­cized Clinton’s Foreign Policy creden­tials and the initial idea of him appoint­ing her had been so unexpect­ed that she had told one of her own aides, “Not in a million years.”

The fact that she had campaigned unreserved­ly for Obama after he defeat­ed her for the Democ­ra­t­ic Nomina­tion, led to specu­la­tion that the Secre­tary of State job was a “reward for her loyal­ty”.

Hillary accept­ed the position, and now, even as her campaign for the Leadership of the Free World is apparently going down in flames, even the Main Stream Media is hard-pressed to come up with anything she accom­plished as Obama’s First Secre­tary of State.

So, how did she do?

On January 26, 2013, after Hillary had stepped down as Secre­tary of State and was replaced by Senator John Kerry, the follow­ing conver­sa­tion took place between Fox News Anchor Chris Wallace and Fox News Senior Polit­i­cal Analyst Brit Hume…

WALLACE: Yeah, I want to pick up on that, Brit, because during the hearing, what struck me was the Repub­li­cans were tough on Hillary, on Benghazi and the Democ­rats weren’t. But, both sides kept on saying what a great secre­tary of state she had been and to praise her service. And here’s some of the points that have been brought up, some of her accom­plish­ments. She helped assem­ble the bombing campaign in Libya to topple Muammar Qaddafi. She helped assem­bly the coali­tion that imposed the tough­est sanctions ever on Iran. And, she estab­lished diplo­mat­ic ties with Burma.

Question, Brit, how do you rate Hillary Clinton’s perfor­mance, record as our top diplo­mat?

HUME: I think those examples you cited would add up to a case for her compe­tence. They do not add up to a case for great­ness, after all, the ground­work on Burma had been done by the previ­ous admin­is­tra­tion. And the admin­is­tra­tion proper­ly followed through on it. You look across the world, now at the major issues. Are Arabs and Israelis closer to peace? How about Iran and North Korea and their nuclear programs? Have they been halted or serious­ly set back? Has the reset with Russia, which she so famous­ly intro­duced with the photo-op in Moscow with the reset button, has they lead to a new and more coöper­a­tive relation­ship? Is there a Clinton doctrine that we can identi­fy that she has artic­u­lat­ed and formed as secre­tary of state? Are there major treaties that she has under­tak­en and negoti­at­ed through to a success­ful conclu­sion? I think the answer to all those questions is that she has not. And those are the kinds of things that might mark her as a great secre­tary of state.

She has certain­ly been indus­tri­ous. She has visit­ed 112 countries. Her conduct as secre­tary of state has been highly digni­fied. She does her homework. There have been no gaffes or blunders. So I think she has been a capable and hard-working secre­tary of state, but I think the case for her being a great secre­tary of state is exceed­ing­ly weak.

Brit was being gracious. Here are seven Foreign Policy Disas­ters, which happened under Hillary’s watch as the Archi­tect of “Smart Power!”, in no partic­u­lar order:

The decision to overthrow Presi­dent Gaddafi in Libya – The short-sighted, ill-conceived action not only under­mined an ally in the (now defunct) “global war on terror,” it also served to throw gasoline on the bonfire known as “Arab Spring.

The Afghanistan “surge”- A military campaign that fails to result in a desired polit­i­cal outcome is con only be consid­ered a failure. What exact­ly was Obama and Hillary’s desired outcome when they called for this?
It is a fait d’accompli that the Karzai Govern­ment will be able to survive long once the U.S. completes its withdrawal of its combat forces from the country in 2014. This is can only be consid­ered a failure, A failure which cost too many of our Bright­est and Best.

Grant­i­ng Afghanistan major non-NATO U.S. ally status – Why did Barry and Hill decide to grant Afghanistan the status of a major non-NATO ally? When we pull out, our enemied will pour in. And, with “friends” like these, you don’t need enemies.

Maintain­ing the status quo with Pakistan – Pakistan has a long histo­ry of sponsor­ing Sunni jihadists of various stripes. Follow­ing the 2001 attacks on the United States, they did an about-face, becom­ing a chief partner in the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan as well as its “global war on terror.”
10 years later, follow­ing the success­ful May 2011 raid in Abbot­tabad, Pakistan that result­ed in the death of Al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, Pakistan prompt­ly denounced the U.S. and closed its vital supply routes to NATO-bound shipments to Afghanistan.
Hil and Barry got “played”.

The East Asia “pivot” – Strict­ly an exercise in containment,attempts at contain­ing China will only fuel Chine­se fears of foreign encir­clement, that will encour­age Chine­se assertive­ness, that will further encour­age contain­ment.
This pivot is only a bluff on behalf of the feckless purvey­ors of “Smart Power” to begin with.

As shown by the contin­ued drawing of “Red Lines”, they will not stand up to our enemies.

Arab Spring – The Arab Spring was a series of protests and upris­ings in the Middle East that began with unrest in Tunisia in late 2010. The Arab Spring has brought down regimes in some Arab countries, sparked mass violence in others, while some govern­ments managed to delay the trouble with a mix of repres­sion, promise of reform and state largesse.
Through this all Hillary and Obama have back the Muslim Broth­er­hood, the Godfa­ther of Muslim Terror­ist Organi­za­tions, in depos­ing Moder­ate Muslim Leaders.
Doesn’t make a while lot of sense, does it?

Benghazi­Gate – On Septem­ber 11, 2012, Muslim Terror­ists stormed the US Embassy Compound in Benghazi, Libya, slaugh­tered 4 brave Ameri­cans, includ­ing US Ambas­sador Chris Stephens, whose lifeless, sexual­ly assault­ed body they drug through the streets, while taking cell phone pictures of his corpse.
I have written sever­al blogs about the Administration’s Cover-up of this atroc­i­ty, but the seminal moment, regard­ing Hillary Clinton came in January of 2013, during an exchange between her and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wiscon­sin at a Foreign Relations Commit­tee hearing.
Johnson asked her about the administration’s conflict­ing expla­na­tions for the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the ambas­sador and three other Ameri­cans. Hillary, as we say down here in Dixie, “got on her high keys” and said,

With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Ameri­cans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decid­ed to go kill some Ameri­cans? What differ­ence at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do every­thing we can to prevent it from ever happen­ing again, Senator.

And, now, as the 2016 Presidential Election approaches, more and more of the magnitude of Clinton’s corruption has been revealed through…

The Clinton Foundation Scandal, WikiLeaks, and E-mailgate – As more and more information concerning the unimaginable corruption of Hillary Clinton, Former President Bill Clinton and their Political Operatives, including John Podesta and Huma Abedin is presented to the American Public on a daily basis, it becomes more and more apparent that the Clintons  and their Political Machine have always considered themselves to be ABOVE THE LAW.

Unfortunately, for her, unlike New York’s Boss Tweed or Memphis’ Boss Crump, who both ruled their Political Empires in much the same way that Hillary has ruled her’s, Hillary inadvertently left an digital “paper trail”.

This trail has exposed the Pay-For-Play Money Laundering Schemes which arose from The Clinton Foundation, and which in turn were used to fund Hillary’s Political Ambitions, and which caused the Clintons to go from being “destitute” when they left the White House, to now being wealthy beyond imagination.

This Digital “paper Trail” has also revealed a cold, calculating Modern-day Female Machiavelli, who built her Political Empire unrestrained by those things which “shackle” us “commoners”.  Things such as ETHICS AND MORALITY.

It is the height of irony, that a creature such as Clinton Aide Humana Abedin’s estranged Husband, Former Congressman Anthony Weiner, a Serial “Sexter” seemingly void of any concept of ethics and morality himself, will wind up being the unwitting instrument of Hillary Clinton’s Political Demise.

Summary – Even though the Clintons have always appeared to be above the law, and skip past every scandal  like a fried egg in those Teflon Skillet commercials, an example must be set, so that the America’s secrets and the safety of our Military and Intelligence Operatives acting covertly in foreign lands, will be protected for the continued sovereignty of our nation.

A President of the United States must be trustworthy, not only for the reassurance of its citizens that they will do the right thing when a crisis occurs, but also for the assurance of our overseas allies, that we will have their backs in case of a crisis in their nation.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and now to The Clinton Foundation Scandal, WikiLeaks, and E-mailgate, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cares about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Every successful person is ambitious. Donald J Trump is an ambitious man. However, judging from his track record and the charitible things that he has done for Americans behind the scenes,  for which he neither sought nor received any publicity for, and his public accomplishments, along with his stated love for this country and his wish for us to prosper economically and once again resume our place as Leader of the Free World, as an average American, I will be voting for him in November of 2016 to become our next President.

America has endured enough duplicity and political chicanery in the last 7 years to last us for centuries. The deleterious effect of the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has left a stain of incompetent leadership and out-of-control political correctness which will take years to wash away.

America and the rest of the Free World cannot afford the devastating effects of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Just like the Broadcast Networks have ended just about all of their soap operas which aired on their channels on a daily basis, Americans need to pull the plug on the failed leadership and the legacy which Barack Hussein Obama is leaving behind.

…including the unfathomable corruption which is the Political Legacy of Hillary Clinton.

Indeed, it is time to make America great again.

Until He Comes,

KJ

***The infor­ma­tion contained in this post may be found at biography.comcanadafreepress.combiography.com,

discoverthenetworks.orginvestopedia.com, The Ameri­can Specta­torThe New York Timescanadafreepress.com,

bbc.co.uk, frontpagemag.com, theguardian.com, infoplease.comdiscoverthenetworks.org,

realclearpolitics.compolicy mic.com,mideast.about.com, and wsj.com.***

The Clinton Pay-For-Play Scandal: Hil “Not Influenced By Any Outside Sources”…and the Check’s in the Mail

August 25, 2016

Access-Hill-NRD-600

Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It’s self-defense. It’s patriotism. – Joe Biden

CNSNews.com reports that

“Hillary Clinton ran the State Department like a failed leader in a third-world country,” Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told a campaign rally in Tampa, Florida on Wednesday. “She sold favors and access in exchange for cash.”

In a telephone interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night, Democrat Hillary Clinton was asked to respond.

“Well, first, What Trump has said is ridiculous. My work as secretary of state was not influenced by any outside forces,” Clinton said. “I made policy decisions based on what I thought was right, to keep Americans safe and to protect U.S. interests abroad.

“No wild political attack by Donald Trump is going to change that. And, in fact, the State Department has said itself that there is no evidence of any kind of impropriety at all.”

Clinton noted that the Clinton Foundation does “life-saving work” and is “well-respected” in the U.S. and around the world.

“And in 2009, they (the Clinton Foundation) took steps that went above and beyond all legal requirements, and indeed, all standard requirements followed by every other charitable organization — voluntarily disclosing donors, significantly reducing sources of funding, even to the point of, you know, of (that) funding being involved in providing medication to treat HIV/AIDS.”

Clinton became secretary of state in 2009 after signing an ethics agreement that said she would “seek to ensure that the activities of the Foundation, however beneficial, do not create conflicts or the appearance of conflicts.”

But an Associated Press report published on Tuesday found that more than half of the non-government officials who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money, in some cases, substantial sums of money, to the Clinton Foundation.

Bill Clinton last week announced that to avoid conflicts of interest, the Foundation will stop accepting foreign and corporate donations and he will step down from the board if Hillary is elected president.

Hillary Clinton told Anderson Cooper that those changes will allow the Clinton Foundation “to continue as much of its important work as possible, but to do it in a way that provides great disclosure, and although none of this is legally required, these steps go further than the policies that were in place when I was secretary state.”

“Why was it OK for the Clinton Foundation to accept foreign donations when you were Secretary of State, but it wouldn’t be okay when you were president?” Cooper asked Clinton.

“Well, what we did when I was secretary of state, as I said, went above anything that was required, anything that any charitable organization has to do,” Clinton said.

“Now, obviously, if I am president, there will be some unique circumstances, and that’s why the foundation has laid out additional unprecedented steps we will take if I am elected.”

“Didn’t those unique circumstances exist when you were secretary of state?” Cooper asked.

“No, no, you know, look, Anderson. I know there’s a lot of smoke and there’s no fire. This AP report — put it in context. It excludes nearly 2,000 meetings I had with world leaders, plus countless other meetings with U.S. government officials when I was secretary of state.”

According to the Associated Press, at least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs.

“The meetings between the Democratic presidential nominee and foundation donors do not appear to violate legal agreements Clinton and former president Bill Clinton signed before she joined the State Department in 2009,” the AP said. “But the frequency of the overlaps shows the intermingling of access and donations, and fuels perceptions that giving the foundation money was a price of admission for face time with Clinton.”

The AP said the 154 people did not include U.S. federal employees or foreign government representatives “because such meetings would presumably have been part of her diplomatic duties.”

Clinton told Cooper the Associated Press report examined “a small portion” of her tenure as secretary of state: “And it drew the conclusion and made the suggestion that my meetings with people like the late, great Elie Wiesel or Melinda Gates or the Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus (a Bangladeshi economist) were somehow due to connections with the Foundation instead of their status as highly respected global leaders. That is absurd,” Clinton said.

“These are people I was proud to meet with, who any secretary of state would have been proud to meet with, to hear about their work and their insights.”

And, the check’s in the mail.

As I have previously written, Clinton’s trail of corruption leads all the way back to when she was fired from the Watergate Investigative Committee for dishonesty.

However, to practice “Pay-For-Play” on a Global Scale, while holding the Office of Secretary of State of the United States of America,  issues downright treasonous.

Why did she do it?

Michael Goodwin, in his column for the New York Post, offers the following spot-on analysis:

The easy answers about why she did what she did are too obvious: She wanted to get rich and she didn’t want anyone to know her business.

Throw in her chronic paranoia and sense of entitlement, and she and Hubby Dearest had a rationale for thinking they were above the law. They’d escaped his impeachment trial, so they believed they had lifetime immunity.

All true, but too simple, and it’s impossible to believe that’s all there is. There has to be more, probably something so big and awful, it would destroy her if it’s discovered.

Remember, the Clintons were absolutely determined to get back to the White House, which would be the ultimate vindication of their public lives. Victory would make them unique in American history, so it doesn’t make sense that they would risk throwing it all away for the obvious — and ordinary — benefits already revealed.

The added riches they collected through what I believe are corrupt actions weren’t necessary. They were getting legitimately rich on his and her book contracts alone.

And what difference would another donation make to the foundation, which was already swimming in more money than it could spend?

Because none of this adds up to a coherent explanation, I believe we are still in the dark about a hidden bombshell. There must be a secret Unholy Grail that explains her self-destructive behavior of stonewalling and lying.

I won’t speculate on what the Clintons are hiding because my gifts of imagination are no match for theirs. They always had a knack for pioneering new ways of selling access. No president had ever thought of renting out the Lincoln Bedroom until they did it.

The sleazy act that so outraged the nation then seems positively quaint now, thanks to the creative ways they’ve monetized power since leaving the White House. Now they could afford to buy the furniture they tried to steal on their way out the door then!

Of course, I could be wrong. I could be giving them far too much credit.

Maybe the Clintons really are just ordinary grifters, con artists who enjoy the thrill of pulling off the scam. Maybe it’s not even about the money.

Then again, it’s always about the money, one way or another.

And so, as with Watergate, with Bernie Madoff and now with the Clintons, the advice to all gumshoes is the same: Follow the money. Whatever deep, dark secret they are hiding, the money will lead us to it.

The price of “paying tribute” in order to gain an audience with someone in power goes all the way back to Biblical Times, continuing to the American and French Revolutions.

Our government was never meant to be a Monarchy. America remains a Constitutional Republic.

American Politicians were never meant to be Lords, who would remain in power in perpetuity, amassing unlimited wealth by accepting “tribute” from those seeking “favors”.

Our Founding Fathers envisioned Citizen Statesman, who after serving their country and their communities for a short period of time, would return to their homes, to their families, and to their trades.

What Hillary Clinton is attempting to get away with is a prime example of why our Founders set up the System of Checks and Balances that they did when they were constructing our system of government.

Obama, the Department of Justice, and the clintons circumvented that system with a series of maneuvers carried out between the White House, the campaign Trail, and a private jet idling on a Tarmac at an airport.

Come November, as Americans, we will have an opportunity to voice how we feel about this travesty of Justice in November of this year.

Unlike the French Revolution, we won’t have to entrust our future to Madame Guillotine.

Our country’s future will be entrusted to The Ballot Box.

This November, remember July 5th, 2016 as the day that Hillary Clinton was proven to be above the law.

And, vote accordingly.

Until He Comes, 

KJ 

The Clinton Foundation Scandal: Laundering Money as Secretary of State for Favors, Fun, and Profit

August 23, 2016

Trump-Spot-600-LA

“Hillary Clinton is the defender of the corrupt and rigged status quo. The Clintons have spent decades as insiders lining their own pockets and taking care of donors instead of the American people. It is now clear that the Clinton Foundation is the most corrupt enterprise in political history. What they were doing during Crooked Hillary’s time as Secretary of State was wrong then, and it is wrong now. It must be shut down immediately.” – Donald J. Trump

While the attention of Main Stream Media is focused on the Democratic Candidate for President, Hillary Clinton, demonstrating how “healthy” she is by opening a probably pre-opened jar of pickles on Jimmy Kimmel’s Late Night Talk Show, they are purposefully ignoring a “YUGE” “Pay-For–Play” Money Laundering Scheme, involving the Former United States Secretary of State.

Fox News’ James Rosen has the exclusive story…

A senior executive at the Clinton Foundation left almost 150 telephone messages for Hillary Clinton’s top aide at the State Department within a two-year time frame, according to previously unpublished documents obtained by Fox News.A review of State Department call logs for Cheryl Mills, the longtime Clinton confidant who served as chief of staff for the entirety of Clinton’s four-year tenure as America’s top diplomat, reflects at least 148 messages from Laura Graham – then the Clinton Foundation’s chief operating officer – between 2010 and 2012. No other individual or non-profit appears in the logs with anything like that frequency or volume, the review found.

One of the messages Graham left for Mills, in August 2011, referenced “our boss” – without further identifying that individual. Another, from January 2012, appeared to reference former President Clinton, using his initials: “Please call. WJC is looking for her [Graham] and she wants to talk to you before she talks to him.” 

The telephone records were released by the State Department to the conservative advocacy group Citizens United as part of a long-running lawsuit over the Freedom of information Act.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said he could not provide “a read-out of every one of those messages or every one of those calls,” nor estimate how many of them were returned. But he acknowledged that Mills and Graham never shared the same boss and insisted the department “always” acted under Clinton to advance U.S. foreign policy interests, “with no other intent in mind beyond that.”

“Secretary Clinton’s ethics agreement at the time [she assumed office] did not preclude other State Department officials from engaging with, or having contact with, the Clinton Foundation,” Toner said. 

Absent additional detail, there is no evidence of any misconduct in the calls or contacts between Graham and Mills. But the records surfaced amid mounting questions about the relationship between the Clinton State Department and the Clinton foundation, and particularly about the role played by Mills.

“It’s an amazing thing that the State Department spokesperson would actually make an argument,” said Citizens United President David Bossie, “that Hillary Clinton would be obligated under an ethics agreement that the White House made her sign with the foundation but her top employees would not be under that same agreement. I find it’s just very Clintonesque.”

Last week, the State Department acknowledged that in June 2012, Mills spent two days traveling to New York to interview job applicants at the foundation. The State Department said Mills “volunteered” to do so, but neither the department nor a spokesman for the Clinton presidential campaign, nor Mills’s attorney, would say whether Mills used annual leave or unpaid days to perform that work – or whether it was done on the taxpayers’ time. 

The call logs reflect a wide cross-section of individuals angling for the secretary’s ear, from celebrities like Sean Penn to elder statesmen of the Democratic Party like Vernon Jordan. The messages include a number averring to irksome home-renovation issues Mills was facing, and even one left by the chief of staff’s mother, who told her daughter, through the intermediary of a State Department secretary, in September 2011: “Please call. Hadn’t heard from you in so long and was wondering if you are out of town.” 

Just how corrupt was the pipeline between the Clinton Foundation and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

By the time Clinton left office in February 2013, the charity had received millions of dollars in new or increased payments from at least seven foreign governments. Five of the governments came on board during her tenure as secretary of state while two doubled or tripled their support in that time, according to data provided by CHAI spokeswoman Daley…CHAI should have told the State Department before accepting donations totaling $340,000 from Switzerland’s Agency for Development and Cooperation in 2011 and 2012. However, it did not believe U.S. authorities needed to review the other six governments, including Britain and Australia, she said, citing various reasons.” [Reuters, 3/19/15]

However, it was not just governments who sent money to the Clintons through their Foundation. Again, according to discoverthenetworks.org…

* “The Clinton Foundation swore off donations from foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That didn’t stop the foundation from raising millions of dollars from foreigners with connections to their home governments, a review of foundation disclosures shows. Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities. Their professed policy interests range from human rights to U.S.-Cuba relations.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

* During Secretary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, “More than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation… collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million…. Some donors also provided funding directly to charitable projects sponsored by the foundation, valued by the organization at $60 million.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

Whether the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians or the formation of an Iranian Connection, as a result of money given to the Clinton Foundation,  as was previously  reported in 2015, or this new revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, this is not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of a Conflict of Interest involving possible Treason.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and now to E-mailgate and the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cares about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Every successful person is ambitious. Donald J Trump is an ambitious man. However, judging from his track record and the charitable things that he has done for Americans behind the scenes,  for which he neither sought nor received any publicity for, and his public accomplishments, along with his stated love for this country and his wish for us to prosper economically and once again resume our place as Leader of the Free World, as an average American, I will be voting for him in November of 2016 to become our next President.

America has endured enough duplicity and political chicanery in the last 7 years to last us for centuries. The deleterious effect of the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has left a stain of incompetent leadership and out-of-control political correctness which will take years to wash away.

America and the rest of the Free World cannot afford the devastating effects of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Just like the Broadcast Networks have ended just about all of their soap operas which aired on their channels on a daily basis, Americans need to pull the plug on the failed leadership and the legacy which Barack Hussein Obama is leaving behind.

The raw, unmitigated corruption involving Hillary Clinton and her Foundation, revealed over the past year, along with these new revelations, involving the DOJ refusing to investigate the FBI’s repeated requests to investigate the Foundation and Cheryl Mill’s involvementin  in  Hillary Clinton’s influence peddling as Secretary of State under President Barack Hussein Obama, via means of the Clinton Foundation, is breath-taking in its size and scope, as more and more unscrupulous details are being revealed.

Hillary Clinton does not belong in the White House.

She belongs UNDER the Jail House.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Hillary Clinton Money Laundering Factory: The Case of the Clinton Foundation Corruption…Why It Matters.

August 12, 2016

164675_600

According to their website,

The Clinton Foundation has 11 initiatives working in the areas of global health, climate change, economic development, health and wellness, and girls and women.

As becomes more clear with each passing day, the Foundation has also served and is still serving two unpublicized goals:

It provided a place to launder money while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and it helps to fill the coffers of the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign Fund.

CNN  (yes, CNN) reported  that

A top aide to Hillary Clinton at the State Department traveled to New York to interview job candidates for a top job at the Clinton Foundation, a CNN investigation has found.

The fact that the aide, Cheryl Mills, was taking part in such a high level task for the Clinton foundation while also working as chief of staff for the secretary of state raises new questions about the blurred lines that have dogged the Clintons in recent years.

A top aide to Hillary Clinton at the State Department traveled to New York to interview job candidates for a top job at the Clinton Foundation, a CNN investigation has found.

The fact that the aide, Cheryl Mills, was taking part in such a high level task for the Clinton foundation while also working as chief of staff for the secretary of state raises new questions about the blurred lines that have dogged the Clintons in recent years.

Upon entering office as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation agreed to a set of rules to ensure any activities by the foundation would not “create conflicts or the appearance of conflicts for Senator Clinton as Secretary of State.”

On June 19, 2012, Mills, then the chief of staff for Clinton at the State Department, boarded a New York City-bound Amtrak train in Washington’s Union station.

The next morning, at the offices of a New York based executive search firm, Mills would interview two high-level business executives. Her mission was to help the Clinton Foundation find a new leader, a source told CNN.

According to Mills’ attorney, her work for the Clinton Foundation while she was employed at the State Department was strictly voluntary. She received no pay and no government funds were used to finance the short trip.

Clinton’s presidential campaign re-iterated that Mills was working as a volunteer on the trip.

charitable organization, as she has to other charities,” said campaign spokesman Brian Fallon. “Cheryl paid for her travel to New York City personally, and it was crystal clear to all involved that this had nothing to do with her official duties. The idea that this poses a conflict of interest is absurd.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Republican Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has tried to get answers about Mills’ New York trip as well. Grassley sent Secretary of State John Kerry a letter in January asking the purpose of Mills’ trip. The State Department did not officially respond to the letter.

“Congress has a rightful right to ask for any information that it wants to from the executive branch of government to keep track of them,” said Scott Amey, an attorney for the Project on Government Oversight. “And the government should be turning that information over, when you have a breakdown in that system, we have a breakdown in our democracy.”

There is no doubt of the connections between Clinton Foundation staffers and State Department staffers.

E-mails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act and released by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch this week raise new questions about the intermingling of Clinton Foundation business, its donors and employees under Hillary Clinton’s control as a public servant. They suggest Foundation officials had no problem trying to curry favor for jobs by emailing top Clinton aides like Mills and Huma Abedin, who is now a senior adviser to Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Mills’ trip from Washington, D.C., to New York by a top Clinton aide in 2012 seems to raise the same potential issues.

The top-level executives Mills would interview for the big job at the Clinton Foundation worked at Pfizer and WalMart — companies that have been huge donors to Foundation, and have worked with the Clinton Global Initiative.

CNN has asked the US State Department if Mills had, or needed permission for the trip, or if the State Department was even aware Mills was involved with the Clinton Foundation while a top aide of Secretary Clinton. A State Department spokesperson responded by stating:

“Federal employees are permitted to engage in outside personal activities, within the scope of the federal ethics rules. All federal employees are subject to federal ethics laws and regulations, including rules pertaining to conflicts of interest.”

It’s easy to understand why Mills was trusted with helping find the next director of the Clinton Foundation. Her relationships with the Clintons goes back decades.

As Bill Clinton’s Deputy White House counsel, she defended the then president during impeachment proceedings.

In 2008, when Hillary Clinton was running for president, Mills was her senior legal campaign adviser.

And when Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State, Mills left the board of the Clinton Foundation and became Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff.

Now, she is once again on the board of the Clinton Foundation while running her own development business focusing on African business.

Republican Candidate Donald J. Trump refers to the Former First lady and Secretary of State as “Crooked Hillary” for good reason: she has left a trail of lies and corruption behind her wherever she has slithered, from D.C. to Little Rock to  D.C. to New York and then back to D.C., again.

Would D.C. count as Triple Yahtzee?

On Jan. 8, 1996, in a still-relevant commentary titled “Blizzard of Lies,” New York Times columnist William Safire described Hillary Clinton as “a congenital liar.”

Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar. Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.

1. Remember the story she told about studying The Wall Street Journal to explain her 10,000 percent profit in 1979 commodity trading? We now know that was a lie told to turn aside accusations that as the Governor’s wife she profited corruptly, her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests through a disreputable broker.

She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.

2. The abuse of Presidential power known as Travelgate elicited another series of lies. She induced a White House lawyer to assert flatly to investigators that Mrs. Clinton did not order the firing of White House travel aides, who were then harassed by the F.B.I. and Justice Department to justify patronage replacement by Mrs. Clinton’s cronies.

Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be “hell to pay” if the furious First Lady’s desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary’s lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage.

3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.

Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.

Why the White House concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell’s father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million.

Why the belated release of some of the incriminating evidence? Not because it mysteriously turned up in offices previously searched. Certainly not because Hillary Clinton and her new hang-tough White House counsel want to respond fully to lawful subpoenas.

One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.

Therefore, ask not “Why didn’t she just come clean at the beginning?” She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.

No wonder the President is fearful of holding a prime-time press conference. Having been separately deposed by the independent counsel at least twice, the President and First Lady would be well advised to retain separate defense counsel.

The late, great William Safire was a prophet.

Whether the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians or the formation of an Iranian Connection, as a result of money given to the Clinton Foundation,  as was previously  reported in 2015, or this new revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, this is not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of Hillary Clinton crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of a Conflict of Interest involving possible Treason.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and now to E-mailgate and the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cares about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Every successful person is ambitious. Donald J Trump is an ambitious man. However, judging from his track record and the charitable things that he has done for Americans behind the scenes,  for which he neither sought nor received any publicity for, and his public accomplishments, along with his stated love for this country and his wish for us to prosper economically and once again resume our place as Leader of the Free World, as an average American, I will be voting for him in November of 2016 to become our next President.

America has endured enough duplicity and political chicanery in the last 7 years to last us for centuries. The deleterious effect of the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has left a stain of incompetent leadership and out-of-control political correctness which will take years to wash away.

America and the rest of the Free World cannot afford the devastating effects of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Just like the Broadcast Networks have ended just about all of their soap operas which aired on their channels on a daily basis, Americans need to pull the plug on the failed leadership and the legacy which Barack Hussein Obama is leaving behind.

The raw, unmitigated corruption involving Hillary Clinton and her Foundation, revealed over the past year, along with these new revelations, involving the DOJ refusing to investigate the FBI’s repeated requests to investigate the Foundation and Cheryl Mill’s involvementin  in  Hillary Clinton’s influence peddling as Secretary of State under President Barack Hussein Obama, via means of the Clinton Foundation, is breath-taking in its size and scope.

Hillary Clinton does not belong in the White House.

She belongs in the Jail House.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Hillary After New Hampshire: From “The Inevitable Candidate” to Just Another “Face in the Crowd”?

February 10, 2016

Berni-Treasure-600-nrdLast  night, in the New Hampshire Democrat Primary Election, Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, lost, in epic fashion, to the old Socialist, Bernie Sanders.

In fact, the only age group who voted for her, were well-off folks, who were 65 years old and older.

What happened to “The Inevitable Democrat Presidential Candidate”?

Dick Morris, Former Advisor to President Bill Clinton, wrote the following op ed for thehill.com

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign is falling apart. Bernie Sanders soared in New Hampshire and now two polls have him tying her nationally. It’s a disaster.

Now she’s called in the B Team — the cynical, paranoid and wacky twins Sidney Blumenthal and David Brock — to bail her out. And here comes the elderly, diminished and livid former President Bill Clinton to lead the duo’s frantic attacks on Sanders.

The attacks are rooted in nothing more than a list of dirty names they call the Vermont senator every day. Having found little in his record to attack, they have consulted the thesaurus to turn up ugly sounding accusations.

Sanders has a coherent, consistent and concise message: Incomes are stagnant because the economy is rigged by the top one-tenth of 1 percent that controls politics through massive campaign contributions.

Clinton has no competing message, just the charge that Sanders’s supporters are “sexist and vulgar.” Brock adds that one of Sanders’s ads was racist because it had too many white people in it.

Their strategy is laughable. After losing 84 percent of young voters in Iowa — and failing to recover them in New Hampshire — they sent in two aging fossils of feminism to insult and threaten young women.

The 81-year-old feminist Gloria Steinem charged that young women are only backing Sanders because that’s where they can meet boys. And 78-year-old Madeleine Albright threatened to consign to a “special place in hell” women who don’t back female candidates like Clinton.

Those are two great ways to attract young voters.

The aging and raging ex-president, meanwhile, speaking to a half-filled gym in a New Hampshire school, ranted about Sanders’s “hypocrisy” in condemning his wife’s paid speeches. Sanders, too, has given paid speeches, Bill Clinton claimed.

He’s got a point. In 2013, for example, Sanders made all of $1,500, which he donated to charity as required by federal law. In 2014, he raked in $1,850 for paid speeches. By contrast, Clinton made, and kept, over $21 million during the same time period. Sanders was only reimbursed for coach class airfare, while Clinton demanded private jets. Sanders’s hosts were the TV show “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Avalon Publishing and a machinists union. Clinton’s were Goldman Sachs, the big banks and the pharmaceutical and energy industries. What hypocrisy for Sanders to use that as an issue!

Both Brock and Blumenthal share the former first lady’s enthusiasm for discussing the “vast right-wing conspiracy” in America. Now that they’ve been outed as being back on her team, it’s easy to understand why Clinton sees conspiracies everywhere. This paranoia, egged on by the B Twins, explains her failure to grasp the cataclysmic changes her own misconduct has wrought on her image, to say nothing of the societal and economic tectonic shifts at work. No, it’s all the GOP’s fault.

Blumenthal worked to spin Monica Lewinsky as a crazed stalker of an innocent president, and his hundreds of gossipy emails urged Clinton to do all she could to topple Moammar Gadhafi when she was secretary of State without realizing that it would open the door and let the terrorists waltz in. He hides in the shadows, ducking subpoenas and frantically emailing his crazy self-serving ideas while flattering his way into Clinton’s affections.

Brock first came into the Clinton camp as a convert from conservatism. Before he did so, he outed Paula Jones, triggering Bill Clinton to lie to a grand jury, resulting in close to $1 million in payments to Jones and thousands to the court in fines, as well as disbarment and impeachment scandals. Now he serves to destroy Hillary Clinton’s career as well by counseling a scorched-earth policy that savages Sanders and alienates the very young people who must provide Clinton her political base in the general election.

Neither the B Twins nor Bill Clinton’s rage can save the bewildered former secretary of State, who cannot understand why a funny thing is happening on her way to her coronation. Voters looked at her and ran screaming.

My, how the “Inevitable Democrat Presidential Candidate” has fallen.

I was immediately struck by how similar the rapidly-devolving candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton was to the classic movie “A Face in the Crowd”:

afaceinthecrowdAndy Griffith makes a spectacular film debut in this searing drama as Lonesome Rhodes, a philosophical country-western singer discovered in a tanktown jail by radio talent scout Patricia Neal and her assistant Walter Matthau. They decide that Rhodes is worthy of a radio spot, but the unforeseen result is that the gangly, aw-shucks entertainer becomes an overnight sensation not simply on radio but, thereafter, on television. As he ascends to stardom, Rhodes attracts fans, sponsors and endorsements by the carload, and soon he is the most powerful and influential entertainer on the airwaves. Beloved by his audience, Rhodes reveals himself to his intimates as a scheming, power-hungry manipulator, with Machiavellian political aspirations. He uses everyone around him, coldly discarding anyone who might impede his climb to the top (one such victim is sexy baton-twirler Lee Remick, likewise making her film debut). Just when it seems that there’s no stopping Rhodes’ megalomania, his mentor and ex-lover Neal exposes this Idol of Millions as the rat that he is. She arranges to switch on the audio during the closing credits of Rhodes’ TV program, allowing the whole nation to hear the grinning, waving Rhodes characterize them as “suckers” and “stupid idiots.” Instantly, Rhodes’ popularity rating plummets to zero. As he drunkenly wanders around his penthouse apartment, still not fully comprehending what has happened to him, Rhodes is deserted by the very associates who, hours earlier, were willing to ask “how high?” when he yelled “jump”. Written by Budd Schulberg, Face in the Crowd was not a success, possibly because it hit so close to home with idol-worshipping TV fans. Its reputation has grown in the intervening years, not only because of its value as a film but because of the novelty of seeing the traditionally easygoing Andy Griffith as so vicious and manipulative a character as Lonesome Rhodes.

Just like Lonesome Rhodes, Hillary’s is a completely manufactured persona. Also like Rhodes, she was meant to represent something unique.

While Rhodes represented the common man, down on his luck, who pulled himself up by his bootstraps to achieve success, Clinton, in turn, is supposed to represent the return of the affable Bill “Bubba” Clinton’s reign as President…a fictional Kennedy-style “Camelot”, where Fairy Tales came true, and the Progressive Clintons ruled with impunity.

And, just as Rhodes was exposed for the vacuous, megalomaniac that he was, so has Hillary been revealed for who she is, through Benghazi and the popular movie about that horrible night, her corrupt influence-peddling involving the Clinton Foundation, and, the FBI Investigation into her use of private servers to handle Top Secret E-mails, while she was Secretary of State.

About that influence-peddling…

Hillary continues to refuse to release the contents of her speeches to Goldman Sachs. There’s a reason for that.

In an attempt to appeal to the young and dumb Bernie Voters, Hillary has been trying to portray herself as an anti-capitalist.

However, Rush Limbaugh, during his nationally-syndicated radio program on February 8th, made  the following observation

How did the Clintons end up having a fortune of $150 million when they had Clinton’s salary of 400 grand as president and Hillary, whatever she had as a Rose Law Firm lawyer, they didn’t have any money compared to this.  I’m not saying they were dirt poor, but how they ended up having $150 million, for doing speeches, are you kidding me?  Nobody gets paid that much to do speeches, because nobody has that much to say to make it that worth it.  There’s something else going on here.  That’s why Mrs. Clinton won’t reveal the transcripts of these speeches.  Something in them would give away the game. 

Either these speeches are filled with nothing but slathering, slavish, complimentary garbage about how great the banks are, how great Goldman Sachs is, and if that’s in there, there’s no way Mrs. Clinton wants her average voters to see that.  As far as Democrat voters are concerned, Hillary and Bernie hate the banks, and if there are transcripts of speeches with Hillary out there praising the banks, talking how wonderful the banks are, saving the world, it would be a big problem.  So there’s no way you’re ever gonna see those transcripts.  But, I mean, $120 million doing speeches.  This is so phony you can just see right through it.

In conclusion, there was a reason that the only voter bloc that Hillary carried last night was the old and the wealthy.

They are the only Democrat Voters who can relate to her.

Now, don’t get me wrong…Bernie is nothing but a Professional Politician, peddling empty promises, also.

However, just like the “47%” voted “Baracky Claus” into a second term as President, so are the “Young and Dumb” voting for “Mr. Free Stuff” in the Democrat Primary Elections.

Perhaps Hillary should promise the young Democrat Ladies free dates with Bubba?

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Clinton/Sanders Debate: Two Old Northeast Progressives “Swapping Stories”

February 5, 2016

Hil-Bern-600nrdIn case you didn’t know, didn’t care, or you just didn’t want to watch a couple of old white “Progressives” from the Northeast lie like rugs on National Television, there was an actual Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate held in Prime Time on Thursday, and not in the dead of night on the Weekend.

Politico.com reports that

The niceties are finished.

After a string of debates where Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders discussed (and occasionally disagreed about) the fine points of progressive policy, the two finally had a full-fledged throwdown Thursday night.

Clinton accused Sanders of going negative on the campaign trail, telling the Vermont Senator at the Democratic debate that his campaign was smearing her name.

“I think it’s time to end the very artful smear that you and your campaign have been carrying out in recent week,” Clinton said after Sanders talked about getting money out of politics.

Sanders has boasted about not receiving money from Wall street, and has pointed out in recent weeks that Clinton has received large sums in exchange for speaking.

“Sen. Sanders has said he wants to run a positive campaign. I’ve tried to keep my disagreements over issues, but time and time again, by innuendo and by insinuation there is this attack that he is putting forth,” Clinton said.

“Which really comes down to anyone who ever took donations or speaking fees from interest groups has to be bought, and I absolutely reject that Senator. I really don’t think those attacks by insinuation are worthy of you,” Clinton continued

Then she leveled the challenge: “If you have something to say, say it. But I have never changed a view or a vote because of a donation I’ve received.”

Hold on a second. We’ll get back to this “Challenge”

Now about the lies…

Foxnews.com reports that

WASHINGTON –  Hillary Clinton cast the financial industry as an adversary in her presidential campaign — despite the money that industry has poured into her White House effort. Bernie Sanders once again mischaracterized the share of the wealth taken by the very richest Americans.

A look at some of the claims in their latest Democratic presidential debate:

CLINTON on Wall Street: “They are trying to beat me in this primary.”

THE FACTS: Wall Street is not the anti-Clinton monolith she implied. People in the securities and investment industry gave more than $17 million last year to super political action committees supporting her presidential run and nearly $3 million directly to her campaign, according to OpenSecrets.org, a campaign-finance watchdog. Wall Street is the top industry donating to her effort, ahead of the legal profession, non-profit institutions and others.

Clinton is taking heat from Sanders over her Wall Street ties, which go back decades.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that Clinton has brought in more money from the financial sector during her four federal campaigns — for Senate and president — than her husband, Bill Clinton, did in his quarter-century political career. In all, more than $44 million was raised for her campaigns. This includes more than $1 out of every $10 of the money contributed for her 2016 campaign.

Clinton has often talked about how much she has raised from teachers, as opposed to big corporate interests. But the $2.93 million given directly to her campaign last year by people in the securities and investment industry surpassed the $2.88 million given by people in education, OpenSecrets found.

SANDERS: “Almost all new income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent.”

THE FACTS: This has been a common mantra by Sanders but it relies on outdated numbers. In the first five years of the economic recovery, 2009-2014, the richest 1 percent captured 58 percent of income growth, according to Emmanuel Saez, a University of California economist whose research Sanders uses.

That’s a hefty share, but far short of “almost all.” In the first three years of the recovery, 2009-2012, the richest 1 percent did capture 91 percent of the growth in income. But part of that gain reflected an accounting maneuver as the wealthiest pulled income forward to 2012 in advance of tax increases that took effect in 2013 on the biggest earners.

Many companies paid out greater bonuses to their highest-paid employees in 2012 before the higher tax rates took effect. Those bonuses then fell back in 2013. And in 2014, the bottom 99 percent finally saw incomes rise 3.3 percent, the biggest gain in 15 years. Average wages also showed signs of picking up last year as the unemployment rate fell, suggesting the bottom 99 percent may have also seen gains in 2015.

CLINTON: “I am against American combat troops being in Syria and Iraq. I support special forces. I support trainers. I support the air campaign.”

THE FACTS: Clinton makes a dubious distinction. Although it can be debated whether certain types of military personnel fit the definition of “combat” troops, there is little doubt that special operations forces like those now operating both in Syria and Iraq do.

In the fall, a special operations soldier was killed in a firefight in Iraq during a joint U.S.-Kurdish commando raid on an Islamic State prison.

The Pentagon recently sent up to 200 special operations troops to Iraq to carry out a range of risky missions, including raids against Islamic State targets.

Pilots of fighter aircraft, bombers and other warplanes that have flown over Iraq and Syria, dropping bombs and missiles on Islamic State targets on a daily basis, certainly are engaged in combat.
Clinton said she supports Obama’s reluctance to take the lead in ground combat in Iraq and Syria. But many military members are now engaged in combat.

SANDERS: “You have three out of the four largest banks in America today, bigger than they were, significantly bigger than when we bailed them out because they were too big to fail.”

THE FACTS: Sanders is right that JPMorgan, Bank of America and Wells Fargo are larger than they were in mid-2008, before they received bailout money. But those gains largely reflect mergers and acquisitions that occurred, frequently at the government’s behest, during the financial crisis. JPMorgan bulked up by purchasing Bear Stearns, in a deal facilitated by the Federal Reserve. Bank of America ballooned when it acquired Merrill Lynch and Wells Fargo roughly doubled in size when it bought a floundering Wachovia Bank.

But the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory overhaul bill, passed in 2010, has forced banks to hold more capital as a cushion against risk and to make future bailouts less likely. That requirement and others has caused several banks, including JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Citi, to shed assets to avoid growing larger and triggering further oversight.

CLINTON on Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal: “I said that I was holding out that hope that it would be the kind of trade agreement that I was looking for. I waited until it had actually been negotiated because I did want to give the benefit of the doubt to the administration. Once I saw what the outcome was, I opposed it.”

THE FACTS: As Obama’s secretary of state, Clinton was far more enthusiastic about the Pacific trade deal taking shape than she became once she was running for president and trying to appeal to the liberal wing of her party. As secretary she had given speeches around the world in support of the deal under negotiation, saying in Australia in 2012 that it “sets the gold standard in trade agreements,” a cheerleading sentiment she echoed elsewhere.

She’s stated since that the final agreement didn’t address her concerns. But the final version actually had been modified to drop certain provisions that liberal activist groups had opposed.

CLINTON: “I am not going to make promises I can’t keep. I am not going to talk about big ideas like single-payer and then not level with people about how much it will cost.”

THE FACTS: Clinton was taking aim at Sanders’ universal health care coverage plan that he calls “Medicare for all,” and a new independent analysis suggests that she was correct about his understating the cost.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the tax increases in Sanders’ plan would only cover about 75 percent of the estimated spending under the plan, creating at least a $3 trillion hole over 10 years.

The analysis was based on Sanders’ estimate of how much his plan would spend. If that turns out to be low, then the financing gap would grow.

The group represents deficit foes from both political parties. Leon Panetta, a CIA director and a defense secretary under President Barack Obama, is a co-chairman of its board.

Remember Former Secretary of State Clinton’s challenge from last night, regarding donations that she has received?

“If you have something to say, say it. But I have never changed a view or a vote because of a donation I’ve received.”

Challenge accepted.

Back in April of 2015, NYMag.com reported that

The qualities of an effective presidency do not seem to transfer onto a post-presidency. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president who became an exemplary post-president. Bill Clinton appears to be the reverse. All sorts of unproven worst-case-scenario questions float around the web of connections between Bill’s private work, Hillary Clinton’s public role as secretary of State, the Clintons’ quasi-public charity, and Hillary’s noncompliant email system. But the best-case scenario is bad enough: The Clintons have been disorganized and greedy.

The news today about the Clintons all fleshes out, in one way or another, their lack of interest in policing serious conflict-of-interest problems that arise in their overlapping roles:

The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.The Washington Post reports that Bill Clinton has received $26 million in speaking fees from entities that also donated to the Clinton Global Initiative.The Washington Examiner reports, “Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.”And Reuters reports, “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.”

The Clinton campaign is batting down the darkest and most conspiratorial interpretation of these stories, and where this all leads remains to be seen. But the most positive interpretation is not exactly good.

When you are a power couple consisting of a former president and a current secretary of State and likely presidential candidate, you have the ability to raise a lot of money for charitable purposes that can do a lot of good. But some of the potential sources of donations will be looking to get something in return for their money other than moral satisfaction or the chance to hobnob with celebrities. Some of them want preferential treatment from the State Department, and others want access to a potential future Clinton administration. To run a private operation where Bill Clinton will deliver a speech for a (huge) fee and a charity that raises money from some of the same clients is a difficult situation to navigate. To overlay that fraught situation onto Hillary’s ongoing and likely future government service makes it all much harder.

And yet the Clintons paid little to no attention to this problem. Nicholas Confessore described their operation as “a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.” Indeed, as Ryan Lizzareported in 2012, Bill Clinton seemed to see the nexus between his role and his wife’s as a positive rather than a negative:

Regardless of Bill Clinton’s personal feelings about Obama, it didn’t take him long to see the advantages of an Obama Presidency. More than anyone, he pushed Hillary to take the job of Secretary of State. “President Clinton was a big supporter of the idea,” an intimate of the Clintons told me. “He advocated very strongly for it and arguably was the tie-breaking reason she took the job.” For one thing, having his spouse in that position didn’t hurt his work at the Clinton Global Initiative. He invites foreign leaders to the initiative’s annual meeting, and her prominence in the Administration can be an asset in attracting foreign donors. “Bill Clinton’s been able to continue to be the Bill Clinton we know, in large part because of his relationship with the White House and because his wife is the Secretary of State,” the Clinton associate continued. “It worked out very well for him. That may be a very cynical way to look at it, but that’s a fact. A lot of the stuff he’s doing internationally is aided by his level of access.”

The Obama administration wanted Hillary Clinton to use official government email. She didn’t. The Obama administration alsodemanded that the Clinton Foundation disclose all its donors while she served as Secretary of State. It didn’t comply with that request, either.

The Clintons’ charitable initiatives were a kind of quasi-government run by themselves, which was staffed by their own loyalists and made up the rules as it went along. Their experience running the actual government, with its formal accountability and disclosure, went reasonably well. Their experience running their own privatized mini-state has been a fiasco.

With the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians and an Iranian Connection regarding some of the money given to the Clinton Foundation, this is not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of the Clintons crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of treason.

Clinton does not belong in the White House. She belongs in jail.

And, Sanders need to move to the tiny country of Denmark and like the rest of his life in that failed “Socialist Paradise”

Or, he needs to be fitted with a short white jacket with long sleeves that tie behind the back.

Just sayin’.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Little White Lies, Bald-Faced Lies, and Hillary: “I’m For Huge Campaign-Finance Reform”…Except in the Clinton Foundation

January 18, 2016

untitled (19)There is a very logical reason that the Main Stream Media, in cooperation with the Democrat Party, is scheduling the Democrat President Primary Candidate Debates late on Weekend Nights:

Familiarity breeds contempt.

Late last night, hidden in the abyss of Sunday Television Programming at 9:00 p.m. Center, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Bernie Sanders, And Martin O’Malley (Who!), , took the stage in South Carolina for another Democrat Presidential Democrat Candidate Debate.

…which, once again, ended early.

Even politicians can blatantly lie for just so long, I suppose.

For example…

SANDERS: “We need someone with the guts to stand up the private insurance companies and all of their money, and the pharmaceutical industry. That’s what this debate should be about.” 

CLINTON: “Well, as someone who, as someone who has a little bit of experience standing up to the health-insurance industry, that spent — you know, many, many millions of dollars attacking me and probably will so again because of what I believe we can do, building on the Affordable Care Act — I think it’s important to point out that there are a lot of reasons we have the health-care system we have today. I know how much money influences the political decision-making. That’s why I’m for huge campaign-finance reform. However, we started a system that had private health insurance. And even during the Affordable Care Act debate, there was an opportunity to vote for what was called the public option. In other words, people could buy-in to Medicare, and when the Democrats were in charge of the Congress, we couldn’t get the votes for that. So, what I’m saying is really simple, this has been the fight of the Democratic Party for decades. We have the Affordable Care Act. Let’s make it work. Let’s take the models that states are doing. We now have driven costs down to the lowest they’ve been in 50 years. Now we’ve got to get individual costs down. That’s what I’m planning to do.”

Liar, liar…pantsuit on fire!

On April 18, 2015, The Wall Street Journal reported that

The board of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation has decided to continue accepting donations from foreign governments, primarily from six countries, even though Hillary Clinton is running for president, a summary of the new policy to be released Thursday shows.

The rules would permit donations from Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.—countries that support or have supported Clinton Foundation programs on health, poverty and climate change, according to the summary.

That means other nations would be prohibited from making large donations to the foundation. But those governments would be allowed to participate in the Clinton Global Initiative, a subsidiary of the foundation where companies, nonprofit groups and government officials work on solutions to global problems.

Ministers from any government would be allowed to attend meetings and appear on panels at the group’s meetings and their governments would be allowed to pay attendance fees of $20,000.

The new policy, which was designed to address growing concern that the donations would present a conflict of interest for a Hillary Clinton presidency, all but ensures that Mrs. Clinton’s links to the charity will be a feature of the emerging presidential campaign.

Just how dishonest is Hillary Rodham Clinton? She wouldn’t lie about her own family would she?

…I mean, besides Bubba.

Is Michael Moore barred from all buffets in the Continental United States?

On April 23, 2015, I wrote a blog titled, “Foundationgate: There’s Little White Liars, Bold-Faced Lars, Statistical Liars, and Then, There’s the Clintons”.

Here is some pertinent information contained in that blog

NYMag.com reports that

The qualities of an effective presidency do not seem to transfer onto a post-presidency. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president who became an exemplary post-president. Bill Clinton appears to be the reverse. All sorts of unproven worst-case-scenario questions float around the web of connections between Bill’s private work, Hillary Clinton’s public role as secretary of State, the Clintons’ quasi-public charity, and Hillary’s noncompliant email system. But the best-case scenario is bad enough: The Clintons have been disorganized and greedy.

The news today about the Clintons all fleshes out, in one way or another, their lack of interest in policing serious conflict-of-interest problems that arise in their overlapping roles:

The New York Times has a report about the State Department’s decision to approve the sale of Uranium mines to a Russian company that donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Global Initiative, and that a Russian investment bank promoting the deal paid Bill $500,000 for a speech in Moscow.The Washington Post reports that Bill Clinton has received $26 million in speaking fees from entities that also donated to the Clinton Global Initiative.The Washington Examiner reports, “Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation.”And Reuters reports, “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors.”

The Clinton campaign is batting down the darkest and most conspiratorial interpretation of these stories, and where this all leads remains to be seen. But the most positive interpretation is not exactly good.

When you are a power couple consisting of a former president and a current secretary of State and likely presidential candidate, you have the ability to raise a lot of money for charitable purposes that can do a lot of good. But some of the potential sources of donations will be looking to get something in return for their money other than moral satisfaction or the chance to hobnob with celebrities. Some of them want preferential treatment from the State Department, and others want access to a potential future Clinton administration. To run a private operation where Bill Clinton will deliver a speech for a (huge) fee and a charity that raises money from some of the same clients is a difficult situation to navigate. To overlay that fraught situation onto Hillary’s ongoing and likely future government service makes it all much harder.

And yet the Clintons paid little to no attention to this problem. Nicholas Confessore described their operation as “a sprawling concern, supervised by a rotating board of old Clinton hands, vulnerable to distraction and threatened by conflicts of interest. It ran multimillion-dollar deficits for several years, despite vast amounts of money flowing in.” Indeed, as Ryan Lizzareported in 2012, Bill Clinton seemed to see the nexus between his role and his wife’s as a positive rather than a negative:

Regardless of Bill Clinton’s personal feelings about Obama, it didn’t take him long to see the advantages of an Obama Presidency. More than anyone, he pushed Hillary to take the job of Secretary of State. “President Clinton was a big supporter of the idea,” an intimate of the Clintons told me. “He advocated very strongly for it and arguably was the tie-breaking reason she took the job.” For one thing, having his spouse in that position didn’t hurt his work at the Clinton Global Initiative. He invites foreign leaders to the initiative’s annual meeting, and her prominence in the Administration can be an asset in attracting foreign donors. “Bill Clinton’s been able to continue to be the Bill Clinton we know, in large part because of his relationship with the White House and because his wife is the Secretary of State,” the Clinton associate continued. “It worked out very well for him. That may be a very cynical way to look at it, but that’s a fact. A lot of the stuff he’s doing internationally is aided by his level of access.”

The Obama administration wanted Hillary Clinton to use official government email. She didn’t. The Obama administration alsodemanded that the Clinton Foundation disclose all its donors while she served as Secretary of State. It didn’t comply with that request, either.

The Clintons’ charitable initiatives were a kind of quasi-government run by themselves, which was staffed by their own loyalists and made up the rules as it went along. Their experience running the actual government, with its formal accountability and disclosure, went reasonably well. Their experience running their own privatized mini-state has been a fiasco.

On Jan. 8, 1996, in a still-relevant commentary titled “Blizzard of Lies,” New York Times columnist William Safire described Hillary Clinton as “a congenital liar.”

Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar. Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.

1. Remember the story she told about studying The Wall Street Journal to explain her 10,000 percent profit in 1979 commodity trading? We now know that was a lie told to turn aside accusations that as the Governor’s wife she profited corruptly, her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests through a disreputable broker.

She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.

2. The abuse of Presidential power known as Travelgate elicited another series of lies. She induced a White House lawyer to assert flatly to investigators that Mrs. Clinton did not order the firing of White House travel aides, who were then harassed by the F.B.I. and Justice Department to justify patronage replacement by Mrs. Clinton’s cronies.

Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be “hell to pay” if the furious First Lady’s desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary’s lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage.

3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.

Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.

Why the White House concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell’s father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million.

Why the belated release of some of the incriminating evidence? Not because it mysteriously turned up in offices previously searched. Certainly not because Hillary Clinton and her new hang-tough White House counsel want to respond fully to lawful subpoenas.

One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.

Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.

Therefore, ask not “Why didn’t she just come clean at the beginning?” She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.

No wonder the President is fearful of holding a prime-time press conference. Having been separately deposed by the independent counsel at least twice, the President and First Lady would be well advised to retain separate defense counsel.

The late, great William Safire was a prophet.

The revelation contained in today’s blog should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention.

Lying comes as naturally to The Former First Lady as breathing in and out.

As I have written, from the time she was fired from the Watergate Investigative Committee to wiping her private e-mail server, Hillary Rodham Clinton has been as crooked as a dog’s hind leg.

Machiavellian in political ambition and armed with a vocabulary that would make the legendary Gong Show Judge, Jaye P. Morgan, blush (look her up, kids), “the Hildebeast” has cut a wide swatch in her path to Political Power.

It should be obvious to Americans by now, that she believes that morality and ethics are for “the little people” (i.e., you and me).

We already have a congenital liar in the White House.

We certainly do not need another one.

Oh…and Ambassador Christopher Stevens remains unavailable for comment.

Until He Comes,

KJ